DOCSLIB.ORG

EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 9.9.2013 SWD(2013)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 9.9.2013 SWD(2013) EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 9.9.2013 SWD(2013) 321 final COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT Accompanying the document Proposal for a Council and European Parliament Regulation on the prevention and management of the introduction and spread of invasive alien species This report commits only the Commission's services involved in its preparation and does not prejudge the final form of any decision to be taken by the Commission {COM(2013) 620 final} {SWD(2013) 322 final} {SWD(2013) 323 final} EN EN COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT Accompanying the document Proposal for a Council and European Parliament Regulation on the prevention and management of the introduction and spread of invasive alien species This report commits only the Commission's services involved in its preparation and does not prejudge the final form of any decision to be taken by the Commission Contents 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 4 2. PROCEDURAL ISSUES AND CONSULTATIONS ............................................................................... 5 2.1. PROCEDURAL ISSUES ............................................................................................................................ 5 2.2. CONSULTATION OF INTERESTED PARTIES.............................................................................................. 5 2.3. EXTERNAL EXPERTISE........................................................................................................................... 5 2.4. CONSULTATION OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT BOARD ......................................................................... 6 3. POLICY CONTEXT, PROBLEM DEFINITION AND SUBSIDIARITY ............................................ 6 3.1. PROBLEM DEFINITION ........................................................................................................................... 6 3.1.1. An ecological problem .................................................................................................................... 7 3.1.2. A policy problem ........................................................................................................................... 11 3.2. WHO IS AFFECTED AND HOW?............................................................................................................. 12 3.3. POLICY BASELINE ............................................................................................................................... 14 3.4. HOW WILL THE PROBLEM EVOLVE? .................................................................................................... 17 3.5. THE EU'S RIGHT TO ACT AND JUSTIFICATION ...................................................................................... 19 3.5.1. The legal basis for action.............................................................................................................. 19 3.5.2. Promoting solidarity ..................................................................................................................... 20 3.5.3. Subsidiarity ................................................................................................................................... 20 4. OBJECTIVES............................................................................................................................................ 21 5. DESCRIPTION OF POLICY OPTIONS................................................................................................ 22 5.1. OPTION 0 - BUSINESS AS USUAL (BASELINE OPTION).......................................................................... 22 5.2. OPTION 1 – ENHANCING COOPERATION AND SUPPORTING VOLUNTARY ACTION................................. 24 5.3. OPTION 2 – A DEDICATED LEGISLATIVE INSTRUMENT ........................................................................ 24 5.3.1. Option 2.1: the basic legislative instrument.................................................................................. 27 5.3.2. Option 2.2: introducing provisions on permits for the release of IAS of Member State concern (i.e. basic legislative instrument with the addition of action C2) ....................................................................... 29 5.3.3. Option 2.3: introducing a strict ban on the release of any alien species, unless included on an EU list of IAS approved for release (i.e. basic legislative instrument with the addition of action C3).............. 30 5.3.4. Option 2.4: introducing an obligation for rapid eradication of newly establishing IAS of EU concern, with the possibility for derogations (i.e. basic legislative instrument with alternative action D3)30 6. ANALYSIS OF THE OPTIONS .............................................................................................................. 32 6.1. ECONOMIC IMPACTS ........................................................................................................................... 33 6.1.1. Option 0: Baseline......................................................................................................................... 33 6.1.2. Option 1: Cooperation and voluntary action ................................................................................ 34 6.1.3. Option 2.1: the basic legislative instrument.................................................................................. 35 6.1.4. Option 2.2: Adding permits for releasing of IAS of Member State concern.................................. 43 6.1.5. Option 2.3: Include a strict ban on release of any alien species into the environment unless it is included in a common EU list of species approved for release into the environment ................................. 45 6.1.6. Option 2.4: Obligation to rapidly eradicate newly establishing IAS of EU concern .................... 45 6.2. SOCIAL IMPACTS................................................................................................................................. 48 6.2.1. Option 0: Baseline......................................................................................................................... 48 6.2.2. Option 1: Cooperation and voluntary action ................................................................................ 48 6.2.3. Option 2.1: The basic legislative instrument................................................................................. 48 6.2.4. Option 2.2: Adding permits for releasing of IAS of Member State concern.................................. 48 6.2.5. Option 2.3: Introducing a strict ban for any release of any alien species unless included in the EU list of species approved for release into the environment ..................................................................... 48 6.2.6. Option 2.4: Obligation for rapid eradication of newly establishing IAS of EU concern .............. 48 6.3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS................................................................................................................. 48 6.3.1. Option 0: Baseline......................................................................................................................... 48 6.3.2. Option 1: Voluntary action ........................................................................................................... 48 6.3.3. Option 2.1: The basic legislative instrument................................................................................. 48 6.3.4. Option 2.2: Adding permits for releasing of IAS of Member State concern included in national catalogues.................................................................................................................................................... 48 3 6.3.5. Option 2.3: Introducing a strict ban for any release of any alien species unless included in the EU list of species approved for release into the environment............................................................................ 48 6.3.6. Option 2.4: Obligation for rapid eradication of newly establishing IAS of EU concern .............. 48 7. COMPARING THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS ....................................................................................... 48 8. MONITORING AND EVALUATION.................................................................................................... 48 8.1. PROGRESS INDICATORS....................................................................................................................... 48 8.2. MONITORING ...................................................................................................................................... 48 8.3. EVALUATION ...................................................................................................................................... 48 4 1. INTRODUCTION Alien species are species that are transported, outside of their natural range across ecological barriers, due to direct or indirect human action. Some of these species cannot adapt to the new environment and die out quite rapidly, but others may survive, reproduce and spread. A percentage of the species that become established can have a significant negative impact on the ecology of their new location as well as serious economic and social consequences: these are the Invasive Alien Species (IAS). It has been estimated that of the 12,046 alien species present in the European environment1, 10-15 % have reproduced and spread and cause environmental, economic and/or social damage2. IAS have
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Review and Meta-Analysis of the Environmental Biology and Potential Invasiveness of a Poorly-Studied Cyprinid, the Ide Leuciscus Idus
    REVIEWS IN FISHERIES SCIENCE & AQUACULTURE https://doi.org/10.1080/23308249.2020.1822280 REVIEW Review and Meta-Analysis of the Environmental Biology and Potential Invasiveness of a Poorly-Studied Cyprinid, the Ide Leuciscus idus Mehis Rohtlaa,b, Lorenzo Vilizzic, Vladimır Kovacd, David Almeidae, Bernice Brewsterf, J. Robert Brittong, Łukasz Głowackic, Michael J. Godardh,i, Ruth Kirkf, Sarah Nienhuisj, Karin H. Olssonh,k, Jan Simonsenl, Michał E. Skora m, Saulius Stakenas_ n, Ali Serhan Tarkanc,o, Nildeniz Topo, Hugo Verreyckenp, Grzegorz ZieRbac, and Gordon H. Coppc,h,q aEstonian Marine Institute, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia; bInstitute of Marine Research, Austevoll Research Station, Storebø, Norway; cDepartment of Ecology and Vertebrate Zoology, Faculty of Biology and Environmental Protection, University of Lodz, Łod z, Poland; dDepartment of Ecology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovakia; eDepartment of Basic Medical Sciences, USP-CEU University, Madrid, Spain; fMolecular Parasitology Laboratory, School of Life Sciences, Pharmacy and Chemistry, Kingston University, Kingston-upon-Thames, Surrey, UK; gDepartment of Life and Environmental Sciences, Bournemouth University, Dorset, UK; hCentre for Environment, Fisheries & Aquaculture Science, Lowestoft, Suffolk, UK; iAECOM, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada; jOntario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, Peterborough, Ontario, Canada; kDepartment of Zoology, Tel Aviv University and Inter-University Institute for Marine Sciences in Eilat, Tel Aviv,
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond Fish Edna Metabarcoding: Field Replicates Disproportionately Improve the Detection of Stream Associated Vertebrate Specie
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.26.437227; this version posted March 26, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC 4.0 International license. 1 2 3 Beyond fish eDNA metabarcoding: Field replicates 4 disproportionately improve the detection of stream 5 associated vertebrate species 6 7 8 9 Till-Hendrik Macher1, Robin Schütz1, Jens Arle2, Arne J. Beermann1,3, Jan 10 Koschorreck2, Florian Leese1,3 11 12 13 1 University of Duisburg-Essen, Aquatic Ecosystem Research, Universitätsstr. 5, 45141 Essen, 14 Germany 15 2German Environmental Agency, Wörlitzer Platz 1, 06844 Dessau-Roßlau, Germany 16 3University of Duisburg-Essen, Centre for Water and Environmental Research (ZWU), Universitätsstr. 17 3, 45141 Essen, Germany 18 19 20 21 22 Keywords: birds, biomonitoring, bycatch, conservation, environmental DNA, mammals 23 1 bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.26.437227; this version posted March 26, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC 4.0 International license. 24 Abstract 25 Fast, reliable, and comprehensive biodiversity monitoring data are needed for 26 environmental decision making and management. Recent work on fish environmental 27 DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding shows that aquatic diversity can be captured fast, reliably, 28 and non-invasively at moderate costs.
    [Show full text]
  • THE HYDROBIOTOPIC DIVERSITY of the LAKES of the LOWER PRUT RIVER, REPUBLIC of MOLDOVA Mihaela MUNTEANU (PILA)1, Silvius STANCIU
    THE HYDROBIOTOPIC DIVERSITY OF THE LAKES OF THE LOWER PRUT RIVER, REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA Mihaela MUNTEANU (PILA)1, Silvius STANCIU2 1PhD Student, „Dunărea de Jos” University of Galați, Romania, email: [email protected]. 2 PhD Professor „Dunărea de Jos”University of Galați, Romania, email: [email protected] Abstract This paper proposes the presentation and analysis of the fish fauna and the specific benthic resources of the Prut River and its tributaries: Costeşti-Stânca, Beleu, Manta. An important objective of the paper is to present the differences in hydrobiotop diversity in different riparian sectors. A healthy ecosystem has a rich ichthyofauna due to the diversity of vegetation and fish species capable of withstanding resistance to aggressive external factors and threats. The aquatic biodiversity of the Prut River is a major complex consisting of phytoplankton and zooplankton. To optimize production of fish, an important factor is maintaining the balance quantity and quality of the entire water system. From this point of view, the paper presented also quantitative aspects of zoobenthos, which is different in the analyzed areas, being influenced by the degree of pollution, the hydrological regime or the physico-chemical conditions. Research has revealed significant differences between different areas of the aquatic fauna of the Prut, mainly due to the human factor. The study is a preliminary one, preparing a broader analysis of the impact of the human factor in the aquatic areas of the Republic of Moldova. Identifying and analyzing the factors that have led to the modification of aquatic structure and diversity can serve as arguments for achieving viable measures for the protection and sustainable use of natural aquatic resources at national level.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond Fish Edna Metabarcoding: Field Replicates Disproportionately Improve the Detection of Stream Associated Vertebrate Species
    Metabarcoding and Metagenomics 5: 59–71 DOI 10.3897/mbmg.5.66557 Research Article Beyond fish eDNA metabarcoding: Field replicates disproportionately improve the detection of stream associated vertebrate species Till-Hendrik Macher1, Robin Schütz1, Jens Arle2, Arne J. Beermann1,3, Jan Koschorreck2, Florian Leese1,3 1 University of Duisburg-Essen, Aquatic Ecosystem Research, Universitätsstr. 5, 45141 Essen, Germany 2 German Environment Agency, Wörlitzer Platz 1, 06844 Dessau-Roßlau, Germany 3 University of Duisburg-Essen, Centre for Water and Environmental Research (ZWU), Universitätsstr. 3, 45141 Essen, Germany Corresponding author: Till-Hendrik Macher ([email protected]) Academic editor: Pieter Boets | Received 26 March 2021 | Accepted 10 June 2021 | Published 13 July 2021 Abstract Fast, reliable, and comprehensive biodiversity monitoring data are needed for environmental decision making and management. Recent work on fish environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding shows that aquatic diversity can be captured fast, reliably, and non-invasively at moderate costs. Because water in a catchment flows to the lowest point in the landscape, often a stream, it can col- lect traces of terrestrial species via surface or subsurface runoff along its way or when specimens come into direct contact with water (e.g., when drinking). Thus, fish eDNA metabarcoding data can provide information on fish but also on other vertebrate species that live in riparian habitats. This additional data may offer a much more comprehensive approach for assessing vertebrate diversity at no additional costs. Studies on how the sampling strategy affects species detection especially of stream-associated communities, however, are scarce. We therefore performed an analysis on the effects of biological replication on both fish as well as (semi-)terrestrial species detection.
    [Show full text]
  • Identification of Priority Areas for the Conservation of Stream Fish Assemblages: Implications for River Management in France A
    Identification of Priority Areas for the Conservation of Stream Fish Assemblages: Implications for River Management in France A. Maire, P. Laffaille, J.F. Maire, L. Buisson To cite this version: A. Maire, P. Laffaille, J.F. Maire, L. Buisson. Identification of Priority Areas for the Conservation of Stream Fish Assemblages: Implications for River Management in France. River Research and Applications, Wiley, 2016, 33 (4), pp.524-537. 10.1002/rra.3107. hal-01426354 HAL Id: hal-01426354 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01426354 Submitted on 2 Jul 2021 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution| 4.0 International License IDENTIFICATION OF PRIORITY AREAS FOR THE CONSERVATION OF STREAM FISH ASSEMBLAGES: IMPLICATIONS FOR RIVER MANAGEMENT IN FRANCE A. MAIREa*,†, P. LAFFAILLEb,c, J.-F. MAIREd AND L. BUISSONb,e a Irstea; UR HYAX, Pôle Onema-Irstea Hydroécologie des plans d’eau; Centre d’Aix-en-Provence, Aix-en-Provence, France b CNRS; UMR 5245 EcoLab, (Laboratoire Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Environnement), Toulouse, France c Université de Toulouse, INP, UPS; EcoLab; ENSAT, Castanet Tolosan, France d ONERA, The French Aerospace Lab Composites Department, Châtillon, France e Université de Toulouse, INP, UPS; EcoLab, Toulouse, France ABSTRACT Financial and human resources allocated to biodiversity conservation are often limited, making it impossible to protect all natural places, and priority areas for protection must be identified.
    [Show full text]
  • Support for Development of a Salmon Management Plan in the Luga River
    BASE Project - Implementation of the Baltic Sea Action Plan in Russia Final report: Support for development of a Salmon management plan in the Luga River Pilot Activity ‘Support for development of a salmon management plan in the Luga River’ Implemented by (Main Consultant) All-Russian Social Organisation “All-Russian Society of Nature Protection”, Leningrad Region office (ARSoNP) Support provided by (EU Expert) Piotr Dębowski Inland Fisheries Institute in Gdansk/Poland. Authors of the report Sergey Titov, Dmitry Sendek, Sergey Mikhelson, Margarita Barabanova, Anton Uspensky, Olga Semenova and Sergey Rezvyi Compilation of this report State Research Institute on Lake and River Fisheries (GosNIORKh), St. Petersburg, RUSSIA For bibliographic purposes this document should HELCOM 2014, BASE project 2012-2014: be cited as ‘Support for development of a salmon management plan in the Luga River’ Design of cover Johanna Laurila, HELCOM Cover photo State Research Institute on Lake and River Fisheries (GosNIORKh), St. Petersburg, RUSSIA Back cover Johanna Laurila, HELCOM English editing (Executive summary and Introduction) Howard McKee, Key Image Ltd Implemented in the framework of: Project Implementation of the Baltic Sea Action Plan in Russia (BASE) Funded by EU Implemented by HELCOM Secretariat and St. Petersburg Public Organisation ‘Ecology and Business’ This report does not necessarily represent the views of HELCOM. HELCOM does not assume responsibility for the content of the report. Information included in this publication or extracts thereof are free for citation on the condition that the complete reference of the publication is given as stated above. Copyright 2014 Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission HELCOM CONTENTS Executive summary 4 1.
    [Show full text]
  • And the Species Diversity Index (D) for Parasitic Fauna in Some Fishes of Ohrid Lake
    Abstract International Journal of Ecosystems and Ecology Science (IJEES) Volume 11, issue 3, 2021 https://doi.org/10.31407/ijees https://doi.org/10.31407/ijees11.3 _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Vol. 11 (3): 477-482 (2021) THE INDICATOR OF ABUNDANCE (N INDIVIDUALS/FISH) AND THE SPECIES DIVERSITY INDEX (D) FOR PARASITIC FAUNA IN SOME FISHES OF OHRID LAKE Muhamir Shyqeriu1,*, Rigerta Sadikaj1, Dritan Arapi2 1*University of Tirana, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Department of Biotechnology, Tirana, Albania; 2University of Tirana, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Flora and Fauna Research Center, Tirana, Albania; *Corresponding Author Muhamir Shyqeriu, e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; Received March 2021; Accepted April 2021; Published May 2021; DOI: https://doi.org/10.31407/ijees11.316 ABSTRACT In the period from 2015 to 2017 in three areas of Ohrid Lake (west and south shore or the Albanian part of the lake) parasites were analyzed for several species of fish that populate this basin. The sampled fish were bleak (A.scoranza), chub (S.cephalus), common roach (R.rutilus), Ohrid gudgeon (G.ohridanus), Albanian roach (P.pictum), Western Balcan barbell (B.rebeli), European eel (A.anguilla), crucian carp (C.carassius), belvica (A.ohridana), common carp (C.carpio) and Ohrid brown trout (S.letnica). Two population parameters were evaluated for parasites; the indicator of abundance (n individuals/fish) and the species diversity index (D). The highest average value for abundance was calculated for Gyrodactylis sp (Monogenea) (10.8±7.339 individuals/fish). We found this helminth as an ectoparasite in Ohrid brown trout. We calculated the smallest abundance for Pomphorhynchus laevis (Acanthocephala) (0.41 ± 0.247 individuals / fish).
    [Show full text]
  • FEATURES of the DISTRIBUTION of THREE SPECIES of FISH TREMATODES in PAVLODAR REGION of KAZAKHSTAN Kanat AKHMETOV1,2, Diana MARALBAYEVA1
    FEATURES OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF THREE SPECIES OF FISH TREMATODES IN PAVLODAR REGION OF KAZAKHSTAN KANAT AKHMETOV1,2, DIANA MARALBAYEVA1 1Department of Biology and Ecology, S. Toraighyrov Pavlodar State University, Lomov St., 64, Pavlodar, 140000, Pavlodar, Kazakhstan 2Corresponding author: phone: +77770667348; e-mail: [email protected] Abstract. The aim of the study is to determine the distribution of three species of fish trematodes in the Pavlodar region, as well as features of infection of definitive hosts and their parasitological analysis. The prospect of studying the fish trematode fauna of the North-East Kazakhstan is relevant because the life cycle of this group of parasitic worms depends on several groups of organisms that are intermediate, accessory and final hosts. 3 species of trematodes were identified: Azygia lucii, Bunodera luciopercae, Sphaerostomum bramae. The indicators of the invasion, prevalence and abundance index of parasites within the examined fish species were determined. The results demonstrated a good state of the intermediate hosts living in the Irtysh River and its reservoirs, infected by the three species of trematodes. Key words: fish parasites; parasitological analysis; Trematoda. INTRODUCTION are notable for the alternation of generations with a change of hosts: two intermediate and a final one. The role of the Azygia lucii (Müller, 1776) is a widespread species of fish final hosts has representatives of many families of ray-finned trematodes found in Europe, North America, the European fish. However, most parasites of freshwater fishes may infect and Asian countries of the Commonwealth of Independent the marine species as well. These trematodes are distributed States. The main host of A.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Fish Species on Levels of Lead Accumulation in the Meat of Common Bream (Abramis Brama L.), White Bream (Blicca Bjoerk
    Journal of Central European Agriculture, 2015, 16(2), p.62-71 DOI: 10.5513/JCEA01/16.2.1590 Impact of fish species on levels of lead accumulation in the meat of common bream (Abramis brama L.), white bream (Blicca bjoerkna L.) and common bleak (Alburnus alburnus L.) from the Vistula River (Poland) Wpływ gatunku ryby na koncentrację ołowiu w mięsie leszcza (Abramis brama L.), krąpia (Blicca bjoerkna L.) i uklei (Alburnus alburnus L.) odłowionych z rzeki Wisły (Polska) Magdalena STANEK1*, Janusz DĄBROWSKI2, Bogdan JANICKI1, Aleksandra ROŚLEWSKA1 and Anita STRZELECKA 1Division of Biochemistry and Toxicology, Faculty of Animal Breeding and Biology, University of Sciences and Technology, Mazowiecka Street 28, 85-084 Bydgoszcz, Poland, *correspondence: [email protected] 2Division of Ecology, Faculty of Animal Breeding and Biology, University of Sciences and Technology, Bydgoszcz, Poland Abstract The aim of this work was to compare the concentration of lead in the meat of common bream (Abramis brama L.), white bream (Blicca bjoerkna L.) and common bleak (Alburnus alburnus L.). The experimental fish were obtained in natural condition from Vistula River, located within Toruń, near wastewater treatment plant. The study involved 60 individuals of freshwater fish caught in autumn. Analyses were carried out on 10 individuals of common bream, 20 white bream and 30 individuals of common bleak. The muscles samples for analyses were taken from the large side muscle of fish body above the lateral line. There were chosen for analyses individuals with similar biometric measurements. Due to a relatively low amounts of meat obtained from white bream and common bleak, the material from individuals of similar body length was combined (about 2-3 pieces).
    [Show full text]
  • Current and Potential Aquatic Invasive Species in Ontario and the Great Lakes Region: a Compilation of Ecological Information
    Science and Research Information Report IR-16 Current and potential aquatic invasive species in Ontario and the Great Lakes region: A compilation of ecological information Science and Research Information Report IR-16 Current and potential aquatic invasive species in Ontario and the Great Lakes region: A compilation of ecological information Elizabeth C. Hatton1, Jeffrey D. Buckley1, Shannon A. Fera1,2, Samantha Henry1, Len M. Hunt3, D. Andrew R. Drake4 and Timothy B. Johnson1 1 Aquatic Research and Development Section, Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF), 41 Hatchery Lane, Picton, ON K0K 2T0 2 Current address: Fisheries Section, Species Conservation Policy Branch, MNRF, 300 Water Street, Peterborough, ON K9J 8M5 3 Centre for Northern Forest Ecosystem Research, MNRF, 103-421 James St S, Thunder Bay, ON P7E 2V6 4 Great Lakes Laboratory for Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, 867 Lakeshore Road, Burlington, ON L7S 1A1 2019 Science and Research Branch Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry © 2019, Queen’s Printer for Ontario Copies of this publication are available from [email protected]. Cette publication hautement spécialisée, Current and Potential Aquatic Invasive Species in Ontario and the Great Lakes Region: A Compilation of Ecological Information, n’est disponible qu’en anglais conformément au Règlement 671/92, selon lequel il n’est pas obligatoire de la traduire en vertu de la Loi sur les services en français. Pour obtenir des renseignements en français, veuillez communiquer avec le ministère des Richesses naturelles et des Forêts au [email protected]. Some of the information in this document may not be compatible with assistive technologies.
    [Show full text]
  • Influence of the Sex and Age on the Content of Selected Minerals in the Meat of Ruffe (Gymnocephalus Cernua L.) from the Vistula River, Poland
    Journal of Elementology ISSN 1644-2296 Stanek M., Dąbrowski J., Cygan-Szczegielniak D., Roślewska A., Stasiak K., Janicki B. 2017. Influence of the sex and age on the content of selected minerals in the meat of ruffe (Gymnocephalus cernua L.) from the Vistula River, Poland. J. Elem., 22(4): 1323-1331. DOI: 10.5601/jelem.2017.22.1.1323 ORIGINAL PAPER INFLUENCE OF THE SEX AND AGE ON THE CONTENT OF SELECTED MINERALS IN THE MEAT OF RUFFE (GYMNOCEPHALUS CERNUA L.) FROM THE VISTULA RIVER, POLAND* Magdalena Stanek1, Janusz Dąbrowski2, Dorota Cygan-Szczegielniak1, Aleksandra Roślewska1, Karolina Stasiak1, Bogdan Janicki1 1Chair of Biochemistry and Toxicology 2Department of Ecology UTP University of Science and Technology in Bydgoszcz, Poland ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to determine concentrations of Na, K, Mg, Ca, P, Zn and Fe in the meat of ruffe (Gymnocephalus cernua L.) and to investigate the relationship between fish sex or age and the mineral content of fish meat. 90 individuals of ruffe were caught in autumn (from October 9 to November 6) from the Vistula River, near Toruń and he local wastewater treat- ment plant. The muscle tissues from the large side muscle in a fish body, above the lateral line, were taken for analyses. All frozen meat samples were freeze dried in a freeze dryer and then tissues were mineralized in a microwave mineralizer. Concentrations of minerals were deter- mined by flame atomic absorption spectroscopy. As the analyses indicated, the concentrations of macroelements were arranged in the order: K > Ca > P > Na > Mg and the content of microele- ments was noted in the following decreasing sequence: Zn > Fe.
    [Show full text]
  • Systematic List of the Romanian Vertebrate Fauna
    Travaux du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle © Décembre Vol. LIII pp. 377–411 «Grigore Antipa» 2010 DOI: 10.2478/v10191-010-0028-1 SYSTEMATIC LIST OF THE ROMANIAN VERTEBRATE FAUNA DUMITRU MURARIU Abstract. Compiling different bibliographical sources, a total of 732 taxa of specific and subspecific order remained. It is about the six large vertebrate classes of Romanian fauna. The first class (Cyclostomata) is represented by only four species, and Pisces (here considered super-class) – by 184 taxa. The rest of 544 taxa belong to Tetrapoda super-class which includes the other four vertebrate classes: Amphibia (20 taxa); Reptilia (31); Aves (382) and Mammalia (110 taxa). Résumé. Cette contribution à la systématique des vertébrés de Roumanie s’adresse à tous ceux qui sont intéressés par la zoologie en général et par la classification de ce groupe en spécial. Elle représente le début d’une thème de confrontation des opinions des spécialistes du domaine, ayant pour but final d’offrir aux élèves, aux étudiants, aux professeurs de biologie ainsi qu’à tous ceux intéressés, une synthèse actualisée de la classification des vertébrés de Roumanie. En compilant différentes sources bibliographiques, on a retenu un total de plus de 732 taxons d’ordre spécifique et sous-spécifique. Il s’agît des six grandes classes de vertébrés. La première classe (Cyclostomata) est représentée dans la faune de Roumanie par quatre espèces, tandis que Pisces (considérée ici au niveau de surclasse) l’est par 184 taxons. Le reste de 544 taxons font partie d’une autre surclasse (Tetrapoda) qui réunit les autres quatre classes de vertébrés: Amphibia (20 taxons); Reptilia (31); Aves (382) et Mammalia (110 taxons).
    [Show full text]