Marine Biology

, Volume 160, Issue 7, pp 1529–1541 | Cite as

The introduction of Littorina littorea to British Columbia, Canada: potential impacts and the importance of biotic resistance by native predators

  • Christopher D. G. Harley
  • Kathryn M. Anderson
  • Crystal A.-M. Lebreton
  • Adrian MacKay
  • Mónica Ayala-Díaz
  • Stephanie L. Chong
  • Laura M. Pond
  • Julia H. Amerongen Maddison
  • Boaz H. C. Hung
  • Samantha L. Iversen
  • Devina C. M. Wong
Feature Article

Abstract

Although the establishment and spread of non-indigenous species depends upon survival in the face of novel environmental conditions and novel biological interactions, relatively little attention has been focused on the specific role of native predators in limiting invasion success. The European common periwinkle, Littorina littorea, was recently introduced to the Pacific coast of Canada and provides a case study of an introduction into an area with an important predator guild (sea stars) that is functionally minor in the invader’s native habitat. Here, we assess the likelihood of establishment, spread, and negative ecological impact of this introduced gastropod, with an emphasis on the role of native sea stars as agents of biotic resistance. Size frequency distributions and local market availability suggest that L. littorea was most likely introduced via the live seafood trade. Non-native hitchhikers (e.g., the trematode Cryptocotyle lingua) were found on/in both market and field specimens. Laboratory studies and field observations confirmed that L. littorea can survive seasonal low salinity in Vancouver, British Columbia. Periwinkles also readily consumed native Ulva, suggesting that periwinkles could impact native communities via herbivory or resource competition. Unlike native gastropods, however, L. littorea lacked behavioural avoidance responses to Northeast Pacific predatory sea stars (Pisaster ochraceus and Pycnopodia helianthoides), and sea star predation rates on L. littorea were much higher than predation rates on native turban snails (Chlorostoma funebralis) in common garden experiments. We therefore expect periwinkle establishment in British Columbia to be limited to areas with low predator density, as is seen in its field distribution to date. We caution that this conclusion may understate the importance of the L. littorea introduction if it also serves as a vector for additional non-indigenous species such as C. lingua.

References

  1. Agoramoorthy G, Hsu MJ (2005) Religious freeing of wildlife promotes alien species invasion. Bioscience 55:5–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bertness MD (1984) Habitat and community modification by an introduced herbivorous snail. Ecology 65:370–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blakeslee AMH, Byers JE (2008) Using parasites to inform ecological history: comparisons among three congeneric marine snails. Ecology 89:1068–1078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blakeslee AMH, Byers JE, Lesser MP (2008) Solving cryptogenic histories using host and parasite molecular genetics: the resolution of Littorina littorea’s North American origin. Mol Ecol 17:3684–3696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Buschbaum C (2000) Direct and indirect effects of Littorina littorea (L.) on barnacles growing on mussel beds in the Wadden Sea. Hydrobiologia 440:119–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Byrnes JE, Reynolds PL, Stachowicz JJ (2007) Invasions and extinctions reshape coastal marine food webs. PLoS ONE 2:e295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carlson RL, Shulman MJ, Ellis JC (2006) Factors contributing to spatial heterogeneity in the abundance of the common periwinkle Littorina littorea (L.). J Molluscan Stud 72:149–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carlsson NOL, Sarnelle O, Strayer DL (2009) Native predators and exotic prey—an acquired taste? Front Ecol Environ 7:525–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carlsson NOL, Bustamante H, Strayer DL, Pace ML (2011) Biotic resistance on the increase: native predators structure invasive zebra mussel populations. Freshw Biol 56:1630–1637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carlton JT (1992) Introduced marine and estuarine mollusks of North America: an end-of-the-20th-century perspective. J Shellfish Res 11:489–505Google Scholar
  11. Carlton JT (2007) Intertidal invertebrates from Central California to Oregon. University of California Press, Berkeley, CAGoogle Scholar
  12. Chang AL, Blakeslee AMH, Miller AW, Ruiz GM (2011) Establishment failure in biological invasions: a case history of Littorina littorea in California, USA. PLoS ONE 6:e16035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chapman MG (1999) Are there adequate data to assess how well theories of rarity apply to marine invertebrates? Biodivers Conserv 8:1295–1318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chapman JW, Carlton JT, Bellinger MR, Blakeslee AMH (2007) Premature refutation of a human-mediated marine species introduction: the case history of the marine snail Littorina littorea in the northwestern Atlantic. Biol Invasions 9:737–750CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chapman JW, Blakeslee AMH, Carlton JT, Bellinger MR (2008) Parsimony dictates a human introduction: on the use of genetic and other data to distinguish between the natural and human-mediated invasion of the European snail Littorina littorea in North America. Biol Invasions 10:131–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cheng BS, Hovel KA (2010) Biotic resistance to invasion along an estuarine gradient. Oecologia 164:1049–1059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Choi FMP (2011) Assessing intertidal marine non-indigenous species in Canadian ports. Dissertation, University of British Columbia, VancouverGoogle Scholar
  18. Dafforn KA, Glasby TM, Johnston EL (2009) Links between estuarine condition and spatial distributions of marine invaders. Divers Distrib 15:807–821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Davenport J, Davenport JL (2005) Effects of shore height, wave exposure and geographical distance on thermal niche width of intertidal fauna. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 292:41–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. deRivera CE, Ruiz GM, Hines AH, Jivoff P (2005) Biotic resistance to invasion: native predator limits abundance and distribution of an introduced crab. Ecology 86:3364–3376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dethier MN, Graham ES, Cohen S, Tear LM (1993) Visual versus random-point percent cover estimation: ‘objective’ is not always better. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 96:93–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Díaz ER, Kraufvelin P, Erlandsson J (2012) Combining gut fluorescence technique and spatial analysis to determine Littorina littorea grazing dynamics in nutrient-enriched and nutrient-unenriched littoral mesocosms. Mar Biol 159:837–852CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Elton C (1958) The ecology of invasions by animals and plants. Methuen, LondonGoogle Scholar
  24. Galil BS (2007) Loss or gain? Invasive aliens and biodiversity in the Mediterranean Sea. Mar Pollut Bull 55:314–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hanna DG (1966) Introduced mollusks of western North America. Occa Pap Calif Acad Sci 48:1–108Google Scholar
  26. Harley CDG (2011) Climate change, keystone predation, and biodiversity loss. Science 334:1124–1127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Held MBE, Harley CDG (2009) Responses to low salinity by the sea star Pisaster ochraceus from high- and low-salinity populations. Invertebr Biol 128:381–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Holsman KK, McDonald PS, Armstrong DA (2006) Intertidal migration and habitat use by subadult Dungeness crab Cancer magister in a NE Pacific estuary. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 308:183–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jacobsen HP, Stabell OB (1999) Predator-induced alarm responses in the common periwinkle, Littorina littorea: dependence on season, light conditions, and chemical labelling of predators. Mar Biol 134:551–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Levine JM, Adler PB, Yelenik SG (2004) A meta-analysis of biotic resistance to exotic plant invasions. Ecol Lett 7:975–989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lewis JR (1964) The ecology of rocky shores. English Universities Press LTD, LondonGoogle Scholar
  32. Lotze HK, Worm B (2002) Complex interactions of climatic and ecological controls on macroalgal recruitment. Limnol Oceanogr 47:1734–1741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lotze HK, Worm B, Molis M, Wahl M (2002) Effects of UV radiation and consumers on recruitment and succession of a marine macrobenthic community. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 243:57–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lubchenco J (1978) Plant species diversity in a marine intertidal community: importance of herbivore preference and algal competitive abilities. Am Nat 112:23–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mack RN, Simberloff D, Lonsdale WM, Evans H, Clout M, Bazzaz FA (2000) Biotic invasions: causes, epidemiology, global consequences, and control. Ecol Appl 10:689–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. McClintock JB (1985) Avoidance and escape responses of the sub-Antarctic limpet Nacella edgari (Powell) (Mollusca, Gastropoda) to the sea star Anasterias perrieri (Smith) (Echinodermata, Asteroidea). Polar Biol 4:95–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Oliveira MD, Calheiros DF, Jacobi CM, Hamilton SK (2011) Abiotic factors controlling the establishment and abundance of the invasive golden mussel Limnoperna fortunei. Biol Invasions 13:717–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Paine RT (1966) Food web complexity and species diversity. Am Nat 100:65–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Paine RT (1969) The Pisaster-Tegula interaction: prey patches, predator food preference, and intertidal community structure. Ecology 50:950–961CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Perez KO, Carlson RL, Shulman MJ, Ellis JC (2009) Why are intertidal snails rare in the subtidal? Predation, growth and the vertical distribution of Littorina littorea (L.) in the Gulf of Maine. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 369:79–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Petraitis PS (1987) Factors organizing rocky intertidal communities of New England: herbivory and predation in sheltered bays. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 109:117–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. R Development Core Team (2004) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  43. Rilov G, Schiel DR (2006a) Seascape-dependent subtidal-intertidal trophic linkages. Ecology 87:731–744CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rilov G, Schiel DR (2006b) Trophic linkages across seascapes: subtidal predators limit effective mussel recruitment in rocky intertidal communities. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 327:83–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rochette R, Dill LM (2000) Mortality, behavior and the effects of predators on the intertidal distribution of littorinid gastropods. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 253:165–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ruiz GM, Fofonoff PW, Carlton JT, Wonham MJ, Hines AH (2000) Invasion of coastal marine communities in North America: apparent patterns, processes, and biases. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 31:481–531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sax DF, Stachowicz JJ, Brown JH, Bruno JF, Dawson MN, Gaines SD, Grosberg RK, Hastings A, Holt RD, Mayfield MM, O’Connor MI, Rice WR (2007) Ecological and evolutionary insights from species invasions. Trends Ecol Evol 22:465–471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Shinen JS, Morgan SG, Chan AL (2009) Invasion resistance on rocky shores: direct and indirect effects of three native predators on an exotic and a native prey species. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 378:47–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Shurin JB, Borer ET, Seabloom EW, Anderson K, Blanchette CA, Broitman B, Cooper SD, Halpern BS (2002) A cross-ecosystem comparison of the strength of trophic cascades. Ecol Lett 5:785–791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sorte CJB, Jones SJ, Miller LP (2011) Geographic variation in temperature tolerance as an indicator of potential population responses to climate change. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 400:209–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Steinhauser F (1979) Climatic atlas of North and Central America. World Meteorological Organization, UNESCO Cartographia, BudapestGoogle Scholar
  52. Thornber C (2007) Associational resistance mediates predator-prey interactions in a marine subtidal system. Mar Ecol Evol Persp 28:480–486Google Scholar
  53. Todd ME (1964) Osmotic balance in Littorina littorea, L. littoralis, and L. saxatilis (Littorinidae). Physiol Zool 37:33–44Google Scholar
  54. Trussell GC, Ewanchuk PJ, Bertness MD (2003) Trait-mediated effects in rocky intertidal food chains: predator risk cues alter prey feeding rates. Ecology 84:629–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Underwood AJ (1997) Experiments in ecology: their logical design and interpretation using analysis of variance. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  56. Whittington RJ, Chong R (2007) Global trade in ornamental fish from an Australian perspective: the case for revised import risk analysis and management strategies. Prev Vet Med 81:92–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wood CL, Byers JE, Cottingham KL, Altman I, Donahue MJ, Blakeslee AMH (2007) Parasites alter community structure. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104(22):9335–9339CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher D. G. Harley
    • 1
  • Kathryn M. Anderson
    • 1
    • 2
  • Crystal A.-M. Lebreton
    • 1
  • Adrian MacKay
    • 1
  • Mónica Ayala-Díaz
    • 2
    • 3
  • Stephanie L. Chong
    • 1
  • Laura M. Pond
    • 1
  • Julia H. Amerongen Maddison
    • 1
  • Boaz H. C. Hung
    • 1
  • Samantha L. Iversen
    • 1
  • Devina C. M. Wong
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  2. 2.Bamfield Marine Sciences CentreBamfieldCanada
  3. 3.Department of BiologyUniversity of VictoriaVictoriaCanada

Personalised recommendations