DOCSLIB.ORG

Guide to Estuarine and Inshore Bivalves of Virginia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Guide to Estuarine and Inshore Bivalves of Virginia W&M ScholarWorks Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 1968 Guide to Estuarine and Inshore Bivalves of Virginia Donna DeMoranville Turgeon College of William and Mary - Virginia Institute of Marine Science Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/etd Part of the Marine Biology Commons, and the Oceanography Commons Recommended Citation Turgeon, Donna DeMoranville, "Guide to Estuarine and Inshore Bivalves of Virginia" (1968). Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects. Paper 1539617402. https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.25773/v5-yph4-y570 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. GUIDE TO ESTUARINE AND INSHORE BIVALVES OF VIRGINIA A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the School of Marine Science The College of William and Mary in Virginia In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts LIBRARY o f the VIRGINIA INSTITUTE Of MARINE. SCIENCE. By Donna DeMoranville Turgeon 1968 APPROVAL SHEET This thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts jfitw-f. /JJ'/ 4/7/A.J Donna DeMoranville Turgeon Approved, August 1968 Marvin L. Wass, Ph.D. P °tj - D . dvnd.AJlLJ*^' Jay D. Andrews, Ph.D. 'VL d. John L. Wood, Ph.D. William J. Hargi Kenneth L. Webb, Ph.D. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author wishes to express sincere gratitude to her major professor, Dr. Marvin L. Wass, whose guidance made the completion of this project possible. Grateful appreciation is extended to the following members of the author's committee: Dr. Jay D. Andrews for his assistance and criticism of this paper; Dr. John L. Wood and Dr. William J. Hargis, Jr., for their criticism of the manu­ script; and Dr. Kenneth L. Webb for his aid and encouragement. Special thanks are due to Dr. William Clench, Dr. Ruth Turner and Dr. Kenneth Boss, members of the Department of Malacology of the Harvard Museum of Zoology, for their illustrations of the Teredinidae and Diplothyra smithii and their invaluable assistance. Mr. Paul Chanley supplied several specimens and invaluable data on salinity tolerance and general habitat. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.............................................. iii LIST OF FIGURES............................................... vii ABSTRACT...................................................... x INTRODUCTION.................................................. 2 KEY.................................... ...................... 5 DESCRIPTIONS OF SUPERFAMILIES AND SPECIES Nuculacea............................... 12 Nucula proxima........................................... 12 Yoldia limatula................................. ......... 13 Arcacea ................................. 15 Noetia ponderosa............. 15 Anadara transversa........... 17 Anadara ovalis................ 18 Mytilacea......................... 19 Brachidontes recurvus................................ 20 Modiolus demissus...................... 21 Mytilus edulis ................. 22 Amygdalum papyria ...... 23 Pectenacea.................................................. 25 Aequipecten irradians........... «... 25 Anomiacea.............. .....•.. *........................... 27 Anomia simplex............................ 27 Ostreacea ............................... 29 Crassostrea virginica............................. 29 Corbiculacea ..... 31 Polymesoda caroliniana. ............... 31 Dreissenacea.. • ......... 33 Congeria. leucophaeata., ................... 33 iv Page Lucinacea........... 35 Lucina multilineata 35 Erycinacea (Leptonacea) ........................ 37 Aligena elevata.......................................... 37 Mysella bidentata........................................ 38 Cardiacea.................................... 40 Laevicardium mortoni..................................... 40 Veneracea................................................... 42 Dosinia discus..................................... ...... 43 Cyclinella tenuis........................................ 44 Mercenaria mercenaria mercenaria. .... ............... 45 Mercenaria mercenaria notata...................,......... 45 Mercenaria campechiensis................................. 46 Pi tar morrhuana.......................................... 47.^ Gemma gemma......... ............... ..................... 48 Petricola pholadiformis.................................. 49 Tellinacea......... 50 Tellina agilis......................................... .. 51 Macoma balthica. ......... i.................... 52 Macoma phenax........ ....... 53 Macoma tenta............... 54 Abra aequalis......... 55 Abra lioica. ......................................... 55 Donax variabilis. ..... 56 Donax fossor........... 57 Tagelus plebeius................*........................ 57 Tagelus divisus......... 58 Solenacea........................ 59 Siliqua costata................................... 59 Ensis directus....................... 60 Solen viridus........................................... 61 Mactracea................. 63 Spisula solidissima solidissima............. 63 Spisula solidissima similis.............. 64 Mulinia lateralis 65 * Rangia cuneata............. ;......... 66 Myacea......... 67 Mya arenaria............................................. 67 Pholadacea • •. ............................................. 69 Barnea truncata ........ ......................... 70 Cyrtopleura costata ..... ••.......... 71 Diplothyra smithii ......................... 72 Martesia cuneiformis........ .............. .............. 73 Bankia gouldi........... -........... 7 3 Teredo navalis....... .................. ................. 7 5 v Page Pandoracea............... .. 77 Lyonsia hyalina......................................... 77 Pandora trilineata............... 78 Poromyacea..................................... ......... 80 Cardiomya gemma............ .................................80 Solemyacea........................ .................. 82 Solemya velum ........................ 82 GLOSSARY......... 84 LITERATURE CITED..................... -.................. 122 VITA .................................... 126 vi LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Left valve with features labeled.......... 94 2. Left valve of a Teredinid showing internal and external views and a diagrammatic pallet (From Clench, 1946)..... 95 3. Nucula proxima Say, 1822............................... 96 4. Yoldia limatula (Say, 1831).............. 96 5. Noetia ponderosa (Say, 1822)........................... 97 6. Anadara transversa (Say, 1822)......................... 97 7. Anadara ovalis (Bruguiere, 1792)........... ......... .. 98 8. Brachidontes recurvus (Rafinesque, 1820)............... 99 9. Modiolus demissus (Dillwyn, 1817)................ 100 10. Mytilus edulis L., 1758......... 100 Amygdalum papyria (Conrad, 1846).......... 101 12. Aequipecten irradians (Lamarck, 1819).................. 101 13. Anomia simplex Orbigny, 1845...... .102 14. Crassostrea virginica (Gmelin, 1792)............... 102 • 15. Polymesoda caroliniana Bose, 1830...................... 103 16. Congeria leucophaeata (Conrad, 1831).................. 103 17. Lucina multilineata Tuomey and Holmes, 1857, right valve ...... .....'.............. 104 18. Laevicardium mortoni (Conrad, 1830).................... 104 19. Aligena elevata Stimpson. 1851................ 105 vii Figure Page 20• My sella bidentata (Montagu).............................. 105 21. Dosinia discus Reeve, 1850.• 106 22. Cycline11a tenuis Recluz, 1852........ 106 23• Mercenaria mercenaria (L., 1758).............*.'•••. •.. 107 24. Pitar morrhuana (Linsley, 1848)....................... 107 25. Gemma gemma (Totten, 1 8 3 4 ) . ............ 108 26- Petricola pholadiformis (Lamarck, 1818).............., 108 27. Macoma balthica (L., 1758)............................ 109 28. Tellina agilis Stimpson, 1858........ 109 29. Macoma phenax Pall, 1900.............................. 110 30. Macoma tenta Say, 1834................................ 110 31. Abra aequalis Say, 1822, right valve.................. Ill 32. Donax variabilis Say, 1822 • H I 33. Tagelus plebeius (Solander, 1786) « 112 34. a. Tagelus divisus (Spengler, 1794), right valve b. Cardinal teeth of T. divisus. enlarged...... 112 35. Siliqua costata (Say, 1822) H 3 36. .a. Ensis directus Conrad, 1843 b. Cardinal teeth of E. directus, enlarged........... 113 37. Solen viridus Say, 1821•.... 1 H 38. Spisula solidissima (Dillwyn, 1817)................... 114 39. Mulinia lateralis (Say, 1822) ....... I ....... • ••• H 5 40. Rangia cuneata (Gray, 1831)......... 115 41. a. Mya arenaria (L., 1758) b. Chondrophore of M. arenaria, enlarged.............. 116 viii Figure Page 42. a. Barnea truncata (Say, 1822) b. Protoplax.......................................... 116 43. Cyrtopleura costata (L., 1758...... 117 44. Diplothyra smithii (Tryon, 1862) (from Turner, 1966).. 118 45. Teredo navalis L., 1758, left valve and pallets (from Turner, 1966)......................................... 119 46. Bankia gouldi Bartsch, 1880, left valve and pallets (from Clench, 1946)....... 119 47. Lyonsia hyalina Conrad, 1831.......................... 120 48. Pandora trilineata Say, 1822.......................... 120 49. Cardiomya gemma Verrill and Bush, 1898................ 121 50. Solemya.velum Say, 1822..............................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • INFORMATION to USERS the Most Advanced Technology Has Been
    INFORMATION TO USERS The most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this manuscript from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. University M'ProCms International A Ben & Howe'' Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor Ml 40106-1346 USA 3-3 761-4 700 800 501 0600 Order Numb e r 9022566 S o m e aspects of the functional morphology of the shell of infaunal bivalves (Mollusca) Watters, George Thomas, Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Attachment Properties of Blue Mussel (Mytilus Edulis L.) Byssus Threads on Culture-Based Artificial Collector Substrates
    Aquacultural Engineering 42 (2010) 128–139 View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE Contents lists available at ScienceDirect provided by Electronic Publication Information Center Aquacultural Engineering journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/aqua-online Attachment properties of blue mussel (Mytilus edulis L.) byssus threads on culture-based artificial collector substrates M. Brenner a,b,c,∗, B.H. Buck a,c,d a Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research (AWI), Am Handelshafen 12, 27570 Bremerhaven, Germany b Jacobs University Bremen, Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany c Institute for Marine Resourses (IMARE), Klußmannstraße 1, 27570 Bremerhaven, Germany d University of Applied Sciences Bremerhaven, An der Karlstadt 8, 27568 Bremerhaven, Germany article info abstract Article history: The attachment strength of blue mussels (Mytilus edulis) growing under exposed conditions on 10 differ- Received 25 May 2009 ent artificial substrates was measured while assessing microstructure of the applied substrate materials. Accepted 9 February 2010 Fleece-like microstructure attracted especially mussel larvae, however, most settled individuals lost attachment on this type of microstructure with increasing size during the time of experiment. Sub- Keywords: strates with thick filaments and long and fixed appendices were less attractive to larvae but provided a Spat collectors better foothold for juvenile mussels as shown by the results of the dislodgement trials. In addition these Offshore aquaculture appendices of substrates could interweave with the mussels, building up a resistant mussel/substrate con- Offshore wind farms Mytilus edulis glomerate. Our results show that a mussel byssus apparatus can withstand harsh conditions, if suitable Dislodgement substrates are deployed.
    [Show full text]
  • CROSS-SHELF TRANSPORT of PLANKTONIC LARVAE of INNER SHELF BENTHIC INVERTEBRATES LAURA ANN BRINK a THESIS Presented to the Depart
    CROSS-SHELF TRANSPORT OF PLANKTONIC LARVAE OF INNER SHELF BENTHIC INVERTEBRATES by LAURA ANN BRINK I, A THESIS Presented to the Department ofBiology and the Graduate School of the University of Oregon in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master ofScience March 1997 11 "Cross-Shelf Transport of Planktonic Larvae of Inner Shelf Benthic Invertebrates," a thesis prepared by Laura Ann Brink in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Science degree in the Department of Biology. This thesis has been approved and accepted by: the Examining Committee Date Committee in charge: Dr. Alan Shanks, Chair Dr. Steve Rumrill Dr. Lynda Shapiro Accepted by: Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School 111 An Abstract of the Thesis of Laura Ann Brink for the degree of Master of Science in the Department of Biology to be taken March 1997 Title: CROSS-SHELF TRANSPORT OF PLANKTONIC LARVAE OF INNER SHELF Approved: -l~P:::::::::~~~~'.1-------­ Ian Shanks There are two schools of thought on the affect of the physical environment in larval transport and dispersal. One is that larvae act as passive particles, being transported solely by physical means. The other idea is that through behavioral changes, larvae can alter their transport so as to improve their chances of successfully settling. Both cross-shelf and 23 hour vertical sampling of meroplanktonic larvae was conducted to investigate the hypothesis that larvae act as passive particles, being dispersed by the currents. The lengths ofbivalve larvae were also measured to determine if there were ontogenetic differences in the vertical distributions of these larvae.
    [Show full text]
  • New Report and Taxonomic Comparison of Anadara and Tegillarca Species of Arcidae (Bivalvia: Arcoidea) from Southern Coast of India
    International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR) ISSN (Online): 2319-7064 Index Copernicus Value (2013): 6.14 | Impact Factor (2013): 4.438 New Report and Taxonomic Comparison of Anadara and Tegillarca Species of Arcidae (Bivalvia: Arcoidea) from Southern Coast of India Souji.S1, Tresa Radhakrishnan2 Department of Aquatic Biology and Fisheries, University of Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram-695 581, Kariyavattom, Kerala, India Abstract: Arcacea family is economically important group of animals. Most of the species in this family are misplaced into invalid subgenera and Indian arcids are wanted a revision in systematic positon. In the case of Arcidae family; all of the species are treated under Anadara as main genera, however, some authors considered that the Tegillarca genus is only a sub genus of Arcidae family. Anadara is the commercially important genus of bivalves of Arcidae family. These two genera are confused by many taxonomists and some considered that the morphometric changes of Tegillarca are only the habitual adaptation. But the collected samples from the same habitat from the southern part of India is clearly demarked the distinction between Anadara species and Tegillarca species. In this paper the differences between these two genera are illustrated with the help of specimens from the same habitat and with the help of taxonomic literature of these genera. Species level classification was done based on the morphometric characters like peculiarities of (i) periostracum, (ii) cardinal area, (iii) umbo, (iv) adductor muscle scar and (v) pallial line. The specimens were collected from Neendakara, Vizhinjam and Kovalam along with the south west coast and Thiruchendur in Tamil Nadu, south east coast of India.
    [Show full text]
  • Freshwater Mussels of the Pacific Northwest
    Freshwater Mussels of the Pacifi c Northwest Ethan Nedeau, Allan K. Smith, and Jen Stone Freshwater Mussels of the Pacifi c Northwest CONTENTS Part One: Introduction to Mussels..................1 What Are Freshwater Mussels?...................2 Life History..............................................3 Habitat..................................................5 Role in Ecosystems....................................6 Diversity and Distribution............................9 Conservation and Management................11 Searching for Mussels.............................13 Part Two: Field Guide................................15 Key Terms.............................................16 Identifi cation Key....................................17 Floaters: Genus Anodonta.......................19 California Floater...................................24 Winged Floater.....................................26 Oregon Floater......................................28 Western Floater.....................................30 Yukon Floater........................................32 Western Pearlshell.................................34 Western Ridged Mussel..........................38 Introduced Bivalves................................41 Selected Readings.................................43 www.watertenders.org AUTHORS Ethan Nedeau, biodrawversity, www.biodrawversity.com Allan K. Smith, Pacifi c Northwest Native Freshwater Mussel Workgroup Jen Stone, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Columbia River Fisheries Program Offi ce, Vancouver, WA ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Illustrations,
    [Show full text]
  • ESENIAS Workshop: Marine Group
    ESENIAS Workshop: marine group Athens 12‐13 October 2015 Venue: HCMR ‐ Agios Kosmas, Hellenikon The meeting was attended by Dr Argyro Zenetos (chairperson), Dr Paraskevi Karachle (rapporteur), and Dr Fabio Crocetta from HCMR, Dr Katja Jelic representing Croatia, Dr Petya Ivanova and Dr Elitsa Stefanova, representing Bulgaria and Dr Konstantinos Tsiamis, invited speaker from the Joint Research Center, Italy. 1st DAY Sessions Following a welcome and a round of introductions, A. Zenetos communicated an introductory presentation on the ESENIAS‐TOOLS project aim and objectives (prepared by Dr Teodora Trichkova). The structure of the project with emphasis on the WP related to Marine Alien species was further analysed. The state of art on marine species in ESENIAS was presented by A. Zenetos. Starting from a previous analysis of Marine data in the ESENIAS area (2013: Zenetos & Karachle, 2015 in ESENIAS book), some preliminary data were shown based on the update by September 2015. A preliminary list of species and their distribution have been compiled from all available sources (websites, recent literature, reports). Comparison of 2015 data with those of 2013, shows an inflation of NIS in Black Sea countries (Bulgaria, Romania, Turkey) in 2015. It is believed that this is an artifact due to the bulk of data which were transferred from the AquaNIS website. A need for validation of these data is needed by country experts and taxonomists. To fulfill obligation for task 2.4 ‘Prioritisation of species and preparation of data fact sheets for priority species’ a list with the most invasive species throughout the Mediterranean and the Black Sea at Marine Strategy Framework Directive Area level, was prepared so as to be widely discussed.
    [Show full text]
  • Key to the Freshwater Bivalves of New Jersey
    Key to the Freshwater Bivalves of New Jersey 1. a. shell with a very sharp posterior ridge, shaped like the marine mussel, Mytilus, generally less than 30 mm, and attached to a hard substrate with byssal threads.........................……………........................Zebra mussel b. animal without byssal threads attaching adult to substrate, with or without teeth but not with the above shape................................….............................2 2. a. valves with cardinal teeth and two sets of lateral teeth.......................…...............................3 b. valves with one set of lateral teeth and pseudocardinal teeth or without teeth.............................................................................................................5 3. a. shell thick and sturdy, beak bulbous and curving anteriorly………………….Atlantic rangia b. shell moderately thick, beak not bulbous nor curving…………………………………………...4 4. a. valves with serrated lateral teeth......................................……….........................Asian clam b. valves with smooth lateral teeth....................................................................Fingernail clam 5. a. hinge teeth absent.................................................................................................................6 b. hinge teeth present..............................................................................................................10 6. a. beaks not projecting above the hinge line................…………………........ Paper pondshell b. beaks projecting above
    [Show full text]
  • FAU Institutional Repository
    FAU Institutional Repository http://purl.fcla.edu/fau/fauir This paper was submitted by the faculty of FAU’s Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute. Notice: ©1991 Elsevier B.V. The final published version of this manuscript is available at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00448486 and may be cited as: Gustafson, R. G., Creswell, R. L., Jacobsen, T. R., & Vaughan, D. E. (1991). Larval biology and mariculture of the angelwing clam, Cyrtopleura costata. Aquaculture, 95(3-4), 257-279. doi:10.1016/0044-8486(91)90092-L Aquaculture, 95 (1991) 257-279 257 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V .. Amsterdam Larval biology and mariculture ofthe angelwing clam, Cyrtopleura costata KG. Gustafson"·l, R.L. Creswell", T.R. Jacobsen" and D.E. Vaughan" "Division olCoastal. Environmental and .iquacultural SCiCIICCS, Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution, 5600 Old DixlC Highway, Fort Pierce, FL 34946, U,)',I "Department otMarinc and Coastal SCiCIICCS, Rutgers Shellfish Research l.aboratorv. New Jcrscv .tgnrultural Evperimcnt Station, Rutgers University, Port Norris, NJ 08349, USI (Accepted 7 November 1990) ABSTRACT Gustafson. R.G .. Creswell, R.L. Jacobsen. T.R. and Vaughan. D.E .. 1991. Larval biology and mari­ culture of the angclwing clam. Cvrtoplcura costata. Aquaculture, 95: 25 7~2 79. The deep-burrowing angclwing clam. Cvrtoplcura costata (Family Pholadidac ). occurs in shallow water from Massachusetts. USA. to Brazil and has been a commercially harvested food product in Cuba and Puerto Rico. This study examines its potential for commercial aquaculture development. The combined effects of salinity and temperature on survival and shell growth to metamorphosis of angclwing larvae were studied using a 5 X 5 factorial design: salinities ranged from 15 to 35%0 S.
    [Show full text]
  • Ponderous Ark Aquaculture in Florida
    The Potential of Blood Ark and Ponderous Ark Aquaculture in Florida Results of Spawning, Larval Rearing, Nursery and Growout Trials Leslie N. Sturmer, Jose M. Nuñez, R. LeRoy Creswell, and Shirley M. Baker TP-169 SEPTEMBER 2009 Cover illustration: Ann Meyers This research was supported by the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) under USDA Special Research Grant No. 2002-3445-11946; and by the National Sea Grant College Program of the U.S. Department of Commerce’s National Oceanic and Atmosphere Administration (NOAA) under NOAA Grant No. NA06 OAR-4170014. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of these organizations. Additional copies are available by contacting: Shellfish Aquaculture Extension Program Florida Sea Grant University of Florida University of Florida PO Box 89 PO Box 110409 Cedar Key, FL 32625-0089 Gainesville, FL 32622-0409 (352)543-5057 (352) 392-2801 www.flseagrant.org TP 169 September 2009 The Potential of Blood Ark (Anadara ovalis) and Ponderous Ark (Noetia ponderosa) Aquaculture in Florida Results of Spawning, Larval Rearing, Nursery, and Growout Trials Leslie N. Sturmer Shellfish Aquaculture Extension Program Cooperative Extension Service Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences University of Florida Cedar Key Jose M. Nuñez The Whitney Laboratory for Marine Bioscience University of Florida St. Augustine R. LeRoy Creswell Florida Sea Grant College Program Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences University of Florida Fort Pierce Shirley M. Baker Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences Program School of Forest Resources and Conservation Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences University of Florida Gainesville September 2009 TP 169 ii Preface In November 1999, a workshop on New Molluscs for Aquaculture was conducted by the University of Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Florida Sea Grant, and the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.
    [Show full text]
  • The Marine and Brackish Water Mollusca of the State of Mississippi
    Gulf and Caribbean Research Volume 1 Issue 1 January 1961 The Marine and Brackish Water Mollusca of the State of Mississippi Donald R. Moore Gulf Coast Research Laboratory Follow this and additional works at: https://aquila.usm.edu/gcr Recommended Citation Moore, D. R. 1961. The Marine and Brackish Water Mollusca of the State of Mississippi. Gulf Research Reports 1 (1): 1-58. Retrieved from https://aquila.usm.edu/gcr/vol1/iss1/1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18785/grr.0101.01 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by The Aquila Digital Community. It has been accepted for inclusion in Gulf and Caribbean Research by an authorized editor of The Aquila Digital Community. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Gulf Research Reports Volume 1, Number 1 Ocean Springs, Mississippi April, 1961 A JOURNAL DEVOTED PRIMARILY TO PUBLICATION OF THE DATA OF THE MARINE SCIENCES, CHIEFLY OF THE GULF OF MEXICO AND ADJACENT WATERS. GORDON GUNTER, Editor Published by the GULF COAST RESEARCH LABORATORY Ocean Springs, Mississippi SHAUGHNESSY PRINTING CO.. EILOXI, MISS. 0 U c x 41 f 4 21 3 a THE MARINE AND BRACKISH WATER MOLLUSCA of the STATE OF MISSISSIPPI Donald R. Moore GULF COAST RESEARCH LABORATORY and DEPARTMENT OF BIOLOGY, MISSISSIPPI SOUTHERN COLLEGE I -1- TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ............................................... Page 3 Historical Account ........................................ Page 3 Procedure of Work ....................................... Page 4 Description of the Mississippi Coast ....................... Page 5 The Physical Environment ................................ Page '7 List of Mississippi Marine and Brackish Water Mollusca . Page 11 Discussion of Species ...................................... Page 17 Supplementary Note .....................................
    [Show full text]
  • Anadara Kagoshimensis (Mollusca: Bivalvia: Arcidae)
    Research Article Mediterranean Marine Science Indexed in WoS (Web of Science, ISI Thomson) and SCOPUS The journal is available on line at http://www.medit-mar-sc.net http://dx.doi.org/10.12681/mms.2076 Anadara kagoshimensis (Mollusca: Bivalvia: Arcidae) in the Adriatic Sea: morphological analysis, molecular taxonomy, spatial distribution, and prediction PIERLUIGI STRAFELLA1, ALICE FERRARI2, GIANNA FABI1, VERA SALVALAGGIO1, ELISA PUNZO1, CLARA CUICCHI1, ANGELA SANTELLI1, ALESSIA CARIANI2, FAUSTO TINTI2, ANNA NORA TASSETTI1 and GIUSEPPE SCARCELLA1 1 Istituto di Scienze Marine (ISMAR), Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR), L.go Fiera della Pesca, 2, 60125 Ancona, Italy 2 Department of Biological, Geological & Environmental Sciences (BiGeA), University of Bologna, Via Selmi, 3, 40126, Bologna, Italy Corresponding author: [email protected] Handling Editor: Fabio Crocetta Received: 11 October 2016; Accepted: 3 August 2017; Published on line: 7 December 2017 Abstract Morphological analysis, molecular characterization, and a study of the distribution and density of Anadara kagoshimensis (Tokunaga, 1906) specimens collected in the Adriatic Sea were carried out using materials and data collected in the course of 329 bottom trawl hauls conducted in five yearly surveys, from 2010 to 2014. Morphological and molecular analysis allowed clarifying the confused taxonomy of the largest alien ark clam species invading Italian waters and the Mediterranean Sea. Analysis of the distribution and density data demonstrated that, along the Italian coast, A. kagoshimensis is mostly found at depths of 8 to 50 m, with a catch frequency of more than 98% in the hauls involving silty-clay sediment at a depth of 8-30 m. The hotspot map clearly shows a reduction in the distribution area of the species from 2010 to 2012.
    [Show full text]
  • Molluscs (Mollusca: Gastropoda, Bivalvia, Polyplacophora)
    Gulf of Mexico Science Volume 34 Article 4 Number 1 Number 1/2 (Combined Issue) 2018 Molluscs (Mollusca: Gastropoda, Bivalvia, Polyplacophora) of Laguna Madre, Tamaulipas, Mexico: Spatial and Temporal Distribution Martha Reguero Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Andrea Raz-Guzmán Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México DOI: 10.18785/goms.3401.04 Follow this and additional works at: https://aquila.usm.edu/goms Recommended Citation Reguero, M. and A. Raz-Guzmán. 2018. Molluscs (Mollusca: Gastropoda, Bivalvia, Polyplacophora) of Laguna Madre, Tamaulipas, Mexico: Spatial and Temporal Distribution. Gulf of Mexico Science 34 (1). Retrieved from https://aquila.usm.edu/goms/vol34/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by The Aquila Digital Community. It has been accepted for inclusion in Gulf of Mexico Science by an authorized editor of The Aquila Digital Community. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Reguero and Raz-Guzmán: Molluscs (Mollusca: Gastropoda, Bivalvia, Polyplacophora) of Lagu Gulf of Mexico Science, 2018(1), pp. 32–55 Molluscs (Mollusca: Gastropoda, Bivalvia, Polyplacophora) of Laguna Madre, Tamaulipas, Mexico: Spatial and Temporal Distribution MARTHA REGUERO AND ANDREA RAZ-GUZMA´ N Molluscs were collected in Laguna Madre from seagrass beds, macroalgae, and bare substrates with a Renfro beam net and an otter trawl. The species list includes 96 species and 48 families. Six species are dominant (Bittiolum varium, Costoanachis semiplicata, Brachidontes exustus, Crassostrea virginica, Chione cancellata, and Mulinia lateralis) and 25 are commercially important (e.g., Strombus alatus, Busycoarctum coarctatum, Triplofusus giganteus, Anadara transversa, Noetia ponderosa, Brachidontes exustus, Crassostrea virginica, Argopecten irradians, Argopecten gibbus, Chione cancellata, Mercenaria campechiensis, and Rangia flexuosa).
    [Show full text]