Ocean currents as a potential dispersal pathway for Antarctica’s most persistent non-native terrestrial insect

Molecular evidence for multiple origins and high genetic differentiation of non-native winter crane fly, Trichocera maculipennis (Diptera: Trichoceridae), in the maritime Antarctic

Native biodiversity and ecosystems of Antarctica safeguarded from biological invasion face recent threats from non-native species, accelerated by increasing human activities and climate changes. Over two decades ago, the winter crane fly, Trichocera maculipennis, was first detected on King George Island. It has now successfully colonized several research stations across King George Island. To understand the origin, genetic diversity, and population structure of this Holarctic species, we conducted mitochondrial DNA cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) sequence analysis across both its native and invasive ranges. In parallel, we performed microsatellite loci analysis within the invasive ranges, utilizing 12 polymorphic microsatellite markers. Furthermore, we compared body sizes among adult males and females collected from three different locations of King George Island. Our COI sequence analysis exhibited two different lineages present on King George Island. Lineage I was linked to Arctic Svalbard and Polish cave populations and Lineage II was related to Canadian Terra Nova National Park populations, implying multiple origins. Microsatellite analysis further exhibited high levels of genetic diversity and significant levels of genetic differentiation among invasive populations. Body sizes of adult T. maculipennis were significantly different among invasive populations but were not attributed to genetics. This significant genetic diversity likely facilitated the rapid colonization and establishment of T. maculipennis on King George Island, contributing to their successful invasion. Molecular analysis results revealed a substantial amount of genetic variation within invasive populations, which can serve as management units for invasive species control. Furthermore, the genetic markers we developed in the study will be invaluable tools for tracking impending invasion events and the travel routes of new individuals. Taken together, these findings illustrate the highly invasive and adaptable characteristics of T. maculipennis. Therefore, immediate action is necessary to mitigate their ongoing invasion and facilitate their eradication.

International Response under the Antarctic Treaty System to the Establishment of A Non-native Fly in Antarctica

Antarctica currently has few non-native species, compared to other regions of the planet, due to the continent's isolation, extreme climatic conditions and the lack of habitat. However, human activity, particularly the activities of national government operators and tourism, increasingly contributes to the risk of non-native species transfer and establishment. Trichocera (Saltitrichocera) maculipennis Meigen, 1888 (Diptera, Trichoceridae) is a non-native fly originating from the Northern Hemisphere that was unintentionally introduced to King George Island in the maritime Antarctic South Shetland Islands around 15 years ago, since when it has been reported within or in the vicinity of several research stations. It is not explicitly confirmed that T. maculipennis has established in the natural environment, but life-history characteristics make this likely, thereby making potential eradication or control a challenge. Antarctic Treaty Parties active in the region are developing a coordinated and expanding international response to monitor and control T. maculipennis within and around stations in the affected area. However, there remains no overarching non-native invasive species management plan for the island or the wider maritime Antarctic region (which shares similar environmental conditions and habitats to those of King George Island). Here we present some options towards the development of such a plan. We recommend the development of (1) clear mechanisms for the timely coordination of response activities by multiple Parties operating in the vicinity of the introduction location and (2) policy guidance on acceptable levels of environmental impacts resulting from eradication attempts in the natural environment, including the use of pesticides.