Cited by 176Marine Ecology and Invasive SpeciesFish Ecology and Management StudiesPhysiological and biochemical adaptations

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 6 of the 46 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Thermal tolerance and potential distribution of invasive lionfish (Pterois volitans/miles complex) on the east coast of the United States

Open access
Kimball, ME, Miller, JM, Whitfield, PE, Hare, JA·2004·Marine Ecology Progress Series

Abstract

MEPS Marine Ecology Progress Series Contact the journal Facebook Twitter RSS Mailing List Subscribe to our mailing list via Mailchimp HomeLatest VolumeAbout the JournalEditorsTheme Sections MEPS 283:269-278 (2004) - doi:10.3354/meps283269 Thermal tolerance and potential distribution of invasive lionfish (Pterois volitans/miles complex) on the east coast of the United States Matthew E. Kimball1,2,3, John M. Miller2, Paula E. Whitfield1, Jonathan A. Hare1,* 1Center for Coastal Fisheries and Habitat Research, NOAA Beaufort Laboratory, 101 Pivers Island Road, Beaufort, North Carolina 28516, USA 2Department of Zoology, Campus Box 7617, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695-7617, USA 3Present address: Rutgers University Marine Field Station, 800 c/o 132 Great Bay Boulevard, Tuckerton, New Jersey 08087-2004, USA *Corresponding author. Email: jon.hare@noaa.gov ABSTRACT: The occurrence of lionfish (Pterois volitans/miles) complex on the southeast United States shelf represents one of the first documented invasions of a Pacific marine fish species into the western Atlantic Ocean. Temperature has been proposed as a possible factor limiting the range of this introduction. To examine this hypothesis, temperature-tolerance studies were conducted following the chronic lethal minimum protocol, with death as the endpoint. Overall, the mean chronic lethal minimum was 10.0°C and mean temperature at feeding cessation was 16.1°C. Rate of temperature decrease and acclimation temperature did not have a significant effect on chronic lethal minimum or temperature at feeding cessation. When combined with mean February water temperatures, lionfish thermal tolerance data indicated that lionfish could overwinter on the southeast United States continental shelf, with a northern limit of Cape Hatteras and an inshore limit coincident with the mean 12°C isotherm, which equates to a 10°C minimum water temperature. The mean 12°C bottom isotherm also runs along the continental shelf break (200 m isobath), marking the offshore limit for lionfish on the southeast United States continental shelf. The current southern limit of the invasion is not bound by temperature, as lionfish could survive (but have not yet been reported) on the Florida coast south of Miami, throughout the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea, extending into the southern hemisphere. Possible reasons for the constrained southern limit may include planktonic transport mechanisms, patterns of juvenile and adult movements, and the initial lionfish introduction site. KEY WORDS: Marine introduction · Biological invasion · Lionfish · Pterois volitans · Pterois miles · Invasive species · Species range limits · Temperature tolerance Full text in pdf format PreviousNextExport citation RSS - Facebook - Tweet - linkedIn Cited by Published in MEPS Vol. 283. Online publication date: November 30, 2004 Print ISSN: 0171-8630; Online ISSN: 1616-1599 Copyright © 2004 Inter-Research.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

Chronic lethal minimum experiments indicate invasive lionfish can tolerate winter temperatures on the southeast US continental shelf, with an overall mean CLmin of 10.0°C and feeding cessation at 16.1°C. Combining these limits with February water temperatures predicts overwintering from Cape Hatteras southward, bounded inshore by the 12°C isotherm and offshore near the shelf break, while the southern limit is not temperature-bound.

Key findings

  • Overall mean chronic lethal minimum was 10.0°C (SD = 0.9), and mean temperature at feeding cessation was 16.1°C.
  • Rate of temperature decline had no significant effect on CLmin: means were 10.0°C at -3°C d⁻¹, 10.6°C at -2°C d⁻¹, and 9.7°C at -1°C d⁻¹; feeding cessation means were 18.0°C, 17.0°C, and 15.3°C, respectively.
  • Acclimation temperature had no significant effect on CLmin: means were 9.3°C at 25°C, 9.2°C at 20°C, and 9.3°C at 15°C acclimation; feeding cessation occurred at 14.0°C, 15.4°C, and 15.0°C.
  • Predicted potential range extends south from Cape Hatteras onto the Gulf of Mexico shelf, with the inshore limit coincident with the mean 12°C isotherm (equating to a 10°C minimum) and the offshore limit near the 200 m isobath; the current southern limit is not bound by temperature, as lionfish could survive south of Miami, throughout the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean, and into the southern hemisphere but have not been reported there.

Methods

  • Chronic lethal minimum protocol with death as endpoint; juvenile lionfish averaged 8.0 cm standard length (SD = 1.3), held at 35 salinity and 25°C before trials.
  • Three experiments: Expt 1 tested -1°C d⁻¹ decline (n = 10); Expt 2 tested -3, -2, and -1°C d⁻¹ (n = 6, 6, 3); Expt 3 tested acclimation to 15°C (n = 6), 20°C (n = 6), and 25°C (n = 3) before -1°C d⁻¹ decline.
  • ANOVA tested effects of decline rate and acclimation temperature on CLmin and feeding cessation; distribution was predicted by comparing experimental limits with NOAA CoastWatch February sea surface temperature composites (382 images, 1995–2003) and bottom-temperature climatology.

Limitations

  • The paper states that the predicted range is based on laboratory-derived CLmin; field minimum tolerable temperatures may be higher because of long-term bioenergetic costs of prolonged sublethal cold exposure and feeding cessation above the CLmin.
  • The paper states that the range prediction uses a 50-year average of bottom water temperature and a 9-year median of sea surface temperature, so interannual variability and long-term ocean temperature changes will shift thermally suitable habitat.
  • The paper states that the offshore limit cannot resolve whether depth or temperature is limiting, because the 12°C bottom isotherm coincides with the 200 m shelf break; evident limitations include small sample sizes in some treatments, use of juvenile fish only, and experiments conducted independent of species designation because of uncertainty over *Pterois volitans/miles* status.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3354/meps283269

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

6 of 46 cited sources checked · 1 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

Show all 86 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 20
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 22
40 of 40
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The mean 12°C February isotherm corresponds to a 10°C minimum water temperature.

    “When combined with mean February water temperatures, lionfish thermal tolerance data indicated that lionfish could overwinter on the southeast United States continental shelf, with a northern limit of Cape Hatteras and an inshore limit coincident with the mean 12°C isotherm, which equates to a 10°C minimum water temperature.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Laboratory chronic lethal minimum measured in juvenile lionfish predicts overwintering survival of wild lionfish populations.

    “When combined with mean February water temperatures, lionfish thermal tolerance data indicated that lionfish could overwinter on the southeast United States continental shelf, with a northern limit of Cape Hatteras and an inshore limit coincident with the mean 12°C isotherm, which equates to a 10°C minimum water temperature.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Juvenile lionfish purchased from a commercial vendor are representative of the invasive lionfish population on the southeast United States shelf.

    “Juvenile lionfish were purchased from a commercial vendor (Marine Center, Dallas, Texas) for all 3 experiments.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The laboratory-derived chronic lethal minimum is a valid proxy for the minimum tolerable temperature of lionfish in the field.

    “The potential range distribution reported here (Fig. 5) is based on the chronic lethal minimum of lionfish determined in the laboratory.”
    “In the field, minimum tolerable temperatures may be higher owing to long-term bioenergetic costs of prolonged exposure to low sublethal temperatures, and the effects of feeding cessation at temperatures higher than the chronic lethal minimum (e.g.Hurst & Conover 2002).”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The 50 yr average bottom water temperature and 9 yr median sea surface temperature are representative of the thermal environment for lionfish.

    “the range distribution predicted here was based on a 50 yr average of bottom water temperature and a 9 yr median of sea surface temperature.”
5 of 5

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?

Self-check

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

  • Feeding-cessation estimates are counted as ten instead of nine

    Minor

    The reported feeding-cessation sample sizes for the three acclimation groups are 3, 5 and 1, totaling 9 estimates, not 10.

    Reported 10 · recomputed 9

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 44 references

3 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–176 of 176

Metadata

Authors
Kimball, M., Miller, J., Whitfield, P., & Hare, J.
Affiliations
  • North Carolina State University (US)
  • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (US)
Corresponding author
Hare, JA
Venue
Marine Ecology Progress Series
Published
2004
Volume
283
Pages
269-278
ISSN
  • 0171-8630 (ISSN-L)
  • 1616-1599
OpenAlex
W2014953618
Cited by
176
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 2
FWCI
2.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Marine Ecology Progress Series (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • North Carolina State University
  • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
  • Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
  • National Marine Fisheries Service
  • National Ocean Service
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 › Ecology › Physiological and biochemical adaptations
Keywords
invasive species, lionfish, heat tolerance, range expansion, overwintering, species distribution, continental shelf, eastern United States, thermal acclimation, range limits, feeding cessation

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-20, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-20 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

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