Asian Carp

The Invasion of the Asian Carp: Silver and

Bigheaded Carp in our Waters







Jesse Zastrow, Jerome Barner,

Zach Fournier, Eamon Harrity

April 14, 2010

ENSC 202

Professor: Stephanie Hurley

Hype



 U.S. Supreme Court may rule on Asian carp

case

 Environmental groups say plan to fight

Asian carp not enough

 Granholm calls Obama carp plan weak

 Feds unveil $78.5M effort to blunt Lakes

migration of carp

 From The Detroit News: http://www.detnews.com/article/20091204/METRO/912040386#ixzz0kTtbznvx

What is the real deal?









“Asian carp are like cancer cells," said Cameron Davis,

senior adviser with the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency. "They can grow and spread very, very quickly

and overtake other healthy living organisms."



-Belkin, D Wall Street Journal Nov. 20 2009









http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view_rec.php?id=5856

Problem Statement

The Silver and Bigheaded carp are invasive

planktivorous fish that could have serious social,

economic and ecological impacts on the Great

Lakes and Lake Champlain.









http://minneso

taindependent.c

om/wp-

content/upload

s/2010/02/Asia

n-Carp.jpg

Basic Outline

 Introduction

 Goals and Objectives

 Findings

 The Carp

 The Great lake and Lake Champlain



 Vectors of introduction



 Preventative Measures



 Conclusions and Recommendations

Goals

 Assess the risk posed by Asian carp to Great Lakes

 How likely is it that they will make it to and survive in the Great

Lakes?

 Will they be able to migrate within the lakes?

 What kind of impacts could they have on the lake system?

 Ultimately, what is the likelihood that the carp will

make it to Lake Champlain and what impacts could

they have here.

Objectives

 Investigate the current status of the carp

 Distribution, impacts on inhabited areas

 Describe the life history of the carp

 Familiarize ourselves with the characteristics of the lakes

 Assess possible vectors and pathways into and between the lakes

 Explore existing and potential prevention practices

 Investigate potential economic, social and ecological impacts of

these fish (conclusions)

Findings







http://asiancarp.net/dasblog/content/binary/Asian%2

0Carp.jpg

Asian Carp







Figure 1: Bighead Carp (Hypophthalmichthys nobilis)









Figure 2: Silver Carp (Hypophthalmichthys molitrix)



Images from Kolar, 2005.

Asian Carp



• Brought in to improve water quality and promote production in

aquaculture ponds, reservoirs, and improve conditions in sewage

pools primarily in Arkansas.

• First introduced to US from private fish farmers in Arkansas (1972 –

bighead, 1973 – Silver) for aquaculture pond clean up, later used in

federal, state, and private facilities then municipal water

management ponds.

• Silver Carp have been recorded in 12 states, and Bighead at least

18 states.

• Introduced to waters from dumping of bait fish, flooding of stocked

ponds, illegal stocking of reservoirs & lakes etc.

Asian Carp

Introduction cont’d









Figure 4: Range of Bighead Carp in the

US, as of August, 2009 (1Fuller, 2009).









Figure 3: Range of Silver Carp in the US,

as of August, 2009 (2Fuller, 2009).

Asian Carp

Native Distribution









Figure 5: Native range of Bighead Carp, mainly large rivers Figure 6: Native range of Silver Carp, mainly large

and lakes of southeastern Asia; eastern China, eastern rivers and lakes of eastern China and eastern Russia

Siberia, and the extreme northern range of North Korea that run into the Pacific Ocean (Kolar et al., 2005)

(Kolar et al., 2005)





• Occur in freshwaters including rivers and lakes in their native China.

• Needs fast-moving water (rivers) for spawning, otherwise prefers

slow-moving waters such as lakes, ponds, and flooded backwaters

Asian Carp

Habitat





 Has been introduced to reservoirs, canals, man-made ponds and lakes, etc. where

they do well.

 Spawn in spring, tributary use highest in winter according to a study by DCC on

the Missouri River.



Table 1: Data collected in the US in 2004, depicting rivers and habitats of juvenille Bighead and Silver Carp.

Table from (Kolar et al., 2005), author cited contacts as the field biologists who provided the data.

Asian Carp

Temperature

 Very temperature tolerant; Adult Asian Carp have been shown to

survive in temperatures ranging 2°C to 40°C.

 A variety of sources document varying optimal temperature ranges,

most fall between 20 and 30°C.

 Temperature fluctuations not necessary for reproduction although

it is characteristic of their native range.

Reproductive Biology

 Fecundity increases with body size and weight.

 Many ranges of Asian Carp reproduction success, from 280,000 to 1,860,800 per

Bighead female and 145,000 to 5,000,000 per Silver female, varying from location

and study.

 Fecundity of Bighead Carp from the lower Missouri River collected in 1998-1999

ranged from 11,588 to 769,964, with an average of 226,213 eggs (Schrank and

Guy 2002).

 A study of 6 Silver Carp in the Mississippi River in 2003 showed a range of total

fecundity as 57,283 to 328,538 eggs.

Asian Carp

Feeding Habits

Table 2: Comparison of feeding habits between Bighead carp and Silver carp (Kolar et al., 2005).

Asian Carp

Feeding



 They consume 7-14% of their body weight in food.

 Bighead carp has been shown to prefer Daphnia (Cooke et al., 2009).

 Asian carp have been shown to consume different ratios of zooplankton and

phytoplankton based on life stage and abundance of plankton.

 Bighead carp revert to phytoplankton when zooplankton levels are low, mainly

blue-green algae, diatoms, and green algae.

 Extremely adaptive feeding habits, change natural zooplankton and

phytoplankton composition and feed on detritus if necessary.

 Bighead carp primarily zooplanktivores, less specialized than Silver.

 Adult Silver carp primarily feed on phytoplankton, larvae on zooplankton. Gill

rakers capable of straining phytoplankton down to 4 um in diameter (Chen et al.,

2007).

Asian Carp

Potential Impact on Recreation/Fishing Industry





 Outcompeting native fish for food

 Concern for native filter feeding fish like Paddlefish, Bigmouth Buffalo, and

Gizzard Shad, as well as many other fish with overlapping food requirements.



 Fishermen overwhelmed with amount of carp, cannot

catch anything else.

 Carp jumping, hitting fishermen, boaters, tubers, etc.

DANGEROUS!

 The Great Lakes contribute $7 billion to the economy through commercial

and sport • fishing, and an additional $8 to $10 billion through recreational

boating (FWS 2009).

 Jumping Carp

Physical Characteristics of each Lake of

Concern



Lake Lake Champlain Lake Michigan Lake Erie

Characteristics



Length 120 miles 307 miles 241 miles

Width 12 miles 118 miles 57 miles

Average Depth 64 feet 279 feet 62 feet

Drainage Area 8,234 square miles 45,000 square 30,140 square

miles miles



Surface Area 435 square miles 22,300 square 9,910 square

miles miles

Ecological Status of the Great Lakes

Region

 The Great Lakes ecosystem is the largest freshwater

ecosystem in the world.

 The Great Lakes ecosystem is an extensive watershed

(288,000 square miles) with 5,000 tributaries and 9,000

miles of shoreline.

 Important sport fish in the ecosystem include: Lake

trout, Brook trout, Lake sturgeon, Yellow perch, Lake

whitefish, Muskellunge, Walleye , Chinook salmon, and

Coho salmon

US FWS 2010. Midwest Region Hot topic: Asian Carp

Ecological Status of the Great Lakes

Region

 Significantly degraded over the past few decades due to

human use and influx of invasive species

 Invasive plants, fish, invertebrates, and macrophytes

have devastated native population

 180+ Invasive species currently inhabiting the Lakes (Modley,

2010)

 Asian Carp- another potential stressor to the aquatic

ecosystem

 In the Mississippi River System they outcompete the native

fish such as bigmouth buffalo, gizzard shad, and paddlefish

for the phytoplankton and zooplankton biomass

http://www.nww.usace.army.mil/lsr/final_fseis/study_kit/appendix_c/images/fig4-21.jpg





General aquatic food web may be used to predict the potential impacts of the

Asian carp on the ecological system of the lakes.



http://techalive.mtu.edu/meec/module08/images/GreatLakesEcology.jpg

Eutrophic Conditions of Lake Michigan

and Lake Erie









www.epa.gov/solec/sogl2009/0104benthicdiversity.pdf



Values ranging from 0-0.6 indicate oligotrophic conditions; values from 0.6-1.0 indicate mesotrophic conditions (shaded area); values above 1.0 indicate

eutrophic conditions. Data points represent average of triplicate samples taken at each sampling site. (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006)

Zooplankton Densities in

Lake Champlain

Missisquoi Bay









St. Albans Bay

Cumberland Bay









The net zooplankton density of the thousands of organisms per square meter in Lake Champlain sampled throughout the 15 stations.

www.anr.state.vt.us/dec//waterq/lakes/docs/.../lp_lc-netzoopdensity.pdf

Potential Pathways

 Chicago Shipping and Sanitary Canal

 Des Plaines River

 Overland flooding

 Other canals

 Human facilitated introduction









(Modley, Personal communication 2010; Daniels, R 2000; Hill, W 2008; FWS 2010; Cooke et al. 2009)

Chicago Shipping and Sanitary Canal









http://www.detnews.com/article/20091204/METRO/912040386

http://www.mnn.com/sites/default/files/main_carp.jpg

CSSC

 A man-made canal,

constructed in the early

1900s as a sewage drain

 It is the only shipping link

between Lake Michigan and

the Mississippi River System

 Currently it is 28 miles long

202 ft wide and 22 ft deep.









http://www.buffalonews.com/260/st

ory/880112.html

www.lib.niu.edu

Des Plaines River

 Flooding greatly

increases this fish’s

mobility and may pose as

a serious complication to

any prevention measure



 Modley 2010, FWS 2010









http://fwcb.cfans.umn.edu/sorensen/research/CarpSpawn.jpg



http://dnr.wi.gov/invasives/fact/asian_carp.htm

OOPS!

Accidental Introduction

 The Great Lakes have around 184 known invasive

species and quite a few have been traced back to the

ballast waters of cargo ships.

 Rainbow Smelt, Fishhook water Flea, Fourspine Stickleback

 Grass carp still shipped around the country for

plankton control in aquaculture ponds

 For all your carp stocking needs!

http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$Department/deptdocs.nsf/all/agdex346



 Looking at the literature, it seems the poly-carp

stocking practice has declined significantly since the

early 2000’s



Ricciardi, 2006; http://www.wvu.e u/~agexten/aquaculture/Pondweed.pdf

Human Facilitated Introduction

 Bait Fish

 Awaiting response from local baitfish shops

 Alewife believed to have been introduced as a bait fish on

accident

 Culinary market

 They are a staple food in their native range and are slowly

gaining popularity here

 Bigheaded carp is shipped live as a specialty food item

 As small markets develop so does the movement of this carp

 “We shouldn't be trying to eradicate it; it's too late for that. We

should be eating it.” Steve Mcnitt- Schafer Fisheries in Thomson, Ill

(Los Angeles Times, Jan. 16 2010)

New York State Canal System









http://www.shipsblog.com/navigating/maps/NYS_Canal_overview.gif

http://www.nyscanals.gov/maps/map7.html

NYSCS

 524 miles of canals connecting Lake Erie to the

finger lakes, Hudson River and Lake Champlain

 12 ft deep in most places

 Warm, nutrient rich waters that support thriving

sport fish populations

 Small and Large mouth bass, walleye, panfish northern

pike, blueback herring and coho salmon







www.nycanal.com

Champlain Canal

 60 miles of shallow nutrient rich water

 As many as 12 invasive species including zebra mussels

and white perch thought to have arrived through this

canal

 Shipping traffic much lower than in the past, mostly for recreational

use now

 Modley (2010) believes that the carp would be more

than capable of migrating up this canal into Lake

Champlain

Asian Carp Preventative Measures Overview



 Current Preventative Measures

 CSSC Underwater Electric Barrier

 eDNA Sampling

 Rapid Response Plan

 Electrofishing/Netting/Targeted Removal



 Alternative Preventative Measures

 Physical Controls

 Biological/Chemical Controls

 Social Controls

Current Preventative Measures









http://asiancarp.org/Images/water%20

was%20up%20to%20here%20coming%

20in%20to%20bank.JPG

CSSC Underwater Electric Barrier









• Only dispersal barrier between Lake Michigan and the Mississippi River basin

•Structure: - steel cables with electrodes on either end

-non-lethal, gradual electric field created underwater

- uncomfortable for fish to pass (USACE 2007)

http://www.lrc.usace.army.mil/proje

cts/fish_barrier/file/DB1.jpg

CSSC Underwater Electric Barrier Cont’d



Two barrier system

 Barrier I (demonstration)

 1 Volts/Inch, pulsing 5Hz every 4ms

 NANPCA, completed April 2002,

 temporary

 Stretches 54 feet of canal (USACE 2009)



 Barrier II

 Barrier II-A

 2 Volts/Inch, pulsing 15 Hz

 every 6.5 ms

 1300ft downstream Barrier I

 Completed April 2008,

 permanent (Asian Carp Working

Group 2010)

 Barrier II-B

 Same operating capacity as II-A

 800 ft downstream Barrier I http://www.lrc.usace.army.mil/proj

ects/fish_barrier/



 Slated for completion October 2010

(Asian Carp Working Group 2010)

CSSC Underwater Electric Barrier Cont’d





Effectiveness Cost Time-Scale

 Dependant upon: Barrier I : $4 million (2007) completed April 2002

 Current velocity Barrier II : project ceiling II A: completed 04/2008

 Water Temperature $16 million (2007) IIB: slated completion

 Conductivity (USACE 2009) 08/2010

( Dettmers et al. 2009)

 Carp life stage (juvenile?)

(Brammeier et al 2008)

• Electric Barrier shown

to be ~ 90-99% effective

( Brammeir et al. 2008)

- MDNR study in 2004 found

electric barrier + acoustic bubbler

to be ~ 83 % effective

• HIGH UNCERTAINTY

eDNA Sampling

 Developed at U. of Notre Dame,

current method of Carp detection

(USACE 2009)

 Examines local water samples for

traces of carp DNA

 Mucoidal secretions

 Feces / urine

 Tissue

• Presence/Non-presence

determined by identified genetic

marker (Lodge 2010)

• Effectiveness:

 Greater ease of detection

 Does not account for specimen life Figure: Two sites depicting positive

history traits, quantity present, or detections, Site A is the Brandon Road pool,

exact location (Lodge 2010) Site B is near power plant in Dresden Island

• Cost: pool

 Current total: $2,600,000

 Future Estimates: $940,000

(Asian Carp Working Group 2010)

http://www.lrc.usace.army.mil/pao/eDNA_FactSheet_20

090918.pdf

Rapid Response Program

“We believe it is still critical to support and defend the electric barrier while it is

down for maintenance,” said IDNR Assistant Director John Rogner. “The

barrier remains our most effective weapon against this very aggressive

invasive species” (IDNR 2009).









http://www.chicagonow.com/blo

gs/dennis-byrne-

barbershop/assets_c/2009/12/fis

h-thumb-600x405-43833.jpg

Rapid Response Program cont’d



 Maintenance on barriers required every 4-6 months, barriers are turned off (USFWS

2010)

 Rapid Response Program implemented during these maintenance periods

 Program consists of dumping piscicide into CSSC to eliminate all biota (Asian Carp

Working Group 2010)

 Rotenone chosen by EPA as most effective means to eliminate Asian carp

 Derived from roots of tropical/sub tropical plants

 Inhibits biochemical processes at cellular level

 No fish is immune => death (US EPA 2007)









http://www.alanwood.net/pesticides

/structures/rotenone.gif









http://www.asiancarp.org/rapidresponse/images/DSC074

19.jpg

Rapid Response Program cont’d

 Effectiveness:

 Studies show 65-95% effective in killing target species (Brammeier et al. 2008)

 Rapid Response implemented in December 2009 in CSSC yielded over 90 tons of dead fish,

including one Asian carp (Hood 2009)

• Cost

 Cost of Rotenone very high, $1 / acre foot

 December 2009 application: 2,200 gallons dumped into CSSC over three day = $3 million (Hood 2009)



 Timescale

 Rotenone degrades rapidly , ceasing to affect fish after a few hours, becomes non-toxic after 4-6 weeks

(US EPA 2008)

 Application of Rotenone in accordance with routine maintenance schedules









http://www.asiancarp.org/rapidresponse/m

edia.htm

Electro-fishing/ Netting/ Targeted

Removal

 In accordance with Asian Carp Working Group Control Strategy Framework (Feb. 2010)

 Utilizes current eDNA sampling methods

 Data reveals carp hotspots above barrier system where carp have been positively identified

 Warm water discharges

 Wastewater treatment plant outfalls

 Tail waters of locks and dams

 Marina basins

 Barge Slips

 Other slack water areas

 Within target areas, fish are concentrated to a confined area (electro-fishing,

acoustics, nets)

 Removed via application of Rotenone (Asian Carp Working Group 2010)

Electro-fishing/ Netting/ Targeted Removal



 Effectiveness:

• Proven to be effective method to eradicate fish in given area

 Control study by IDNR downstream of barrier system yielded 30-40 Asian carp in eDNA identified

area (MDNR et al. 2010)

 Likelihood of success directly linked to expedience of eDNA sample

analyzation, fish are mobile

 Speeding up eDNA methods critical to effectvie removal!

 Cost

• Estimated cost for implementation of this program (~April 2010) :

$2 million (Asian Carp Working Group 2010)









http://www.tnfish.org/Electrofishing

ShockingSurveys_TWRA/TWRA_Elect

rofishingNegus.jpg

Alternative Preventative Measures









http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/dennis-byrne-

barbershop/assets_c/2010/01/carp-thumb-

560x338-56351.jpg

Physical Methods

 Physical Barriers

 Vertical Drop Barrier

 Hydraulic drop greater than carp leaping ability (~10 ft)

 Dams, feasible in small tributaries => 95-100 % effective (Brammeier et al. 2007)

 Rotating Drum Screens

 Drums set in-stream on a cable

 Continually turn, allow passage of fine debris but not carp ( MDNR et al. 2004)

 Small scale, 95-100 % effective

 Floating Curtains

 Floating curtain attached to pilings across water body

 Allows fine debris to pass; small scale => 95-100% effective (MDNR et al. 2004)

 High Velocity Structures

 Concentrated areas of high velocity

 Flat aprons in dam spillways, velocity faster than carp swimming speed

 Highly effective, small scale (MDNR et al. 2004)

Physical Methods cont’d





 Bubble Curtains

 Perforated tube laid across bottom of channel,

compressed air pumped through creating wall of bubbles

 50-95% effective

 Construction and operating costs: $0.5-1 million



 Strobe Lights

http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/commun/ml-

 Most effective when utilized in concert with other deterrents fe/images/articles/fullSize/09-13-11a.jpg



(bubble curtains, acoustic deflections)

 60-95% effective in eel study

(MDNR et al. 2004)

 Cost: $0.5-1 million, but only to be used at

channel entrances (Brammeier et al. 2007)









(MDNR et al. 2004)

Physical Methods cont’d



 Acoustic Deterrents

 Sound Projector Array

 Electronic signal generator, several powerful amplifiers, under water array of sound

projectors (MDNR et al. 2004)

 80% effective, estimated cost $1 million (Brammeier et al. 2007)

 Acoustic field not highly concentrated, effective for blocking river intakes

 Uncertainty in optimal operating range to maximize effectiveness (life stage) (MDNR et

al. 2004)

 Bio-acoustic Fish Fence

 Combined concentrated acoustic field and bubble curtain

 Electromagnetic/pneumonic sound transducer coupled to bubble sheet generator

 Multi-faceted carp barrier

 90% effective; cost: $1.2 million (MDNR et al. 2004)

 Hybrid Systems

 System incorporating SPA with bubble curtain being developed

 Allow direct modification of signal to target Asian carp (MDNR et al. 2004)

Figure: SPA system

(MDNR et al. 2004)

Figure: Bio-acoustic Fish

Fence System

(MDNR et al. 2004)

Physical Methods cont’d

http://www.epa.st

ate.il.us/environm



Modified Structural Operations

ental-

 progress/v30/n4/i

mages/lockport-

lock.jpg

 Modified Lock Operations

 100% certainty that carp have not passed

electro-barrier not attained

 Modifying lock operations adjacent to

Lake Michigan as prevention

 Proposed actions include: no action, close every week, close one week/month, close every other

week

 Effectiveness not known, impact to shipping may be significant (Asian Carp Working Group 2010)

 Modified Bank Fortifications

 Des Plaines River and I&M Canal directly adjacent to CSSC, overland of waters

between water bodies during storm events

 Propose modified bank fortifications to stop water body transfer

 Concrete barriers



 Chain link fencing



 High priority flooding zones identified for these structures, ~13.5 mile stretch of CSSC

 High cost: $13,200,000; permanent concrete structures effective in stopping overland

flow, chain link fence uncertain (juveniles) (Asian Carp Working Group 2010)

Figure: Des Plaines River overflow above

dispersal barriers

(USACE 2010)

Biological/Chemical Controls

 Chemical

 Rotenone, non-discriminate, large scale

 Current technology not yet developed carp-specific chemical (Asian Carp Working

Group 2010)



 Biological

 Relatively unknown, currently being researched

 Research: effect of variable acoustics, electric fields, and light modifications

 Goal to disrupt spawning activities (Asian Carp Working Group 2010)

Social Controls

 Prevent Direct/Indirect Introduction

 Prohibit live sale (Lacey Act)

 Educational Programs

 Social awareness (Stop Asian Carp!)



 Market controls

 Open American fishing markets to carp, commodity product

 Create incentives for harvest (Asian Carp Working Group 2010)

Conclusions

 Will they make it into the Great Lakes?

 YES

 Economic interest, political turmoil

 Proximity to Great Lakes

 High level of uncertainty

 Will they survive in the Lakes?

 YES

 Eutrophic Conditions of bays, inlets, slack water areas, and stream

entry points

 Life histrory of carp

 Mobility, omniplanktivores, adaptability

 Whole lake model might not be applicable.

Conclusions

 Will they get to Lake Champlain?

 Colonization is likely but…

 Geographic expanse

 Effectiveness of preventative measures

Missisquoi Bay









St. Albans Bay









Burlington Bay

Shelburne Bay









http://www.lcbp.org/PDFs/SOL2008-web.pdf

Conclusions

 Impacts

 Serious Ecological Impacts

 Disrupt natural food web (Cooke et al. 2009… already detrimental to native

planktivores in the Mississippi)

 No natural predators

 Ability to shift diet with plankton composition

 Rapid Expansion

 Large size and rapid growth rate

 Economic Impacts

 Damage Fisheries

 Mississippi River and Missouri River Systems have lost numerous fisheries

 Social Impacts

 Loss of recreational value of waterways

 Loss of historic, traditional fishing areas

 Aesthetic value

Recommendations

PREVENTION is the best method!

Recommendations

 Strengthen current preventative measures

 Increase public awareness!

 Establish viable market for Asian carp

 Fund habitat suitability research

 Complete assessment

of Great Lakes

vulnerability



http://media.mlive.com/kzgaz

ette_impact/photo/asian-carp-

fe07641114258f6d_large.jpg

Recommendations cont’d

Preventive Measures

 Complete construction of Barrier II-B by October 2010, upgrade Barrier I to

permanent status

 Research techniques to enhance eDNA techniques, increase capacity

 Strengthen current Rapid Response Programs

- Heightened monitoring, contingency plans

 Continue target electro fishing/netting

 Implement bank fortifications to separate CSSC, Des Plaines River, and I&M

Canal

 Modify lock operations on a weekly basis (preventative)

 Utilize integrated alternative prevention measures at channel openings

upstream of electric barriers (preventative)

 Hybrid acoustic/bubble systems, small scale physical barriers

Questions?

 Players: Invasive Silver and Bigheaded carp

 Problem: They possess the ability to disrupt the natural

food web and cause significant social, economic, and

ecological impacts

 Goal: Investigate likelihood that the

asian carp will actually spread and

have serious impacts

 What we conclude: Yes, the carp

will reach the Great Lakes and

possibly Lake Champlain

 Too many uncertainties to be sure

 Recommendations:

PREVENTION is the best

method!!!!

Citations

 Chen, P., Wiley, E. O., Mcnyset K. M. (2007). Ecological niche modeling as a predictive tool: silver and bighead carps in

North America. Biol Invasions, 9(43-51), DOI: 10.1007/s10530-006-9004-x

 Cooke, L.S., Hill, R.W., & Meyer, P. K. (2009) Feeding at different plankton densities alters invasive bighead carp

(Hypophthalmychthys nobilis) growth and zooplankton species composition Hydrobiologia, 625(185-193). doi:

10.1007/s10750-009-9707-y

 1Fuller, P. (2009). From NAS – Nonindigenous Aquatic Species, Bighead Carp. USGS. Retrieved from



http://nas2.er.usgs.gov/viewer/omap.aspx?SpeciesID=551

 2Fuller, P. (2009). From NAS – Nonindigenous Aquatic Species, Silver Carp. USGS. Retrieved from



http://nas2.er.usgs.gov/viewer/omap.aspx?SpeciesID=549

 Huang, D., Liu, J., & Hu, C. (2001). Fish resources in Chinese reservoirs and their utilisation. Abstract retrieved from

http://www.fws.gov/contaminants/OtherDocuments/ACBSRAFinalReport2005.pdf

 Kolar, C. S., Chapman, D.C., Courteney, Jr. W. R., Housel, C. M., Williams, J. D., & Jennings, D. P. (2005). Asian Carps of

the Genus Hypophthalmichthys (Pisces, Cyprinidae) ― A Biological Synopsis and Environmental Risk Assessment.