https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7880-1241
Abstract
We present the first field observations of caddisfly (Trichoptera) larvae using an invasive alien aquatic plant, Crassula helmsii (Kirk) Cockayne, in case construction. In samples from invaded ponds across the UK and Belgium, we have recorded the presence of C. helmsii fragments in cases from Limnephilus lunatus Curtis, Citation1834, Limnephilus marmoratus Curtis, Citation1834, Limnephilus flavicornis (Fabricius, Citation1787) (Limnephilidae), Triaenodes bicolor (Curtis, Citation1834), and Oecetis furva (Rambur, Citation1842) (Leptoceridae). Fragmentation of C. helmsii in case creation and augmentation may produce vegetative propagules, thus facilitating further dispersal of this invasive macrophyte.
Introduction
Invasive alien aquatic plants are proliferating globally, with far-reaching (and potentially detrimental) consequences for the structure and functioning of recipient ecosystems (Gallardo Clavero, Sánchez, and Vilà Citation2016; Lobato‑de Magalhães et al. Citation2023; Strayer Citation2010; Tasker, Foggo, and Bilton Citation2022). The dispersal and establishment of alien macrophyte species is therefore of great interest to researchers and conservation practitioners. Propagule pressure, including from vegetative fragments, is considered a key factor in the spread of such plants (Lobato‑de Magalhães et al. Citation2023; Louback-Franco, Dainez-Filho, Souza, and Thomaz Citation2020).
Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera) are widespread and frequently abundant members of the benthic fauna of freshwaters worldwide (de Moor and Ivanov Citation2007). Many caddisfly species create protective cases from plant fragments, mollusc shells and/or mineral grains, adhered using silk secreted from labial glands. These are made recurrently through each of the five larval instars (Hanna Citation2009). Crane et al. (Citation2021) hypothesised that the creation and augmentation of caddis cases could facilitate the dispersal of vegetatively propagating alien macrophytes, and demonstrated this potential in the laboratory by assessing the fragmentation of Elodea canadensis Michx., Elodea nuttallii (Planch.) H. St. John, Crassula helmsii (Kirk, Citation1899) Cockayne and Lagarosiphon major (Ridl.) Moss during case-building by Limnephilus lunatus Curtis, Citation1834. Here, we present the first field observations of the invasive alien macrophyte New Zealand pygmyweed (Crassula helmsii – see Smith and Buckley Citation2020) used in case construction by caddisfly larvae.
Material and methods
As part of a field study assessing the impacts of Crassula helmsii on benthic macroinvertebrates (unpublished), we collected samples from waterbodies invaded by C. helmsii across NW Europe. Samples were taken from dense (>50% cover) C. helmsii stands using an FBA net (20 × 25 cm, 1 mm mesh). Samples were transferred to 1 l pots and immediately fixed in either 70% industrial denatured alcohol or 70% propylene glycol.
Observations
In samples from invaded ponds across the United Kingdom (UK) and Belgium, case-building caddisfly larvae frequently used fragments of Crassula helmsii for case-building. From invaded ponds in Cornwall, Norfolk and Sussex, UK, we have recorded the presence of C. helmsii fragments in cases from Limnephilus lunatus, Limnephilus marmoratus Curtis, Citation1834, Limnephilus flavicornis (Fabricius, Citation1787) (Limnephilidae) and Triaenodes bicolor (Curtis, Citation1834) (Leptoceridae). In Antwerp Province, Belgium, C. helmsii fragments were also observed in the case of Oecetis furva (Rambur, Citation1842) (Leptoceridae). Crassula helmsii material in the cases we examined varied according to caddisfly species. Limnephilus marmoratus and L. flavicornis cases consisted of stem fragments, whilst L. lunatus and T. bicolor tended to use leaves and O. furva was observed using a mixture of leaf and stem fragments ().
Figure 1. Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera) with cases containing Crassula helmsii (Kirk), Citation1899, Cockayne fragments: (a) Limnephilus flavicornis (Fabricius, Citation1787), with case composed of stem fragments; (b) Limnephilus lunatus Curtis, Citation1834, with case composed of leaves; (c) Oecetis furva (Rambur, Citation1842), with case comprising a mixture of leaves and stem fragments; (d) Triaenodes bicolor (Curtis, Citation1834), with case containing leaves. Scale bars = 2 cm.
Crassula helmsii has been demonstrated to readily reproduce from single-node stem fragments (Hussner Citation2009), so their production during case-building is likely to represent a source of viable propagules, as suggested by Crane et al.’s (Citation2021) laboratory studies. Even in caddisfly species using leaves, which for C. helmsii are not viable propagules (Hussner Citation2009), case-building is likely to also generate ‘waste’ fragments which may themselves be viable. Material in cases tended to be green upon collection, suggesting that the caddisfly larvae had generated these fragments through shredding rather than utilising material already broken down by other processes. In sites where we observed the use of C. helmsii fragments in case-building, native aquatic macrophytes were often abundant, but caddisfly larvae did not appear to select these preferentially. Indeed, the recalcitrant (degradation-resistant) nature of C. helmsii detritus relative to many native macrophytes (Tasker, personal observations) may promote preferential use of C. helmsii fragments as a source of material for case-building.
Conclusion
Our observations provide the first field evidence that the creation and augmentation of caddisfly cases may result in the fragmentation of the invasive alien macrophyte Crassula helmsii, as demonstrated in the laboratory by Crane et al. (Citation2021). Given the near-ubiquity of caddisflies in freshwater systems worldwide, this behaviour could significantly increase the production of C. helmsii propagules, and facilitate its further dispersal and establishment. The interactions between caddisfly larvae and C. helmsii reported here may also apply to other invasive alien aquatic plants.
Acknowledgements
We thank Kevin Scheers for his assistance with sampling in Belgium.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Additional information
Funding
References
- Crane, K., Cuthbert, R. N., Ricciardi, A., Kregting, L., Coughlan, N. E., MacIsaac, H. J., Reid, N., and Dick, J. T. A. (2021), ‘Gimme Shelter: Differential Utilisation and Propagule Creation of Invasive Macrophytes by Native Caddisfly Larvae’, Biological Invasions, 23, 95–109.
- Curtis, J. (1834), ‘Descriptions of Some Nondescript British Species of May-Flies of Anglers’, The London and Edinburgh Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science, 4, 120–125.
- de Moor, F.C., and Ivanov, V.D. (2007), ‘Global Diversity of Caddisflies (Trichoptera: Insecta) in freshwater,’ in Freshwater Animal Diversity Assessment, eds. E. V. Balian, C. Lévêque, H. Segers and K. Martens, Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 393–407.
- Fabricius, J.C. (1787), Mantissa insectorum sistens eorum species nuper detectas adiectis characteribus genericis, differentiis specificis, emendationibus, observationibus, Copenhagen: Proft.
- Gallardo, B., Clavero, M., Sánchez, M. I., and Vilà, M. (2016), ‘Global Ecological Impacts of Invasive Species in Aquatic Ecosystems’, Global Change Biology, 22, 151–163.
- Hanna, H. M. (2009), ‘The Growth of Larvae and Their Cases and the Life Cycles of Five Species of Caddis Flies (Trichoptera)’, Proceedings of the Royal Entomological Society of London. Series A, General Entomology, Ser A, 34, 121–129.
- Hussner, A. (2009), ‘Growth and Photosynthesis of Four Invasive Aquatic Plant Species in Europe’, Weed Research, 49, 506–515.
- Kirk, T. (1899), The Students’ Flora of New Zealand and the Outlying Islands, Wellington: John Mackay.
- Lobato‑de Magalhães, T., Murphy, K., Efremov, A., Davidson, T. A., Molina-Navarro, E., Wood, K. A., Tapia-Grimaldo, J., Hofstra, D., Fu, H., and Ortegón-Aznar, I. (2023), ‘How on Earth Did That Get There? Natural and Human Vectors of Aquatic Macrophyte Global Distribution’, Hydrobiologia, 850, 1515–1542.
- Louback-Franco, N., Dainez-Filho, M. S., Souza, D. C., and Thomaz, S. M. (2020), ‘A Native Species Does Not Prevent the Colonization Success of an Introduced Submerged Macrophyte, Even at Low Propagule Pressure’, Hydrobiologia, 847, 1619–1629.
- Rambur, P. (1842), Histoire naturelle des insectes: Neuroptera, Paris: Librairie Encyclopédique de Roret.
- Smith, T., and Buckley, P. (2020), ‘Biological Flora of the British Isles: Crassula Helmsii’, Journal of Ecology, 108, 797–813.
- Strayer, D. L. (2010), ‘Alien Species in Fresh Waters: Ecological Effects, Interactions with Other Stressors, and Prospects for the Future’, Freshwater Biology, 55, 152–174.
- Tasker, S. J. L., Foggo, A., and Bilton, D. T. (2022), ‘Quantifying the Ecological Impacts of Alien Aquatic Macrophytes: A Global Meta-Analysis of Effects on Fish, Macroinvertebrate and Macrophyte Assemblages’, Freshwater Biology, 67, 1847–1860.