Biological Invasions

, Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 61–78 | Cite as

Invasion Genetics of Ponto-Caspian Gobies in the Great Lakes: A ‘Cryptic’ Species, Absence of Founder Effects, and Comparative Risk Analysis

Article

Abstract

Genetic variability and structure of nonindigenous vs native populations are compared for the Eurasian round goby Neogobius melanostomus and the tubenose goby Proterorhinus marmoratus, which both invaded Lake St. Clair of the North American Great Lakes about 1990. The round goby spread rapidly to all of the Great Lakes and the tubenose goby largely has been restricted to Lake St. Clair, with some recent range extension into western Lake Erie. Risk analyses may indicate whether genetic variability of colonizers is predictive of their relative invasive and establishment successes. The present investigation examined DNA sequence variation across the left domain of the mitochondrial DNA cytochrome b gene in round and tubenose gobies from Eurasian and Great Lakes locations. We also sequenced six additional Neogobius species (including the monkey N.␣fluviatilis, racer N. gymnotrachelus, and bigheadN. kessleri gobies that have been ‘on the move’ in Europe) and the knout goby Mesogobius batrachocephalus from the Black Sea in order to develop diagnostic genetic characters to identify them in case of future and/or undetected invasions and to delineate their phylogenetic relationships. Results show that a diverse number of haplotypes characterize round and tubenose goby populations from both North America and Eurasian sites, fitting a risk analysis prediction of high genetic variability in their successful introductions. Phylogenetic results indicate that the current genus Neogobius is paraphyletic and that the subgenusApollonia thus should be elevated to the level of genus, containingApollonia (N.) melanostomus (the round goby) andA. (N.) fluviatilis (the monkey goby). In addition, there appear to be two separate species of Proterorhinus marmoratus, a marine P. marmoratus Pallas 1814 in the Black Sea (matching the original type locality), and a ‘cryptic’ freshwater species in the Danube and Dnieper Rivers and probably other Eurasian freshwater habitats, as well as invasive in the Great Lakes. We suggest resurrecting the name P. semilunaris Heckel 1837 for the freshwater species (a taxon that was originally described from rivers draining into the Aegean Sea and the Danube River, but was later placed in synonymy with P. marmoratus).

Keywords

cytochrome b exotic species founder effect Great Lakes Neogobius nonindigenous Ponto Caspian Proterorhinus risk analysis round goby tubenose goby 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ahnelt, H, Holcik, J 1996Distribution of two species of the genus Neogobius (Pisces: Gobiidae) in area of the southern Caspian SeaActa Universitatis Carolinae4099114Google Scholar
  2. Ahnelt, H, Banarescu, P, Spolwind, R, Harka, A, Waidbacher, H 1998Occurrence and distribution of three gobiid species (Pisces, Gobiidae) in the middle and upper Danube region – examples of different dispersal patterns?Biological (Bratislava)53665678Google Scholar
  3. ANSTF (1996) The Generic Nonindigenous Aquatic Organisms Risk Analysis Review Process Risk Assessment and Management Committee of the Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force, Washington, DC. October 21, 1996Google Scholar
  4. Avise, JC 2000Phylogeography: The History and Formation of SpeciesHarvard University PressCambridge MAGoogle Scholar
  5. Bernatchez, L 2001The evolutionary history of brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) inferred from phylogeographic, nested clade, and mismatch analyses of mitochondrial DNA variationEvolution55351379PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. California Academy of Sciences (2005) Ichthyology, Catalog of Fishes. http://www.calacademy.orgGoogle Scholar
  7. Case, TJ 1990Invasion resistance arises in strongly interacting species-rich model competition communitiesProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA.8796109614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Charlebois PM, Marsden JE, Goettel RG, Wolfe RK, Jude DJ and Rudnika S (1997) The round goby Neogobius melanostomus (Pallas): A Review of European and North American Literature. Illinois-Indiana Sea Grant Program and Illinois Natural History Survey. INHS Special Publication No. 20. 76 ppGoogle Scholar
  9. Crossman, EJ, Holm, E, Cholmondeley, R, Tuininga, K 1992First record for Canada of the rudd, Scardinius erythrophthalmus and notes on the introduced round goby, Neogobius melanostomusThe Canadian Field-Naturalist106206209Google Scholar
  10. Dillon, AK, Stepien, CA 2001Genetic and biogeographic relationships of the invasive round (Neogobius melanostomus) and tubenose (Proterorhinus marmoratus) gobies in the Great Lakes versus Eurasian populationsJournal of Great Lakes Research27267280Google Scholar
  11. Dougherty, JD, Moore, WS, Ram, JL 1996Mitochondrial DNA analysis of round goby (Neogobius melanostomus) and tubenose goby (Proterorhinus marmoratus) in the Great Lakes basinCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences53474480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Elton, CS 1958The Ecology of Invasions by Animals and PlantsMethuenLondonGoogle Scholar
  13. Felsenstein, J 1985Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrapEvolution39783791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Froese R and Pauly D (eds) (2004) FishBase. http://www.fishbase.orgGoogle Scholar
  15. Gaggiotti, OE, Excoffier, LA 2000A simple method of removing the effect of a bottleneck and unequal population sizes on pairwise genetic distancesProceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B Biological Sciences2678187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Garcia-Ramos, G, Rodriguez, D 2002Evolutionary speed of species invasionsEvolution46661668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ghedotti, MJ, Smihula, JC, Smith, GR 1995Zebra mussel predation by round gobies in the laboratoryJournal of Great Lakes Research21665669Google Scholar
  18. Grigorovich, IA, MacIsaac, HJ, Shadrin, NV, Mills, EL 2002Patterns and mechanisms of aquatic invertebrate introductions in the Ponto-Caspian regionCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences5911891208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Grigorovich, IA, Colautti, RI, Mills, EL, Holeck, K, Ballert, AG, MacIsaac, HJ 2003Ballast-mediated animal introductions in the Laurentian Great Lakes: retrospective and prospective analysesCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences60740756CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gunther A (1861) Catalogue of the fishes in the British Museum. Catalogue of the acanthopterygian fishes in the collection of the British Museum. 3. Gobiidae, Discoboli, Pediculati, Blenniidae, Labyrinthici, Mugilidae, Notacanthi. London. Catalog Fishes v. 3: i-xxv + 1–586 + i-xGoogle Scholar
  21. Heckel, JJ 1837Ichthyologische Beiträge zu den Familien der Cottoiden, Scorpaenoiden, Gobioiden und CyprinoidenAnn. Wien. Mus. Naturges.2143164Google Scholar
  22. Holcík, J 1991Fish introductions in Europe with particular reference to its central and eastern partCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences481323Google Scholar
  23. Holland, BS 2000Genetics of marine bioinvasionsHydrobiologia4206371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jude, DJ 1997Round gobies: cyberfish of the third millenniumGreat Lakes Research Review32734Google Scholar
  25. Jude, DJ 2001Round and tubenose gobies: 10 years with the latest Great Lakes phantom menaceDreissena11114Google Scholar
  26. Kautman, J 2001The first occurrence of Neogobius gymnotrachelus in the Slovak DanubeFolia Zoologica507980Google Scholar
  27. Kessler, KT 1857Nachträge zur Ichthyologie des südwestlichen RusslandsBulletin de la’Societe Imperiale des Naturalistes de Moscou30453481Google Scholar
  28. Kocher TD, Thomas WK, Meyer A, Edwards SV, Pabbo S, Villablanca FX and Wilson AC. Dynamics of mitochondrial DNA evolution in animals: amplification and sequencing with conserved primers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 86: 6196–6200Google Scholar
  29. Kolar, CS, Lodge, DM 2001Progression invasion biology: predicting invadersTrends in Ecology and Evolution16199204PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kolar, CS, Lodge, DM 2002Ecological predictions and risk assessment for alien fishes in North AmericaScience29812331236PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kriesch, A 1873Ein neuer GobiusVerhandllungen der kaiserlich-kongiglichen zoologish-Botanischen Gesellschaft in Wien23369376Google Scholar
  32. Kumar S, Tamura K, Jakobsen IB and Nei M (2001) MEGA2.1: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis software, Arizona State University, Tempe AZGoogle Scholar
  33. Kvach, JV 2001Ligula invasion of monkey goby (Neogobius fluviatilis) in some estuaries of northwestern Black Sea regionVestnik Zoologii348588Google Scholar
  34. Landrum, PF, Fisher, SW 1998

    Influence of lipids on bioaccumulation and trophic transfer of organic contaminants in aquatic organisms

    Arts, MWainman, B eds. Lipids in Freshwater EcosystemsSpringer-VerlagNew York, NY203234
    Google Scholar
  35. MacIsaac, HJ, Grigorovich, IA, Ricciardi, A 2001Reassessment of species invasions concepts: the Great Lakes basin as a modelBiological Invasions3405416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Margush, T, McMorris, FR 1981Consensus n-treesBulletin of Mathematical Biology.43239244Google Scholar
  37. Martin, AP, Naylor, GJP, Palumbi, SR 1992Population genetic structure of the armorhead Psudopentaceros wheeleri, in the North Pacific ocean: application of the polymerase chain reaction to fisheries problemsCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences4923862391Google Scholar
  38. Mathias, A, Kisdi, E, Olivieri, I 2001The evolution of dispersal in a heterogeneous landscapeEvolution55246259PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Meyer, A, Kocher, TD, Bsibwaki, P, Wilson, AC 1990Monophyletic origin of Lake Victoria cichlid fishes suggested by mitochondrial DNA sequencesNature (London)47550553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mills, EL, Leach, JH, Carlton, JT, Secor, CL 1993Exotic species in the Great Lakes: a history of biotic crises and anthropogenic introductionsJournal of Great Lakes Research19154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Moskal’kova, KI 1996Ecological and morphophysiological prerequisites for the expansion of the area of distribution of the round goby Neogobius melanostomus in anthropogenically polluted bodies of waterVoprosy Ikhtiologii36615621Google Scholar
  42. Moulton, MP, Pimm, SL 1983The introduced Hawaiian avifauna: biogeographic evidence for competitionAmerican Naturalist121669690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Muller, J 2001Invasion history and genetic population structure of riverine macroinvertebratesZoology104110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Nei, M 1987Molecular Evolutionary GeneticsColumbia University PressNew York NYGoogle Scholar
  45. Nicholls AM and Tumeo MA (2001) Primer on Federal Invasive Species Risk Policy. Prepared for the Risk Analysis for Invasive Species Workshop, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM, October 21–23, 2001Google Scholar
  46. Nordman, AV 1840

    Observations sur la fauna pontique

    Démidoff, A. eds. Voyage dans la Russie méridionale et la Crimée. Vol IIIVoyage Russie MéridParis353635
    Google Scholar
  47. Pallas PS (1814) Zoographia Rosso-Asiatica, sistens omnium animalium in extenso Imperio Rossico et adjacentibus maribus observatorum recensionem, domicilia, mores et descriptiones, anatomen atque icones plurimorum. 3 vols [1811–1814]. Petropoli. Zool. Rosso-Asiatica v. 3(I–vii): 1–428Google Scholar
  48. Palumbi SR (1997). Nucleic Acids II: The polymerase chain reaction. In: Hillis DM, Moritz C and Mable BK (eds)., Molecular Systematics, Second edn, Ch 7, Sinauer Assoc., Sunderland MA, pp. 205–247Google Scholar
  49. Rambaut A (1996) Se-Al: Sequence Alignment Editor. http://evolve.zoo.ox.ac.uk/Google Scholar
  50. Raymond, M, Roussett, F 1995An exact test for population differentiationEvolution4912801283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Ricciardi, A, MacIsaac, HJ 2000Recent mass invasion of the North American Great Lakes by Ponto-Caspian speciesTrends in Ecology and Evolution156265PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ross, RM, Lellis, WA, Bennett, RM, Johnson, CS 2001Landscape determinants of nonindigenous fish invasionsBiological Invasions334736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Saitou, N, Nei, M 1987The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstruction of phylogenetic treesMolecular Biology and Evolution4406425PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Schneider S, Kueffer J, Roessli D. and Excoffier L. (2003) Arlequin vers. 2.2: a software for population genetic data analysis. Genetics and Biometry Laboratory. University of Geneva, Switzerland, http://lgb.unige.ch/arlequin/about.phpGoogle Scholar
  55. Shea, K, Chesson, P 2002Community ecology theory as a framework for biological invasionsTrends in Ecology and Evolution17170176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Simberloff, D, Holle, B 1999Positive interactions of nonindigenous species: invasional meltdown?Biological Invasions12132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Simonovic, PD 1999Phylogenetic relationships of Ponto-Caspian gobies and their relationship to the Atlantic–Mediterranean GobiinaeJournal of Fish Biology54533555Google Scholar
  58. Skora KE and Stolarski J (1993) New fish species in the Gulf of Gdansk, Neogobius spp. [cf. Neogobius melanostomus (Pallas 1811)]. Bulletin of Sea Fisheries Institute 1: 83Google Scholar
  59. Slatkin, M 1995A measure of population subdivision based on microsatellite allele frequenciesGenetics139457462PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Stepien, CA, Kocher, TD 1997

    Molecules and morphology in studies of fish evolution

    Kocher, TDStepien, CA eds. Molecular Systematics of FishesAcademic PressSan Diego, CA111
    Google Scholar
  61. Stepien, CA, Hubers, AN, Skidmore, JL 1999Diagnostic genetic markers and evolutionary relationships among invasive dreissenoid and corbiculoid bivalves: phylogenetic signal from mitochondrial 16S rDNAMolecular Phylogenetics and Evolution133149PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Stepien, CA, Taylor, CD, Dabrowska, KA 2002Genetic variability and phylogeographic patterns of a nonindigenous species invasion: a comparison of exotic versus native zebra and quagga mussel populationsJournal of Evolutionary Biology15314328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Stepien, CA, Taylor, CD, Grigorovich, IA, Shirman, SV, Wei, R, Korniushin, AV, Dabrowska, KA 2003DNA and systematic analysis of invasive and native dreissenid mussels: is Dreissena bugensis really D. rostriformis?Aquatic Invaders14818Google Scholar
  64. Stepien CA, Brown JE, Neilson ME and Tumeo MA (2005) Genetic diversity of invasive species in the Great Lakes versus their Eurasian Source Populations: Insights for risk analysis. Risk Analysis (Blackwell Sci.) (in press)Google Scholar
  65. Swofford DL, (2003) PAUP*: Phylogenetic Analysis using Parsimony (*and other methods), vers. 4.0b 10. Sinauer Associates, Inc., Sunderland, MAGoogle Scholar
  66. Swofford, DL, Olsen, GJ, Waddell, PJ, Hillis, DM 1996

    Phylogenetic inference

    Hillis, DMMoritz, CMable, BK eds. Molecular Systematics2Sinauer AssocSunderland MA407514
    Google Scholar
  67. US EPA (1998) Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment, Risk Assessment Forum, Washington, DC. US Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-630-R-98-002FGoogle Scholar
  68. Vasil’eva ED, Vasil’yev, VP and Pinchuk VI (1993) [Craniological analysis of the goby subgenus Ponticola Iljin, 1927. III. Comparative morphological study of Neogobius kessleri, N. ratan and additional data on N. syrman in connection with the diagnostic features and composition of the subgenus Ponticola]. Voprosy Ikhtiologii 33(5): 609–617 [in Russian]Google Scholar
  69. Weir, BS 1996Genetic Data Analysis IISinauer AssocSunderland MAGoogle Scholar
  70. Williamson, M 1996Biological InvasionsChapman and HallNew York NYGoogle Scholar
  71. Wright, S 1978Evolution and the genetics of populations. Vol. 4 In: Variability. Within and Among Natural PopulationsUniversity of Chicago PressChicago ILGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Great Lakes Genetics Laboratory, The Lake Erie CenterThe University of ToledoOregonUSA
  2. 2.Cleveland State University Program of Excellence in Environmental Risk Analysis, Center for Environmental Science, Technology and PolicyCleveland State UniversityClevelandUSA
  3. 3.Office of Sponsored Programs and ResearchCleveland State UniversityClevelandUSA

Personalised recommendations