Integrated Pest Management of Invasive Fish: Common Carp
Transcript of Integrated Pest Management of Invasive Fish: Common Carp
Integrated Pest Management of Invasive Fish:Common Carp
Peter W. Sorensen, Przemek Bajer & Lab
University of MinnesotaDept. of Fisheries, Wildlife, and Conservation Biol.
This Talk
Invasive Fish Integrated Pest Management The sea lamprey Introduction to the common carp Integrated, sustainable control An hypothesis and approach An example in North American Midwest Questions?
The world’s ‘worst’ invasive fishes
North America
1.
2.
3.
4.
4.
5.
6
Conventional Control Toxins/ draw-downs/ trapping (mass mortality)
Often unsustainable, damaging (nontargeted) Often not possible (ex. Asian carp)
RotenoneTFM
Integrated Pest Management (IPM)Control of a species using a collection of techniquesthat target specific biological attributes in an economically, socially and ecologically viablemanner that is sustainable over the long-term.
-Specialized biochemistry and physiology-Mechanistic behaviors and life histories-Short generation times
Integrated control of fish(2 species)
The sea lamprey
Sea lamprey invasion triggered collapse of the Great Lakes fisheries…
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Perc
ent o
f Hist
oric
Ave
rage
Abu
ndan
ce
1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990Year
wild lake trout - MI
Lake Superior
lampreyenter lake
?
Herculean Searchfor larvicide
• 6000+ compounds tested• 3-trifluoromethyl-4-nitrophenol (TFM ) found
Early focus on barriers
Life History
Deployment of Lampricides
$1.5 million for treatments each year
$3 million assessment
Search for an integrated program
New Poisoning Techniques New barriers
Sterile males??
??
New traps
Population Models
Summary: Sea Lamprey Control
1. Complex mix, designed to enhance TFM2. An open system but a simple and ‘unusual’
creature.3. A qualified success Many native fish have returned BUT Costs high TFM is still the backbone.
The common carp-a teleost-oviparous-long-lived-physiologically resilient
A fish from shallow seas in central Asia…
Invasion Perpetuated by Man
Catholic Church
The Romans
U.S. Fish Commission-stocking Australia
Fish farming
Global but especially damaging in a few places
Adult carp destroy habitats and water quality
Algae bloom
Plantsdecline
Nutrients (N, P)
‘Bio
logi
cal p
ump’ X
Shading
Uprooting
200410 kg/ha
2006100 kg/ha
2008250 kg/ha
Damaging to Plants, Waterfowl and Fish
Carp Biomass
Hennepin-Hoper Lakes, IL after carp invasion
Extant Control Techniques-Mix of unselective removal & exclusion techniques-Expensive, usually unsustainable
- VARIABLE RESULTS
Rotenone
Adult seining
Water Draw-downs
Electrical Barriers
Seining
Drawdowns
Carp seperation cages
Integrated Carp Managementin Tasmania
A Closed population in a sensitive lake with low biodiversity
Monthly carp captures from Lake Crescent February 1995 - November 2003
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
Nu
mb
er
of
pro
ce
sse
d c
arp
Total of 7753 carp removed and processed. Population estimates
than 20 females remain
‘Judas males’ to capture aggregations
Spawning sabotage using traps and lime
10 years, 2 million dollars
Now down to few females…
Adult removal and spawning sabotage
Summary: Carp in Tasmania
Simple, clever combination A closed system with sensitive species Qualified success Suppressed but not extirpated No poisons used What if they are introduced again Very expensive
Overarching goal:‘To develop biologically and economically sound
plans for controlling carp in MN lakes over the long-term by exploiting its life history*’
* not known!
Integrated Control of Carp inMinnesota , 2005-
Initial Sub-Objectives 1.Do carp use pheromones, and might they be useful?
2.Do carp have specific aggregate for spawning or other reasons and might they be targeted?
3. Is carp abundance attributable to specific factors that might be targeted (population dynamics*)?
* Models but shockingly little data!
1. PheromonesChemical signals that pass between organisms of the same species (Karlson & Luscher 1959, Sorensen & Wyatt 2000).
O
OH
O
O
OS
O
OHßOH
O
O
O
Female PGF pheromone attracts carp to traps in the field (Li & Sorensen)
0
1
2
3
10 20 30 50Mea
n nu
mbe
r of f
ish
in th
e ra
nge
(+SE
)
Distance from a trap (m)
ImplantBlank
P = 0.01
Mean distance from a trap• Implant: 28.97 ± 2.80 m (N = 27)• Blank: 38.54 ± 2.19 m (N = 12)P < 0.01
COOH
OH
OH O
Sorensen and Li, unpublished
2. Spawning, can it or other aggregations be sabotaged?
Radio-tracking 80 adult carp during spawning season in a system of interconnected lakes and marshes
Weak spawning site preferences (and strong propensity to migrate and then return)
Spawning sabotage not reasonable
19
31
31
70
7
2
Bajer & Sorensen (2010)
Aggregations in Winter(targetable?)
3. Why are there so many carp? (and can we do something about it)
Numbers
Ages
LakeSamplingsessions Marked Recaps
Population Estimate(95% CI)
Biomass(kg/ha)
Dutch 11 2088 122 13,312 (11,300 – 16,100)
371*
Echo 13 929 72 5,666(4,605 - 7,361 )
326
Susan 11 361 15 4,459(5,700-3,661)
307
ABUNDANCE
*150 kg/ha is considered damaging
Recruitment: highly sporadic in MN
0
500
1000
1500
2000
250019
8819
8919
9019
9119
9219
9319
9419
9519
9619
9719
9819
9920
0020
0120
0220
0320
0420
0520
06
Num
ber o
f car
pSusan & Marsh winterkill
? ?
Marsh winterkills
Marsh winterkills
Marsh winterkills
Rem
oval
of c
arp
and
BH
Bajer and Sorensen; Biol Invasions 2009
Why winterkill?Lakes that winterkill are unstable, lack predators that otherwise eat carp eggs and larvae….
Summer-time unstable nursery habitats(Australia)
Test-1: Carpsim shows winterkill can explicitly explain the densities we measure
YOY carp presentNo YOY carp present
> 200 / net
> 130 / net
Test-3: When we stock lakes with fertilized carp eggs, eggs are eaten in normoxic lakes
but NOT normoxic lakes (PB)%
Sur
viva
l to
hatc
h da
y
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Open Control Coarse mesh
normoxic
hypoxic
A Model of Invasiveness
Riley
Susan Marsh
Recruits?R
ecruits?
Nursery
Adult Refuge
Adult Refuge
Bajer and Sorensen 2010
Integrated Carp Control in MN
I. Diagnosis problem and establish goals
II. Treat carp based on Population Dynamicsa. Remove a critical number of adultsb. Suppress recruitment (and/or spawning)c. Suppress emigration (if necessary)
III. Monitor and Model
IV. Adapt
A ‘Typical’ Example:Riley Creek Chain of Lakes
http://www.bwsr.state.mn.us/publications/WD_Guidebook/RileyPurgatory.pdf
RICE MARSH
ANN
SUSAN
RILEY
Lucy
1. Targeted removal of adult carp: Judas fish2008 – population estimated: 4,181 carp (Lake Susan)
January 2009 – Judas fish 3278 removed (78%)
January 2010 183 removed
April 2010 138 removed (at the carp barrier) 590 remain in the lake (15% of original)
2. ‘Monitoring’ fish movement (with an aim to controlling recruitment)
Construct simple ($100) fish gate to ensure no carp movement
3. Monitor and Suppress RecruitmentAerate nursery, encourage game-fish, monitor
RESULTS: Carp Abundance
So far, effective + no signs of recruitment…
Carp movement is predictable and stoppable
Date
4.1.20
09
4.7.20
09
4.14.2
009
4.21.2
009
4.28.2
009
5.05.2
009
5.12.2
009
5.19.2
009
5.27.2
009.
6.01.2
009
Cou
nt
0
10
20
30
40
50
Tem
pera
ture
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
Carp Pike TemperatureDepth (cm)
Rain event
Results: Aquatic vegetation recovered
Before removalAfter removal
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Vege
tativ
e co
ver %
Depth
2008
2009
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
30-A
pr
14-M
ay
28-M
ay
11-J
un
25-J
un
9-Ju
l
23-J
ul
6-A
ug
20-A
ug
3-S
ep
17-S
ep
1-O
ct
15-O
ct
Wat
er C
larit
y (m
)20082009
Results: Water clarity improvements in L. Susan
Before removal
Sources: MPCA, UofM
2010
1. Three components (at present):-recruitment, immigration, adult removal
2. Works well in moderate sized, semi-closed lakes3. A success (so far):
- Large sustainable drop in carp density- Substantial increase in water quality- No poisons- Affordable- Well received
4. Could be improved and expanded… (barely touched)5. The common carp system is suitable for experiments
Integrated Pest Management in Minnesota
SUMMARY:
1. IPM can work! 2. It likely must focus on recruitment, density
dependence.3. It will be situation specific (species, locale, scales)4. Solid biological foundation is still needed5. Modeling is useful esp. if good data exists6. It can /should set the stage for more sophisticated and
diverse techniques such as genetic control.
FUNDING
Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed DistrictRamsey Washington Metro Watershed District
Test-2: ‘We’ now often find age-0 carp in hypoxic lakes, but never in normoxic lakes (PB)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70bl
uegi
llsu
nfis
h
blac
k cr
appi
e
larg
emou
thba
ss
north
ern
pike
yello
w p
erch
gree
n su
nfis
h
blac
kbu
llhea
d
adul
t car
p
YO
Y c
arp
Hypoxic N=12
Normoxic N=13
Aver
age
(+-S
E) c
atch
per
trap
net
Removal of carp in Lake Riley 94% population removed using Judas fish on 3/5/10
Recruitment following winterkill is common(ex. Lake Echo)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
Win
ter d
isso
lved
oxy
gen
(mg/
L)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
Num
ber o
f car
p
TREATING: Riley Chain of Lakes
Population*
MORTALITY!
Immigration* Emigration
SpawningHatchingEgg sac resorption
Growth
Prevent/ control winterkill to enhance predation*
monitor
* = Monitor
Recruitment*
2) However, not all carp need be removed?(to improve water quality)
Is 100 kg carp /ha a threshold for severe
damage in shallow lakes?Bajer et al. 2009
L. Susan!
?
Hennepin Hoper Lakes, IL, USA
Lake Keller (refuge lake with Bluegills)
RESULTS:- eggs ‘disappear’ within 3 days (prior to hatch)- 1000’s of eggs in bluegill sunfish guts
- SUMMER: No young carp found in Lake
Bluegill Predationin Lake Keller
05
101520253035404550
1 2 3 4 5 6Day after Spawning
Avg
# Eg
gs
in 1
00g
Vege
tatio
n
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
# Eggs in Stom
ach
Vegetation
Stomach
Keller Lake Trap Catch
Blue
gill
Bullh
ead
Youn
g C
arp
Adul
t Car
p
Cra
ppie
Fath
ead
min
now
Gre
en s
unfis
h
Gol
dfis
h
Hyb
rid s
unfis
h
Bass
Pike
Pum
pkin
seed
Yello
w p
erch
Mea
n co
unt
0
2
4
6
8
10
50100150200250300350400450500
18.3° C
Population Dynamics!
Population
Mortality
Recruitment*
Immigration Emigration
* Survival of fertilized eggs to adulthood
SpawningHatchingEgg sac resorbtion
Growth
A dashed line signifies intermittency
1. Remove a critical targeted number of adult carp
Tracked carp aggregation in January under ice n corner Seined and removed 3278 carp, over 20,000 lbs (78% of population) Biomass reduced from 307 lbs/acre to 90 lbs/acre
Winter seining – Lake Susan
Reduction in carp biomass
Wat
er q
ualit
yTurbid water
Clear water
Many ways to control abundance(the best will address the local situation)
Population
MORTALITY
Recruitment*
Immigration Emigration
SpawningHatchingEgg sac resorbtion
Growth
Winter 2008/2009:-78% of the population in Lake Susan- 35% of population from Lake Riley
Winter/summer 2009, repeat at critical level:- Ongoing
1. Remove Critical Number of Adult Carp
2008/2009: Temporary ($100) barriers to stop spawning carp moving into winterkilled marsh (other fish passed)
2. Control winterkill effects, Phase I:
Monitoring Temp Barrier
Life HistoryEggs
???
??????
2. They move: Approximately 1/3 of adult carp move in/out wetlands to spawn (ex. Riley-Susan-Marsh)
Study lakesStudy lakes
Echo
Dog
Dutch
Susan, Rice Marsh, Riley
Olfaction plays a critical role in carp sexual behavior
Monitored for 1 hr
N = 7 pairs
Spawning activity
0
5
10
15
20
Nose-plugged Sham control
Male carp treated
# sp
awni
ng a
ct /
min
(mea
n +S
E)
P < 0.01
Study 1 Hypothesis: The abundance of age-0 carp will
be higher in hypoxic lakes which have lower density of predatory fishes that forage on carp eggs and larvae
Study Design – step 2 Mortality of carp eggs determined in 2 normoxic and 2
hypoxic lakes
2-4 Carp spawning areas located in each lake Carp eggs attached to yarn floats In each area we placed:
8 in open water (fish + invertebrates) 4 in coarse mesh bags (invertebrates only) 4 in fine mesh controls Counted daily until hatching
Diet of native fishes examined in one normoxic lake
Invasive Species ‘an alien [nonnative / exotic / introduced] species whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm
or harm to human health’
(President Clinton’s - Executive Order 13112)