Description
Other Taxonomic Groupings - Cultivated varieties of Cyprinus carpio, with a few large scales are called 'mirror carp'; those with no scales are 'leather carp'; 'normal' fishes are called 'scale carp. All three varieties were included in early shipments from Germany (Cole 1905).
Taxonomy
| Kingdom | Phylum | Class | Order | Family | Genus |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Animalia | Chordata | Osteichthyes | Cypriniformes | Cyprinidae | Cyprinus |
Synonyms
Invasion History
Chesapeake Bay Status
| First Record | Population | Range | Introduction | Residency | Source Region | Native Region | Vectors |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1893 | Established | Stable | Introduced | Regular Resident | Europe | East Asia | Fisheries(Fisheries Intentional) |
History of Spread
Cyprinus carpio (Common Carp) are native to Eastern Asia, and probably ranged west to the Danube basin, from which they were probably transplanted to western Europe, beginning in Roman times, and reaching Britain by the 17th century (Lever 1996). The date and location of the first introduction to North America is somewhat disputed. Dekay in 1842 (cited by Courtenay et al. 1984 and by Lever 1996) described the importation of six or seven dozen carp in 1831-1832 and their release into ponds adjacent to the Hudson, where floods washed them into the main river. Citing the absence of specimens in New York markets in the 1870s, Cole (1905) questioned the identity of these fishes, suggesting that they may have been Carassius auratus-Cyprinus carpio (Goldfish- Common Carp) hybrids. However, most authors cite the 1831 date (Courtenay et al. 1984; Lever 1996) as the first introduction of C. carpio to North America). A separate introduction to the West Coast of North America was made in 1872 in CA by private individuals (Courtenay et al. 1984; Dill and Cordone 1997).
However, the major introduction of Cyprinus carpio to the United States consisted of fish imported from Germany in 1877, to Druid Hill Park, Baltimore, by the United States Fish Commission (USFC). Three hundred and forty-five fish were stocked in USFC rearing ponds. In 1878, some of the fish reared at Baltimore were transferred to Washington. Additional imports were made in 1879 and 1882. Fish from these stocks were introduced to VA by the Virginia Fish Commision in 1880 (Cole 1905; Hildebrand and Schroeder 1928; Jenkins and Burkhead 1993). USFC records indicate limited shipping of reared C. carpio in 1880-81 (MacDonald 1884; Smiley 1884b), but massive exports in 1882, 260,000 carp were sent to 298 of 301 congressional districts, as well as the Hawaiian Islands (MacDonald 1884). Most of the carp were intended for culture by private individuals, but accidental releases were very frequent. Between 1879 and 1896 the number of C.carpio annually distributed by the USFC varied between 12,265 and 348,784. The USFC stopped distributing Cyprinus carpio in 1896. By 1883, this fish was being caught by fishermen on the Great Lakes and the Mississippi River, and had been stocked in the Sacramento and Columbia Rivers on the West Coast (Cohen and Carlton 1995; Cole 1904).
Cyprinus carpio were initially imported with high expectations as an easily cultured food fish, which because of its herbivorus habits, and ability to thrive in conditions not suitable for other fishes, was expected to have little impact on native fishes (Baird 1880; Cole 1905). By the 1890's C. carpio had become widely distributed in the eastern United States and were widely held accountable for the decline of many native fish populations (Cole 1905) (see 'Ecological impacts'.) This fish has been reported fro , and is probably established in, every state except AK, and is probably established in all of them (Fuller et al. 1999).
Chesapeake Bay records- In 1882, 33,164 fish were distributed to DC, MD, VA, and PA combined. Batches of 20-870 C. carpio were released in 21 MD counties (MacDonald 1884). Dates of introduction and subsequent early records are listed below:
James River- Cyprinus carpio were shipped to congressional districts in the watershed in 1882 (MacDonald 1884). They were apparently not common by 1950 in the upper (nontidal) river (Raney 1950), but were 'fished commercially in both the Chickahominy and James rivers' (Raney and Massman 1953).
York River- Cyprinus carpio were shipped to congressional districts in the watershed in 1882 (MacDonald 1884). They were 'occasionally taken' in haul seines in the tidal Pamunkey (Raney and Massmann 1953).
Rappahannock River - Cyprinus carpio were shipped to congressional districts in the watershed in 1882 (MacDonald 1884). They were apparently not abundant in seine hauls in the tidal Rappahannock (Massmann et al. 1952).
Potomac River- Cyprinus carpio were transferred from the ponds in Baltimore and reared in ponds near the Washington Monument in 1879. By 1898 C. carpio were abundant in the river near Washington DC (Smith and Bean 1898). They are abundant in the mainstem of the river to the Wicomico River, and downstream in tributaries to Breton Bay (Lippson et al. 1979).
Susquehanna River- Cyprinus carpio were shipped to congressional districts in the watershed in 1882 (MacDonald 1884).
Upper Bay and Drainages - In 1882, Harford, Baltimore, Anne Arundel Counties, received 120-370 C. carpio each (MacDonald 1884. At Battery Island, (mouth of Gunpowder River) MD in 1893, 'It was noted that carp were very abundant in the waters and several reports of large numbers were brought in. On May 31, there was a report of 2,700 lbs reported in a single haul of a seine' (Worth 1895). By 1912-1917, they were abundant from Susquehanna River to the Rhode River (Fowler 1912; Radcliffe and Welsh 1917; Fowler 1917).
Eastern Shore Tributaries - In 1882; Caroline, Cecil, Kent; Dorchester, Talbot, Wicomico and Worcester Counties recieved 20-100 C. carpio each (MacDonald 1884). In recent Maryland Department of Natural Resources surveys, they were collected in the Elk River drainage (Boward et al. 1997d) but not in other Eastern Shore river systems.
Delaware River - In 1882, C. carpio were widely shipped to fish-ponds in PA and DE (MacDonald 1884; Raasch and Altemus 1991). By 1911, they were abundantin DE (Fowler 1911).
Cyprinus carpio are now found on every continent except Antarctica (Jones et al. 1978), and have been reported from 119 countries (Food and Agriculture Organization 1998).
History References - Baird 1880; Boward et al. 1997d; Cole 1905; Courtenay et al. 1984; Dill and Cordone 1997; Food and Agriculture Organization 1998; Fowler 1911; Fowler 1912; Fowler 1917; Fowler 1919; Fuller et al. 1999; Hildebrand and Schroeder 1928; Jenkins and Burkhead 1993; Jones et al. 1978; Lippson et al. 1979; McDonald 1884; Massmann et al. 1952; Raasch and Altemus 1991; Radcliffe and Welsh 1917; Raney 1950; Raney and Massmann 1953; Smiley 1884b; Smith and Bean 1898
Invasion Comments
Ecology
Environmental Tolerances
| For Survival | For Reproduction | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Minimum | Maximum | Minimum | Maximum | |
| Temperature (ºC) | 0.7 | 35.7 | 14.0 | 28.0 |
| Salinity (‰) | 0.0 | 19.0 | 0.0 | 10.0 |
| Oxygen | hypoxic | |||
| pH | 5.5000000000 | |||
| Salinity Range | fresh-meso |
Age and Growth
| Male | Female | |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum Adult Size (mm) | 180.0 | 128.0 |
| Typical Adult Size (mm) | 350.0 | 450.0 |
| Maximum Adult Size (mm) | 508.0 | 1219.0 |
| Maximum Longevity (yrs) | 38.0 | 38.0 |
| Typical Longevity (yrs | 12.0 | 12.0 |
Reproduction
| Start | Peak | End | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reproductive Season | |||
| Typical Number of Young Per Reproductive Event |
|||
| Sexuality Mode(s) | |||
| Mode(s) of Asexual Reproduction |
|||
| Fertilization Type(s) | |||
| More than One Reproduction Event per Year |
|||
| Reproductive Startegy | |||
| Egg/Seed Form |
Impacts
Economic Impacts in Chesapeake Bay
Cyprinus carpio (Common Carp) developed a bad reputation among Chesapeake Bay fishermen by the early 20th century, and was widely blamed for decline of freshwater fish stocks, although many overfishing, dams, pollution, etc. probably played a larger role (Hildebrand and Schroeder 1928). Aesthetic - Cyprinus carpio roils water and uproots vegetation, etc. At times, feeding trails of suspended sediment can be conspicuous in shallow water (Cole 1905; Crivelli 1983; Stevenson and Confer 1978). Fisheries - 'In the markets of Chesapeake Bay and elsewhere, it is considered an inferior food fish', but supported a small local fishery (Hildebrand and Schroeder 1928) and still does, appearing in local markets (Hines, personal observation). Cyprinus carpio is not highly regarded as a sport fish (Jenkins and Burkhead 1993). See 'Ecological impacts' for effects on native and introduced fish stocks. Habitat Change - See 'Ecological impacts'. References - Cole 1905; Crivelli 1983; Hildebrand and Schroeder 1928; Jenkins and Burkhead 1993; Stevenson and Confer 1978
Economic Impacts Outside of Chesapeake Bay
After high initial hopes of economic benefits as an aquaculture, sport, and commercial fish (Baird 1880; Creveling 1881), within twenty years Cyprinus carpio (Common Carp) acquired a strong negative reputation in the United States and were widely considered responsible for widespread fisheries declines (Cole 1905; Smith 1907). Effects on native fishes and habitat are hard to quantify, because the introduction took place at a time of widespread human-caused habitat degradation (Cole 1905; Hildebrand and Schroeder 1928). However, significant local fisheries did develop for them in the Missisippi Valley and elsewhere (Smith 1907; Hildebrand and Schroeder 1928; Mills et al. 1993). Cyprinus carpio are nonetheless generally considered a deleterious introduction (Courtenay et al. 1984; Taylor et al. 1984).
References - Baird 1880; Cole 1905; Courtenay et al. 1984; Creveling 1881; Hildebrand and Schroeder 1928; Mills et al. 1993; Smith 1907; Taylor et al. 1984
Ecological Impacts on Chesapeake Native Species
Within 20 years of their introduction, Cyprinus carpio (Common Carp) were widely considered to be having adverse effects on native fishes and fisheries (Cole 1905; Smith 1907). Hildebrand and Schroeder (1928) noted much of the observed decline of native fishes in Chesapeake Bay, which had been blamed on C. carpio, was actually due to human-caused habitat degradation; and was paralleled in marine waters, where no fish species were introduced. Adverse effects of C. carpio seem much greater in North American than in European waters (Crivelli 1983). Cyprinus carpio biomasses in American waters average 3X higher (frequently 10X) than in European waters, and the average weight of individuals is larger (~2X) in American waters. Possible reasons for this difference may include higher spring temperatures and less effective predator control in North America (Crivelli 1988).
The impacts of C. carpio introductions on aquatic ecosystems appear to be complex, since as benthically feeding omnivores, they can affect animal and plant populations through direct herbivory or predation, or indirectly through bioturbation and food-web effects. Consequently, the effects of early carp-removal experiments were difficult to interpret (Gerking 1950; Taylor et al. 1984). Controlled experiments in small ponds or pools (Gallo and Drenner 1994; King et al. 1997; Robertson et al. 1997) provide a means of elucidating some of these interactions.
Competition- The diet of C. carpio overlaps that of many native fishes to some extent, especially suckers and catfish, although C. carpio are much more herbivorous (Jenkins and Burkhead 1993; Taylor et al. 1984). The importance of competition with native fishes is unknown.
Predation - Cyprinus carpio were widely considered 'spawn-eaters', eating the eggs of other species such as largemouth bass, but little evidence was found for this (Cole 1905). Fish eggs are usually a rare component in C. carpio stomach contents (Cole 1905; Taylor et al. 1984). However C. carpio were found to be eating eggs of the endangered native Razorback Sucker (Xyrauchen texanus) in Lake Mead NV (Taylor et al. 1984). Cyprinus carpio eat a wide range of molluscs including gastropods and bivalves, but seem to select species with thin shells (Stein et al. 1975).
Herbivory- Cyprinus carpio consume vegetation directly and also uproot it in the course of digging for animal prey (Cole 1905; Stevenson and Confer 1978; Taylor et al. 1984). Removal and enclosure experiments indicate that C. carpio adversely affect vegetation, though the relative importance of herbivory, uprooting, and bioturbation are not known (Taylor et al. 1984). In the Camargue, France, C. carpio did not feed on living vegetation but did consume a high percentage of seeds (Crivelli 1988) In Chesapeake Bay, 'almost 5,000 ha of aquatics were eliminated by C. carpio in the late 1950's on the Susquehanna Flats' (Stevenson and Confer 1978).
Bioturbation- Cyprinus carpio are well-known for roiling the water and increasing turbidity (Cole 1905). The importance of this effect is hard to separate from C. carpio's more direct effects on vegetation (Taylor et al. 1984). Crivelli (1983) found that in the Camargue, France, the chief effect was uprooting and tearing of aquatic vegetation, and that this effect was strongly proportional to C. carpio biomass. So much of the turbidity in Chesapeake Bay is derived from terrigenous silt and detritus, and phytoplankton blooms that the role of C. carpio in turbidity is likely to be very local. However, in shallow inlets of the Chesapeake turbidity due to carp feeding can reduce Secchi disk depths to 7.5 cm (Stevenson and Confer 1978). Similar cases of C. carpio-induced turbidity were observed to be affecting growth of submersed vegetation in the Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge, Virginia Beach VA (Chamberlain 1948).
Aside from directly increasing turbidity through bioturbation, C. carpio can affect phytoplankton, periphyton, and growth indirectly through release of nutrients from sediments. High C. carpio biomass treatments in experiments in Australian billabongs had greater turbidity, phytoplankton biomass, rates of particle settlement, and higher sediment oxygen demand, but lower periphyton biomass. Mechanisms for these changes were not always clear, however, and sometimes appeared to differ among treatments (King et al. 1997; Robertson et al. 1990). Similar experiments in experimental ponds in TX showed that C. carpio reduced biomass of one plant species (Najas guadalupensis- Common Water-Nymph) and reduced diversity of submersed vegetation, but turbidity effects were influenced by the biomass of one introduced plant species (Myriophyllum spicatum- Eurasian Watermilfoil) (Gallo and Drenner 1994).
References - Cole 1905; Chamberlain 1948; Crivelli 1983; Gallo and Drenner 1994; Gerking 1950; King et al. 1997; Hildebrand and Schroeder 1928; Jenkins and Burkhead 1993; Robertson et al. 1997; Smith 1907; Stein et al. 1975; Stevenson and Confer 1978; Taylor et al. 1984F
Ecological Impacts on Other Chesapeake Non-Native Species
Predation- Cyprinus carpio (Common Carp) eat Corbicula fluminea (Asian Freshwater Clam) up to 14 mm size (Lake Fairfield; TX; McCrady 1990) and in a Yugoslav lake fed on Dreissena polymorpha (Zebra Mussels) at low rates (9.5 mussels/fish stomach). This bivalve was selected against because of its attached habits (Stein et al. 1975). However, much higher rates of predation were found on D. polymorpha in the Mississippi River (59 mussels/fish), with mussels 1.5-49.5 (mean 11.2) mm long being eaten (Tucker et al. 1996). Tucker et al. point out that C. carpio's known adverse impacts may offset any benefits from its feeding on D. polymorpha.
Herbivory- Cyprinus carpio eat and uproot introduced plant species such as Hydrilla verticillata (Hydrilla), Myriophyllum spicatum (Eurasian Watermilfoil), Egeria densa (Brazilian Waterweed), Potamogeton crispus (Curly Pondweed), and Najas minor (Eurasian Water-Nymph). Carp appeared to be controlling M. spicatum in some Chesapeake tributaries during the late 1950's-early 1960's outbreaks through feeding, uprooting, and bioturbation (Stevenson and Confer 1978). Hydrilla verticillata was the dominant item found in carp stomachs (Lake Fairfield; TX, McCrady 1990).
Bioturbation - Bioturbation by C. carpio has adverse effects on introduced as well as native plant species (Crivelli 1983; Stevenson and Confer 1978).
Hybridization - Cyprinus carpio is known to hybridize with Carassius auratus (Goldfish) (Cole 1905), especially in polluted areas (Page and Burr 1991).
References - Cole 1905; Crivelli 1983; McCrady 1990; Page and Burr 1991; Stein et al. 1975; Stevenson and Confer 1978; Tucker et al. 1996
References
Baird, Spencer F. (1880) Part IV. A. Inquiry into the decrease of food-fishes., In: (Eds.) Report of the Commissioner, United States Commission of Fish and Fisheries for 1878. , Washington, D.C.. Pp. 45-57Carlander, Kenneth D. (1969) Handbook of freshwater fishery biology. Vol. 1., In: (Eds.) . , Ames. Pp.
Chamberlain, E. B., Jr. (1948) Ecological factors influencing the growth and management of certain waterfowl food plants on Back Bay Nation Wildlife Refuge, Transactions of the North American Wildlife Conference 13: 347-355
Cole, Leon J. (1905) The German carp in the United States, In: (Eds.) Report of the Bureau of Fisheries for 1904, pp. 525-641. , Washington, D. C.. Pp.
Cope, Edward Drinker (1879) The Fishes of Pennsylvania, In: (Eds.) Report of the State Commisioners of Fisheries. , Harrisburg. Pp.
Courtenay, Walter R., Jr.; Hensley, Dannie A.; Taylor, Jeffrey; McCann, James A. (1984) Distribution of exotic fishes in the continental United States., In: Courtenay, Walter R., and Stauffer, Jay R.(Eds.) Distribution, Biology, and Management of Exotic Fishes. , Baltimore, MD. Pp.
Creveling, John P. (1881) Report of the State Commisioners of Fisheries., In: (Eds.) . , Harrisburg, PA. Pp.
Crivelli, Alain J. (1983) The destruction of aquatic vegetation by carp., Hydrobiologia 106: 37-41
Dill, William A.; Cordone, Almo J. (1997) History and status of introduced fishes in California, 1871-1996, California Department of Fish and Game Fish Bulletin 178: 1-414
Ernst, Carl H.; Wilgenbusch, James C.,; Morgan, Donald L.; Boucher, Timothy P.; Sommerfield, Mark (1995) Fishes of Fort Belvoir, Virginia, Maryland Naturalist 39: 1-60
1998-2012 Database on Introductions of Aquatic Species. Web address http://www.fao.org/fishery/introsp/search/en
Fowler, H. W. (1911) The fishes of Delaware, Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 63: 3-16
Fowler, H. W. (1912) Records of fishes for the middle Atlantic states and Virginia, Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 23: 157-164
Fowler, Henry W. (1917) Notes on fishes from New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Maryland, Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 69: 108-126
Fowler, Henry W. (1919) A list of the fishes of Pennsylvania, Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 32: 49-74
Fuller, Pam. L.; Nico, Leo; Williams, J. D. (1999) Nonindigenous fishes introduced into inland waters of the United States, , Bethesda MD. Pp.
Gallo, Kirsten, Drenner, Ray (1994) Ecological impacts between carp, macrophytes, and the water column, Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America 75: 73-74
Gerking, Shelby D. (1950) A carp removal experiment at Oliver Lake, Indiana, Investigations of Indiana Lakes and Streams 3: 373-388
Hildebrand, Samuel F.; Schroeder, William C. (1928) Fishes of Chesapeake Bay, Unites States Bureau of Bisheries Bulletin 53: 1-388
Jenkins, Robert E.; Burkhead, Noel M. (1993) Freshwater fishes of Virginia., , Bethesda, MD. Pp.
Jones, Philip W.; Martin, F. Douglas; Hardy, Jerry D., Jr. (1978) Development of fishes of the mid-Atlantic Bight. V. 1. Acipenseridae through Ictaluridae., In: (Eds.) . , Washington DC. Pp.
King, A. J.; Robertson, A. I.; Healey, M. R. (1997) Experimental manipulations of the biomass of introduced carp (Cyprinus carpio) in billabongs. I. Impacts on water column properties., Marine and Freshwater Research 48: 435-443
Korwin-Kossakowski, M. (1988) Larval development of Carp, Cyprinus carpio L. in acidified water, Journal of Fish Biology 32: 17-26
Lee, David S.; Gilbert, Carter R.; Hocutt, Charles H.; Jenkins, Robert E.; McAllister, Don E.; Stauffer, Jay R. (1980) Atlas of North American Freshwater Fishes, , Raleigh. Pp.
Lippson, Alice J.; Haire, Michael S.; Holland, A. Frederick; Jacobs, Fred; Jensen, Jorgen; Moran-Johnson, R. Lynn; Polgar, Tibor T.; Richkus, William (1979) Environmental Atlas of the Potomac Estuary, , Baltimore, MD. Pp.
Massmann, William H.; Ladd, Ernest C.; McCutcheon, Henry M. (1952) A biological survey of the Rappahannock River, Virginia, Virginia Fisheries Laboratory Special Scientific Report 6: 1-152
McCrady, Ellen Joy (1990) Interactions between the invasive freshwater clam, Corbicula fluminea, and its fish predators in Lake Fairfield, Texas, , Arlington, Texas. Pp.
McDonald, Marshall (1884) Report on the distribution of carp durng the season of 1882, Report of the Commissioner of Fish and Fisheries : 915-942
Mills, Edward L.; Leach, Joseph H.; Carlton, James T.; Secor, Carol L. (1993) Exotic species in the Great Lakes: a history of biotic crises and anthropogenic introductions., Journal of Great Lakes Research 19: 1-54
Musick, J. A.; Wiley, Martin L. (1972) Fishes of Chesapeake Bay and the adjacent coastal plain, Special Scientific Report, Virginia Institute of Marine Science 65: 175-212
Page, Lawrence M.; Burr, Brooks M. (1991) Freshwater Fishes., , Boston. Pp.
Raasch, Maynard S.; Altemus, Vaughn L., Sr. (1991) Delaware's freshwater and brackish water fishes: a popular account, , Wilmingotn, Delaware. Pp.
Radcliffe, Lewis; Welsh, W. W. (1917) Notes on a collection of fishes from the head of Chesapeake Bay, Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 30: 35-42
Raney, Edward C. (1950) Freshwater fishes., , Richmond. Pp. 151-194
Raney, Edward, C.; Massmann, William H. (1953) The fishes of the tidewater section of the Pamunkey River, Virginia, Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences 43: 424-432
Robertson, A. I.; Healey, M. R.; King, A. J. (1997) Experimental manipulations of the biomass of introduced carp (Cyprinus carpio) in billabongs. II. Impacts on benthic properties and processes, Marine and Freshwater Research 48: 445-454
Schwartz, Frank J. (1965) Natural salinity tolerances of some freshwater fishes, Underwater Naturalist 2: 13-15
Smiley, Charles W. (1884) Report on the distribution of carp to July 1, 1881, from young reared in 1879 and 1880,, , Washington, D.C.. Pp. 943-1008
Smith, Hugh M. (1907) Our fish immigrants, National Geographic 18: 385-400
Smith, Hugh M. (1907) The Fishes of North Carolina. Volume II, , Raleigh. Pp.
Smith, Hugh M.; Bean, Barton A. (1898) List of fishes known to inhabit the waters of the District of Columbia and vicinity., Bulletin of the U. S. Fish Commission 18: 179-187
Stein, R. A.; Kitchell, J. F.; Knezic, Borivoi (1975) Selective predation by carp (Cyprinus carpio) on benthic molluscs in Skadar Lake, Yugoslavia, Journal of Fish Biology 7: 391-399
Stevenson, J. Court; Confer, Nedra M. (1978) Summary of available information on Chesapeake Bay submersed vegetation, , Annapolis MD. Pp.
Taylor, Jeffrey; Courtenay, Walter R.; McCann, James A. (1984) Known impacts of exotic fishes in the continental United States., , Baltimore, MD. Pp. 323-373
Tucker, John K.; Cronin, Fredrick A.; Soergel, Dirk W. (1996) Predation on zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha) by common carp (Cyprinus carpio), Journal of Freshwater Ecology 10: 49-55
Wang, Johnson, C. S.; Kenehahan, Ronnie (1979) Fishes of the Delaware estuaries: a guide to the early life histories, , Towson MD. Pp.