Cited by 188Marine Ecology and Invasive SpeciesFish Ecology and Management StudiesMarine and fisheries research

Evaluating the potential efficacy of invasive lionfish (Pterois volitans) removals

Open access
Barbour, Andrew B., Allen, Michael S., Frazer, Thomas K., Sherman, Krista D.·2011·PLoS ONE

Abstract

The lionfish, Pterois volitans (Linnaeus) and Pterois miles (Bennett), invasion of the Western Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean Sea and Gulf of Mexico has the potential to alter aquatic communities and represents a legitimate ecological concern. Several local removal programs have been initiated to control this invasion, but it is not known whether removal efforts can substantially reduce lionfish numbers to ameliorate these concerns. We used an age-structured population model to evaluate the potential efficacy of lionfish removal programs and identified critical data gaps for future studies. We used high and low estimates for uncertain parameters including: length at 50% vulnerability to harvest (L(vul)), instantaneous natural mortality (M), and the Goodyear compensation ratio (CR). The model predicted an annual exploitation rate between 35 and 65% would be required to cause recruitment overfishing on lionfish populations for our baseline parameter estimates for M and CR (0.5 and 15). Lionfish quickly recovered from high removal rates, reaching 90% of unfished biomass six years after a 50-year simulated removal program. Quantifying lionfish natural mortality and the size-selective vulnerability to harvest are the most important knowledge gaps for future research. We suggest complete eradication of lionfish through fishing is unlikely, and substantial reduction of adult abundance will require a long-term commitment and may be feasible only in small, localized areas where annual exploitation can be intense over multiple consecutive years.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0019666

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • To date, two studies have used modeling to predict responses of lionfish populations to removals.

    “To date, two studies have used modeling to predict responses of lionfish populations to removals (Barbour et al., 2011;Morris et al., 2011a).”

    From Reproductive biology of invasive lionfish (Pterois spp.) (2015) · cites this paper as Barbour et al., 2011

  • Both of these studies relied on parameters that were not derived from data on lionfish reproduction in the Caribbean.

    “Both of these studies relied on parameters that were not derived from data on lionfish reproduction in the Caribbean.”

    From Reproductive biology of invasive lionfish (Pterois spp.) (2015) · cites this paper as Barbour et al., 2011

  • The majority of lionfish control efforts to date have focused on manual removal.

    “The majority of lionfish control efforts to date have focused on manual removal27”
  • Lionfish are not effectively targeted by standard fishing gears such as fish traps or hook-and-line.

    “lionfish are not effectively targeted by standard fishing gears such as fish traps or hook-and line.”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [29]Potts JC Berrane D Morris JA Jr in press Age and growth of lionfish from the Western North Atlantic. Proceedings of the 63rd Gulf Caribbean Fisheries Institute In press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Barbour, A. B., Allen, M. S., Frazer, T. K., & Sherman, K. D.
Affiliations
University of Florida (US)
Corresponding author
Barbour, Andrew B.
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2011-05-10
Volume
6
Issue
5
Pages
e19666
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2012613333
Cited by
188
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 7
FWCI
13.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (0802270)
  • University of Florida
  • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
  • National Marine Fisheries Service
  • National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science
  • Southeast Fisheries Science Center
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Marine Ecology and Invasive Species
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Fish Ecology and Management Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Marine and fisheries research
Keywords
invasive lionfish, Pterois volitans, Pterois miles, invasive species management, recruitment overfishing, exploitation rate, natural mortality, population recovery, age-structured population model, western Atlantic, Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico
MeSH terms
Aging, Animals, Body Weight, Computer Simulation, Conservation of Natural Resources, Female, Male, Models, Biological, North Carolina, Perciformes, Introduced Species

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