Also collected from Black River, Nipigon River, and Thunder Bay, Lake Superior, Canada (Mills et al. 1993). 

Apeltes quadracus often live sympatrically with other species of stickleback throughout their native range, though they are generally solitary with regard to other members of their own species. Individuals are often observed perched among bottom debris and vegetation, never in open water, hovering over a patch of substrate, picking at it frequently, then moving on to another patch (Delbeek and Williams 1987). Delbeek and Williams (1987) also found that fourspine stickleback fed exclusively on the bottom, wither among benthic vegetation or from the substrate, the most abundant organisms in their diets being diatoms, nauplii, nematodes, ostracods, and cyclopods. During spawning, the males of this species establish territories and build small nests in which females lay their eggs (Courtenay 1985). Them male then chases the female away and cares for the eggs until they hatch. Courtenay (1985) also found that, unlike other stickleback species, male Apeltes tend multiple nests at one time in both laboratory and natural breeding site observations. Fourspine stickleback also has the widest range of salinity tolerance of any North American species of stickleback (Holm and Hamilton 1988).

Bait shops in Alabama were found to be selling stickleback mixed in with fathead minnows at the time the specimens were collected (N. Nichols, pers. comm.).

Summary of species impacts derived from literature review. Click on an icon to find out more...

Environmental

Potential:
Rapid increases of A. quadracus in Thunder Bay suggest that the species is displacing native stickleback species at a rapid rate (Stephenson and Momot 2000).  Where established, this species is mostly confined to nearshore areas.

There is little or no evidence to support that Apeltes quadracus has significant socio-economic impacts in the Great Lakes.

There is little or no evidence to support that Apeltes quadracus has significant beneficial effects in the Great Lakes.

Note: Check federal, state/provincial, and local regulations for the most up-to-date information.

Control
Biological
There are no known biological control methods for this species.

Physical
There are no known physical control methods for this species.  Netting or other physical removal might be effective if the fish are in a limited area, but unlikely to be effective for eradication of even a small population.

Chemical
Of the four chemical piscicides registered for use in the United States, antimycin A and rotenone are considered “general” piscicides, but no studies have been found of their effects on Apeltes quadracus (GLMRIS 2012).

Increasing CO2 concentrations, either by bubbling pressurized gas directly into water or by the addition of sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3) has been used to sedate fishes with minimal residual toxicity, and is a potential method of harvesting fish for removal, though maintaining adequate CO2 concentrations may be difficult in large/natural water bodies (Clearwater et al. 2008). CO2 is approved only for use as an anesthetic for cold, cool, and warm water fishes the US, not for use as euthanasia, and exposure to NaHCO3 concentration of 142-642 mg/L for 5 min. is sufficient to anaesthetize most fish (Clearwater et al. 2008).

It should be noted that chemical treatment will often lead to non-target kills, and so all options for management of a species should be adequately studied before a decision is made to use piscicides or other chemicals. Potential effects on non-target plants and organisms, including macroinvertebrates and other fish, should always be deliberately evaluated and analyzed. The effects of combinations of management chemicals and other toxicants, whether intentional or unintentional, should be understood prior to chemical treatment. Boogaard et al. (2003) found that the lampricides 3-trifluoromethyl-4-nitrophenol (TFM) and 2’,5-dichloro-4’-nitrosalicylanilide (niclosamide) demonstrate additive toxicity when combined. In another study on cumulative toxicity, combinations of niclosamide and TFM with contaminants common in the Great Lakes (pesticides, heavy metals, industrial organics, phosphorus, and sediments) were found to be mostly additive in toxicity to rainbow trout, and one combination of TFM, Delnav, and malathion was synergistic, with toxicity magnified 7.9 times (Marking and Bills 1985). This highlights the need for managers to conduct on-site toxicity testing and to give serious consideration to determining the total toxic burden to which organisms may be exposed when using chemical treatments (Marking and Bills 1985). Other non-selective alterations of water quality, such as reducing dissolved oxygen levels or altering pH, could also have a deleterious impact on native fish, invertebrates, and other fauna or flora, and their potential harmful effects should therefore be evaluated thoroughly.

Note: Check state/provincial and local regulations for the most up-to-date information regarding permits for control methods. Follow all label instructions.