Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 447

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Biogeographic barriers, connectivity and homogenization of freshwater faunas: it's a small world after all

RAHEL, FRANK J.·2007·Freshwater Biology

Abstract

Summary: 1. Historically, biogeographic barriers to the movement of aquatic organisms existed at multiple spatial scales and contributed to the development of unique regional faunas. At increasing spatial scales, these barriers consisted of waterfalls and cascades; catchment divides; major mountain ranges and oceans. This hierarchy of movement barriers produced increasingly distinct aquatic biotas at larger drainage units. 2. Humans have provided a variety of pathways by which aquatic species can circumvent historical biogeographic barriers. These include both authorised and unauthorised stocking, construction of canals and water conveyance systems, transport in ship ballast water, fishing and angling gear (including boats) transferred among water bodies and intentional release of ornamental and other captive species. 3. One consequence of human‐aided breaching of biogeographic barriers has been the spread of noxious species that have altered aquatic ecosystems and fisheries in ways that are undesirable to humans. 4. Another consequence of human‐aided breaching of biogeographic barriers has been the homogenization of aquatic biotas. Homogenization occurs when a few cosmopolitan species come to dominate communities at the expense of unique native species. Among aquatic organisms this phenomenon is best documented for fish faunas where a small set of species introduced for sport fishing, aquaculture, or ornamental purposes have become widespread throughout the world. 5. Slowing biotic homogenization will require slowing the rate at which species breach biogeographic barriers. This will involve implementing regulations that limit stocking opportunities; increasing the public's awareness about the consequences of releasing non‐native species and developing technological solutions that prevent movement of aquatic organisms or eliminate them before they become established. 6. River restoration can influence homogenization of aquatic biotas through two major mechanisms: by removing barriers to movement and by restoring natural habitat conditions. Removal of movement barriers may facilitate the spread of non‐native species and thus contribute to biotic homogenization. Restoration of natural flow regimes and habitat conditions may reduce biotic homogenization by favouring regional native species over cosmopolitan, non‐native species.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2427.2006.01708.x

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 53 references

Cited by

See all 447

Metadata

Authors
RAHEL, F. J.
Venue
Freshwater Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-03-02
Volume
52
Issue
4
Pages
696-710
ISSN
  • 0046-5070 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2427
OpenAlex
W2159701866
Cited by
447
References
53
FWCI
16.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Biogeographic barriers, connectivity and homogenization of freshwater faunas: it's a small world after all. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2427.2006.01708.x
The paper
RAHEL, F. J. (2007). Biogeographic barriers, connectivity and homogenization of freshwater faunas: it's a small world after all. Freshwater Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2427.2006.01708.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.