Invasive Australian crayfish in Texas waters causing concern for wildlife
An invasive species of crayfish is spreading through Texas waters, sparking grave wildlife concerns for conservationists.
Researchers in Brownsville, Texas, have been investigating reports of an Australian red claw crayfish, a crustacean that typically belongs 8,000 miles away, after the species was seen pervading southern Texas waters, specifically the Rio Grande Valley.
The Rio Grande is a free-flowing natural river located in the southernmost tip of Texas that spans roughly 4,200 square miles across four counties. Around 196 miles of the river, which was designated by Congress in 1978 as 'the Rio Grande Wild and Scenic River,' meanders through stretches of breathtaking desert and canyons of stratified rock.
Texas Parks & Wildlife officials are concerned that the crayfish species is spreading quickly, causing havoc by outnumbering other native species that exist in the same water.
The Australian red claw is a large-bodied crayfish, distinctively recognized by its blue-green body with red and maroon highlights. When fully grown, the crustacean can reach a total length of around 10 inches and can weigh up to 1.3lb, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Typically, they can be found in tropical and subtropical climates, coastal streams, and freshwater environments, and favor slower-moving upper reaches of rivers as well as lakes and lagoons, according to experts.
At present, there are over 400 crayfish species that inhabit waters in the U.S. – a total that amounts to roughly 70 percent of the world's total species, according to Virginia State University.
Speaking on a PBS show aired Sunday about the concerns, University of Illinois crustaceans expert Chris Taylor, said: 'The biggest threat that we know of for native crayfish species are invasive crayfish coming into new habitats and actively displacing them.'
Taylor added that one of the goals of the biological project in Brownsville was to 'assess that threat'.
'You can't overstate how important crayfish are. They are prey source for fish species, mammal species, [and] birds,' said University of Illinois aquatic ecologist Dusty Swedberg.
'Everything is interconnected and [if] you start to lose some of those middle pieces in a food web, it's going to have an impact somewhere else', Taylor added.
Researchers have been monitoring the risk of competition that the invasive species poses to the native crayfish revealing that they were trying to see 'where they are, how many are there, [and] if they're successfully reproducing.'
Texas Parks and Wildlife invertebrate biologist Archis Grubh said he was expecting to find at least '50 to 100' after researchers waded through the river.
However, he remained positive stating there were 'not as many in the resacas as I was expecting, so I think that's a good sign.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
11 hours ago
- Yahoo
Instead of 'de-extincting' dire wolves, scientists should use gene editing to protect living, endangered species
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. Have you been hearing about the dire wolf lately? Maybe you saw a massive white wolf on the cover of Time magazine or a photo of "Game of Thrones" author George R.R. Martin holding a puppy named after a character from his books. The dire wolf, a large, wolflike species that went extinct about 12,000 years ago, has been in the news after biotech company Colossal claimed to have resurrected it using cloning and gene-editing technologies. Colossal calls itself a "de-extinction" company. The very concept of de-extinction is a lightning rod for criticism. There are broad accusations of playing God or messing with nature, as well as more focused objections that contemporary de-extinction tools create poor imitations rather than truly resurrected species. While the biological and philosophical debates are interesting, the legal ramifications for endangered species conservation are of paramount importance. As a legal scholar with a Ph.D. in wildlife genetics, my work focuses on how we legally define the term "endangered species." The use of biotechnology for conservation, whether for de-extinction or genetic augmentation of existing species, promises solutions to otherwise intractable problems. But it needs to work in harmony with both the letter and purpose of the laws governing biodiversity conservation. What did Colossal actually do? Scientists extracted and sequenced DNA from Ice Age-era bones to understand the genetic makeup of the dire wolf. They were able to piece together around 90% of a complete dire wolf genome. While the gray wolf and the dire wolf are separated by a few million years of evolution, they share over 99.5% of their genomes. The scientists scanned the recovered dire wolf sequences for specific genes that they believed were responsible for the physical and ecological differences between dire wolves and other species of canids, including genes related to body size and coat color. CRISPR gene-editing technology allows scientists to make specific changes in the DNA of an organism. The Colossal team used CRISPR to make 20 changes in 14 different genes in a modern gray wolf cell before implanting the embryo into a surrogate mother. While the technology on display is marvelous, what should we call the resulting animals? Some commentators argue that the animals are just modified gray wolves. They point out that it would take far more than 20 edits to bridge the gap left by millions of years of evolution. For instance, that 0.5% of the genome that doesn't match in the two species represents over 12 million base pair differences. Related: Colossal's de-extincted 'dire wolf' isn't a dire wolf and it has not been de-extincted, experts say More philosophically, perhaps, other skeptics argue that a species is more than a collection of genes devoid of environmental, ecological or evolutionary context. Colossal, on the other hand, maintains that it is in the "functional de-extinction" game. The company acknowledges it isn't making a perfect dire wolf copy. Instead it wants to recreate something that looks and acts like the dire wolf of old. It prefers the "if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's a duck" school of speciation. Disagreements about taxonomy — the science of naming and categorizing living organisms — are as old as the field itself. Biologists are notorious for failing to adopt a single clear definition of "species," and there are dozens of competing definitions in the biological literature. Biologists can afford to be flexible and imprecise when the stakes are merely a conversational misunderstanding. Lawyers and policymakers, on the other hand, do not have that luxury. In the United States, the Endangered Species Act is the main tool for protecting biodiversity. To be protected by the act, an organism must be a member of an endangered or threatened species. Some of the most contentious ESA issues are definitional, such as whether the listed species is a valid "species" and whether individual organisms, especially hybrids, are members of the listed species. Colossal's functional species concept is anathema to the Endangered Species Act. It shrinks the value of a species down to the way it looks or the way it functions. When passing the act, however, Congress made clear that species were to be valued for their "aesthetic, ecological, educational, historical, recreational, and scientific value to the Nation and its people." In my view, the myopic focus on function seems to miss the point. Despite its insistence otherwise, Colossal's definitional sleight of hand has opened the door to arguments that people should reduce conservation funding or protections for currently imperiled species. Why spend the money to protect a critter and its habitat when, according to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, you can just "pick your favorite species and call up Colossal"? Biotechnology can provide real conservation benefits for today's endangered species. I suggest gene editing's real value is not in recreating facsimiles of long-extinct species like dire wolves, but instead using it to recover ones in trouble now. Projects, by both Colossal and other groups, are underway around the world to help endangered species develop disease resistance or evolve to tolerate a warmer world. Other projects use gene editing to reintroduce genetic variation into populations where genetic diversity has been lost. For example, Colossal has also announced that it has cloned a red wolf. Unlike the dire wolf, the red wolf is not extinct, though it came extremely close. After decades of conservation efforts, there are about a dozen red wolves in the wild in the reintroduced population in eastern North Carolina, as well as a few hundred red wolves in captivity. The entire population of red wolves, both wild and captive, descends from merely 14 founders of the captive breeding program. This limited heritage means the species has lost a significant amount of the genetic diversity that would help it continue to evolve and adapt. In order to reintroduce some of that missing genetic diversity, you'd need to find genetic material from red wolves outside the managed population. Right now that would require stored tissue samples from animals that lived before the captive breeding program was established or rediscovering a "lost" population in the wild. Recently, researchers discovered that coyotes along the Texas Gulf Coast possess a sizable percentage of red wolf-derived DNA in their genomes. Hybridization between coyotes and red wolves is both a threat to red wolves and a natural part of their evolutionary history, complicating management. The red wolf genes found within these coyotes do present a possible source of genetic material that biotechnology could harness to help the captive breeding population if the legal hurdles can be managed. This coyote population was Colossal's source for its cloned "ghost" red wolf. Even this announcement is marred by definitional confusion. Due to its hybrid nature, the animal Colossal cloned is likely not legally considered a red wolf at all. RELATED STORIES —Colossal's de-extinction campaign is built on a semantic house of cards with shoddy foundations — and the consequences are dire —'Our animals are gray wolves': Colossal didn't de-extinct dire wolves, chief scientist clarifies —How related are dire wolves and gray wolves? The answer might surprise you. Under the Endangered Species Act, hybrid organisms are typically not protected. So by cloning one of these animals, Colossal likely sidestepped the need for ESA permits. It will almost certainly run into resistance if it attempts to breed these "ghost wolves" into the current red wolf captive breeding program that has spent decades trying to minimize hybridization. How much to value genetic "purity" versus genetic diversity in managed species still proves an extraordinarily difficult question, even without the legal uncertainty. Biotechnology could never solve every conservation problem — especially habitat destruction. The ability to make "functional" copies of a species certainly does not lessen the urgency to respond to biodiversity loss, nor does it reduce human beings' moral culpability. But to adequately respond to the ever-worsening biodiversity crisis, conservationists will need all available tools. This edited article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Yahoo
21 hours ago
- Yahoo
How far you walk may be more important than speed to fix chronic back pain
While walking is beneficial for reducing the risk of lingering chronic low back pain, experts say that it is how you walk that really matters. Walking more is a bigger factor than how fast you walk, Norwegian researchers said on Friday. 'Our findings suggest that daily walking volume is more important than mean walking intensity in reducing the risk of chronic lower back pain,' they wrote in a study published in the journal JAMA Network Open. The authors also found that walking for more than 100 minutes a day -- or an hour and forty minutes -- was associated with a 23 percent lower risk of chronic low back pain compared with walking fewer than 78 minutes a day. Walking 125 minutes or more daily also lowered the risk by 24 percent. The study included data from more than 11,000 patients aged 20 years and older, who were a part of the Trøndelag Health Study. Their health was first assessed during the years from 2017 to 2019. The authors later followed up from 2021 to 2023. Participants did not have chronic low back pain at the start of the study. To measure their walking, they wore accelerometers. Following just over four years, 1,659 participants reported experiencing chronic low back pain. They noted that participants with a higher walking volume tended to exercise more often and that the reduction in risk of chronic low back pain leveled off beyond walking for 100 minutes a day. Still, they urged that these findings could inform policy related to the costly condition going forward. The findings come after previous research that also identified being active as a way to alleviate chronic low back pain. Back pain affects more than a quarter of Americans. Another study last year found that people with chronic low back pain who walked 30 minutes a day for five days a week went twice as long without a recurrence as those who did not walk, according to UCLA Health. Approximately 70 percent of individuals experience a recurrence of low back pain within 12 months following recovery from an episode, Australian researchers found. Walking can help to strengthen the muscles that support the spine, and increase circulation and joint mobilization, according to Healthline. It is the sixth-most costly condition in the U.S. and can be incredibly debilitating, making even standing up or sitting at work a struggle. 'If confirmed by future research, these results could inform public health strategies aimed at preventing chronic low back pain, as well as complementing current guidelines that solely report on physical activity as a secondary prevention tool,' they said.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - It's hurricane season again, and public health hangs in the balance
June marks the beginning of the 2025 Atlantic hurricane season, and forecasters are warning of above-average activity. More than half of U.S. coastal areas should plan to face a major hurricane of Category 3, 4, or 5. If our 2024 experience is a reliable predictor, we can anticipate more than $100 billion in damage, more than 100 fatalities and an increasingly problematic, if overlooked, element of these disasters: the threat to public health. Hurricanes and other water-centric events, like flooding, are creating ideal environments for the transmission of infectious diseases, from mold exposure to flesh-eating diseases to mosquito-borne viruses. Clusters of a potentially fatal infection caused by Vibrio bacteria, which can cause severe diarrhea and necrotizing skin lesions, hit Florida after Hurricane Ian in 2023. Cases in 2024 exceeded that total, with high burdens in Florida counties that experienced the worst flooding from Hurricane Helene. In Texas last summer, health officials warned the public of the risk of contracting West Nile virus post-Hurricane Beryl. Mosquito-borne illness is possible wherever there are mosquitoes. Florida, California and Texas all experienced locally acquired cases of dengue fever in 2024. Chikungunya, which can result in lifelong physical debilitation, is also present in the United States, with travel-associated and locally acquired cases being documented in Gulf states as recently as 2019. Several deaths from Eastern equine encephalitis occurred last year in northeastern states, with several towns instituting curfews to curb the mosquito-borne threat. Rises in mosquito populations are a well-documented hazard after hydrologic disasters like hurricanes, tsunamis and floods. These events can compromise sewage pipes, contaminate drinking water and result in diffuse areas of standing water that become breeding grounds for mosquitoes. Emergency preparedness professionals have long understood the risk. What's changing is the frequency of billion-dollar disasters — and with them, we suspect, greater damage, flooding, and disease risk. The good news is that we can leverage past experience, predictive models and tools like state and regional medical stockpiles to mitigate some of the worst health impacts. By strategically positioning medical supplies and countermeasures closer to the point of need, health authorities can significantly reduce response time, minimize logistical challenges and save lives. A number of states already have medical stockpiles for basic medications and personal protective equipment; others are creating or updating legislative authorities for them. These stockpiles generally lack federal support and medical countermeasures for high-consequence threats. The utility of state or regional caches could be expanded to include emerging needs like vaccines, treatments and diagnostics for vector-borne infections. Congress authorized the Department of Health and Human Services to conduct a pilot program matched by local funds for state stockpiling of medical countermeasures and other supplies for public health emergencies. The Biden administration did not request funding for state stockpiles and Congress has not appropriated funds for the program, however, stagnating the initiative. Funding is the number one type of support that jurisdictions say they need to help them establish and maintain stockpiles. Investing in state or regional stockpiles is a cost-effective approach to emergency preparedness. It minimizes the need for last-minute, high-cost procurements during crises, places more autonomy in the hands of states and helps maintain health care system resilience. President Trump's executive order on preparedness recognizes ownership of preparedness at the state and local level, and calls on federal policy to help empower state and local jurisdictions to make smart infrastructure choices. This same ethos can extend to public health preparedness. Last year's final report of the congressional Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic concluded that state stockpiles can provide a tailored local complement to the federal Strategic National Stockpile. As natural disasters increase in frequency and intensity, the federal government can support local decision-makers in meeting their communities' unique public health readiness needs. During COVID-19, many local officials did not know what was in the federal stockpile. Drawing stockpiles closer to the communities that will need them, tied to input from local, state or regional medical advisory groups, would increase awareness of stockpile contents and enable tailored input to support assets these communities need. Redundancies built into state or regional caches could allow local health care providers access to critical supplies that allow them to meet medical standards of practice even in a crisis. State stockpiles could facilitate greater efficacy of vendor-managed inventories and improve the quality and efficiency of supply rotations. Especially for countermeasures that have cold chain requirements or other complicated logistics, the federal role can be to provide the training and best practices to allow jurisdictions to successfully store and distribute these assets when needed. COVID-19 revealed a national unpreparedness to increase production rationally based on identifiable gaps pre-disaster. For example, better local input on necessary ventilator functionalities would have improved the production of quality devices as demand surged, rather than devices produced by auto manufacturers that were failures. State and regional stockpiles can reverse this underpreparedness and empower local communities. Congress should show its federal support by extending the authorized timeline for the state stockpile program and, critically, funding it commensurately in the coming appropriations cycle. By strategically positioning medical supplies and countermeasures closer to the point of need, a federal-regional-state partnership can significantly reduce response time, minimize logistical challenges and save lives before future hurricane seasons and other regional disasters occur. Craig Vanderwagen is a former assistant secretary for preparedness and response in the Department of Health and Human Services and the founder and general manager of East West Protection, LLC, which provided private and public sector disaster preparedness support. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
