Prelude: Research and management of aquatic nonindigenous species in India

S. Bailey
{"title":"Prelude: Research and management of aquatic nonindigenous species in India","authors":"S. Bailey","doi":"10.14321/aehm.024.02.02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The introduction of nonindigenous species to freshwater (inland) and coastal marine habitats is a global phenomenon, with many aquatic habitats subject to severe, irreversible negative impacts resulting from competition for space and resources between indigenous and nonindigenous species, as well their parasites and pathogens (Gallardo et al., 2016). Despite the accumulating ecological and economic impacts in aquatic habitats, research and management efforts in aquatic systems are much lower than for terrestrial habitats, and are unevenly distributed geographically, taxonomically and by introduction pathway (Bailey et al., 2020; Seebens et al., 2017). These global trends are mirrored within India, although effort has been comparatively low. A basic search using keywords “nonindigenous/nonnative/introduced/alien aquatic/marine species” and “India” reveals only 36 papers in the scientific literature on aquatic nonindigenous species in India (Web of Science, accessed 29 June 2021). The majority of these publications are comprised of surveys/new records of nonindigenous species (16 studies) or assess risk and management options (10 studies) while a few investigate invasion dynamics (5 studies) and impacts (5 studies) (Table 1). Subba Rao (2005) identifies 205 nonindigenous taxa reported as new records in the Indian Seas between 1960-2004, despite limited scientific attention to the subject in these waters. A majority of these taxa, comprised of fishes, polychaete worms, algae, crustaceans, molluscs, ciliates, fungi, ascidians and other taxa, are likely associated with ships’ ballast water and/or biofouling as the transport pathways (Subba Rao, 2005). Aquatic nonindigenous species are frequently underreported due to limited search effort and insufficient taxonomic expertise (especially for smaller/microscopic taxa)(Carlton and Fowler, 2018; Ojaveer et al., 2017). Like other parts of the world, fishes are one of the best-studied aquatic taxa, with more than 2300 species reported, including at least 300 nonindigenous species, from India’s rivers, lakes and reservoirs – typically as (unauthorized) releases or escapees associated with aquaria and aquaculture activities (Singh and Lakra, 2011). (Note that Singh, this issue, provides an updated number of 532 nonindigenous fishes in India). The inventory of nonindigenous species in India is certainly incomplete, as, like all other regions globally, records are compromised by incomplete historical records impacting the ability to determine the true origin of many species as indigenous or nonindigenous (Carlton, 1996) and an absence of regular and targeted monitoring (such as Hayes et al. 2019; see also Ojaveer et al. 2014). While there has been some consideration of transportation pathways associated with introductions to India, there are often a number of mechanisms possible for each species, and dedicated research will be needed to identify responsible pathways and develop effective management strategies. In addition to ships’ ballast water and biofouling, aquaculture and aquarium pathways, recent literature points to bait sales, live prayer release, internet commerce and anthropogenic marine litter as potentially","PeriodicalId":421207,"journal":{"name":"Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14321/aehm.024.02.02","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The introduction of nonindigenous species to freshwater (inland) and coastal marine habitats is a global phenomenon, with many aquatic habitats subject to severe, irreversible negative impacts resulting from competition for space and resources between indigenous and nonindigenous species, as well their parasites and pathogens (Gallardo et al., 2016). Despite the accumulating ecological and economic impacts in aquatic habitats, research and management efforts in aquatic systems are much lower than for terrestrial habitats, and are unevenly distributed geographically, taxonomically and by introduction pathway (Bailey et al., 2020; Seebens et al., 2017). These global trends are mirrored within India, although effort has been comparatively low. A basic search using keywords “nonindigenous/nonnative/introduced/alien aquatic/marine species” and “India” reveals only 36 papers in the scientific literature on aquatic nonindigenous species in India (Web of Science, accessed 29 June 2021). The majority of these publications are comprised of surveys/new records of nonindigenous species (16 studies) or assess risk and management options (10 studies) while a few investigate invasion dynamics (5 studies) and impacts (5 studies) (Table 1). Subba Rao (2005) identifies 205 nonindigenous taxa reported as new records in the Indian Seas between 1960-2004, despite limited scientific attention to the subject in these waters. A majority of these taxa, comprised of fishes, polychaete worms, algae, crustaceans, molluscs, ciliates, fungi, ascidians and other taxa, are likely associated with ships’ ballast water and/or biofouling as the transport pathways (Subba Rao, 2005). Aquatic nonindigenous species are frequently underreported due to limited search effort and insufficient taxonomic expertise (especially for smaller/microscopic taxa)(Carlton and Fowler, 2018; Ojaveer et al., 2017). Like other parts of the world, fishes are one of the best-studied aquatic taxa, with more than 2300 species reported, including at least 300 nonindigenous species, from India’s rivers, lakes and reservoirs – typically as (unauthorized) releases or escapees associated with aquaria and aquaculture activities (Singh and Lakra, 2011). (Note that Singh, this issue, provides an updated number of 532 nonindigenous fishes in India). The inventory of nonindigenous species in India is certainly incomplete, as, like all other regions globally, records are compromised by incomplete historical records impacting the ability to determine the true origin of many species as indigenous or nonindigenous (Carlton, 1996) and an absence of regular and targeted monitoring (such as Hayes et al. 2019; see also Ojaveer et al. 2014). While there has been some consideration of transportation pathways associated with introductions to India, there are often a number of mechanisms possible for each species, and dedicated research will be needed to identify responsible pathways and develop effective management strategies. In addition to ships’ ballast water and biofouling, aquaculture and aquarium pathways, recent literature points to bait sales, live prayer release, internet commerce and anthropogenic marine litter as potentially
前奏:印度水生非本地物种的研究与管理
将非本地物种引入淡水(内陆)和沿海海洋栖息地是一种全球现象,许多水生栖息地受到严重的、不可逆转的负面影响,这是由于本地物种和非本地物种之间对空间和资源的竞争,以及它们的寄生虫和病原体(Gallardo et al., 2016)。尽管水生生境的生态和经济影响不断累积,但水生系统的研究和管理工作远低于陆地生境,并且在地理、分类和引种途径上分布不均(Bailey et al., 2020;Seebens et al., 2017)。这些全球趋势也反映在印度国内,尽管在这方面的努力相对较少。使用关键词“非本地/非本地/引进/外来水生/海洋物种”和“印度”进行基本搜索,只显示出36篇关于印度水生非本地物种的科学文献(Web of Science,访问日期为2021年6月29日)。这些出版物中的大多数包括非本地物种的调查/新记录(16项研究)或评估风险和管理方案(10项研究),而少数调查入侵动态(5项研究)和影响(5项研究)(表1)。Subba Rao(2005)确定了1960-2004年间印度洋报告的205个非本地分类群作为新记录,尽管这些水域对该主题的科学关注有限。这些分类群中的大多数,包括鱼类、多毛类蠕虫、藻类、甲壳类、软体动物、纤毛虫、真菌、海鞘类和其他分类群,可能与船舶压载水和/或生物污垢有关,作为运输途径(Subba Rao, 2005)。由于搜索努力有限和分类学专业知识不足(特别是对于较小/微观分类群),水生非本地物种经常被低估(Carlton and Fowler, 2018;Ojaveer et al., 2017)。与世界其他地区一样,鱼类是研究得最好的水生分类群之一,据报道有2300多种,其中包括至少300种非本地物种,来自印度的河流、湖泊和水库——通常是(未经授权的)放生或与水族馆和水产养殖活动有关的逃逸物种(Singh和Lakra, 2011)。(请注意,本期Singh提供了印度532种非本地鱼类的最新数量)。印度的非本地物种清单当然是不完整的,因为与全球所有其他地区一样,记录受到不完整的历史记录的影响,影响了确定许多物种是本地物种还是非本地物种的真正起源的能力(Carlton, 1996),以及缺乏定期和有针对性的监测(如Hayes等人。2019;另见Ojaveer et al. 2014)。虽然已经考虑了一些与引进印度有关的运输途径,但每个物种通常有许多可能的机制,需要专门的研究来确定负责任的途径并制定有效的管理策略。除了船舶的压载水和生物污垢、水产养殖和水族馆通道外,最近的文献指出,鱼饵销售、现场祈祷释放、互联网商业和人为海洋垃圾都是潜在的
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信