Evaluation of visual encounter surveys of the noble crayfish, Astacus astacus, and the spiny-cheek crayfish, Orconectes limosus

Open access


Several methods of sampling are commonly used to detect freshwater crayfish (Decapoda: Malacostraca). Many of them are laborious, time-consuming, and require dedicated equipment. The aims of this contribution are i) to compare visual encounter surveys and baited trap success in the detection of the noble crayfish, Astacus astacus (L.), which is endangered in Poland, and ii) to assess the time needed to detect the invasive spiny-cheek crayfish, Orconectes limosus (Raf.). The study is based on data collected between 2016–2018 in various habitats of Astacus astacus and Orconectes limosus in Poland. Visual encounter surveys are at least as effective in assessing the presence of A. astacus as the trapping method. The modal value for the detection time of O. limosus at all sites and all surveys was two minutes. Sample rarefaction showed that one survey covered 11.33 (SD = 0.43) of a maximum of 12 detections per survey. This suggests that, despite some limitations, visual detection might be an efficient method for determining crayfish presence/absence for a wide range of applications.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Ahmadi M. 2016 – The Feasibility of Electrotaxis and Phototaxis in American Crayfish – Improved Experimental Designs. Lambert Academic Publishing.

  • Alonso F. 2001 – Efficiency of electrofishing as a sampling method for freshwater crayfish population in small creeks – Limnetica 20: 59-72.

  • Dorn N.J. Urgelles R. Trexler J.C. 2005 – Evaluating active and passive sampling methods to quantify crayfish density in a freshwater wetland – J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 24:346-356.

  • Green N. Bentley M. Stebbing P. Andreou D. Britton R. 2018 – Trapping for invasive crayfish: comparisons of efficacy and selectivity of baited traps versus novel artificial refuge traps – Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst. 419: 15.

  • Holdich D. Black J. 2007 – The spiny-cheek crayfish Orconectes limosus (Rafinesque 1817) [Crustacea: Decapoda: Cambaridae] digs into the UK – Aquat. Invasions 2: 1-15.

  • Marzec M. Okrągła I. 2018 – Crayfishes in selected lakes of the Suwalski Landscape Park – Przegl. Przyr. 3: 100-106 (in Polish with an English summary).

  • Nowicki P. Tirelli T. Sartor R.M. Bona F. Pessani D. 2008 – Monitoring crayfish using a mark-recapture method: potentials recommendations and limitations – Biodivers. Conserv. 17: 3513-3530.

  • Pilotto F. Free G. Crosa G. Sena F. Ghiani M. Cardoso A.C. 2008 – The invasive crayfish Orconectes limosus in Lake Varese: estimating abundance and population size structure in the context of habitat and methodological constraints – J. Crust. Biol. 28: 633-640.

  • Price J.E. Welch S.M. 2009 – Semi-quantitive methods for crayfish sampling: sex size and habitat bias – J Crust. Biol 29: 208-216.

  • Rabeni C.F. Collier K.J. Parkyn S.M. Hicks B.J. 1997 – Evaluating techniques for sampling stream crayfish (Paranephrops planifrons) – New. Zeal. J. Mar. Fresh. 31: 693-700.

  • Reynolds J. O’Connor W. O’Keeffe. Lynn D. 2010 – A technical manual for monitoring white-clawed crayfish Austropotamobius pallipes in Irish lakes – Irish Wildlife Manuals No. 45. Environment Heritage and Local Government.

  • Strużyński W. 2015 – The noble crayfish Astacus astacus (Linnaeus 1758) – In: Monitoring Animal Species. A Practical Guide. Part IV (Eds) M. Makomaska-Juchiewicz M. Bonk Biblioteka Monitoringu Środowiska Warszawa: 262-280 (in Polish).

Journal information
Impact Factor

CiteScore 2018: 0.72

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.286
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 1.053

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 23 23 14
PDF Downloads 12 12 12