Management of interactions between endangered species using habitat restoration

Biological Conservation

Volumn 144, Issue 9, 2011, Pages 2171-2176

  Gumm, J M ^a,b   Snekser, J L ^a   Leese, J M ^a   Little, K P ^a   Leiser, J K ^c   Imhoff, V E ^a   Westrick, B ^d   Itzkowitz, M ^a  

^a LEHIGH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE COUNTY   (United States)

^c Northampton Community College   (United States)

^d KENTUCKY STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Cyprinodon bovinus; Desert springs; Gambusia nobilis; Leon Springs pupfish; Pecos gambusia; Species interactions; Territoriality

Indexed keywords

BREEDING SITE; CONSERVATION PLANNING; EGG PREDATION; ENDANGERED SPECIES; ENDEMIC SPECIES; HABITAT AVAILABILITY; HABITAT RESTORATION; POPULATION SIZE; SPAWNING; TELEOST; TERRITORIALITY;

TEXAS; UNITED STATES;

CYPRINODON BOVINUS; GAMBUSIA; GAMBUSIA NOBILIS;

EID: 79960921595     PISSN: 00063207     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2011.05.006     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Barrows C.W., Swartz M.B., Hodges W.L., Allen M.F., Rotenberry J.T., Li B., Scott T.A., Chen X. A framework for monitoring multiple-species conservation plans. Journal of Wildlife Management 2005, 69:1333-1345.
2. Bascompte J., Stouffer D.B. The assembly and disassembly of ecological networks. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 2009, 364:1781-1787.
3. Boersma P.D., Kareiva P., Fagan W.F., Clark J.A., Hoekstra J.M. How good are endangered species recovery plans?. BioScience 2001, 51:643-650.
4. Brunner R.D., Clark T.W. A practice-based approach to ecosystem management. Conservation Biology 1997, 11:48-58.
5. Clark J.A., Harvey E. Assessing multi-species recovery plans under the endangered species act. Ecological Applications 2002, 12:655-662.
6. Collyer M.L., Novak J.M., Stockwell C.A. Morphological divergence of native and recently established populations of White Sands pupfish (Cyprinodon tularosa). Copeia 2005, 2005:1-11.
7. Echelle, A.A., Echelle, A.F., Kiner, L., Garrett, G.P., Karges, J., Fishers, W.L., 2001. In: Draw, Diamond Y. (Ed.), Final Report: Monitoring Effects of a Renovation Project on Endangered Fish and Invertebrates. T.P.a.W.D. Endangered Resources Branch.
8. Echelle A.F., Echelle A.A., Bonnel L.K., Allen N.L., Brooks J.E., Karges J. Effects of a restoration effort on an endangered pupfish (Cyprinodon bovinus) after genetic introgression by a non-native species. Homenaje al Doctor Andres Resendez Medina 2004, 129-139. Universidad Autonoma de Neuvo Leon, Monterrey, Mexico. M. Loranzo-V, A.J. Contreras-B (Eds.).
9. Echelle A.A., Carson E.W., Echelle A.F., Van Den Bussche R.A., Dowling T.E., Meyer A. Historical biogeography of the new-world pupfish genus Cyprinodon (Teleostei: Cyprinodontidae). Copeia 2005, 2005:320-339.
10. Grumbine R.E. What is ecosystem management. Conservation Biology 1994, 8:27-38.
11. Gumm J.M., Snekser J.L., Itzkowitz M. Conservation and conflict between endangered desert fishes. Biology Letters 2008, 4:655-658.
12. Hocutt C.H., Wiley E.O. The Zoogeography of North American Freshwater Fishes 1968, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
13. Hoekstra J.M., Clark J.A., Fagan W.F., Boersma P.D. A comprehensive review of endangered species act recovery plans. Ecological Applications 2002, 12:630-640.
14. Hubbs C.L., Miller R.R. The Great Basin, with emphasis on glacial and postglacial times. II. The zoological evidence. Bulletin of the University of Utah 1948, 38 Biological Series 10:17-166.
15. Itzkowitz M. The effects of other fish on the reproductive behaviour of the male variegated pupfish, Cyprinodon variegatus (Pisces: Cyprinodontidae). Behaviour 1974, 48:1-22.
16. Jewell S. Multi-species recovery plans. Endangered Species Bulletin 2000, 25:30-31.
17. Kennedy T.A., Finlay J.C., Hobbie S.E. Eradication of invasive Tamarix ramosissma along a desert stream increases native fish density. Ecological Applications 2005, 15:2072-2083.
18. Kodric-Brown A. Establishment and defense of breeding territories in a pupfish (Cyprinodontidae: Cyprinodon). Animal Behaviour 1978, 26:818-834.
19. Kodric-Brown A., Brown J.H. Native fishes, exotic mammals, and the conservation of desert springs. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2007, 5:549-553.
20. Koike H., Echelle A.A., Loftis D., Van Den Bussche R.A. Microsatellite DNA analysis of success in conserving genetic diversity after 33years of refuge management for the desert pupfish complex. Animal Conservation 2008, 11:321-329.
21. LaRoe E.T. Implementation of an ecosystem approach to endangered species conservation. Endangered Species UPDATE 1993, 10:3-6.
22. Leiser J.K., Itzkowitz M. The relative costs and benefits of territorial defense and the two conditional male mating tactics in the Comanche Springs pupfish (Cyprinodon elegans). Acta Ethologica 2002, 5:65-72.
23. Leiser J.K., Itzkowitz M. The costs and benefits of territorial neighbours in a Texas pupfish (Cyprinodon bovinus). Behaviour 2003, 140:97-112.
24. Likens G.E., Walker K.F., Davies P.E., Brookes J., Olley J., Young W.J., Thoms M.C., Lake P.S., Gawne B., Davis J., Arthington A.H., Thompson R., Oliver R.L. Ecosystem science: toward a new paradigm for managing Australia's inland aquatic ecosystems. Marine and Freshwater Research 2009, 60:271-279.
25. Martin A.P., Wilcox J.L. Evolutionary history of Ash Meadows pupfish (genus Cyprinodon) populations inferred using microsatellite markers. Conservation Genetics 2004, 5:769-782.
26. Mills L.S., Soule M.E., Doak D.F. The keystone- species concept in ecology and conservation. BioScience 1993, 43:219-225.
27. Minckley W.L. Translocation as a tool for conserving imperiled fishes: Experiences in western United States. Biological Conservation 1995, 72:297-309.
28. Oro D., Pérez-Rodríguez A., Martínez-Vilalta A., Bertolero A., Vidal F., Genovart M. Interference competition in a threatened seabird community: a paradox for a successful conservation. Biological Conservation 2009, 142:1830-1835.
29. Rogowski D.L., Stockwell C.A. Assessment of the potential impacts of exotic species on populations of white sands pupfish Cyprinodon tularosa. Biological Invasions 2006, 18:79-87.
30. Saunders D.L., Meeuwig J.J., Vincent A.C.J. Freshwater Protected Areas: Strategies for Conservation Áreas Protegidas de Agua Dulce: Estrategias para la Conservación. Conservation Biology 2002, 16:30-41.
31. Shepard W.D. Desert springs-both rare and endangered. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 1993, 3:351-359.
32. Soulé M.E., Estes J.A., Berger J., Martinez Del Rio C. Ecological effectiveness: conservation goals for interactive species. Conservation Biology 2003, 17:1238-1250.
33. Tear T.H., Scott J.M., Hayward P.H., Griffith B. Recovery plans and the endangered species act: are criticisms supported by data?. Conservation Biology 1995, 9:182-192.
34. Thirgood S., Redpath S., Newton I., Hudson P. Raptors and red grouse: conservation conflicts and management solutions. Conservation Biology 2000, 14:95-104.
35. Tylianakis J.M., Didham R.K., Bascompte J., Wardle D.A. Global change and species interactions in terrestrial ecosystems. Ecology Letters 2008, 11:1363.
36. Tylianakis J.M., LalibertÈ E., Nielsen A., Bascompte J. Conservation of species interaction networks. Biological Conservation 2010, 143:2270-2279.
37. Watters J.V., Lema S.C., Nevitt G.A. Phenotype management: a new approach to habitat restoration. Biological Conservation 2003, 112:435-445.
38. Wilcox J.L., Martin A.P. The devil's in the details: genetic and phenotypic divergence between artificial and native populations of the endangered pupfish (Cyprinodon diabolis). Animal Conservation 2006, 9:316-321.