







































Ecology, Economy, and Society–the INSEE Journal 7(1): 13-27, January 2024 

THEMATIC ESSAY 

Sustainable Management of Exotic Fish Biodiversity 

in Karnataka: Status, Challenges, and Threats 

Amie Chakma, Manikantan Pappuswamy and Aditi Chaudhary*** 

Abstract: Fish biodiversity, a significant part of the aquatic ecosystem, has been 
studied widely in India. However, the distribution and diversity of fish species have 
not been well-researched at the state and/or regional levels. Karnataka is bestowed 
with 8% of the country’s water resources, which are under extreme pressure because 
of unregulated population growth, biological invasion, and developmental 
requirements. Since the middle of the nineteenth century, India has been introducing 
alien species to its water bodies. Currently, 13.6% of the fish diversity in India is 
exotic and has been established voluntarily or involuntarily for various purposes. The 
establishment of invasive alien fishes negatively influences native fish communities 
around the globe. In general, most publications present the latest status of 
ichthyofauna in several regions of Karnataka; however, there is no up-to-date 
documentation on strategic environmental developments and unforeseen challenges, 
such as invasive alien species (IAS). This study reconstructs existing knowledge while 
analytically reviewing challenges, potential management techniques, advancements, 
and the impacts of climate change and disseminates the data necessary for the 
comprehension of the biological invasion of IAS. 

Keywords: Invasive alien species, Biological invasion, Fish biodiversity, Threats, 
Conservation, Aquatic ecosystem, Karnataka. 

 

 

 
 Department of Life Sciences, Christ (Deemed to be University), Bangalore – 560029, India. 
amie.chakma@res.christuniversity.in  

 Department of Life Sciences, Christ (Deemed to be University), Bangalore – 560029, 
India. manikantan.p@christuniversity.in  

*** PhD student, Department of Life Sciences, Christ (Deemed to be University), Bangalore 

– 560029, India; aditi.chaudhary@res.christuniversity.in  

Copyright © Chakma, Pappuswamy and Chaudhary 2024. Released under Creative 
Commons Attribution © NonCommercial 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC 4.0) by the 

author.  

Published by Indian Society for Ecological Economics (INSEE), c/o Institute of Economic 

Growth, University Enclave, North Campus, Delhi 110007.  

ISSN: 2581–6152 (print); 2581–6101 (web).  

DOI: https://doi.org/10.37773/ees.v7i1.902  

 

mailto:amie.chakma@res.christuniversity.in
mailto:manikantan.p@christuniversity.in
mailto:aditi.chaudhary@res.christuniversity.in
https://doi.org/10.37773/ees.v7i1.902


 Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [14] 

1. INTRODUCTION 

Fishing is a major occupation in most villages in Karnataka (around 30%), 
second only to farming (Ramchurjee and Suresha 2006). Karnataka has nearly 
0.52 million hectares of freshwater resources, with around 0.15 million 
hectares dedicated to fish farming. Despite the large water-spread area, 
Karnataka contributes only 8% of the total Indian fish production, indicating 
that several technical and socio-economic constraints impede fish production 
(Basavakumar, Devendrappa, and Srenivas 2011). The Karnataka riverine 
system supplies 75 species for aquarium trade, followed by 48 species for 
aquaculture, 53 species for capture fishery, and 27 species for game fishing. 
Among the threatened species category, 5 are critically endangered, 22 are 
endangered, and 13 are vulnerable. There are 200 non-threatened species, of 
which 18 are near-threatened, 155 are of least concern, 12 are data-deficient, 
and 15 have not been evaluated against International Union for Conservation 
of Nature (IUCN) criteria (NBFGR. 2010). The actual number of invasive 
species in Karnataka could be higher; however, given the geographically 
uneven research effort on biological invasions, this figure is yet to be 
determined. 

In recent decades, globalization has facilitated the transportation of goods 
and people worldwide, resulting in the establishment of exotic species in 
regions beyond their natural habitats. The cost of controlling these invasive 
alien species (IAS), and the economic impacts of their persistence, total 
thousands of dollars annually, according to the IUCN. A 2020 study projects 
that the number of established IAS will increase by 30% between 2005 and 
2050 (IUCN 2021). Thus far, evidence indicates that 13.6% of fish species in 
India are exotic. They have been established (Joshi et al. 2021)—voluntarily 
or involuntarily—for various purposes, such as aquaculture, therapeutic 
value, research, capture fishery, game fishing, and aquarium trade (Lakra, 
Singh, and Ayyappan 2008). This paper summarizes the extensive studies 
that have been conducted by several researchers on fisheries in Karnataka, 
i.e., fisheries that have a substantial influence. Currently, there is no 
comprehensive and dynamic up-to-date documentation on strategic 
environmental developments to address unforeseen challenges such as the 
establishing of IAS. This paper reconstructs existing knowledge and 
analytically reviews the challenges, potential, management techniques, 
advancements, and the impacts of climate change on fisheries to 
disseminate the research necessary to understand the nature and impact of 
the biological invasion of IAS. 

 

 



[15] Chakma, Pappuswamy and Chaudhary 

2. RIVER DRAINAGE IN KARNATAKA 

The Karnataka drainage map features the following salient features (Figure 
1). Rapid rivers flow into the Arabian Sea in the west from the Western Ghats 
(Sahyadri), producing a significant water divide between the eastern and 
western parts of the state. Some of these rivers are Aganashini, Netravati, 
Bedti/Gangavalli, Kalinadi, Chakra, and Sharavati. The rivers Krishna,  

Figure 1: River Drainage in Karnataka 

 

Source: Maps of India (www.mapsofindia.com) 

Tungabhadra, and Cauvery are located in the eastern part of the state. The 
Godavari River has several tributaries, namely, Manjira, Karanja, Painganga, 
Pranhita, Wainganga, Wardha, Maer, and Sabri. Most of the Krishna River’s 
upstream flow as well as its tributaries pass through northern Karnataka, 

http://www.mapsofindia.com/


 Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [16] 

some heading straight into Andhra Pradesh. Bhima, Ghataprabha, 
Malaprabha, and Tungabhadra are its main tributaries. The catchment area 
and the tributaries of the Krishna, particularly in the northern and central 
districts, serve more than 60% of the state. The Cauvery River begins its 
journey in the southern region of Kodagu, travels down the slopes of the 
Eastern Ghats and flows across the Mysore plateau, eventually passing 
through upland areas in Tamil Nadu before it enters the Bay of Bengal.  A 
few rivers that flow across the Mysore plateau in southern Karnataka—
Uttara Pinakini, Dakshina Pinakini, and Palar—are seasonally active, 
originating near the Nandi Hills and flowing into the sea after passing 
through Andhra Pradesh or Tamil Nadu. 

3. THE BIODIVERSITY OF THE MAJOR RIVERS OF 
KARNATAKA  

The Cauvery River—the fourth-largest river network draining the southern 
part of peninsular India—alone accounts for 109 fish species. Around 168 
species have been recorded in the Krishna River basin, followed by 130 
species in the Tungabhadra, 61 species in the Varda, 59 species in the 
Godavari, 37 species in the Sharavathi, 29 species in the Bhirna, 17 species in 
the Bedti, and 13 species in the Kagina. The west-flowing river basins, 
formed from by the Sita, Swam, and Varahi rivers, recorded 81 species 
(Mogalekar et al. 2016) (Figure 2). 

Figure 2. Fish Diversity in the Various Riverine Systems of Karnataka 

 

Source: Mogalekar et al. (2016)  

 

109, 16%

168, 24%

130, 18%

61, 9%

59, 8%

37, 5%

29, 4%
17, 2%

13, 2% 81, 12%

Cauvery Krishna Tungabhadra

Varda Godavari Sharavathi

Bhirna Bedti Kagina

Sita, Swam, Varahi



[17] Chakma, Pappuswamy and Chaudhary 

4. INVASION ECOLOGY IN KARNATAKA  

This section summarizes the structure of exotic freshwater species in 
Karnataka.  

4.1 Streams and River  

The majority of the fish species documented were found to be extensively 
dispersed in rivers and streams, as demonstrated in a study of the Tunga 
River. The current analysis suggests that the Cyprinid family is predominant 
in the region (Naik et al. 2013; Bhat 2004). According to local fisherfolk, the 
river is losing its natural carnivorous fish, including Wallago attu, Channa 
marulius, Heteropneustes fossilis, and, most notably, Ompok bimaculatus (Naik, 
Kumar, Mahesh, and Benkappa 2013) ; Gowda et al. 2015; Zoological Survey 
of India 2013; Atkore et al. 2020; Narasimhaiah et al. 2013). 

4.2 Wetlands and Lakes 

Mydala Lake, Tumakuru, was established for the aquaculture industry and 
comprises both endemic and exotic species. Current records on exotic 
species suggest that the presence of Oreochromis nilotica and Oreochromis 
mossambicus are a risk to the major endemic carp of India, an issue that ought 
to be explored (Shivaraju and Ahmad 2017). Although minor carp, such as 
Cyprinus carpio and Ctenopharyngodon idellus, are also present in the lake, they are 
likely to be considered invasive. Kelageri Lake, with a catchment area of 6.36 
square miles, has been recorded to have fish belonging to many 
orders/families, but these species were undetected during the study, perhaps 
due to the presence of IAS such as catfish, which are abundant in this lake. 
Eliminating predatory and invasive fishes, reducing anthropogenic threats, 
and following lake management guidelines might help other sensitive fishes, 
thereby improving fish faunal diversity in Kelageri Lake (Parimala 2021; 
Kamble and Ganesh 2016; Thirumala and Kiran 2017a). 

4.3 Dams 

Conservation efforts are crucial for Savandurga forest—a deciduous forest 
that serves as a vital resource for the local populace, who rely on it for various 
purposes. Unfortunately, due to human activities such as burning, a 
significant portion of the forest has been degraded, leading to the 
establishment of non-native species and canopy openings. Manchanbele 
Dam, which is located in the Savandurga forest, serves as a crucial catchment 
area. Given the rise in tourism activity within this region, it is imperative to 
implement conservation measures for its preservation (Chetana and Ganesh 
2007). 

 



 Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [18] 

Table 1: Contribution of Exotic Fish Diversity Studies in Karnataka  

S. 
No. 

Title Author Outcome of the Study 

1. 1 Assessment of 
Fish Diversity of 
Tunga River, 
Karnataka, India  

Naik et al. (2013) The introduction of Clarias 
gariepinus, also known as the 
African catfish, has resulted in a 
decline in indigenous fish stock 
due to competition for space and 
food. The Indian government 
has banned the introduction of 
this highly carnivorous species, 
which has caused severe damage 
to aquatic fauna, and the Union 
Agriculture Ministry has ordered 
the mass killing of these fish to 
prevent further harm. 

2. 2 Fish Biodiversity 
of Tunga, Bhadra 
and Tungabhadra 
Rivers of 
Karnataka, India 

Gowda et al. 
(2015) 

The paper suggests that the lower 
and middle stretches of the river 
support more exotic species. It is 
possible to ensure species 
sustainability in the river if 
fishery regulations are limited to 
the upper and lower stretches of 
the river. 

3. 3 Ecology and 
Ichthyofaunal 
Diversity of 
Mydala Lake of 
Tumakuru, 
Karnataka State, 
India  

Shivaraju and 
Ahmad (2017) 

Findings suggest that there is a 
need to investigate the potential 
threat posed by exotic species, 
such as Oreochromis, to the native 
major carps of India. 

4. 4 Ichthyofaunal 
Diversity Status 
in Kelageri Lake, 
Dharwad, 
Karnataka State 

Kamble and 
Ganesh (2016) 

Kelageri Lake is rich in aquatic 
biodiversity, primarily due to 
fishing regulations (restrictions 
on the use of a particular mesh 
size), which has resulted in lesser 
fish mortality than in other 
adjoining lakes. 

5. 5 Ichthyofauna of 
Jannapura Pond, 
Bhadravathi, 
Karnataka 

Venkateshwarlu 
and Somashekar 
(2005) 

A study on the ichthyofauna in 
Jannapura Pond, Bhadravathi, 
revealed that three species, viz, 
Oreochromis mossambicus, 
Ctenopharyngodon idella, and 
Cyprinus Carpio, were introduced 
species. 



[19] Chakma, Pappuswamy and Chaudhary 

S. 
No. 

Title Author Outcome of the Study 

6. 6 Survey and 
Activity Patterns 
of Nocturnal 
Mammals in a 
Fragmented Dry 
Deciduous Forest 
of Karnataka 

Chetana and 
Ganesh (2007) 

The degradation of the 
Manchanbele Dam, Savandurga, 
caused by human activities such 
as burning has led to the 
establishment of exotic species 
and canopy openings. 
 

7. 7 Ichthyofaunal 
Biodiversity of 
Tunga Reservoir 
(Gajanoor Dam), 
Karnataka (India) 

Naik et al. (2012) Exotic fish, including Oreochromis 
mossambicus, Oreochromis niloticus, 
and Clarias garipinus, were found 
in all three landing centres. The 
rapid breeding of tilapia had a 
3significant impact on 
i4ndigenous fish p5opulations 
due to co6mpetition for 
reso7urces. 

 

5. IMPACTS OF INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES  

The introduction of IAS has negatively influenced native fish communities 
around the globe. Due to a lack of risk assessment studies, indigenous fishes 
and their habitats are under threat (Cambray 2003). Fishing culture, including 
the cultivation of ornamental fish, and the rearing of alien fishes in flood-
prone zones, are potential risk factors that can result in the depletion of native 
species (Joshi et al. 2021; Knight 2010). IUCN has identified Gambusia affinis 
as one of the worst invasive species. It is recorded as an IAS in the country. 
Larvivorous fish are widely utilized for mosquito biocontrol and are prevalent 
among both rural and urban populations. However, in multiple global 
locations, these fish have been observed to breed prolifically and compete 
effectively with native fish species, leading to ecological imbalances and 
compromising environmental integrity (Raja and Ravikanth 2020). 

According to reports, the introduction of Tor khudree has been linked to the 
extinction of the indigenous Tor remadevii in the Cauvery (Pinder et al. 2019). 
Moreover, since Tor khudree has spread outside of its native range to across 
much of peninsula India, this species has lately been brought down from 
“endangered” to “least concern” per the IUCN (Pinder et al. 2019). 

The African catfish (Clarias gariepinus) has a significant effect on native species 
which it competes with for available resources, causing a reduction in the 
native fish habitat and population (Naik et al 2013). It has been observed that 
the entire native fish flora has been exterminated in some water bodies upon 
the introduction of this species because it devours aquatic habitat and a range 



 Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [20] 

of aquatic species even though they may exhibit tolerance. The highly 
predatory African catfish was brought into India’s aquatic ecosystem by a 
different pathway. Over the years, the population of this fish has increased 
in many aquatic habitats in the country, thereby impacting the local fish 
population. As a result, the Ministry of Agriculture has mandated the mass 
extermination of these fish and banned their culture (Naik et al. 2013).  

In the 1950s, the common carp (Cyprinus carpio) was introduced into artificial 
lakes and has severely impacted the native fish of various river systems. It has 
been reported that the common carp has replaced and dominates most 
species in reservoirs; for example, the Krishnarajasagar Reservoir (Yaqoob 
2021). Similarly, other reservoirs and perennial tanks have faced the same 
issue wherein the decision to cultivate common carp has been influenced by 
tilapia culture. The commercially important major carp of India dominate 
endemic species like Puntius pulchellus, Puntius jerdoni, Puntius carnaticus, and 
Labeo nigrescens (Singh and Lakra 2011; Silas 1949). Tilapia has substituted 
most of the indigenous fish species in reservoirs—for instance, in Nelligudda 
and Manchanabele in Karnataka. This can be attributed to substantial 
landings of Oreochromis mossambicus. Moreover, local fishermen claim that the 
species is an undesired catch because there is not much of a market locally 
and the species harvest has been rising over time (Sarkar et al. 2018; Naik et 
al. 2013). 

Over the past ten years, several new species have emerged in 
biodiversity hotspot areas such as the Northeast and Western Ghat regions 
(Sarkar, Mahapatra, and Lakra 2014). A new invasive species, Pterygoplichthys 
disjunctivus, commonly called the loricariid catfish, was first recorded in 2014 
in the Cauvery River (Panikkar et al. 2015). 

Pterygoplichthys disjunctivus has been reported to have significant ecological 
impacts, including disrupting the food web by extensive grazing on plankton 
and detritus, out-competing native species for food, causing the death of 
aquatic birds due to choking on the species’ hard spines, disrupting plant 
communities through tail-lashing, and damaging fishing gear due to their 
nests and fishing burrows. However, the deleterious effects of these species 
were not apparent until after their introduction and establishment in the 
ecosystem (Panikkar et al. 2015; Sandilyan et al. 2018). According to the 
literature available on exotic fish in open inland waters, reservoirs located in 
South Indian states are susceptible to the risks posed by these non-native 
species. 

Climate change and the associated extreme weather events can facilitate the 
spread of IAS to new regions and reduce the resistance of habitats to 
invasions. It is necessary to research the impacts of climate change on aquatic 



[21] Chakma, Pappuswamy and Chaudhary 

resources, especially IAS, and to integrate measures to prevent and manage 
their spread through climate change policies (ICAR-CIFRI 2016.) 

Table 2: Impacts of Exotic Species in the Aquatic Ecosystems of Karnataka  

 
S. 
No. 

 
Name of Exotic    
Species 

      
Recognized and Predicted 
Impacts of Exotic Species 

 
References 

    1. Gambusia affinis 
(Mosquito fish)  

Breeds in large numbers and 
contends with endemic fish, 
disrupting environmental integrity 
in several locations around the 
world. 

Raja and 
Ravikanth 
(2020) 

    2. Oreochromis 
mossambicus  
(Mozambique 
tilapia) 

High usage as a substitute for most 
indigenous fish species has led to a 
decline in the population of 
indigenous fishes. 

Naik et al. 
(2013) 

    3. Oreochromis niloticus 
(Nile tilapia) 

The high increase in its population 
has led to competition for 
resources. 

Khan, 
Preetha, and 
Sharma (2015) 

    4. Clarias gariepinus  
(African catfish) 
 

Its carnivorous nature causes the 
extinction of native species and, 
consequently, loss of biodiversity. 

Sarkar et al. 
(2018) 

    5. Pterygoplichthys 
disjunctivus  
(Vermiculated 
sailfin catfish) 

Its ability to cause disturbances in 
the food web and its highly 
competitive food traits results in 
the decline of native species, the 
death of aquatic birds, and 
disruption in plant communities. 

Panikkar et al. 
(2015) 

    6. Cyprinus carpio  
(Common carp) 

Cirrhinus species (C. cirrhosus, C. 
reba, and C. mrigala) have declined 
as a consequence of its presence. 

Sarkar et al. 
(2018) 

    7. Ctenopharyngodon 
Idella 
(Grass carp) 

Negative effect on large carps, 
according to the mixed trophic 
impact routine of ecological 
modelling research. 

Khan et al. 
(2015) 

    8. Hypophthalmichthys 
molitrix  
(Silver carp) 

Hinders the growth of catla fish. Sarkar et al. 
(2018) 

 

6. FISHERIES IN RESERVOIRS OF KARNATAKA  

Karnataka has the maximum number of large reservoirs compared to other 
states (Sarkar et al. 2014); around 13.87% of reservoirs in India belong to 



 Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [22] 

Karnataka. Construction of barriers such as reservoirs and dams has 
increased the share of IAS in the riverine system and decreased the flow of 
water, creating a potential site for farming and thereby resulting in a 
controlled ecosystem where selective species—such as tilapia—are preferred 
due to locals’ unawareness of the impact of IAS. Since the middle of the 
nineteenth century, India has used alien species to diversify its fisheries and 
aquaculture. However, many of the local indigenous fish species have been 
adversely affected due to the introduction of these invasive species. In the 
Girna and Krishnasagar reservoirs, Karnataka, Cirrhinus species (C. cirrhosus, 
C. reba, and C. mrigala) have declined as a consequence of the existence of 
common carp (Sarkar et al. 2018; Sugunan 2000). 

Cyprinus carpio is the prevalent exotic carp in Hemavathy Reservoir, 
Karnataka, and landings are consistently adequate all through the year. Since 
they have a faster growth rate and make a substantial contribution to fisheries, 
common carp are considered ideal for many reservoirs in Karnataka. 
However, it is not recommended to stock common carp in thermally 
stratified reservoirs with anoxic hypolimnion due to the unsatisfactory 
growth and survival reported from the Nelligudda, Manchanabele, and 
Suvarnavathy reservoirs of Karnataka (Sarkar et al. 2018; Thirumala and Kiran 
2017b). Reservoirs in Karnataka also contain exotic carp, which satisfies local 
market demand. In addition, other enormous Indian carp—such as grass carp 
(Ctenopharyngodon idella)—make a significant contribution to fisheries. These 
exotic carp have a good effect on gobies but a negative effect on large carp, 
according to the mixed trophic impact routine of ecological modelling 
research (Khan et al. 2015), which was used to study the impact of direct and 
indirect interactions. Due to poor market demand and consumer preferences, 
it has been determined that the silver carp (Hypophthalmichthys molitrix) and 
grass carp are not suitable for stocking in South Indian lakes. 

In 2009–10, Suvarnavathy Reservoir witnessed an increase of 70% in its 
fishing yield, of which, large Indian carp made up almost 90% of the catch 
due to maintained stocking and constrained fishing. Krishnarajasagar 
Reservoir, Karnataka, was regularly filled with advanced carp fingerlings from 
2009 to 2010 under a public–private partnership (PPP), and current research 
reveals that capturing techniques such as cultured-based fisheries are 
appropriate for the large reservoirs of Karnataka (Rao et al. 2013; Sarkar et al. 
2014; Hassan et al. 2017; Raghavan et al. 2008; Khan et al. 2015; Thirumala 
and Kiran 2017a). 

7. CONSERVATION MEASURES 

Based on the available literature on non-native fish in open inland waters, it 
has been suggested that reservoirs in the southern states of India are at risk 



[23] Chakma, Pappuswamy and Chaudhary 

of being affected by exotic species. Restricting catfish to small reservoirs is 
necessary because certain catfish species, such as Heteropneustes fossilis and 
Clarias batrachus, are highly invasive. However, catfish fisheries remain 
profitable and in demand in some regions (Sarkar et al. 2014). The 
invasiveness of Tor khudree has surpassed its native range, posing a threat to 
the conservation of the mahseer, Tor remadevii. Active removal of Tor khudree 
from the Cauvery is necessary to eradicate the species with the help of anglers 
and other appropriate approaches (Pinder et al. 2019). Bhimasandra Pond 
currently has a thriving population of the invasive species, Oreochromis 
mossambicus, while native Indian major carp species, including Labeo and 
Puntius sp., face significant threats from rapidly increasing water pollution. To 
preserve the pond and its ecosystem, multiple conservation measures, such 
as restoring habitats and promoting education and awareness, must be 
adopted to enhance fishery yields, optimize economic gains, and maintain 
species diversity. Culture-based fisheries are an effective management tool 
for increasing yield from open waters when the selection of desired species 
is lower than the carrying capacity of the water body. Direct fish stocking for 
recruitment and recapture from open waters is the foundation of culture-
based fisheries. However, most Indian reservoirs and wetlands have 
insufficient recruitment of desired fish species due to breeding failure caused 
by habitat degradation and overfishing. To avoid overfishing, a three-month 
fishing break from July to September is necessary to enable adequate fish 
growth. Mesh management in fishing is also a vital component that must be 
properly ensured. Taking appropriate measures to protect these resources 
through ecologically sustainable aquaculture is crucial (Shivaraju and Ahmad 
2017). 

8. CONCLUSION 

Deteriorating riverine habitats in India are reported to be invaded by alien 
fishes. If this deterioration continues at the present pace, it will lead to the 
spread of disease and loss of valuable fish species as well as a decline in the 
economy (Joshi et al. 2021). These factors—along with certain other factors 
such as anthropological activities in the environment, overexploitation, and 
habitat loss—are significant threats to aquatic biodiversity, due to which 
immediate action on conservation strategies in the form of promoting aquatic 
biodiversity is necessary (Sarkar et al. 2014). The conservation policy should 
promote freshwater ecosystems, encourage the restoration of threatened 
species, and encourage interactive surveillance, preventative measures, 
elimination, and awareness to manage the negative impacts of IAS in the 
ecosystem. Furthermore, introducing divisions such as particular tanks for 
IAS at institutions has been found to be beneficial (Raj et al. 2021). 
Conservation tools and innovative techniques should be introduced as well, 



 Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [24] 

followed by the cultural recognition that conservation is everyone’s 
responsibility. Lastly, to achieve these goals, extensive research should be 
conducted on the interactions of native and exotic species, biodiversity 
alteration, inherited deterioration, and the advent of infectious diseases and 
parasites. 

Ethics Statement: I hereby confirm that this study complies with requirements of 
ethical approvals from the institutional ethics committee for the conduct of this 
research.  

Data Availability statement: The data used to support this research is not provided 

in a repository as it has no data set.  

Conflict of Interest Statement: No potential conflict of interest was reported by 

the author. 

REFERENCES 

Atkore, Vidyadhar, Nachiket Kelkar, Shrinivas Badiger, Kartik Shanker, and Jagdish 
Krishnaswamy. 2020. “Multiscale Investigation of Water Chemistry Effects on Fish 
Guild Species Richness in Regulated and Nonregulated Rivers of India’s Western 
Ghats: Implications for Restoration.” Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 149 
(3): 298–319. https://doi.org/10.1002/tafs.10230.  
Basavakumar, K V, S Devendrappa, and S T Srenivas. 2011. “A Study on Profile of 
Fishing Community of a Village in Karnataka.” Karnataka Journal of Agriculture Science 
24 (5): 684–687. 
Bhat, Anuradha. 2004. “Patterns in the Distribution of Freshwater Fishes in Rivers 
of Central Western Ghats, India and Their Associations with Environmental 
Gradients.” Hydrobiologia 529 (1–3): 83–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-004-
4949-1  
Chandrashekhariah, H N, M F Rahman, and S Lakshmi Raghavan. 2000. “Status of 
Fish Fauna in Karnataka.” In Endemic Fish Diversity of Western Ghat, edited by A G 
Ponniah and A Gopalakrishnan, pp. 98–135. Lucknow: National Bureau of Fish 
Genetic Resources Publication. 
Chetana, H C, and T Ganesh. 2007. “Survey and Activity Patterns of Nocturnal 
Mammals in a Fragmented Dry Deciduous Forest of Karnataka.” Zoos’ Print Journal 
22 (4): 2644–47. https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.ZPJ.1576.2644-7  
Zoological Survey of India, ed. 2013. State Fauna Series, 21: Fauna of Karnataka. 
Kolkata: Zoological Survey of India. 
Gowda, Gangadhara, Ganapathi Naik, Sushanth V Rai, Harsha Nayak, and 
Sruthisree C. 2015. “Fish Biodiversity of Tunga, Bhadra and Tungabhadra Rivers of 
Karnataka, India.” Research Journal Animal, Veterinary and Fishery Sciences 3 (10): 1–16. 
Hassan, M A, Mishal Puthiyottil, Gunjan Karnatak, and Anil Prakash Sharma. 2017. 

“Toward the Blue Revolution in India : Prospects for Inland Open Waters.” World 
Aquaculture 48 (1): 25–8.  
ICAR-CIFRI. 2016. Annual Report 2016–17. Barrackpore: ICAR-Central Inland 
Fisheries Research Institute. 
IUCN. 2021. Issue Brief February 2021: Invasive Alien Species and Climate Change. Gland: 

https://doi.org/10.1002/tafs.10230
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-004-4949-1
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-004-4949-1
https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.ZPJ.1576.2644-7


[25] Chakma, Pappuswamy and Chaudhary 

International Union for Conservation of Nature. 
Joshi, Kripal Datt, V S Basheer, Aditya Kumar, Satyendra Mohan Srivastava, Vikash 
Sahu, and Kuldeep Lal. 2021. “Alien Fish Species in Open Waters of India: 
Appearance, Establishment and Impacts.” Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 91 (3): 167–
73. https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v91i3.114139  
Kamble, Poorvi, and Ganesh C B. 2016. “Ichthyofaunal Diversity Status in Kelageri 
Lake, Dharwad, Karnataka State.” International Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Studies 4 
(4): 343–6. 
Khan, Feroz, P Preetha, and A P Sharma. 2015. “Modelling the Food Web for 
Assessment of the Impact of Stock Supplementation in a Reservoir Ecosystem in 
India.” Fisheries Management and Ecology 22 (5): 359–70. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/fme.12134  
Knight, J D M. 2010. “Invasive Ornamental Fish: A Potential Threat to Aquatic 
Biodiversity in Peninsular India.” Journal of Threatened Taxa 2 (2): 700–4. 
https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.o2179.700-4.  
Lakra, Wazir Singh, A K Singh, and S Ayyappan, eds. 2008. Fish Introduction in India: 
Status, Potential and Challenges. New Delhi: Narendra Publishers. 
Mogalekar, H S, Paulraj Jawahar, and Canciyal Johnson. 2016. “Fish Diversity of 
Rivers of Karnataka.” Journal of the Inland Fisheries Society of India 48 (1): 56–83. 
Naik, A Kumar, Jitendra Kumar, V Mahesh, and S Benakappa. 2013. “Assessment 
of Fish Diversity of Tunga River, Karnataka, India.” Nature & Science 11 (2): 82–7.  
Naik, A Kumar, S Benakappa, S R Somashekara, H N Anjaneyappa, Jitendra Kumar, 
V Mahesh, and Shrinivas H Hulkoti. 2013. “Studies on Ichthyofaunal Diversity of 
Karanja Reservoir, Karnataka, India.” International Research Journal of Environmental 
Sciences 2 (2): 1–5.  
Naik, A Kumar, Jitendra Kumar, S R Somashekara, S Benakappa, H N Anjaneyappa, 
V Mahesh, and Shrinivas H Hulkoti. 2012. “Ichthyofaunal Biodiversity of Tunga 
Reservoir (Gajanoor Dam), Karnataka (India).” Bulletin of Environment, Pharmacology 
and Life Sciences 1 (11): 35–40. 
NBFGR. 2010. Threatened Freshwater Fishes of India. Lucknow: National Bureau of Fish 
Genetics Resources Publication. 
Panikkar, P, T D Jagadeesh, D S Krishna Rao, Uttam Kumar Sarkar, M Naskar. 2015. 
“First Record of Non-native Vermiculated Sucker Mouth Catfish, Pterygoplichthys 
disjunctivus (Siluriformes, Loricariidae) in Cauvery River of Peninsular India.” The 
Bioscan 10 (4): 1659–63. 
Parimala, B. 2021. “Diversity of Fishes in Relation to Habitat of Freshwater 
Bhimasandra Pond in Tumakuru, Karnataka, India.” Journal of Hunan University 
(Natural Sciences) 48 (12). https://doi.org/10.22376/ijpbs.2021.12.4.b21-26  
Pinder, Adrian C, J Robert Britton, Andrew J Harrison, Prakash Nautiyal, Shannon 
D Bower, Steven J Cooke, Steve Lockett, et al. 2019. “Mahseer (Tor spp.) Fishes of 
the World: Status, Challenges and Opportunities for Conservation.” Reviews in Fish 
Biology and Fisheries 29: 417–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11160-019-09566-y  
Narasimhaiah, Narasimhaiah, K Rekha, and Tenjing Singh. 2013. “Ichthyofaunal 
Diversity of Selected Centres of Nandini River of Western Ghats, Karnataka, India.” 
Scientific Transactions in Environment and Technovation 6 (3): 146–50. 
Raghavan, Rajeev, Gopalan Prasad, P H Anvar-Ali, and Benno Pereira. 2008. “Exotic 

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v91i3.114139
https://doi.org/10.1111/fme.12134
https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.o2179.700-4
https://doi.org/10.22376/ijpbs.2021.12.4.b21-26
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11160-019-09566-y


 Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [26] 

Fish Species in a Global Biodiversity Hotspot: Observations from River Chalakudy, 
Part of Western Ghats, Kerala, India.” Biological Invasions 10 (1): 37–40. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-007-9104-2.  
Raj, Smrithy, Pranav Prakash, Rajesh Reghunath, Josin C Tharian, Rajeev Raghavan, 
and Appukuttannair Biju Kumar. 2021. “Distribution of Alien Invasive Species in 
Aquatic Ecosystems of the Southern Western Ghats, India.” Aquatic Ecosystem Health 
and Management 24 (2): 64–75. https://doi.org/10.14321/aehm.024.02.10.  
Raja, M Nobin, and G Ravikanth. 2020. “The Enemy of My Enemy is Still My 
Enemy: the Biological Invasion and Management of Gambusia in Peninsular India.” 
Current Science 119 (11): 1752–9. https://doi.org/10.18520/cs/v119/i11/1752-1759.   
Ramchurjee, Nichola, and S Suresha. 2006. “Biodiversity Conservation Problems 
And Their Consequences On Sustainable Ecotourism: A Case Study Of Bandipur 
National Park, Karnataka, India.” JSSCWM Quest Journal 3 (1): 36–41. 
Rao, D S K, M Karthikeyan, N R Ramakrishna, B R Jagadish, M E Vijaykumar, P 
Nagaraju, and A P Sharma. 2013. “Culture-based Fisheries in a Large Indian 
Reservoir–A Case Study at Krishnarajasagar (Cauvery River Basin, Karnataka).” 
In Book of Abstracts, National Seminar on Emerging Trends in Indian Aquaculture, p. 28. 
Trivandrum: Department of Aquatic Biology and Fisheries, University of Kerala. 
Sandilyan, S, B Meenakumari, A Biju Kumar, and Rupam Mandal. 2018. A Review on 
Impacts of Invasive Alien Species on Indian Inland Aquatic Ecosystems. Chennai: National 
Biodiversity Authority.  
Sarkar, Uttam Kumar, P Mishal, Simanku Borah, Gunjan Karnatak, Ganesh 
Chandra, Suman Kumari, D K Meena, et al. 2018. “Status, Prospects, Threats, and 
the Way Forward for Sustainable Management and Enhancement of the Tropical 
Indian Reservoir Fisheries: An Overview.” Reviews in Fisheries Science and Aquaculture 
26 (2): 155–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/23308249.2017.1373744.   
Sarkar, Uttam Kumar, Bijay Kali Mahapatra, and Wazir Singh Lakra. 2014. “A 
Review on Status, Potentials, Threats and Challenges of the Fish Biodiversity of West 
Bengal.” Journal of Biodiversity, Bioprospecting and Development 2 (1). 
https://doi.org/10.4172/2376-0214.1000140  
Shivaraju, Venkateshwarlu, and Shahnawaz Ahmad. 2017. “Ecology and 
Ichthyofaunal Diversity of Mydala Lake of Tumakuru, Karnataka State, India.” 
International Journal of Zoology Studies 2 (5): 216–21. 
Silas, E G. 1949. “On a Collection of Fish From Travancore.” Journal of Bombay 
Natural History Society 48 (4): 792–7. 
Singh, Atul K, and Wazir Singh Lakra. 2011. “Risk and Benefit Assessment of Alien 
Fish Species of the Aquaculture and Aquarium Trade Into India.” Reviews in 
Aquaculture 3 (1): 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-5131.2010.01039.x.   
Sugunan, V V. 2000. “Ecology and Fishery Management of Reservoirs in India.” 
Hydrobiologia 430 (1–3): 121–47. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1004081316185.   

  Thirumala, S, and B R Kiran. 2017a. “Fish Diversity in Jambadahalla Lake of 
Chikmagalur District, Karnataka.” International Journal for Scientific Research and 
Development 5 (5): 1068–71. 
Thirumala, S, and B R Kiran. 2017b. “A Review on Fisheries Management and 
Development in Bhadra Reservoir, Karnataka.” International Journal for Research in 
Applied Science and Engineering, 5 (7): 904-908. 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-007-9104-2
https://doi.org/10.14321/aehm.024.02.10
https://doi.org/10.18520/cs/v119/i11/1752-1759
https://doi.org/10.1080/23308249.2017.1373744
https://doi.org/10.4172/2376-0214.1000140
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-5131.2010.01039.x
https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1004081316185


[27] Chakma, Pappuswamy and Chaudhary 

Venkateshwarlu, M, and D S Somashekar. 2005. “Ichthyofaunal of Jannapura Pond, 
Bhadravathi, Karnataka.” Zoos’ Print Journal 20 (9): 1991. 
https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.ZPJ.1294.1991  
Yaqoob, Shabeena. 2021. “A Review of Structure, Origin, Purpose & Impact of 
Common Carp (Cyprinuscarpio) in India.” Annals of the Romanian Society for Cell 
Biology 25 (6): 34–47. 

https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.ZPJ.1294.1991

