Dikerogammarus villosus (killer shrimp)
- Summary of Invasiveness
- Taxonomic Tree
- Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
- Distribution Table
- History of Introduction and Spread
- Risk of Introduction
- Habitat List
- Biology and Ecology
- Water Tolerances
- Natural enemies
- Notes on Natural Enemies
- Means of Movement and Dispersal
- Pathway Causes
- Pathway Vectors
- Impact Summary
- Environmental Impact
- Threatened Species
- Risk and Impact Factors
- Detection and Inspection
- Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
- Prevention and Control
- Gaps in Knowledge/Research Needs
- Links to Websites
- Distribution Maps
Don't need the entire report?
Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.Generate report
PicturesTop of page
IdentityTop of page
Preferred Scientific Name
- Dikerogammarus villosus Sowinsky, 1894
Preferred Common Name
- killer shrimp
Other Scientific Names
- Dikerogammarus villosus bispinosus Martynov 1925
Summary of InvasivenessTop of page
D. villosus is a freshwater amphipod originating from the Ponto-Caspian region. Its range expansion began in the late twentieth century and was associated with re-opening of the shipping canal between the Danube River and Main River (Vaate et al., 2002). Large body size, extremely voracious predatory behaviour, high fecundity and wide environmental tolerance make this amphipod a very successful invader of European waters. Invasion of D. villosus often results in significant local reduction or even extinction of native amphipods and other macroinvertebrates on which it preys (reviewed in Haas et al., 2002; Grabowski et al., 2007). D. villosus is included on the list of the 100 most invasive exotic species of Europe (Devin and Beisel, 2009), and has been deemed the worst non-native invader of England and Wales's waterways by the Environment Agency (BBC, 2011b).
Taxonomic TreeTop of page
- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Metazoa
- Phylum: Arthropoda
- Subphylum: Crustacea
- Class: Malacostraca
- Subclass: Eumalacostraca
- Order: Amphipoda
- Suborder: Gammaridea
- Family: Gammaridae
- Genus: Dikerogammarus
- Species: Dikerogammarus villosus
Notes on Taxonomy and NomenclatureTop of page
Dikerogammarus villosus Sowinsky 1894 is a valid amphipod species. Martynov (1925) described Dikerogammarus bispinosus as a subspecies of D. villosus. However, a recent genetic study by Müller et al. (2002) demonstrated that these two taxa should be considered as separate species.
DescriptionTop of page
As with other gammarids, D. villosus has a typical laterally compressed, arched, and semi-transparent body (See Pictures). The maximum reported body length is 30 mm (Nesemann et al., 1995). The species demonstrates conspicuous pigmentation polymorphisms, with striped, spotted and uniform morphs. This polymorphism is not related to the moult cycle or the life cycle, and may rather serve as a mechanism allowing D. villosus to minimize the probability of being detected by predators on different substrata (Müller et al., 2002; Devin et al., 2004). The other prominent morphological features of the species include: large and powerful mandibles making D. villosus an effective predator (Mayer et al., 2008); long densely situated setae on the flagellum but not on other parts of antenna II; dorsal tubercles on urosome segments I and II with 3-5 spines (Eggers and Martens, 2001; See Pictures). Juvenile individuals resemble adults, but are much smaller in size. Their growth undergoes a number of moultings. Detailed descriptions of D. villosus morphology can be found in Carausu (1943), Eggers and Martens (2001) and Konopacka (2004).
DistributionTop of page
D. villosus is a recent invader of Central and Western Europe freshwater ecosystems. The amphipod is native to the lower reaches of the rivers discharging into the Black Sea and Caspian Sea (Dedju, 1967; Nesemann et al., 1995; Vaate et al., 2002). Between 1920 and 1980, D. villosus invaded the entire lower and middle sections of the Danube River and in 1994 it was recorded in the lower Rhine River in the Netherlands for the first time (Vaate and Klink, 1995). Further spread of the species occurred through the southern migration corridor, including the Danube River (Black Sea basin) and the Rhine River (North Sea basin) hydrologically connected through the Main-Danube canal (Vaate et al., 2002). D. villosus has now been documented in all major rivers of Western Europe (reviewed in Nesemann et al., 1995; Vaate et al., 2002; Jazdzewski and Konopacka, 2002; Bollache et al., 2004). In 2003, this amphipod was found in the Bug River in Poland (Konopacka, 2004), indicating its migration through the central European invasion corridor (Dnieper > Vistula > Oder > Elbe > Rhine). Currently, D. villosus continues its rapid spread throughout Europe and is considered as one of the most probable future amphipod invaders of the North American waters (Ricciardi and Rasmussen, 1998).
Distribution TableTop of page
The distribution in this summary table is based on all the information available. When several references are cited, they may give conflicting information on the status. Further details may be available for individual references in the Distribution Table Details section which can be selected by going to Generate Report.Last updated: 10 Jan 2020
|Continent/Country/Region||Distribution||Last Reported||Origin||First Reported||Invasive||Reference||Notes|
|Austria||Present||Introduced||Nesemann et al. (1995); Füreder and Pöckl (2007)|
|Belarus||Present, Widespread||2006||Introduced||Mastitsky and Makarevich (2007)||Dnieper River near Kholmech village, and near Staiki village|
|Belgium||Present||1998||Introduced||Invasive||Josens et al. (2005)||River Meuse|
|Bulgaria||Present||2006||Native||Grabowski and Pešic (2007)|
|Czechia||Present||Introduced||Berezina and Ďuriš (2008)||Elbe River near Hrensko, also near Loubi and Strekov, and Elbe River near Melnik and Vltava River in Prague, near the Charles and Manes bridges|
|France||Present||Introduced||Invasive||Devin et al. (2001); Bollache et al. (2004); Josens et al. (2005); Grabowski and Pešic (2007); CABI (Undated)|
|Germany||Present||Introduced||Invasive||Nesemann et al. (1995); Tittizer et al. (2000); Haas et al. (2002); Bernauer and Jansen (2006); Mayer et al. (2007)|
|Hungary||Present||Introduced||Muskó (1994); Nesemann et al. (1995); Vaate et al. (2002)|
|Italy||Present||Introduced||Invasive||Casellato et al. (2006); Casellato et al. (2008)|
|Moldova||Present||Native||Dedju (1967)||Kuchurganskiy Liman|
|Netherlands||Present||Introduced||Invasive||Bij de Vaate and Klink (1995); Josens et al. (2005)|
|Poland||Present||Introduced||Invasive||Konopacka (2004); Jazdzewski et al. (2005); Bącela et al. (2008); Gruszka and Woźniczka (2008); CABI (Undated)|
|Romania||Present||Native||Wattier et al. (2006)|
|Russia||Present||1967||Native||Dedju (1967)||Lower Don River|
|Serbia||Present||2001||Introduced||Invasive||Paunovic et al. (2007)||Danube River (river km 1429-925)|
|Slovakia||Present||1999||Introduced||Sporka (1999)||Danube River|
|Switzerland||Present||Introduced||Bollache (2004); Lods-Crozet and Reymond (2006)|
|Ukraine||Present||Introduced||Lubyanov (1957); Dedju (1967); Emelyanova (1982); Pligin and Emelyanova (1989); Emelyanova et al. (1999); Pligin (2005)|
|United Kingdom||Present, Few occurrences||Introduced||UK, BBC (2010); BBC (2011); BBC (2011a)||Cambridgeshire|
History of Introduction and SpreadTop of page
D. villosus is native to the lower reaches of the rivers discharging into the Black Sea and Caspian Sea (Dedju, 1967; Nesemann et al., 1995; Vaate et al., 2002). Its spread to Central and Western Europe initially occurred by active migration and transportation with boats and ships via the southern invasion corridor, which includes the Danube River (Black Sea Basin) and the Rhine River (North Sea Basin) connected through the Main-Danube Canal (Vaate et al., 2002). The first records of the species from the middle Danube in Hungary are dated 1920s to 1930s (Nesemann et al., 1995). In 1989, the species was recorded in the Austrian part of the Danube River, and three years later – in Germany near Straubing and Regensburg (Nesemann et al., 1995). By 1994, following the opening of the Main-Danube Canal, D. villosus invaded the rivers Main and Rhine (Vaate and Klink, 1995). The amphipod then very rapidly spread westwards colonizing the French rivers Moselle (1996), Saône (1997), Rhône (1998), Meuse (1998), Seine (2000), and eastwards through the Mittelland Canal to colonize the German rivers Weser (1998), Elbe (1999) and Oder (2000) (reviewed in Devin et al., 2001; Vaate et al., 2002; Jazdzewski and Konopacka, 2002; Bollache et al., 2004). By 2002, D. villosus had, through the River Oder, reached the brackish Szczecin Lagoon of the Baltic Sea in Poland (Gruszka and Wozniczka, 2008). In the early 2000s, D. villosus was found in a number of European lakes, including Lake Constance (2002), Germany (Mayer et al., 2007); Lake Geneva (2002), Lake Bienne (2005), Lake Zurich (2006), Switzerland (Lods-Crozet and Reymond, 2006); Lake Garda (2003), Italy (Casellato et al., 2006), and Lac du Bourget (2007), France (Grabowski et al., 2007).
In 2003, D. villosus was also recorded in the Bug River in Poland (Konopacka, 2004), indicating on its migration through the central European invasion corridor (Dnieper > Vistula > Oder > Elbe > Rhine). This is proved by the recent (2006) collections of the amphipod in the Belarusian section of the Dnieper River (Mastitsky and Makarevich, 2007).
New records of D. villosus in continental Europe regularly occur. The species has now been found in the UK (BBC, 2010; 2011a, b) and is also expected to arrive soon in North America (Ricciardi and Rasmussen, 1998).
IntroductionsTop of page
|Introduced to||Introduced from||Year||Reason||Introduced by||Established in wild through||References||Notes|
|Natural reproduction||Continuous restocking|
|Austria||Hungary||1992||Interconnected waterways (pathway cause)||Yes||Nesemann et al. (1995)|
|Belarus||Ukraine||2000-2005||Interconnected waterways (pathway cause)||Yes||Mastitsky and Makarevich (2007)|
|Belgium||1998||Interbasin transfers (pathway cause)||Yes||Josens et al. (2005)|
|Czech Republic||2003||Interbasin transfers (pathway cause)||Yes||Berezina and Duriš (2008)|
|France||1997||Interbasin transfers (pathway cause)||Yes||Devin et al. (2001)|
|Germany||1992||Interbasin transfers (pathway cause)||Yes||Bollache et al. (2004); Casellato et al. (2007)|
|Hungary||Romania||1926||Interconnected waterways (pathway cause)||Yes||Vaate et al. (2002)|
|Italy||2006||Interbasin transfers (pathway cause)||Yes||Casellato et al. (2006)|
|Netherlands||1995||Interbasin transfers (pathway cause)||Yes||Vaate and Klink (1995)|
|Poland||Ukraine||2001||Interbasin transfers (pathway cause)
Interconnected waterways (pathway cause)
|Yes||Jazdzewski and Konopacka (2002)|
|Slovakia||Romania||1999||Interconnected waterways (pathway cause)||Yes||Sporka (1999)|
|Switzerland||2002||Interbasin transfers (pathway cause)||Yes||Lods-Crozet and Reymond (2006)|
|Ukraine||Ukraine||1940-1950s||Interconnected waterways (pathway cause)||Yes||Lubyanov (1957)||D. villosus is native to the lower section of the Dnieper River, Ukraine. However, around 1940s it began its spread upstream|
Risk of IntroductionTop of page
The spread of D. villosus across Europe has been facilitated by the construction of interbasin canals, in particular the Main-Danube Canal (Vaate et al., 2002) and the Dnieper-Bug Canal (Grabowski et al., 2007; Mastitsky and Makarevich, 2007). The most common mechanisms of dispersal include the active migration and transportation of the species along with boats and ships (Dick, 2009). Using these pathways, D. villosus will likely become widely distributed in continental Europe. In addition, due to its broad tolerance to salinity and temperature, D. villosus may survive in ballast waters of cargo ships and thus become globally dispersed in temperate areas (Bruijs et al., 2001). The examples of the most likely regions to be invaded by D. villosus in the near future include the Great Britain (Dick, 2009) and North America (Ricciardi and Rasmussen, 1998).
HabitatTop of page
D. villosus inhabits fresh and brackish waters of continental Europe. It occupies a wide range of substrates, with a preference for mats of algae near the water surface (Dedju, 1967; Devin et al., 2003).
Habitat ListTop of page
|Irrigation channels||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Lakes||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Reservoirs||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Rivers / streams||Principal habitat||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Estuaries||Principal habitat||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Lagoons||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Lagoons||Present, no further details||Natural|
Biology and EcologyTop of page
The population genetics of D. villosus has been examined in several studies. Müller et al. (2002) analysed two mitochondrial fragments (16S and COI) in individuals collected widely in Central Europe, including the native range of the species in the lower Danube River. Both markers revealed similar low numbers of unique haplotypes in D. villosus (9 for the 322 bp fragment of the 16S gene and 6 for the 338 bp fragment of the COI gene). The authors also found that the conspicuous colour variation typical for D. villosus does not differentiate at the allozyme level, indicating on panmixia among colour morphs and thus conspecificity.
Wattier et al. (2006) developed three D. villosus-specific polymorphic microsatellite markers (DikF, DikQ and DikS, GeneBank numbers BV678051 to BV678053). Using these novel markers and the COI gene for samples from the whole geographic range of D. villosus in Central and Western Europe, Wattier et al. (2007) found no evidence of genetic bottlenecks during the invasion of the species.
Physiology and Phenology
- rather high plasticity in relation to temperature and salinity (Bruijs et al., 2001)
- remarkable polymorphism of the body pigmentation, which has been repeatedly reported both from the native and invaded ranges (Müller et al., 2002; Devin et al., 2004a)
- high growth rate (Devin et al., 2004b)
- large body size (up to 30 mm in the native area (Nesemann et al., 1995))
- short generation time (Devin et al., 2004b)
- multivotine reproduction cycle, with up to three generations per year (Devin et al. 2004b).
Water TolerancesTop of page
|Parameter||Minimum Value||Maximum Value||Typical Value||Status||Life Stage||Notes|
|Depth (m b.s.l.)||0.5||1.0||Optimum||10 tolerated (Lods-Crozet and Reymond, 2006)|
|Salinity (part per thousand)||0||10||Optimum||24 tolerated (Bruijs et al., 2001)|
|Water temperature (ºC temperature)||20||23||Optimum||Lower limit close to 0 and upper limit 35 tolerated (Bruijs et al., 2001; Wijnhoven et al., 2003)|
Natural enemiesTop of page
|Natural enemy||Type||Life stages||Specificity||References||Biological control in||Biological control on|
|Anguilla anguilla||Predator||Adults/Juveniles||not specific||Eckmann et al., 2008|
|Dictyocoela berillonum||Parasite||Adult||not specific||Wattier et al., 2007|
|Dictyocoela muelleri||Parasite||Adult||not specific||Wattier et al., 2007|
|Lota lota||Predator||Adults/Juveniles||not specific||Eckmann et al., 2008|
|Maritrema||Parasite||Adult||not specific||Sudarikov et al., 2002|
|Microsporidium||Parasite||Adult||not specific||Wattier et al., 2007|
|Nosema dikerogammari||Parasite||Adult||to species||Ovcharenko and Wita, 1996|
|Nosema granulosis||Parasite||Adult||not specific||Wattier et al., 2007|
|Perca fluviatilis||Predator||Adults/Juveniles||not specific||Eckmann et al., 2008|
|Plagioporus||Parasite||Adult||not specific||Chernogorenko et al., 1978|
|Pleurogenoides medians||Parasite||Adult||not specific||Sudarikov et al., 2002|
|Spirochona gemmipara||Adult||not specific||Fernandez-Leborans, 2001|
Notes on Natural EnemiesTop of page
Being a large-bodied and numerous invertebrate species, D. villosus is readily consumed by fish. In the introduced range, D. villosus has been field-documented as a food item of the European eel Anguilla anguilla, Eurasian perch Perca fluviatilis, and burbot Lota lota (Eckmann et al., 2008).
Studies on parasites of D. villosus are very scarce. In its native range, this amphipod has been reported to host two microsporidian species (Ovcharenko and Wita, 1996; Wattier et al., 2007), three trematode species (Chernogorenko et al., 1978; Sudarikov et al., 2000), and an epibiont ciliate (Fernandez-Leborans, 2001). In its introduced range, D. villosus has been documented to host only microsporidian parasites (Wattier et al., 2007). There is no published information on the role parasites play in the population dynamics of D. villosus.
Means of Movement and DispersalTop of page
Natural dispersal of D. villosus occurs by active migration (Nesemann et al., 1995; Vaate et al., 2002; Jazdzewski and Konopacka, 2002; Josens et al., 2005). The speed of active D. villosus upstream range extension may reach up to 40 km/year, or approximately 100 m/day (Josens et al., 2005).
Vector Transmission (Biotic)
Biotic vectors of D. villosus transmission have not been documented.
Intentional introductions of D. villosus, though possible, have not been reported.
Pathway CausesTop of page
Pathway VectorsTop of page
Impact SummaryTop of page
Environmental ImpactTop of page
D. villosus has been nicknamed the “killer shrimp” for its extremely aggressive behaviour towards native invertebrate species. Due to its large body size and well developed mouthparts, D. villosus is an effective predator, which kills or simply bites off much more prey than it can consume (Dick et al., 2002). In all the European aquatic systems where it has become established, D. villosus has largely replaced both indigenous and exotic amphipod species (Kelleher et al., 1999; Dick and Platvoet, 2000; Whitfield, 2000; Dick et al., 2002; Kley and Maier, 2003; Bollache et al., 2004; MacNeil and Platvoet, 2005; Lods-Crozet and Reymond, 2006). In addition, it readily consumes fish eggs (Casselato et al., 2007) and even attacks fish larvae (Schmidt and Josens, 2004). Due to its predatory activities, D. villosus significantly changes natural food webs of invaded ecosystems and occupies high trophic levels comparable to fish (Van Riel et al., 2006). However, D. villosus is also an omnivorous species able to act as an effective filter-feeder on microalgae (Platvoet et al., 2006).
Threatened SpeciesTop of page
|Threatened Species||Conservation Status||Where Threatened||Mechanism||References||Notes|
|Gammarus duebeni||No details||Predation||Dick et al., 2002|
|Gammarus fossarum||No details||Predation||Lods-Crozet and Reymond, 2006; Whitfield, 2000|
|Gammarus pulex||No details||Predation||Lods-Crozet and Reymond, 2006; Whitfield, 2000|
|Gammarus roeseli||No details||Predation||Whitfield, 2000|
Risk and Impact FactorsTop of page Invasiveness
- Proved invasive outside its native range
- Abundant in its native range
- Highly adaptable to different environments
- Is a habitat generalist
- Tolerates, or benefits from, cultivation, browsing pressure, mutilation, fire etc
- Capable of securing and ingesting a wide range of food
- Highly mobile locally
- Fast growing
- Has high reproductive potential
- Has high genetic variability
- Altered trophic level
- Damaged ecosystem services
- Ecosystem change/ habitat alteration
- Modification of natural benthic communities
- Modification of nutrient regime
- Negatively impacts aquaculture/fisheries
- Reduced native biodiversity
- Threat to/ loss of native species
- Competition - monopolizing resources
- Competition (unspecified)
- Rapid growth
- Highly likely to be transported internationally accidentally
- Difficult to identify/detect as a commodity contaminant
- Difficult to identify/detect in the field
- Difficult/costly to control
UsesTop of page
D. villosus does not have any economic value or provide any social benefit. It is not used in environmental services.
DiagnosisTop of page
A description of the specific genetic markers for the identification of D. villosus can be found in the work by Wattier et al. (2006).
Detection and InspectionTop of page
Adult D. villosus can relatively easily be identified in the field using the descriptions provided by Carausu (1943), Eggers and Martens (2001), Konopacka (2004) and Dobson (2012). Juveniles are harder to identify as most of the specific morphological features in such individuals are underdeveloped. The amphipods can be collected using standard nets for benthic sampling (e.g., a rectangular dipnet).
Similarities to Other Species/ConditionsTop of page
D. villosus can be confused with the two other congeners currently spreading in Europe, namely Dikerogammarus bispinosus and Dikerogammarus haemobaphes. Moreover, for a long time D. bispinosus has been considered a subspecies of D. villosus (e.g., Dedju 1967). However, besides certain morphological differences, these three species are isolated both genetically and reproductively (Müller et al., 2002). One of the most prominent discriminating morphological features is the structure of the dorsal tubercles on urosome segments I and II. Although both D. villosus and D. bispinosus possess well developed, pointed tubercles, the tubercles in D. bispinosus are armed with two main apical spines each, whereas in D. villosus the number of such spines varies from 3 to 5. In D. haemobaphes the tubercles are not pointed and typically carry two main spines each. In addition, these three species differ in the pattern of setation of antenna II and the gnathopods (Carausu, 1943; Eggers and Martens, 2001; Müller et al., 2002). A UK identification guide to invasive freshwater shrimps and isopods includes species present in the UK and others that are invasive across Europe (Dobson, 2012).
Prevention and ControlTop of page
Due to the variable regulations around (de)registration of pesticides, your national list of registered pesticides or relevant authority should be consulted to determine which products are legally allowed for use in your country when considering chemical control. Pesticides should always be used in a lawful manner, consistent with the product's label.
Early warning systems
A number of open-access Internet databases and thematic web-sites can be used as the early warning systems since they provide maps of the current distribution of D. villosus in Europe, as well as georeferenced information on the recent findings of this amphipod. Examples of such websites include:
· DAISIE Database on Alien Species in Europe (http://europe-aliens.org/)
· Aquatic Invaders of Belarus: Alien Species Database (http://www.aliensinbelarus.com)
· Website of the online journal ‘Aquatic Invasions’ (http://www.aquaticinvasions.net)
There are no ecologically sound measures for eradication of D. villosus at a waterbody-wide scale.
There are no acknowledged methods to control or remove D. villosus.
Integrated Pest Management
No Integrated Pest Management programs for D. villosus have been developed.
Monitoring and Surveillance
There are no specific monitoring programs aimed at early detection and tracking of D. villosus.
Gaps in Knowledge/Research NeedsTop of page
There are several significant gaps and uncertainties in the current knowledge of the biology and ecology of D. villosus, including:
- environmental requirements
- factors controlling the seasonal patterns of reproduction
- natural enemies
- control menthods.
ReferencesTop of page
Bacela K; Grabowski M; Konopacka A, 2008. Dikerogammarus villosus (Sowinsky, 1894) (Crustacea, Amphipoda) enters Vistula - the biggest river in the Baltic basin. Aquatic Invasions ["Invasive species in inland waters of Europe and North America: distribution and impacts" 30th Congress of the International Association of Theoretical and Applied Limnology, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, August 2007.], 3(1):95-98. http://www.aquaticinvasions.ru/2008/AI_2008_3_1_Bacela_etal.pdf
BBC, 2011. 'Killer' shrimp is the worst alien invader of Britain's waterways which officials say are costing billions of pounds to tackle. BBC News. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14428585
Berezina NA; Duriš Z, 2008. First record of the invasive species Dikerogammarus villosus (Crustacea: Amphipoda) in the Vltava River (Czech Republic). Aquatic Invasions, 3(4):455-460. http://www.aquaticinvasions.ru/2008/AI_2008_3_4_Berezina_Duris.pdf
Bollache L; Devin S; Wattier R; Chovet M; Beisel J-N; Moreteau JC; Rigaud T, 2004. Rapid range extension of the Ponto-Caspian amphipod Dikerogammarus villosus in France: potential consequences. Archiv für Hydrobiologie, 160:57-66.
Bruijs MCM; Kelleher B; Velde G van der; Vaate A bij de, 2001. Oxygen consumption, temperature and salinity tolerance of the invasive amphipod Dikerogammarus villosus: Indicators of further dispersal via ballast water transport. Archiv für Hydrobiologie, 152(4):633-646.
Casellato S; Visentin A; Piana G la, 2007. The predatory impact of Dikerogammarus villosus, a danger for fish. In: Biological invaders in inland waters: profiles, distribution, and threats [ed. by Gherardi, F.]. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer, 495-506.
Devin S; Beisel J-N; Bachmann V; Moreteau JC, 2001. Dikerogammarus villosus (Amphipoda: Gammaridae): another invasive species newly established in the Moselle river and French hydrosystems. Annales de Limnologie, 37:21-27.
Devin S; Bollache L; Beisel J-N; Moreteau JC; Perrot-Minnot M-J, 2004. Pigmentation polymorphism in the invasive amphipod Dikerogammarus villosus: some insights into its maintenance. Journal of Zoology (London), 264:391-397.
Devin S; Piscart C; Beisel J-N; Moreteau J-C, 2004. Life history traits of the invader Dikerogammarus villosus (Crustacea: Amphipoda) in the Moselle River, France. International Review of Hydrobiology, 89:21-34.
Dick JTA; Platvoet D, 2000. Invading predatory crustacean Dikerogammarus villosus eliminates both native and exotic species. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 267(1447):977-983.
Dobson M, 2012. Identifying Invasive Freshwater Shrimps and Isopods., UK: Freshwater Biological Association, 30 pp. https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/nonnativespecies/news/index.cfm?id=77
Eckmann R; Mörtl M; Baumgärtner D; Berron C; Fischer P; Schleuter D; Weber A, 2008. Consumption of amphipods by littoral fish after the replacement of native Gammarus roeseli by invasive Dikerogammarus villosus in Lake Constance. Aquatic Invasions, 3(2):187-191. http://www.aquaticinvasions.ru/2008/AI_2008_3_2_Eckmann_etal.pdf
Emelyanova LV, 1982. Species diversity of gammarids in the phytophilous communities of shallows of the Kievskoe Reservoir. In: Hydrobiological studies of the waterbodies of south-western part of the USSR. Kiev: Naukova Dumka, 45-47.
Emelyanova LV; Scherbak VI; Klenus VG, 1999. Functioning of the different biotic components of the Kievskoe Reservoir under conditions of chronic radioactive background. Zapovidna Spava v Ukraini, 5(1):73-77.
Füreder L; Pöckl M, 2007. Ecological traits of aquatic NIS invading Austrian fresh waters. In: Biological invaders in inland waters: profiles, distribution, and threats [ed. by Gherardi, F.]. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer, 233-257.
Grabowski M; Bacela K; Konopacka A, 2007. How to be an invasive gammarid (Amphipoda: Gammaroidea) - comparison of life history traits. Hydrobiologia [Invasive Crustacea, Symposium 7 at The Sixth International Crustacean Congress (ICC6), Glasgow, UK, 18-22 July 2005.], 590:75-84. http://springerlink.metapress.com/content/1573-5117/
Grabowski M; Bacela K; Wattier R, 2007. Dikerogammarus villosus (Sowinsky, 1894) (Crustacea, Amphipoda) colonizes next alpine lake - Lac du Bourget, France. Aquatic Invasions, 2(3):268-271. http://www.aquaticinvasions.ru/2007/AI_2007_2_3_Grabowski_etal.pdf
Gruszka P; Wozniczka A, 2008. Dikerogammarus villosus (Sowinski, 1894) in the River Odra estuary - another invader threatening Baltic Sea coastal lagoons. Aquatic Invasions, 3(4):395-403. http://www.aquaticinvasions.ru/2008/AI_2008_3_4_Gruszka_Wozniczka.pdf
Haas G; Brunke M; Strei B, 2002. Fast turnover in dominance of exotic species in the Rhine River determines biodiversity and ecosystem function: an affair between amphipods and mussels. In: Invasive Aquatic Species of Europe: Distribution, Impacts and Management [ed. by Leppakoski E, Gollasch S, Olenin] Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 426-432.
Jazdzewski K; Konopacka A, 2002. Invasive Ponto-Caspian species in waters of the Vistula and Oder basins and the southern Baltic Sea. In: Invasive aquatic species of Europe: Distribution, impacts and management [ed. by Leppäkoski E, Gollasch S, Olenin] Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 384-398.
Josens G; Vaate A bij de; Usseglio-Polatera P; Cammaerts R; Cherot F; Grisez F; Verboonen P; Bossche JP vanden, 2005. Native and exotic Amphipoda and other Peracarida in the River Meuse: new assemblages emerge from a fast changing fauna. Hydrobiologia, 542:203-220.
Kelleher B; Velde G van der; Giller PS; Vaate A bij de, 1999. Dominant role of exotic mass invaders in the diet of important fish species of the River Lower Rhine, The Netherlands. Crustacean Issues, 12:35-46.
Kley A; Maier G, 2003. Life history characteristics of the invasive freshwater gammarids Dikerogammarus villosus and Echinogammarus ischnus in the river Main and the Main-Donau canal. Archiv für Hydrobiologie, 156(4):457-469.
Lubyanov IP, 1957. On the bioecological characteristics of benthic fauna of the middle Dnieper in relation to hydrologic works. In: Proceedings of the Thematic and Problem Workshops of the Zoological Institute. Issue VII, Problems of Hydrobiology of Inland Waters. Leningrad-Moscow: Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 181-187.
MacNeil C; Platvoet D, 2005. The predatory impact of the freshwater invader Dikerogammarus villosus on native Gammarus pulex (Crustacea: Amphipoda); influences of differential microdistribution and food resources. Journal of Zoology, 267:31-38.
Martynov AW, 1925. [Gammarids of the lower reaches of the Dnieper]. (Gammaridae des unteren Laufes des Dnjepr.) In: Arbeiten der All-Ukarainischen Wissenschaftlich-Praktischen Staats-Station des Schwarzen und Asow Meeres, B1. 133-153.
Mayer G; Maas A; Waloszek D, 2007. Comparison between the mouthparts of Gammarus roeseli and Dikerogammarus villosus - an attempt to understand the success of an invader to Lake Constance. In: Abstracts of the XIII International Colloquium on Amphipoda, Tihany, Hungary, 20-25 May 2007 [ed. by Muskó, I. B.]. 28-29.
Ricciardi A; Rasmussen JB, 1998. Predicting the identity and impact of future biological invaders: a priority for aquatic resource management. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 55(7):1759-1765.
Riel MC van; Velde G van der; Rajagopal S; Marguillier S; Dehairs F; Vaate A bij de, 2006. Trophic relationships in the Rhine food web during invasion and after establishment of the Ponto-Caspian invader Dikerogammarus villosus. Hydrobiologia, 565:39-58.
Tittizer T; Scholl F; Banning M; Haybach A; Schleuter M, 2000. [Aquatic macrobenthic aliens of German inland waterways]. (Aquatische Neozoen im Makrozoobenthos der Binnenwasserstrassen Deutschlands.) Lauterbornia, 39:1-72.
Vaate A bij de; Jazdzewski K; Ketelaars HAM; Gollash S; Velde G van der, 2002. Geographical patterns in range extension of Ponto-Caspian macroinvertebrate species in Europe. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 59:1159-1174.
Wattier RA; Beguet J; Gaillard M; Müller JC; Bollache L; Perrot-Minnot M-J, 2006. Molecular markers for systematic identification and population genetics of the invasive Ponto-Caspian freshwater gammarid Dikerogammarus villosus (Crustacea, Amphipoda). Molecular Ecology Notes, 6:487-489.
Wattier RA; Haine ER; Beguet J; Martin G; Bollache L; Muskó IB; Platvoet D; Rigaud T, 2007. No genetic bottleneck or associated microparasite loss in invasive populations of a freshwater amphipod. Oikos, 116(11):1941-1953. http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.2007.0030-1299.15921.x
Wijnhoven S; Riel MC van; Velde G van der, 2003. Exotic and indigenous freshwater gammarid species: physiological tolerance to water temperature in relation to ionic content of the water. Aquatic Ecology, 37:151-158.
Bącela K, Grabowski M, Konopacka A, 2008. Dikerogammarus villosus (Sowinsky, 1894) (Crustacea, Amphipoda) enters Vistula - the biggest river in the Baltic basin. Aquatic Invasions. 3 (1), 95-98. http://www.aquaticinvasions.ru/2008/AI_2008_3_1_Bacela_etal.pdf DOI:10.3391/ai.2008.3.1.16
BBC, 2011a. Killer' shrimp is the worst alien invader of Britain's waterways which officials say are costing billions of pounds to tackle. In: BBC News, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14428585
Berezina N A, Ďuriš Z, 2008. First record of the invasive species Dikerogammarus villosus (Crustacea: Amphipoda) in the Vltava River (Czech Republic). Aquatic Invasions. 3 (4), 455-460. http://www.aquaticinvasions.ru/2008/AI_2008_3_4_Berezina_Duris.pdf DOI:10.3391/ai.2008.3.4.17
Bollache L, Devin S, Wattier R, Chovet M, Beisel J-N, Moreteau J C, Rigaud T, 2004. Rapid range extension of the Ponto-Caspian amphipod Dikerogammarus villosus in France: potential consequences. Archiv für Hydrobiologie. 57-66.
CABI, Undated. Compendium record. Wallingford, UK: CABI
CABI, Undated a. CABI Compendium: Status as determined by CABI editor. Wallingford, UK: CABI
Devin S, Beisel J-N, Bachmann V, Moreteau J C, 2001. Dikerogammarus villosus (Amphipoda: Gammaridae): another invasive species newly established in the Moselle river and French hydrosystems. Annales de Limnologie. 21-27.
Emelyanova L V, 1982. Species diversity of gammarids in the phytophilous communities of shallows of the Kievskoe Reservoir. In: Hydrobiological studies of the waterbodies of south-western part of the USSR. Kiev, Ukraine, USSR: Naukova Dumka. 45-47.
Emelyanova L V, Scherbak V I, Klenus V G, 1999. Functioning of the different biotic components of the Kievskoe Reservoir under conditions of chronic radioactive background. Zapovidna Spava v Ukraini. 5 (1), 73-77.
Füreder L, Pöckl M, 2007. Ecological traits of aquatic NIS invading Austrian fresh waters. In: Biological invaders in inland waters: profiles, distribution, and threats. [ed. by Gherardi F]. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. 233-257.
Gruszka P, Woźniczka A, 2008. Dikerogammarus villosus (Sowinski, 1894) in the River Odra estuary - another invader threatening Baltic Sea coastal lagoons. Aquatic Invasions. 3 (4), 395-403. http://www.aquaticinvasions.ru/2008/AI_2008_3_4_Gruszka_Wozniczka.pdf DOI:10.3391/ai.2008.3.4.5
Haas G, Brunke M, Strei B, 2002. Fast turnover in dominance of exotic species in the Rhine River determines biodiversity and ecosystem function: an affair between amphipods and mussels. In: Invasive Aquatic Species of Europe: Distribution, Impacts and Management. [ed. by Leppakoski E, Gollasch S, Olenin]. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 426-432.
Josens G, Vaate A bij de, Usseglio-Polatera P, Cammaerts R, Cherot F, Grisez F, Verboonen P, Bossche J P vanden, 2005. Native and exotic Amphipoda and other Peracarida in the River Meuse: new assemblages emerge from a fast changing fauna. Hydrobiologia. 203-220.
Lubyanov I P, 1957. On the bioecological characteristics of benthic fauna of the middle Dnieper in relation to hydrologic works. In: Proceedings of the Thematic and Problem Workshops of the Zoological Institute. Issue VII, Problems of Hydrobiology of Inland Waters [Proceedings of the Thematic and Problem Workshops of the Zoological Institute. Issue VII, Problems of Hydrobiology of Inland Waters], Leningrad-Moscow, USSR: Academy of Sciences of the USSR. 181-187.
Mayer G, Maas A, Waloszek D, 2007. Comparison between the mouthparts of Gammarus roeseli and Dikerogammarus villosus - an attempt to understand the success of an invader to Lake Constance. In: Abstracts of the XIII International Colloquium on Amphipoda, Tihany, Hungary, 20-25 May 2007 [Abstracts of the XIII International Colloquium on Amphipoda, Tihany, Hungary, 20-25 May 2007], [ed. by Muskó I B]. 28-29.
Tittizer T, Scholl F, Banning M, Haybach A, Schleuter M, 2000. Aquatic macrobenthic aliens of German inland waterways. (Aquatische Neozoen im Makrozoobenthos der Binnenwasserstrassen Deutschlands). Lauterbornia. 1-72.
Vaate A bij de, Jazdzewski K, Ketelaars H A M, Gollash S, Velde G van der, 2002. Geographical patterns in range extension of Ponto-Caspian macroinvertebrate species in Europe. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 1159-1174.
Wattier R A, Beguet J, Gaillard M, Müller J C, Bollache L, Perrot-Minnot M-J, 2006. Molecular markers for systematic identification and population genetics of the invasive Ponto-Caspian freshwater gammarid Dikerogammarus villosus (Crustacea, Amphipoda). Molecular Ecology Notes. 487-489.
OrganizationsTop of page
France: Laboratoire des Interactions Ecotoxicologie, Biodiversité, Ecosystèmes, Campus Bridoux, Rue du Général Delestraint - 57070 METZ, http://www.liebe.univ-metz.fr/tebe-e.htm
Russian Federation: Institute of Zoology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Universitetskaya emb. 1, St.-Petersburg, 199034, http://www.zin.ru
Ukraine: Institute of Hydrobiology, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, 12 Heroyiv Stalingradu Ave, Kyiv, 04210, http://www.nas.gov.ua/en/Structure/dgb/ihb/Pages/default.aspx
ContributorsTop of page
04/06/09 Original text by:
Sergey Mastitsky, Belarusian State University, Biology Faculty, General Ecology Dept., Nezalezhnasti 4 ave., 220030 Minsk, Belarus, Russia
Distribution MapsTop of page
Unsupported Web Browser:
One or more of the features that are needed to show you the maps functionality are not available in the web browser that you are using.
Please consider upgrading your browser to the latest version or installing a new browser.
More information about modern web browsers can be found at http://browsehappy.com/