4.6 Article

Vectors and Timing of Freshwater Invasions in Great Britain

期刊

CONSERVATION BIOLOGY
卷 23, 期 6, 页码 1526-1534

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL PUBLISHING, INC
DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01249.x

关键词

ballast water; contaminants; invasive species; invasive species policy; nursery plants; pet trade

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nonindigenous freshwater species cause large ecological and economic impacts in Great Britain. In response the government is in the process of implementing a broad, new nonindigenous species strategy. We assembled a list of all nonindigenous freshwater species that are or were established in Great Britain, their date of first record, and their vector of introduction. This list provides a baseline against which the success of new policies can be assessed. Because the biota of Great Britain has been well recorded, our results provide a highly resolved case study of the vectors and drivers of species transport and establishment. A total of 117 nonindigenous freshwater species are currently established in Great Britain; a further 17 species were once established but are now extirpated. Between 1800 and 2000 the number of established species increased at an accelerating rate, and this increase correlated with the growth in human population and gross domestic product. The construction of large reservoirs in Great Britain occurred over a short period and overlapped high rates of new species establishment, indicating that habitat modification may have been an important driver of establishment. Nonindigenous species now account for 24% of fish, 12% of plant, 54% of amphibian, and 88% of decapod crustacean freshwater species richness in Great Britain. The ornamental trades have been responsible for the greatest percentages of intentionally (73%) and unintentionally (34%) introduced species that have become established. Shipping and aquaculture have also been strong vectors. These vectors should be prioritized for management within the new nonindigenous species strategy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据