Time‐series analysis of native and non‐native crayfish dynamics in the Thames River Basin (south‐eastern England)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Monitoring is crucial for the conservation of endangered crayfish species as well as for managing and controlling invasive species. Yet, relatively few studies have assessed relationships between native white‐clawed crayfish Austropotamobius pallipes and non‐native signal Pacifastacus leniusculus , narrow‐clawed Astacus leptodactylus , virile Orconectes virilis and red‐swamp Procambarus clarkii crayfishes in freshwater environments at ecologically relevant spatial and temporal scales. Thus, the present study examines the distribution dynamics of native and non‐native crayfishes in the River Thames Basin District (16 133 km 2 , south‐eastern England) over four decades (1971–2010). To reveal geographical bioinvasion and decline patterns, data on occurrences (sampling site, date) of native white‐clawed and four non‐native crayfishes were used to create sequences of decade maps for each species. Cumulative numbers of occupied grid squares were used to construct ‘invasion/decline’ curves and rates. To quantify dynamic features, the frequencies of survey occurrence for each species were subjected to time‐series analysis, followed by cross‐correlation to determine relationships between crayfishes. White‐clawed crayfish was initially widespread, but gradually disappeared after the mid‐1970s, coinciding with the introduction and initial dispersal of signal crayfish. During 2001–2010 white‐clawed crayfish numbers declined steeply. Introduced in the mid‐1980s, narrow‐clawed crayfish spread within a few years, but is now restricted to the east of the basin, where virile and red‐swamp crayfishes were reported with low presence since their introductions in 2006. Dynamics of white‐clawed and signal crayfishes showed the opposing trends with a highly significant negative association. Geographical patterns indicate that non‐native crayfishes were introduced in multiple locations in the study area. Recovery of native crayfish seems unlikely, given the impacts of signal crayfish and the continuing arrival of new crayfish species. This paper demonstrates the utility of using broad temporal and spatial scales for revealing accurate insights on invasion and decline dynamics. Copyright © 2013 Crown copyright.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".