DOCSLIB.ORG

Invasive Species in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

INVASIVE SPECIES IN THE CHESAPEAKE BAY WATERSHED A WORKSHOP TO DEVELOP REGIONAL INVASIVE SPECIES MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES HELD MAY 7 -8, 2002 BALTIMORE, MARYLAND FINAL REPORT TO THE CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM, INVASIVE SPECIES WORKING GROUP edited by FREDRIKA C. MOSER MARYLAND SEA GRANT COLLEGE AUGUST, 2002 A Maryland Sea Grant Publication Publication number UM-SG-TS-2002-03 Paper copies of this Maryland Sea Grant Progrma Publication are available by writing the Maryland Sea Grant office, electronic copies are available on the web at: www.mdsg.umd.edu/exotics/ Maryland Sea Grant College Program University System of Maryland Sea Grant 4321 Hartwick Road, Suite 300 College Park, MD 20740 TABLE OF CONTENTS Workshop Summary Introduction ......................................................................................................... 5 Highlights from the Draft Invasive Species Management Plans ........................... 6 Workshop Background Introduction ......................................................................................................... 8 Basis for Selection of the Six Workshop Target Species ...................................... 8 Workshop Program Design ............................................................................................................... 11 Plenary Discussion: Key Issues ......................................................................... 12 Draft Management Plans Introduction ....................................................................................................... 14 Draft Management Plan (Phragmites australis- Common Reed) Breakout Session Participants............................................................................ 15 Species Summary .............................................................................................. 16 Explanatory Text for the Implementation Table ................................................. 25 Implementation Tables ...................................................................................... 28 Key Issues ......................................................................................................... 33 Draft Management Plan (Lythrum salicaria- Purple Loosestrife) Breakout Session Participants ............................................................................ 35 Species Summary .............................................................................................. 36 Explanatory Text for the Implementation Table ................................................. 44 Implementation Tables ...................................................................................... 48 Key Issues ......................................................................................................... 53 Draft Management Plan (Trapa natans- Water Chestnut) Breakout Session Participants ............................................................................ 54 Species Summary .............................................................................................. 55 Explanatory Text for the Implementation Table ................................................. 60 Implementation Tables ...................................................................................... 63 Key Issues ......................................................................................................... 68 Draft Management Plan (Cygnus olor- Mute Swan) Breakout Session Participants ............................................................................ 69 Species Summary .............................................................................................. 70 Explanatory Text for the Implementation Table ................................................. 79 Implementation Tables ...................................................................................... 83 Key Issues ......................................................................................................... 87 Draft Management Plan (Myocastor coypus- Nutria) Breakout Session Participants ............................................................................ 89 Species Summary .............................................................................................. 90 Explanatory Text for the Implementation Table ................................................. 96 Implementation Tables ...................................................................................... 99 Key Issues ........................................................................................................ 103 3 Draft Management Plan (Dreissena polymorpha - Zebra Mussel) Breakout Session Participants ........................................................................... 104 Species Summary ............................................................................................. 105 Explanatory Text for the Implementation Table ................................................ 110 Implementation Tables ..................................................................................... 113 Key Issues ........................................................................................................ 118 Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 120 Acknowledgements .................................................................................................... 121 Appendix I - Species Distribution Maps Phragmites presence in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Purple loosestrife presence in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Water chestnut presence in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Mute swan presence in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Nutria presence in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Appendix II Invasive Species Groupings from the Chesapeake Bay Program's Invasive Species Workgroup Appendix III Guidance Document for Developing a Regional Species Management Strategy Framework Tables Priority Invasive Species ..................................................................................... 9 Workshop Plenary Speakers .............................................................................. 11 4 WORKSHOP SUMMARY Introduction The U.S. EPA Chesapeake Bay Program and Maryland Sea Grant College Program jointly sponsored a workshop May 7 - 8, 2002, in Baltimore, Maryland to discuss management strategy frameworks for six species identified as causing, or having the potential to cause, significant degradation of the Chesapeake Bay aquatic ecosystem. Ninety individuals representing government, private, academic and non-governmental organizations participated in the two-day workshop. The workshop provided an opportunity for participants to discuss in plenary and breakout sessions the necessary components of an invasive species management plan. Through these interactions, six species-specific draft management strategy frameworks were completed by the close of the workshop. Included were: Phragmites (Phragmites australis); purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria); water chestnut (Trapa natans); mute swan (Cygnus olor); nutria (Myocastor coypus); and zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha). By design the workshop did not address issues specific to the introduction of species through the uptake and discharge of ship's ballast water. Instead, the focus was on species considered to be of highest priority for active management in the Chesapeake Bay watershed by the Chesapeake Bay Program's Invasive Species Workgroup (ISW). This broad range of species were introduced through diverse pathways, have differing levels of population success (from well established populations, such as phragmites and purple loosestrife to limited populations such as zebra mussel), and present varying degrees of economic and ecological risks. Indeed, this diversity in selected invasive species proved beneficial for several reasons. First, it allowed participants to think expansively about the problem, rather than taking a more narrow approach that a single species discussion would have evoked. Second, it brought together specialists from different fields, thereby providing an exciting opportunity for new ideas and solutions to be proposed. Third, it addressed serious invasive species issues for specific areas of the Bay watershed. By developing management strategies for a broad spectrum of species the Chesapeake Bay watershed produced model species management plans that may serve as frameworks for managing invasive species of aquatic plants, invertebrates and vertebrates that emerge in the future. A unique aspect of this workshop was that it brought together representatives from a range of jurisdictions and interests within the Chesapeake Bay watershed to discuss management of multiple aquatic invasive species. Although numerous management plans exist for individual species, this workshop may have been the first in the United States to take a regional watershed approach to developing management strategies for six invasive aquatic species concurrently. This structure provided an important opportunity for the Chesapeake Bay jurisdictions to take a national leadership role in addressing a pressing environmental and economic problem. The success of this workshop is noteworthy. Six draft invasive species management strategy frameworks now exist for the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Continued efforts by the jurisdictions, the Chesapeake Bay Program, other interested groups and the public will allow these plans to be finalized and implemented by the jurisdictions. 5 Highlights from
Recommended publications
  • Marine Bivalve Molluscs

    Marine Bivalve Molluscs

    Marine Bivalve Molluscs Marine Bivalve Molluscs Second Edition Elizabeth Gosling This edition first published 2015 © 2015 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd First edition published 2003 © Fishing News Books, a division of Blackwell Publishing Registered Office John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK Editorial Offices 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030‐5774, USA For details of our global editorial offices, for customer services and for information about how to apply for permission to reuse the copyright material in this book please see our website at www.wiley.com/wiley‐blackwell. The right of the author to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher. Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks. All brand names and product names used in this book are trade names, service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The publisher is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book. Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author(s) have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.
  • Dreisseina Spp

    Dreisseina Spp

    Dreissena spp. Diagnostic features Shells equivalve, mytiliform, inflated, sunken elongate internal ligament. There is a distinct septum behind umbos. Periostracum present. Edentate hinge without teeth. Pallial line not sinuate. Anatomy: eulamellibranch gills, closed mantle with two well developed short siphons. Very small foot with a byssal apparatus (Huber 2010). Dreissena polymorpha (length up to about 50 mm) Classification Class Bivalvia I nfraclass Heteroconchia Cohort Heterodonta Megaorder Neoheterodontei Order Myida Superfamily Dreissenoidea Family Dreissenidae Genus Dreissena van Beneden, 1835 (Type species: Mytilus polymorphus Pallas, 1771) (Synonyms - see http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=181565). Original reference: Van Beneden, P. J. (1835). Histoire naturelle et anatomique du Driessena [sic] polymorpha, genre nouveau dans la famille de mylilacées [sic]. Bulletins de L’ Academie Royale des Sciences et Belles-lettres de Bruxelles 2: 25-26 Type locality: Tributary of the Ural River in the Caspian Sea Basin, Russia. Biology and ecology Epifaunal. Very adaptable and can tolerate a wide range of salinity and water conditions, ranging from fresh to brackish water. Dioecious with external fertilisation and planktotrophic larvae. Extremely fertile and fast growing and can reach huge population densities. Distribution Native to the lakes of southeast Russia, the Dnieper River drainage of Ukraine and the Black and Caspian Seas. has also been introduced throughout Europe and North America, China and ndia. Notes Dresseina spp.do not occur in Australia but because it could be accidentally introduced, it is mentioned here as a potential threat. Two members of this genus have become major pests in freshwater environments in North America and Europe by clogging water intake structures (e.g., pipes and screens).
  • Risk Assessment for Three Dreissenid Mussels (Dreissena Polymorpha, Dreissena Rostriformis Bugensis, and Mytilopsis Leucophaeata) in Canadian Freshwater Ecosystems

    Risk Assessment for Three Dreissenid Mussels (Dreissena Polymorpha, Dreissena Rostriformis Bugensis, and Mytilopsis Leucophaeata) in Canadian Freshwater Ecosystems

    C S A S S C C S Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat Secrétariat canadien de consultation scientifique Research Document 2012/174 Document de recherche 2012/174 National Capital Region Région de la capitale nationale Risk Assessment for Three Dreissenid Évaluation des risques posés par trois Mussels (Dreissena polymorpha, espèces de moules dreissénidées Dreissena rostriformis bugensis, and (Dreissena polymorpha, Dreissena Mytilopsis leucophaeata) in Canadian rostriformis bugensis et Mytilopsis Freshwater Ecosystems leucophaeata) dans les écosystèmes d'eau douce au Canada Thomas W. Therriault1, Andrea M. Weise2, Scott N. Higgins3, Yinuo Guo1*, and Johannie Duhaime4 Fisheries & Oceans Canada 1Pacific Biological Station 3190 Hammond Bay Road, Nanaimo, BC V9T 6N7 2Institut Maurice-Lamontagne 850 route de la Mer, Mont-Joli, QC G5H 3Z48 3Freshwater Institute 501 University Drive, Winnipeg, MB R3T 2N6 4Great Lakes Laboratory for Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 867 Lakeshore Road, PO Box 5050, Burlington, Ontario L7R 4A6 * YMCA Youth Intern This series documents the scientific basis for the La présente série documente les fondements evaluation of aquatic resources and ecosystems in scientifiques des évaluations des ressources et des Canada. As such, it addresses the issues of the écosystèmes aquatiques du Canada. Elle traite des day in the time frames required and the problèmes courants selon les échéanciers dictés. documents it contains are not intended as Les documents qu‟elle contient ne doivent pas être definitive statements on the subjects addressed considérés comme des énoncés définitifs sur les but rather as progress reports on ongoing sujets traités, mais plutôt comme des rapports investigations. d‟étape sur les études en cours. Research documents are produced in the official Les documents de recherche sont publiés dans la language in which they are provided to the langue officielle utilisée dans le manuscrit envoyé au Secretariat.
  • Biological Synopsis of Dark Falsemussel (Mytilopsis Leucophaeata)

    Biological Synopsis of Dark Falsemussel (Mytilopsis Leucophaeata)

    Biological Synopsis of Dark Falsemussel (Mytilopsis leucophaeata) J. Duhaime and B. Cudmore Fisheries and Oceans Canada Centre of Expertise for Aquatic Risk Assessment 867 Lakeshore Rd., P.O. Box 5050 Burlington, Ontario L7R 4A6 2012 Canadian Manuscript Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 2980 Canadian Manuscript Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences Manuscript reports contain scientific and technical information that contributes to existing knowledge but which deals with national or regional problems. Distribution is restricted to institutions or individuals located in particular regions of Canada. However, no restriction is placed on subject matter, and the series reflects the broad interests and policies of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, namely, fisheries and aquatic sciences. Manuscript reports may be cited as full publications. The correct citation appears above the abstract of each report. Each report is abstracted in the data base Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts. Manuscript reports are produced regionally but are numbered nationally. Requests for individual reports will be filled by the issuing establishment listed on the front cover and title page. Numbers 1-900 in this series were issued as Manuscript Reports (Biological Series) of the Biological Board of Canada, and subsequent to 1937 when the name of the Board was changed by Act of Parliament, as Manuscript Reports (Biological Series) of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada. Numbers 1426 - 1550 were issued as Department of Fisheries and Environment, Fisheries and Marine Service Manuscript Reports. The current series name was changed with report number 1551. Rapport Manuscrit Canadien des Sciences Halieutiques et Aquatiques Les rapports manuscrits contiennent des renseignements scientifiques et techniques qui constituent une contribution aux connaissances actuelles, mais qui traitent de problèmes nationaux ou régionaux.
  • Manual to the Freshwater Mussels of MD

    Manual to the Freshwater Mussels of MD

    MMAANNUUAALL OOFF TTHHEE FFRREESSHHWWAATTEERR BBIIVVAALLVVEESS OOFF MMAARRYYLLAANNDD CHESAPEAKE BAY AND WATERSHED PROGRAMS MONITORING AND NON-TIDAL ASSESSMENT CBWP-MANTA- EA-96-03 MANUAL OF THE FRESHWATER BIVALVES OF MARYLAND Prepared By: Arthur Bogan1 and Matthew Ashton2 1North Carolina Museum of Natural Science 11 West Jones Street Raleigh, NC 27601 2 Maryland Department of Natural Resources 580 Taylor Avenue, C-2 Annapolis, Maryland 21401 Prepared For: Maryland Department of Natural Resources Resource Assessment Service Monitoring and Non-Tidal Assessment Division Aquatic Inventory and Monitoring Program 580 Taylor Avenue, C-2 Annapolis, Maryland 21401 February 2016 Table of Contents I. List of maps .................................................................................................................................... 1 Il. List of figures ................................................................................................................................. 1 III. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 3 IV. Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................................ 4 V. Figure of bivalve shell landmarks (fig. 1) .......................................................................................... 5 VI. Glossary of bivalve terms ................................................................................................................
  • Biodiversità Ed Evoluzione

    Biodiversità Ed Evoluzione

    Allma Mater Studiiorum – Uniiversiità dii Bollogna DOTTORATO DI RICERCA IN BIODIVERSITÀ ED EVOLUZIONE Ciclo XXIII Settore/i scientifico-disciplinare/i di afferenza: BIO - 05 A MOLECULAR PHYLOGENY OF BIVALVE MOLLUSKS: ANCIENT RADIATIONS AND DIVERGENCES AS REVEALED BY MITOCHONDRIAL GENES Presentata da: Dr Federico Plazzi Coordinatore Dottorato Relatore Prof. Barbara Mantovani Dr Marco Passamonti Esame finale anno 2011 of all marine animals, the bivalve molluscs are the most perfectly adapted for life within soft substrata of sand and mud. Sir Charles Maurice Yonge INDEX p. 1..... FOREWORD p. 2..... Plan of the Thesis p. 3..... CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION p. 3..... 1.1. BIVALVE MOLLUSKS: ZOOLOGY, PHYLOGENY, AND BEYOND p. 3..... The phylum Mollusca p. 4..... A survey of class Bivalvia p. 7..... The Opponobranchia: true ctenidia for a truly vexed issue p. 9..... The Autobranchia: between tenets and question marks p. 13..... Doubly Uniparental Inheritance p. 13..... The choice of the “right” molecular marker in bivalve phylogenetics p. 17..... 1.2. MOLECULAR EVOLUTION MODELS, MULTIGENE BAYESIAN ANALYSIS, AND PARTITION CHOICE p. 23..... CHAPTER 2 – TOWARDS A MOLECULAR PHYLOGENY OF MOLLUSKS: BIVALVES’ EARLY EVOLUTION AS REVEALED BY MITOCHONDRIAL GENES. p. 23..... 2.1. INTRODUCTION p. 28..... 2.2. MATERIALS AND METHODS p. 28..... Specimens’ collection and DNA extraction p. 30..... PCR amplification, cloning, and sequencing p. 30..... Sequence alignment p. 32..... Phylogenetic analyses p. 37..... Taxon sampling p. 39..... Dating p. 43..... 2.3. RESULTS p. 43..... Obtained sequences i p. 44..... Sequence analyses p. 45..... Taxon sampling p. 45..... Maximum Likelihood p. 47..... Bayesian Analyses p. 50..... Dating the tree p.
  • Quagga Mussel (Dreissena Bugensis) ERSS

    Quagga Mussel (Dreissena Bugensis) ERSS

    Quagga Mussel (Dreissena bugensis) Ecological Risk Screening Summary U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, February 2011 Revised, September 2014, June 2015, May 2019 Web Version, 8/26/2019 Photo: NOAA Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic. Available: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Quagga_mussel_(8740859295).jpg. (May 2019). 1 Native Range and Status in the United States Native Range From Benson et al. (2019): “Dreissena rostriformis bugensis is indigenous to the Dneiper River drainage of Ukraine and Ponto-Caspian Sea. It was discovered in the Bug River in 1890 by Andrusov, who named the species in 1897 (Mills et al. 1996).” 1 Status in the United States Dreissena bugensis is listed as an injurious species by the U.S. Congress under the Lacey Act (18 U.S.C. 42(a)(1) under the names “Dreissena rostriformis or Dreissena bugensis” (U.S. Congress 2018). The importation of quagga mussels into the United States, any territory of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any possession of the United States, or any shipment between the continental United States, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any possession of the United States is prohibited. According to Benson et al. (2019), nonindigenous occurrences of Dreissena rostriformis bugensis have been reported in the following States, with range of years and hydrologic units in parentheses: Arizona (2007-2017; Aqua Fria; Bill Williams; Havasu-Mohave
  • First Record of the Brackish Water Dreissenid Bivalve Mytilopsis Leucophaeata in the Northern Baltic Sea

    First Record of the Brackish Water Dreissenid Bivalve Mytilopsis Leucophaeata in the Northern Baltic Sea

    Aquatic Invasions (2006) Volume 1, Issue 1: 38-41 DOI 10.3391/ai.2006.1.1.9 © 2006 The Author(s) Journal compilation © 2006 REABIC (http://www.reabic.net) This is an Open Access article Research article First record of the brackish water dreissenid bivalve Mytilopsis leucophaeata in the northern Baltic Sea Ari O. Laine1*, Jukka Mattila2 and Annukka Lehikoinen2 1Finnish Institute of Marine Research, P.O. Box 2, FIN-00561 Helsinki, Finland 2STUK - Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, Research and Environmental Surveillance, Laippatie 4, P.O. Box 14, FIN-00881 Helsinki, Finland *Corresponding author E-mail: [email protected] Received 11 January 2006; accepted in revised form 23 January 2006 Abstract Conrad’s false mussel, Mytilopsis leucophaeata has been found in the central Gulf of Finland, which is the first record of this brackish water dreissenid species in the northern Baltic Sea. In 2003 a strong recruitment of young dreissenid bivalves was observed and in 2004 dense assemblages consisting of adult M. leucophaeata were discovered in an area affected by cooling water discharges from a nuclear power plant. The introduction of the species has obviously taken place via ballast water transport, resulting in a successful establishment in a favourable warm water environment. Based on the wide salinity tolerance, M. leucophaeata might also colonize areas inhabited by functionally similar bivalves if able to survive the cold winter conditions. Key words: Mytilopsis leucophaeata, Dreissenidae, invasions, Baltic Sea, cooling waters Introduction population has probably gone extinct. Recently, a local but obviously established population was Conrad’s false mussel, Mytilopsis leucophaeata found in river Warnow estuary, northern (Conrad 1831) (Bivalvia, Dreissenidae) is Germany (Darr and Zettler 2000).
  • Dreissena Polymorpha ERSS

    Dreissena Polymorpha ERSS

    Zebra Mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) Ecological Risk Screening Summary U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, March 2020 Revised, April 2020 Web Version, 3/9/2021 Organism Type: Mussel Overall Risk Assessment Category: High Photo: Bj.schoenmakers. Licensed under Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication. Available: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dreissena_polymorpha_(Zebra_mussel),_Arnhem,_the _Netherlands.jpg. (March 2020). 1 1 Native Range and Status in the United States Native Range From Benson et al. (2020): “The zebra mussel is native to the Black, Caspian, and Azov Seas. In 1769, Pallas first described populations of this species from the Caspian Sea and Ural River.” According to CABI (2019) Dreissena polymorpha is native to Romania, the Mediterranenan Sea, the Black Sea, and the Ukraine. Status in the United States According to Benson et al. (2020) Dreissena polymorpha has been introduced to Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. From Benson et al. (2020): “Established in all the Great Lakes, all of the large navigable rivers in the eastern United States, and in many small lakes in the Great Lakes region.” “The initial invasive range of zebra mussels in the Great Lakes has decreased due to displacement by the congeneric quagga mussel.” Dreissena polymorpha was officially listed as an injurious wildlife species in 1991 under the Lacey Act (18.U.S.C.42(a)(1)) by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS 1991).
  • Evolutionary History of Relict Congeria (Bivalvia: Dreissenidae): Unearthing the Subterranean Biodiversity of the Dinaric Karst Bilandžija Et Al

    Evolutionary History of Relict Congeria (Bivalvia: Dreissenidae): Unearthing the Subterranean Biodiversity of the Dinaric Karst Bilandžija Et Al

    Evolutionary history of relict Congeria (Bivalvia: Dreissenidae): unearthing the subterranean biodiversity of the Dinaric Karst Bilandžija et al. Bilandžija et al. Frontiers in Zoology 2013, 10:5 http://www.frontiersinzoology.com/content/10/1/5 Bilandžija et al. Frontiers in Zoology 2013, 10:5 http://www.frontiersinzoology.com/content/10/1/5 RESEARCH Open Access Evolutionary history of relict Congeria (Bivalvia: Dreissenidae): unearthing the subterranean biodiversity of the Dinaric Karst Helena Bilandžija1,2, Brian Morton3, Martina Podnar4 and Helena Ćetković1* Abstract Background: Patterns of biodiversity in the subterranean realm are typically different from those encountered on the Earth’s surface. The Dinaric karst of Croatia, Slovenia and Bosnia and Herzegovina is a global hotspot of subterranean biodiversity. How this was achieved and why this is so remain largely unresolved despite a long tradition of research. To obtain insights into the colonisation of the Dinaric Karst and the effects of the subterranean realm on its inhabitants, we studied the tertiary relict Congeria, a unique cave-dwelling bivalve (Dreissenidae), using a combination of biogeographical, molecular, morphological, and paleontological information. Results: Phylogenetic and molecular clock analyses using both nuclear and mitochondrial markers have shown that the surviving Congeria lineage has actually split into three distinct species, i.e., C. kusceri, C. jalzici sp. nov. and C. mulaomerovici sp. nov., by vicariant processes in the late Miocene and Pliocene. Despite millions of years of independent evolution, analyses have demonstrated a great deal of shell similarity between modern Congeria species, although slight differences in hinge plate structure have enabled the description of the two new species.
  • Mytilopsis Leucophaeata (Dark Falsemussel)

    Mytilopsis Leucophaeata (Dark Falsemussel)

    Dark Falsemussel (Mytilopsis leucophaeata) Ecological Risk Screening Summary U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, March 2012 Revised, August 2017 and December 2017 Web Version, 1/28/2019 Image: dshelton. Licensed under CC BY-NC. Available: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/3831381. (December 2017). 1 Native Range and Status in the United States Native Range From Fofonoff et al. (2017): “[…] native to the east coast of North America from the Chesapeake Bay to Veracruz, Mexico.” 1 Status in the United States From NatureServe (2017): “This species is native from Chesapeake Bay southward through the Gulf of Mexico but was introduced into the Hudson River, New York, as early as 1937 and later to the lower Charles River, Massachusetts, according to Rehder (1937), Jacobson (1953) and Carlton (1992). Benson et al. (2001) cite invasions in Alabama, Florida, Kentucky, and Tennessee.” “Introduced sites in New England include the Housatonic River in Shelton, Fairfield Co., Connecticut; the Charles River in Boston, Suffolk Co., Massachusetts; and the lower Hudson River basin, New York (Smith and Boss, 199[5]). In Alabama, it is locally abundant in upper Mobile Bay and parts of the Mobile Delta and is occasionally found far inland in the Tennessee River and Mobile Basin, presumably dispersed by barges although there is evidence that it reproduces in fresh water in Alabama (Williams et al., 2008).” The establishment status of Mytilopsis leucophaeata in Tennessee and Kentucky is not adequately documented. From Fofonoff et al. (2017): “In 1937, two specimens were collected in the tidal Hudson River, near Haverstraw, New York (NY) (Rehder 1937). In 1952, an established population of M.
  • The Zebra Mussel in Europe“

    The Zebra Mussel in Europe“

    Chapter 9 Dreissena polymorpha in Belarus: history of spread, population Biology and ecosystem impacts Alexander Y. Karatayev, Lyubov E. Burlakova and Dianna K. Padilla This chapter was originally published in the book „The Zebra Mussel in Europe“. The copy attached is provided by Margraf Publishers GmbH for the author‘s benefit and for the benefit of the author‘s institution for non-commercial research and educational use. All other uses, reproduction and distribution are prohibited and require a written permission by the publisher. G. van der Velde, S. Rajagopal & A. bij de Vaate de bij A. & Rajagopal S. Velde, der van G. The Zebra Mussel in Europe THE ZEBRA MUSSEL IN EUROPE Europe in Mussel Zebra The Edited by Gerard van der Velde, Sanjeevi Rajagopal & Abraham bij de Vaate The Zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) is one of world’s most successful invasive species. Originating from the Ponto-Caspian region, it spread all over Europe and crossed over to North America via the ocean. Wherever it has spread, it made its presence felt with tremendous ecological and economic impact. To make matters worse, the species is still expanding its geographical range. Although there is a stream of information concerning the zebra mussel and its relatives, a recent up-to-date book summarizing the newest information on the zebra mussel was lacking. The present book is expected to fill this gap. It deals with edited by all aspects of the zebra mussel and some of its relatives, varying in its content from Gerard van der Velde taxonomy and phylogeny, to fossil and recent species, distribution and dispersal, genetics, food, growth and life history, ecology and ecological impact, endosymbionts, parasites, Sanjeevi Rajagopal predation, use as indicator for water quality and for water quality improvement and biofouling Abraham bij de Vaate and control.