mpariso ing of nt C70 S g in Sitk So
ska S 6 AlaskaSea Grant Colic e Pnig»u» 8 Jriing 11 University ol Alaska Fa»hanks 1'airhanks, A laska 99775-5 0 907! 474-7086
A Comparisonof TwoRearing Sites of the Giant KelpMacrocysris integrifolia in Sitka Sound, Alaska
SamuelH. Rahung Alaska Aquaculture1»corporated P,O. Box 1288 Wrangeil. Alaska 99929
~r<
AK-N r-90 02 1990
Pnee: $3.SO Elmer E. RasmusonLibrary Cataloging-in-PublicationData
Rabung, Samuel H. A comparisonof two rearingsites of thegiant kelp Macrocystis integrifolia in Sitka Sound, Alaska.
AK-S G-90-02!
1. Macrocystis integrifolia. 2. Kelps. 3. Marine algae--Alaska Sitka Sound. I. Alaska Sea Grant College Program. II. Title, III. Series: Alaska sea grant report; 90-02.
QK569.L53R33 1990
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This publicationwas produced by theAlaska Sea Grant College Program, Cover design andartwork is by KarenLundquist, text formatting is by RuthOlson, and editing is by Sue Keller. Alaska SeaGrant is cooperativelysupported by the U.S. Departmentof Commerce, NOAA Office of SeaGrant and Extramural Programs, under grant number NA86AA-D- SG041,project number A/75-01; and by theUniversity of Alaskawith fundsappropriated by the state,
Samuel Rabung submitted this paper to the Aquatic ResourcesDepartment, Sheldon Jackson College, Sitka, Alaska, as a senior thesis in December 1987.
The Universityof A]askaFairbanks provides equal education and employmcnt tor all, regardlessof race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, disability, statusas a Vietnam era or disabled veteran, marital status,changes in marital status,pregnancy, or parenthoodpursuant to applicablestate and federal laws. TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract I
Introduction I
Background Information I Scopeof the Study 2 Biologyof Giant Kelp 2
Methods 6
Site Selection 6 Transplanting Sporophytes 8 Testi ng Environmental Conditions 8 Reproductionwith Sporophylls 9 LaboratoryCulture of Gametophytes 10
Results I I
Discussion and Recommendations I 3
References 20 Alaska Kelp Rearing Sites 1
ABSTRACT
In orderto test the suitabilityof a sitefor the rearingof Macrocystisintegrifolia, ten sporophyteswere transplanted from a wildpatch at WhitingHarbor, Sitka, Alaska, to a site locatedbehind the Sheldon Jackson College salmon hatchery in Sitka.Growth and survival werecompared at thelocations from April 4 toMay 28, 1987. Growth at WhitingHarbor was significantly greaterthan growth at SheldonJackson College SJC!.A freshwaterlens at theSJC site is thoughtto haveimpaired growth of theupper blades on theplants, For thisreason the S JCsite is notsuitable for M. integrifolia.
Attemptswere made to artificiallyculture M.integrifolia at the S JCfacility. Culturing from sporerelease through gametophyte stages to maturationand zygote fertilization was successful.However, culturing of thenew sporophytes was not successful.
INTROI3UCTION
Background Information
The giantkelp, Macrocystis integrifolia Bory, has the potentialto becomea major contributorto future renewableenergy resources as well asto food productionfor the increasingworld population. Experimental sea farms for producing food and energy have beendesigned and some testing has been undertaken to develop the needed technology for utilizingMacrocystis in thismanner Harger and Neushul 1983, Chapman and Chapman 1980,Wise andSylvestri 1976!,
Theprincipal industrial use of Macrocystisat presentis theproduction of alginsand alginatesfor usein variousindustries such as textiles,paper and cardboard, paint, pharmaceuticals,plastics, and especially the food industry in America,Historical records showthat the use of seaweedsin agricultureis a veryold andwidespread practice wherever there are rich supplies.This involves their use not only as foodfor animals, but also as fertilizerfor thesoil Chapmanand Chapman 1980, Sleeper 1980, North 1976,1971!. The principalcomponents of the edible algae are carbohydrates, small quantities of proteinand fat, ash,and water 80-90percent!, as well asmany essential trace elements Rosell and Srivastava1985, Chapman and Chapman1980, North 1971!.
Macrocystishas been used traditionally as a foodsource by theNative peoples along both coastsof thePacific, especially when coated by herringspawn Shields et al. 1985!.At present,herring roe-on-kelp is a rnultirnilliondollar industry with themajority being consumed in Japan Whyte 1979!, 2 Alaska Ketp Rear'iiig Sites
Macrocystishas traditionally been harvested from wild stocks;only recently have attempts beenmade at culturingthe plant. Harvest strategies have been developed for somewild stocks Coon 1982!, and restoration of wild stocksand habitat irnprovernent programs have been initiated to increase abundancein soine areas. Restoration and habitat improvementinclude removing sea urchins and other predators, removing competitor plants,transplanting, creating artificial substrate, and culturing and seeding techniques Fosterand Schiel 1985, Druehl 1979, Wilson et al. 1979,North 1976!. Thererecently has been increased interest in re-opening a herring roe-on-kelp fishery in southeastAlaska, It is generallyassumed that such a fisherywould rely on the mariculture ofkelp because of the damage done to wild stocks during the last roe-on-kelp fishery in the Sitkaarea in the1960s Stekoll 1987!, The roe-on-kelp market in Japanpays the highest price,up to $14a pound,for roe-on-Macrocystis;therefore the culture of Macrocystiswill bethe main component of thenew fishery {Stekoll 1987!, This new fishery, however, is dependenton locating an adequate herring roe resource that has not yet been allocated to a fishery Pierce1987!. There is currentlya herringroe-on-kelp fishery in PrinceWilliam Soundwhich relieson wild M. integrifolia harvestedin the Sitkaarea. These fishermen haveexpressed great interest in thepossibility of buyingcultured Macrocystis.
Scope of the Study
SheldonJackson College in Sitkais developinga.mariculture program which includes the cultureof kelps.The SJCkelp cultureprogram includes developing a mariculture laboratoryfacility but needs an ocean rearing area to complete the rearing cycle of M. integrifolia.An area as close to the laboratory aspossible would be convenient, and easy to supervise.The area immediately in front of theS JC hatchery appeared to meet these needs. SinceM. integrifoliawas not foundthere, this study was conducted to determinethe suitabilityof thesite for culturing this plant. For this study I testedthe SJC site by {1! transplantingwhole sporophytes to the SJC site and coinparing growth and survival and environmentalconditions with a controlsite, and {2! culturingM. integrifoliain the laboratory.I did not, however,outplant young sporophytes at the SJCsite and at the control site for comparinggrowth and survival.
Biology of Giant Kelp Macrocystisintegrifolia ranges from Monterey, California, to Sitka,Alaska. The plants growon rocks in thelower-most intertidal and upper subtidal zones to a depthof about8 meters,in areasclose to theopen ocean but not exposed directly to heavysurf Scagel 1963, 1967!.
Thedescription v;uies with latitude and locale, but generallyM. integrifoliais oneof the largestbrown algae in thesporophyte phase Figure 1!, and is deep brown to yellowin Alaska Kelp Rearing Sites 3
apic scimit
approximately I m
Fi ' g ure l. . Semi-diagrammatic sketchof Macroacrocystis s integrifolia from Coon and Roland 1980!, 4 Alaska Kelp Rearing Sites
color.It hasa strap-shapedcreeping rhizome, 2-4 cm wide. The rhizome is profuselyand dichotomouslybranched, and is attachedclosely to the substrateby branchedroot-like holdfastswhich arise from the margins,Numerous erect main stipesarise from the rhizome.The stipes are slender, up to 1 cmin diameterand up to 30 m long.Leaf-like branches blades! arise at intervals along the stipe. The blades are flattened, 25-35 cm long andup to 5 cmwide longerand up to 30 cm widein SitkaSound! with irregularly furrowedsurfaces and toothed margins. The blades taper gradually to theend and are abruptlyrounded at thebase to a sphericalor ovalfloat pneumatocyst!at the point of attachmentonthe stipe. The terminal blade, located at the apex {apical scimitar} of thestipe, is split at thebase with severalnew leaf-'like branches in variousstages of separation Scagel 1967!.
Like all giantkelps, M, integrifoliaexhibits complete alternation of generations,and both thegametophyte and sporophyte can be perennial Figure 2!. Thesporophyte phase can live for 16to 30 yearsand the gametophyte phase in thevegetative form! canlive threeto four years.
Thegametophyte phase is microscopicand haploid and germinates from motile spores of sporophylls,which are specialized blades of thesporophyte. Release of sporestakes place whenthe walls of the sporangiaweaken and rupture, creating thin, light areason the sporophyll.The spores settle and lose their fiagella within 12hours of release,The spores germinatewithin three days and produce durnbell-shaped gametophytes,
Thevegetative, filamentous form of thegametophyte is produced in low light or low nutrientconditions. This form is few celledand can live threeto four years.It is seen growingon rocks in the intertidalzone as brown "slime." In the vegetativeform, the gametophytecannot reproduce.
Thereproductive form of thegametophyte is produced in highlight intensity conditions. Thefemale may be unicellular with anoogonium, while the male is multicellular -10 cells!.Fertilization is oogamous,with themale bi-fiagellated sperm swimming to the femaleoogonium. The male gametophyte degenerates after fertilization, while thefernale persistsuntil thesporophyte germinates. Gamete formation to zygotegermination takes 13 days,and within a fewweeks the gametophyte degenerates. Macrocystis integrifolia can progressfrom zygotegermination to maturesporophyte in 8-12 months.
In thesporophyte phase the plant is diploidand macroscopic. The sporophyte is the phase thatis seengrowing in theocean, and can grow from a singlecell to 20 m in 8-12months. Growthbegins with a filarnentousform which lastsfor a few daysto two weeks.The filamentousform then becomes a blade that is onecell thick. Differentiation takes place in a fewmonths and the juvenile sporophyte form appears. The principal growth period occurs from early April to theend of May R. RaLonde,SIC, personalcommunication!. North 971! givesa detailedaccount of theli fe historyand development of Macrocystis. Alaska Kelp Rearing Sites 5
sporangium hl!
zoospore N!
young g gametophytes
antheridia~ oogonium
gemetephyt Q' gametophyte itgt N! fertilization microscopic holdfast embryonic sporophyte adult N! sporophyte diploid N!
iuveniie sporophyt N!
Figure 2. Themorphology arid life historyof Macrocystis from Foster and Schiel 1985!. 6 Alaska Kelp Rearing Sites
Theenvironmental requirements of M. integnfoliavary depending on life stage,depth, latitude,and locale. This alga requires a substrateof small rocks or cobblein moderately wave-exposedareas, to a substratethat is solid suchas a boulderwhen subjectedto appreciabletidal currents Coonand Roland 1980!.
Fosterand Schiel 985! listedthe following requirements for thegenus Macrocystis from researchon M, pyrifera!:The optimum temperature ranges from 12to 24 C, andsalinity needsto berelatively constant at around 33 ppt partsper thousand!. Macrocystis generally cangrow only to a depthwhere irradiance is reducedto about1 percentof surfacelight. Thereare 11known nutrient requirements for Macrocystis;these are C, 0, N, P, Mn, Fe, Co,Cu, Zn, Mo, andI, Of these,N isknown to belimiting sometimes in nature,and P, Mn, Fe, Cu, andZn alsomay be limiting in natureat times.
METHODS
Thesuitability of theS JChatchery site for M. integrifoliaculture was tested in thespring of 1987by ! transplantingwhole sporophytes from Whiting Harbor to the hatchery site andcomparing the growth and survival of sporophytesbetween the two sites,and ! collectingsporophylls and inducing reproduction in thelaboratory.
Site SeIection
Scatteredpatches of Macrocystisintegrifoliaare found throughout Sitka Sound, but I have not seenany of great size. For a collection and control site, I chose a large patch approximately100 m longand 10 m wideat WhitingHarbor 7 03'03"N, 13522'15 "W! at the northeastend of the Sitkaairport runway, only 1.9miles .1 km! from SJC.The WhitingHarbor site has a depthbetween 4 and5 meters,there is no freshwaterrunoff, and the bottomis composedof largeand small boulders, some cobble, and sand. It is semi- enclosedbut does receive a considerableamount of oceanswell and chop.
Theexperimental site in frontof theSJC facility 7 03'59"N,135o19'19" W, Figure3! variesbetween 4 and5 metersdeep, has considerable freshwater input from the SJC salmonhatchery and hydro-electricflume, and consistsof a silt and sandbottom. The SJC siteis notenclosed, but is protectedfrom direct ocean waves by nearbyislands. It does, however,receive substantial ocean swell as well as chop from boats using nearby Crescent Bayboat harbor. Both the experimental and control sites have Larninaria groenlandica, a relatedkelp, present in fairly largenumbers. Alaska Kelp Rearing Sites 7 S Alaska Kelp Rearing Sites
Trartsplanting Sporophytes DuringFebruary 1987, 10 sporophyte fronds were obtained by scubadiving at Whiting Harbor.The frondswere removed with the substrateto whichthey were attached if possible,or by cuttingas much of the holdfastas possible away from the substrate.The frondswere transported to the S JCsite, a fiveto ten-minute trip by boat,in a 0.9m x 1.2 m x 0.6 m plastictub filled with seawater,The holdfasts of plantsthat were cut loosefrom thesubstrate were attached tocement blocks weighing approximately 4.5kg! with twine priorto resubmergenceat the SJC site. Five of thefronds were tagged with Peterson discs forgrowth monitoring and the other five were controls. The purpose of the controls was to ensurethat the experimental treatment of themeasured fronds was not affecting their survival.Five fronds were tagged for growth monitoring at Whiting Harbor in thesame manneras the transplanted fronds, The remainder of thepatch at WhitingHarbor was the control for that site.
Growthof theblades was determined by taking weekly measurements of the increase in bladelength. Ten bladesof eachof the five experimentalfronds at bothsites were monitored.The blades were measured starting with the fifth free blade from the top on each frond Figure 1! atthe time of theinitial measurement. They were numbered I to IGfrom thetop down.Each experimental blade was punched with a smallhole near the attachment to thepneumatocyst and the distance from the pneumatocyst to the punched hole was measuredaccording tothe method of Parke 948!. This distance was measured weekly to determinethe change in bladelength. Maximum width of eachblade also was measured on a weekly basis.
Survivalof thetransplanted experimental Macrocystis was compared to thesurvival of the transplantedcontrol plants and to theexperimental and control plants at Whiting Harbor. Survivalwas divided into two categories: blade survival, with death being defined as more than3/4 of theblade degenerated; andfrond survival, with death being defined as the degenerationorloss of manypneumatocysts resulting in thestipe falling to thebottom, or the completeseverance and loss of the frond.
Testing Environmental Conditions
Temperature,salinity, nitrate concentration, and light penetrationat theSJC site were comparedwith those at theWhiting Harbor control site by measuringthese variables weeklyfrom April 4 to May28. Thedepth at eachsite varied considerably when measurementswere taken because of dailytidal fiuctuations, Forthis reason, temperature, salinity,and nitrate measurements were taken at thesurface, halfway down, and at the bottom,except on May 2 andMay 28 when temperature andsalinity rneasurernents were taken at 1-meter intervals from the surface to the bottom. Alaska Ketp Rearing Sites 9
Temperaturewas measuredto the nearest0.5 C with a hand-heldthermometer at the surfaceand with a YellowSprings Instruments temperature-salinity meter from the surface to the bottom.
Salinitywas measured to the nearest 0.5 ppt with a YSItemperature-salinity meter from the surface to the bottom.
Light penetrationwas measured with a standard20-cm secchi disc between 10:00 AM and 2:00PM andwith anambient-underwater irradiometer at 1-meterintervals from thesurface to the bottom.
Watersamples were collectedat the surface,halfway down, andat the bottomwith a Nansenbottle andanalyzed in the laboratoryfor nitratecontent. Nitrate concentrations were measuredwith an Orion research model 701A Digital Ionalyzer equipped with a model93- 07nitrate ion electrode. Reagent grade solid silver sulfate was added tothe samples prior to nitrateanalysis to preventchloride ion interference J. Marcello,SJC, personal communication!.
Reproduction with Sporophylls
Sporophyllswere collected from Whiting Harbor on September 22, October 15 an 27, and November22. They were brought into the laboratory atSJC as a sourceof spores in order to artificiallyculture them to thejuvenile sporophyte stage. All culturevessels, substrates, andmedia were sterilized to minimizecontamination from bacteria, blue-green algae, diatoms,flagellates, and other algae,using the methodsof Stekoll 987! with inodification.All containerswere either autoclaved or treatedwith 1;1chlorine bleach;hot water 0OC! for 3 one-hoursoakings, then rinsed once with iodophor followed by distilledwater. Sterilization of air stones,settling substrates and frames, and glass microscopeslides was accomplished by boiling in distilledwater for onehour, Liquids weresterilized by filteringthrough a 0.45micron Millipore-type filter.
Sporophyllswere collected by cuttingthem free from the stipe with a knifewhile scuba diving.The sporophylls were kept in bucketsof seawaterwhile being transported toSJC. At thelaboratory the sporophylls were sorted, washed and clipped onto rods in a seawater bathuntil used for sporerelease. The seawater bath was a 2,4m x0.9 m x 15cm deep woodentrough with unfiltered seawater pumped from a depthof about12 m. Inducingspore release and culturing of gametophytesbegan by holding the sporophylls in theseawater bath, at about110C and 30 ppt salinity, until ripe, according to themethods of Stekoll 987! with modification.Mature sporophyllswere brushedclean in sterile seawaterwith a stiffbrush, then dried thoroughly with a cottonrag or papertowels. The bladeswere then placed on severalpaper towels in a sterilemetal pan and covered with morepaper towels. Sterile seawater was poured on the towels to dampenthem and the pan 10 Alaska Kelp Rearing Sites
wascovered with clear plastic kitchen wrap. The covered sporophylls were then placed in a refrigeratorat2-40C for two to four hours. Following that, the sporophylls were placed in a beakerof sterileseawater at 9-12 C underfluorescent lights, keeping the ends of the sporophyllsoutof thewater with a sterilepetri-dish lidor clothespins toreduce mircilage production.
If thesporophylls were mature at thispoint, swimming spores were released within 4S minutes,clouding the water a lightyellow-brown color. The density of thespores was determinedbyfixing a smallsample ofthe spore suspension withformalin and counting on a hemocytometerundera microscope.Thedensity of thespore suspension wasadjusted to about20,000 spores per ml bydilution with sterile seawater, The spore suspension was thenpoured over the settling substrate in a sterilecontainer, and a transparentcover was placedon the container. The container was kept in theseawater bath at 9-120Cand under fiuorescentlights producing about 40-50 micro-Einsteins perrn2 per second. Cremona a non-fraying synthetic string! was used as the settling substrate and was wrappedaround a plexiglassframe to keepthe strandsapart and off the bottom. Microscopeslides were placed in thecontainer for sporesto settleon in orderto monitor growthand development. After 24 hours the spore suspension wasdiscarded and replaced with3,0 liters of sterile,Provasoli enriched seawater with iodine PESI! Tables 1 and2!. Thefinal step in thisphase was the formation of gametophytesfollowing spore germination.
Laboratory Culture of C~ametophytes
Thegametophytes were maintained in culture in thelab and induced to matureand release gametes,leading to fertilizationand germination forming the sporophyte generation. The temperatureandlight intensity were maintained asbefore and the culture was given a 16:8 hourlight:dark cycle as recommended byL.D. Druehl personal communication!. Watermovement wasprovided byaeration using an air stone fed by an aquarium pump. Theair wasfiltered in line by a 0.30micron filter to minimizechemical and bacterial contamination,Germanium dioxide was added tothe media to inhibit diatom growth when diatornswere detected Table 1!. Since Ge02 can also be harmful tothe Macrocystis, it was usedonly when necessary andthe media was changed within two days of applicationon therecommendation of L.D. Druehl and M. Stekoll personal communication!, ThePESI mediawas changed at least once weekly for threeweeks. A sectionof thestring was examinedfor sporophytegrowth and a microscopeslide from the culture was examined for plantgrowth and development each time the media was changed. Alaska Kelp Rearing Sites 11
Table 1. PESI mediafor Macrocystisculture from Stekoll 1987, Provasoli 1966!.
PESI stock solution: Na glycerophosphate 0.50 g NaNO~ 3.50 g Fe .1 mg/ml of 1:1 M FeEDTA! 250 ml P II Metal Mix 250 ml Kl .4 mg/ml! 1.0 ml Tris hydroxymethyl!aminomethane 6.05 g or Tris HC1 7.88 g B vitamins 10 ml each Deionized water to 1.0 L final vol.
Method;Adjust pH to 7.8with HCl or NaOHbefore making the final dilutionto 1.0L. Sterilizeby filteringthrough a 0.45micron filter. For workingsolutions, add 20 ml of PESIstock to 1.0L ofsterile seawater. Toinhibit diatom growth, add 2.0 ml of 250 mg/ml germaniumdioxide to each1,0 L of theworking solution.
RESULTS Ofthe five fronds measured atWhiting Harbor, three survived for at least 10 days April 8 to April 18!and two survived for atleast 24 days April 8 toMay 2!. The exact date of deathis notknown as the sites were checked weekly. On May 28, the Whiting Harbor contolfronds were in goodcondition, but there were no experimental fronds left, Of the fivefronds measured atSJC, three survived for at least 7 days April 4 toApril 11!, two survivedfor at least 28 days April 4 toMay 2!, and one survived for at least 54 days April 4 toMay 28!. On May 2 therewere no surviving control fronds at theSJC site. The causeof deathat the Whiting Harbor site was attributed to the subsistence herring roe-on- kelpharvest. The blades of somemarked fronds that were reachable from the surface were cutoff at thepneumatocysts shortly after herring spawned in thearea. The cause of deathat theSJC site was unknown; some fronds were gone completely and some were observed lyingon thebottom decaying. The herring did spawnat theSJC site but the blades were notharvested. Several plants were submerged bythe weight of thespawn but reappeared two weekslater after the eggshatched and measurements were continued. Thegreatest growth ofan individual blade atWhiting Harbor was 49 mm in 10 days April 8 toApril 18!. The greatest growth of an individual blade at SJC was 6 mmin 28days April4 toMay 2!. Growthat theWhiting Harbor site was significantly greater than that 12 Alaska Kelp Rearing Sites
Table 2. Stock solutionsfor PESI stock from Stekoll 1987, Provasoli 1966!.
FeEDTA
A. Fe NH42 SO42.6H2 0.702 g Na2EDTA2H20 0.665 g
Deionized water to 1.0 L ot B. FeNaEDTA 0.657 g Deionized water to 1.0 L
P U Metal Mix
Na EDTA-H 0 1.00 g H BO bortc actd! 1.14 g FeC136H20 49 mg MnSO41H20 123 mg ZnSO47H20 22 mg CoSO47H20 4.8 rng Deionized water to 1.0 L Method:Add EDTA to about 800 ml of deionized water first, then add metal salts and bring to volume.
B vitamins
'Vitamin B cyanocobalamin! 12 1.0 mg/100 ml Biotin 0.5 mg/100 ml Thiamine. HC1 50 mg/100 rnl
Method:These vitamins can be made up separatelyor together.Store at 4oC if sterile ftltered, or freezein 10 ml aliquots. Alaska Kelp Rearing Sites t 3
at theSJC site T test,P = .11! Figure4!. Growthof theupper five bladeswas greater thanthe growth of thelower five blades on all theexperimental fronds at theWhiting Harborsite. At theSJC site the growth of theupper five blades was not greater than that of thelower five bladeson anyof theexperimental fronds.
Lightpenetration was greater at Whiting Harbor than at SJCon April 4, 11,18, and 28 and May2, butwas attenuated atapproximately thesame rate at both sites Figure 5!. Light intensityat bothsites was never below 2.3 micro-Einsteins per m2per second, the minimumrequired for kelpgrowth Fosterand Schiel 1985!. Temperaturesatboth sites were usually within about one degree of eachother except on May28 when the S JCsite was about three degrees cooler Figure 6!.
At theSJC site the surface salinity was always lower, and there was a markedincrease in salinitywith depth illustrating the presence of a freshwaterlens Figure7! downto approximately2 m depth.
Nitrateconcentrations from approximately 25ppm parts per million! to approximately 1 $ ppm were measuredat both sites,indicating either unusuallyhigh nitrate levelsfrom unknownsources or somesort of systematicerror in measurement,mostlikely the latter. Table3 summarizestheresults of thelaboratory culture of garnetophytesandsporophytes fromsporophylls collected atWhiting Harbor. Many of thesamples had gametophytes, and a fewvery small sporophytes were observed in culture samples four weeks after spore release.Spores were released on November l also but were lost due to equipment failure.
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Theresults of thisstudy show that the SJC site probably is not suitable asan outplanting sitefor M. integrifolia.This is primarilydue to theconsiderable freshwater lens from the SJCsalmon hatchery and hydro-electric fiume. The plants showed poor growth in the upper blades at the S JCsite, within the freshwater lens. Lightlimitation is oneof themost important factors influencing Macrocystis growth Jackson1987!. The lower light intensity at the S JCsite probably was not limiting because thelevel of intensitynever was below the lower light limit for kelpgrowth Foster and Schiel1985, Fei andNeushul 1984!. Adult Macrocystis are generally insensitive to changesin subsurface light because they can transport the photosynthetic products from the surfacecanopy toward the holdfast Foster and Schiel 1985, McCleneghan and Houk 198S,Lobban 1978!. This could have been a proble~atthe SJC site with the degeneration of theupper canopy caused by the freshwater lens, It ispossible that the degeneration of the uppercanopy caused by the freshwaterlens at theSJC site reduced the amountof 14 Ataska Kelp Rearing 'Sites
40
35
30
25 E Z 20
15 illUZo '0
5 6 9 10
BLADE LOCATION
WH WH 2 SJC WH 3 1 SJC 2
Figure 4. Kelp bladegrowth at Whiting Harbor and S JC,April 11 to May 2, 1987. WH1 extends only to April 18.! Alaska Kelp Rearing Sites 15
LIGHT X 00! pW/crnr O O O O e> 8 8 R o o 8 o 8 8 8 nt 8 o 8 IOo O o IO O o 0 o D rn ro < O Il> N nl FP 6 r O 4 Pl g ID O
3 I orU 4
3 Z a
0 O Q 0 O O 0 O 0 O O O O O O O Ln o lA O O IA O 4 O 0 O II!O O o O O O O O O nl vJ rn rn d CV C4 4 B EA Dnl rnnl Drn Ill O
She!donJackson Whiting Harbor College
Figure5. Lightintensity atdifferent depths on April 4, 11,18, and 28 and May 2 and 28,1987. One watt per m~ is approximately equal to 5 micro-Einsteinsper m2 per second. 16 Alaska Kelp Rearing Sites
TEMPERATURE DEGREES CELSIUS! O ~ N co 8 io oi Qr w CEI Co r Co IJJ wo nlw w CO Cb
E z 4 0Lit CI
E z 4
0
io r IXI Ch io OJ CQ ro 5 oi 0 ~ ni rn in p io $0 pl rt!
Sheldon Jackson ~M~I- Whiting HarbOr College
Figure6. Temperatureprofiles for April 4, 11, 18, and 28 and May 2 and28, 1987. Alaska Kelp Rearing Sites I 7
SALlhllTY PPT!
E I-z 4 IL UJ lO
E ZlU o O
O O O Ct CV M
SI Id J II ~9- Whiting Harbor College
Figure7. Salinityprofiles for April 4, 11,18, and 28 and May 2 and28, 1987. I8 Alaska Kelp Rearing Sites
Table3. Summaryof observations of laboratory cultures from sporophylls of Maerocystisintegrifolia collected in WhitingHarbor, Alaska, Sept. 22, Oct. 15 and 27, and Nov. 22, 1987.
Date of Date of spore release observation
Oct. 22 Ocr. 27 Gametophytes Culture No. 1! Nov. 13 Male and fernale gametophytes, few sporophytes Nov. 18* C arnetophytesand dead material Nov. 28 Dead
Nov. 2 Nov. 13 Spores, few Culture No, 2! gametophytes Nov, 18* Few gametophytes, diatom contaminate s Nov. 28 Dead
~Observedby M. Stekoll.
photosyntheticproducts available for transport tothe lower portions of theplant, thereby limiting new growth.
The growthdynamics and density of a Macrocysrispopulation are variable, and therefore oneset of datamay not be adequateto determinegrowth rates for a site Druehland Wheeler1986, Gerard and North 1984, Lobban 1978!. The blade growth measured at WhitingHarbor during this study represents thegrowth under particular conditions. If the studywere carried out to completion by outplantingatWhiting Harbor and monitoring growthand survival were conducted again the amount of bladegrowth could be much different,varying with the subtle differences in theenvironment from time to time.The resultsof this studyshould be viewedas only an indicationof environmentalconditions andpotential blade growth rates at the sites.
.4.major weakness in this study was the lack of nutrient analysis at the culture sites. The nutrientlevels need to be determined inorder to evaluate thequality of a siteand compare it Alaska Kelp Rearing Sites 19
withother sites. Researchers in kelp culture should be certain beforehand of the availability andaccuracy of equipmentand methods to measurethese parameters.
Thisstudy shows that M, integrifotia can be cultured at theSJC facility. Culture number I probablydied from photo-inhibition as it wasreceiving no dark period L.D. Druehl and M. Stekoll,personal communication!. Culture number 2 wasdiscarded because of diatom contaminationfrom the seawaterbath, Both of theseproblems have been solved at this pointand another culture can be started. This study would be more conclusive if culturing werecarried out to completion by outplanting atWhiting Harbor and monitoring growth and survival,
Stekoll 987! describedthree phases in kelpculture: sporophyll collection and release of spores,laboratory culture of garnetophytesand sporophytes, and outplanting and maintenanceof sporophytes.If techniques for thefirst two phasesas described in this studyare followed it would be possible torear M. integrifolia for outplanting. Whiting Harboris an obvious choice for an outplanting site in theSitka area as Macrocysris grows naturallythere. However, when culturing kelp for food,outplanting sites must be located awayfrom sources of pollUtionto keepthe kelp fit for consumption.Macrocysris integrifoliacan concentrate heavy metals and other toxicants making it unfit for consumption L.D. Druehl, personalcommunication!, The SJC site is near a boat harbor andWhiting Harbor is nearboth the airport and the sewage effluent of Sitka.Both sites mayreceive effluent from Alaska Lumber and Pulp Co. located in SitkaSound, Anyone culturingkelp for food in these areas should test the plants for elevated toxin levels. Testing for toxicantsshould be incorporated into evaluation studies for kelpculture sites, Other criteriafor evaluationof a siteshould include interference with other activities. The S JCsite was locatedwithin the SJCsalmon hatchery terminal harvest area and would have interferedwith the purse seining of returningsalmon B. Davidson,SJC, personal communication!.
An alternativetooutplanting the juvenile sporophytes is to rear them in an enclosed tank, wherethey would be safe from predation and competition, until they reach a certainsize. Thisis beingdone in Californiaand appears tobe very successful M.Stekoll, personal communication!.Future studies of culturesites could include testing the effects of tank rearingprior to outplanting. Inconclusion, there are at least four criteria to take into consideration when assessing the suitabilityofa sitefor the artificial culture ofMacrocystis. Themost obvious and important is;Will Macrocysris grow there? Does the site meet the light, temperature, salinity, nutrient, andwater motion requirements forMacrocystis? Another important criterion is: Will kelp culturinginterfere with other activities occurring at thesite? Third: is thesite accessible? Will it belogistically practical to maintainoutplanted kelp cultures at this site? And last. If thekelp is beingcultured for food,are there sources of toxicants nearby that could render thekelp unfit for consumption?If the site appears to meetthese criteria, it is reasonableto conducta trialoutplanting. 20 Alaska Kelp Rearing Sites
REFERENCES
Chapman,V.J. and D.J. Chapman.1980. Seaweeds and their uses,3rd edn. Chapmanand Hall, New York, 334 p,
Coon,L.M. 1982.Macrocystis harvest strategy in British Columbia:Synthetic and dcgradativcprocesses in marine macrophytcs. Walter de Gruyter & Co., Berlin.
Coon, L.M, and W.G. Roland. 1980.Harvesting impacts on Macrocystisirttegrifolia; A preliminary study. FishcricsDevelopment Report No. 12. MarineResources Branch, Ministry of Environment, Province of British Columbia.
Druehl, L.D. 1979.An cnhnnccmentscheme lor Macrocystisirt tegrifolia Phacophyceac!.Procccdings of the International Seaweed Symposium No, 9, p. 79-84.
Druchl, L.D. and W,N. Wheeler. 1986. Population biology of Macrocystisirttegrifolia from British Columbia,Canada. Marine Biology 90:173-179.
Fci, X,G, and M. Neushul. 1984. Effects of light on the growth and development of giant kelp. Hydrobiologia 116/117:456-462.
Foster, M.S. and D.R. Schicl. 1985.The ecology of giant kelp lorcsts in California. A community profile. Biological Rcport 85 ,2!, U,S. Fish and Wildlife Service, NASA-Slidcll Computer Complex, 1010 Gause Boulevard, Slidell, LA 70458,
Gerard,V.A. and W.J. North. 1984.Measuring growth, production,and yield of'thc giant kelp, Macrocystis pyrifera. Hydrobiologr'a 116/117:321-324.
Harger, B,W,W. and M. Neushul. 1983. Test farming of the giant kelp, Macrocystis, as a marine biomass producer. Journal of the World Mariculture Society 14;392-403.
Jackson,G.A. 1987.Modelling the growth and harvestyield of the giant kelp Macrocyrti t pyrifera. Marine Bt'alogy 95:611-624.
Lobban, C.S. 1978. The growth and deathof the Macrocystis sporophyte Phaeophyceae,Laminarialcs!. Phycolog ia 17 !: 196-202.
McClencghan,K. and J,L. Houk. 1985.The effects of canopyremoval on holdfast growth in Macrocystis pyrifera Phacophyta: Laminarialcs!. California Fish and Game 71 !:22-27.
North, W.J. 1971. Introduction and background. In: W.J. North, cd. Thc biology of giant kelp beds Macrocystis! in Calil'ornia. Nova Hedwigia Beih. 32:1-97. Alaska Kelp Rearing Sites 2 1
Parke,M. 1948.Studies on British Laminariaceae. I. Growth in Laminariasaccharina L,! Lamour.Journal of the Marine Biological Associadonof thc U.K. 27;651-709.
Piercc,B. 1987, Aquaculture inAlaska, Alaska State Legislature. House Research Agency Rcport 87-B,
Provasoli,L. 1966.Media and prospects for thccultivation of marinealgae, In: A, Watanabeand A. Hattori,cds. Cultures and collections: Proceedings of the V.S.-Japan Conference inHakonc, Japan, September1966. Japanese Society of PlantPhysiologists, p. 63-75.
Rosell,K. andL.M. Srivastava.1985. Seasonal variations in totalnitrogen, carbon and amino acids in Macrocysrisin egrifoliaandNereocysris luerkeana Phacophyta!. Journal of theFisheries Rcscarch Board of Canada 33:1015-1023.
Scagel,R.F. 1963, Distribution of attached marine algae in relation to oceanographicconditions in the northeastPacific. In: M,J, Dunbar, ed., Marine distributions. University of Toronto Press, Royal Societyof CanadaSpecial Publication No. 5, p. 37-50,
Scagel,R.F. 1967.Guide to commonseaweeds of British Columbia.British ColumbiaProvincial Museum. Handbook No. 27.
Shields,T,L., G.S. Jamieson, and P.E, Sprout. 1985. Spawn-on-kelp fisheries in theQueen Charlotte Islandsand Northcm British Columbia Coast 1982 and 1983. Canadian Tcchnical Rcport of Fisheriesand Aquauc Scicnccs No. 1372,53 p.
Sleeper,H.L. 1980. Algin from Afacrocystis, In: I.A. Abbott, M.S. Foster, and L.F. Eklund, cds, Pacific seaweedaquaculture: Proceedings ofa SymposiumonUseful Algae. California Sca Grant Collcgc Program, p. 130-135.
Stckoll,M.S, 1987. Artificial growth and propagation of the giant kelp Macrocysris in cgrifolia. University of Alaska, Juneau,SFS-8704.
Whytc,J.N.C. 1979. The quality, handling, and transplanting ofkelp for komochi kombu production. In: Proceedingsof thc Herring Roe on Kelp Workshop. Univcrsi of yAlaska Sca Grant Rcport No. 79-3,Alaska Sca Grant Collcgc Program, 138 Irving II, Universityof Alaska,Fairbanks, AK 99775-5040.
Wilson,K.C., P.L. Haaker, and D.A. Hanan, 1979, Restoration ofMacrocys pyrifera is Phacophyceac! at PalosVcrdes Peninsula, California. Proceedings of the International Seaweed Symposium No. 9, p. 85-89.
Wise,J.J. and A.J, Silvcsui. 1976, Mobil process efficiently converts methanol togasoline. Oil and Gas Journal 74 7!:140-]42.