Alien fishes in California watersheds: Characteristics of successful and failed invaders

Ecological Applications

Volumn 14, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 587-596

  Marchetti, Michael P ^a   Moyle, Peter B ^b   Levine, Richard ^c  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Akaike's information criterion (AICc); Alien species; Characteristics of invaders; Establishment; Fish invasion; Information theoretic approach; Integration; Invasion biology; Native species; Physiological tolerance; Prior invasion success

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL INVASION; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; ICHTHYOFAUNA; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PERSISTENCE; RANGE EXPANSION;

CALIFORNIA; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

ANIMALIA; PISCES;

EID: 1642335705     PISSN: 10510761     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1890/02-5301     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Balon, E. K. 1975. Reproductive guilds in fishes: a proposal and definition. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 32(6):821-864.
2. Balon, E. K. 1984. Patterns in the evolution of reproductive styles in fishes. Pages 35-53 in G. W. Potts and R. J. Wootton, editors. Fish reproduction: strategies and tactics. Academic Press, London, UK.
3. Burnham, K. P., and D. R. Anderson. 2002. Model selection and inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Second edition. Springer-Verlag, New York, New York, USA.
4. Carlton, J. T. 1996. Pattern, process and prediction in marine invasion ecology. Biological Conservation 78:97-106.
5. Daehler, C. T., and D. R. Strong, Jr. 1993. Prediction and biological invasion. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 10: 380.
6. D'Antonio, C. M., L. A. Meyerson, and J. Denslow. 2001. Exotic species and conservation. Pages 59-80 in M. E. Soule and G. H. Orians, editors. Conservation biology: research priorities for the next decade. Island Press, Washington, D.C., USA.
7. Dill, W. A., and A. J. Cordone. 1997. History and status of introduced fishes in California, 1871-1996. Fish Bulletin 178. California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, California, USA.
8. Ehrlich, P. R. 1989. Attributes of invaders and the invading processes: vertebrates. Pages 315-328 in J. A. Drake, H. A. Mooney, F. di Castri, R. H. Groves, F. J. Kruger, M. Rejmánek, and M. Williamson. Biological invasions: a global perspective. John Wiley and Sons, New York, New York, USA.
9. Fausch, K. D., Y. Taniguchi, S. Nakano, G. D. Grossman, and C. R. Townsend. 2001. Flood disturbance regimes influence rainbow trout invasion success among five Holarctic regions. Ecological Applications 11:1438-1455.
10. Franklin, A. B., D. R. Anderson, R. J. Gutierrez, and K. P. Burnham. 2000. Climate, habitat quality, and fitness in Northern Spotted Owl populations in northwestern California. Ecological Monographs 70:539-590.
11. Fuller, P. L., L. G. Nico, and J. D. Williams. 1999. Nonindigenous fishes introduced into inland waters of the United States. Special Publication 27 American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
12. Gido, K. B., and J. H. Brown. 1999. Invasion of North American drainages by alien fish species. Freshwater Biology 42:387-399.
13. Goldstein, R. M., and T. P. Simon. 1999. Toward a united definition of guild structure for feeding ecology of North American freshwater fishes. Pages 123-202 in T. P. Simon, editor. Assessing the sustainability and biological integrity of water resources using fish communities. CRC Press, New York, New York, USA.
14. Halliwell, D. B., R. W. Langdon, R. A. Daniels, J. P. Kurtenbach, and R. A. Jacobson. 1999. Classification of freshwater fish species of the Northeastern United States for use in the development of indices of biological integrity with regional applications. Pages 301-338 in T. P. Simon, editor. Assessing the sustainability and biological integrity of water resources using fish communities. CRC Press, New York, New York, USA.
15. Holway, D. A., A. V. Suarez, and T. J. Case. 2002. Role of abiotic factors in governing susceptibility to invasion: a test with Argentine ants. Ecology 83:1610-1619.
16. Horvath, T. G., and G. A. Lamberti. 1997. Drifting macrophytes as a mechanism for zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) invasion of lake-outlet streams. American Midland Naturalist 138:29-36.
17. Jules, E. S., M. J. Kauffman, W. D. Ritts, and A. L. Carroll. 2002. Spread of an invasive pathogen over a variable landscape: a nonnative root rot on Port Orford cedar. Ecology 83:3167-3181.
18. Kolar, C. S., and D. M. Lodge. 2001. Progress in invasion biology: predicting invaders. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 16:199-204.
19. Kolar, C. S., and D. M. Lodge. 2002. Ecological predictions and risk assessment for alien fishes in North America. Science 298:1233-1236.
20. Leppakoski, E., and S. Olenin. 2000. Non-native species and rates of spread: lessons from the brackish Baltic Sea. Biological Invasions 2:151-163.
21. Lever, C. 1996. Naturalized fishes of the world. Academic Press, London, UK.
22. Lockwood, J. L. 1999. Using taxonomy to predict success among introduced avifauna: relative importance of transport and establishment. Conservation Biology 13:560-567.
23. Lodge, D. M. 1993a. Biological invasions: lessons for ecology. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 8:133-136.
24. Lodge, D. M. 1993b. Species invasions and deletions: community effects and responses to climate and habitat change. Pages 367-387. in P. M. Kareiva, J. G. Kingsolver, and R. B. Huey, editors. Biotic interactions and global change. Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts, USA.
25. Lonsdale, W. M. 1999. Concepts and synthesis: global patterns of plant invasions, and the concept of invasibility. Ecology 80:1522-1536.
26. McKinney, M. L. 2001. Effects of human population size, area, and time on non-native plant and fish diversity in the United States. Biological Conservation 100:243-252.
27. McKinney, M. L., and J. L. Lockwood. 1999. Biotic homogenization: a few winners replacing many losers in the next mass extinction. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 14: 450-453.
28. Moyle, P. B. 2002. Inland fishes of California, revised and expanded. University of California Press, Berkeley, California, USA.
29. Moyle, P. B., and J. J. Cech, Jr. 2000. Fishes: an introduction to ichthyology. Fourth edition. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, USA.
30. Moyle, P. B., and T. Light. 1996a. Fish invasions in California: do abiotic factors determine success? Ecology 77: 1666-1670.
31. Moyle, P. B., and T. Light. 1996b. Biological invasions of freshwater: empirical rules and assembly theory. Biological Conservation 78:149-161.
32. Parker, I. M., D. Simberloff, M. W. Lonsdale, K. Goodell, M. J. Wonham, P. M. Kareiva, M. H. Williamson, B. Von Holle, P. B. Moyle, J. E. Byers, and L. Goldwasser. 1999. Impact: toward a framework for understanding the ecological effects of invaders. Biological Invasions 1:3-19.
33. Rahel, F. J. 2000. Homogenization of fish faunas across the United States. Science 288:854-856.
34. Rejmanek, M., and D. M. Richardson. 1996. What attributes make some plant species more invasive? Ecology 77:1655-1661.
35. Ricciardi, A., and J. B. Rasmussen. 1998. Predicting the identity and impact of future biological invaders: a priority for aquatic resource management. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 55:1759-1765.
36. Splus. 2002. Splus 6.0. Insigntful Corporation, Seattle, Washington, USA.
37. Trexler, J. C., W. F. Loftus, F. Jordan, J. J. Lorenz, J. H. Chick, and R. M. Kobza. 2000. Empirical assessment of fish introductions in a subtropical wetland: an evaluation of contrasting views. Biological Invasions 2:265-277.
38. Vermeij, G. J. 1996. An agenda for invasion biology. Biological Conservation 78:3-9.
39. Williamson, M. H. 1996. Biological invasions. Chapman and Hall, London, UK.
40. Williamson, M. H., and A. Fitter. 1996. The varying success of invaders. Ecology 77:1661-1666.