DOCSLIB.ORG

Otters, Sea Stars, and Glacial Melt: Top-Down and Bottom-Up Factors That Influence Kelp Communities

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Otters, Sea Stars, and Glacial Melt: Top-Down and Bottom-Up Factors That Influence Kelp Communities Otters, sea stars, and glacial melt: top-down and bottom-up factors that influence kelp communities Item Type Thesis Authors Traiger, Sarah B. Download date 07/10/2021 21:31:28 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/11122/7903 OTTERS, SEA STARS, AND GLACIAL MELT: TOP-DOWN AND BOTTOM-UP FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE KELP COMMUNITIES By Sarah B. Traiger, B.S. A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Marine Biology August 2017 APPROVED: Brenda Konar, Committee Chair Sarah Hardy, Committee Member, Chair Department of Marine Biology Stephen Okkonen, Committee Member Matthew Edwards, Committee Member Wayne Litaker, Committee Member Bradley Moran, Dean College of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences Michael Castellini, Dean o f the Graduate School ABSTRACT Kelp beds are important features of the Alaska coastline and provide habitat, protect coastlines, and support commercial and subsistence harvests. Kelp beds are affected by top-down and bottom-up factors, which are changing due to human and climate-related impacts. The influences of these top-down and bottom-up factors on kelp beds are investigated in three chapters. My first chapter investigated the influence of glacial discharge on recruitment and early community development in subtidal kelp communities by monitoring benthic sessile algae and invertebrates on cleared rocks across a glacial gradient along with various physical and biological parameters in the summers of 2013-2014. It has been predicted that Alaska’s glaciers will lose 30-60% of their volume by 2100. The melt from glaciers increases sedimentation and lowers salinity, impacting important habitat-providing kelp. I found that sites upstream from glacial discharge had higher kelp recruitment than downstream sites, and that up to 72% of the variation in community development was related to mobile invertebrates and kelp in the surrounding community. Glacially-influenced environmental factors did not explain any variation that was not already explained by biological factors. My second chapter explored whether patterns in the recruitment of the dominant canopy kelp,Nereocystis luetkeana and the subcanopy kelp, Saccharina latissima were a result of dispersal limitation or failure to grow to macroscopic size. My goals were to determine 1) whether glacial melt conditions affect adult fecundity (spore production) of either species, 2) how sedimentation affects early gametophyte growth and survival in each species, and 3) whether competitive interaction between species at the gametophyte stage is altered by sediments. I found that glacial melt conditions did not affect the fecundity of either species, but sedimentation affected survival and competition.Saccharina latissima was the superior competitor under high sediment conditions. Because glacially- iii influenced coastal areas often have little exposed hard substrate and predation by sea otters and sea stars on clams can provide hard substrate for kelp colonization, my third chapter examined methods for determining predation on clams by these predators without direct observation. I found that foraging pits of sea otters and sea stars could not be distinguished using quantitative measurements. In contrast, shell litter proved useful in quantifying relative foraging rates. Clam consumption by sea otters and sea stars was equal at all but one site. Collectively, my thesis chapters provide information on the effects of glacial discharge on microscopic and early kelp life stages in Alaska which can be incorporated into management practices. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TITLE PAGE..........................................................................................................................................i ABSTRACT..........................................................................................................................................iii TABLE OF CONTENTS......................................................................................................................v LIST OF TABLES.............................................................................................................................viii LIST OF FIGURES.............................................................................................................................. x ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................................................................................... xii GENERAL INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................1 LITERATURE CITED......................................................................................................................... 6 CHAPTER 1: INITIAL RECRUITMENT AND EARLY COLONIZATION OF KELP- ASSOCIATED BENTHIC COMMUNITIES VARIES IN RELATION TO GLACIAL DISCHARGE....................................................................................................................... 11 1.1 ABSTRACT...............................................................................................................................11 1.2 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................... 12 1.3 METHODS.................................................................................................................................14 1.3.1 Study Site.............................................................................................................................14 1.3.2 Environmental factors.........................................................................................................15 1.3.3 Biological factors................................................................................................................ 17 1.3.4 Patterns of initial recruitment and early community development................................. 17 1.3.5 Data Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 18 1.4 RESULTS ...................................................................................................................................20 1.4.1 Environmental factors....................................................................................................... 20 1.4.2 Biological factors .............................................................................................................. 21 1.4.3 Patterns of community development................................................................................ 21 1.4.4 Correlations with environment and surrounding community......................................... 23 1.5 DISCUSSION ........................................................................................................................... 25 1.5.1 Patterns of early community development.......................................................................26 1.5.2 Factors correlated with community development...........................................................27 1.5.3 Implications........................................................................................................................ 32 1.6 LITERATURE CITED.............................................................................................................33 1.7 TABLES AND FIGURES....................................................................................................... 38 1.8 APPENDIX A ........................................................................................................................... 58 v CHAPTER 2: SUPPLY AND SURVIVAL: GLACIAL MELT IMPOSES LIMITATIONS AT THE KELP MICROSCOPIC LIFE STAGE.....................................................................60 2.1 ABSTRACT.............................................................................................................................. 60 2.2 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................... 61 2.3 MATERIALS AND METHODS.............................................................................................64 2.3.1 Study site............................................................................................................................ 64 2.3.2 Fecundity Comparison....................................................................................................... 65 2.3.3 Competition-sedimentation experiments..........................................................................67 2.3.4 Single Species Response to Sedimentation......................................................................68 2.3.5 Mixed Species Response to Sedimentation......................................................................69 2.3.6 Data analysis....................................................................................................................... 71 2.4 RESULTS ...................................................................................................................................72 2.4.1 Fecundity did not differ between sites upstream and downstream of glacial discharge ..................................................................................................................................................... 72 2.4.2 Competition-sedimentation experiment...........................................................................73 2.4.2.1 Nereocystis andSaccharina gametophyte survival and growth are similar
Load more

Recommended publications
  • COMPLETE LIST of MARINE and SHORELINE SPECIES 2012-2016 BIOBLITZ VASHON ISLAND Marine Algae Sponges
    COMPLETE LIST OF MARINE AND SHORELINE SPECIES 2012-2016 BIOBLITZ VASHON ISLAND List compiled by: Rayna Holtz, Jeff Adams, Maria Metler Marine algae Number Scientific name Common name Notes BB year Location 1 Laminaria saccharina sugar kelp 2013SH 2 Acrosiphonia sp. green rope 2015 M 3 Alga sp. filamentous brown algae unknown unique 2013 SH 4 Callophyllis spp. beautiful leaf seaweeds 2012 NP 5 Ceramium pacificum hairy pottery seaweed 2015 M 6 Chondracanthus exasperatus turkish towel 2012, 2013, 2014 NP, SH, CH 7 Colpomenia bullosa oyster thief 2012 NP 8 Corallinales unknown sp. crustous coralline 2012 NP 9 Costaria costata seersucker 2012, 2014, 2015 NP, CH, M 10 Cyanoebacteria sp. black slime blue-green algae 2015M 11 Desmarestia ligulata broad acid weed 2012 NP 12 Desmarestia ligulata flattened acid kelp 2015 M 13 Desmerestia aculeata (viridis) witch's hair 2012, 2015, 2016 NP, M, J 14 Endoclaydia muricata algae 2016 J 15 Enteromorpha intestinalis gutweed 2016 J 16 Fucus distichus rockweed 2014, 2016 CH, J 17 Fucus gardneri rockweed 2012, 2015 NP, M 18 Gracilaria/Gracilariopsis red spaghetti 2012, 2014, 2015 NP, CH, M 19 Hildenbrandia sp. rusty rock red algae 2013, 2015 SH, M 20 Laminaria saccharina sugar wrack kelp 2012, 2015 NP, M 21 Laminaria stechelli sugar wrack kelp 2012 NP 22 Mastocarpus papillatus Turkish washcloth 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 NP, SH, CH, M 23 Mazzaella splendens iridescent seaweed 2012, 2014 NP, CH 24 Nereocystis luetkeana bull kelp 2012, 2014 NP, CH 25 Polysiphonous spp. filamentous red 2015 M 26 Porphyra sp. nori (laver) 2012, 2013, 2015 NP, SH, M 27 Prionitis lyallii broad iodine seaweed 2015 M 28 Saccharina latissima sugar kelp 2012, 2014 NP, CH 29 Sarcodiotheca gaudichaudii sea noodles 2012, 2014, 2015, 2016 NP, CH, M, J 30 Sargassum muticum sargassum 2012, 2014, 2015 NP, CH, M 31 Sparlingia pertusa red eyelet silk 2013SH 32 Ulva intestinalis sea lettuce 2014, 2015, 2016 CH, M, J 33 Ulva lactuca sea lettuce 2012-2016 ALL 34 Ulva linza flat tube sea lettuce 2015 M 35 Ulva sp.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    Appendix C: An Analysis of Three Shellfish Assemblages from Tsʼishaa, Site DfSi-16 (204T), Benson Island, Pacific Rim National Park Reserve of Canada by Ian D. Sumpter Cultural Resource Services, Western Canada Service Centre, Parks Canada Agency, Victoria, B.C. Introduction column sampling, plus a second shell data collect- ing method, hand-collection/screen sampling, were This report describes and analyzes marine shellfish used to recover seven shellfish data sets for investi- recovered from three archaeological excavation gating the siteʼs invertebrate materials. The analysis units at the Tseshaht village of Tsʼishaa (DfSi-16). reported here focuses on three column assemblages The mollusc materials were collected from two collected by the researcher during the 1999 (Unit different areas investigated in 1999 and 2001. The S14–16/W25–27) and 2001 (Units S56–57/W50– source areas are located within the village proper 52, S62–64/W62–64) excavations only. and on an elevated landform positioned behind the village. The two areas contain stratified cultural Procedures and Methods of Quantification and deposits dating to the late and middle Holocene Identification periods, respectively. With an emphasis on mollusc species identifica- The primary purpose of collecting and examining tion and quantification, this preliminary analysis the Tsʼishaa shellfish remains was to sample, iden- examines discarded shellfood remains that were tify, and quantify the marine invertebrate species collected and processed by the site occupants for each major stratigraphic layer. Sets of quantita- for approximately 5,000 years. The data, when tive information were compiled through out the reviewed together with the recovered vertebrate analysis in order to accomplish these objectives.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 3 Marine Spcies Lists
    Appendix 3 Marine Species Lists with Abundance and Habitat Notes for Provincial Helliwell Park Marine Species at “Wall” at Flora Islet and Reef Marine Species at Norris Rocks Marine Species at Toby Islet Reef Marine Species at Maude Reef, Lambert Channel Habitats and Notes of Marine Species of Helliwell Provincial Park Helliwell Provincial Park Ecosystem Based Plan – March 2001 Marine Species at wall at Flora Islet and Reef Common Name Latin Name Abundance Notes Sponges Cloud sponge Aphrocallistes vastus Abundant, only local site occurance Numerous, only local site where Chimney sponge, Boot sponge Rhabdocalyptus dawsoni numerous Numerous, only local site where Chimney sponge, Boot sponge Staurocalyptus dowlingi numerous Scallop sponges Myxilla, Mycale Orange ball sponge Tethya californiana Fairly numerous Aggregated vase sponge Polymastia pacifica One sighting Hydroids Sea Fir Abietinaria sp. Corals Orange sea pen Ptilosarcus gurneyi Numerous Orange cup coral Balanophyllia elegans Abundant Zoanthids Epizoanthus scotinus Numerous Anemones Short plumose anemone Metridium senile Fairly numerous Giant plumose anemone Metridium gigantium Fairly numerous Aggregate green anemone Anthopleura elegantissima Abundant Tube-dwelling anemone Pachycerianthus fimbriatus Abundant Fairly numerous, only local site other Crimson anemone Cribrinopsis fernaldi than Toby Islet Swimming anemone Stomphia sp. Fairly numerous Jellyfish Water jellyfish Aequoria victoria Moon jellyfish Aurelia aurita Lion's mane jellyfish Cyanea capillata Particuilarly abundant
    [Show full text]
  • Small Scale Clam Farming in Washington
    S m a l l - S c a l e CLAM Farming For PleaSure and ProFit in WaShington According to one Native American tale, the first humans arrived in the Pacific Northwest by stepping out of a clam shell. Since those ancient times, clams have had central roles in shaping the cultures and economies of the Pacific Northwest. For many shoreline property owners or leaseholders in Washington, clam farming is an enjoyable and sometimes profitable way to remain connected with the rich aquacultural legacy of the state. It is also a good way for them to become more aware of coastal processes such as sedimentation and erosion and to be vigilant for Spartina cordgrass, European green crab and other unintentionally introduced marine organisms. Two clam species — native littleneck clams and Manila clams — are routinely farmed in Washington. This publication introduces shoreline property owners and leaseholders to these two species and describes methods for growing clams for consumption. 1 2 IntroducIng two PoPular clams Three clam species — native littleneck clams (Protothaca staminea), Manila clams (Venerupis japonica) and geoduck clams (Panope abrupta) — are routinely farmed in Washington. Successful cultivation of geoduck clams entails different farming strategies and, as such, is not described in this introductory document. Native littleneck clams have been an important food On Washington beaches, Manila clams thrive in source of Northwest coastal Indian tribes. These clams protected bays and inlets on relatively stable have relatively thick shells that can attain a length of beaches with mixtures of gravel, sand, three inches. They can grow to a harvestable size in mud and shell.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 MABR Bioblitz Summary Report
    Mount Arrowsmith Biosphere Region BioBlitz 2021 Summary Report Table of Contents Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................................................................................................................. iiI The Mount Arrowsmith Biosphere Region ............................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction to a BioBlitz ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 1 BioBlitz Events ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 The 2021 Biosphere-Wide Blitz ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Goals and Objectives ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 3 Methods ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • List of Bivalve Molluscs from British Columbia, Canada
    List of Bivalve Molluscs from British Columbia, Canada Compiled by Robert G. Forsyth Research Associate, Invertebrate Zoology, Royal BC Museum, 675 Belleville Street, Victoria, BC V8W 9W2; [email protected] Rick M. Harbo Research Associate, Invertebrate Zoology, Royal BC Museum, 675 Belleville Street, Victoria BC V8W 9W2; [email protected] Last revised: 11 October 2013 INTRODUCTION Classification rankings are constantly under debate and review. The higher classification utilized here follows Bieler et al. (2010). Another useful resource is the online World Register of Marine Species (WoRMS; Gofas 2013) where the traditional ranking of Pteriomorphia, Palaeoheterodonta and Heterodonta as subclasses is used. This list includes 237 bivalve species from marine and freshwater habitats of British Columbia, Canada. Marine species (206) are mostly derived from Coan et al. (2000) and Carlton (2007). Freshwater species (31) are from Clarke (1981). Common names of marine bivalves are from Coan et al. (2000), who adopted most names from Turgeon et al. (1998); common names of freshwater species are from Turgeon et al. (1998). Changes to names or additions to the fauna since these two publications are marked with footnotes. Marine groups are in black type, freshwater taxa are in blue. Introduced (non-indigenous) species are marked with an asterisk (*). Marine intertidal species (n=84) are noted with a dagger (†). Quayle (1960) published a BC Provincial Museum handbook, The Intertidal Bivalves of British Columbia. Harbo (1997; 2011) provided illustrations and descriptions of many of the bivalves found in British Columbia, including an identification guide for bivalve siphons and “shows”. Lamb & Hanby (2005) also illustrated many species.
    [Show full text]
  • Freshwater Paralytic Shellfish Poisoning Toxins and Other Cyanobacterial Neurotoxins in New York Lakes" (2019)
    SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry Digital Commons @ ESF Dissertations and Theses Fall 12-2019 Freshwater Paralytic Shellfish oisoningP Toxins and other Cyanobacterial Neurotoxins in New York Lakes Zacharias J. Smith SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.esf.edu/etds Part of the Algae Commons, Bacteria Commons, Environmental Microbiology and Microbial Ecology Commons, and the Toxicology Commons Recommended Citation Smith, Zacharias J., "Freshwater Paralytic Shellfish Poisoning Toxins and other Cyanobacterial Neurotoxins in New York Lakes" (2019). Dissertations and Theses. 122. https://digitalcommons.esf.edu/etds/122 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ ESF. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ ESF. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Freshwater Paralytic Shellfish Poisoning Toxins and other Cyanobacterial Neurotoxins in New York Lakes by Zacharias J. Smith A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry Syracuse, New York December 2019 Department of Chemistry Approved by: Gregory Boyer, Major Professor Roxanne Razavi, Chair, Examining Committee Avik Chatterjee, Department Chair S. Scott Shannon, Dean, The Graduate School i © Copyright Zacharias J. Smith All rights reserved ii Acknowledgments I gratefully acknowledge the support of Dr. Gregory Boyer throughout the completion of my degree, where without his technical and academic support this achievement would not have been possible. I would also like to acknowledge my steering committee members, Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of Extreme Longevity in Modern and Fossil Bivalves
    Syracuse University SURFACE Dissertations - ALL SURFACE August 2016 The evolution of extreme longevity in modern and fossil bivalves David Kelton Moss Syracuse University Follow this and additional works at: https://surface.syr.edu/etd Part of the Physical Sciences and Mathematics Commons Recommended Citation Moss, David Kelton, "The evolution of extreme longevity in modern and fossil bivalves" (2016). Dissertations - ALL. 662. https://surface.syr.edu/etd/662 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the SURFACE at SURFACE. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations - ALL by an authorized administrator of SURFACE. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Abstract: The factors involved in promoting long life are extremely intriguing from a human perspective. In part by confronting our own mortality, we have a desire to understand why some organisms live for centuries and others only a matter of days or weeks. What are the factors involved in promoting long life? Not only are questions of lifespan significant from a human perspective, but they are also important from a paleontological one. Most studies of evolution in the fossil record examine changes in the size and the shape of organisms through time. Size and shape are in part a function of life history parameters like lifespan and growth rate, but so far little work has been done on either in the fossil record. The shells of bivavled mollusks may provide an avenue to do just that. Bivalves, much like trees, record their size at each year of life in their shells. In other words, bivalve shells record not only lifespan, but also growth rate.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to Intertidal Bivalves in Southwest Alaska National Parks Katmai National Park and Preserve Kenai Fjords National Park Lake Clark National Park and Preserve
    National Park Service Inventory & Monitoring Program Southwest Alaska Network Guide to Intertidal Bivalves In Southwest Alaska National Parks Katmai National Park and Preserve Kenai Fjords National Park Lake Clark National Park and Preserve Dennis C. Lees Littoral Ecological & Environmental Services 075 Urania Avenue Leucadia, California 92024 May 2006 National Park Service Southwest Alaska Network Inventory and Monitoring Program Report Number: NPS/AKRSWAN/NRTR-2006/02 Guide to Intertidal Bivalves In Southwest Alaska National Parks Katmai National Park and Preserve Kenai Fjords National Park Lake Clark National Park and Preserve Dennis C. Lees Littoral Ecological & Environmental Services 075 Urania Avenue Leucadia, California 92024 May 2006 National Park Service Southwest Alaska Network Inventory and Monitoring Program Report Number: NPS/AKRSWAN/NRTR-2006/02 Recommended Citation Lees, D.C. 2006. Guide to Intertidal Bivalves In Southwest Alaska National Parks: Katmai National Park and Preserve, Kenai Fjords National Park, and Lake Clark National Park and Preserve. National Park Service Alaska Region, Inventory and Monitoring Program. 57 pp. Keywords Infauna; bivalve; inventory; intertidal; soft-sediment; SouthwestAlaska Network, Katmai National Park and Preserve; Kenai Fjords National Park; Lake Clark National Park and Preserve. Abbreviations KATM—Katmai National Park and Preserve KEFJ—Kenai Fjords National Park LACL—Lake Clark National Park and Preserve MLLW—Mean Lower Low Water NPS—National Park Service SWAN—SouthwestAlaska Network of the National Park Service Cover Photograph: (Top left) Brown bear feeding on softshell clams in an intertidal mud flat in front of Katmai Wilderness Lodge, Kukak Bay, Katmai National Park and Preserve. Depth and size relationships among Baltic macomas, oval macomas, softshell and truncate softshell clams in the sediment cross-section are approximately representative from top to bottom.
    [Show full text]
  • Free Download
    PROMETHEUS PRESS/PALAEONTOLOGICAL NETWORK FOUNDATION (TERUEL) 2003 Available online at www.journaltaphonomy.com Kowalewski et al. Journal of Taphonomy VOLUME 1 (ISSUE 1) Quantitative Fidelity of Brachiopod-Mollusk Assemblages from Modern Subtidal Environments of San Juan Islands, USA Michał Kowalewski* Dario G. Lazo Department of Geological Sciences, Virginia Departamento de Ciencias Geológicas, Polytechnic Institute and State University, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires 1428, Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA Argentina Monica Carroll Carlo Messina Department of Geology, University of Georgia, Department of Geological Sciences, University of Athens, GA 30602, USA Catania, 95124 Catania, Italy Lorraine Casazza Stephaney Puchalski Department of Integrative Biology, Museum of Department of Geological Sciences, Indiana Paleontology, University of California, University, Bloomington, IN 47405, Berkeley CA 94720, USA USA Neal S. Gupta Thomas A. Rothfus Department of Earth Sciences and School Department of Geophysical Sciences, University of of Chemistry, University of Bristol, Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, Bristol, BS8 1RJ, UK USA Bjarte Hannisdal Jenny Sälgeback Department of Geophysical Sciences, University of Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University, Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA Norbyvagen 22, SE-752 36 Uppsala, Sweden Austin Hendy Jennifer Stempien Department of Geology, University of Cincinnati, Department of Geological Sciences, Virginia Cincinnati, OH 45221, Polytechnic Institute and State University, USA Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA Richard A. Krause Jr. Rebecca C. Terry Department of Geological Sciences, Virginia Department of Geophysical Sciences, University of Polytechnic Institute and State University, Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA USA Michael LaBarbera Adam Tomašových Department of Organismal Biology and Anatomy, Institut für Paläontologie, Würzburg Universität, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA Pleicherwall 1, 97070 Würzburg, Germany Article JTa003.
    [Show full text]
  • Commercial Backgrounder
    MANAGEMENT AND RECENT HISTORY OF COMMERCIAL BAY CLAM FISHERIES IN OREGON Many species of bay clams inhabit the intertidal and subtidal waters of Oregon’s bays and estuaries. However, only three species of bay clams (cockles, Clinocardium nuttallii; gaper clams, Tresus capax; butter clams, Saxidomus gigantea) are the primary targets for harvest by the commercial bay clam fisheries. Regulations regarding operation of the commercial fisheries are established by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW / Licensing and Shellfish Programs) and the Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA / Food Safety Program). Most bay clams harvested by the commercial fisheries are sold as bait for the commercial Dungeness crab fishery, but the market for human consumption of bay clams has grown over recent years. This document provides an overview of ODFW management and recent history for the commercial bay clam fisheries in Oregon bays and estuaries with particular focus on Tillamook Bay. COMMERCIAL BAY CLAM FISHERIES Two distinct fisheries exist for the commercial harvest of bay clams from Oregon waters, including: (1) Bay Clam Intertidal Fishery (collection of bay clams from the intertidal zone or “rake fishery”); and (2) Bay Clam Dive Fishery (collection of bay clams from the subtidal zone or “dive fishery”). Both of these commercial fisheries focus on harvest of identical species of bay clams (i.e., cockles, gaper clams, butter clams), but differ in the requirements for licensing, permitting, harvest methods, and other aspects of the fishery. ODFW
    [Show full text]
  • (SEATOR) Partnership: Addressing Data Gaps in Harmful Algal Bloom Monitoring and Shellfish Safety in Southeast Alaska
    toxins Article The Southeast Alaska Tribal Ocean Research (SEATOR) Partnership: Addressing Data Gaps in Harmful Algal Bloom Monitoring and Shellfish Safety in Southeast Alaska John R. Harley 1,*, Kari Lanphier 2, Esther G. Kennedy 2 , Tod A. Leighfield 3, Allison Bidlack 1, Matthew O. Gribble 4 and Christopher Whitehead 2 1 Alaska Coastal Rainforest Center, University of Alaska Southeast, Juneau, AK 99801, USA; [email protected] 2 Sitka Tribe of Alaska, Sitka, AK 99835, USA; [email protected] (K.L.); [email protected] (E.G.K.); [email protected] (C.W.) 3 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science, Charleston, SC 29412, USA; tod.leighfi[email protected] 4 Gangarosa Department of Environmental Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 8 April 2020; Accepted: 15 June 2020; Published: 19 June 2020 Abstract: Many communities in Southeast Alaska harvest shellfish such as mussels and clams as an important part of a subsistence or traditional diet. Harmful algal blooms (HABs) of phytoplankton such as Alexandrium spp. produce toxins that can accumulate in shellfish tissues to concentrations that can pose a hazard for human health. Since 2013, several tribal governments and communities have pooled resources to form the Southeast Alaska Tribal Ocean Research (SEATOR) network, with the goal of minimizing risks to seafood harvest and enhancing food security. SEATOR monitors toxin concentrations in shellfish and collects and consolidates data on environmental variables that may be important predictors of toxin levels such as sea surface temperature and salinity.
    [Show full text]