Pseudorasbora parva - NOBANIS

NOBANIS – Invasive Alien Species Fact Sheet 

Pseudorasbora parva 

Author of this fact sheet: Andrzej Witkowski, Museum of Natural History, Wrocław University, Sienkiewicza 21, 50- 

335 Wrocław, Poland; Phone: ++ 48 71 375 41 53, E-mail: a.witkowski@biol.uni.wroc.pl 

Bibliographical reference – how to cite this fact sheet: 

Witkowski, A. (2011): NOBANIS – Invasive Alien Species Fact Sheet – Pseudorasbora parva. – From: Online 

Database of the European Network on Invasive Alien Species – NOBANIS www.nobanis.org, Date of access x/x/201x. 

Species description 

Scientific names: Pseudorasbora parva (Temminck et Schlegel, 1846) - Cypriniformes, 

Cyprinidae. 

Synonyms: Leuciscus parvus Schlegel, 1842; L. pusillus Temmnick et Schlegel, 1846; Fundulus 

virescens Temmnick et Schlegel, 1846; Leuciscus pusillus Temmnick et Schlegel, 1846; Micraspius 

mianowski Dybowski, 1869; Aphiocypris chinensis Fowler, 1924; Pseudorasbora altipinna 

Nichols, 1925; Pseudorasbora fowleri Nichols, 1925; P. depressirostris Nichols, 1925; P. 

monstruosa Nichols, 1925; P. parva parvula Nichols, 1929; P. parva tenuis Nichols, 1929; P. 

parva Berg, 1949; P. parva parva Okada, 1960. 

Common names: Stone moroco, topmouth gudgeon, false razbora (GB), střevlička východní (CZ), 

Blaubandbärbling, Amurbärbling, Pseudokeilfleckbarbe, Asiatischer Gründling (DE), 

båndgrundling (DK), Ebarasboora (EE), Rytinis gruzlelis (LT), Amūras čebačeks (LV), czebaczek 

amurski (PL), Tschebatchek, Čebačok amurskij (RU). 

Fig. 1. Pseudorasbora parva, photo by Andrzej Kruk.

Species identification 

P. parva has an elongate body, slightly flattened on sides, resembling that of the species of the 

genus Gobio. Maximum size up to 110 mm Tl, though most individuals are 80-90 mm in length and 

17.1-19.2 g in body mass. Life span up to 3-4 years.The head is somewhat flattened in its anterior 

part. The mouth is clearly in top position. The dorsal and anal fins are short. The caudal fin is big 

and deeply incised, with both parts of similar size. The ventral fins are located slightly anterior to 

the dorsal fin. The throat is covered with scales. The lateral line is complete, running in the middle 

of sides. The scales are large and cycloidal. Number of scales in lateral line (34) 35-38 (39). The 

coloration is similar in both sexes, with greay back, light sides and belly, passing from yellowishgreen 

to silver. Young individuals have a dark stripe along the body sides; it disappears with age. In 

caudal part of the scales pigment forms characteristic lunate spots. The fins are pale, light yellow, 

only on the dorsal fin there is a darker stripe, running obliquely backwards (Berg 1949, Kotusz and 

Witkowski 1998, Šebela and Wohlgemuth 1984, Witkowski 1991a,b). 

The sexual dimorphism becomes pronounced during spawning. In males breeding tubercles appear 

on the head. The greatest accumulation of sharp tubercles (ca. 14) is located in the anterior part of 

the head, on the frons, near nostrils and below and above the eye. Few tubercles (ca. 4) are observed 

also on the lower lip. In that period the males darken distinctly, and their fins become black while 

the operculum gets violet. The females become clearly lighter (Anhelt and Tiefenbach 1991, Berg 

1949, Movčan and Kozlov 1978, Muchačeva 1950). 

Native range 

The native range of P. parva is the East Asian subregion including the basins of the rivers Amur, 

Yang-tze, Huang-ho, Japanese islands (Kiusiu, Sikoku and the southern and central parts of 

Honsiu), western and southern parts of the Korean Peninsula and Taiwan (Minkiang river system) 

(Bănărescu 1999, Berg 1949). 

Alien distribution 

History of introduction and geographical spread 

In Europe P. parva was found in many regions and river systems of Romania, including the Danube 

delta, already in the 1960s. It was first recorded in 1961 from southern Romania (fish farm Nucet – 

Dimbovita river system) (Bănărescu 1999, Bănărescu and Nalbant 1965) and Albania (Knezevič et 

al. 1978). Spreading along the Danube river, the stone moroco was recorded from Hungary in 1963. 

It is not excluded that it got there with fry of Ctenopharyngodon idella, Aristichthys nobilis and 

Hypophathalmichthys molitrix, imported to several local fish farm. In subsequent years it was found 

in most fish ponds and in open waters, including lake Balaton (Biró 1972). In 1972 the species was 

recorded from the European part of the former USSR – the Danube delta and Dniester (Kozlov 

1974). Bănărescu (1999) is of opinion that in some areas (Volga, Don, Dniester, Neman) it was 

introduced much earlier, before 1961. It was probably from Hungary that it penetrated into the 

former Czechoslovakia. It was first recorded there in 1974 in the Tisa river catchment area (Žitnan 

and Holčik 1976). In Lithuania P. parva was introduced accidentally into lake Dunojaus in 1963 

when introducing several other herbivorous fish species. However during the recent decades the 

species have not been observed in that lake anymore. So the status in Lithuania is unknown 

(possibly extinct) (Virbickas 2000). In subsequent years P. parva was found in Czechoslovakia in 

over 20 sites, including a few near the Polish border (district Karvina) (Wohlgemuth and Šebela 

1987). In mid 1970s it was purposefully introduced in France (region of Sarthe) (Allardi, Canceler 

1988), and then observed in the Rodan river (Allardi and Keith 1991). In 1982 and subsequent years 

the species was recorded from Austria (first in the March and Tulln rivers) (Weber 1984). In 1984 

the stone moroco was caught in eastern Gemany in the Weisse Elster river (near Gera) (Arnold 

2

1985). Since 1987 this species has established permanent populations in western Germany (Arnold 

1990). Using the Main-Danube canal and then the Rhine, it has spread in western Europe where 

now it is present (since 1992) in Belgium and the Netherlands (Golzan et al. 2002, Pollux and 

Korosi 2006). In these areas (Germany, Benelux) is has probably spread as a result of private 

stocking/introductions as well, because it is often kept in ponds and sold as ornamental fish or bait 

fish, (S. Nehring, pers. comm.). In the 1970s and 1980s it was found in Bulgaria, northern Greece, 

Turkey and in the western part of the Balkans (Serbia and Montenegro) - in lakes Skardar, Prespa, 

Ohrida and in Aliakmaon river (Bianco 1988, Erk’akan 1984, Jankovic and Karapetkova 1992, 

Rosecchi et al. 1993, Wildekamp et al. 1997). In Poland P. parva was recorded for the first time as 

late as 1990; it got there with stocking material of carp, imported in the 1980s, probably from 

Hungary (Witkowski 1991a,b). In subsequent years (till 2000) the species was recorded from most 

lowland rivers of Poland (Witkowski 2002). In recent few years the stone moroco was found also in 

northern Italy (Bănărescu 1999, Perdices and Doadrio 1992), in Iberian Peninsula (Caiola and de 

Sostoa 2002) and southern England (Domaniewski and Wheeler 1996, Gozlan et al. 2002). In 2002 

the first finding of P. parva in scandinavia was done in Denmark (Olesen et al. 2003) in a small 

lake. In 2003 it was further found in a small river (Olesen T. M., pers. comm.). Thus in slightly less 

than 50 years P. parva colonised almost entire Europe, Central Asia and North Africa (ca. 32 

countries) (Gozlan et al. 2010a). 

Pathways of introduction 

The species was introduced in Europe with stocking material of herbivorous fishes 

(Ctenopharyngodon idella, Aristichthys nobilis, Hypophathalmichthys molitrix) imported from 

China. Only in a few instances P. parva was introduced purposefully, as an ornamental fish (Beyer 

2004) or as a food for predatory fishes in hatcheries (Cakic et al. 2004). In a great majority of cases 

it was an accidental introduction or natural expansion of the range through river systems. From the 

initial introductions the species has within 50 years spread to almost entire Europe, northern Africa 

(Algieria), central Asia (Kazakhstas, Usbekhistan, Iran), either naturally or accidentally, with 

stocking material of other species (Arnold 1985, Coad and Abdoli 1990, Gozlan et. al 2002, 

Perdices and Doadrio 1992). In Denmark, regular trade with P. parva for aquarists was seen in 2004 

(Olesen, pers. comm.). The fish was imported from Germany and this is probably the pathway of 

introduction to Denmark. Since the first introductions of P. parva outside its natural range, 

approximately 5 new countries were invaded in each decade, with an average of 3.9 years 

(SD=5.19) between the first introduction and the first detection (Gozlan et al. 2010a, Witkowski 

2009). 

Alien status in region 

A review of literature on the ichthyofauna of lowland rivers of Central Europe (Witkowski et al. 

2000, 2004) indicates that the species is now a constant component of the Central European fauna, 

and is often a dominant. In Poland, in the autumn of 1993, when a pond of ca. 5 ha (fish farm Ruda 

Sułowska) was emptied, ca. 300 kg of the species was caught. Similarly high abundance of P. parva 

was noted in some ponds of the southern Czech Republic, where its density ranged from 370 to 14 

331 indiv./ha, and the biomass was 2.28-8.12 kg/ha (Adamek and Sukop 2000). In Germany, in 

Austria and in the European part of Russia the species is locally abundant. In Denmark only low 

densities of P. parva has been found until today (Olesen, pers. comm.). In Lithuania the status is 

that the species is probably extinct from the lake were P. parva was introduced accidentally 

(Virbickas 2000). P. parva has not reached Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia (See also table 1). 

3

Country Not Not Rare Local Common Very 

found established 

common 

Austria X 

Belgium X 

Czech Republic X 

Denmark X 

Estonia X 

European part of Russia X 

Finland X 

Faroe Islands X 

Germany X 

Greenland X 

Iceland X 

Ireland X 

Latvia X 

Lithuania 

Netherlands 

X 

Norway X 

Poland 

Slovakia 

X 

Sweden X 

Not 

known 

Table 1. The frequency and establishment of Pseudorasbora parva, please refer also to the 

information provided for this species at www.nobanis.org/search.asp. Legend for this table: Not 

found –The species is not found in the country; Not established - The species has not formed selfreproducing 

populations (but is found as a casual or incidental species); Rare - Few sites where it is 

found in the country; Local - Locally abundant, many individuals in some areas of the country; 

Common - Many sites in the country; Very common - Many sites and many individuals; Not 

known – No information was available. 

Ecology 

Habitat description 

In both its original distribution range and in secondarily invaded areas the stone moroco inhabits 

shallow lakes, carp ponds, irrigation canals, ditches, slow sections of lowland rivers and their 

oxbows. It prefers much vegetated places (Berg 1949, Kapusta et al. 2008, Kozlov 1974, 

Muchačeva 1950, Witkowski 2000) but in Denmark the only two finding sites are characterised by 

being relatively vegetation free (Olesen, pers. comm.). 

Reproduction and life cycle 

P. parva spawns when one year old. In the Amur river basin the spawning starts when the water 

reaches the temperature of 15-19 o C (May-August), whereas in Europe it spawns earlier – in April- 

June (Giurca and Angelescu 1971, Baruš et al. 1984). The fertility of P. parva ranges from a few 

hundred to a few thousand eggs: Amur – 388-3060; Czech Republic – 2018-5326; Danube - 610- 

3200; Dnieper – 800-4200. The eggs are ellipsoidal (major diameter 2.0- 2.5 mm), sticky and 

yellowish. The species belongs to the indifferent (litho-phytophilous) reproductive guild (Baruš et 

al. 1984, Kozlov 1974, Movčan and Smirnov 1981, Muchačeva 1950). The spawning is multi-litter 

and takes place in the littoral. The eggs are laid on plants, sand, stones, mollusc shells and other 

4

substrata. Before spawning the female carefully cleans the substratum for egg-laying. During one 

act it lays up to several dozen eggs. One male may spawn with a few consecutive females. The male 

guards the eggs till hatching, and aggressively drives away other, often larger, fish (Šebela and 

Wohlgemuth 1984). The embryonic development at the water temperature of 20-28 o C takes 4-8, 

and the larval development 41-42 days (Kozlov 1974, Makajeva and Zaki Mochamed 1982, 

Półtorak 1995, Šebela and Wohlgemuth 1984). 

Dispersal and spread 

The species owes its rapid expansion mainly to the small body size and biology (fx. high oxygen, 

temperature range of oxygen – mode of life (hiding in densely vegetated parts of water bodies), 

multi-litter spawning and parental care. Apart from this, its expansion is favoured by human 

activities – stocking open waters and water bodies subject to intense fish farming. Its spread is also 

aided by anglers, since it is often used as a bait-fish for predatory fishes. From places it invaded as a 

result of unintentional introduction (fish ponds), it rapidly penetrates into open waters (Błachuta et 

al. 1993). 

Impact 

Affected habitats and indigenous organisms 

Where it occurs in masses in fish ponds, it competes for food with farmed fish species (Kozlov 

1974, Movčan and Smirnov 1981). Most importantly it consumes larger species of planktonic 

crustaceans which results in an increase in the quantity of phytoplankton, and further in increasing 

eutrophication of the water bodies (Adamek and Sukop 2000). Besides, it feeds on juvenile stages 

of many locally valuable native fish species (Žitnan and Holčik 1976). Potential hybridisation 

between P. parva and sunbleak Leucaspius delineatus, a threatened species in Europe, constitutes a 

serious threat (Gozlan, Beyer 2006). 

Being a vector of infectious diseases, it constitutes a serious threat to both native and farmed fishes 

in Europe. Parasite specific to P. parva that has been reported is Dactylogyrus squameus and this 

has facilitated their dispersal to the Czech and Slovak Republics and Italy (Galli et al. 2007, 

Ondraćkova et al. 2004). A range of native generalist pathogens are associated with invasive P. 

parva, these are typically zoosporic fungi (Czeczuga et al. 2002), parasites such as Diplostomum 

spataceum in Georgia (Kakalova and Shonia 2008) and viruses such as fry rhabdovirus (PFR) in 

Germany (Ahne and Thomsen 1986). This virus which causes acute disease of Esox lucius fry has 

been isolated from P. parva. The two most severe parasite found associated with P. parva in its 

invasive range are Anguillicola crassus and rosette agent Sphaerothecum destruans (Gozlan et al. 

2005, 2009, 2010b). The identification of P. parva as a healthy carrier for the intercellular parasite 

S. destruans is a concern in that this pathogen has been responsible for mass mortalities of salmonid 

fishes in USA (Arkush et al. 1998) and has since been associated with the decline of native 

European fish species including Leucaspius delineatus (Gozlan et al. 2010a,b). 

Genetic effects 

No genetic effects have been reported. 

Human health effects 

No human health effects have been reported. 

Economic and societal effects (positive/negative) 

5

In open waters of southern Europe P. parva has probably contributed to a decrease in abundance or 

even disappearance of some autochthonous cyprinids (Scardinius erythrophthalmus, Carassius 

carassius, Rhodeus sericeus, Gobio gobio, Leucaspius delineatus) (Giurca and Angelescu 1971, 

Žitnan and Holčik 1976). According to Bănărescu (1999) and Rosecchi et al. (1993) in rivers the 

species has probably modified the structure of the native communities of aquatic invertebrates. In 

ponds, during a mass occurrence, it depletes food basis of farmed species (carp), decreasing their 

productivity (Adamek and Sukop 2000). 

Management approaches 

Prevention methods 

In most European countries introduction of foreign fish species into open waters is prohibited. It is 

difficult, however, to successfully counteract penetration through canal-connected river systems and 

illegal (private) fish stocking. Considering the present distribution and the high abundance in many 

areas, it is practically impossible to eliminate the species or limit its numbers. However, stocking 

material imported for fish farms or in order to stock open waters should be checked especially 

carefully for its „purity”. Besides, using the stone moroco as live bait for predatory fishes should be 

abandoned. In Poland releasing some alien fish species, including stone moroco, in the water bodies 

where they were caught, is strictly prohibited (Degree of the Minister of Agriculture and Village 

Development, and the Regulations of Amateur Angling - Polish Angling Union) (Witkowski 2006). 

Direct trade with the fish in Europe should be stopped. There has been a proposal to add P. parva 

to the Estonian list of worst alien species (minister’s regulation) that can not be brought into Estonia 

(C. Birnbaum, pers. comm.). Pseudorasbora parva is placed on the Grey List of Invasive Alien 

Species in Germany and Austria (Nehring et al. 2010, Wiesner et al. 2010). 

Eradication, control and monitoring efforts 

In pond carp farms it is recommended, before introducing carp, for a short time to keep (and then 

remove) native predatory fishes – pikeperch and pike (Giurca and Angelescu 1971). Adamek and 

Sukop (2000) think, however, that P. parva, because of its small size, is of no interest to native 

predators (pikeperch – Sander lucioperca, pike – Esox lucius, wels – Silurus glanis), and only perch 

(Perca fluviatilis) may be potentially dangerous to it. 

Information and awareness 

There are no reports of information or awareness campaigns regarding the species. 

Knowledge and research 

Further, detailed studies on the biology, and especially the effect of the species on the native 

communities of hydrobionts (fishes, invertebrates) and the aquatic environment are necessary. 

Recommendation or comments from experts and local communities 

None 

References and other resources 

Contact persons 

Thorsten Møller Olesen (DK), Vandmiljøkontoret, Nordjyllands Amt, Niels Bohrs Vej 30, 9220 

Aalborg Øst, Phone: +45 9635 1422, Fax: 9815 2009, E-mail: tmo@nja.dk 

6

Ēriks Aleksejevs (LV), Latvian Fish Resources Agency, Laboratory of Inland Waters 

Riga, Daugavgrivas Str. 8, LV-1048; E-mail: eriks.aleksejevs@latzra.lv 

Stefan Nehring (DE), Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, Konstantinstrasse 110, D-53179 

Bonn; Phone: +49-228-84911444; E-mail: stefan.nehring@bfn.de 

Links 

Species summary Pseudorasbora parva – Fish Base 

References 

Adamek Z. and Sukop I. (2000). Vliv střevličky východni (Pseudorasbora parva) na parametry rybničniho prostředi. 

Biodiverzita ichtiofauny ČR, 3: 37-43. 

Ahne W. and Thomsen I. (1986). Isolation of pike fry rhabdovirus from Pseudorasbora parva (Temminck and 

Schlegel). J. Fish Diseases 9: 555-556. 

Alllardi J. and Chanceler F. (1988). Note ichtyologique sur la presence en France de Pseudorasbora parva (Schlegel, 

1842). Bull. Franc. de la Peche et de la Piscicult., 308: 35-37. 

Allardi J., Keith P. (eds). (1991). Atlas preliminare des poissons d’eau douce de France. Mus. Nat. Hist. Nat. Paris, 234 

ss. 

Anhelt H. and Tiefenbach O. (1991). Zum auftreten des Blaubandbärblings (Pseudorasboraparva)(Teleostei: 

Gobioninae) in den Flüssen Raab und Lafnitz. Österr. Fischerei, 44: 19-26. 

Arkush K.D., Frasca S. and Hedrick R.P. (1998). Pathology associated with the rosette agent, a systemic protist 

infecting salmonid fishes. J. Aquat. Animal Helth 10: 1-11. 

Arnold A. (1985). Pseudorasbora parva (Schlegel 1842) nun auch in der DDR! Z. Binnenfisch. DDR 32: 182-183. 

Arnold A. (1990). Eingebürgerte Fischarten. Die Neue Brehm-Bücherei 602, Ziemsen Verlag: 1-144. 

Bănărescu P. (1999). Pseudorasbora parva (Temmnick et Schlegel 1846). In: P. Bănărescu (ed.) – The freshwater 

fishes of Europe. 5.I. Cyprinidae 2/I. Aula Verl., Wiesbaden. 

Bănărescu P. and Nalbant T. (1965). Studies on the systematics of Gobioninae (Pisces: Cyprinidae). Rev. Roum. de 

Biol. Ser. de Zoologie 10: 219-229. 

Baruš V., Kux Z. and Libosvarsky J. (1984). On Pseudorasbora parva (Pisces) in Czechoslovakia. Folia Zool., 33: 5- 

18. 

Berg L. S. (1949). Ryby presnych vod SSSR i sopredelnych stran. 2. ss. 477- 925. Izd. AN SSSR, Moskva-Leningrad. 

Beyer K. (2004). Escapees of potentially invasive fishes from an ornamental aquaculture facility: the case of topmouth 

gudgeon Pseudorasbora parva. J. Fish Biol., 65 (Suppl.): 326-327. 

Bianco P. J. (1988). Occurrence of Asiatic gobionid Pseudorasbora parva (Temmnick and Schlegel) in south-eastern 

Europe. J. Fish Biol. 32: 973-974. 

Biró P. (1972). Pseurorasbora parva a Balatondon. Halaszat 18: 11-13. 

Błachuta J., Kuszewski J., Kusznierz J. and Witkowski A. (1993). Ichtiofauna dorzecza Baryczy. Rocz. Nauk. PZW 6: 

19-48. 

Caiola N. and de Sostoa A. (2002). First record of the Asiatic cyprinid Pseudorasbora parva in the Iberian Peninsula. J. 

Fish Biol., 61: 1058-1060. 

Cakic P., Lenhardt M., Kolarevic J., Mickovic B. and Hegedis A. (2004). Distribution of the Asiatic cyprinid 

Pseudorasbora parva in Serbia and Montenegro. J. Fish. Biol., 65: 1431-1434. 

Coad B. W. and Abdoli A. (1993). Exotic fish species in the fresh waters of Iran. Zool. in the Middl. East, 9: 65-80. 

Czeczuga B., Kiziewicz B. and Danilkiewicz Z. (2002). Zoospric fungi growing on specimens of certain fish species 

recently introduced to Polish waters. Acta Ichthiol. et Piscat. 32: 117-125. 

Domaniewski J. and Wheeler A. (1996). The topmouth gudgeon has arrived. Fish, 43 40. 

Erk’akan F. (1984). Trakya Bölgesinden Tűrkiye icin yeni kayit olan bir balik tűrű, Pseudorasbora parva (Pisces, 

Cyprinidae). Doga Bilim Dergisi, A2: 350-351. 

Galli P., Strona G., Benzoli F., Crosa G. and Stefani F. (2007). Monogenoids from freshwater fish in Italy, with 

comments on alien species. Comp. Parasitol. 74: 264-272. 

Giurca R. and Angelescu N. (1971). Consideratii privinid biologia sia aria de raspindire geografica a cyprinidului 

Pseudorasbora parva (Schlegel) in apele Romaniei. Bul. Cercet. Piscicole, 30: 99-109. 

Gozlan R. E., Andreau D., Asaeda T., Beyer K., Bouhadad R., Bernard D., Caiola N., Cakic P., Esmaeili H.R., Falka I., 

Golicher D., Harka A., Jeney G., Kovac V., Musil J., Povz M., Virbickas T., Wolter Ch., Tarkan A.S., Tricarico E., 

7

Trichkova T., Verreycken H., Witkowski A., Zweimueller I. and Britton J.R. (2010a). Th great escape: A review of 

topmouth gudgeon Pseudorasbora parva invasion in Europe and beyond. Fish and Fisheries 14: 315-340. 

Gozlan R.E. and Beyer K. (2006). Hybridisation between Pseudorasbora parva and Leucaspius delineatus. Folia Zool. 

55: 53-60. 

Gozlan R.E., Britton J.R., Cowx I. and Copr. G. H. (2010b). Current knowledge on non-native freshwater fish introductions. J. Fish 

Biol., 76: 751-786. 

Gozlan, R. E., Pinder A. C. and Shelley J. (2002). Occurrence of the Asiatic cyprinid Pseudorasbora parva in England. 

J. Fish Biol., 61: 298-300. 

Gozlan R.E., St-Hilaire S., Andreou D. and Arkush K. (2009). Identification of the rosette-like agent as Sphaerothecum 

destruans, a multihost fish pathogen. Int. J. Parasit. (in press). 

Gozlan R. E., St-Hilaire S., Feist S. W., Martin P. and Kent M. L. (2005). Disease threat to European fish. Nature, 435: 

1046, 

Jankovic D. and Karapetkova M. (1992). Present status of the studies on range of distribution of Asian fish species 

Pseudorasbora parva (Schlegel) 1842 in Yugoslavia and Bulgaria. Ichthyologia, 24: 1-9. 

Kakalova E. and Shonia L. (2008). The results of ecological-parasitological study of Pseudorasbora parva populated in 

Kumisi reservoir and Basaleti lake. Proc. Inst. Zool. 23: 41-42. 

Kapusta A., Bogacka-Kapusta E. and Czarnecki B. (2008). The significance of stone moroko Pseudorasbora parva 

(Temminck and Schlegel) in the small-sized fish assemblages in the litoral zone of the heated Lake Licheńskie. 

Arch. Pol. Fish. 16: 49-62. 

Knezevič B., Vukovič T. and Kavarič M. (1978). Pseudorasbora parva (Schlegel). Nova vrsta za ihtiofaunu Jugoslavie. 

Rib. Jugosl. 33: 140-142. 

Kotusz J. and Witkowski A. (1998). Morphometrics of Pseudorasbora parva (Schlegel, 1842)(Cyprinidae: 

Gobioninae), a species introduced into the Polish waters. Acta 

Ichthyol. Piscat., 28: 3-14. 

Kozlov V. I. (1974). Amurskij čebačok – Pseudorasbora parva (Schl.) – novyj vid ichtiofauny bassejna Dnestra. Vest. 

Zool. 1: 77-78. 

Makajeva A. P. and Zaki Mochamed M. I. (1982). Razmnoženije i razvitje psevdorasbory Pseudorasbora parva 

(Schlegel) v vodojemach Srednej Azji. Vopr. Ichtiol., 22: 80-92. 

Movčan Y. V. and Kozlov V. I. (1978). Morfologičeskaja charakteristika i nekotoryje čerty 

ekologii amurskogo čebačka (Pseudorasbora parva (Schlegel)) v vodojemach Ukrainy. Gidrobiol. Žurn., 14: 42-48. 

Movčan Y. V. and Smirnov A. J. (1981). Fauna Ukrainy. 8 Ryby. Koropovi 1. AN USSR, Kiiv. 

Muchačeva V. A. (1950). K biologii amurskogo čebačka Pseudorasbora parva (Schlegel). Tr Amur. Ichtiol. Eksped., 

1945-1949, 1: 365-374. 

Nehring S., Rabitsch W., Wolter, C. and Wiesner, C. (2010). Schwarze Liste invasiver Fische Deutschlands. BfN- 

Skript, in press. 

Olesen T.M, Nielsen, J.G. and Møller, P.R. (2003). Båndgeundling Pseudorasbora parva (Temminck & Schlegel, 

1864) ny ynglefisk i Danmark. Flora og Fauna, 109 (1): 1-5. 

Ondrackova M., Matejusova I., Simkova A. and Gelnar M. (2004). New reports of dactylogyridean species 

(Monogenea) for Central Europe. Helmintologia 41: 139-145. 

Perdices A. and Doadrio I. (1992). Presence of the Asiatic Cyprinid Pseudorasbora parva (Schlegel 1842) in acque 

interne Italiane. Rivista di Idrobiologia, 29: 461-467. 

Pollux B. J. A. and Korosi A. (2006). On the occurrence of the Asiatic cyprinid Pseudorasbora parva in the 

Netherlands. J. Fish Biol., 69: 1575-1580. 

Półtorak B. (1995). Rozwój zarodkowy i larwalny Pseudorasbora parva (Schlegel, 1842) (Cyprinidae, Pisces). Inst. 

Zool. Uniw. Wrocł. (maszynopis). 

Rosecchi E., Crivelli A. and Catsadorakis G. (1993). The establishment and impact of Pseudorasbora parva, an exotic 

fish species introduced into Lake Mikri Prespa (north-western Greece). Aquatic Conservation: Marine and 

Frshwater Ecosystems, 3: 223-231. 

Šebela M. and Wohlgemuth E. (1984). Některá pozorováni Pseudorasbora parva (Schlegel, 1842) (Pisces, Cyprinidae) 

v chovu. Čas. Morav. Muz., 69: 187-194. 

Virbickas J. (2000). Lithuanian fish, pp. 192, ISBN 9986-575-99-0. 

Weber E. (1984). Die Ausbreitung der Pseudokeilfleckenbarben in im Donauraum. Österr. Fisch. 33: 63-65. 

Wiesner C., Nehring S., Wolter C. and Rabitsch W. (2010) Schwarze Liste invasiver Fische Österreichs. BfN-Skript, in 

press. 

Wildekamp R., Van Neer H., Kücük W. and Ülsüsayin F. (1997). First record of eastern Asiatic gobionid fish 

Pseudorasbora parva from the Asiatic part of Turkey. J. Fish Biol., 51: 858-861. 

Witkowski A. (1991a). Pseudorasbora parva (Schlegel, 1842) (Cyprinidae, Gobioninae) nowy gatunek w polskiej 

ichtiofaunie. Przegl. Zool. 35: 323-331. 

8

Witkowski A. (1991b). Czebaczek amurski (Pseudorasbora parva) – kolejny zawleczony gatunek w naszej 

ichtiofaunie. Kom. Ryb., 4: 23-25. 

Witkowski A. (2000). Czebaczek amurski – Pseudorasbora parva (Schlegel, 1842). In: M. Brylińska (ed.) - Ryby 

Słodkowodne Polski, PWN, Warszawa, 335-337 ss. 

Witkowski A. (2002). Introduction of fishes into Poland: benefaction or palgue? Nature Conservation, 59: 41-52. 

Witkowski A. (2006). Pseudorasbora parva (Schlegel, 1842). W: Głowaciński Z., Mirek Z. (red.) - Polska Księga 

Gatunków Inwazyjnych, IOP PAN, Kraków. 

Witkowski A. (2009). On the expansion and occurrence of an invasive species – Pseudorasbora parva (Temminck et 

Schlegel, 1846) (Teleostei: Cypriniade: Gobioninae) in Poland. Fragm. Faun. 52: 25-32. 

Witkowski A., Błachuta J., Kotusz J. and Kusznierz J. (2000). Lampreys and fishes of the upper and middle Odra basin 

(Silesia, SW Poland) – The present situation. Acta Hydrobiol. 42: 283-303. 

Witkowski A., Kotusz J., Przybylski M., Marszał L., Heese T., Amirowicz A., Buras P. and Kukuła K. (2004). Origin, 

species composition and present degree of threat to fish fauna in the Vistula and Oder river systems. Arch. Pol. Fish. 

12 (Supl.): 7-20. 

Wohlgemuth E. and Šebela M. (1987). Střevlička východni, nový prvek evropské ichtyofauny. Živa 35: 25-27. 

Žitnan R. and Holčik J. (1976). On the first find of Pseudorasbora parva in Czechoslovakia. Zool. Listy 25: 91-95. 

Date of creation/modification of this species fact sheet: 21-03-2010/ 06-07-2011 

9

Pseudorasbora parva - NOBANIS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?