Issue
Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst.
Number 423, 2022
Biological conservation, ecosystems restoration and ecological engineering
Article Number 21
Number of page(s) 10
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/kmae/2022016
Published online 29 July 2022
  • Abrahamson SA. 1966. Dynamics of an isolated population of the crayfish Astacus astacus. Oikos 17: 96–107. [Google Scholar]
  • BioRes Bt. 2015. Az Ó - Dráva ökológiai alapállapot felmérése (Ecological baseline study of the Old Drava). Pécs 71: 132–133. [Google Scholar]
  • Blagus M, Tadić L. 2018. Obnova vodotoka–mjera zaštite i poboljšanja riječnog ekosustava (Watercourse restauration–measures to protect and improve the river ecosystem). Hrvatske vode 26: 239–248. [Google Scholar]
  • Correia AM. 2002. Niche breadth and trophic diversity: feeding behaviour of the red swamp crayfish (Procambarus clarkii) towards environmental availability of aquatic macroinvertebrates in a rice field (Portugal). Acta Oecologica 23: 421–429. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Crandall KA, De Grave S. 2017. An updated classification of the freshwater crayfishes (Decapoda: Astacidea) of the world, with a complete species list. J Crustacean Biol 37: 615–653. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Creed RP. Jr. 1994. Direct and Indirect Effects of Crayfish Grazing in a Stream Community. Ecology 75: 2091–2103. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Dobrović A, Maguire I, Boban M, Grbin D, Hudina S. 2021. Reproduction dynamics of the marbled crayfish Procambarus virginalis Lyko, 2017 from an anthropogenic lake in northern Croatia. Aquatic Invasions 16: 482–498. [Google Scholar]
  • Dorn N, Wojdak J. 2004. The role of omnivorous crayfish in littoral communities. Oecologia 140: 150–159. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • dos Reis Oliveira PC, van der Geest HG, Kraak MHS, Westveer JJ, Verdonschot RCM, Verdonschot PFM. 2020. Over forty years of lowland stream restoration: Lessons learned? J Environ Manage 264: 110417. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Dragičević P, Faller M, Kutleša P, Hudina S. 2020. Update on the signal crayfish, Pacifastacus leniusculus (Dana, 1852) range expansion in Croatia: A 10-year report. BioInvasions Record 9: 793–807. [Google Scholar]
  • EC. 1992. Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:31992L0043&from=EN. [Google Scholar]
  • EC. 2000. Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32000L0060. [Google Scholar]
  • EC. 2007. Directive 2007/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on the assessment and management of flood risks. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32007L0060. [Google Scholar]
  • EC. 2018. Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32018L2001&from=de. [Google Scholar]
  • EC. 2021. LIFE Public Database. https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/life/publicWebsite/search/advanced. [Google Scholar]
  • Edgerton BF, Henttonen P, Jussila J, 2004 Understanding the Causes of Disease in European Freshwater Crayfish. Conserv Biol 18: 1466–1474. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Edsman L, Füreder L, Gherardi F, Souty-Grosset C. 2010. Astacus astacus. In: IUCN 2010, IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. www.iucnredlist.org. [Google Scholar]
  • EEA. 2018. European waters–assessment of status and pressures 2018. Publications Office of the European Union. https://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/water/european-waters/water-quality-and-water-assessment/water-assessments/eea-2018-water-assessment. [Google Scholar]
  • EEA. 2021. Natura 2000 Public Database. https://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/access_data/index_en.htm. [Google Scholar]
  • Eionet. 2021. Reference Portal for Natura 2000. https://www.eionet.europa.eu/etcs/etc-bd/activities/building-the-natura-2000-network. [Google Scholar]
  • Energy Community. 2018. Legal Framework 2018 4th Edition, Vienna, 15 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Ercoli F, Ruokonen TJ. 2014. Does the introduced signal crayfish occupy an equivalent trophic niche to the lost native noble crayfish in boreal lakes? Biol Invasions 16: 2025–2036. [Google Scholar]
  • European Union. 2020. EUR-LEX. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html. [Google Scholar]
  • European Union. 2021. Interreg. https://interreg.eu/list-of-programmes. [Google Scholar]
  • Eurostat. 2021. Glossary: Country codes. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Glossary:Country_codes. [Google Scholar]
  • FEOW. 2008. Freshwater Ecoregions of the World (FEOW) by the Nature Conservancy and World Wildlife Fund. Nat Conserv World Wildl Fund. www.feow.org (accessed February 9, 2021). [Google Scholar]
  • Fitzpatrick BM, Fordyce JA, Niemiller ML, Reynolds RG. 2012. What can DNA tell us about biological invasions? Biol Invasions 14: 245–253. [Google Scholar]
  • Füreder L, Edsman L, Holdich D, et al. 2006. Indigenous crayfish. Habitat and threats. In: Souty-Grosset, C., Holdich, D.M., Noel, P.Y., Reynolds, J.D. and Haffner, P., eds. Atlas of crayfish in Europe, Patrimoines naturels, 64, Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Paris, 25–47 pp. [Google Scholar]
  • Füreder L, Oberkofler B, Hanel R, Machino Y. 2002. Freshwater crayfish in South Tyrol (Italy): Distribution and protection measures of endangered Austropotamobius pallipes. Bull Fr Pêche Piscic 367: 651–662. [Google Scholar]
  • Geist J, Hawkins SJ. 2016. Habitat recovery and restoration in aquatic ecosystems: current progress and future challenges. Aquat Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst 26: 942–962. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Ghia D, Fea G, Sacchi R, et al. 2013. Modelling Environmental Niche for the Endangered Crayfish Austropotamobius pallipes Complex in Northern and Central Italy. Freshw Crayfish 19: 189–195. [Google Scholar]
  • Govedič M. 2017. First record of the spiny-cheek crayfish (Orconectes limosus) in Slovenia–300 km upstream from its known distribution in the Drava River. Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst. 418: 7. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Griffiths HI, Krystufek B, Reed JM. 2004. Balkan biodiversity: Pattern and Process in the European Hotspot. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. [Google Scholar]
  • Grzybowski M, Glińska-Lewczuk K. 2019. Principal threats to the conservation of freshwater habitats in the continental biogeographical region of Central Europe. Biodivers. Conserv 28: 4065–4097. [Google Scholar]
  • Helfield JM, Engström J, Michel JT, Nilsson C, Jansson R. 2012. Effects of river restoration on riparian biodiversity in secondary channels of the Pite River, Sweden. Environ Manag 49: 130–141. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Holdich DM, Reynolds JD, Souty-Grosset C, Sibley PJ. 2009. A review of the ever increasing threat to European crayfish from non-indigenous crayfish species. Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst. 394–395: 11. [Google Scholar]
  • Huđek H, Žganec K, Pusch MT. 2020. A review of hydropower dams in Southeast Europe–distribution, trends and availability of monitoring data using the example of a multinational Danube catchment subarea. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 117: 0–10. [Google Scholar]
  • Hudina S, Hock K, Žganec K, Lucić A. 2012. Changes in population characteristics and structure of the signal crayfish at the edge of its invasive range in a European river. Int. J Lim 48: 3–11. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Hudina S, Hock K, Radović A, et al. 2016. Species-specific differences in dynamics of agonistic interactions may contribute to the competitive advantage of the invasive signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus) over the native narrow-clawed crayfish (Astacus leptodactylus). Mar Freshw Behav Physiol 49: 147–157. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hulme PE. 2017. Climate change and biological invasions: evidence, expectations, and response options. Biol Rev 92: 1297–1313. [Google Scholar]
  • IUCN. 2007. IUCN Red List of threatened species. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural resources, Cambridge. [Google Scholar]
  • Jelić M, Klobučar GIV, Grandjean F, et al. 2016. Insights into the molecular phylogeny and historical biogeography of the white-clawed crayfish (Decapoda, Astacidae). Mol Phylogenet Evol 103: 26–40. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Keller LF, Waller DM. 2002. Inbreeding effects in wild populations. Trends Ecol Evol 17: 230–241. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Klobučar G, Podnar M, Jelić M, et al. 2013. Role of the Dinaric Karst (western Balkans) in shaping the phylogeographic structure of the threatened crayfish Austropotamobius torrentium. Freshw Biol 58: 1089–1105. [Google Scholar]
  • Kouba A, Buřič M, Kozák P. 2010. Bioaccumulation and effects of heavy metals in crayfish: a review. Water Air Soil Pollut 211: 5–16. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Kouba A, Petrusek A, Kozák P. 2014. Continental-wide distribution of crayfish species in Europe: Update and maps. Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst. 413: 5. [Google Scholar]
  • Krstić S. 2012. Environmental Changes in Lakes Catchments as a Trigger for Rapid Eutrophication - A Prespa Lake Case Study. In: Piacentini, T., Miccadei, E., eds. Studies on Environmental and Applied, Geomorphology, IntechOpen, London, 63–116 pp. [Google Scholar]
  • Kušar D, Vrezec A, Ocepek M, Ic V. 2013. Aphanomyces astaci in wild crayfish populations in Slovenia: first report of persistent infection in a stone crayfish Austropotamobius torrentium population. Dis Aquat Organ 103: 157–169. [Google Scholar]
  • Leps M, Sundermann A, Tonkin JD, Lorenz AW, Haase P. 2016. Time is no healer: increasing restoration age does not lead to improved benthic invertebrate communities in restored river reaches. Sci Total Environ 557–558: 722–732. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • LIFE Programme. 2014. Old-Drava - Transboundary cooperation for revitalization of riverine habitat complex in Drava region within Natura 2000 sites - LIFE13 NAT/HU/000388.https://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=4860. [Google Scholar]
  • LIFE Programme. 2015. DRAVA LIFE - DRAVA LIFE Integrated River Management LIFE14 NAT/HR/000115. https://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=5327. [Google Scholar]
  • Lovrenčić L, Bonassin L, Boštjančić LL, et al. 2020a. New insights into the genetic diversity of the stone crayfish: taxonomic and conservation implications. BMC Evol Biol 20: 1–20. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Lovrenčić L, Temunović M, Maguire I. 2020b. How well does Natura 2000 protect threatened stone crayfish in Croatia? Nat Croat 29: 241–253. [Google Scholar]
  • Lovrenčić L, Temunović M, Gross R, Grgurev M, Maguire I. 2022. Integrating population genetics and species distribution modelling to guide conservation of the noble crayfish, Astacus astacus, in Croatia. Sci Rep 12: 2040. [Google Scholar]
  • Ludányi M, Peeters ETHME, Kiss B, Roessink I. 2016. Distribution of crayfish species in Hungarian waters. Glob Ecol Conserv 8: 254–262. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Machino Y, Füreder L. 2005. How To Find A Stone Crayfish Austropotamobius torrentium (Schrank, 1803): A biogeographic study in Europe. Bull Fr Pêche Piscic 376--377: 507–517. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Maguire I, Gottstein S. 2004. The Distribution Pattern of Freshwater Crayfish in Croatia. Crustaceana 77: 25–47. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Maguire I, Klobučar GIV. 2003. Appearance of Orconectes limosus in Croatia. Crayfish news 25: 7. [Google Scholar]
  • Maguire I, Jelić M, Klobučar G. 2011. Update on the distribution of freshwater crayfish in Croatia. Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst. 401: 31. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Maguire I, Podnar M, Jelic M, et al. 2014. Two distinct evolutionary lineages of the Astacus leptodactylus species-complex (Decapoda: Astacidae) inferred by phylogenetic analyses. Invertebrate Systematics 28: 117–123. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Maguire I, Jelić M, Klobučar G, Delpy M, Delaunay C, Grandjean F. 2016. Prevalence of the pathogen Aphanomyces astaci in freshwater crayfish populations in Croatia. Dis Aquat Organ 118: 45–53. [Google Scholar]
  • Maguire I, Klobučar G, Žganec K, Jelić M, Lucić A, Hudina S. 2018. Recent changes in distribution pattern of freshwater crayfish in Croatia - Threats and perspectives. Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst. 419: 2. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Malmqvist B, Rundle S. 2002. Threats to the running water ecosystems of the world. Environ Conserv 29: 134–153. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Mathers KL, White JC, Fornaroli R, Chadd R. 2020. Flow regimes control the establishment of invasive crayfish and alter their effects on lotic macroinvertebrate communities. J Appl Ecol 57: 886–902. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Moss B, Hering D, Green AJ, et al. 2009. Climate change and the future of freshwater biodiversity in Europe: a primer for policy-makers. Freshw Rev 2: 103–130. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Mrugała A, Šanda R, Shumka S, Vukić J. 2017. Filling the blank spot: First report on the freshwater crayfish distribution in Albania. Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst. 418: 34. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Neubarth J. 2018. The role of hydropower in selected South- Eastern European countries, EuroNatur Foundation and RiverWatch, 36 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Nystrom P, Brönmark C, Graneli W. 1999. Influence of an Exotic and a Native Crayfish Species on a Littoral Benthic Community. Oikos 85: 545–553. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Oidtmann B, Heitz E, Rogers D, Hoffmann R. 2002. Transmission of crayfish plague. Dis Aquat Organ 52: 159–167. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Olsson K, Stenroth P, Nystro PER. 2009. Invasions and niche width: does niche width of an introduced crayfish differ from a native crayfish? Freshw Biol 54: 1731–1740. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Pacioglu O, Theissinger K, Alexa A, et al. 2020. Multifaceted implications of the competition between native and invasive crayfish: a glimmer of hope for the native’s long-term survival. Biol Invasions 22: 827–842. [Google Scholar]
  • Palmer MA, Menninger HL, Bernhardt E. 2010. River restoration, habitat heterogeneity and biodiversity: A failure of theory or practice? Freshw Biol 55: 205–222. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Pârvulescu L, Palocs C, Molnar P. 2009. First record of the spiny-cheek crayfish Orconectes limosus (Rafinesque, 1817)(Crustacea: Decapoda: Cambaridae) in Romania. North West J Zool 5: 424–428. [Google Scholar]
  • Pârvulescu L, Zaharia C. 2013. Distribution and ecological preferences of noble crayfish in the Carpathian Danube basin: Biogeographical insights into the species history. Hydrobiologia 726: 53–63. [Google Scholar]
  • Pârvulescu L, Pîrvu M, Moroşan L-G, Zaharia C. 2015. Plasticity in fecundity highlights the females’ importance in the spiny-cheek crayfish invasion mechanism. Zoology 118: 424–432. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Pavlović S, Milošević S, Borković S, et al. 2006. A Report of Orconectes (Faxonius) Limosus (Rafinesque, 1817) [Crustacea: Decapoda: Astacidea: Cambaridae: Orconectes: Subgenus Faxonius] in the Serbian Part of the River Danube. Biotechnol Biotechnol Equip 20: 53–56. [Google Scholar]
  • Pecl GT, Araújo MB, Bell JD, et al. 2017. Biodiversity redistribution under climate change: Impacts on ecosystems and human well-being. Science 355: 6332 [Google Scholar]
  • Perdikaris C. Konstantinidis, E. Georgiadis, C. Kouba, A. 2017. Freshwater crayfish distribution update and maps for Greece: Combining literature and citizen-science data. Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst. 418: 51 [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Piria M, Copp GH, Dick JTA, et al. 2017. Tackling invasive alien species in Europe II: Threats and opportunities until 2020. Manag Biol Invasions 8: 273–286. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Piria M, Stroil BK, Giannetto D, et al. 2021. An assessment of regulation, education practices and socio-economic perceptions of non-native aquatic species in the Balkans. J Vertebr Biol 70: 4. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Préau C, Bertrand R, Nadeau I, et al. 2020. Niche modelling to guide conservation actions in France for the endangered crayfish Austropotamobius pallipes in relation to the invasive Pacifastacus leniusculus. Freshw Biol 65: 304–315. [Google Scholar]
  • Reynolds JD, Souty-Grosset C, Richardson AM. 2013. Ecological roles of crayfish in freshwater and terrestrial habitats. Freshwater Crayfish 19: 197–218. [Google Scholar]
  • Richter BD, Mathews R, Harrison DL, Wigington R. 2003. Ecologically sustainable water management: managing river flows for ecological integrity. Ecol Appl 13: 206–224. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Riverwatch and EuroNatur. 2018. Eco-masterplan for Balkan Rivers - Drawing a line in the sand. Riverwatch, Vienna, EuroNatur, Radolfzell, 54 p. https://riverwatch.eu/en/balkanrivers/map. [Google Scholar]
  • Samardžić M, Lucić A, Hudina S. 2014. The first record of the marbled crayfish (Procambarus fallax (Hagen, 1870) f. virginalis) in Croatia. Crayfish News 36: 4. [Google Scholar]
  • Scholtz G, Braband A, Tolley L, et al. 2003. Parthenogenesis in an outsider crayfish. Nature 421: 806. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Schrimpf A, Theissinger K, Dahlem J, et al. 2014. Phylogeography of noble crayfish (Astacus astacus) reveals multiple refugia. Freshw Biol 59: 761–776. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Schulz R, Schulz H. 2004. Roundtable session 1 threats to indigenous crayfish populations–studies on a landscape level. Bull Fr Pêche Piscic 372-373: 447–456. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Schwaiger K, Schrittwieser J, Koller-Kreimel V, Hödl-Kreuzbauer E. 2013. Sustainable Hydropower Development in the Danube Basin, ICPDR, Vienna. [Google Scholar]
  • Schwarz U. 2012. Balkan Rivers–The Blue Heart of Europe. Hydromorphological Status and Dam Projects, Fluvius, Vienna, 8–14 pp. [Google Scholar]
  • Schwarz U. 2020. Hydropower Projects on Balkan Rivers 2020 Update, Fluvius, Vienna, 3p. [Google Scholar]
  • Simić V, Petrović A, Rajković M, Paunović M. 2008. Crayfish of Serbia and Montenegro - The population status and the level of endangerment. Crustaceana 81: 1153–1176. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Souty-Grosset C, Holdich D, Nöel P, Reynolds J, Haffner PH. 2006. Atlas of Crayfish in Europe, Patrimoines naturels, 64, Museum national d’Histoire naturelle, Paris. [Google Scholar]
  • Souty-Grosset C, Anastácio PM, Aquiloni L, et al. 2016. The red swamp crayfish Procambarus clarkii in Europe: Impacts on aquatic ecosystems and human well-being. Limnologica 58: 78–93. [Google Scholar]
  • Spitzy R. 1973. Crayfish in Austria, history and actual situation. Freshw Crayfish 1: 10–14. [Google Scholar]
  • Statzner B, Fièvet E, Champagne J-Y, Morel R, Herouin E. 2000. Crayfish as geomorphic agents and ecosystem engineers: Biological behavior affects sand and gravel erosion in experimental streams. Limnol Oceanogr 45: 1030–1040. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Tockner K, Stanford JA. 2002. Riverine flood plains: Present state and future trends. Environ Conserv 29: 308–330. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Todorov M, Antonova V, Hubenov Z, et al. 2014. Distribution and current status of stone crayfish populations Austropotamobius torrentium (Decapoda: Astacidae) in Natura 2000 protected areas in Bulgaria. Acta Zool Bulg 66: 181–202. [Google Scholar]
  • Todorov M, Trichkova T, Hubenov Z, Jurajda P. 2020. Faxonius limosus (Rafinesque, 1817) (Decapoda: Cambaridae), a new invasive alien species of European union concern in Bulgaria. Acta Zool Bulg 72: 113–121. [Google Scholar]
  • Tošić I, Vujević D, Stančić Z. 2019. Impact of floods on increased heavy metal content in the inundation area of the Drava river in the Varaždin county. Hrvatske vode 5: 305–316. [Google Scholar]
  • Trichkova T, Botev I, Hubenov Z, et al. 2013. Freshwater crayfish (Decapoda: Astacidae) distribution and conservation in Bulgaria. Freshw Crayfish 19: 243–248. [Google Scholar]
  • Trontelj P, Machino Y, Sket B. 2005. Phylogenetic and phylogeographic relationships in the crayfish genus Austropotamobius inferred from mitochondrial COI gene sequences. Mol Phylogenet Evol 34: 212–226. [Google Scholar]
  • Trožić-Borovac S. 2011. Freshwater crayfish in Bosnia and Herzegovina: the first report on their distribution. Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst. 401: 26. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Twardochleb LA, Olden JD, Larson ER. 2013. A global meta-analysis of the ecological impacts of nonnative crayfish. Freshw Sci 32: 1367–1382. [Google Scholar]
  • UNESCO. 2012. Mura-Drava-Danube UNESCO Biosphere Reserve. http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/environment/ecological-sciences/biosphere-reserves/europe-north-america/croatiahungary/mura-drava-danube. [Google Scholar]
  • Usio N. 2000. Effects of crayfish on leaf processing and invertebrate colonisation of leaves in a headwater stream: decoupling of a trophic cascade. Oecologia 124: 608–614. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Vander Zanden J, Casselman J, Rasmussen J. 1999. Stable isotope evidence for food web consequences of species invasions in lakes. Nature 401: 464–467. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Veselý L, Ruokonen TJ, Weiperth A, et al. 2021. Trophic niches of three sympatric invasive crayfish of EU concern. Hydrobiologia 5: 727–737. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Weinländer M, Füreder L. 2009. The continuing spread of Pacifastacus leniusculus in Carinthia (Austria). Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst. 394–395: 17. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Weinländer M, Füreder L. 2010. The ecology and habitat requirements of Austropotamobius torrentium in small forest streams in Carinthia (Austria). Freshw Crayfish 17: 221–226. [Google Scholar]
  • Weinländer M, Füreder L. 2016. Native and alien crayfish species: Do their trophic roles differ? Freshw Sci 35: 1340–1353. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Weinländer M, Bou-Vinals A, Füreder L. 2014. Landscape analyses offer a promising tool for managing native and alien crayfish species. Freshw Crayfish 20: 27–40. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Weiperth A, Bláha M, Szajbert B, et al. 2020. Hungary: A European hotspot of non-native crayfish biodiversity. Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst. 421: 43. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Weiss S, Apostolou A, Djug S, et al. 2018. Endangered Fish Species in Balkan Rivers: their distributions and threats from hydropower development. RiverWatch, Vienna, EuroNatur, Radolfzell, 162 p. [Google Scholar]
  • WWF Adria. 2021. World’s first 5-country biosphere reserve will benefit people and nature in the ‘Amazon of Europe, WWF Adria, Zagreb. [Google Scholar]
  • WWF Austria. 2013. Assessment of the River and Floodplain Restoration Potential in the Transboundary UNESCO Biosphere Reserve “Mura-Drava-Danube”, WWF, Vienna. [Google Scholar]
  • Zorić KS, Atanacković AD, Ilić M, Csányi B, Paunović MM. 2020. The spiny-cheek crayfish Faxonius limosus (Rafinesque, 1817) (Decapoda: Cambaridae) invades new areas in Serbian inland waters. Acta Zool Bulg 72: 623–627. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.