Lecture4 [8.27 Mib]
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Invasivne species Methods for control, prevention and removal (eradication) Legislation According to IUCN Red list, alien invasive species are responsible for extinction of more species in the world than any other agent. E.g., on the global level 1/3 of birds, 6% of mammals and 11% of amphibians is endangered by alien invasive species. Education „better save than sorry“ - the only successful way of fighting invasive species is prevention (disable their entrance into new habitat) - activities are focused to raise awareness about negative influence of IAS and consequences of their presence in the nature - to be successful against IAS, public must be included (especially risk groups – fishermen, pat owners, gardeners) – lectures, tv, radio, leaflets, educative publications, Internet….. Prevention is the first line of defence - most effective and most cost-effective - if it fails, hard(er) to fight and eradicate already established IAS population - if possible and justifiable the IAS should be eradicated (if prevention didn’t work out) - in ideal cases, eradication is the first and only step in stopping the negative influence of IAS - if eradication is not possible, control of spreading is necessary (more demanding and expensive) - 5 - 11 Taxonomic groups of invasive species introduced to Croatia in 2011 (from DAISI database) IAS with established populations in Cro (that can’t be eradicated with nowadays knowledge and technology, their control their spreading into new areas): zebra mussel (Dreissenia polymorpha), killer shrimp (Dikerogammarus villosus), harlequin ladybird (Harmonia axyridis), rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus), desert false indigo(Amorpha fruticosa) & tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima) Eradication Mechanical methods - easier for bigger organisms - traps, nets… Chemical methods - insecticides, herbicides - Expensive - Sometimes not selective - IAS can become resistant Biological methods (biocontrol) - With other organisms, with diseases - They can become invasive - Before any implementation it should be tested and possible scenarios done Procedure of invasive assessment (estimation) - Risk assessment – most frequently a questioner – based on the answers, species (present or not present in the area) is classified according to its invasibility - There is no a 100% sure way of invasibility estimation, but comparing our estimates with estimates and experience from ecologically similar areas is helpful - Normally it is done for a single species (taking into account possibility of introduction, population establishment, speed of possible spread and influence) - Also it could be conducted for propagule’s vectors and introduction paths (more complex and demanding) - Hight risk > 18 bodova; - Medium risk 14 – 17 bodova - Low risk 0 – 13 bodova What are black and white list? - Based on the risk assessment a species is listed to a list: Black list – proved to be strongly invasive - Introduction is strictly forbidden - species that are not necessarily present, but if present they could make lots of problems and damage White list – species that are not „risky”, and their introduction should not present any threat – they could be introduced but it should not be taken as „introduce it as much as you want and let if freely into the nature” Gray list – species that are neither on the black not white list - Normally species that are „unknown” in terms of invasibility (some of their „relatives are either on the black or on the white list) Invasive alien species – a growing threat in Europe Invasive alien species (IAS) cost the EU an estimated EUR 12 billion per year, prompting the European Commission to push for an EU-wide approach to tackle the issue. The phenomenon, which occurs when plants and animals are deliberately or unintentionally introduced by human action to a new environment where they establish, reproduce and proliferate, is causing serious problems for biodiversity. The dedicated legal instrument aims to tackle the problem through a new harmonised system and a shift from “cure” to “prevention”. Recognising the increasingly serious problem of IAS in Europe, the European Commission will launch a dedicated legislative instrument by September 2013. The instrument, which is due to be adopted in 2013, is one of six key objectives of the EU 2020 Biodiversity Strategy. The proposal is for three types of interventions; prevention, early warning and rapid response, and management. http://www.tvlink.org/mediadetails.php?key=7ce01ed5e48804848445&title=Invasive+ alien+species+–+a+growing+threat+in+Europe&titleleft=Environment • Commission adopts first EU list of invasive alien species, an important step towards halting biodiversity loss Brussels, 13 July 2016 Today the European Commission took an important step towards halting biodiversity loss, adopting a list of invasive alien species that require action across the EU. The list contains 37 species that cause damage on a scale that justifies dedicated measures across the Union. LIST OF INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES OF UNION CONCERN Plants: American Skunk cabbage; Asiatic tearthumb; Curly waterweed; Eastern baccharis; Floating pennywort; Floating primrose; Green cambomba; Kudzu vine; Parrot’s feather; Persian hogweed; Water hyacinth; Water primrose (2 species); Whitetop weed Animals: Amur sleeper; Asian hornet; Small Indian mongoose; Bryant’s fox squirrel; Chinese mitten crab; Coypu; Eastern crayfish ; Grey squirrel; Indian house crow; Marbled crayfish; Muntjac deer; North American bullfrog; Pallas’s squirrel; Racoon; Red eared slider; Red swamp crayfish; Ruddy duck; Sacred ibis; Siberian chipmunk; Signal crayfish; South American coati; Topmouth gudgeon; Virile (northern) crayfish The first update of the Union list entered into force in August 2017 (12 new species) The second update of the Union list is under preparation. SUCCESSFULL ERADICATIONS IN EU 37 PROJECTS – 33 ON ISLANDS 26% RATS 4% RABBITS SUCCESSFUL RECOVERY OF NATIVE BIODIVERSITY INVASIVE INVERTEBRATES (AQUATIC) ERADICATION PROJECTS – RARE - mass trapping - Hormone traps – inhibit sexual maturity - Pheromone bites – sexually mature males - Males’ sterilisation – (x-rays) back to habitat – unsuccessful mating Collapse > 80% „treated” populations Invasive freshwater crustaceans in Croatia OLD NICS introduced to Europe before 1980 class: Malacostraca order: Decapoda infraorder: Astacidea Signal c. Pacifastacus leniusculus Spiny-cheek c. Faxonius (Orconectes) limosus Red swamp c. Procambarus clarkii NEW NICS introduced to Europe after 1980 NORTH AMERICA Calico c. Faxonius immunis Kentucky river c. Faxonius juvenilis Crayfish plague Virile c. Faxonius virilis Eastern white river c. Procambarus acutus Gulf white river c. Procambarus zonangulus Marbled c. Procambarus fallax f. virginalis Yabby Cherax destructor AUSTRALIA Red claw Cherax quadricarinatus New diseases? In Croatia – Decapoda • Faxonius limosus • Pacifastacus leniusculus • Eriocheir sinensis • Procambarus fallax f. virginalis • (Procambarus virginalis) Faxonius limosus (Rafinesque, 1817) spiny-cheek crayfish Spine on the inner side of the article Brown-red stripes Spines on the sides of the head CephalothoraxRostrum scheme Up to 12 cm F. limosus o Origin: North America o Introduced to: Europe F. limosus Distribution of F. limosus in Europe (Kouba et al., 2014) F. limosus o Introduced to Europe in the second half of 19th century (Poland) to replace native noble crayfish (Astacus astacus) o During 20th century spread across Europe F. limosus o All freshwater habitats o Adaptable to different habitat conditions (even pollution) o Highly fecund F. limosus • Impact: o Competition with natives for food and space o Vector of Aphanomyces astaci (crayfish plague) o A. astaci one of “100 worst invasive species” F. limosus • Control: Up till nowadays no successful methods F. limosus in Croatia Upstream dispersion through the Drava • 2007. - 2009. • literature data & River research until 2006. Data until 2011. g. Data until 2016. g. F. limosus • F. limosus push out native Astacus astacus & Astacus leptodactylus A. astacus – noble crayfish A. leptodactylus narrow-clawed crayfish Pacifastacus leniusculus (Dana, 1852) – signal crayfish Up to 16 cm blue Cephalothorax scheme P. leniusculus o Origin: North America o Introduced to: o Europe o Asia: Japan P. leniusculus Distribution of P. leniusculus in Europe (Kouba et al., 2014) P. leniusculus Introduced to Europe in 20th century (1959. Sweden) to replace native crayfish populations o Impact: o Competition with natives for food and space o Crayfish plague vector o Control: o No successful methods P. leniusculus in Coatia Downstream spread through the Mura and Drava Introduced to the Korana River • 2007. - 2009. • 2011 P. leniusculus • in Mura & Drava P. leniusculus pushes out (replace) Astacus astacus • in Korana pushes out (replace) A. leptodactylus A. astacus – noble crayfish The first record of the signal crayfish in Croatia dates from 2008 (Maguire et al., 2008). Until now, signal crayfish records in Croatia have been found in the Mura River and the the Drava River. 18-24.4 km/year (fastest in Europe) O. limosus was first recorded in Croatia in 2003 (Maguire and Klobucar, 2003; Maguire and Gottstein-Matocec, 2004) in the Nature Park Kopacki rit, where it spread from the Hungarian section of the Danube River > 2.5 km/year Lake Natoma (USA) - Sweden Lake Tahoe, Lake Hennessey (USA) - Finland Austria – from California(Lake Tahoe + Sweden) – Drava & Mura – Slovenia - Croatia Phylogenetic