Comparison of mosquito control provided by the arroyo chub (Gila orcutti) and the mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis)

Journal of the American Mosquito Control Association

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 430-441

  Van Dam, Alex R ^a,b   Walton, William E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Biological control; Culex; Larvivorous fish; Native fish; Riverine wetlands

Indexed keywords

GAMBUSIA AFFINIS; GILA ORCUTTII; INVERTEBRATA; PISCES;

WATER;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CULEX; CYPRINIFORMES; CYPRINODONTIFORMES; FEEDING BEHAVIOR; INSECT; LARVA; METHODOLOGY; MOSQUITO; PHYSIOLOGY; REPRODUCTION; SEASON; TIME;

ANIMALS; CULEX; CYPRINIDAE; CYPRINODONTIFORMES; FEEDING BEHAVIOR; LARVA; MOSQUITO CONTROL; PUPA; REPRODUCTION; SEASONS; TIME FACTORS; WATER;

EID: 39749159823     PISSN: 8756971X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2987/5620.1     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. APHA [American Public Health Association]. 1995. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 19th edition. Washington DC: American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association, and the Water Environment Federation.
2. Arthington AH, Lloyd LN. 1989. Introduced poeceliids in Australia and New Zeland. In: Meffe GK, Snelson FF Jr, eds. Ecology and evolution of livebearing fishes (Poeceliidae). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. p 333-348.
3. Bell MA. 1978. Fishes of the Santa Clara River system, southern California. Contrib Sci Nat Hist Mus Los Angeles Co 295:1-20.
4. Bence JR, Murdoch WW. 1986. Prey size selection by the mosquitofish and its relation to optimal diet theory. Ecology 67:324-336.
5. Bence JR. 1988. Indirect effects and biological control of mosquitoes by mosquitofish. J Appl Ecol 25:505-521.
6. Castleberry DT, Cech JJ Jr. 1986. Physiological responses of a native and introduced desert fish to environmental stressors. Ecology 67:912-918.
7. Courtenay WR Jr, Meffe GK. 1989. Small fishes in strange places: a review of introduced poeceliids. In: Meffe GK, Snelson FF Jr., eds. Ecology and evolution of livebearing fishes (Poeceliidae). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. p 301-331.
8. Gamradt SC, Kats LB. 1996. Effect of introduced crayfish and mosquitofish on California newts. Conserv Biol 10:1155-1162.
9. Gratz NS, Legner EF, Meffe GK, Bay EC, Service MW, Swanson C, Cech JJ Jr, Laird M. 1996. Comments on "Adverse assessments of Gambusia affinis." J Am Mosq Control Assoc 12:160-166.
10. Greenfield DW, Greenfield T. 1972. Introgressive hybridization between Gila orcutti and Hesperoleucus symmetricus (Pisces: Cyprinidae) in the Cuyama River basin, California. I. Meristics, morphometrics and breeding. Copeia 1972:849-859.
11. Grubb JC. 1972. Differential predation by Gambusia affinis on the eggs of seven species of anuran amphibians. Am Midl Nat 88:102-108.
12. Goodell JA, Kats LB. 1999. Effects of introduced mosquitofish on Pacific treefrogs and the role of alternative prey. Conserv Biol 13:921-924.
13. Hayes MP, Jennings MR. 1986. Decline of ranid frog species in western North America: are bullfrogs (Rana catesbeiana) responsible? J Herpetol 20:490-509.
14. Kramer VL, Garcia R, Colwell AE. 1988. An evaluation of Gambusia affinis and Bacillus thuringiensis var. israelensis as mosquito control agents in California wild rice fields. J Am Mosq Control Assoc 4:470-478.
15. Lawler SP, Dritz D, Strange T, Holyoak M. 1999. Effects on introduced mosquitofish and bullfrogs on the threatened California red-legged frog. Conserv Biol 13:613-622.
16. Merritt RW, Cummins KW, eds. 1996. An introduction to the aquatic insects of North America. 3rd edition. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing.
17. Meyer RP, Durso SL. 1999. Identification of the mosquitoes of California. Sacramento: Mosquito and Vector Control Association of California.
18. Minckley WL. 1999. Ecological review and management recommendations for recovery of the endangered Gila topminnow. Great Basin Nat 59:203-244.
19. Moyle PB. 2002. Inland fishes of California. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press.
20. Offill YA, Walton WE. 1999. Comparative efficacy of the threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) and the mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis) for mosquito control. J Am Mosq Control Assoc 15:380-390.
21. Richards C, Soltz DL. 1986. Feeding of rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri) and arroyo chubs (Gila orcutti) in a California mountain stream. Southwest Nat 31:250-253.
22. Rupp HR. 1996. Adverse assessment of Gambusia affinis: an alternate view for mosquito control practitioners. J Am Mosq Control Assoc 12:155-159.
23. Sawara Y. 1974. Reproduction in the mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis), a freshwater fish introduced into Japan. Jpn J Ecol (Otsu) 24:140-146.
24. Sheller FJ, Fagan WF, Unmack PJ. 2006. Using survival analysis to study translocation success in the Gila topminnow (Poeciliopsis occidentalis). Ecol Appl 16:1771-1784.
25. Swanson C, Cech JJ Jr, Piedrahita RH. 1996. Mosquitofish: biology, culture and use in mosquito control. Elk Grove: Mosquito Vector Control Association of California.
26. Swift C, Haglund TR, Ruiz M, Fisher RN. 1993. The status and distribution of freshwater fishes of southern California. Bull South Calif Acad Sci 92:101-167.
27. SYSTAT Version 9.01®. 1998. Users Manual. Chicago: SPSS, Inc.
28. Tres JA. 1992. Breeding biology of the arroyo chub, Gila orcutti (Pisces: Cyprinidae) [M.S. thesis]. Pomona, CA: California State Polytechnic University. 73 p.
29. Van Dam AR. 2007. Evaluating Gila orcutti for use in mosquito control and the effect of fish exudates on Culicid oviposition site choice [M.S. thesis]. Department of Entomology, University of California, Riverside. 72 p.
30. Walton WE. 2007. Larvivorous fish including Gambusia. In: Floore T, ed. Biorational control of mosquitoes. Mount Laurel, NJ: American Mosquito Control Association. J Am Mosq Control Assoc 23(2: Suppl.):184-220.
31. Walton WE, Mulla MS. 1991. Integrated control of Culex spp. in experimental wetlands. Bull Soc Vector Ecol 16:203-221.
32. Wells AW, Diana JS. 1975. Survey of the freshwater fishes and their habitats in the coastal drainages of southern California. Los Angeles: Report of the California Department of Fish and Game, Inland Fish Branch. 360 p.