MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417179521 · doi:10.1002/ecs2.70489

Removing invasive stream macrofauna shifts nontarget invertebrate mesofauna through facilitation

2025· article· en· W4417179521 on OpenAlexaff
J. Kenneth Whitt, Christopher J. Patrick, Peter J. Lisi, Peter B. McIntyre, Michael J. Blum, J. Derek Hogan

Bibliographic record

VenueEcosphere · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFreshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecology
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersStrategic Environmental Research and Development Program
KeywordsInvertebrateBenthic zoneCaddisflyAbundance (ecology)PredationIntroduced speciesGammarus pulexInvasive speciesFaunaHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Positive interactions among non‐native species can drive invasional meltdowns to the detriment of native biota. Here, we assessed whether targeted control of aquatic invasive species (AIS) can benefit native species by eliminating synergies among invaders. We did so by monitoring changes in the abundance of native and non‐native benthic invertebrates following the targeted removal of non‐native fish and crustaceans in 10 streams on the island of Oʻahu (Hawaiʻi, USA). Benthic invertebrate sampling was conducted in paired control reaches and removal reaches in each stream immediately following removals, one month following removals, and then at 2‐ to 3‐month intervals for 16 months. Temporal variations in the abundance, composition, and diversity of the native and non‐native invertebrates were compared among streams and between treatment reaches using multivariate data visualization and mixed‐effects models. We observed both seasonal shifts in overall community composition and treatment‐specific effects on the abundance of common taxa that were mediated by the number of AIS fish removed. Most notably, as removal of non‐native poeciliid fish increased, we observed concordant decreases (−32 ± 13% mean ± SE) in non‐native caddisfly ( Cheumatopsyche analis ) and increases (122 ± 69%) in partially native chironomid midges in the treatment reaches relative to the control reaches. Our results provide experimental evidence supporting the hypothesis that predation by introduced poeciliids on midges indirectly facilitates non‐native caddisfly populations via competitive release. Our findings indicate that removal of poeciliids allows midges to outcompete non‐native caddisflies and increase their abundance. Our study illustrates that targeted removal of non‐native species can have cascading negative effects on other introduced taxa. Understanding trophic relationships among invasive and native species can thus enhance management efforts by maximizing benefits to native species relative to effort and cost.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.507
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.010

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.202 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcosphereSame topicFreshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecologyFrench-language works237,207