Embryo and Larval Development of the Yellow Clam Mesodesma Mactroides (Reeve, 1854) (Mesodesmatidae) MADRONES-LADJA JA
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
§4-71-6.5 LIST of CONDITIONALLY APPROVED ANIMALS November
§4-71-6.5 LIST OF CONDITIONALLY APPROVED ANIMALS November 28, 2006 SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME INVERTEBRATES PHYLUM Annelida CLASS Oligochaeta ORDER Plesiopora FAMILY Tubificidae Tubifex (all species in genus) worm, tubifex PHYLUM Arthropoda CLASS Crustacea ORDER Anostraca FAMILY Artemiidae Artemia (all species in genus) shrimp, brine ORDER Cladocera FAMILY Daphnidae Daphnia (all species in genus) flea, water ORDER Decapoda FAMILY Atelecyclidae Erimacrus isenbeckii crab, horsehair FAMILY Cancridae Cancer antennarius crab, California rock Cancer anthonyi crab, yellowstone Cancer borealis crab, Jonah Cancer magister crab, dungeness Cancer productus crab, rock (red) FAMILY Geryonidae Geryon affinis crab, golden FAMILY Lithodidae Paralithodes camtschatica crab, Alaskan king FAMILY Majidae Chionocetes bairdi crab, snow Chionocetes opilio crab, snow 1 CONDITIONAL ANIMAL LIST §4-71-6.5 SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME Chionocetes tanneri crab, snow FAMILY Nephropidae Homarus (all species in genus) lobster, true FAMILY Palaemonidae Macrobrachium lar shrimp, freshwater Macrobrachium rosenbergi prawn, giant long-legged FAMILY Palinuridae Jasus (all species in genus) crayfish, saltwater; lobster Panulirus argus lobster, Atlantic spiny Panulirus longipes femoristriga crayfish, saltwater Panulirus pencillatus lobster, spiny FAMILY Portunidae Callinectes sapidus crab, blue Scylla serrata crab, Samoan; serrate, swimming FAMILY Raninidae Ranina ranina crab, spanner; red frog, Hawaiian CLASS Insecta ORDER Coleoptera FAMILY Tenebrionidae Tenebrio molitor mealworm, -
Geoducks—A Compendium
34, NUMBER 1 VOLUME JOURNAL OF SHELLFISH RESEARCH APRIL 2015 JOURNAL OF SHELLFISH RESEARCH Vol. 34, No. 1 APRIL 2015 JOURNAL OF SHELLFISH RESEARCH CONTENTS VOLUME 34, NUMBER 1 APRIL 2015 Geoducks — A compendium ...................................................................... 1 Brent Vadopalas and Jonathan P. Davis .......................................................................................... 3 Paul E. Gribben and Kevin G. Heasman Developing fisheries and aquaculture industries for Panopea zelandica in New Zealand ............................... 5 Ignacio Leyva-Valencia, Pedro Cruz-Hernandez, Sergio T. Alvarez-Castaneda,~ Delia I. Rojas-Posadas, Miguel M. Correa-Ramırez, Brent Vadopalas and Daniel B. Lluch-Cota Phylogeny and phylogeography of the geoduck Panopea (Bivalvia: Hiatellidae) ..................................... 11 J. Jesus Bautista-Romero, Sergio Scarry Gonzalez-Pel aez, Enrique Morales-Bojorquez, Jose Angel Hidalgo-de-la-Toba and Daniel Bernardo Lluch-Cota Sinusoidal function modeling applied to age validation of geoducks Panopea generosa and Panopea globosa ................. 21 Brent Vadopalas, Jonathan P. Davis and Carolyn S. Friedman Maturation, spawning, and fecundity of the farmed Pacific geoduck Panopea generosa in Puget Sound, Washington ............ 31 Bianca Arney, Wenshan Liu, Ian Forster, R. Scott McKinley and Christopher M. Pearce Temperature and food-ration optimization in the hatchery culture of juveniles of the Pacific geoduck Panopea generosa ......... 39 Alejandra Ferreira-Arrieta, Zaul Garcıa-Esquivel, Marco A. Gonzalez-G omez and Enrique Valenzuela-Espinoza Growth, survival, and feeding rates for the geoduck Panopea globosa during larval development ......................... 55 Sandra Tapia-Morales, Zaul Garcıa-Esquivel, Brent Vadopalas and Jonathan Davis Growth and burrowing rates of juvenile geoducks Panopea generosa and Panopea globosa under laboratory conditions .......... 63 Fabiola G. Arcos-Ortega, Santiago J. Sanchez Leon–Hing, Carmen Rodriguez-Jaramillo, Mario A. -
AEBR 114 Review of Factors Affecting the Abundance of Toheroa Paphies
Review of factors affecting the abundance of toheroa (Paphies ventricosa) New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No. 114 J.R. Williams, C. Sim-Smith, C. Paterson. ISSN 1179-6480 (online) ISBN 978-0-478-41468-4 (online) June 2013 Requests for further copies should be directed to: Publications Logistics Officer Ministry for Primary Industries PO Box 2526 WELLINGTON 6140 Email: [email protected] Telephone: 0800 00 83 33 Facsimile: 04-894 0300 This publication is also available on the Ministry for Primary Industries websites at: http://www.mpi.govt.nz/news-resources/publications.aspx http://fs.fish.govt.nz go to Document library/Research reports © Crown Copyright - Ministry for Primary Industries TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................... 1 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 2 2. METHODS ....................................................................................................................... 3 3. TIME SERIES OF ABUNDANCE .................................................................................. 3 3.1 Northland region beaches .......................................................................................... 3 3.2 Wellington region beaches ........................................................................................ 4 3.3 Southland region beaches ......................................................................................... -
Recent Trends in Marine Phycotoxins from Australian Coastal Waters
Review Recent Trends in Marine Phycotoxins from Australian Coastal Waters Penelope Ajani 1,*, D. Tim Harwood 2 and Shauna A. Murray 1 1 Climate Change Cluster (C3), University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2007, Australia; [email protected] 2 Cawthron Institute, The Wood, Nelson 7010, New Zealand; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +61‐02‐9514‐7325 Academic Editor: Lucio G. Costa Received: 6 December 2016; Accepted: 29 January 2017; Published: 9 February 2017 Abstract: Phycotoxins, which are produced by harmful microalgae and bioaccumulate in the marine food web, are of growing concern for Australia. These harmful algae pose a threat to ecosystem and human health, as well as constraining the progress of aquaculture, one of the fastest growing food sectors in the world. With better monitoring, advanced analytical skills and an increase in microalgal expertise, many phycotoxins have been identified in Australian coastal waters in recent years. The most concerning of these toxins are ciguatoxin, paralytic shellfish toxins, okadaic acid and domoic acid, with palytoxin and karlotoxin increasing in significance. The potential for tetrodotoxin, maitotoxin and palytoxin to contaminate seafood is also of concern, warranting future investigation. The largest and most significant toxic bloom in Tasmania in 2012 resulted in an estimated total economic loss of ~AUD$23M, indicating that there is an imperative to improve toxin and organism detection methods, clarify the toxin profiles of species of phytoplankton and carry out both intra‐ and inter‐species toxicity comparisons. Future work also includes the application of rapid, real‐time molecular assays for the detection of harmful species and toxin genes. -
Physiological Effects and Biotransformation of Paralytic
PHYSIOLOGICAL EFFECTS AND BIOTRANSFORMATION OF PARALYTIC SHELLFISH TOXINS IN NEW ZEALAND MARINE BIVALVES ______________________________________________________________ A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Environmental Sciences in the University of Canterbury by Andrea M. Contreras 2010 Abstract Although there are no authenticated records of human illness due to PSP in New Zealand, nationwide phytoplankton and shellfish toxicity monitoring programmes have revealed that the incidence of PSP contamination and the occurrence of the toxic Alexandrium species are more common than previously realised (Mackenzie et al., 2004). A full understanding of the mechanism of uptake, accumulation and toxin dynamics of bivalves feeding on toxic algae is fundamental for improving future regulations in the shellfish toxicity monitoring program across the country. This thesis examines the effects of toxic dinoflagellates and PSP toxins on the physiology and behaviour of bivalve molluscs. This focus arose because these aspects have not been widely studied before in New Zealand. The basic hypothesis tested was that bivalve molluscs differ in their ability to metabolise PSP toxins produced by Alexandrium tamarense and are able to transform toxins and may have special mechanisms to avoid toxin uptake. To test this hypothesis, different physiological/behavioural experiments and quantification of PSP toxins in bivalves tissues were carried out on mussels ( Perna canaliculus ), clams ( Paphies donacina and Dosinia anus ), scallops ( Pecten novaezelandiae ) and oysters ( Ostrea chilensis ) from the South Island of New Zealand. Measurements of clearance rate were used to test the sensitivity of the bivalves to PSP toxins. Other studies that involved intoxication and detoxification periods were carried out on three species of bivalves ( P. -
Ripiro Beach
http://researchcommons.waikato.ac.nz/ Research Commons at the University of Waikato Copyright Statement: The digital copy of this thesis is protected by the Copyright Act 1994 (New Zealand). The thesis may be consulted by you, provided you comply with the provisions of the Act and the following conditions of use: Any use you make of these documents or images must be for research or private study purposes only, and you may not make them available to any other person. Authors control the copyright of their thesis. You will recognise the author’s right to be identified as the author of the thesis, and due acknowledgement will be made to the author where appropriate. You will obtain the author’s permission before publishing any material from the thesis. The modification of toheroa habitat by streams on Ripiro Beach A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science (Research) in Environmental Science at The University of Waikato by JANE COPE 2018 ―We leave something of ourselves behind when we leave a place, we stay there, even though we go away. And there are things in us that we can find again only by going back there‖ – Pascal Mercier, Night train to London i Abstract Habitat modification and loss are key factors driving the global extinction and displacement of species. The scale and consequences of habitat loss are relatively well understood in terrestrial environments, but in marine ecosystems, and particularly soft sediment ecosystems, this is not the case. The characteristics which determine the suitability of soft sediment habitats are often subtle, due to the apparent homogeneity of sandy environments. -
Phylum MOLLUSCA Chitons, Bivalves, Sea Snails, Sea Slugs, Octopus, Squid, Tusk Shell
Phylum MOLLUSCA Chitons, bivalves, sea snails, sea slugs, octopus, squid, tusk shell Bruce Marshall, Steve O’Shea with additional input for squid from Neil Bagley, Peter McMillan, Reyn Naylor, Darren Stevens, Di Tracey Phylum Aplacophora In New Zealand, these are worm-like molluscs found in sandy mud. There is no shell. The tiny MOLLUSCA solenogasters have bristle-like spicules over Chitons, bivalves, sea snails, sea almost the whole body, a groove on the underside of the body, and no gills. The more worm-like slugs, octopus, squid, tusk shells caudofoveates have a groove and fewer spicules but have gills. There are 10 species, 8 undescribed. The mollusca is the second most speciose animal Bivalvia phylum in the sea after Arthropoda. The phylum Clams, mussels, oysters, scallops, etc. The shell is name is taken from the Latin (molluscus, soft), in two halves (valves) connected by a ligament and referring to the soft bodies of these creatures, but hinge and anterior and posterior adductor muscles. most species have some kind of protective shell Gills are well-developed and there is no radula. and hence are called shellfish. Some, like sea There are 680 species, 231 undescribed. slugs, have no shell at all. Most molluscs also have a strap-like ribbon of minute teeth — the Scaphopoda radula — inside the mouth, but this characteristic Tusk shells. The body and head are reduced but Molluscan feature is lacking in clams (bivalves) and there is a foot that is used for burrowing in soft some deep-sea finned octopuses. A significant part sediments. The shell is open at both ends, with of the body is muscular, like the adductor muscles the narrow tip just above the sediment surface for and foot of clams and scallops, the head-foot of respiration. -
Seashells Shells Joined Together
What shell is this? Many of the shells you see on the beach were once two Seashells shells joined together. These shells are called bivalves. by Feana Tu‘akoi Sometimes you will find them still joined, but mostly they have broken away from the other shell. Bivalves are the most common seashells washed up on our beaches. They include the shells of pipi, tuatua, oysters, mussels, and scallops. Some shells, such as limpets and pāua, are single shells. They might have small holes in the top. Other single shells, such as the Cookʼs Turban shell, are shaped like a spiral. Mussel shell Pipi shell Many of New Zealandʼs beaches are covered in shells – little shells, big shells, smooth shells, flat shells, and curly shells. Some shells are plain, and some have Cookʼs Turban shell patterns. Have you ever wondered where all these shells come from? Empty homes Almost all seashells were once homes for sea creatures. When the creatures inside the shells die or are eaten by predators, their shells are left behind. Many of the empty shells get washed up onto the beach. Limpet shell 2 3 Molluscs Shell science We often call the creatures that live in shells “shellfish” Hamish Spencer is a shell scientist. – but they are not really fish. They are part of a group of He studies shells and shellfish, and he creatures called molluscs. finds them fascinating. A mollusc has a soft body and no bones, but many Hamish has seen some unusual shellfish. Hamish Spencer molluscs have a hard shell. The shell helps to keep the “A shipworm has a body that looks like mollusc safe from predators such as seagulls, crabs, a worm, but with two small shells fish, and other, bigger, molluscs. -
Geoduck Aquaculture Research Program (GARP)
FINAL REPORT Publication and Contact Information This report is available on the Washington Sea Grant website at wsg.washington.edu/geoduck For more information contact: Washington Sea Grant University of Washington 3716 Brooklyn Ave. N.E. Box 355060 Seattle, WA 98105-6716 206.543.6600 wsg.washington.edu [email protected] November 2013 • WSG-TR 13-03 Acknowledgements ashington Sea Grant expresses its appreciation to the many individuals who provided information and support Wfor this report. In particular, we gratefully acknowledge research program funding provided by the Washington State Legislature, Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Washington State Department of Ecology, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and University of Washington. We also would like to thank shellfish growers who cooperated with program investigators to make this research possible. Finally, we would like to recognize the guidance provided by the Department of Ecology and the Shellfish Aquaculture Regulatory Committee. Primary Investigators/ Contributing Scientists Washington Sea Grant Staff Recommended Citation Report Authors Jeffrey C. Cornwell David Armstrong Penelope Dalton Washington Sea Grant Carolyn S. Friedman Lisa M. Crosson Marcus Duke (2013) Final Report: P. Sean McDonald Jonathan Davis David G. Gordon Geoduck aquaculture Jennifer Ruesink Elene M. Dorfmeier Teri King research program. Report Brent Vadopalas Tim Essington Meg Matthews to the Washington State Glenn R. VanBlaricom Paul Frelier Robyn Ricks Legislature. Washington Aaron W. E. Galloway Eric Scigliano Sea Grant Technical Report Micah J. Horwith Raechel Waters WSG-TR 13-03, 122 pp. Perry Lund Dan Williams Kate McPeek Roger I. E. Newell Julian D. Olden Michael S. Owens Jennifer L. Price Kristina M. -
The Effects of Environment on Arctica Islandica Shell Formation and Architecture
Biogeosciences, 14, 1577–1591, 2017 www.biogeosciences.net/14/1577/2017/ doi:10.5194/bg-14-1577-2017 © Author(s) 2017. CC Attribution 3.0 License. The effects of environment on Arctica islandica shell formation and architecture Stefania Milano1, Gernot Nehrke2, Alan D. Wanamaker Jr.3, Irene Ballesta-Artero4,5, Thomas Brey2, and Bernd R. Schöne1 1Institute of Geosciences, University of Mainz, Joh.-J.-Becherweg 21, 55128 Mainz, Germany 2Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, Am Handelshafen 12, 27570 Bremerhaven, Germany 3Department of Geological and Atmospheric Sciences, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011-3212, USA 4Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research and Utrecht University, P.O. Box 59, 1790 AB Den Burg, Texel, the Netherlands 5Department of Animal Ecology, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands Correspondence to: Stefania Milano ([email protected]) Received: 27 October 2016 – Discussion started: 7 December 2016 Revised: 1 March 2017 – Accepted: 4 March 2017 – Published: 27 March 2017 Abstract. Mollusks record valuable information in their hard tribution, and (2) scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was parts that reflect ambient environmental conditions. For this used to detect changes in microstructural organization. Our reason, shells can serve as excellent archives to reconstruct results indicate that A. islandica microstructure is not sen- past climate and environmental variability. However, animal sitive to changes in the food source and, likely, shell pig- physiology and biomineralization, which are often poorly un- ment are not altered by diet. However, seawater temperature derstood, can make the decoding of environmental signals had a statistically significant effect on the orientation of the a challenging task. -
Giant Pacific Octopus (Enteroctopus Dofleini) Care Manual
Giant Pacific Octopus Insert Photo within this space (Enteroctopus dofleini) Care Manual CREATED BY AZA Aquatic Invertebrate Taxonomic Advisory Group IN ASSOCIATION WITH AZA Animal Welfare Committee Giant Pacific Octopus (Enteroctopus dofleini) Care Manual Giant Pacific Octopus (Enteroctopus dofleini) Care Manual Published by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums in association with the AZA Animal Welfare Committee Formal Citation: AZA Aquatic Invertebrate Taxon Advisory Group (AITAG) (2014). Giant Pacific Octopus (Enteroctopus dofleini) Care Manual. Association of Zoos and Aquariums, Silver Spring, MD. Original Completion Date: September 2014 Dedication: This work is dedicated to the memory of Roland C. Anderson, who passed away suddenly before its completion. No one person is more responsible for advancing and elevating the state of husbandry of this species, and we hope his lifelong body of work will inspire the next generation of aquarists towards the same ideals. Authors and Significant Contributors: Barrett L. Christie, The Dallas Zoo and Children’s Aquarium at Fair Park, AITAG Steering Committee Alan Peters, Smithsonian Institution, National Zoological Park, AITAG Steering Committee Gregory J. Barord, City University of New York, AITAG Advisor Mark J. Rehling, Cleveland Metroparks Zoo Roland C. Anderson, PhD Reviewers: Mike Brittsan, Columbus Zoo and Aquarium Paula Carlson, Dallas World Aquarium Marie Collins, Sea Life Aquarium Carlsbad David DeNardo, New York Aquarium Joshua Frey Sr., Downtown Aquarium Houston Jay Hemdal, Toledo -
Panopea Abrupta ) Ecology and Aquaculture Production
COMPREHENSIVE LITERATURE REVIEW AND SYNOPSIS OF ISSUES RELATING TO GEODUCK ( PANOPEA ABRUPTA ) ECOLOGY AND AQUACULTURE PRODUCTION Prepared for Washington State Department of Natural Resources by Kristine Feldman, Brent Vadopalas, David Armstrong, Carolyn Friedman, Ray Hilborn, Kerry Naish, Jose Orensanz, and Juan Valero (School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington), Jennifer Ruesink (Department of Biology, University of Washington), Andrew Suhrbier, Aimee Christy, and Dan Cheney (Pacific Shellfish Institute), and Jonathan P. Davis (Baywater Inc.) February 6, 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... iv LIST OF TABLES...............................................................................................................v 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................... 1 1.1 General life history ..................................................................................... 1 1.2 Predator-prey interactions........................................................................... 2 1.3 Community and ecosystem effects of geoducks......................................... 2 1.4 Spatial structure of geoduck populations.................................................... 3 1.5 Genetic-based differences at the population level ...................................... 3 1.6 Commercial geoduck hatchery practices ...................................................