Corresponding author: Lubabalo Mofu ( l.mofu@saiab.ac.za ) Academic editor: Emili García-Berthou
© 2019 Lubabalo Mofu, Ross N. Cuthbert, Tatenda Dalu, Darragh J. Woodford, Ryan J. Wasserman, Jaimie T. A. Dick, Olaf L. F. Weyl.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Mofu L, Cuthbert RN, Dalu T, Woodford DJ, Wasserman RJ, Dick JTA, Weyl OLF (2019) Impacts of non-native fishes under a seasonal temperature gradient are forecasted using functional responses and abundances. NeoBiota 49: 57-75. https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.49.34986
|
Developing predictive methods to forecast the impacts of existing and emerging invasive species is of critical importance to biodiversity conservation. However, invader impacts are context-dependent, making reliable and robust predictions challenging. In particular, it is unclear how temporal variabilities in relation to temperature regime shifts influence invader ecological impacts. In the present study, we quantify the functional responses of three coexisting freshwater fishes: the native freshwater River Goby Glossogobius callidus, and the non-native Mozambique Tilapia Oreochromis mossambicus and Western Mosquitofish Gambusia affinis, under two temperature treatments using chironomid larvae as prey. This was used along with fish abundance data to determine temporal differences in ecological impacts of each fish species between seasons (i.e. at two corresponding temperatures). All three fish species exhibited potentially population-destabilizing Type II functional responses. Their maximum feeding rates were consistently higher in the warm temperature treatment, whereas attack rates tended to be reduced. Non-native Mozambique Tilapia had the highest maximum feeding rate under both temperature treatments (18 °C and 25 °C), followed by the non-native Western Mosquitofish and lastly the native River Goby, suggesting greater per capita impacts on native prey by non-native fishes. The predatory fish abundances differed significantly according to season, with native River Goby and non-native Mozambique Tilapia generally more abundant than non-native Western Mosquitofish. By multiplying functional response maximum feeding rates with abundances of each fish species across the seasonal gradient, the relative impact potential of non-native Mozambique Tilapia was consistently higher compared to that of native gobies. Western Mosquitofish impacts were less apparent, owing to their low abundances. We demonstrate how seasonal temperature fluctuations affect the relative impact capacities of introduced species and the utility of consumer functional response and the relative impact potential metric in impact forecasting.
Context-dependence, impact assessment, introduced species, relative impact potential, seasonal abundance, thermal regime
Biological invasions are a central driver of global biodiversity loss (
Despite the considerable work conducted on invasive species, predicting ecological impacts of biological invasions has remained elusive (
Methodological developments, which incorporate native/non-native species resource utilization across context-dependencies, have recently provided robust predictive tools for invasion science (
Classically, the functional response has been combined with the ‘numerical response’ to determine the ‘total response’ of consumers (
The current study focuses on one native and two non-native fish species that co-occur in irrigation ponds within the Sundays River Valley, Eastern Cape, South Africa. These are the native River Goby Glossogobius callidus (Smith, 1937), and two non-native species, Mozambique Tilapia Oreochromis mossambicus (Peters, 1852) and Western Mosquitofish Gambusia affinis (Baird and Girard, 1853). The native River Goby is naturally found in estuarine and freshwater habitats (
The collection of animals and all experiments were carried out in compliance with the Eastern Cape Department of Economic Development and Environmental Affairs (DEDEA permit no. CRO 35/17CR and CRO 36/17CR) and ethical clearance was approved by the National Research Foundation – South African Institute for Aquatic Biodiversity (NRF-SAIAB reference no. 25/4/1/5_2017/03).
River Goby, Mozambique Tilapia and Western Mosquitofish individuals were sourced using a 30 m × 2 m seine net with 12 mm mesh wings and an 8 mm mesh cod-end from Dunbrody (33°27'53"S; 25°33'02"E) and Disco Chicks (33°27'26"S; 25°39'57"E) irrigation ponds, Eastern Cape, South Africa. Upon capture, fish were transported to NRF-SAIAB, Grahamstown in continuously aerated containers with source water. Each fish species was housed separately in a controlled temperature and light laboratory and kept under a 12:12 light:dark cycle. Temperature was maintained at either 18 ± 2 °C or 25 ± 2 °C (i.e. experimental temperature groups) for seven days prior to experimentation, with each species acclimated separately in 40 L fish tanks in a closed recirculating system. All fish were maintained on a standardized diet of larval chironomids ad libitum. The chironomid larvae were collected by kick sampling from the Bloukrans River (33°19'06"S; 26°34'22"E) using a kick net (1000 µm). The chironomids were then strained twice through 2.0 mm and then 1.0 mm sieves to obtain the experimental size class (total length (TL) ± standard deviation ((SD) 1.5 ± 0.11 mm) and then rinsed thoroughly with deionized water to remove any other food sources.
Functional response experiments were performed at 18 °C and 25 °C, reflecting respective spring and summer temperatures at the sampling locations. Following
The fish predator abundance data were obtained from the NRF-SAIAB`s monitoring program of irrigation ponds in the Sundays River Valley, Eastern Cape, South Africa. Abundance from two irrigation ponds were used, ML Swart (33°24'33"S; 25°29'04"E), and River Bend (33°26'23"S; 25°42'25"E). The pond names represent either the property or farm owner’s name, as recorded by the Lower Sundays River Water User Association. These ponds were selected on the basis that they were surveyed in both spring and summer and that all three species were captured to give abundance estimates. During each survey, the irrigation pond water temperatures were measured using a HANNA HI98129 combo pH and electrical conductivity meter (HANNA Instruments Inc., Woonsocket, USA). Spring (18 °C) and summer (25 °C) abundance estimates were used in this study as they were in line with the experimental temperatures, and reflect seasonal temperature means.
The ponds were surveyed using a 30 m × 2 m siene net with 12 mm mesh wings and an 8 mm mesh cod-end. At least three hauls were conducted per pond and, upon completion of a single haul, all fish were kept alive in a continuously aerated container (20 L) until every seine haul was completed within a pond. Fish were then identified to species-level, enumerated and released back to the water. The abundance data were based on maximum catch field abundances using mean catch per 100 m2.
Generalized linear models (GLMs) assuming a Poisson error distribution and log link were used to analyze overall prey consumption with respect to species, temperature and prey supply. Likewise, GLMs were used to compare fish abundances with respect to species, season and pond. Non-significant terms and interactions were removed stepwise to obtain minimum adequate models (
To distinguish between Type II and III functional responses, logistic regression of the proportion of prey consumed as a function of initial prey density was performed (but see also
where Ne is the number of prey eaten, N0 is the initial density of prey, a is the attack rate, h is the handling time and T is the experiment duration (fixed at 1). To enable model fitting, the Lambert W function was used (needed as Ne appears on both sides of the equation; (
We calculated relative impact potential (RIP) of native (i.e. River Goby) and non-native (i.e. Mozambique Tilapia, Western Mosquitofish) species using the mean bootstrapped functional response maximum feeding rate (FR) and abundance (AB) for the three species at each season and pond (
when RIP < 1, the predicted impact of the non-native fish is predicted to be less than the native; when RIP = 1, there is no difference in impact between the fish species; whereas when RIP > 1, the non-native has a greater impact than the native. To integrate uncertainty into the RIP score, a probability density function (pdf) was applied using the standard deviation (SD) of the FR and AB estimates and this generated 80% confidence intervals (CIs) (see
Prey survival of larval chironomids was 99% in control groups with predators absent, and thus prey mortality in the experimental groups was attributed to predation. Overall consumption was significantly different among fish species (χ2 = 221.67, df = 2, p < 0.001). Native River Goby consumed significantly fewer prey than both non-native Mozambique Tilapia (z = 14.61, p < 0.001) and non-native Western Mosquitofish (z = 8.43, p < 0.001). Mozambique Tilapia, in turn, consumed significantly more prey than Western Mosquitofish overall (z = 6.41, p < 0.001). Consumption was also significantly greater at the higher temperature, analogous with the summer season (χ2 = 179.61, df = 1, p < 0.001), and consumption increased with temperature for all species as there was no significant ‘predator × temperature’ interaction (χ2 = 3.54, df = 2, p = 0.171; Figure
At 18 °C (i.e. spring temperature), all three fish species displayed a Type II functional response (Table
At 25 °C (i.e. summer temperature), all three fish species also exhibited a Type II functional response (Table
Functional response curves for native River Goby (blue circles, solid lines), non-native Mozambique Tilapia (red squares, dashed lines) and non-native Western Mosquitofish (green triangles, dotted lines) at 18 °C (a) and 25 °C (b). Means are ± SE. Filled points are means and unfilled points are raw data.
Parameter estimates from first-order logistic regression of the proportion of consumed prey as a function of prey density, with rounded functional response estimates, a = attack rate; h = handling time, 1/h = maximum feeding rate.
Predator | Temperature | First-order term, p | a | p | h | p | 1/h |
Native River Goby | 18 °C | –0.04, <0.001 | 4.34 | <0.001 | 0.05 | <0.001 | 20.00 |
Non-native Mozambique Tilapia | 18 °C | –0.03, <0.001 | 5.23 | <0.001 | 0.02 | <0.001 | 43.48 |
Non-native Western Mosquitofish | 18 °C | –0.03, <0.001 | 4.74 | <0.001 | 0.04 | <0.001 | 27.78 |
Native River Goby | 25 °C | –0.03, <0.001 | 3.65 | <0.001 | 0.03 | <0.001 | 34.48 |
Non-native Mozambique Tilapia | 25 °C | –0.01, <0.001 | 2.20 | <0.001 | 0.01 | <0.001 | 111.11 |
Non-native Western Mosquitofish | 25 °C | –0.02, <0.001 | 3.80 | <0.001 | 0.02 | <0.001 | 58.82 |
There was a significant ‘species × season × pond’ interaction (χ2 = 92.54, df = 2, p < 0.001; Figure
Under both spring and summer treatments, the non-native Mozambique Tilapia consistently displayed relative impact potential scores > 1 relative to the native River Goby irrespective of focal ponds, suggesting greater impact than the native species (Table
Relative Impact Potential (RIP) using mean bootstrapped maximum feeding rates for non-native Mozambique Tilapia and non-native Western Mosquitofish against native River Goby. Field abundance data are integrated from ML Swart and River Bend ponds in spring and summer. Uncertainties are reflected through 80% confidence intervals (CIs).
Species | Season | Pond | Mean FR maximum feeding ± SD | Mean field abundance ± SD | RIP | CIs | P rip>1 |
Non-native Mozambique Tilapia, native River Goby | Spring | ML Swart | 45.40 ± 11.31, 19.96 ± 3.53 | 2.41 ± 2.84, 2.25 ± 3.10 | 7.25 | 0.42 – 16.32 | 75.17 |
Non-native Mozambique Tilapia, native River Goby | Spring | River Bend | 45.40 ± 11.31, 19.96 ± 3.53 | 2.04 ± 0.69, 5.22± 4.80 | 1.69 | 0.35 – 3.57 | 55.21 |
Non-native Western Mosquitofish, native River Goby | Spring | ML Swart | 26.68 ± 2.87, 19.96 ± 3.53 | 0.19 ± 0.17, 2.25 ± 3.10 | 0.35 | 0.29 – 0.78 | 70.78 |
Non-native Western Mosquitofish, native River Goby | Spring | River Bend | 26.68 ± 2.87, 19.96 ± 3.53 | 2.04 ± 0.69, 5.22 ± 4.80 | 1.01 | 0.22 – 2.11 | 33.40 |
Non-native Mozambique Tilapia, native River Goby | Summer | ML Swart | 125.02 ± 54.57, 32.60 ± 4.10 | 15.50 ± 4.80, 13.70 ± 11.10 | 7.30 | 1.58 – 15.35 | 96.40 |
Non-native Mozambique Tilapia, native River Goby | Summer | River Bend | 125.02 ± 54.57, 32.60 ± 4.10 | 20.10 ± 8.02, 5.41 ± 2.77 | 18.26 | 5.21 – 36.15 | 99.98 |
Non-native Western Mosquitofish, native River Goby | Summer | ML Swart | 97.17 ± 148.60, 32.60 ± 4.10 | 20.70 ± 21.20, 13.70 ± 11.10 | 7.58 | 0.30 – 16.56 | 69.64 |
Non-native Western Mosquitofish, native River Goby | Summer | River Bend | 97.17 ± 148.60, 32.60 ± 4.10 | 0.06 ± 0.13, 5.41 ± 2.77 | 0.05 | 0.00 – 0.09 | 40.20 |
The relative impact potential biplots concur with the relative impact potential scores (Figure
Relative impact potential (RIP) biplots (see also Table
Using the relative impact potential metric proposed by
Temperature differences had a significant effect on the functional response parameters, wherein attack rates were high in spring (i.e. 18 °C) and were reduced in summer (i.e. 25 °C). This result concurs with
Secondly, we show that there was significant variation in fish abundances among species according to season, and also between ponds. Such variation in fish abundances seems to be a common theme, especially in fish communities that co-occur in environments and this is driven by spatial and temporal variation in life-history traits (
Changes in relative impact potential scores with seasonal temperature fluctuations and fish abundances from different localities demonstrate how such context-dependencies can have a critical effect on the relative field impact capacities of introduced species through time (
The present study further demonstrates the usefulness of numerical response proxies such as abundances in rapid assessments of potential impacts of introduced species. Indeed, in many cases, impact predictions are inherently limited if based on per capita impacts alone, given the importance of abundances in discernments of overall offtake rates by consumer populations (
Overall, this study provides further evidence of the strength of the relative impact potential metric in predicting ecological impacts of species and provides an extension to the framework by integrating an environmental gradient, which reflects seasonal temperature fluctuations. The identification of temporal shifts in impact across seasons and habitats in our study presents novel insights into invader impact. In many ecosystems, data on species abundances are still lacking, but since the relative impact potential metric enables impact predictions for species without invasion histories, we recommend more surveys to estimate abundance of potential invaders and/or for practitioners to incorporate other proxies (such as fecundity) into the metric (see
This study forms part of a PhD research project supported by the Professional Development Programme Doctoral Scholarship with the South African Institute for Aquatic Biodiversity (NRF, Grant No. 101039), the CIB/DST Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology (CIB) and the National Research Foundation – South African Research Chairs Initiative of the Department of Science and Technology (Inland Fisheries and Freshwater Ecology, Grant No. 110507) and NRF incentive funding (Grant Nos. 109015 to O.L.F.W., 103581 to D.J.W and 88746 to R.J.W). We acknowledge use of infrastructure and equipment provided by the NRF-SAIAB Research Platform and the funding channelled through the NRF-SAIAB Institutional Support system. Eastern Cape Department of Economic Development and Environmental Affairs (DEDEA) is thanked for issuing research permits. Any opinion, finding and conclusion or recommendation expressed in this material is that of the authors. Consequently, the National Research Foundation of South Africa and CapeNature do not accept any liability in this regard.