FISHY NEWS

DAM! WHERED ALL THE FISH GO?!

Human activity one of the major causes of invasive fish species affecting native populations
By Marisa E. Patrick

Thursday, February 19, 2014 (France, Germany, Canada) Several researching teams from
across the globe have come together to sort out some fishy business. A study in 2008 conducted
by Fabien Leprieur, Olivier Beauchard, Simon Blanchet, Thierry Oberdorff, and Sebastien
Brosse, has analyzed the effects of global human economic activity in relation to the introduction
of invasive species in freshwater systems. Together, the team collected a global data set
pertaining to more than 1,000 freshwater river basins, which cover more than 80% of the Earths
surface. However, the World Conservation Union describes these locations also possessing the
highest numbers of threatened fish species. The team set out to determine as to whether the fish
were threatened by natural factors, human factors alone, or a mixture of the two.
The team stated, Our results revealed six global invasion hotspots where non-native
species represent more than a quarter of the total number of species per basin. Their report
meticulously detailed the regions spanning from the Americas to Europe and Africa, Australia,
and almost everywhere in between. According to the Red List from the World Conservation
Union (IUCN), the species within these regions may be at the highest risk of extinction,
however, the Northern Hemisphere alone possesses the largest population of invasive species.
The team derived three possible hypotheses as to the influx of non-native species, only proving
one as credibly supportive; human activity, biotic resistance, and biotic acceptance. Human
activity, the only proven theory, states through the disturbances in natural environmental
processes via human development, natural landscapes transform and large amounts of biotic
pressure is applied. The second theory, biotic resistance, pertains to the idea in which a
community already filled with a large amount of native species will counteract the development
of invasive species. This argument was not supported, as obviously large amounts of invasive
species were thriving in locations. Furthermore, the third theory of biotic acceptance depicted
an idea in which an environment which is supportive of native species, must also be supportive
of non-native species. However, too many factors are present to define this theory as true or
supported. Therefore, the team primarily focused on the role in which human development
effects fish populations and invasive introduction.
The team described the introduction of invasive species as a process formed of three
stages. The first is the initial dispersal of non-native organisms via multiple processes. The
second stage pertains to the discovery of consumptive materials and nutrients, or adaptation for,
by the non-native fish species, allowing for the development of self-sustaining populations.
The final stage involves the spread of the invasive organisms until the eventual imbalance or

takeover of the native species. However, these organisms must first be introduced for the second
and third stages to be performed.
Human activity considered was gross domestic product rates, population density, and the
percentage of urban area. Overall, the rate and magnitude at which cities and populations
developed. Out of all other factors, mostly including natural processes, the team calculated
humans had the greatest independent effect on [invasive] species richness, totally to over 70%
of the overall contribution. From that percent, 43% was due to gross domestic product resulting
from the activity gained from a specific river basin. The larger percentages were found to be
mostly due to the natural, or instinctive, biological nature of humans. Evolution has instilled
within us to live near water, as water is key to survival. However, with populations so large,
water must be mass transported and thus, developing regions are more likely to introduce
freshwater habitat disturbances such as dams and reservoirs which drastically alter the flow of
the natural river regime. When these barriers are put in place, biogeographical islands are
formed. Populations become isolated demotes the growth of native species. However, due to the
adaptive nature of most thriving invasive species, these non-native populations take over. This
greatly impacts the biodiversity of the region due to the fact many species are endemic, or native
to the region for species nutrient supplies and factors. When these supplies are cut off or altered,
a species has difficulties surviving, especially when their resources are being reduced
exponentially due to the incoming invasive species. Furthermore, locks are made for trade and
importation. With importation, invasive species and disease are transported. Finally, the demand
for major supplies of goods requires accelerated transportation, increasing the rates at which
invasive species are introduced.
Between the combination of nutrient depletion and growing invasive populations, native
fish also face the difficulties of habitat loss, pollution, and overexploitation from recreational
activities due to the ever growing human population located nearby. The team discovered that
over 20% of the 680 species on the Red List for the regions were threated directly due to the
invasive populations. The team concluded that once an invasive population because selfsustainable, the economic costs for removal are extremely high and the process is extremely
difficult and most of the time must be constantly supervised. Therefore, the team proposed
solutions in anticipation of invasive introduction.
The team demanded regulations on importation shipments be stronger regulated.
Sanitation and overlook of vessels could also be considered. The importation of invasive species,
whether purposeful or not, was also suggested to be strongly prohibited with major consequences
if occurring. The design of efficient control programs was also suggested, as the economic costs
of ensuring the safety of native species would be more efficient and less expensive than the
removal of future invasions. The team stated, anticipating such potential biodiversity threats
should therefore be a priority. One can easily find themselves in agreement as freshwater fish
makeup largely for the primary sources of protein in world populations, and with the data found,
freshwater rivers seem to be the primarily threatened ecosystems. However, scaling back on
industry seems to be an option no one wants to oversea. As of now, the fish keep on swimming.

P
Lo S

BIOLOGY

Fish Invasions in the Worlds

River Systems: When Natural
Processes Are Blurred by Human
Activities
1*

Fabien Leprieur , Olivier Beauchard , Simon Blanchet , Thierry Oberdorff , Se

bastien Brosse

1 Laboratoire Evolution and Diversite Biologique, UMR 5174, CNRS-Universite Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France, 2 Faculty of Sciences, Department of
Biology, Ecosystem Management Research Group University of Antwerp, Antwerpen (Wilrijk), Belgium, 3 De partement de Biologie, Centre
Interuniversitaire de Recherche sur le Saumon Atlantique (CIRSA) and Que bec-Oce an, Universite Laval, Sainte-Foy, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada, 4
Institut de Recherche pour le De veloppement (UR131), Antenne au Muse um National dHistoire Naturelle, Paris, France

Because species invasions are a principal driver of the human-induced biodiversity crisis, the
identification of the major determinants of global invasions is a prerequisite for adopting sound
conservation policies. Three major hypotheses, which are not necessarily mutually exclusive, have
been proposed to explain the establishment of non-native species: the human activity hypothesis,
which argues that human activities facilitate the establishment of non-native species by disturbing
natural landscapes and by increasing propagule pressure; the biotic resistance hypothesis,
predicting that species-rich communities will readily impede the establishment of non-native species;
and the biotic acceptance hypothesis, predicting that environmentally suitable habitats for
native species are also suitable for non-native species. We tested these hypotheses and report here
a global map of fish invasions (i.e., the number of non-native fish species established per river basin)
using an original worldwide dataset of freshwater fish occurrences, environmental variables, and
human activity indicators for 1,055 river basins covering more than 80% of Earths surface. First,
we identified six major invasion hotspots where non-native species represent more than a quarter of
the total number of species. According to the World Conservation Union, these areas are also
characterised by the highest proportion of threatened fish species. Second, we show that the human
activity indicators account for most of the global variation in non-native species richness, which is
highly consistent with the human activity hypothesis. In contrast, our results do not provide
support for either the biotic acceptance or the biotic resistance hypothesis. We show that
the biogeography of fish invasions matches the geography of human impact at the global scale,
which means that natural processes are blurred by human activities in driving fish invasions in the
worlds river systems. In view of our findings, we fear massive invasions in developing countries with
a growing economy as already experienced in developed countries. Anticipating such potential
biodiversity threats should therefore be a priority.

Citation: Leprieur F, Beauchard O, Blanchet S, Oberdorff T, Brosse S (2008) Fish invasions in the worlds river systems: When natural processes are blurred by
human activities. PLoS Biol 6(2): e28. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.006002

PLoS Biology | www.plosbiology.org

February 2008 | Volume 6 | Issue 2 | e28