Invasion versus Isolation: Trade-Offs in Managing Native Salmonids with Barriers to Upstream Movement

Abstract: Conservation biologists often face the trade‐off that increasing connectivity in fragmented landscapes to reduce extinction risk of native species can foster invasion by non‐native species that enter via the corridors created, which can then increase extinction risk. This dilemma is acute for stream fishes, especially native salmonids, because their populations are frequently relegated to fragments of headwater habitat threatened by invasion from downstream by 3 cosmopolitan non‐native salmonids. Managers often block these upstream invasions with movement barriers, but isolation of native salmonids in small headwater streams can increase the threat of local extinction. We propose a conceptual framework to address this worldwide problem that focuses on 4 main questions. First, are populations of conservation value present (considering evolutionary legacies, ecological functions, and socioeconomic benefits as distinct values)? Second, are populations vulnerable to invasion and displacement by non‐native salmonids? Third, would these populations be threatened with local extinction if isolated with barriers? And, fourth, how should management be prioritized among multiple populations? We also developed a conceptual model of the joint trade‐off of invasion and isolation threats that considers the opportunities for managers to make strategic decisions. We illustrated use of this framework in an analysis of the invasion‐isolation trade‐off for native cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii) in 2 contrasting basins in western North America where invasion and isolation are either present and strong or farther away and apparently weak. These cases demonstrate that decisions to install or remove barriers to conserve native salmonids are often complex and depend on conservation values, environmental context (which influences the threat of invasion and isolation), and additional socioeconomic factors. Explicit analysis with tools such as those we propose can help managers make sound decisions in such complex circumstances.     

Prevalence of the Crayfish Plague Pathogen Aphanomyces astaci in Invasive American Crayfishes in the Czech Republic

Abstract:  In Central Europe invasive North American crayfishes are carriers of the oomycete Aphanomyces astaci, which causes crayfish plague. This lethal disease currently represents one of the major threats to native European crayfishes. We used molecular methods—species-specific amplification and sequencing of the pathogen DNA—to investigate the prevalence of individuals latently infected with A. astaci in 28 populations of two invasive American crayfish species (6 of the signal crayfish [ Pacifastacus leniusculus ] and 22 of the spiny-cheek crayfish [ Orconectes limosus ]) in the Czech Republic. The pathogen occurred in 17 investigated populations. We recorded a high variation in positive reactions, ranging from 0% to 100%, in populations of O. limosus . In P. leniusculus, however, only one individual out of 124 tested positive for the pathogen. There was a clear relationship between the water body type and pathogen prevalence in O. limosus . Infection ratios in isolated standing waters were usually low, whereas in running waters, pathogen prevalence often exceeded 50%. Other evaluated characteristics of potential plague pathogen carriers (size, sex, and the presence of melanized spots in the cuticle) seemed to be unrelated to infection. Our data suggest that in contrast to other European countries, O. limosus seems to be the primary reservoir of crayfish plague in the Czech Republic. Although all populations of alien American crayfishes may be potential sources of infections and should be managed as such, knowledge on the prevalence of the plague pathogen at various localities may allow managers to focus conservation efforts on the most directly endangered populations of native crayfishes.     

Changing Drivers of Deforestation and New Opportunities for Conservation

Abstract: Over the past 50 years, human agents of deforestation have changed in ways that have potentially important implications for conservation efforts. We characterized these changes through a meta‐analysis of case studies of land‐cover change in the tropics. From the 1960s to the 1980s, small‐scale farmers, with state assistance, deforested large areas of tropical forest in Southeast Asia and Latin America. As globalization and urbanization increased during the 1980s, the agents of deforestation changed in two important parts of the tropical biome, the lowland rainforests in Brazil and Indonesia. Well‐capitalized ranchers, farmers, and loggers producing for consumers in distant markets became more prominent in these places and this globalization weakened the historically strong relationship between local population growth and forest cover. At the same time, forests have begun to regrow in some tropical uplands. These changing circumstances, we believe, suggest two new and differing strategies for biodiversity conservation in the tropics, one focused on conserving uplands and the other on promoting environmental stewardship in lowlands and other areas conducive to industrial agriculture.