DOCSLIB.ORG

Natura Impact Statement for the Short-Term Deployment of a Tidal Energy Test Device in the Fergus Estuary

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Natura Impact Statement for the Short-Term Deployment of a Tidal Energy Test Device in the Fergus Estuary Natura Impact Statement for the Short-term Deployment of a Tidal Energy Test Device in the Fergus Estuary Produced by AQUAFACT International Services Ltd On behalf of DesignPro Ltd. April 2018 AQUAFACT INTERNATIONAL SERVICES LTD., 12 KILKERRIN PARK, LIOSBAUN, TUAM ROAD, GALWAY H91 FW7V www.aquafact.ie [email protected] tel +353 (0) 91 756812 Table of Contents 1. Introduction 1 1.1. Requirement for an Article 6 Assessment ............................................................................................ 1 1.2. The Aim of this Report ........................................................................................................................ 2 1.3. Consultation ...................................................................................................................................... 3 2. Appropriate Assessment Process 3 2.1. Legislative Context ............................................................................................................................. 3 2.2. Stages of AA ....................................................................................................................................... 4 2.2.1. Stage 1. Screening for Appropriate Assessment ................................................................................ 5 2.2.2. Stage 2. Appropriate Assessment (NIS) ............................................................................................. 5 2.2.3. Stage 3. Alternative Solutions .......................................................................................................... 6 2.2.4. Stage 4. Imperative Reasons of Overriding Public Interest (IROPI)/Derogation .................................. 6 3. Description of the Project 7 3.1. Description of the Proposed Activity ................................................................................................... 7 3.1.1. Background ..................................................................................................................................... 7 3.1.2. Installation and Operation ............................................................................................................... 9 3.1.3. Decommissioning ........................................................................................................................... 16 3.2. Description of Receiving Environment............................................................................................... 17 3.2.1. Annex I Habitats ............................................................................................................................ 17 3.2.2. Annex II Species ............................................................................................................................. 23 3.2.2.1. Bottlenose dolphin Tursiops truncatus (1349) 23 3.2.2.2. Otter Lutra lutra (1355) 28 3.2.2.3. Lamprey species 29 3.2.2.4. Atlantic Salmon Salmo salar (1106) 30 3.2.3. Species of Conservation Interest ..................................................................................................... 30 3.3. Potential Impacts of the Proposal ..................................................................................................... 35 3.3.1. Potential Impacts associated with Installation ................................................................................ 35 3.3.1.1. Direct Physical Disturbance to the Seafloor 35 3.3.1.2. Contamination during Installation Works 36 3.3.1.3. Suspended Sediments 36 3.3.1.4. Noise 36 3.3.1.5. Installation Vessels and Equipment 37 3.3.1.6. Accidental Events 38 3.3.2. Potential Impacts associated with the Operation of the Test Site..................................................... 38 3.3.2.1. Physical Presence 38 3.3.2.2. Noise 40 3.3.2.3. Maintenance Vessels 40 3.3.2.4. Accidental Events 41 4. Appropriate Assessment Stage 1 Screening 41 4.1. Identification of Relevant Natura 2000 Sites ..................................................................................... 41 4.2. Screening Assessment & Statement .................................................................................................. 46 5. Appropriate Assessment Stage 2 Natura Impact Statement 48 5.1. Characteristics of Relevant Sites ....................................................................................................... 48 5.1.1. Lower River Shannon cSAC (IE001265) ............................................................................................ 48 5.1.2. River Shannon and River Fergus Estuaries SPA (IE004077) ............................................................... 49 5.2. Conservation Objectives of Relevant Sites ......................................................................................... 50 5.2.1. Lower River Shannon cSAC (IE001265) ............................................................................................ 50 5.2.2. River Shannon and River Fergus Estuaries SPA (IE004077) ............................................................... 56 5.3. Impact Assessment .......................................................................................................................... 60 5.3.1. Impact Assessment Methodology ................................................................................................... 60 5.3.2. Annex I Habitats ............................................................................................................................ 62 5.3.2.1. Estuaries 62 5.3.2.2. Mudflats and sandflats not covered by seawater at low tide [1140] 64 5.3.2.3. Reefs [1170] 65 5.3.3. Annex I Species .............................................................................................................................. 67 5.3.3.1. Petromyzon marinus (Sea Lamprey) [1095] 67 5.3.3.2. Lampetra fluviatilis (River Lamprey) [1099] 71 5.3.3.3. Salmo salar (Salmon) [1106] 72 5.3.3.4. Tursiops truncatus (Common Bottlenose Dolphin) [1349] 74 5.3.3.5. Lutra lutra (Otter) [1355] 78 5.3.4. Special Conservation Interests ........................................................................................................ 81 5.3.4.1. Cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo) [A017] 81 5.3.4.2. Shelduck (Tadorna tadorna) [A048] 82 5.3.4.3. Wigeon (Anas penelope) [A050] 83 5.3.4.4. Teal (Anas crecca) [A052] 84 5.3.4.5. Pintail (Anas acuta) [A054] 84 5.3.4.6. Shoveler (Anas clypeata) [A056] 85 5.3.4.7. Black-headed Gull (Chroicocephalus ridibundus) [A179] 86 5.3.4.8. Wetlands [A999] 87 5.3.5. Cumulative Impacts ....................................................................................................................... 87 6. Best-Practice Mitigation and Monitoring 88 7. Summary 96 8. References 98 List of Figures Figure 2.1: Stages in the AA process (Source: DEHLG, 2009). ............................................................................................. 4 Figure 3.1: Tidal turbine in operating configuration ........................................................................................................ 10 Figure 3.2: Schematic of device (Dare Technology) ......................................................................................................... 11 Figure 3.3: Schematic of the operating device................................................................................................................. 11 Figure 3.4: Location of test site and Foreshore Licence Area in the Shannon Estuary ...................................................... 14 Figure 3.5: Illustration of installed device and mooring .................................................................................................. 15 Figure 3.6: Location of shore side monitoring station. .................................................................................................... 15 Figure 3.7: Topography and water depth at the proposed device location (AQUAFACT, 2018) ....................................... 17 Figure 3.8: Marine habitats in the survey area (NPWS, 2012a). ...................................................................................... 18 Figure 3.9: Sites surveyed in February 2018 .................................................................................................................... 19 Figure 3.10: Representative images from rocky seabed within the proposed test site area ............................................ 20 Figure 3.11: Intertidal zone along the shoreline of Canon Island ..................................................................................... 21 Figure 3.12: Intertidal zone along the coastline of Inishtubbrid ...................................................................................... 21 Figure 3.13: Annex 1 habitats in the vicinity of the proposed test site area. ................................................................... 22 Figure 3.14: Representative photographs of the onshore monitoring station location. .................................................. 23 Figure 3.15: Location of sightings of dolphin groups encountered during boat surveys between 1996 and 1997 (length of line denotes group size) (Rogan et al., 2000). ................................................................................................ 25 Figure 3.16: Effort corrected encounter rate of bottlenose dolphins from Shannon dolphin tour boat data between 2000-2010 (Berrow et al., 2012a). ..................................................................................................................... 26 Figure 3.17:
Load more

Recommended publications
  • TREATISE ONLINE Number 48
    TREATISE ONLINE Number 48 Part N, Revised, Volume 1, Chapter 31: Illustrated Glossary of the Bivalvia Joseph G. Carter, Peter J. Harries, Nikolaus Malchus, André F. Sartori, Laurie C. Anderson, Rüdiger Bieler, Arthur E. Bogan, Eugene V. Coan, John C. W. Cope, Simon M. Cragg, José R. García-March, Jørgen Hylleberg, Patricia Kelley, Karl Kleemann, Jiří Kříž, Christopher McRoberts, Paula M. Mikkelsen, John Pojeta, Jr., Peter W. Skelton, Ilya Tëmkin, Thomas Yancey, and Alexandra Zieritz 2012 Lawrence, Kansas, USA ISSN 2153-4012 (online) paleo.ku.edu/treatiseonline PART N, REVISED, VOLUME 1, CHAPTER 31: ILLUSTRATED GLOSSARY OF THE BIVALVIA JOSEPH G. CARTER,1 PETER J. HARRIES,2 NIKOLAUS MALCHUS,3 ANDRÉ F. SARTORI,4 LAURIE C. ANDERSON,5 RÜDIGER BIELER,6 ARTHUR E. BOGAN,7 EUGENE V. COAN,8 JOHN C. W. COPE,9 SIMON M. CRAgg,10 JOSÉ R. GARCÍA-MARCH,11 JØRGEN HYLLEBERG,12 PATRICIA KELLEY,13 KARL KLEEMAnn,14 JIřÍ KřÍž,15 CHRISTOPHER MCROBERTS,16 PAULA M. MIKKELSEN,17 JOHN POJETA, JR.,18 PETER W. SKELTON,19 ILYA TËMKIN,20 THOMAS YAncEY,21 and ALEXANDRA ZIERITZ22 [1University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, USA, [email protected]; 2University of South Florida, Tampa, USA, [email protected], [email protected]; 3Institut Català de Paleontologia (ICP), Catalunya, Spain, [email protected], [email protected]; 4Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, USA, [email protected]; 5South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, Rapid City, [email protected]; 6Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, USA, [email protected]; 7North
    [Show full text]
  • TREBALLS 1 DEL MUSEU DE ZOOLOGIA Illustrated Keys for The,Classification of Mediterranean Bryozoa
    / AJUNTAMENT DE BARCELONA TREBALLS 1 DEL MUSEU DE ZOOLOGIA Illustrated keys for the,classification of Mediterranean Bryozoa M. Zabala & P. Maluquer 1 BARCELONA 1988 NÚMERO 4 Drawing of the cover: Scrupocellaria reptans (Linnaeus), part of a branch with bran- ched scutum, ovicells, frontal avicularia and lateral vibracula. Treb. Mus. 2001. Barcelona. 4. 1988 Illustrated keys for the classification of Mediterranean Bryozoa Consell de Redacció: O. Escola, R. Nos, A. Ornedes, C. Prats i F. Uribe. Assessor científic: P. Hayward M. ZABALA, Dcpt. de Ecologia, Fac. de Biologia, Univcrsitat de Barcelona, Diagonal, 645 08028 Barcelona. P. MALUQUER, Dept. de Biologia Animal, Fac. de Biologia, Lniversitat de Barcelona, Diagonal, 645 08028 Barcelona. Edita: Museu de Zoologia, Ajuntament de Barcelona Parc de la Ciutadclla, Ap. de Correus 593,08003 -Barcelona O 1987, Museu de Zoologia, Ajuntament de Barcelona ISBN: 84-7609-240-7 Depósito legal: B. 28.708-1988 Exp. ~0058-8k'-Impremta Municipal Composición y fotolitos: Romargraf, S.A. FOREWORD Bryozoansare predominantly marine, invertebrate animals whose curious and often attractive forms have long excited the interest of naturalists. In past times they were regarded as plants, and the plant- !ike appearance of some species was later formalized in the term "zoophyte", which also embraced the hydroids and a few other enigmatic animal groups. As "corallines" they were considered to be close to the Cnidaria, while "moss animals" neatly described the appearance of a feeding colony. Establishing their animal nature did not resolve the question of systematic affinity. It is only comparatively recently that Bryozoa have been accepted as a phylum in their own right, although an early view of them as for- ming a single phylogenetic unit, the Lophophorata, with the sessile, filter-feeding brachiopods and pho- ronids, still persists.
    [Show full text]
  • Symbiotic Cooperation Between Freshwater Rock-Boring Bivalves and Microorganisms Promotes Silicate Bioerosion
    Symbiotic cooperation between freshwater rock-boring bivalves and microorganisms promotes silicate bioerosion Damien Daval, François Guyot, Ivan Bolotov, Ilya Vikhrev, Alexander Kondakov, Artem Lyubas, Andrey Bychkov, Vasily Yapaskurt, Martiane Cabié, Oleg Pokrovsky To cite this version: Damien Daval, François Guyot, Ivan Bolotov, Ilya Vikhrev, Alexander Kondakov, et al.. Symbi- otic cooperation between freshwater rock-boring bivalves and microorganisms promotes silicate bio- erosion. Scientific Reports, Nature Publishing Group, 2020, 10 (1), 10.1038/s41598-020-70265-x. hal-03011084 HAL Id: hal-03011084 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03011084 Submitted on 17 Nov 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. 1 Symbiotic cooperation between freshwater rock-boring bivalves 2 and microorganisms promotes silicate bioerosion 3 Damien Daval1,*, François Guyot2,3, Ivan N. Bolotov4, Ilya V. Vikhrev4, Alexander V. 4 Kondakov4, Artem A. Lyubas4, Andrey Y. Bychkov5, Vasily O. Yapaskurt5, Martiane Cabié6 5 and Oleg S. Pokrovsky7,8 6 7 1 Université de Strasbourg – CNRS / ENGEES – EOST, Laboratoire d’Hydrologie et de 8 Géochimie de Strasbourg, UMR 7517, Strasbourg, France 9 2 Institut de Minéralogie, de Physique des Matériaux et de Cosmochimie, Museum National 10 d'Histoire Naturelle, Sorbonne-Université, UMR 7590 CNRS, Paris, France 11 3 Institut Universitaire de France 12 4 N.
    [Show full text]
  • Channel Island Marine Molluscs
    Channel Island Marine Molluscs An Illustrated Guide to the Seashells of Jersey, Guernsey, Alderney, Sark and Herm Paul Chambers Channel Island Marine Molluscs - An Illustrated Guide to the Seashells of Jersey, Guernsey, Alderney, Sark and Herm - First published in Great Britain in 2008 by Charonia Media www.charonia.co.uk [email protected] Dedicated to the memory of John Perry © Paul Chambers, 2008 The author asserts his moral right to be identified as the Author of this work in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission from the Publisher. Typeset by the Author. Printed and bound by Lightning Source UK Ltd. ISBN 978 0 9560655 0 6 Contents Introduction 5 1 - The Channel Islands 7 Marine Ecology 8 2 - A Brief History of Channel Island Conchology 13 3 - Channel Island Seas Shells: Some Observations 19 Diversity 19 Channel Island Species 20 Chronological Observations 27 Channel Island First Records 33 Problematic Records 34 4 - Collection, Preservation and Identification Techniques 37 5 - A List of Species 41 Taxonomy 41 Scientific Name 42 Synonyms 42 Descriptions and Illustrations 43 Habitat 44 Distribution of Species 44 Reports of Individual Species 45 List of Abbreviations 47 PHYLUM MOLLUSCA 49 CLASS CAUDOFOVEATA 50 CLASS SOLENOGASTRES 50 ORDER NEOMENIAMORPHA 50 CLASS MONOPLACOPHORA
    [Show full text]
  • Impacts of Invasive Alien Marine Species on Ecosystem Services and Biodiversity: a Pan-European Review
    Aquatic Invasions (2014) Volume 9, Issue 4 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3391/ai.2014.9.4.01 Open Access © 2014 The Author(s). Journal compilation © 2014 REABIC Supplementary material Impacts of invasive alien marine species on ecosystem services and biodiversity: a pan-European review Stelios Katsanevakis1*, Inger Wallentinus2, Argyro Zenetos3, Erkki Leppäkoski4, Melih Ertan Çinar5, Bayram Oztürk6, Michal Grabowski7, Daniel Golani8 and Ana Cristina Cardoso1 1European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Institute for Environment and Sustainability (IES), Ispra, Italy 2Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Gothenburg, Sweden 3Institute of Marine Biological Resources and Inland Waters, Hellenic Centre for Marine Research, Ag. Kosmas, Greece 4Department of Biosciences, Environmental and Marine Biology, Åbo Akademi University, Turku, Finland 5Ege University, Faculty of Fisheries, Department of Hydrobiology, Bornova, Izmir, Turkey 6Faculty of Fisheries, Marine Biology Laboratory, University of Istanbul, Istanbul, Turkey 7Department of Invertebrate Zoology & Hydrobiology, University of Lodz, Poland 8Department of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior and the National Natural History Collections, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel E-mail: [email protected] (SK), [email protected] (IW), [email protected] (AZ), [email protected] (EL), [email protected] (MEC), [email protected] (BO), [email protected] (MG), [email protected] (DG), [email protected] (ACC) *Corresponding author Received: 8 January 2014 / Accepted: 6 June 2014 / Published online: 4 August 2014 Handling editor: Vadim Panov Supplementary material Supplement 1. Species-specific review of the impacts of invasive alien species on ecosystem services and biodiversity in the European Seas, and other related information.
    [Show full text]
  • On Bivalve Phylogeny: a High-Level Analysis of the Bivalvia (Mollusca) Based on Combined Morphology and DNA Sequence Data
    Invertebrate Biology 12 I(4): 27 1-324. 0 2002 American Microscopical Society, Inc. On bivalve phylogeny: a high-level analysis of the Bivalvia (Mollusca) based on combined morphology and DNA sequence data Gonzalo Giribet'%aand Ward Wheeler2 ' Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University; 16 Divinity Avenue, Cambridge, Massachusetts 021 38, USA Division of Invertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History, Central Park West at 79th Street, New York, New York 10024, USA Abstract. Bivalve classification has suffered in the past from the crossed-purpose discussions among paleontologists and neontologists, and many have based their proposals on single char- acter systems. More recently, molecular biologists have investigated bivalve relationships by using only gene sequence data, ignoring paleontological and neontological data. In the present study we have compiled morphological and anatomical data with mostly new molecular evi- dence to provide a more stable and robust phylogenetic estimate for bivalve molluscs. The data here compiled consist of a morphological data set of 183 characters, and a molecular data set from 3 loci: 2 nuclear ribosomal genes (1 8s rRNA and 28s rRNA), and 1 mitochondria1 coding gene (cytochrome c oxidase subunit I), totaling -3 Kb of sequence data for 76 rnollu bivalves and 14 outgroup taxa). The data have been analyzed separately and in combination by using the direct optimization method of Wheeler (1 996), and they have been evaluated under 1 2 analytical schemes. The combined analysis supports the monophyly of bivalves, paraphyly of protobranchiate bivalves, and monophyly of Autolamellibranchiata, Pteriomorphia, Hetero- conchia, Palaeoheterodonta, and Heterodonta s.I., which includes the monophyletic taxon An- omalodesmata.
    [Show full text]
  • Irish Biodiversity: a Taxonomic Inventory of Fauna
    Irish Biodiversity: a taxonomic inventory of fauna Irish Wildlife Manual No. 38 Irish Biodiversity: a taxonomic inventory of fauna S. E. Ferriss, K. G. Smith, and T. P. Inskipp (editors) Citations: Ferriss, S. E., Smith K. G., & Inskipp T. P. (eds.) Irish Biodiversity: a taxonomic inventory of fauna. Irish Wildlife Manuals, No. 38. National Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Dublin, Ireland. Section author (2009) Section title . In: Ferriss, S. E., Smith K. G., & Inskipp T. P. (eds.) Irish Biodiversity: a taxonomic inventory of fauna. Irish Wildlife Manuals, No. 38. National Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Dublin, Ireland. Cover photos: © Kevin G. Smith and Sarah E. Ferriss Irish Wildlife Manuals Series Editors: N. Kingston and F. Marnell © National Parks and Wildlife Service 2009 ISSN 1393 - 6670 Inventory of Irish fauna ____________________ TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary.............................................................................................................................................1 Acknowledgements.............................................................................................................................................2 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................................3 Methodology........................................................................................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • Universidade Federal Do Paraná Nicole Stakowian
    UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO PARANÁ NICOLE STAKOWIAN DESCRIPTION OF MORPHOLOGICAL, REPRODUCTIVE AND PHYSIOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF THE ANGEL WING BIVALVE Cyrtopleura costata (PHOLADIDAE) IN A SUBTROPICAL ESTUARY OF BRAZIL CURITIBA 2020 NICOLE STAKOWIAN DESCRIPTION OF MORPHOLOGICAL, REPRODUCTIVE AND PHYSIOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF THE ANGEL WING BIVALVE Cyrtopleura costata (PHOLADIDAE) IN A SUBTROPICAL ESTUARY OF BRAZIL Dissertação apresentada como requisito parcial à obtenção do grau de Mestre em Ciências Biológicas - Zoologia, no Curso de Pós- graduação em Zoologia, Setor de Ciências Biológicas, da Universidade Federal do Paraná. Orientadora: Profa Dra Carolina Arruda de Oliveira Freire Co-orientador: Prof. Dr. Luiz Ricardo Lopes Simone CURITIBA 2020 Ao Romildo do Rosário, à Comunidade de São Miguel e a todos os pescadores e pescadoras de comunidades tradicionais que contribuem para o avanço da ciência e para a conservação dos recursos naturais. AGRADECIMENTOS À minha família, minha mãe Luciane Kleinke e minha irmã Marcelly Kleinke pelo amor, força, cuidado, pelas risadas, pelas lágrimas enxugadas e, principalmente, pela paciência com meus muitos períodos de ausência. Obrigada Norma Kobora por todo o carinho, por se preocupar comigo, torcer por mim, me dar suporte e apoio. Ao meu companheiro Igor Kobora por acreditar em mim cegamente e me apoiar em tudo. Por ser o advogado que mais sabe sobre biologia e moluscos, por ter procurado Cyrtopleura comigo e pelos campos que fizemos juntos. Obrigada por todo amor, cuidado e suporte. Sou muito grata por te ter como parceiro na vida. Você me faz sentir poderosíssima e capaz de ganhar o mundo. À minha orientadora Profa. Carolina Freire por ter me aceito e aceito meu projeto, por ter sido porta aberta e luz durante esse período.
    [Show full text]
  • Fiches Descriptives Des Espèces Marines De France Métropolitaine Dont La Protection Est Envisagée
    Direction de la Recherche, de l’Expertise et de la Valorisation Direction Déléguée au Développement Durable, à la Conservation de la Nature et à l’Expertise - 1 - - 1 - Service du Patrimoine Naturel Anthony Doré, Pierre Noël, Bernard Séret Fiches descriptives des espèces marines de France métropolitaine dont la protection est envisagée Rapport SPN 2014 - 28 Avril 2014 Le Service du Patrimoine Naturel (SPN) Inventorier - Gérer - Analyser - Diffuser Au sein de la direction de la recherche, de l’expertise et de la valorisation (DIREV), le Service du Patrimoine Naturel développe la mission d'expertise confiée au Muséum national d'Histoire naturel pour la connaissance et la conservation de la nature. Il a vocation à couvrir l'ensemble de la thématique biodiversité (faune/flore/habitat) et géodiversité au niveau français (terrestre, marine, métropolitaine et ultra-marine). Il est chargé de la mutualisation et de l'optimisation de la collecte, de la synthèse et la diffusion d'informations sur le patrimoine naturel. Placé à l'interface entre la recherche scientifique et les décideurs, il travaille de façon partenariale avec l'ensemble des acteurs de la biodiversité afin de pouvoir répondre à sa mission de coordination scientifique de l’Inventaire national du Patrimoine naturel (code de l'environnement : L411-5). Un objectif : contribuer à la conservation de la Nature en mettant les meilleures connaissances à disposition et en développant l'expertise. En savoir plus : http://www.mnhn.fr/spn/ Directeur : Jean-Philippe SIBLET Adjoint au directeur en charge des programmes de connaissance : Laurent PONCET Adjoint au directeur en charge des programmes de conservation : Julien TOUROULT Porté par le SPN, cet inventaire est l'aboutissement d'une démarche qui associe scientifiques, collectivités territoriales, naturalistes et associations de protection de la nature en vue d'établir une synthèse sur le patrimoine naturel en France.
    [Show full text]
  • Zirfaea Pilsbryi Class: Bivalvia, Heterodonta, Euheterodonta
    Phylum: Mollusca Zirfaea pilsbryi Class: Bivalvia, Heterodonta, Euheterodonta Order: Imparidentia, Myida The rough piddock Family: Pholadoidea, Pholadidae, Pholadinae Taxonomy: The taxonomies of both pholad 2007). Myoid bivalves are burrowers and bor- species in this guide (Z. pilsbryi and Penitel- ers, with long siphons and hinges with few la penita) are extensive and complicated, teeth (Coan and Valentich-Scott 2007). Mem- including many synonyms and overlapping bers of the Pholadidae bore into a variety of descriptions (for full list of synonymies see substrates, possess no pallets on siphon tips Kennedy 1974). Zirfaea pilsbryi was origi- and have an anterior end that is pointed or nally described as Z. gabbii, a species even- curved with no notch (contrast to Teredinidae tually moved to the genus Penitella (see P. species, e.g., Bankia setacea, this guide) (see gabbii, Kennedy 1974). Lowe renamed and Plate 427F, 430D, Coan and Valentich-Scott described Z. pilbsryi in 1931. Thus, these 2007). While most pholad species are inter- three species names (Z. pilsbryi, Z. gabbii, tidal or subtidal, some can be found boring and P. gabbii) and the subspecies designa- into wood at great depths (e.g., 7,250 meters tion, Z. gabbii femii (Adegoke 1967 in Ken- Xylophaga, Kennedy 1974; Reft and Voight nedy 1974), are common synonyms, with 2009; Voight 2009; Marshall and Spencer descriptions that overlap and are specific to 2013). original author (see Kennedy 1974). Body: (see Plate 297, Ricketts and Calvin 1952; Fig 361, Kozloff 1993). Description Color: Size: Individuals up to 150 mm in length Interior: (Ricketts and Calvin 1971; Haderlie and Ab- Exterior: bott 1980; Kozloff 1993) and may be the Byssus: largest of the boring species (Ricketts and Gills: Calvin 1971).
    [Show full text]
  • Discovery of a Silicate Rock-Boring Organism and Macrobioerosion in Fresh Water
    ARTICLE DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-05133-4 OPEN Discovery of a silicate rock-boring organism and macrobioerosion in fresh water Ivan N. Bolotov 1,2, Olga V. Aksenova1,2, Torkild Bakken3, Christopher J. Glasby4, Mikhail Yu. Gofarov1,2, Alexander V. Kondakov1,2, Ekaterina S. Konopleva1,2, Manuel Lopes-Lima 5,6, Artyom A. Lyubas1,2, Yu Wang7,8, Andrey Yu. Bychkov9,10, Agniya M. Sokolova11,12, Kitti Tanmuangpak13, Sakboworn Tumpeesuwan14, Ilya V. Vikhrev1,2, J. Bruce H. Shyu8, Than Win 15 & Oleg S. Pokrovsky 16,17 1234567890():,; Macrobioerosion is a common process in marine ecosystems. Many types of rock-boring organisms break down hard substrates, particularly carbonate rocks and calcareous struc- tures such as dead corals and shells. In paleontology, the presence of rocks with boreholes and fossil macroboring assemblage members is one of the primary diagnostic features of shallow marine paleo-environments. Here we describe a silicate rock-boring organism and an associated community in submerged siltstone rock outcrops in Kaladan River, Myanmar. The rock-boring mussel Lignopholas fluminalis is a close relative of the marine piddocks, and its borings belong to the ichnospecies Gastrochaenolites anauchen. The neotectonic uplift of the area leading to gradual decrease of the sea level with subsequent shift from estuarine to freshwater environment was the most likely driver for the origin of this community. Our findings highlight that rocks with macroborings are not an exclusive indicator of marine paleo-ecosystems, but may also reflect freshwater habitats. 1 Northern Arctic Federal University, Arkhangelsk, Russia 163002. 2 Federal Center for Integrated Arctic Research, Russian Academy of Sciences, Arkhangelsk, Russia 163000.
    [Show full text]
  • Penitella Penita Class: Bivalvia, Heterodonta, Euheterodonta
    Phylum: Mollusca Penitella penita Class: Bivalvia, Heterodonta, Euheterodonta Order: Imparidentia, Myida Common piddock Family: Pholadoidea, Pholadidae, Martesiinae Taxonomy: The taxonomies of both pholad species are intertidal or subtidal, some can be species in this guide (Z. pilsbryi and Penitel- found boring into wood at great depths (e.g. la penita) are extensive and complicated, 7,250 meters Xylophaga, Kennedy 1974; Reft including many synonyms and overlapping and Voight 2009; Voight 2009; Marshall and descriptions (for full list of synonymies see Spencer 2013). Kennedy 1974). Penitella penita was origi- Body: nally described as Pholas penita by Conrad Color: Foot and mantle white (Turner in 1837. The current name was designated 1955). by Gabb in 1869 and the most common syn- Interior: onym seen today is Pholadidea penita. Exterior: However, Pholadidea species differ from Byssus: those in the genus Penitella by having a Gills: mesoplax that is divided longitudinally into Shell: Shell shape is elongate, and divided two pieces, a feature not present in the latter into two distinct parts (Fig. 1). Shell anterior genus (see Penitella, Kennedy 1974). becomes worn away from burrowing abrasion (Evans and LeMessurier 1972), the addition Description of new shell creates a rough and bulbous Size: Individuals to 70–95 mm in length and anterior (Kozloff 1993). No periostracum is 50 mm in height (Turner 1955; Haderlie and present. Abbott 1980; Kozloff 1993). The illustrated Interior: Divided into three areas by specimen (from Coos Bay) is 40 mm long, pallial lines. The pallial sinus and posterior is 18 mm high (Fig. 1). with a large posterior muscle scar.
    [Show full text]