Next Article in Journal
DNA Barcoding for Managing Blackberry Genetic Resources on Black Sea Coast (Russia)
Previous Article in Journal
Seasonal Dynamics of Phytoplankton Community Structure and Environmental Drivers in the Coastal Waters of the Leizhou Peninsula, China
Previous Article in Special Issue
Dynamic Accumulation and Bio-Mediated Fragmentation of Microplastics in the Digestive System of Red Swamp Crayfish (Procambarus clarkii)
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Diversity
Volume 17
Issue 12
10.3390/d17120868
diversity-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Revisiting the Invasion: A Success Story of Crayfish Species in Piedmont Plain Lakes (NW Italy)

by
Boggero Angela
1,*,
Orlandi Marco
1,
Zaupa Silvia
1,2 and
Kamburska Lyudmila
1,3
1
CNR-Water Research Institute (IRSA), Corso Tonolli 50, 28922 Verbania Pallanza, Italy
2
CNR-Water Research Institute (IRSA), Via Roma 3, 74123 Taranto, Italy
3
National Biodiversity Future Center (NBFC), Piazza Marina 61, 90133 Palermo, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Diversity 2025, 17(12), 868; https://doi.org/10.3390/d17120868
Submission received: 1 November 2025 / Revised: 9 December 2025 / Accepted: 16 December 2025 / Published: 18 December 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Diversity and Biogeography of Crustaceans in Continental Waters)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Crayfish often become invasive when introduced to new waters. From the late 19th to the late 20th century, the commercial import of North American species (e.g., Faxonius limosus, Pacifastacus leniusculus, Procambarus clarkii) into Europe for food, ornamental aquaculture, and restocking native crayfish populations after crayfish plague succeeded due to their adaptability, high reproductive rates, and resilience. Extensive baited-trap monitoring of Piedmont lakes carried in 2025 confirmed the occurrence of two invasive crayfish species (F. limosus, and P. clarkii) in 10 of 17 lakes and recorded P. clarkii for the first time ever in lakes Pistono, San Michele, and Sirio, expanding our knowledge of their distribution in Piedmont freshwaters. Since all detected species are listed as Invasive Alien Species of Union Concern, protecting the ecological integrity of Piedmont’s freshwaters requires coordinated action by member states, regional authorities, policymakers, and water managers to prevent and control their spread and to improve information sharing. Non-native crayfish occurrence is influenced not only by hydrological and habitat connectivity and predator–prey interactions but also by illegal activities that supply the food market.

1. Introduction

Crayfish are often a central component of freshwater food webs and ecosystems. In streams and lakes, crayfish inhabit a wide variety of niches, from shallow vegetated margins and submerged woody debris to deep riffles, burrows, and rocky substrates. They serve as important predators and consumers, feeding on benthic invertebrates, detritus, macrophytes, and algae [1,2], while also representing a key prey item for fish, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and mammal species [3,4]. When species are introduced into new ecosystems, whether intentionally or unintentionally, they often encounter few of the natural predators and controlling factors that kept their populations under control in their native ranges. Among these, some crayfish are prime examples of organisms capable of becoming invasive when introduced into new water bodies [5,6]. Over the course of a century (from the late 19th to the late 20th century), several North American crayfish species were introduced into Europe to supply the food market and aquaculture, as well as to restock populations of the native noble crayfish (Astacus astacus Linnaeus, 1758) or the white-clawed crayfish (Austropotamobius pallipes (Lereboullet, 1858)), which were declining due to crayfish plague [7,8,9]. Among them are the spiny-cheek crayfish, F. limosus (Rafinesque, 1817), the red swamp crayfish, P. clarkii (Girard, 1852), and the signal crayfish, P. leniusculus (Dana, 1852), whose success in new environments was driven by their adaptability, high reproductive rates, and resilience to diverse conditions [2,10]. These silent invaders often go unnoticed until they make their impact, revealing complex interactions within freshwater ecosystems, or until their occurrence becomes evident to fishermen and the general public [11,12]. Once established, non-native crayfish can rapidly expand their range, outcompete native species, and modify habitat structures, leading to profound ecological shifts and biodiversity loss [13,14].
Because crayfish have been introduced into various environments primarily for human consumption, the aquarium trade, or as live bait [13,15], and due to their detrimental effects on ecosystem services—such as competition, predation, disease transmission, and hybridization—they serve as an ideal model organism for investigating how community structure and ecosystem functions depend on species composition. Long-term or frequent monitoring of these species provides crucial insights into their spreading patterns and environmental consequences—a necessity in a rapidly changing environment under current global changes such as climate change, ecosystem disruption, habitat loss, and pollution [2,16]. The presence of non-native crayfish not only indicates shifts in water quality and ecosystem health but also offers a window into the broader state of freshwater habitats.
This paper therefore is based on the selection of Piedmont plain lakes because (1) no prior systematic inventory of non-native crayfish there exists, (2) the region encompasses a representative range of lake types, and (3) because of agricultural land use pressures that ease crayfish invasion by altering lake ecosystems and food webs. It aims to provide the first comprehensive survey of non-native crayfish distribution and abundance across these lakes and identify environmental and anthropogenic drivers of their establishment. Targeted monitoring will fill a critical knowledge gap and inform management priorities while also providing baseline for future detection and impact assessments for analyzing the historical progression of crayfish invasions in Piedmont plain lakes.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

The Piedmont lakes in Northwest Italy are a group of lakes of fluvial, glacial, and tectonic origin. Most of them (12 out of 17) belong to the Province of Turin (TO), 1 to Biella (BI), 2 to Novara (NO), 3 to Verbano-Cusio-Ossola (VCO), and 3 to Vercelli (VC) (Figure 1). A few of them span more than one province. Lake Maggiore, due to its large size, lies across two countries—Italy and Switzerland (CH)—and spans both the Piedmont (NO, VCO provinces) and Lombardy (Varese—VA) regions (Table 1, see GBIF at https://doi.org/10.15468/knwyc9 publication date 9 November 2025 for detailed information on occurrences).
Surrounded by rolling hills, steep mountain slopes, glacier moraines, and extensive vineyards, these submontane lakes (altitude < 800 m a.s.l.) are predominantly characterized by meso- or eutrophic waters. Among them, Lake Maggiore stands out due to its impressive size, with a surface area of 212 km2 and a maximum depth of 372 m. Other significant lakes include Lake Orta, with a surface area of 18 km2 and a maximum depth of 143 m, and Lake Viverone, covering 6 km2 with a depth of 50 m. The remaining natural lakes are limited in size (mean 0.7 km2 ± 1.5 SD) and maximum depth (median 11.5 m ± 14.7 SD). They are popular destinations for tourism, water sports, and outdoor recreation. Most of them are Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) and/or Special Protection Areas (SPAs), part of the European Union’s Natura 2000 ecological network or designated by the European Bird Directive to preserve biodiversity (https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/nature-and-biodiversity/birds-directive_en accessed on 16 October 2025); others belong to the Avigliana Lakes Nature Park. The larger ones include Natura 2000 sites (Lake Orta) and Emerald zones of protection (Lake Maggiore in Switzerland) along their shorelines.

2.2. Field and Laboratory Procedures

During the summer of 2025 (late June–early October), a survey on all Piedmont plain lakes (NW Italy) was carried out (see Figure 1) to update the current knowledge on the number of non-native crayfish species present in the area and on their distribution. The sampling approach, tailored to each lake’s size, was adapted from Garzoli et al. [17] to ensure accuracy and efficiency. This procedure involved using baited cylindrical traps (30 × 60 cm–mesh size 1 cm2) along the shoreline of each lake, at sites representing different habitats (e.g., natural—mud, sand, pebbles, gravel substrate type surrounded by Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin. Ex Steud; non-natural—boat harbours and lake-retaining walls) where the occurrence of crayfish was previously confirmed or suspected. A series of 13 interconnected traps was placed in the shallow surface water layers at the bottom of each of the two selected habitat types and left overnight to coincide with the peak activity period of crayfish. After 12 h, the traps were retrieved and, after the identification to species, the number of male and female crayfish in each trap was recorded. Any incidental native species, such as reptiles, rodents, and fish, were identified and promptly released to minimize the impact on local biodiversity. Absolute abundances were estimated using the Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE), calculated as total crayfish caught per trap per site per day, reported as average CPUE per lake [18].
In the laboratory, crayfish were anesthetized by gradually freezing them at decreasing temperatures (from 4 °C to –20 °C) [19]. Subsequently, identification by species and sex was confirmed based on distinctive morphological features such as body shape, claw (chela) structure, colour pattern and its distribution, and sex-specific characteristics such as gonopod/pleopod presence and morphology, together with other physical characteristics distinguishing them from native species [20].

3. Results

Overall, two non-native crayfish species, F. limosus and P. clarkii, were caught in Piedmont lakes during our survey.
Seven out of seventeen lakes show no presence of non-native crayfish species. The total number of individuals captured and identified for each species was as follows: 326 (male, 195; female, 131) P. clarkii; 35 (male, 11; female; 24) F. limosus. No data are available for P. leniusculus, as the species was found only in the Swiss sector of Lake Maggiore [21].
Most lakes (eight) harbour only a single species (P. clarkii) (Table 2), while Lake Orta hosts two coexisting species (F. limosus and P. clarkii). Notably, Lake Maggiore is the only lake that hosts all three species simultaneously, but only in the Swiss sector (from the municipality of Locarno to Magadino) (Table 2). The Italian sector of the lake harbours two species (P. clarkii and F. limosus) at several Lombardy sites, whereas Piedmont sites host only F. limosus (see GBIF at https://doi.org/10.15468/knwyc9 publication date 9 November 2025 for detailed information on occurrences).
Across the altitudinal range surveyed, P. clarkii specimens were found at 193–377 m a.s.l., whereas F. limosus occurred between 193 and 290 m a.s.l., restricted to the deepest lakes, where it occurred at a depth of up to 12 m (Figure 2).
The mean CPUE per each lake per crayfish species (Table 2) did not differ significantly between species (Welch two-sample t-test: T = 0.37, df = 1.20, p = 0.77, [22]), with the widest range of variability and highest values for P. clarkii (Figure 3).
Overall, random sampling revealed opposite, skewed sex ratios in the two species: P. clarkii was male-biased (M:F = 1.49), while F. limosus was female-biased (M:F = 0.46). Sex ratios varied across individual lakes.
In 2025, mean CPUE abundance of P. clarkii varied considerably across lakes (Table 2, Figure 4). Lakes are clearly divided into three groups: those with mean CPUE ≥ 1.5 individuals per lake (lakes Candia, and Pistono), those with mean CPUE between 0.5 and 1.5 (Bertignano, Campagna, and San Michele), and those with mean CPUE ≤ 0.5 (Avigliana Grande, Maggiore, Orta, Sirio, and Viverone). The mean CPUE values for F. limosus placed lakes Maggiore and Orta into different groups (Maggiore: 0.5–1.0; Orta: ≤0.5). Furthermore, the mean CPUE of F. limosus exceed that of P. clarkii in Lake Maggiore, whereas the opposite was observed in the nearby Lake Orta.

4. Discussion

The detected species (F. limosus, and P. clarkii) are listed as Invasive Alien Species of Union Concern under EU Regulation 1143/2014 [23] enacted in Italy by the Legislative Decree 229/2015. This regulation aims to prohibit their introduction, promote measures for early detection, rapid response, and containment or eradication, foster cooperation among member states for effective prevention and control efforts, and facilitate the dissemination of information to support policymaking and management strategies. This is in line with the EU Regulation 1143/2014 requests to protect the ecological integrity of the EU’s ecosystems by controlling invasive species that may cause harm [24].
The two non-native crayfish species, known as Old NICS (Non-Indigenous Crayfish Species) [25], were among the first to be introduced to Europe before 1975. They are of significant environmental, economic, and social importance due to their impacts on native ecosystems and human activities and are among the most invasive crayfish globally, and their management is a priority for conservation and resource protection authorities [14]. Their negative impacts on local fisheries and angling, as well as on lotic waters and rice farming, are well known causes of ecosystem service loss [13,26]. Four non-native crayfish species documented elsewhere in Italy [26] but not found during the present research in Piedmont (Cherax destructor, C. quadricarinatus, P. leptodactylus, and P. virginalis as marbled crayfish) could however become a threat if introduced.
Our results are consistent with those of Aquiloni et al. [26]; thus, based on the abundance and distribution data of P. clarkii, it is confirmed that this species is the most abundant and widespread crayfish in Piedmont lakes, whereas F. limosus is restricted to the northernmost, deeper lakes. Indeed, Aquiloni et al. [26] also reported P. clarkii as the most successful non-native species in Northern Italy, notably dominating the Po River Valley with very large populations.
Our findings align with published patterns [26]: F. limosus predominates in larger, deeper, structurally complex subalpine lakes and mesotrophic, higher-flow rivers, whereas P. clarkii prefers eutrophic warm, shallow, anthropized waters, explaining their spatial segregation and potential competition in Piedmont waterbodies [20,27,28]. In our lakes, F. limosus occupies vegetated shorelines and overwinters in deeper waters, while P. clarkii is more often found near boat harbours and retaining walls. In addition, the two species also show geographical segregation in Lake Maggiore: Lombardy sites harbour both species, whereas Piedmont only F. limosus, likely reflecting the influence of the Po Plain, where P. clarkii is widespread, versus the more mountainous, less anthropized areas.
A balanced sex ratio (~1:1) is generally optimal for crayfish reproduction. Deviations from 1:1 can result from sex- and species-specific behaviours and life history differences (differential migration, gear catchability, growth rates, inter-specific competition, and mortality) [29]. In our temperate lakes, F. limosus (M:F = 0.46) and P. clarkii (M:F = 1.49) show temporally displaced mating periods. Procambarus clarkii males are most active in summer, often outnumbering females, raising predation risk and mortality, while F. limosus females are largely absent because they are reproducing and caring for offspring; consequently, P. clarkii males dominate in summer abundance, whereas F. limosus peaks earlier in its reproductive season [10,30].
We hypothesized that the occurrence of non-native crayfish in Piedmont lakes is influenced by hydrological connectivity, predator–prey interactions, and illegal activities.
Hypothesis 1.
In Piedmont (Table 1), lakes that typically lack tributaries and outflows (Nero, Meugliano, Moncrivello) do not contain non-native crayfish (mean CPUE = 0), suggesting that these water bodies are relatively isolated and disconnected from the main hydrographic network. Such geographical and hydrological features can contribute to a reduced likelihood of invasive species establishing populations within these lakes, thereby maintaining their native aquatic biodiversity.
Hypothesis 2.
Conversely, lakes hosting predators like Ameiurus melas (Rafinesque, 1820), Silurus glanis Linnaeus, 1758, Trachemys scripta (Thunberg in Schoepff, 1792), or birds (e.g., ardeids, grebes, mergansers, and cormorants) exhibit complex predator–prey interactions that may lead to the absence (mean CPUE = 0 in Alice Superiore, Avigliana Piccolo, Maglione, and Mergozzo) or scarcity (mean CPUE ≤ 0.5: Avigliana Grande, Orta, and Sirio) of non-native crayfish [31,32,33] of P. clarkii. Lake Maggiore is an exception. Although its mean CPUE values for F. limosus fall in the 0.5–1.0 class, its CPUE for P. clarkii is ≤ 0.5, which could be an indication of a strong predation pressure that favours the less aggressive but less visible F. limosus. The lakes act as key feeding grounds where crayfish represent a vital prey resource. These dynamic highlights how non-native species can integrate into local food webs, potentially affecting native species and disrupting ecosystem balance [34,35].
Hypothesis 3.
Field observations and local reports indicate persistent illegal nocturnal fishing at Lake Viverone targeting crayfish for commercial sale [36], which is likely causing a measurable decline in the local P. clarkii population (mean CPUE ≤ 0.5). Activity typically occurs at night, using baited traps and torches to ease the capture in shallow waters. This clandestine harvesting appears to be driven by economic demand and undoubtedly evades health controls, increasing the risk of spreading pathogens. This behaviour also hinders management and monitoring efforts and exposes participants and buyers to legal sanctions and food safety risks [36]. Addressing this issue requires coordinated enforcement measures, community awareness, market surveillance, and incentives for product compliance.

Historical Context

Previous data (Table 3) are derived from the published literature, technical documents such as action plans, datasets, publications in national journals, theses, and citizen science observations. Records span from early incidental reports in the 1990s to systematic surveys up to the present (2020s).
Data were collected via several methods such as baited traps, dip and fishing nets, electrofishing bycatch, visual surveys along the shorelines, and citizen observations. Visual and citizen observations were valuable for detection of new species but vary in accuracy and were verified by experts to confirm species identity. On the contrary, systematic surveys using standardized trapping provide reliable occurrence and density data; however, such studies have only been published in recent years (Table 3) [17,37,38,39].
Table 3. List of published papers, datasets, technical reports focused on non-native crayfish distribution in Piedmont freshwaters. Taxon name (some of the papers use the older synonym Orconectes limosus for F. limosus), type of frequency data format, sampling method, and site names are also provided: A = total number of individuals; D = density (ind m−2); O = occurrence. Colours of species are the same as in Figure 1.
Table 3. List of published papers, datasets, technical reports focused on non-native crayfish distribution in Piedmont freshwaters. Taxon name (some of the papers use the older synonym Orconectes limosus for F. limosus), type of frequency data format, sampling method, and site names are also provided: A = total number of individuals; D = density (ind m−2); O = occurrence. Colours of species are the same as in Figure 1.
Cited TaxonData TypeSamplingSitesReference
O. limosusOtrapsBaldissero pondDelmastro, 1999 [40]
O. limosusAfishing net, trapslakes Maggiore, OrtaBazzoni, 2006 [41]
O. limosusOliterature, observationsmultiple localitiesMorpurgo et al., 2010 [42]
O. limosusDtrapsLake MaggioreGarzoli et al., 2020 [17]
F. limosusOactive search, trapslakes Maggiore, Mergozzo, OrtaBoggero et al., 2023 [39]
F. limosusDtrapsLake OrtaBoggero et al., 2025a [43]
F. limosusDobservation, trapsLake MaggioreBoggero et al., 2025b [44]
F. limosusDtrapsLake MergozzoKamburska et al., 2025 [45]
P. clarkiiA, Odip net, electrofishing, observationsVenesima streamDelmastro, 1992 [46]
P. clarkiiOobservationsmultiple localitiesDelmastro, 1994 [47]
P. clarkiiOobservationsmultiple localitiesDelmastro, 1999 [40]
P. clarkiiOliterature, observationsmultiple localitiesMorpurgo et al., 2010 [42]
P. clarkiiOobservationsLake OrtaPiscia et al., 2011a [48]
P. clarkiiOobservationsLake OrtaPiscia et al., 2011b [49]
P. clarkiiDtrapsLake CandiaDonato, 2016 [50]
P. clarkiiOobservationslakes Bertignano, ViveroneRegione Piemonte, 2017a [51]
P. clarkiiOobservationsLake ViveroneRegione Piemonte, 2017b [52]
P. clarkiiOdip net, electrofishing, fishing net, observations, torches, traces, trapslakes Avigliana G., Campagna, Candia, Gay-Stroppiana, Maggiore, del Malpasso, Orta, ViveroneDelmastro, 2017 [53]
P. clarkiiDtrapsLake CandiaDonato et al., 2018 [37]
P. clarkiiOobservationsLake CandiaCittà Metropolitana Torino, 2019 [54]
P. clarkiiOliteraturemultiple localitiesLo Parrino et al., 2020 [55]
P. clarkiiAtrapsLake CandiaPastorino et al. 2023 [56]
P. clarkiiAactive searchLake CandiaScoparo et al., 2023 [57]
P. clarkiiDtrapsLake OrtaKamburska et al., 2024 [58]
P. clarkiiAtrapslakes Avigliana, tributariesMaganza et al., 2025 [59]
P. clarkiiDtrapsLake OrtaBoggero et al., 2025a [43]
P. clarkiiDobservations, trapsLake OrtaBoggero et al., 2025b [44]
P. leniusculusOactive search, observationsValla streamCandiotto et al., 2010 [60]
P. leniusculusOobservationsLake MaggioreBoggero et al., 2018 [21]
P. leniusculusDactive search, trapsrivers Valla, ErroLarson et al., 2022 [38]
P. leniusculusDobservations, tapsLake MaggioreBoggero et al., 2025b [44]
Spatially, non-native crayfish (e.g., F. limosus, P. clarkii) have been recorded across lowland and submontane water bodies in several provinces and neighbouring areas. Temporally, records show initial introductions in 1989 for P. clarkii [46], and at the beginning of the 2000s for F. limosus and P. leniusculus [40,60], followed by expansion and occasional local declines perhaps linked to environmental and climate changes, such as unprecedented heatwaves throughout 2022 in many European countries [61].
Comparison across past and current studies is thus hindered by uneven spatial coverage, often limited to accessible or already monitored sites, variable sampling effort, and temporal gaps. Historical records frequently lack standardized efforts compared with modern monitoring, making trend analyses unreliable or even impossible. Ongoing standardized monitoring (regular trapping at fixed stations with precise geographic coordinates) improves comparability, detection sensitivity, and trend assessment.
Previous scientific and technical reports on non-native crayfish in Piedmont lakes frequently did not provide data on abundances, while our results fill this knowledge gap thanks to the extensive monitoring carried out in summer 2025. Furthermore, for the first time, P. clarkii was detected in three additional lakes (Pistono, San Michele, and Sirio). This may indicate a recent range expansion but could also result from historically inadequate monitoring of small peripheral water bodies, delayed reporting, or improved detection techniques in recent surveys.

5. Conclusions

  • An inventory of non-native crayfish for Piedmont lakes had never been conducted prior to 2025, making this the first comprehensive effort to document the occurrence and to assess the distribution of non-native crayfish species within the region. Extensive baited-trap monitoring allowed us to confirm the occurrence of two non-native species of North American origin (F. limosus, and P. clarkii) and to record P. clarkii for the first time ever in three lakes that had never been monitored before (Pistono, San Michele, and Sirio).
  • Isolated lakes or those with complex predator–prey networks or with illegal activities host few or lack non-native crayfish because limited connectivity restricts dispersal while high predator and human pressures and biotic interactions lower population density and thus detectability.
  • Standardized monitoring of crayfish populations is not only crucial for assessing the ecological health of freshwater ecosystems but also to enable comparison of data and trend analyses.
  • This baseline is crucial for informing managers to develop effective strategies to prevent further spread and to protect Piedmont’s freshwaters. Therefore, coordinated measures are required to prevent and control the ecological threats posed by invasive species.
  • Moreover, improving information exchange across stakeholders and water managers is necessary to halt illegal harvesting for food and pet trade, since all these activities highly contribute to crayfish spread.
  • The data we obtained help fill a knowledge gap not only in our region but across Italian lakes.
In summary, Piedmont lakes are valuable cultural and economic attractions, facing not only heavy anthropogenic activities from urbanization, recreational, wastewater, and irrigation [62,63] but also from biological pollution. In addition to this, the “winning” traits of invasive species [64], e.g., their mating behaviour and the greater aggressiveness of P. clarkii versus F. limosus, will likely intensify their competitive advantage altering community dynamics under global warming. This underscores the urgent need for frequent monitoring of non-native species, which is currently missing from national action plans.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, B.A.; methodology, B.A. and K.L.; software, B.A., O.M., and Z.S.; validation, B.A. and K.L.; formal analysis, O.M.; investigation, B.A., O.M. and K.L.; data curation, O.M., Z.S., and K.L.; writing—original draft preparation, B.A.; writing—review and Editing, O.M. and K.L.; visualization, Z.S.; funding acquisition, B.A. and K.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

Thanks are due to three Projects International Commission for the Protection of Italian–Swiss Waters (CIPAIS), CUSIO2030 CUP B53C23000930007, and the National Biodiversity Future Centre (NBFC) funded by the Italian Ministry of University and Research, and PNRR, Missione 4 Componente 2, “Dalla ricerca all’impresa” (Investimento 1.4, Project CN00000033), for their support.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The present work did not require any ethics approval. No formal guidelines exist for the euthanasia of decapod crustaceans. The method employed was selected based on published procedures aimed at ensuring appropriate handling and minimizing potential suffering in invertebrate research.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

More detailed data from Table 1 are openly available in GBIF at https://doi.org/10.15468/knwyc9 publication date 9 November 2025.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the many people who made this work possible by opening the doors of their properties, supporting us in the field, and facilitating what is a demanding work. Special thanks to Edoardo Alzate (11 years old) and Francesco Nordi (12 years old), our very young helpers who quickly became passionate citizen scientists, and Marco Matiussi and Gianfranco Varini, who discovered new interests. All of them accompanied us for much of the fieldwork.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Mathers, K.L.; White, J.C.; Fornaroli, R.; Chadd, R. Flow regimes control the establishment of invasive crayfish and alter their effects on lotic macroinvertebrate communities. J. Appl. Ecol. 2020, 57, 886–902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Soto, I.; Ahmed, D.A.; Beidas, A.; Oficialdegui, F.J.; Tricarico, E.; Angeler, D.G.; Haubrock, P.J. Long-term trends in crayfish invasions across European rivers. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 867, 161537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Giordano, J.; Battisti, C. The non native red swamp crayfish Procambarus clarkii as prey for waterbirds: A note from Torre Flavia wetland (Central Italy). Alula 2023, 30, 194–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Reynolds, C.; Miranda, N.A.F.; Cumming, G.S. The role of waterbirds in the dispersal of aquatic alien and invasive species. Divers. Distrib. 2015, 21, 744–754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Lodge, D.M.; Taylor, C.M.; Holdich, D.M.; Skurdal, J. Non-indigenous crayfishes threaten North American freshwater biodiversity: Lessons from Europe. Fisheries 2000, 25, 7–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Emery-Butcher, H.E.; Beatty, S.J.; Robson, B.J. The impacts of invasive ecosystem engineers in freshwaters: A review. Freshw. Biol. 2020, 65, 999–1015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Crandall, K.A.; de Grave, S. An updated classification of the freshwater crayfishes (Decapoda: Astacidea) of the world, with a complete species list. J. Crustac. Biol. 2017, 37, 615–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Faulkes, Z. Prohibiting pet crayfish does not consistently reduce their availability online. Nauplius 2018, 26, e2018023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Patoka, J.; Kocánová, B.; Kalous, L. Crayfish in Czech cultural space: The longest documented relationship between humans and crayfish in Europe. Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst. 2016, 417, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Lindqvist, O.V.; Huner, J.V. Life history characteristics of crayfish: What makes some of them good colonizers? In Crayfish in Europe as Alien Species. How to Make the Best of a Bad Situation? Gherardi, F., Holdich, D.M., Eds.; Balkema: Rotterdam, The Netherland, 1999; pp. 23–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Moorhouse, T.P.; Macdonald, D.W. Are invasives worse in freshwater than terrestrial ecosystems? WIREs Water 2015, 2, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Simberloff, D. Maintenance management and eradication of established aquatic invaders. Hydrobiologia 2021, 848, 2399–2420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Lodge, D.M.; Deines, A.; Gherardi, F.; Yeo, D.C.J.; Arcella, T.; Baldridge, A.K.; Barnes, M.A.; Chadderton, W.L.; Feder, J.L.; Gantz, C.A.; et al. Global Introductions of Crayfishes: Evaluating the Impact of Species Invasions on Ecosystem Services. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2012, 43, 449–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. O’Hea-Miller, S.B.; Davis, A.R.; Wong, M.Y.L. The impacts of invasive crayfish and other non-native species on native freshwater crayfish: A review. Biology 2024, 13, 610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Olden, J.D.; Whattam, E.; Wood, S.A. Online auction marketplaces as a global pathway for aquatic invasive species. Hydrobiologia 2021, 848, 1967–1979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Haubrock, P.J.; Cuthbert, R.N.; Haase, P. Long-term trends and drivers of biological invasion in Central European streams. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 876, 162817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Garzoli, L.; Mammola, S.; Ciampittiello, M.; Boggero, A. Alien crayfish species in the deep subalpine Lake Maggiore (NW-Italy), with a focus on the biometry and habitat preferences of the spiny-cheek crayfish. Water 2020, 12, 1391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Demers, A.; Reynolds, J.D. Water quality requirements of the white-clawed crayfish, Austropotamobius pallipes, a field study. Freshw. Crayfish 2006, 15, 283–291. [Google Scholar]
  19. Gray, A.; Mayer, K.; Gore, B.; Gaesser, M.; Ferguson, N. Microplastic burden in native (Cambarus appalachiensis) and non-native (Faxonius cristavarius) crayfish along semi-rural and urban streams in southwest Virginia, USA. Environ. Res. 2024, 258, 119494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Souty-Grosset, C.; Holdich, D.M.; Noël, P.Y.; Reynolds, J.D.; Haffner, P. Atlas of Crayfish in Europe; Patrimoines Naturels: Paris, France, 2006; Volume 64, 187p. [Google Scholar]
  21. Boggero, A.; Dugaro, M.; Migliori, L.; Garzoli, L. Prima segnalazione del gambero invasivo Pacifastacus leniusculus (Dana 1852) nel Lago Maggiore (Cantone Ticino, Svizzera). Boll. Della STSN 2018, 106, 103–106. [Google Scholar]
  22. Welch, B.L. The significance of the difference between two means when the population variances are unequal. Biometrika 1938, 29, 350–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Regulation (EU). No. 1143/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Prevention and Management of the Introduction and Spread of Invasive Alien Species. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2014/1143/2019-12-14 (accessed on 16 October 2025).
  24. Caffrey, J.M.; Baars, J.-R.; Barbour, J.H.; Boets, P.; Boon, P.; Davenport, K.; Dick, J.T.A.; Early, J.; Edsman, L.; Gallagher, C.; et al. Tackling Invasive Alien Species in Europe: The Top 20 Issues. Manag. Biol. Invasion 2014, 5, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Holdich, D.M.; Reynolds, J.D.; Souty-Grosset, C.; Sibley, P.J. A review of the ever increasing threat to European crayfish from non-indigenous crayfish species. Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst. 2009, 11, 394–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Aquiloni, L.; Tricarico, E.; Gherardi, F. Crayfish in Italy: Distribution, threats and management. Int. Aquat. Res. 2010, 2, 1–14. [Google Scholar]
  27. Manenti, R.; Ghia, D.; Fea, G.; Ficetola, G.F.; Padoa-Schioppa, E.; Canedoli, C. Causes and consequences of crayfish extinction: Stream connectivity, habitat changes, alien species and ecosystem services. Freshw. Biol. 2019, 64, 284–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Siesa, M.E.; Manenti, R.; Padoa-Schioppa, E.; De Bernardi, F.; Ficetola, G.F. Spatial autocorrelation and the analysis of invasion processes from distribution data: A study with the crayfish Procambarus clarkii. Biol. Invasions 2011, 13, 2147–2160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Correia, C.; Borges, L. Spanish Crayfish, Procambarus Clarkii, with Fyke Nets & Traps in Andalusia and Extremadura; Fith Report of the implementation of the FIP; 2024; p. 19. Available online: https://fisheryprogress.org/sites/default/files/documents_actions/FishFix%20Crayfish%20FIP%20report%20FINAL%209%20MAR%202022.pdf (accessed on 16 October 2025).
  30. Holdich, D.M. Biology of Freshwater Crayfish; Blackwell Science Ltd.: Oxford, UK, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  31. Englund, G.; Krupa, J.J. Habitat use by crayfish in stream pools: Influence of predators, depth and body size. Freshw. Biol. 2000, 43, 75–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Pérez-Santigosa, N.; Hidalgo-Vila, J.; Florencio, M.; Díaz-Paniagua, C. Does the exotic invader turtle, Trachemys scripta elegans, compete for food with coexisting native turtles? Amphib.-Reptil. 2011, 32, 167–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ferreira, M.; Gago, J.; Ribeiro, F. Diet of European Catfish in a Newly Invaded Region. Fishes 2019, 4, 58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. David, P.; Thebault, E.; Anneville, O.; Duyck, P.F.; Chapuis, E.; Loeuille, N. Impacts of invasive species on food webs: A review of empirical data. Adv. Ecol. Res. 2017, 56, 1–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Móréh, Á.; Scheuring, I. Invaders’ trophic position and their direct and indirect relationship influence on resident food webs. Ecol. Model. 2025, 508, 111238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Gherardi, F.; Aquiloni, L.; Diéguez-Uribeondo, J.; Tricarico, E. Managing invasive crayfish: Is there a hope? Aquat. Sci. 2011, 73, 185–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Donato, R.; Rollandin, M.; Favaro, L.; Ferrarese, A.; Pessani, D.; Ghia, D. Habitat use and population structure of the invasive red swamp crayfish Procambarus clarkii (Girard, 1852) in a protected area in northern Italy. Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst. 2018, 419, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Larson, C.E.; Bo, T.; Candiotto, A.; Fenoglio, S.; Doretto, A. Predicting invasive signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus) spread using a traditional survey and river network simulation. River Res. Appl. 2022, 38, 1424–1435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Boggero, A.; Croci, C.; Zanaboni, A.; Zaupa, S.; Paganelli, D.; Garzoli, L.; Bras, T.; Busiello, A.; Orrù, A.; Beatrizzutti, S.; et al. New records of the spinycheek crayfish Faxonius limosus (Rafinesque, 1817): Expansion in subalpine lakes in north-western Italy. Bioinvasions Rec. 2023, 12, 445–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Delmastro, G.B. Annotazioni sulla storia naturale del Gambero della Louisiana Procambarus clarkii (Girard, 1852) in Piemonte centrale e prima segnalazione regionale del Gambero americano Orconectes limosus (Rafinesque, 1817) (Crustacea: Decapoda: Astacidea: Cambaridae). Rivista Piemont. Storia Nat. 1999, 20, 65–92. [Google Scholar]
  41. Bazzoni, P. Censimento e Studio delle Popolazioni di Gambero D’acqua dolce Nell’area del Verbano-Cusio-Ossola; Azienda Agricola Ossolana Acque: Verbania, Italy, 2006; p. 25. [Google Scholar]
  42. Morpurgo, M.; Aquiloni, L.; Bertocchi, S.; Brusconi, S.; Tricarico, E.; Gherardi, F. Distribuzione dei gamberi d’acqua dolce in Italia. STSN 2010, 87, 125–132. [Google Scholar]
  43. Boggero, A.; Croci, C.; Orlandi, M.; Paganelli, D.; Zaupa, S.; Kamburska, L. Invasive Crayfish Occurrence in the Subalpine Lake Orta (NW Italy) in 2021–2022, Version 1.10; Occurrence Dataset; Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche—Istituto di Ricerca sulle Acque: Verbania Pallanza, Italy, 2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Boggero, A.; Garzoli, L.; Orlandi, M.; Zaupa, S.; Kamburska, L. Invasive Crayfish Occurrence in the Subalpine Lake Maggiore (NW Italy) in 2017–2018, Version 1.10; Occurrence Dataset; Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche—Istituto di Ricerca sulle Acque: Verbania Pallanza, Italy, 2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Kamburska, L.; Croci, C.; Orlandi, M.; Paganelli, D.; Zaupa, S.; Boggero, A. Occurrence of Invasive Faxonius Limosus in the Subalpine Lake Mergozzo (NW-Italy) in 2021–2022, Version 1.8; Occurrence Dataset; Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche—Istituto di Ricerca sulle Acque: Verbania Pallanza, Italy, 2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Delmastro, G.B. Sull’acclimatazione del gambero della Louisiana Procambarus clarkii (Girard, 1852) nelle acque dolci italiane (Crustacea: Decapoda: Cambaridae). Pianura—Suppl. Prov. Nuova Cremona 1992, 4, 5–10. [Google Scholar]
  47. Delmastro, G.B. Il gambero della Louisiana, un nuovo abitatore delle nostre acque. Il Notiziario, Pro Natura Carmagnola 1994, 19. [Google Scholar]
  48. Piscia, R.; Volta, P.; Boggero, A.; Manca, M. The invasion of Lake Orta (Italy) by the red swamp crayfish Procambarus clarkii (Girard, 1852): A new threat to an unstable environment. Aquat. Invasions 2011, 6, S45–S48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Piscia, R.; Volta, P.; Boggero, A.; Manca, M. Segnalazione di Procambarus clarkii (Girard 1852) una specie aliena invasiva, nel Lago d’Orta (Piemonte). Biol. Ambient. 2011, 25, 71–73. [Google Scholar]
  50. Donato, R. Life history e Struttura di Popolazione di Procambarus clarkii (Girard, 1852) (Crustacea, Cambaridae) nel Parco Naturale del Lago di Candia (TO). Master’s Thesis, Università degli Studi di Torino, Turin, Italy, 2016; p. 122. [Google Scholar]
  51. Regione Piemonte. Piano di Gestione: Zona Speciale di Conservazione IT1130004—Lago di Bertignano e Stagni di Roppolo. 2017, p. 191. Available online: https://www.regione.piemonte.it/giscartografia/Parchi/Piani/IT1130004_PdG_Relazione.pdf (accessed on 16 October 2025).
  52. Regione Piemonte. Piano di Gestione: Zona Speciale di Conservazione e Zona di Protezione Speciale IT1110020—Lago di Viverone. 2017, p. 184. Available online: https://www.regione.piemonte.it/giscartografia/Parchi/Piani/IT1110020_PdG_Relazione.pdf (accessed on 16 October 2025).
  53. Delmastro, G.B. Il gambero della Louisiana Procambarus clarkii (Girard, 1852) in Piemonte: Nuove osservazioni su distribuzione, biologia, impatto e utilizzo (Crustacea: Decapoda: Cambaridae). Rivista Piemont. Storia Nat. 2017, 38, 61–129. [Google Scholar]
  54. Città Metropolitana Torino—Parco Naturale Lago di Candia. Piano di Gestione: Zona Speciale di Conservazione (ZSC) Zona di Protezione Speciale (ZPS) IT1110036—Lago di Candia. 2019, p. 204. Available online: http://www.cittametropolitana.torino.it/cms/risorse/natura/dwd/pdf/aree_protette/aree/candia/PdG/PdG__Relazione.pdf (accessed on 16 October 2025).
  55. Lo Parrino, E.; Ficetola, G.F.; Manenti, R.; Falaschi, M. Thirty years of invasion: The distribution of the invasive crayfish Procambarus clarkii in Italy. Biogeographia 2020, 35, 43–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Pastorino, P.; Anselmi, S.; Zanoli, A.; Esposito, G.; Bondavalli, F.; Dondo, A.; Pucci, A.; Pizzul, E.; Faggio, C.; Barceló, D.; et al. The invasive red swamp crayfish (Procambarus clarkii) as a bioindicator of microplastic pollution: Insights from Lake Candia (northwestern Italy). Ecol. Indic. 2023, 150, 110200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Scoparo, M.; Cardinali, I.; La Porta, G.; Caldaroni, B.; Magara, G.; Dörr, A.J.M.; Elia, A.C.; Lancioni, H. Phylogenetic Diversity of the Red Swamp Crayfish Procambarus clarkii and Its Dispersal Pattern in Northern and Central Italy. Biology 2023, 12, 313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Kamburska, L.; Sabatino, R.; Schiavetta, D.; De Santis, V.; Ferrari, E.; Mor, J.-R.; Zaupa, S.; Garzoli, L.; Boggero, A. A new misleading colour morph: Is Marmorkrebs the only “marbled” crayfish? BioInvasions Rec. 2024, 13, 949–961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Maganza, A.; Gabetti, A.; Mossotto, C.; Pastorino, P.; Esposito, G.; Di Nicola, M.R.; Rizzioli, B.; Elia, A.C.; Prearo, M. Assessing the distribution and habitat suitability of Austropotamobius pallipes complex in proximity of invasive Procambarus clarkii in the Avigliana Lakes (northwest Italy): An integrated approach to ecosystem health and conservation. Aquat. Sci. 2025, 87, 50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Candiotto, A.; Delmastro, G.B.; Dotti, L.; Sindaco, R. Pacifastacus leniusculus (Dana, 1852), un nuovo gambero esotico naturalizzato in Piemonte (Crustacea: Decapoda: Astacidae). Rivista Piemont. Storia Nat. 2010, 31, 73–82. [Google Scholar]
  61. Kim, J.-H.; Nam, S.-H.; Kim, M.-K.; Serrano-Notivoli, R.; Tejedor, E. The 2022 record-high heat waves over southwestern Europe and their underlying mechanism. Weather Clim. Extrem. 2024, 46, 100729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Lake, P.S.; Palmer, M.A.; Biro, P.; Cole, J.; Covich, A.P.; Dahm, C.; Verhoeven, J.O.S. Global change and the biodiversity of freshwater ecosystems: Impacts on linkages between above-sediment and sediment biota: All forms of anthropogenic disturbance—Changes in land use, biogeochemical processes, or biotic addition or loss—Not only damage the biota of freshwater sediments but also disrupt the linkages between above-sediment and sediment-dwelling biota. BioScience 2000, 50, 1099–1107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Waters, M.N.; Piehler, M.F.; Rodriguez, A.B.; Smoak, J.M.; Bianchi, T.S. Shallow lake trophic status linked to late Holocene climate and human impacts. J. Paleolimnol. 2009, 42, 51–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Tricarico, E.; Aquiloni, L. How Behaviour Has Helped Invasive Crayfish to Conquer Freshwater Ecosystems. In Biological Invasions and Animal Behaviour; Weis, J.S., Sol, D., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2016; pp. 291–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Diversity 17 00868 g001
Figure 1. Regional distribution map of F. limosus, P. leniusculus, and P. clarkii. Overlap between historical and recent records. Lakes in black; Piedmont in dark grey; Switzerland in pale grey.
Figure 1. Regional distribution map of F. limosus, P. leniusculus, and P. clarkii. Overlap between historical and recent records. Lakes in black; Piedmont in dark grey; Switzerland in pale grey.
Diversity 17 00868 g001
Diversity 17 00868 g002
Figure 2. Occurrence of F. limosus at depths of approximately 11–12 m in the Swiss sector of Lake Maggiore (Locarno: photo by Beatrizzotti S.).
Figure 2. Occurrence of F. limosus at depths of approximately 11–12 m in the Swiss sector of Lake Maggiore (Locarno: photo by Beatrizzotti S.).
Diversity 17 00868 g002
Diversity 17 00868 g003
Figure 3. Box plots: distribution of mean CPUE abundances per species and across those lakes where the species was recorded. Colours of species as in Figure 1. FL: Faxonius limosus (n = 35); PC: Procambarus clarkii (n = 326).
Figure 3. Box plots: distribution of mean CPUE abundances per species and across those lakes where the species was recorded. Colours of species as in Figure 1. FL: Faxonius limosus (n = 35); PC: Procambarus clarkii (n = 326).
Diversity 17 00868 g003
Diversity 17 00868 g004
Figure 4. Distribution of mean CPUE abundances per species and across lakes. Colours of species as in Figure 1. Black: no crayfish recorded.
Figure 4. Distribution of mean CPUE abundances per species and across lakes. Colours of species as in Figure 1. Black: no crayfish recorded.
Diversity 17 00868 g004
Table 1. Lakes sampled in summer 2025 by state/province, protected status (SAC: Special Area of Conservation/SPA: Special Protection Area), altitude (m a.s.l.), geographic coordinates (latitude, longitude in DMS), surface lake area (km2), and maximum depth (m).
Table 1. Lakes sampled in summer 2025 by state/province, protected status (SAC: Special Area of Conservation/SPA: Special Protection Area), altitude (m a.s.l.), geographic coordinates (latitude, longitude in DMS), surface lake area (km2), and maximum depth (m).
LakeState-ProvinceProtectionAltitudeLat NLong ELake AreaMax Depth
ViveroneBI/TO/VCSAC/SPA23045°24′59″08°02′08″5.750
Alice SuperioreTOSAC57545°27′44″07°47′43″0.111
Avigliana GrandeTOSAC/SPA35245°03′57″07°23′13″0.928
Avigliana PiccoloTOSAC/SPA35645°03′13″07°23′30″0.612
BertignanoTOSAC/SPA37745°25′56″08°03′44″0.111
CampagnaTOSAC/SPA23845°29′02″07°53′42″0.15
CandiaTOSAC/SPA22645°19′25″07°54′43″1.58
MeuglianoTOSAC71545°28′36″07°47′23″0.0311
NeroTOSAC/SPA34245°30′17″07°52′24″0.127
PistonoTOSAC/SPA28045°29′34″07°52′28″0.116
San MicheleTOSAC/SPA23845°28′37″07°53′16″0.119
SirioTOSAC/SPA26645°29′13″07°53′02″0.344
MergozzoVCO 20445°57′20″08°28′00″1.873
MoncrivelloVCSAC/SPA26345°20′24″07°59′32″0.032
MaglioneVCSAC/SPA25145°20′43″07°59′44″0.12
OrtaVCO/NO 29045°49′02″08°24′24″18.2143
MaggioreCH-VCO/NO/VA 19346°05′53″08°42′53″212.5372
Table 2. Lakes sampled in summer 2025 with crayfish occurrence and mean CPUE abundances per species and across lakes. FL: Faxonius limosus; PC: Procambarus clarkii.
Table 2. Lakes sampled in summer 2025 with crayfish occurrence and mean CPUE abundances per species and across lakes. FL: Faxonius limosus; PC: Procambarus clarkii.
LakeCrayfishMean CPUE
ViveronePC0.44
Alice Superiore----
Avigliana GrandePC0.49
Avigliana Piccolo----
BertignanoPC1.27
CampagnaPC1.19
CandiaPC2.00
Meugliano----
Nero----
PistonoPC1.50
San MichelePC1.10
SirioPC0.10
Mergozzo----
Moncrivello----
Maglione----
OrtaFL, PC0.05, 0.49
MaggioreFL, PC1.27, 0.38
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Angela, B.; Marco, O.; Silvia, Z.; Lyudmila, K. Revisiting the Invasion: A Success Story of Crayfish Species in Piedmont Plain Lakes (NW Italy). Diversity 2025, 17, 868. https://doi.org/10.3390/d17120868

AMA Style

Angela B, Marco O, Silvia Z, Lyudmila K. Revisiting the Invasion: A Success Story of Crayfish Species in Piedmont Plain Lakes (NW Italy). Diversity. 2025; 17(12):868. https://doi.org/10.3390/d17120868

Chicago/Turabian Style

Angela, Boggero, Orlandi Marco, Zaupa Silvia, and Kamburska Lyudmila. 2025. "Revisiting the Invasion: A Success Story of Crayfish Species in Piedmont Plain Lakes (NW Italy)" Diversity 17, no. 12: 868. https://doi.org/10.3390/d17120868

APA Style

Angela, B., Marco, O., Silvia, Z., & Lyudmila, K. (2025). Revisiting the Invasion: A Success Story of Crayfish Species in Piedmont Plain Lakes (NW Italy). Diversity, 17(12), 868. https://doi.org/10.3390/d17120868

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Article metric data becomes available approximately 24 hours after publication online.
Back to TopTop