Abstract
The movement of fish can be regulated by behavioural manipulation through non-physical barrier systems. Aquatic invasive species are becoming one of the major management issues in North America, and threaten native aquatic ecosystems, including freshwater fish. Placements of non-physical barriers in waterways can help disrupt the movement of invasive fish. This study examined the effect of a strobe-light stimulus on the avoidance behaviour of two proxy species, juvenile common carp (Cyprinus carpio) and juvenile channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus), in a controlled laboratory environment. For each species, three sequential treatments of pre-stimulus, strobe-light stimulus, and post-stimulus for 30 min periods were recorded on acclimated groups of 5 juvenile common carp and 5 juvenile channel catfish using 15 and 13 replicates, respectively. The distribution of juvenile common carp individuals throughout the tank did not change significantly with treatment, nor did cohesive grouping behaviour. Similarly, there were no significant differences across experimental treatments in average location/distance of juvenile channel catfish relative to the strobe light or degree of cohesion in response to the strobe light. Non-physical barriers have been widely reported to vary between species and environmental conditions. These results suggest that strobe lights evoke no avoidance or attractive responses in juvenile common carp and juvenile channel catfish, and will likely not be an effective barrier to inhibit movements of juvenile invasive fishes.
Highlights
In recent years, aquatic invasive species has become one of the major management concerns, given their negative impact on our ecosystems, and increasing population size and habitat ranges [1,2,3].Physical barriers in aquatic environments are common, effective management techniques that can physically obstruct fish movement [4]
There was no significant interaction between grid sections (A, B, and C) and treatments on the mean number of fish (ANOVA: F4, 126 = 0.83, p = 0.51, Figure 1)
All grid sections were assumed to be equal, the results suggest that the average distributions per grid section were different during the pre-stimulus treatment
Summary
Aquatic invasive species has become one of the major management concerns, given their negative impact on our ecosystems, and increasing population size and habitat ranges [1,2,3]. Physical barriers in aquatic environments are common, effective management techniques that can physically obstruct fish movement [4]. Physical barrier technologies may be useful in managing fishes in reservoir environments, areas with high debris loads increase maintenance requirements, rendering the application of such barriers impractical [5]. Non-physical deterrence systems can be defined as any stimuli that discourages or prevents a species from moving into specified areas [6]. Non-physical deterrence systems rely on the Fishes 2019, 4, 29; doi:10.3390/fishes4020029 www.mdpi.com/journal/fishes
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
