MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2520274928

Population Ecology of Introduced Flathead Catfish

2004· article· en· W2520274928 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
William E. Pine

Notice bibliographique

RevueNCSU Libraries Repository (North Carolina State University Libraries) · 2004
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEnvironmental Science
ThématiqueMarine and fisheries research
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésFlatheadCatfishEcologyPopulationFisheryEnvironmental scienceBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>Demography
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Invasive aquatic species are becoming increasingly problematic for aquatic ecologists and resource managers, as the ecological and economic impacts of introductions become better known. The flathead catfish Pylodictis olivaris is a large piscivorous fish native to most of the interior basin of the United States. Via legal and illegal introductions, they have been introduced into at least 13 U.S. states and one Canadian province primarily along the Atlantic slope. I used a variety of capture-recapture models to estimate flathead catfish population parameters in three North Carolina coastal plain rivers (Contentnea Creek, Northeast Cape Fear River, and Lumber River). My estimates using a Jolly-Seber model were hindered by low capture probabilities and high temporary emigration. Reasonable estimates were possible using a robust-design framework to estimate population size and temporary emigration with supplemental information from a radio-telemetry study to examine model assumptions. Population size estimates using a robust design model including temporary emigration ranged from 4 to 31 fish/km (&gt;125-mm total length, TL) of sampling reach. Additional analyses showed high rates of temporary emigration (&gt;90%), independently supported by radio-telemetry results. I also examined flathead catfish diet in these rivers and found that flathead catfish fed on a wide variety of freshwater fish and invertebrates, anadromous fish, and occasionally estuarine fish and invertebrates. Fish or crayfish comprised more than 50% of the stomach contents by percent occurrence, percent-by-number, and percent-by-weight in all rivers and years. A significant difference in the diet composition percent-by-number was found between Contentnea Creek and the Northeast Cape Fear River. Significant differences were not detected between years within Contentnea Creek but were found within the Northeast Cape Fear River. Feeding intensity (as measured by stomach fullness) was highest in the Northeast Cape Fear River associated with a lower mean size of feeding flathead catfish in this river than of those in Contentnea Creek or the Lumber River. A significant correlation between diet item length and flathead catfish total length was found for Contentnea Creek in 2001. This relationship was not significant in the Northeast Cape Fear River in either year. Based on the diet composition data collected in this study and those published on native and introduced flathead catfish populations, I am not able to support or refute the hypothesis that flathead catfish are preferentially feeding on specific species or families. However, the flathead catfish populations examined here are well established, and the greatest impact from selective predation may have occurred immediately following introduction. Based on my findings, flathead catfish could restructure or suppress native fish communities in coastal rivers through direct predation because of their primarily piscivorous food habits. To evaluate the potential ecosystem impact of this invasive species on the native fish community, I developed an ecosystem simulation model (including flathead catfish) based on empirical data collected for a North Carolina coastal river. Model results suggest that flathead catfish suppress native fish community biomass by 5-50% through both predatory and competitive interactions. However, these reductions could be mitigated through sustained exploitation of flathead catfish by recreational or commercial fishers at levels equivalent to those for native flathead catfish populations (6-25% annual exploitation). These findings demonstrate the potential for using directed harvest of an invasive species to mitigate the negative impacts to native species.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,086
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0000,003
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,005
Tête enseignante GPT0,170
Écart entre enseignants0,165 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations11
Publié2004
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueNCSU Libraries Repository (North Carolina State University Libraries)Même sujetMarine and fisheries researchTravaux en français237 207