Skip to main content

Accelerating rates of freshwater invasions in the catchment of the River Thames

Biological Invasions volume 15, pages 945–951 (2013)Cite this article

Abstract

We identify a total of 96 freshwater non-indigenous species established in the River Thames catchment, England; of which 55 % were introduced intentionally. Our analysis shows that 53 % of the species became established in the last 50 years and invasion rates have significantly increased since 1800. Analysis of shipping activity and population size in the catchment area revealed a positive correlation with non-indigenous species discovery, suggesting that globalisation has facilitated many species invasions. Our calculated modern (post 1961) invasion rates reveal that one non-indigenous species is discovered every 50 weeks, despite legislation aiming to prevent introductions, making the Thames catchment among the most highly invaded freshwater systems in the world. Although sympatric invaders are expected to interact and alter one another’s impact, most studies focus on individual conspicuous invaders. Our results indicate that it is essential to comprehend multiple invasions in future work.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price includes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  • Allendorf FW, Lundquist LL (2003) Introduction: population biology, evolution, and control of invasive species. Conserv Biol 17:24–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briski E, Bailey SA, Cristescu ME et al (2010) Efficacy of ‘saltwater flushing’ in protecting the Great Lakes from biological invasions by invertebrate eggs in ships’ ballast sediment. Freshw Biol 55:2414–2424

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark PF, Rainbow PS, Robbins RS et al (1998) The alien Chinese mitten crab, Eriocheir sinensis (Crustacea: Decapoda: Brachyura), in the Thames catchment. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 78:1215–1221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen AN, Carlton JT (1998) Accelerating invasion rate in a highly invaded estuary. Science 279:555–558

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dudgeon D, Arthington AH, Gessner MO et al (2006) Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges. Biol Rev 81:163–182

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Francis RA, Hoggart SPG, Gurnell AM et al (2008) Meeting the challenges of urban river habitat restoration: developing a methodology for the River Thames through central London. Area 40:435–445

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • García-Berthou E, Alcaraz C, Pou-Rovira Q et al (2005) Introduction pathways and establishment rates of invasive aquatic species in Europe. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 62:453–463

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffen BD, Guy T, Buck JC (2008) Inhibition between invasives: a newly introduced predator moderates the impacts of a previously established invasive predator. J Anim Ecol 77:32–40

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grosholz ED (2005) Recent biological invasion may hasten invasional meltdown by accelerating historical introductions. Proc Nat Acad Sci 102:1088–1091

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hill M, Baker R, Broad G et al. (2005) Audit of non-native species in England. English Nature report 662

  • Johnson P, Olden J, Solomon C et al (2009) Interactions among invaders: community and ecosystem effects of multiple invasive species in an experimental aquatic system. Oecologia 159:161–170

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaluza P, Koelzsch A, Gastner MT et al (2010) The complex network of global cargo ship movements. J R Soc Interface 7:1093–1103

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller RP, Zu Ermgassen PSE, Aldridge DC (2009) Vectors and timing of freshwater invasions in Great Britain. Conserv Biol 23:1526–1534

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leppäkoski E, Olenin S (2000) Non-native species and rates of spread: lessons from the brackish Baltic Sea. Biol Invasions 2:151–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mack RN, Lonsdale WM (2001) Humans as global plant dispersers: getting more than we bargained for. Bioscience 51:95–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marvier M, Kareiva P, Neubert MG (2004) Habitat destruction, fragmentation, and disturbance promote invasion by habitat generalists in a multispecies metapopulation. Risk Anal 24:869–878

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mills EL, Strayer DL, Scheuerell MD et al (1996) Exotic species in the Hudson River Basin: a history of invasions and introductions. Estuaries Coasts 19:814–823

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rahel FJ, Olden JD (2008) Assessing the effects of climate change on aquatic invasive species. Conserv Biol 22:521–533

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ricciardi A (2006) Patterns of invasion in the Laurentian Great Lakes in relation to changes in vector activity. Divers Distrib 12:425–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy H, Bacon J, Beckmann B et al. (2012) Non-native species in Great Britain: establishment, detection and reporting to inform effective decision making. Defra report July 2012

  • Ruiz GM, Carlton JT (2003) Invasive species: vectors and management strategies. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Strayer DL, Dudgeon D (2010) Freshwater biodiversity conservation: recent progress and future challenges. J North Am Benthol Soc 29:344–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sytsma MD, Cordell JR, Chapman JW et al. (2004) Lower Columbia River aquatic nonindigenous species survey 2001–2004: final technical report. Final technical report. Prepared for the United States Coast Guard and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the UK Environment Agency for funding and Claire Frankland from the Museum of London Docklands for access to the Port of London Authority data. We would also like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Biological and Chemical Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, Mile End Road, London, E1 4NS, UK

    Michelle C. Jackson & Jonathan Grey

  2. Centre for Conservation Ecology and Environmental Science, School of Applied Sciences, Bournemouth University, Poole, BH12 5BB, UK

    Michelle C. Jackson

Authors
  1. Michelle C. Jackson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jonathan Grey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michelle C. Jackson.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (PDF 468 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jackson, M.C., Grey, J. Accelerating rates of freshwater invasions in the catchment of the River Thames. Biol Invasions 15, 945–951 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-012-0343-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-012-0343-5

Keywords

  • Multiple invasions
  • River Thames catchment
  • Invasion rates
  • Globalisation
  • Freshwater