Geology topics

Cynthia S. Kolar

Publications and source records attributed to Cynthia S. Kolar.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2016

USGS science and technology help managers battle invading Asian carp

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) conducts Asian carp research focused on early detection, risk assessment, and development of control tools and strategies. The goals are to prevent the establishment of invasive Asian carp in the Great Lakes and to reduce their impacts in the Ohio River and Mississippi River Basins and elsewhere. Managers can use the information, tools, and strategies for early detection of Asian carp and to control them when their presence is first evident. New detection and control tools are designed to accommodate expansion to other invasive species and application in geographically diverse areas. This USGS focus complements goals of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI), a multi-agency collaboration started in 2010 to protect and restore the Great Lakes. As a member of the Asian Carp Regional Coordinating Committee, which guides Asian carp efforts, the USGS works closely with Federal and State agencies, Canada, and others to address high-priority Asian carp issues and provide science to inform management decisions. The USGS has gained extensive knowledge of Asian carp biology and life history over the past 30 years. That knowledge guides the design, development, and application of control strategies, and is essential for developing approaches in line with modern principles and practices of integrated pest management (IPM). IPM is a process used to solve pest problems while minimizing risks to people and the environment.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2012

Binational ecological risk assessment of bigheaded carps (Hypophthalmichthys spp.) for the Great Lakes Basin.

Bigheaded carps (Bighead and Silver carps) are considered a potential threat to the Great Lakes basin. A binational ecological risk assessment was conducted to provide scientifically defensible advice for managers and decision-makers in Canada and the United States. This risk assessment looked at the likelihood of arrival, survival, establishment, and spread of bigheaded carps to obtain an overall probability of introduction. Arrival routes assessed were physical connections and human-mediated releases. The risk assessment ranked physical connections (specifically the Chicago Area Waterway System) as the most likely route for arrival into the Great Lakes basin. Results of the risk assessment show that there is enough food and habitat for bigheaded carp survival in the Great Lakes, especially in Lake Erie and productive embayments in the other lakes. Analyses of tributaries around the Canadian Great Lakes and the American waters of Lake Erie indicate that there are many suitable tributaries for bigheaded carp spawning. Should bigheaded carps establish in the Great Lakes, their spread would not likely be limited and several ecological consequences can be expected to occur. These consequences include competition for planktonic food leading to reduced growth rates, recruitment and abundance of planktivores. Subsequently this would lead to reduced stocks of piscivores and abundance of fishes with pelagic, early life stages. Overall risk is highest for lakes Michigan, Huron, and Erie, followed by Lake Ontario then Lake Superior. To avoid the trajectory of the invasion process and prevent or minimize anticipated consequences, it is important to continue to focus efforts on reducing the probability of introduction of these species at either the arrival, survival, establishment, or spread stage (depending on location).

Great Lakes Basin↗

USGS2002

Interactions among zebra mussel shells, invertebrate prey, and Eurasian ruffe or yellow perch

The exotic zebra mussel, Dreissena polymorpha , is established in all of the Laurentian Great Lakes and may affect benthivorous fishes by increasing the complexity of benthic substrates and changing energy flow patterns within the food web. Native yellow perch, Perca flavescens , and the nonindigenous Eurasian ruffe, Gymnocephalus cernuus , are benthivores that may compete for limited food resources. As ruffe spread to areas with more dense zebra mussel populations, the zone of interaction among zebra mussels, yellow perch, and ruffe will increase and intensify. In the laboratory, the effect of zebra mussel shells on the ability of these fishes to forage on amphipods ( Gammarus pseudolimnaeus ) and chironomids ( Chironomus plumosus ) was examined in light and darkness. In 12 h, ruffe consumed more amphipods than did similar-sized yellow perch, particularly in darkness on bare cobble, and in light within zebra mussels. Amphipods decreased activity more in the presence of ruffe than yellow perch. More amphipods were found in zebra mussel shells than in bare cobble, whether or not fish were present. In darkness, when ruffe consumed more amphipods on bare cobble, amphipods became more associated with zebra mussel shells. Although ruffe consumed more amphipods than yellow perch, perch consumed more chironomids than ruffe on bare cobble. The presence of zebra mussel shells altered the relative consumption of invertebrates in some substrate-light combinations. Experiments such as these help to improve understanding of the direct and indirect effects of predation between and among native and nonindigenous species that may exert structuring forces on the nearshore communities of the Great Lakes currently or in the future.

Journal of Great Lakes Research↗

USGS1997

Conditions for the return and simulation of the recovery of burrowing mayflies in western Lake Erie

In the 1950s, burrowing mayflies, Hexagenia spp. ( H. limbata and H. rigida ), were virtually eliminated from the western basin of Lake Erie (a 3300 km 2 area) because of eutrophication and pollution. We develop and present a deterministic model for the recolonization of the western basin by Hexagenia to pre-1953 densities. The model was based on the logistic equation describing the population growth of Hexagenia and a presumed competitor, Chironomus (dipteran larvae). Other parameters (immigration, low oxygen, toxic sediments, competition with Chironomus, and fish predation) were then individually added to the logistic model to determine their effect at different growth rates. The logistic model alone predicts 10–41 yr for Hexagenia to recolonize western Lake Erie. Immigration reduced the recolonization time by 2–17 yr. One low-oxygen event during the first 20 yr increased recovery time by 5–17 yr. Contaminated sediments added 5–11 yr to the recolonization time. Competition with Chironomus added 8–19 yr to recovery. Fish predators added 4–47 yr to the time required for recolonization. The full model predicted 48–81 yr for Hexagenia to reach a carrying capacity of ≈350 nymphs/m 2 , or not until around the year 2038 if the model is started in 1990. The model was verified by changing model parameters to those present in 1970, beginning the model in 1970 and running it through 1990. Predicted densities overlapped almost completely with actual estimated densities of Hexagenia nymphs present in the western basin in Lake Erie in 1990. The model suggests that recovery of large aquatic ecosystems may lag substantially behind remediation efforts.

Michigan, Ohio, Ontario↗

USGS1996

Competition between nonindigenous ruffe and native yellow perch in laboratory studies

The ruffe Gymnocephalus cernuus is a European percid that was accidently introduced in Duluth Harbor, Lake Superior. This nonindigenous species is closely related to yellow perch Perca flavescens , and because the two species have similar diets and habitat requirements, they are potential competitors. Laboratory studies in aquaria and pools were conducted to determine whether ruffe can compete with yellow perch for food. Ruffe had capture rates similar to those of yellow perch when food was unlimited. Ruffe spent more time than yellow perch over a feeding container before leaving it and searching again, and they also required less time to ingest (or handle) prey. However, the presence of yellow perch shortened the time ruffe spent over foraging areas when food was more limited. In addition, yellow perch were more active than ruffe, as indicated by their more frequent visits to a feeding container. Hence, the outcome of exploitative competition was not conclusive; ruffe appear to have the advantage in some behaviors, yellow perch in others. Ruffe were much more aggressive than yellow perch, and interference competition may be important in the interactions between these species. Our results indicate that ruffe might compete with native yellow perch.

Minnesota, Wisconsin↗