Biological Invasions

, Volume 19, Issue 3, pp 939–954

Large-scale invasion of western Atlantic mesophotic reefs by lionfish potentially undermines culling-based management

  • Dominic A. Andradi-Brown
  • Mark J. A. Vermeij
  • Marc Slattery
  • Michael Lesser
  • Ivonne Bejarano
  • Richard Appeldoorn
  • Gretchen Goodbody-Gringley
  • Alex D. Chequer
  • Joanna M. Pitt
  • Corey Eddy
  • Struan R. Smith
  • Eran Brokovich
  • Hudson T. Pinheiro
  • M. Elliott Jessup
  • Bart Shepherd
  • Luiz A. Rocha
  • Jocelyn Curtis-Quick
  • Gal Eyal
  • Timothy J. Noyes
  • Alex D. Rogers
  • Dan A. Exton
Original Paper

DOI: 10.1007/s10530-016-1358-0

Cite this article as:
Andradi-Brown, D.A., Vermeij, M.J.A., Slattery, M. et al. Biol Invasions (2017) 19: 939. doi:10.1007/s10530-016-1358-0

Abstract

The detrimental effects of invasive lionfishes (Pterois volitans and Pterois miles) on western Atlantic shallow reefs are well documented, including declines in coral cover and native fish populations, with disproportionate predation on critically endangered reef fish in some locations. Yet despite individuals reaching depths >100 m, the role of mesophotic coral ecosystems (MCEs; reefs 30–150 m) in lionfish ecology has not been addressed. With lionfish control programs in most invaded locations limited to 30 m by diving restrictions, understanding the role of MCEs in lionfish distributions remains a critical knowledge gap potentially hindering conservation management. Here we synthesise unpublished and previously published studies of lionfish abundance and body length at paired shallow reef (0–30 m) and MCE sites in 63 locations in seven western Atlantic countries and eight sites in three Indo-Pacific countries where lionfish are native. Lionfish were found at similar abundances across the depth gradient from shallow to adjacent MCEs, with no difference between invaded and native sites. Of the five invaded countries where length data were available three had larger lionfish on mesophotic than shallow reefs, one showed no significant difference, while the fifth represented a recently invaded site. This suggests at least some mesophotic populations may represent extensions of natural ontogenetic migrations. Interestingly, despite their shallow focus, in many cases culling programs did not appear to alter abundance between depths. In general, we identify widespread invasive lionfish populations on MCE that could be responsible for maintaining high densities of lionfish recruits despite local shallow-biased control programs. This study highlights the need for management plans to incorporate lionfish populations below the depth limit of recreational diving in order to address all aspects of the local population and maximise the effectiveness of control efforts.

Keywords

Pterois volitans Pterois miles Lionfish Mesophotic MCE Invasive species Twilight zone Ontogenetic migration 

Supplementary material

10530_2016_1358_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (70 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 70 kb)
10530_2016_1358_MOESM2_ESM.xlsx (25 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (XLSX 24 kb)

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dominic A. Andradi-Brown
    • 1
    • 2
  • Mark J. A. Vermeij
    • 3
    • 4
  • Marc Slattery
    • 5
  • Michael Lesser
    • 6
  • Ivonne Bejarano
    • 7
  • Richard Appeldoorn
    • 7
  • Gretchen Goodbody-Gringley
    • 8
  • Alex D. Chequer
    • 9
  • Joanna M. Pitt
    • 10
  • Corey Eddy
    • 11
  • Struan R. Smith
    • 12
  • Eran Brokovich
    • 13
  • Hudson T. Pinheiro
    • 14
    • 15
  • M. Elliott Jessup
    • 14
  • Bart Shepherd
    • 14
  • Luiz A. Rocha
    • 14
  • Jocelyn Curtis-Quick
    • 16
    • 19
  • Gal Eyal
    • 17
    • 18
  • Timothy J. Noyes
    • 8
  • Alex D. Rogers
    • 1
  • Dan A. Exton
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
  2. 2.Operation Wallacea, Wallace HouseOld Bolingbroke, Spilsby, LincolnshireUK
  3. 3.CARMABI FoundationWillemstadCuraçao
  4. 4.Aquatic Microbiology, Institute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem DynamicsUniversity of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  5. 5.Department of BioMolecular SciencesUniversity of MississippiOxfordUSA
  6. 6.School of Marine Science and Ocean EngineeringUniversity of New HampshireDurhamUSA
  7. 7.Department of Marine SciencesUniversity of Puerto RicoMayagüezUSA
  8. 8.Bermuda Institute of Ocean SciencesSt. GeorgesBermuda
  9. 9.Ocean Support FoundationHamiltonBermuda
  10. 10.Bermuda Government Department of Environment and Natural ResourcesCrawlBermuda
  11. 11.Department of BiologyUniversity of Massachusetts DartmouthNorth DartmouthUSA
  12. 12.Bermuda Aquarium Museum and ZooFlattsBermuda
  13. 13.The Israel Society of Ecology and Environmental SciencesTel AvivIsrael
  14. 14.California Academy of SciencesSan FranciscoUSA
  15. 15.Department of Ecology and Evolutionary BiologyUniversity of California Santa CruzSanta CruzUSA
  16. 16.Cape Eleuthera InstituteRock Sound, EleutheraBahamas
  17. 17.Department of ZoologyTel Aviv UniversityTel AvivIsrael
  18. 18.The Interuniversity Institute for Marine Sciences in EilatEilatIsrael
  19. 19.Centre for Ecology and ConservationUniversity of ExeterExeterUK

Personalised recommendations