Next Article in Journal
Some Like It Hot: Investigating Thermoregulatory Behavior of Carcharhinid Sharks in a Natural Environment with Artificially Elevated Temperatures
Previous Article in Journal
Profiling Genetic Breeding Progress in Bagrid Catfishes
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Low Ontogenetic Diet Diversity and Flexibility of the Pike-Perch, Sander lucioperca (Linnaeus, 1758) (Osteichthyes, Percidae): A Case Study
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Fishes
Volume 8
Issue 9
10.3390/fishes8090427
fishes-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 thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Morphological and Trophic Features of the Invasive Babka gymnotrachelus (Gobiidae) in the Plain and Mountainous Ecosystems of the Dniester Basin: Spatiotemporal Expansion and Possible Threats to Native Fishes

by
Sergey Afanasyev
1,*,
Olena Hupalo
1,
Nataliia Tymoshenko
1,
Olena Lietytska
1,
Anatolii Roman
1,
Oksana Manturova
1 and
Doru Bănăduc
2,*
1
Institute of Hydrobiology, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, 04210 Kyiv, Ukraine
2
Applied Ecology Research Center, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, 550024 Sibiu, Romania
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Fishes 2023, 8(9), 427; https://doi.org/10.3390/fishes8090427
Submission received: 26 July 2023 / Revised: 15 August 2023 / Accepted: 18 August 2023 / Published: 22 August 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue European and Adjacent Aquatic Ecosystem Hotspots: Fish Impacted by Natural and Anthropogenic Environmental Stress Factors)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Over the last few years, the racer goby B. gymnotrachelus quickly expanded in the mountainous rivers of the Dniester basin at aheight of 300 m a.s.l. and above. The occurrence frequency of the racer goby in fish communities in the mountainous rivers of the Carpathian ecoregion remains low (up to 20%), as compared with the plain rivers, where the species occurs in 70–100% of cases. The major prey groups in its diet in both plain and mountainous were Chironomidae, Diptera, and Crustacea. Chironomidae formed the maximal portion (35% at an occurrence frequency of 72.5%), and Trichoptera formed 18%at an occurrence frequency of 41%, whereas fish larvae were absent in their diet in mountainous rivers. The peculiar environmental conditions of mountainous rivers caused the adaptive modifications of the morphological features of the racer goby at the subpopulation level, which compriseda decrease inthe specimens’ size in rivers with a flow velocity of above 1.5 m/s and rivers with pebble contentsof above 50%in the bottom sediments.The modifications showed an increase inbody streamlining as an adaptation to flow velocity and turbulence and the stony substrate of the river’s bottom. Thus, the morphological adaptation of B. gymnotrachelus to the conditions of the mountainous rivers is in progress, and the formationof astable population in these rivers can be expected. In contrast, the native fish species’ resilience in the face of newcomers is still high, and this is because their alevins are not food for invaders.
Keywords:
racer goby Babka gymnotrachelus; Gobiidae; Dniester River basin; Carpathians; Eastern plains; highland and lowland streams; morphology; diet; alien fish; adaptations; native fish species resilience characteristics
Key Contribution: The relatively widespread racer gobyfish in the basins of the Marmara, Black, and Caspian Seasexhibits continual expansion. Both its biological and ecological characteristics help this speciesconquer new areas, but the resilience capacity of the native fish species, especially in the mountainous ecosystems, exhibits ongoing spatiotemporal dynamics. For this species, by carrying out spatiotemporal trend assessments and monitoring and management, this studyhighlighted the importance of morphological and trophic characteristic dynamics both for the racer goby, which is expanding, and for the existent native fish species, which still exhibit theresilience capacity to fight against newcomers. All of this “fight for territory” phenomenon currently occursin the Dniester River basin, a well-known biodiversity hot spot.This study’s results offernot only a new perspective on the local fish fauna but also a better understanding of the associated risks for decision making inmanagement.

1. Introduction

The rapid development of civilization negatively affected water and aquatic ecosystems [1,2], and specifically, over the last century, itsignificantly accelerated the natural processes of the spread species and enabled the exchange of species between previously isolated regions [3]. Aquatic ecosystems, especially those that are already disturbed by various human activities, appear to be particularly vulnerable to these invasions [4,5]. The spread of alien fish species is caused not only by purposeful or accidental introductions but also by the species’ migration beyond their natural range dueto various anthropogenic stressors, which induce natural habitat degradation: the construction of dams, the modification of river flow, climate change, sea level rise, water pollution, etc. [6,7,8,9].
The native freshwater fish species are among those that aremost affected by the alien species’ introduction [10,11,12,13].
Biological invasions, which occur when species are transferred to new geographical regions andspread and form new ranges, are of special concern because of potentially negative ecological and economic effects [14].
Racer goby Babka gymnotrachelus (Kessler, 1857) (syn. Neogobiusgymnotrachelus) [11,15] is a relict Ponto–Caspian species of the familyGobiidae:It is a freshwater and brackish-water benthic non-migratory fish that is widely spread in Ukraine and in the desalinized sections of the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov, and they are specifically observed inlimans and coastal lakes at a salinity of up to 50/00. In rivers, this species inhabits the bottom, preferring habitats with silted sandy or fine stony substrates, zones with slow flow, and depths of up to 2–5 m [11,12,16]. RG is one of the most successive invaders in European continental waters, and it actively expands its range, especially in the Danube and Vistula basins [3,17,18,19,20].
The recent rapid natural expansion of the range of the racer goby Babka gymnotrachelus (Kessler, 1857) is one of the mechanisms of natural diversification, and it is a threat to the native biodiversity of the mountainous tributaries of the Dniester River. Due tovarious degradation types of the natural habitats in the Carpathian mountain basin [21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28], the high adaptive potential and ecological flexibility of the species catalyzed its expansion in many European water courses, particularly in the Dniester basin [10,14,29].
Information on RG spread from websites such as fishbase.org (accessed on 27 February 2023), http://www.nobanis.org (accessed on 1 March 2023), and https://www.iucnredlist.org (accessed on 2 March 2023) is not complete, especially regarding the Dniester basin. The map, given in the monograph from [30], is based only on the records of Polish specialists Kukuła and Bylak [31], who wrongly stated the practical absence of data regarding RG spread in the Dniester River basin, relying only on the modern reprint of the popular book [32].
At the same time, the natural range of this Ponto–Caspian species covers the entire lower section of the Dniester River within the ecoregion Pontic province. In fact, just the natural spread of the Ponto–Caspian species is one of the reasons and markers for the delineation of the ecoregions of the Pontic province and Eastern plains. We have not determined the time of RG penetration beyond the limits of its natural range; however, it can be argued that since the XIX cent., it has been reliably recorded in the upper Dniester section within the limits of Eastern plains [33,34,35], but it has not been recorded upstream of the Zbruch River’s mouth. Up untilthe mid-XX cent., RG spread upstream the Dniester to the town of Sambir [36,37,38,39,40]. Over the next years, the population of RG increased, and it became quite widely spread and started to invadeleft-bank tributaries, which was confirmed by numerous records over the 1970–1990s in the rivers Zhvanchyk, Smotrych, Zbruch, and Strypa [41,42] (Figure 1).
In right-bank tributaries, the first RG specimens were found in 1976 in the lower section of the Lukva and Strvyazh rivers andthe upper section of BystrytsiaTysmenytska [42] (see Figure 1).
The aim of thisstudyisto reveal the invasion’s scope and directions and the morphological peculiarities of B. gymnotrachelus in the plain and mountainous rivers of the Dniester basin within the Carpathian and Eastern Plainecoregions.

2. Material and Methods

The invasion vectors and spread dynamics of the racer goby B. gymnotrachelus (hereinafter referred to as RG) in the Dniester basin were studied usingthe original records and archive materials of complex surveys carried out bythe Institute of Hydrobiology NAS of Ukraine starting from 1983 and literature data. In addition, in 2019, special surveys were carried out in the main Dniester channel (upstream the Smotrych River inflow) and its tributaries:Strviazh, BystrytsiaTysmenytska, Trudnytsia, Repchanka, Lug, Svirzh, GnylaLypa, Syvka, Limnytsia, Bystrytsia, ZolotaLypa, Seret, and Smotrych; the surveys aimed tosearch for localization sites and the spread of RG. In 2021–2022, complementary surveys were carried out in the Svicha and Yagorlykrivers (see Figure 1).
Until 2018, samplings were carried out according to the State Fishery Agency licenses.In 2019–2022, catches were carried out usingthe gearpermitted by the rules of amateur and sport fishing [44]: anichthyological sac used for 1 h ateach site (in the sections, it was 100–200 m long within the determined sites, and the sampling area was equal to 500 m2) and fishing rods at the potential occurrence sites of the species. The species was identifiedin situaccording to the key provided in [11].
Ateach site, field protocols were filled in with records of water and air temperatures, flow velocity, water transparency, and bottom substrate and sediment type and composition [45].
Samples were preserved using a4% formaldehyde solution for further analysis in the laboratory. In total,118 RG specimens were processed usingI.F. Pravdin’s method [46,47]. Age was determined usingscales and gill covers. Measurements were carried out using thestandard methodologyfor fam. Percidae, with complementary measurements for the fam. Gobiidae (Figure 2).
Morphometric analysis was carried out on67 specimens. The morphological variability of RG was analyzed using a total of 5 meristic traits: scale number in the lateral line (Squ);and ray number in the first (D1) and second (D2) dorsal fins and in anal (A) and pectoral (P) fins.Twenty-two morphometric traits were examined: standard length (l); body length (lcor); snout length (lr); horizontal diameter of eye (do); inter-orbital width (io); maximal head width (ic); maximal (H) and minimal (h) body height; maximal (iH) and minimal (ih) body depth; peduncle length (pl); anterodorsal (aD); antennal (aA); post-orbital (po) distance; length of the second dorsal fin base (lD2); length of anal fin base (lA); length of pectoral fin base (lP); length of suction cup (lV); length of caudal fin (lC); height of first (hD1) and second (hD2) dorsal fins; head height (hc) (see Figure 1).
Data were statistically processed in Past v 2.17 [49].
The morphological features of RG in terms of plastic traits in different ecoregions wereexamined in three samples from mountainous rivers (Strviazh, Limnytsia, andSvicha) and four samples from plain rivers (main Dniester channel, Seret, Smotrych, and Yagorlyk). Sample similarity was assessed within the principal component space using atotalof 22 morphometric traits with an account of several environmental factors (flow velocity, projective cover of higher aquatic vegetation, and granulometric composition of bottom substrate). Specimens with incomplete datasets were not considered in the analysis.
In order to assess differences in the morphology of RG samples from mountainous and plain rivers, PCA was carried out usinga set of morphometric traits, with an account of some environmental factors (flow velocity using the OTTMFproWaterFlowMeter device, projective cover of higher aquatic vegetation, and substrate composition).
The significance of ecological factors in RG sample differentiation with respect tomorphological traits was assessed usingnon-metricmultidimensionalscaling (NMDS), and it was based on amatrix of distances between the individual specimens calculated usingEuclid distances in 3D space.Morphological analysis was carried out in the combined mountainous and plain riversamples, and RG specimens were 3–7 cm long and 1–3 years old. Normality was tested usingthe Shapiro–Wilk test. Morphological analysis was carried out using the two-sample t-test.The correlation between flow velocity and specimens’ body length and between pebble portion in substrates and body length was established via acorrelation coefficient.The qualitative analysis of stomach content was carried out in 45 RG specimens. Each food category was identified individually. The material was weighed at 0.01 g.

3. Results

The analysis of the entiredataset revealed the occurrence of RG in 46 sites inthe Dniester basin. According to catches of the Institute of Hydrobiology and catches by the authors since 1983, RG inhabited and still inhabits all areas of the ecoregion Pontic province (where it should not be considered invasive) and beyond its native range—in the Eastern plainecoregion and in the main channel of the Dniester River in the Carpathianecoregion. Outside the main channel in the Carpathian ecoregion, it was first recorded in 2000 when five specimens were caught in the Strviazh River near Zarichchia vil. at aheight of 352 m a.s.l. In 2001, two specimens were caught in the Stryi River upstream of Rozgirche vil. at aheight of 320 m a.s.l., and during 2002–2005, we recorded this species in the Svicha, Syvka, and Limnytsiarivers. On 23 July 2003, it was found by Polish specialists in the Strviazh River near the Ukrainian–Polish state boundary. Since 2009, the first RG specimens have been found at aheight of above 400 m a.s.l. in the Opir and BystrytsiaNadvirnianskarivers (Table 1).
We have analyzed the records, biological characteristics, and feeding spectra of the species in some typical rivers beyond theirnative range in two samples from the Carpathian and Eastern Plainecoregions. The maximal portion of both samples comprised two-year-old specimens with body lengths of 4–5 cm (Figure 3). On the contrast to the mountainous rivers, in the plain rivers portion of older specimens of the body length 6–8 cm also was big (see Figure 3).
In both samples, the mean ratio of males and females was close to 1:2. In mountainous rivers, most females were 4–5 cm long, and in the plain rivers, they were 5–6 cm long (see Figure 4). In both samples, males were somewhat largerthan females, although this isnot a characteristicofthis fish species.
The abundance of RG in mountainous and plain rivers notably differed (Table 2), and this was likely dependentona set of abiotic conditions (Table 3).
In mountainous rivers (Strvyazh, Svicha, andLimnytsia), the density and habitat characteristics were as follows.
In the Strviazh River nearZasadky village, RG’s density was 0.8 ind/100 m2. The mean flow velocity amounted to 1.7 m/s, the depth measured up to 1 m, and the bottom was covered with pebbles. In the Svicha River nearLiutynka village, the mean flow velocity was equal to 0.8 m/s, the depth measured up to 1.2 m, and the bottom was covered with gravel and pebbles and was partly silted; RG’s density was equal to 1.4 ind/100 m2. In the Limnytsia River near the town of Kalush, RG’sdensity was equal to 1.2 ind/100 m2, the mean flow velocity was 1.5 m/s, the depth measured up to 0.7 m, and bottom sediments consisted of pebbles and was covered in silt and filamentous algae.
The density of RG in the plain rivers was notably higher. In the main channel of Dniester (near the towns of StaryiMartyniv and Galych), it amounted to 3.8 ind/100 m2, the mean flow velocity in this section was 0.7 m/s, the depth is up to 1.5 m, and the bottom was covered with pebbles andsilted in places. In the Seret River (nearthe villages of Ostrivets, Ugryn, and Lysivtsi), RG’s density was recorded at the maximum in this study at – 4.6 ind/100 m2. The mean flow velocity in this section amounted to 0.6 m/s, the depth measured up to 2 m, and the bottom sediments consisted of pebbles and silted sand.In some places, the silt layer reached 0.1 m. In the Smotrych River (near the town of Smotrych),the RG density was equal to 3.0 ind/100 m2,flow velocity was 0.6 m/s, the depth measured 1.5–2 m, and bottom sediments consisted of gravel and pebbles, and the bottom was covered silt and sand layers up to 0.2 m thick. In the Yagorlyk River, the RG density value was the lowest of the considered plain rivers—1.8 ind/100 m2; the mean flow velocity was 0.3 m/s, and depth was measured at 0.4–0.6 m.The bottom sediments consisted of gravel and sand, and it was covered with silt layers up to 0.2 m thick.
Analyses of the feeding spectra of RG showed that Chironomidae larvae were the main diet component, which formed 35% of the food volume.Their occurrence frequency in the stomach content in mountainous and plain rivers amounted, respectively, to 72.5 and 95.7% (Figure 5 and Figure 6). The only notable differences comprised the presence of Trichoptera larvae and the absence of fish larvae in the stomachs of RG from mountainous rivers. At the same time, Trichoptera were absent in the stomachs of specimens from plain rivers, whereas fish larvae formed up to 25% of the stomach content with an occurrence frequency of 91.3%. Other feeding categories were almost similar in the stomachs of specimens from both river types (see Figure 5 and Figure 6).
Morphological differences between RG samples from the rivers of Carpathian and Eastern plain ecoregionswereexamined using the two-sample Student’s t-test, and samples of specimens aged 1–3 years with body lengths of 3–6 cm were used to avoid the effects of size and age variability. Both samples were found to be normally distributed: inmountainous rivers, n = 14, W = 0.95, and p = 0.59; inplain rivers, n = 34, W = 0.97, and p = 0.60.
Notable confident differences with respect tothe morphological characteristics of RG from mountainous and plain rivers were revealed in 9 (40.9%) of 22 considered morphometric traits (Table 4).
Specimens from mountainous rivers were characterized by smallerbody dimensions with respect to length (l), depth (iH), and maximal (H) and minimal (h) height; shorterantennaldistance (aA), snout length (lr), and head height (hc); and maximal head width (ic), whereas the eye’s diameter (do) was larger.
Flow velocity and pebble portions in bottom substrates exhibited negative linear regression with respect tothe body size of same-age specimens(Figure 7).
PCA results (Figure 8) demonstrated a distribution of all samples into two clusters. The first combined samples were from mountainous rivers (Strviazh, Limnytsia, and Svicha), and the second combined sampleswere from plain rivers (Dniester, Seret, Smotrych, and Yagorlyk). The first principal component accounted for 27.6% of the values, and a strong positive correlation was revealed in terms of body length (r = 0.69), body depth (r = 0.63), antennaldistance (r = 0.67), snout length (r = 0.55), head height (r = 0.79), maximal head width (r = 0.66), and negative correlation in terms of eye diameter (r = −0.60). A strong correlation was also revealed in the samples’ differentiation viathe bottom substrate type (silt r = 0.92; sand r = 0.83) and projective cover of higher vegetation (r = 0.71), and a negative correlation was observed with respect to pebble portions in substrates (r = −0.94) and flow velocity (r = −0.80).
The second principal component accounted for 13.0% of values, and a strong positive correlation was revealed by the pectoral fin’s length (r = 0.68), caudal fin’s length (r = 0.54), and maximal body depth (r = 0.54) and by pebble portions in bottom substrates (r = 0.62), whereas a negative correlation was revealed due to theprojective cover of higher vegetation (r = −0.53).
On the whole, it is evident that RG samples from the plain rivers of the Eastern plain ecoregion are close to one another in terms of morphological traits, which enabled their combination into one sample in order to facilitate further analyses of the morphological differences between samples from different ecoregions. Samples from the mountainous rivers of the Carpathian ecoregion were combined as well.
The results of the NMDS analysis demonstrated the samples’ separation by morphological traits and environmental factors (Figure 9). The Shepard plot parameters were equal to the following: stress = 0.0962; Axis 1 = 0.823; Axis 2 = 0.0786.
Pebble substrates and flow velocity were found to be the most determinative factors in mountainous rivers, and the silt layer was the most determinative in plain rivers.

4. Discussion

RG is considered “potentially invasive” in the “blacklists” of Austria and Germany. Competition for feeding objects and spawning areas, as a rule, results in further expansion when the population increases and smaller specimens are forced to change habitats [10,50]. RGwas also considered invasive in the transboundary of the Evros River basin [51].
For the first time, in the Carpathian ecoregion, we recorded this species in 2001 in the Stryi River, and in 2003, two specimens were caught in the Polish section of the basin in the Carpathian ecoregion [31]. In 2009, for the first time, in the Dniester basin, RG crossed the height mark of 400 m a.s.l., and in the upper section of the Strviazh River, RG crossed the height of 398 m a.s.l.; its population was so numerous that it dominated the local ichthyofauna [16,29,31,35]. The DNAanalysis of the specimens demonstrated that RG in the Strviazh River exhibited Black Sea origins [16,35,52].
General analyses showed that the invasion of RG in the Dniester basin occurred in“splashes”: Until the early XX century, RGpractically did not inhabit theupstream area of the middle Dniester section (upstream theZbruch River’s mouth).In the first part of the XX century, it actively spread along the main Dniester channel. Starting from the 1980s to 1990s, RGactively expanded into left- and right-bank tributaries within the limits of the Eastern Plainecoregion, and starting from the early 2000s, the species penetrated the Carpathian ecoregion and invaded the piedmont and mountainous sections of the rivers (see Figure 1).
The species actively expanded into the left- and right-bank tributaries of the Dniester River within the Eastern plain ecoregion (BystrytsiaTysmenytska and its tributaries Tysmenytsia, Ripchanka, Trudnytsia, and Seret). Surveys of the upper and middle sections of the Dniester basin carried out in 2018–2020 revealed many new localities of RG [40,53].
Moving upstream, RG occupies free ecological niches in thesesections, and they are different due tothe set of hydrological conditions, the availability of certain feeding objects, the occurrence of predators, etc. Due to adaptation to various habitats, RGdeveloped complex combinations of ecomorphological features, which are associated with movement, feeding, and environmental conditions [54]. The set of environmental factors affect body shape and manifests themselvesas changes inmeristic and morphological traits. Phenotypic variability and the flexibility of life processes facilitate successive invasions, enabling easy adaptation to different environmental conditions overall invasion stages [54]. In our opinion, thechanges inmorphological traits in the B.gymnotrachelus sample from the rivers of the Carpathianecoregion were not related to size and age variability and sexual dimorphism. Examining theset of morphological traits, the RG sample from mountainous rivers confidently differed with respect to smaller body dimensions: body length (l), height and depth (H, iH, and ih), antennal distance (Aa), snout length (lr), head height (hc), and maximal head width (ic);in contrast, theeye’s diameter (do) was larger. These morphological modifications of RG in mountainous rivers indicated its adaptation to high flow velocity and pebble substrates (these two factors were the most significant).
Regarding the potential effects of RG on the local ichthyofauna, we should stress that food competition with aboriginal species is a key element of its negative effect. Insect larvae and imago and crustaceans, on which RG feeds, in the mountainous sections of the rivers are also the main feeding objects ofrare species Salmo trutta Linnaeus, 1758; Hucho hucho (Linnaeus) 1758; and Thymallusthymallus (Linnaeus, 1758) [11,12], species which that experience significant negative human impact in the Carpathian basin [55,56,57,58,59,60];they exhibitdecreasing population frequency, abundance, and ecological status. Thus, even the partial overlapping of the feeding spectra along with the low biomass of food organisms can cause tension in the trophic relations of fish. Depending on food availability, RG is able to modify its feeding strategy, and it has awide spectrumof potential prey that facilitateits invasion into new habitats [3,61].
Most specialists tend to think that RG spreads dueto intensive navigation.However, this is not true for the Dniester basin, as the river is not navigable. It was supposed that B. gymnotrachelus invasion into the Piedmont rivers of the Dniester basin was connected tothe Stebnyk chemical enterprise catastrophe in 1983, which caused mass fish deathwithin the river section from the BystrytsiaTysmenytska’s inflow to the Dniester’s mouth; this section was 500 km long and had highly mineralized waters.Thus, it released many ecological niches in the rivers of the Dniester basin [41]. It is probable that this ecological catastrophe induced a series of morphological adaptations in RG, which enabled its active spread along the mountainous tributaries of the Dniester River.
We also suppose that the intensification of anthropogenic load on the rivers and climate change facilitated B. gymnotrachelus expansion upstream into the mountainous tributaries, andthe speciessuccessfully occupies available ecological niches and compete with native fish species.

5. Conclusions

Thus, recently B. gymnotrachelus rapidly spread in the mountainous rivers of the Dniester basin in the Carpathian ecoregion at aheight of above 300 m a.s.l. The occurrence frequency of B. gymnotrachelus in fish communities in the mountainous rivers of the Carpathian ecoregion remains relatively low at about 10–20%, whereas it ranges between 70 and 100%In plain rivers.
The main components of the B. gymnotrachelus diet were observed to beChironomidae, Diptera, andCrustacea. Chironomidae larvae formed the maximal portion of diets in both mountainous and plain rivers (35%). In mountainous rivers, the feeding spectra of B.gymnotrachelus partially overlapped with the feeding spectra of rare native fish, including salmonids. The food competition with native fish is probably the key element of the negative impact of the racer goby on the Carpathian ichthyofauna. Fortunately, in mountainous areas, in the trophic context, native fish species larvae are not under direct threat as potential food for B. gymnotrachelus.
Specific environmental conditions of the mountainous rivers caused adaptive modifications with respect tomorphological traits at the subpopulation level, and these modifications manifested as a decrease in body size in same-agespecimens in rivers with a flow velocity above 1.5 m/s and pebble portions of above 50% in bottom sediments. Modifications showed an increase inbody streamlining dueto adaptation to flow velocity and turbulence in the mountainous rivers and stony substrate of the river bottom. Thus, the morphological adaptation of the species to the conditions of mountainous rivers is in progress, and the formationof stable populations in these rivers can be expected.
The Ponto–Caspian fauna to which the RG fish species belong has evolved in an unusually rich and peculiar way over the millennia due to its dynamic geology; this was observed in a series of lakes and seas with widely varying salinity and water levels andduring the intermittent periods of separation and the establishment of connections between the basins of the Caspian and Black seas;connections between these seasand the Mediterranean Sea; and connections between theworld’s oceans and seas [62,63]. This evolutionary history backgroundmakes RG a skilled and invasive alien fish species in the Dnieper basin, and its expansion range is expected to extendin the future.
The relatively widespread racer gobyfish species in the Marmara, Black, and Caspian Sea basins continue theirexpansion. Both the species’ biological and ecological characteristics that orient them toward conquering new areas and the resilience capacity of the native fish species, especially in mountainous ecosystems, exhibit ongoing spatiotemporal dynamics. By carrying out spatiotemporal trend assessments, monitoring, and management, this studyhighlighted the importance of morphological and trophic characteristic dynamics both for the racer goby, which is expanding, and for the existent native fish species, which still exhibit theresilience capacity to fight against the newcomers. All of this “fight for territory and resources” phenomenon is currently occurring in the well-knowndiversity basin of the Dniester River.This study’s results offernot only a new perspective on local fish fauna but also a better understanding of the associated risks of the studied aquatic ecosystems for management decision makers.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.A. and D.B.; data curation, S.A. and D.B.; formal analysis, S.A. and D.B.; investigation, S.A., O.H., N.T., O.L., A.R. and O.M.; methodology: S.A., O.H., N.T. and O.L.; supervision, S.A. and D.B.; validation, S.A. and D.B.; visualization, O.H. and N.T.; writing—original draft, S.A., O.H., N.T., O.L., A.R., O.M. and D.B.; writing—review and editing, S.A., D.B. and O.M.All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research is based on the work supported by the State program of Ukraine “Support of priority fields of scientific researches” N 6541230 and received no external funding. The APS was kindly funded by Ecotur Sibiu.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted under the permits of the Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources: No. 2019/10 of 26 April 2019 for the Dniester (with tributaries) within the Lviv region; No. 2019/11 of 1 May 2019 for the Dniester (with tributaries) within the Ternopil region; No. 2019/12 of 14 May 2019for the Dniester (with tributaries) within the Ivano-Frankivsk region; and No. 2020/4 of 25 September 2020for the Dniester (with tributaries) within the Ivano-Frankivsk region. Fishing was carried out in accordance with the rules of the Order of the State Committee of Fisheries of Ukraine No. 19 of 15 February 1999. The work was performed in accordance with the bioethical requirements for animals in accordance with the Law of Ukraine “On Protection of Animals from Cruelty” of 21 February 2006. All work was performed in compliance with the international standards of the European Convention for the Protection of Vertebrate Animals Used for Experimental and Other Scientific Purposes (European Convention for the Protection of Vertebrate Animals Used for Experimental and Other Scientific Purposes, Strasbourg, 1986) and in accordance with the “General Ethical Principles for Animal Experiments”, and the study was approved by the First National Congress on Bioethics (Kyiv, 2001). Before formalin fixation, all fish were killed by overdosing usinganesthetics (1.5–2.0mL/L solution of 2-phenoxyethanol for 5min). The method of “killing fish by overdosing on anesthetics” meets European bioethical requirements under Directive 2010/63/EU.

Data Availability Statement

All this study data can be obtained at request from the first correspondence author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Priscoli, J.D. Waterandcivilization:Usinghistorytoreframewaterpolicydebatesandtobuildanewecologicalrealism. Water Policy 2000, 1, 623–636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Hosseiny, S.H.; Bozorg-Haddad, O.; Bocchiola, D. Water, culture, civilization, and history. Econ. Political Soc. Issues Water Resour. 2021, 189–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Kostrzewa, J.; Grabowski, M. Opportunistic feeding strategy as factor promoting the expansion of racer goby (Neogobius gymnotrachelus Kessler, 1857) in the Vistulabasin. Lauterbornia 2003, 48, 91–100. [Google Scholar]
  4. Lodge, D.M.; Stein, R.A.; Brown, K.M.; Covich, A.P.; Bronmark, C.; Garvey, J.E.; Klosiewskt, S.P. Predicting impact of freshwater exotic species on native biodiversity: Challenges in spatial scaling. Austral Ecol. 1998, 23, 53–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Anastasiu, P.; Preda, C.; Bănăduc, D.; Cogălniceanu, D. Alien species of EUC on cern in Romania. Transylv. Rev. Syst. Ecol. Res. 2017, 19, 93–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Bănăduc, D.; Simić, V.; Cianfaglione, K.; Barinova, S.; Afanasyev, S.; Öktener, A.; McCall, G.; Simić, S.; Curtean-Bănăduc, A. Freshwater as a sustainable resource and generator of secondary resources in the 21st century: Stressors, threats, risks, management and protection strategies, and conservation approaches. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 16570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Lipej, L.; Kovačić, M.; Dulčić, J. An analysis of adriatic ichthyofauna—Ecology, zoogeography, and conservation status. Fishes 2022, 7, 58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Yick, J.L.; Wisniewski, C.; Diggle, J.; Patil, J.G. Eradication of the invasive Common Carp, Cyprinus Carpio from a Large Lake: Lessons and Insights from the Tasmanian Experience. Fishes 2021, 6, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Bănăduc, D.; Afanasyev, S.; Akeroyd, J.R.; Năstase, A.; Năvodaru, I.; Tofan, L.; Curtean-Bănăduc, A. The Danube Delta: The Achilles heel of Danube River–Danube Delta–Black Sea region fish diversity under a Black sea impact scenario due to sea level rise—A prospective review. Fishes 2023, 8, 355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Copp, G.H.; Bianco, P.G.; Bogutskaya, N.G.; Eros, T.; Falka, I.; Ferreira, M.T.; Fox, M.G.; Freyhof, J.; Gozlan, R.E.; Grabowska, J.; et al. To be, or not to be, a non-native freshwater fish? J. Appl. Ichthyol. 2005, 21, 242–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Movchan, Y.V. Fishes of Ukraine; Determinative Key and Reference Book; Zoloti Vorota: Kyiv, Ukraine, 2011; 420p. [Google Scholar]
  12. Turianyn, I.I. Fishes of Carpathian Water Bodies; Karpaty: Uzhgorod, Ukraine, 1982; 144p. [Google Scholar]
  13. Afanasyev, S.A.; Gupalo, Y.A.; Manturova, O.V. Distribution and Peculiarities of Biology of the Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus (Perciformes: Centrarchidae) in the Water Bodies of Kyiv City. Hydrobiol. J. 2017, 53, 14–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Kvach, Y.; Kutsokon, Y. The non-indigenous fishes in the fauna of Ukraine: A potentia ad actum. BioInvasions Rec. 2017, 6, 269–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Froese, R.; Pauly, D. (Eds.) FishBase. World Wide Web Electronic Publication. Version (12/2019). Available online: www.fishbase.org (accessed on 27 February 2023).
  16. Kukuła, K.; Ortyl, B.; Bylak, A. Habitat selection patterns of a species at the edge—Case study of the native racer goby population in Central Europe. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 19670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Bănăduc, D.; Joy, M.; Olosutean, H.; Afanasyev, S.; Curtean-Bănăduc, A. Natural and anthropogenic driving forces as key elements in the Lower Danube Basin–South-Eastern Carpathians–North-Western Black Sea coast area lakes: A broken stepping stones for fish in a climatic change scenario? Environ. Sci. Eur. 2020, 32, 73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Bănăduc, D.; Rey, S.; Trichkova, T.; Lenhardt, M.; Curtean-Bănăduc, A. The Lower Danube River–Danube Delta–North West Black Sea: A pivotal area of major interest for the past, present and future of its fish fauna—A short review. Sci. Total Environ. 2016, 545–546, 137–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Bănăduc, D.; Bănăduc, A.; Lenhardt, M.; Guti, G. “Porţile de Fier/Iron Gates” Gorges Area (Danube) Fish Fauna. Transylv. Rev. Syst. Ecol. Res. “Iron Gates” Natural Park 2014, 16, 171–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Bănăduc, D.; Bakhshalizadeh, S.; Curtean-Bănăduc, A. Natura 2000 A Panacea? Natura 2000 Site Oltul Mijlociucibin-Hârtibaciu(ROSCI0132)—A Local Extinction of a Native Fish Species and a New Alien Fish Arrival Case Study. Transylv. Rev. Syst. Ecol. Res. 2023, 25, 81–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Curtean-Bănăduc, A.; Mihuţ, C.; Burcea, A.; McCall, G.S.; Matei, C.; Bănăduc, D. Screening for Microplastic Uptake in an Urbanized Freshwater Ecosystem: Chondrostoma nasus (Linnaeus, 1758) Case Study. Water 2023, 15, 1578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Boeraş, I.; Burcea, A.; Coman, C.; Bănăduc, D.; Curtean-Bănăduc, A. Bacterial microbiomes in the sediments of lotic systems ecologic drivers and role: A case study from the Mureş River, Transylvania, Romania. Water 2021, 13, 3518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Bănăduc, D.; Sas, A.; Cianfaglione, K.; Barinova, S.; Curtean-Bănăduc, A. The role of aquatic refuge habitats for fish, and threats in the context of climate change and human impact, during seasonal hydrological drought in the Saxon Villages area (Transylvania, Romania). Atmosphere 2021, 12, 1209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Curtean-Bănăduc, A.; Burcea, A.; Mihuţ, C.-M.; Bănăduc, D. The benthic trophic corner stone compartment in POPs transfer from abiotic environment to higher trophic levels—Trichoptera and Ephemeroptera pre-alert indicator role. Water 2021, 13, 1778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Bănăduc, D.; Curtean-Bănăduc, A.; Cianfaglione, K.; Akeroyd, J.; Cioca, L.-I. Proposed environmental risk management elements in a Carpathian valley basin, within the Roşia Montană European historical mining area. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 4565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Costea, G.; Pusch, M.T.; Bănăduc, D.; Cosmoiu, D.; Curtean-Bănăduc, A. A review of hydropower plants in Romania: Distribution, current knowledge, and their effects on fish in headwater streams. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 145, 111003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Burcea, A.; Boeraş, I.; Mihuţ, C.-M.; Bănăduc, D.; Matei, C.; Curtean-Bănăduc, A. Adding the Mureş River Basin (Transylvania, Romania) to the list of hotspots with high contamination with pharmaceuticals. Sustainability 2020, 12, 10197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Voicu, R.; Voicu, L.; Radecki-Pawlik, A.; Bănăduc, D.; Plesiński, K. A new concept of frontal migration system for fish—For overflow weirs and river sills. Transylv. Rev. Syst. Ecol. Res. 2022, 24, 95–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Bylak, A.; Kukuła, K. Importance of peripheral basins: Implications for the conservation of fish assemblages. Aquat. Conserv. Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 2018, 28, 1055–1066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Kvach, Y.; Zamorov, V.; Pupins, M. Review of Invasive Ponto-Caspian Gobiids: Current Range and History of Expansion; Daugavpils University Academic Press “Saule”: Daugavpils, Latvia, 2021; 92p. [Google Scholar]
  31. Kukuła, K.; Bylak, A. Rodzima populacja babki łysej Neogobius gymnotrachelus w Polsce? (The native population of racer goby Neogobius gymnotrachelus in Poland?). Chrońmy Przyr. Ojczystą 2013, 69, 61–65. [Google Scholar]
  32. Sabaniejew, L.P. Ryby Rosyji. Zhizn’ i lowlya (uzhené) nashykh présnowodnykh ryb; Fizkultura i Sport: Moskwa, Russia, 1982; Volume 1. [Google Scholar]
  33. Kessler, K. Description of fish belonging to families common to the Black and Caspian Seas. Proc. StPetersburg Nat. Hist. Soc. 1874, 5, 191–324. [Google Scholar]
  34. Berg, L.S. Freshwater Fishes of the U.S.S.R. and Adjacent Countries: Guide to the Fauna of the U.S.S.R., 4th ed.; USSR Academy of Sciences Press: Moscow, Russia, 1949; Volume 3, pp. 928–1382. [Google Scholar]
  35. Grabowski, M.; Hupało, K.; Bylak, A.; Kukuła, K.; Grabowska, J. Double origin of the racer goby (Babka gymnotrachelus) in Poland revealed with mitochondrial marker. Possible implications for the species alien/native status. J. Limnol. 2015, 75, 101–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Sokolov, N. Catalogue of a collection of cyclostomata and fishes of the State Natural History Museum of NAS of Ukraine. Proc. State Nat. Hist. Mus. 2004, 19, 15–28. [Google Scholar]
  37. Yaroshenko, M.F. Hydrofauna of the Dniester River; USSR Academy of Sciences Press: Moscow, Russia, 1957; 168p. [Google Scholar]
  38. Vaynshtein, A.S. Ichthyofauna of the upper Dniester basin. Pratsi In-tu gidrobiologii AN UkrRSR 1958, 34, 48–60. [Google Scholar]
  39. Tatarynov, K.A. Fishes. In Ukranian Carpathians. Nature; Holubets, M.A., Honchar, M.T., Komendar, V.I., Kucheriaviy, A., Odynak, Y.P., Eds.; Nauk. Dumka: Kyiv, Ukraine, 1988; pp. 156–161. [Google Scholar]
  40. Transboundary Dniester River Basin: Ecological State, Reference Conditions, Management; Afanasyev, S.; Manturova, O. (Eds.) Kafedra: Kyiv, Ukraine, 2021; 384p. [Google Scholar]
  41. Fauna of Ukraine, Fishes; Smirnov, A.I. (Ed.) Nauk. Dumka: Kyiv, Ukraine, 1986; Volume 8, 320p. [Google Scholar]
  42. Movchan, Y.V.; Manilo, L.G.; Smirnov, A.I.; Shcherbukha, A.Y. Catalogue of Collections of Zoological Museum of the National Natural History Museum of NAS of Ukraine; Zoomuzey NNPM NAN Ukrainy: Kyiv, Ukraine, 2003; 241p. [Google Scholar]
  43. Surface Waters Sidebar. Available online: http://geoportal.davr.gov.ua:81/ (accessed on 28 June 2023).
  44. Order of the State Committee of Fisheries of Ukraine No. 19 of February 15, 1999. Available online: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z0269-99#Text (accessed on 24 February 2019).
  45. Afanasyev, S.O. Development of European approaches to biological assessment of the state of hydroecosystems and their application to the monitoring of ukrainian rivers. Hydrobiol. J. 2002, 38, 130–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Pravdin, I.F. Guide to the Study of Fish; Pishhevaja promyshlennost: Moscow, Russia, 1966; 375p. [Google Scholar]
  47. Pylypenro, Y.V.; Shevchenko, P.G.; Tsedyk, V.V.; Korniyenko, V.O. Methods of Ichthyological Research (Tutorial); OLDI-PLUS: Kherson, Ukraine, 2017; 432p. [Google Scholar]
  48. Zabroda, T.A.; Dyrypasko, O.A. Estimation of sex differences in morphometric characteristics of the round goby Neogobius melanostomus (Pallas, 1814) of the Sea of Azov. Bull. Zaporizhzhya Natl. Univ. 2009, 2, 41–47. [Google Scholar]
  49. Hammer, Ø.; Harper, D.A.T.; Ryan, P.D. PAST: Paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontol. Electron. 2001, 4, 4. Available online: http://palaeo-electronica.org/2001_1/past/issue1_01.htm (accessed on 18 April 2019).
  50. Grabowska, J.; Zięba, G.; Przybylski, M.; Smith, C. The role of intraspecific competition in the dispersal of an invasive fish. Freshw. Biol. 2019, 64, 933–941. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Zogaris, S.; Ntakis, A.; Barbieri, R. The Racer Goby, Babka gymnotrachelus (Kessler, 1857) Invades the Evros River: Evidence of Recent Establishment in Greece. Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst. 2019, 420, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Ohayon, J.L.; Stepien, C.A. Genetic and biogeographic relationships of the racer goby Neogobius gymnotrachelus (Gobiidae: Teleostei) from introduced and native Eurasian locations. J. Fish Biol. 2007, 71, 360–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Afanasyev, S.O.; Gupalo, O.O.; Lietytska, O.M.; Tymoshenko, N.V.; Roman, A.M.; Abramiuk, I.I.; Golub, O.O. Alien Fish Species of the Ukrainian Part of the Dniester River Basin: Distribution and Dynamics of Settlement. Hydrobiol. J. 2022, 58, 52–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Jakubčinová, K.; Simonović, P.; Števove, B.; Čanak Atlagić, J.; Kováč, V. What can morphology tell us about ecology of four invasive goby species? J. Fish Biol. 2017, 90, 1999–2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Popa, G.-O.; Dudu, A.; Bănăduc, D.; Curtean-Bănăduc, A.; Burcea, A.; Ureche, D.; Nechifor, R.; Georgescu, S.E.; Costache, M. Genetic Analysis of Populations of Brown Trout (Salmo trutta L.) from the Romanian Carpathians. Aquat. Living Resour. 2019, 32, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Popa, G.-O.; Curtean-Bănăduc, A.; Bănăduc, D.; Florescu, I.E.; Burcea, A.; Dudu, A.; Georgescu, S.E.; Costache, M. Molecular markers reveal reduced genetic diversity in Romanian populations of Brown Trout, Salmo trutta L., 1758 (Salmonidae). Acta Zool. Bulg. 2016, 68, 399–406. [Google Scholar]
  57. Bănăduc, D. The Hucho hucho (Linnaeus) 1758 (Salmoniformes, Salmonidae) species, monitoring in the Vişeu River (Maramureş, Romania). Transylv. Rev. Syst. Ecol. Res. 2008, 5, 183–188. [Google Scholar]
  58. Voicu, R.; Bănăduc, D.; Greenberg, L.; Curtean-Bănăduc, A. Caraş River Gorge aspects of Salmonids’ communities management—Technical solutions. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 2018, 10, 5–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Bănăduc, D.; Răchită, R.; Curtean-Bănăduc, A.; Gheorghe, L. The species Hucho hucho (Linnaeus, 1758), (Salmoniformes, Salmonidae) in Ruscova River (Northern Romanian Carpathians). Acta Oecol. Carp. 2013, VI, 149–166. [Google Scholar]
  60. Curtean-Bănăduc, A.; Bănăduc, D. Thymallus thymallus (Linnaeus, 1758), ecological status in Maramureş Mountains Nature Park (Romania). Transylv. Rev. Syst. Ecol. Res. 2016, 18, 53–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Kakareko, T.; Zbikowski, J.; Zytkowicz, J. Diet partitioning in summer of two syntopic neogobiids from two different habitats of the lower Vistula River, Poland. J. Appl. Ichthyol. 2005, 21, 292–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Reid, D.F.; Orlova, M.I. Geological and evolutionary underpinnings for the success of Ponto-Caspian species invasions in the Baltic Sea and North American Great Lakes. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2002, 59, 1144–1158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Alieva, A.K.; Nasibulina, B.M.; Bakhshalizadeh, S.; Kurochkina, T.F.; Popov, N.N.; Barbol, B.I.; Bănăduc, D.; Jussupbekova, N.M.; Kuanysheva, G.A.; Ali, A.M. The Low Ontogenetic Diet Diversity and Flexibility of the Pike-Perch, Sander lucioperca (Linnaeus, 1758) (Osteichthyes, Percidae): A Case Study. Fishes 2023, 8, 395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Fishes 08 00427 g001
Figure 1. Expansion of B. gymnotrachelus in the middle and upper sections of the Dniester River over the last decades (the map was plotted using internetresource [43]): 1—Dniester; 2—Strviazh; 3—BystrytsiaTysmenytska; 4—Trudnytsia; 5—Repchanka; 6—Stryi; 7—Opir; 8—Svicha; 9—Syvka; 10—Limnytsia; 11—Lukva; 12—Bystrytsia; 13—BystrytsiaNadvirnianska; 14—Vereshchytsia; 15—Shchyrets; 16—Zubra; 17—Lug; 18—Svirzh; 19—GnylaLypa; 20—ZolotaLypa; 21—Strypa; 22—Seret; 23—Zbruch; 24—Zhvanchyk; 25—Smotrych; 26—Yagorlyk. Blue line means the Dniester basin limits, red line means the sate boundaries.
Figure 1. Expansion of B. gymnotrachelus in the middle and upper sections of the Dniester River over the last decades (the map was plotted using internetresource [43]): 1—Dniester; 2—Strviazh; 3—BystrytsiaTysmenytska; 4—Trudnytsia; 5—Repchanka; 6—Stryi; 7—Opir; 8—Svicha; 9—Syvka; 10—Limnytsia; 11—Lukva; 12—Bystrytsia; 13—BystrytsiaNadvirnianska; 14—Vereshchytsia; 15—Shchyrets; 16—Zubra; 17—Lug; 18—Svirzh; 19—GnylaLypa; 20—ZolotaLypa; 21—Strypa; 22—Seret; 23—Zbruch; 24—Zhvanchyk; 25—Smotrych; 26—Yagorlyk. Blue line means the Dniester basin limits, red line means the sate boundaries.
Fishes 08 00427 g001
Fishes 08 00427 g002
Figure 2. Scheme of racer goby measurements (modified from [48]).
Figure 2. Scheme of racer goby measurements (modified from [48]).
Fishes 08 00427 g002
Fishes 08 00427 g003
Figure 3. Size and age distribution of B. gymnotrachelus in the mountainous rivers of the Carpathian region (a) and the plain rivers of the Eastern plains (b).
Figure 3. Size and age distribution of B. gymnotrachelus in the mountainous rivers of the Carpathian region (a) and the plain rivers of the Eastern plains (b).
Fishes 08 00427 g003
Fishes 08 00427 g004
Figure 4. Sexual distribution of B. gymnotrachelus in the mountainous rivers of the Carpathian region (a) and the plain rivers of the Eastern plains (b).
Figure 4. Sexual distribution of B. gymnotrachelus in the mountainous rivers of the Carpathian region (a) and the plain rivers of the Eastern plains (b).
Fishes 08 00427 g004
Fishes 08 00427 g005
Figure 5. Portion (%) of food items in the total stomach content of B. gymnotrachelus in mountainous rivers (Strviazh, Syvka, andLimnytsia) and plain rivers (Seret).
Figure 5. Portion (%) of food items in the total stomach content of B. gymnotrachelus in mountainous rivers (Strviazh, Syvka, andLimnytsia) and plain rivers (Seret).
Fishes 08 00427 g005
Fishes 08 00427 g006
Figure 6. Occurrence frequency (%) of food items in B. gymnotrachelus feeding in the mountainous rivers (Strvyazh, Syvka, and Limnytsia) and plain rivers (Seret).
Figure 6. Occurrence frequency (%) of food items in B. gymnotrachelus feeding in the mountainous rivers (Strvyazh, Syvka, and Limnytsia) and plain rivers (Seret).
Fishes 08 00427 g006
Fishes 08 00427 g007
Figure 7. Linear regression applied on B. gymnotrachelus body size relative to flow velocity (a) and pebble portion (%) in bottom substrates (b).
Figure 7. Linear regression applied on B. gymnotrachelus body size relative to flow velocity (a) and pebble portion (%) in bottom substrates (b).
Fishes 08 00427 g007
Fishes 08 00427 g008
Figure 8. Distribution of B. gymnotrachelus samples viaa set of morphometric traits and environmental conditions. Samples from the rivers: 1—Strviazh; 2—Limnytsia; 3—Svicha; 4—Smotrych; 5—Seret; 6—Dniester; 7—Yagorlyk.
Figure 8. Distribution of B. gymnotrachelus samples viaa set of morphometric traits and environmental conditions. Samples from the rivers: 1—Strviazh; 2—Limnytsia; 3—Svicha; 4—Smotrych; 5—Seret; 6—Dniester; 7—Yagorlyk.
Fishes 08 00427 g008
Fishes 08 00427 g009
Figure 9. Effect of environmental factors on the differentiation of B. gymnotrachelus by morphological parameters: 1—combined sample of mountainous rivers (Strviazh, Svicha, and Limnytsia); 2—combined sample of plain rivers (Dniester middle section, Seret, Smotrych, andYagorlyk); V—velocity; Veg—vegetation; S—sand; Si—silt; G—gravel; P—pebbles.
Figure 9. Effect of environmental factors on the differentiation of B. gymnotrachelus by morphological parameters: 1—combined sample of mountainous rivers (Strviazh, Svicha, and Limnytsia); 2—combined sample of plain rivers (Dniester middle section, Seret, Smotrych, andYagorlyk); V—velocity; Veg—vegetation; S—sand; Si—silt; G—gravel; P—pebbles.
Fishes 08 00427 g009
Table 1. Chronology of the first records of B. gymnotrachelus in the Dniester tributaries above 300 m a.s.l.
Table 1. Chronology of the first records of B. gymnotrachelus in the Dniester tributaries above 300 m a.s.l.
SiteRivern of SpecimensDateHeight m a.s.l.
Zarichchia village
49°30′54.3″ N 22°47′16.7″ E		Strviazh512 June 2000352
Rozgirche village
49°06′56.6″ N 23°40′08.9″ E		Stryi212 July 2001320
Koroscenko village (Poland)
49°28′40″ N, 22°41′15″ E		Strviazh223 July2003395
Broshniv-Ocada village
49°00′16.7″ N 24°11′53.8″ E		Syvka32004330
Vygodivka village
48°59′57.9″ N 23°53′27.0″ E		Svicha22004393
Berlogy village
48°58′13.8″ N 24°13′59.5″ E		Limnytsia42005329
Mezhybrody village
49°06′36.8″ N 23°36′18.6″ E		Stryi22006374
Dubyna village
49°03′25.1″ N 23°32′51.0″ E		Opir22009417
Nadvirna town
48°39′05.7″ N 24°34′48.3″ E		Bystrytsia Nadvirnianska12009406
Table 2. Density of B. gymnotrachelus (per 100 m2) and its biological characteristics in the mountainous and plain rivers of the Dniester basin (2019–2022).
Table 2. Density of B. gymnotrachelus (per 100 m2) and its biological characteristics in the mountainous and plain rivers of the Dniester basin (2019–2022).
Density, ind/100 m2Body Length, cm, M ± mBody Weight, g, M ± mSexes Ratio,
♂:♀		n of Specimens
Mountainous rivers—Carpathian ecoregion
Strviazh 0.84.4 ± 0.351.7 ± 0.431:34
Svicha1.44.5 ± 0.111.7 ± 0.146:17
Limnytsia1.24.1 ± 0.491.5 ± 0.59only ♀6
Plain rivers—Eastern plain ecoregion
Dniester3.85.6 ± 0.344.0 ± 0.801:119
Seret4.65.6 ± 0.203.9 ± 0441:223
Smotrych3.04.1 ± 0.331.5 ± 0.381:26
Yagorlyk1.85.9 ± 0.194.1 ± 0.46only ♀9
Table 3. The main hydromorphological characteristics of B. gymnotrachelus habitats.
Table 3. The main hydromorphological characteristics of B. gymnotrachelus habitats.
RiverRiver TypeMean Flow Velocity, m/sProjective Cover of Higher Vegetation, %Sediments Composition, %
SiltSandGravelPebbles
Strviazh mountainous1.70002575
Svichamountainous0.83554050
Limnytsiamountainous1.55353260
Dniesterplain 0.773020437
Seretplain0.6153540250
Smotrychplain0.6103040255
Yagorlykplain0.425504550
Table 4. Morphological characteristics of B. gymnotrachelus samples from mountainous and plain rivers, M ± m. Confident values are given in bold.
Table 4. Morphological characteristics of B. gymnotrachelus samples from mountainous and plain rivers, M ± m. Confident values are given in bold.
TraitsMountainous Rivers,
n = 14		Plain Rivers,
n = 34		Student’s t-TestConfidence Level, p
l, mm42.79 ± 1.3251.59 ± 1.12−4.52>0.0001
l cor71.04 ± 0.3771.95 ± 0.23−2.120.0393
pl16.33 ± 0.5017.36 ± 0.30−1.830.0738
lC21.42 ± 0.2920.83 ± 0.201.600.1154
H15.58 ± 0.3017.31 ± 0.22−4.46>0.0001
iH13.06 ± 0.3414.90 ± 0.20−4.93>0.0001
h7.62 ± 0.188.47 ± 0.14−3.520.0010
ih3.14 ± 0.203.53 ± 0.12−1.720.0915
aD33.59 ± 0.2333.37 ± 0.200.630.5329
aA53.98 ± 0.4057.82 ± 0.31−6.94>0.0001
hD112.79 ± 0.4313.40 ± 0.28−1.180.2434
lD235.53 ± 0.5434.91 ± 0.291.090.2814
hD213.69 ± 0.4913.75 ± 0.21−0.140.8899
lP21.95 ± 0.6322.09 ± 0.26−0.250.8038
lV20.07 ± 0.3720.48 ± 0.21−1.010.32
lA28.78 ± 0.4928.00 ± 0.391.120.2666
lr26.52 ± 0.8131.86 ± 0.50−5.68>0.0001
po49.48 ± 0.9648.69 ± 0.590.720.4757
do29.01 ± 0.6227.13 ± 0.392.580.0130
oi9.14 ± 0.7610.11 ± 0.41−1.210.2309
hc58.31 ± 0.7369.50 ± 0.66−9.89>0.0001
ic71.91 ± 1.7981.14 ± 0.88−5.18>0.0001
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

Afanasyev, S.; Hupalo, O.; Tymoshenko, N.; Lietytska, O.; Roman, A.; Manturova, O.; Bănăduc, D. Morphological and Trophic Features of the Invasive Babka gymnotrachelus (Gobiidae) in the Plain and Mountainous Ecosystems of the Dniester Basin: Spatiotemporal Expansion and Possible Threats to Native Fishes. Fishes 2023, 8, 427. https://doi.org/10.3390/fishes8090427

AMA Style

Afanasyev S, Hupalo O, Tymoshenko N, Lietytska O, Roman A, Manturova O, Bănăduc D. Morphological and Trophic Features of the Invasive Babka gymnotrachelus (Gobiidae) in the Plain and Mountainous Ecosystems of the Dniester Basin: Spatiotemporal Expansion and Possible Threats to Native Fishes. Fishes. 2023; 8(9):427. https://doi.org/10.3390/fishes8090427

Chicago/Turabian Style

Afanasyev, Sergey, Olena Hupalo, Nataliia Tymoshenko, Olena Lietytska, Anatolii Roman, Oksana Manturova, and Doru Bănăduc. 2023. "Morphological and Trophic Features of the Invasive Babka gymnotrachelus (Gobiidae) in the Plain and Mountainous Ecosystems of the Dniester Basin: Spatiotemporal Expansion and Possible Threats to Native Fishes" Fishes 8, no. 9: 427. https://doi.org/10.3390/fishes8090427

APA Style

Afanasyev, S., Hupalo, O., Tymoshenko, N., Lietytska, O., Roman, A., Manturova, O., & Bănăduc, D. (2023). Morphological and Trophic Features of the Invasive Babka gymnotrachelus (Gobiidae) in the Plain and Mountainous Ecosystems of the Dniester Basin: Spatiotemporal Expansion and Possible Threats to Native Fishes. Fishes, 8(9), 427. https://doi.org/10.3390/fishes8090427

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop