DOCSLIB.ORG

Erie Canal Aquatic Invasive Deterrent Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Erie Canal Aquatic Invasive Deterrent Study Erie Canal Aquatic Invasive Deterrent Study Prepared for: BuroHappold and New York Power Authority Prepared by: 15250 NE 95th Street Redmond, WA 98052 CONFIDENTIAL October 2019 Erie Canal Aquatic Invasive Deterrent Study Prepared for: BuroHappold New York Power Authority Prepared by: R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. 15250 NE 95th Street Redmond, WA 98052 CONFIDENTIAL October 2019 CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................... VI STUDY SCOPE ............................................................................................................................ 1 PROJECT BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................ 1 2.1. STUDY AREA .......................................................................................................................... 4 EVALUATION OF SUITABLE DETERRENTS .................................................................................. 4 3.1. REVIEW AND SYNTHESIZE EXISTING INFORMATION ......................................................................... 4 Summary of NYS Priority AIS ................................................................................. 5 3.1.1.1. Fish Species ............................................................................................. 6 3.1.1.2. Invertebrate Species ................................................................................ 6 3.1.1.3. Plant Species ............................................................................................ 7 Summary of AIS Deterrent Technologies .............................................................. 7 3.2. BRAINSTORMING AND MATRIX DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................. 7 Select Components ................................................................................................ 8 Develop Criteria ..................................................................................................... 8 3.3. CONDUCT EVALUATION ............................................................................................................ 9 3.4. AGENCY/STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH .......................................................................................... 10 3.5. TECHNOLOGIES SUITABLE FOR CONSIDERATION IN NETWORKED ALTERNATIVES ................................. 13 Hydrologic Separation ......................................................................................... 13 Boat Lift and Wash ............................................................................................... 14 Bio-acoustic Fish Fence (BAFF) ............................................................................ 17 AIS Barrier Screen ................................................................................................ 19 3.6. TECHNOLOGIES NOT USED IN NETWORKED ALTERNATIVES ............................................................ 20 DEVELOPMENT OF INITIAL NETWORKED ALTERNATIVES ....................................................... 23 4.1. NETWORKED ALTERNATIVE 1: PROTECT THE HUDSON .................................................................. 23 Hydrologic Separation at Summit of Erie Canal .................................................. 23 4.1.1.1. Permanently Close Guard Gate G7 ....................................................... 25 4.1.1.2. Permanently Close Lock E21 ................................................................. 25 4.1.1.3. Entrain the Mohawk River..................................................................... 26 R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. Page | i 2242/Erie Canal Aquatic Invasive Deterrent Study October 2019 – CONFIDENTIAL 4.1.1.4. Permanently Drain the Erie Canal between E21 and G7 ...................... 26 4.2. NETWORKED ALTERNATIVE 2: WATERSHED DIVIDE ..................................................................... 26 Bio-Acoustic Fish Fence (BAFF) at Tonawanda .................................................... 28 Hydrologic Separation at Rochester Guard Gate ................................................ 29 Cease Lock Operations on Oswego Canal, Lock O7/O8 ....................................... 30 Hydrologic Separation at Summit of Erie Canal .................................................. 32 4.3. NETWORKED ALTERNATIVE 3: KEY WATERSHED PROTECTION ........................................................ 32 Bio-Acoustic Fish Fence (BAFF) at Tonawanda .................................................... 32 Cease Lock Operations at Macedon (Lock E30) and Install Fish Barrier Screen at Macedon Bypass Channel .................................................................... 32 4.3.2.1. Cease Lock Operations at E30 ............................................................... 34 4.3.2.2. Provide barrier screen on bypass channel ............................................ 34 Cease Lock Operations on Oswego Canal, Lock O7/O8 ....................................... 35 Hydrologic Separation at Summit of Erie Canal .................................................. 35 Cease Lock Operations on the Erie Canal at Baldwinsville and Brewerton, Locks E24/E23 ...................................................................................................... 35 4.3.5.1. Cease Lock Operations at Locks E24 and E23 ....................................... 36 Cease Lock Operations on the Erie Canal at Waterford, Lock E2 ........................ 37 4.3.6.1. Cease Lock Operations at E2 ................................................................. 37 EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS OF NETWORKED DETERRENT ALTERNATIVES .............................. 38 5.1. EFFECTIVENESS MODEL METHODS ........................................................................................... 39 5.2. MODEL RESULTS ................................................................................................................... 41 COST ESTIMATE EVALUATION ................................................................................................ 43 6.1. CAPITAL COST ...................................................................................................................... 43 6.2. GENERAL O&M COST ........................................................................................................... 44 6.3. POWER COSTS ...................................................................................................................... 44 ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING EVALUATION ........................................................................ 45 7.1. PERMITTING SUMMARY ......................................................................................................... 45 7.2. PERMITTING CHALLENGES ....................................................................................................... 46 Project Complexity ............................................................................................... 46 R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. Page | ii 2242/Erie Canal Aquatic Invasive Deterrent Study October 2019 – CONFIDENTIAL Stakeholder Outreach .......................................................................................... 46 Historical Significance .......................................................................................... 46 NETWORKED SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION .................... 48 8.1. RECOMMENDED NETWORKED DETERRENT ALTERNATIVE .............................................................. 48 8.2. EDUCATION, OUTREACH, AND MONITORING .............................................................................. 49 8.3. COMPATIBILITY AND INTEGRATION WITH EXISTING PROGRAMS ...................................................... 52 CITATIONS ............................................................................................................................... 56 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Summaries of Existing Information A1 Ecological Summaries of AIS Guilds A2 Deterrent Technology Summary Table Appendix B Deterrent Technology Evaluation Process B1 Criteria Document B2 Technology Summary Table B3 Results Appendix C. Effectiveness Analysis Appendix D. Preliminary Cost Estimation Appendix E. Permitting R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. Page | iii 2242/Erie Canal Aquatic Invasive Deterrent Study October 2019 – CONFIDENTIAL LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2-1. The New York State Canal System with infrastructure and flow direction. .......... 2 Figure 2-2. Watersheds intersected by the Erie Canal. ........................................................... 3 Figure 3-1. Normalized scores for deterrent technology concepts evaluated in the Pugh Matrix by the internal expert team. ........................................................... 10 Figure 3-2. Construction of the Bio-Acoustic Fish Fence at Barkley Dam, Kentucky. Waterproof power cables, sound transducers, and LED light bars are visible 18 Figure 3-3. Schematic of Bio-acoustic Fish Fence (BAFF) combining multiple stimuli to create a non-physical fish barrier/guidance structure (figure from Bowen et al. 2009). .......................................................................................................... 19 Figure 4-1. A schematic depicting deterrents and changing flow patterns associated with Alternative 1, Protect the Hudson. .............................................................. 24 Figure 4-2. Dry Canal reach between closure of Lock E21 and Guard Gate 7. .....................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Non-Native Freshwater Molluscs in the Neotropics: What Can Be Learned from Brazilian Reservoirs?
    Aquatic Invasions (2020) Volume 15, Issue 3: 455–472 CORRECTED PROOF Research Article Non-native freshwater molluscs in the Neotropics: what can be learned from Brazilian reservoirs? Igor Christo Miyahira*, Larissa Strictar Pereira and Luciano Neves dos Santos Instituto de Biociências, Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (IBIO/UNIRIO). Avenida Pasteur, 458 – Urca, 22290-250, Rio de Janeiro – RJ, Brazil *Corresponding author E-mail: [email protected] Citation: Miyahira IC, Pereira LS, dos Santos LN (2020) Non-native freshwater Abstract molluscs in the Neotropics: what can be learned from Brazilian reservoirs? Aquatic Habitat modification and the establishment of non-native species are two major Invasions 15(3): 455–472, https://doi.org/10. causes of biodiversity loss. Reservoirs modify habitat, can restrain the occurrence 3391/ai.2020.15.3.06 of native species, and allow the establishment of non-native undesirable organisms. Received: 16 April 2019 Non-native species are widespread. However, the status and distribution of some Accepted: 20 April 2020 invaders in these man-made systems remains unclear, especially in the Neotropics. Published: 24 June 2020 In this study, we surveyed digital databases to determine the distribution of non- native molluscs in Brazilian reservoirs. Studies on non-native molluscs in Brazilian Handling editor: Demetrio Boltovskoy reservoirs had been increasing steadily until they reached their peak in 2015. Eight Thematic editor: Ian Duggan non-native mollusc species were recorded in reservoirs in all river basins except for Copyright: © Miyahira et al. the Amazonas River. Non-native molluscs were reported in 74 reservoirs, mostly This is an open access article distributed under terms located within the Paraná River basin.
    [Show full text]
  • A Risk Assessment of the Golden Mussel, Limnoperna Fortunei (Dunker, 1857) for Ontario, Canada
    Management of Biological Invasions (2017) Volume 8, Issue 3: 383–402 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3391/mbi.2017.8.3.12 Open Access © 2017 The Author(s). Journal compilation © 2017 REABIC Special Issue: Management of Invasive Species in Inland Waters Risk Assessment A risk assessment of the golden mussel, Limnoperna fortunei (Dunker, 1857) for Ontario, Canada Gerald L. Mackie1,* and Jeff K. Brinsmead2 123 Avra Court, Guelph, Ontario, N1H 7B2 Canada 2Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, 300 Water Street, 2nd Floor South, Peterborough, ON K9J 8M5 Canada Author e-mails: [email protected] (GLM), [email protected] (JKB) *Corresponding author Received: 26 September 2016 / Accepted: 8 May 2017 / Published online: 24 June 2017 Handling editor: Frank Collas Editor’s note: This study was first presented at the 19th International Conference on Aquatic Invasive Species held in Winnipeg, Canada, April 10–14, 2016 (http://www.icais.org/html/previous19.html). This conference has provided a venue for the exchange of information on various aspects of aquatic invasive species since its inception in 1990. The conference continues to provide an opportunity for dialog between academia, industry and environmental regulators. Abstract The golden mussel, Limnoperna fortunei, is an epibenthic mytilid native to freshwaters of China and south-eastern Asia. It became established in Hong Kong in 1965, in Japan in the 1990’s and South America in 1991 through ballast water discharge into the La Plata River basin in Argentina. It has since expanded to Bolivia, Paraguay, Uruguay, and Brazil in South America. Populations have steadily increased in these countries since their first reported incidence.
    [Show full text]
  • Physiological Response of Invasive Mussel Limnoperna Fortunei (Dunker, 1857) (Bivalvia: Mytilidae) Submitted to Transport and Experimental Conditions N
    http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.15315 Original Article Physiological response of invasive mussel Limnoperna fortunei (Dunker, 1857) (Bivalvia: Mytilidae) submitted to transport and experimental conditions N. I. S. Cordeiroa,b, J. T. M. Andradea,c, L. C. Montresord, D. M. R. Luza,b, J. M. Araújoa, C. B. Martinezb, J. Pinheiroe and T. H. D. A. Vidigala,b* aLaboratório de Malacologia e Sistemática Molecular, Departamento de Zoologia, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais – UFMG, Campus Pampulha, Avenida Antônio Carlos, 6627, CEP 31270-901, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil bLaboratório de Estudos de Limnoperna fortunei – LELf, Centro de Pesquisas Hidráulicas e Recursos Hídricos, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais – UFMG, Campus Pampulha, Avenida Antônio Carlos, 6627, CEP 31270-901, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil cPrograma de Pós-graduação em Zoologia, Departamento de Zoologia, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais – UFMG, Campus Pampulha, Avenida Antônio Carlos, 6627, CEP 31270-901, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil dLaboratório de Malacologia, Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz – FIOCRUZ, Avenida Brasil, 4365, Manguinhos, CEP 21040-900, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil eLaboratório de Biofísica, Departamento de Ciências Fisiológicas, Instituto de Biologia, Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro – UFRRJ, BR 465, Km 7, CEP 23897-000, Seropédica, RJ, Brasil *e-mail: [email protected] Received: September 30, 2015 – Accepted: November 23, 2015 – Distributed: February 28, 2017 (With 2 figures) Abstract Successful animal rearing under laboratory conditions for commercial processes or laboratory experiments is a complex chain that includes several stressors (e.g., sampling and transport) and incurs, as a consequence, the reduction of natural animal conditions, economic losses and inconsistent and unreliable biological results.
    [Show full text]
  • Genomics and Transcriptomics of the Green Mussel Explain the Durability
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Genomics and transcriptomics of the green mussel explain the durability of its byssus Koji Inoue1*, Yuki Yoshioka1,2, Hiroyuki Tanaka3, Azusa Kinjo1, Mieko Sassa1,2, Ikuo Ueda4,5, Chuya Shinzato1, Atsushi Toyoda6 & Takehiko Itoh3 Mussels, which occupy important positions in marine ecosystems, attach tightly to underwater substrates using a proteinaceous holdfast known as the byssus, which is tough, durable, and resistant to enzymatic degradation. Although various byssal proteins have been identifed, the mechanisms by which it achieves such durability are unknown. Here we report comprehensive identifcation of genes involved in byssus formation through whole-genome and foot-specifc transcriptomic analyses of the green mussel, Perna viridis. Interestingly, proteins encoded by highly expressed genes include proteinase inhibitors and defense proteins, including lysozyme and lectins, in addition to structural proteins and protein modifcation enzymes that probably catalyze polymerization and insolubilization. This assemblage of structural and protective molecules constitutes a multi-pronged strategy to render the byssus highly resistant to environmental insults. Mussels of the bivalve family Mytilidae occur in a variety of environments from freshwater to deep-sea. Te family incudes ecologically important taxa such as coastal species of the genera Mytilus and Perna, the freshwa- ter mussel, Limnoperna fortuneri, and deep-sea species of the genus Bathymodiolus, which constitute keystone species in their respective ecosystems 1. One of the most important characteristics of mussels is their capacity to attach to underwater substrates using a structure known as the byssus, a proteinous holdfast consisting of threads and adhesive plaques (Fig. 1)2. Using the byssus, mussels ofen form dense clusters called “mussel beds.” Te piled-up structure of mussel beds enables mussels to support large biomass per unit area, and also creates habitat for other species in these communities 3,4.
    [Show full text]
  • Study on Invasive Alien Species – Development of Risk Assessments: Final Report (Year 1) - Annex 5: Risk Assessment for Limnoperna Fortunei
    Study on Invasive Alien Species – Development of Risk Assessments: Final Report (year 1) - Annex 5: Risk assessment for Limnoperna fortunei Study on Invasive Alien Species – Development of risk assessments to tackle priority species and enhance prevention Contract No 07.0202/2016/740982/ETU/ENV.D2 Final Report Annex 5: Risk Assessment for Limnoperna fortunei Dunker (1857) February 2020 1 Study on Invasive Alien Species – Development of Risk Assessments: Final Report (year 1) - Annex 5: Risk assessment for Limnoperna fortunei Risk assessment template developed under the "Study on Invasive Alien Species – Development of risk assessments to tackle priority species and enhance prevention" Contract No 07.0202/2016/740982/ETU/ENV.D2 Based on the Risk Assessment Scheme developed by the GB Non-Native Species Secretariat (GB Non-Native Risk Assessment - GBNNRA) Name of organism: Limnoperna fortunei Dunker (1857) Author(s) of the assessment: Frances Lucy, CERIS, Institute of Technology, Sligo, Ireland Elena Tricarico, University of Florence, Italy Risk Assessment Area: The risk assessment area is the territory of the European Union (excluding the outermost regions) and the United Kingdom Peer review 1: Michael Millane, Inland Fisheries Ireland Peer review 2: Robert Tanner, European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization (EPPO/OEPP), Paris, France This risk assessment has been peer-reviewed by two independent experts and discussed during a joint expert workshop. Details on the review and how comments were addressed are available in the
    [Show full text]
  • The Scientific Literature on Limnoperna Fortunei
    Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências (2014) 86(3): 1373-1383 (Annals of the Brazilian Academy of Sciences) Printed version ISSN 0001-3765 / Online version ISSN 1678-2690 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0001-3765201420130281 www.scielo.br/aabc The scientific literature on Limnoperna fortunei (Dunker 1857) from 1982 to 2012 FABIANA G. BARBOSA National Museum of Natural Sciences/CSIC, C/José Gutiérrez Abascal, 2, 2806, Madrid, Spain Manuscript received on July 10, 2013; accepted for publication on December 10, 2013 ABSTRACT Limnoperna fortunei (golden mussel) is a freshwater bivalve native to Southeast Asia, but is becoming an invasive species in several aquatic ecosystems in the world. In this study, a scientometric analysis was performed to identify the patterns, trends and gaps of knowledge for this invasive species. A survey of the published literature was conducted using the database of the Thomson Institute for Scientific Information (ISI). A total of 107 papers were surveyed that were published between 1982 and 2012 in 60 journals. The number of papers on L. fortunei over the years has increased, especially within the last eight years of the study period. Argentina, Brazil, and Japan are the countries that contributed the most papers to the literature on invasive bivalve. The majority of papers were field-observational studies. Among some important gaps that need to be addressed are the relatively small number and/or lack of studies conducted in the native countries and in countries invaded by L. fortunei, the lack of internationally collaborative publications in these countries, as well as a low number of internationally collaborative studies.
    [Show full text]
  • First Record of the Invasive Brackish Water Mytilid Limnoperna Securis (Lamarck, 1819) in the Bay of Biscay
    Aquatic Invasions (2012) Volume 7, Issue 2: 171–180 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3391/ai.2012.7.2.003 Open Access © 2012 The Author(s). Journal compilation © 2012 REABIC Research Article First record of the invasive brackish water mytilid Limnoperna securis (Lamarck, 1819) in the Bay of Biscay Idoia Adarraga* and Julián Martínez Sociedad Cultural INSUB. Museo Okendo. Apdo. 3223, 20080 Donostia-San Sebastián, Spain E-mail: [email protected] *Corresponding author Received: 2 March 2011 / Accepted: 17 June 2011 / Published online: 30 June 2011 Abstract The occurrence of the non-indigenous species Limnoperna securis belonging to Mytilidae family is recorded for the first time in the Bay of Biscay. Numerous individuals were collected in intertidal and shallow waters in the inner part of Nervión estuary (Bizkaia, Basque Country, SE Bay of Biscay). In the present paper, notes about the history of this small brown mussel invasion, vectors of introduction and dispersal, as well as consequences of invasion are discussed. Key words: invasive species, biological invasion, vectors, ecological traits, Nervión estuary, Mytilidae Introduction (Lamarck, 1819). The first one was reported by Bachelet et al. (2008) in the Bidasoa estuary, Maritime traffic across the oceans and culturing whereas the second one is presented here. of non-native organisms at the edge of the sea Limnoperna is one of more than 30 genera in contributed to the spread and establishment of an the Mytilidae family, which includes a group of ever increasing number of alien species in relatively small bivalve molluscans. To date, the coastal and brackish water environments (Reise Limnoperna genus comprises nine valid species: et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Limnoperna Fortunei Global Invasive
    FULL ACCOUNT FOR: Limnoperna fortunei Limnoperna fortunei System: Freshwater Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Animalia Mollusca Bivalvia Mytiloida Mytilidae Common name golden mussel (English), mejillón dorado (Spanish), mexilhão- dourado (Portuguese, Brazil) Synonym Limnoperna depressa , (Brandt & Temcharoen, 1971) Limnoperna lacustris , (Morton, 1973) Limnoperna siamensis Limnoperna supoti , (Brandt, 1974) Modiola lacustris Volsella fortunei , Dunker, 1857 Similar species Dreissena polymorpha, Mytella charruana Summary Limnoperna fortunei (or golden mussel) is an epifaunal mytilid, native to Chinese and south-eastern Asian rivers and creeks. It became established in Hong Kong in 1965, and in Japan and Taiwan in the 1990's. In 1991 it invaded America through the Plata Basin in South America. Limnoperna fortunei modifies the presence and abundance of native macroinvertebrate fauna. It causes great economic damage to water intakes and cooling systems of facilities.[Español] view this species on IUCN Red List Species Description The shell is dark brown above the umbonal keel and a yellow brown below. The interior of the shell with the nacreous layer, is purple above and white below the keel. The umbones are nearly terminal and the dorsal ligamental margin is straight or slightly curved. The ventral margin of the shell is a variable feature within specimens. There are no hinge teeth and no byssal notch. Similar species include Mytella charruana (d'Orbigny, 1842) and Dreissena polymorpha (Pallas, 1771), the zebra mussel. Lifecycle Stages Trocophore is the first planktonic stage (hours). Several stages of free-swimming planktonic veliger (D-larvae about 7 days, between 80-146 um; veliconcha between 90-237 um and pediveliger or umbonate, more than 256 um).
    [Show full text]
  • Para Especies Exóticas En México Limnoperna Fortunei (Dunker, 1857)
    Método de Evaluación Rápida de Invasividad (MERI) para especies exóticas en México Limnoperna fortunei (Dunker, 1857) Limnoperna fortunei (Dunker, 1857) Foto: Gustavo A. Darrigran. Fuente: Invasive Species Compendium. Limnoperna fortunei modifica la presencia y abundancia de la fauna de microinvertebrados nativos (GISD, 2005), las dietas de los peces, y sus altas tasas de filtración causan un impacto ambiental al cambiar las condiciones ecológicas en las zonas colonizadas (CABI, 2016). Esto causa un gran daño económico para las tomas de agua y las instalaciones de los sistemas de refrigeración (GISD, 2005). Información taxonómica Reino: Animalia Phylum: Mollusca Clase: Bivalvia Orden: Mytilida Familia: Mytilidae Género: Limnoperna Especie: Limnoperna fortunei (Dunker, 1857) Nombre común: Mejillón dorado. Resultado: 0.5570 Categoría de riesgo: Muy alto 1 Método de Evaluación Rápida de Invasividad (MERI) para especies exóticas en México Limnoperna fortunei (Dunker, 1857) Descripción de la especie La concha de los adultos es de color marrón oscuro por encima de la quilla y de un amarillo-marrón pálido en la parte de abajo. El nácar del interior de la concha es púrpura por encima y blanco por debajo de la quilla. La capa periostracal exterior de la cáscara es lisa y brillante, y gruesa, donde se curva hacia el interior en el margen de la cáscara. En el agua clara, se ve de color oro (CABI, 2016). Distribución original Nativa de China y sudeste de los ríos y arroyos de Asia (CABI, 2016). Estatus: Exótica no presente en México ¿Existen las condiciones climáticas adecuadas para que la especie se establezca en México? Sí 1. Reporte de invasora Especie exótica invasora: Es aquella especie o población que no es nativa, que se encuentra fuera de su ámbito de distribución natural, que es capaz de sobrevivir, reproducirse y establecerse en hábitats y ecosistemas naturales y que amenaza la diversidad biológica nativa, la economía o la salud pública (LGVS, 2010).
    [Show full text]
  • Limnoperna Fortunei) on Phytoplankton and Nutrient Cycling
    Aquatic Invasions (2012) Volume 7, Issue 1: 91–100 doi: 10.3391/ai.2012.7.1.010 (Open Access) © 2012 The Author(s). Journal compilation © 2012 REABIC Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Aquatic Invasive Species (29 August-2 September 2010, San Diego, USA) Research Article Impact of the invasive golden mussel (Limnoperna fortunei) on phytoplankton and nutrient cycling Daniel Cataldo1,2,3,*, Inés O´ Farrell1,2,, Esteban Paolucci2,3, Francisco Sylvester1,2 and Demetrio Boltovskoy1,2,3 1 Departamento de Ecología, Genética y Evolución, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Universidad de Buenos Aires, 1428 Buenos Aires, Argentina 2 Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas, Argentina 3 Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales “Bernardino Rivadavia”, Argentina E-mail: [email protected] (DC), [email protected] (IOF), [email protected] (EP), [email protected] (FS), [email protected] (DB) *Corresponding author Received: 20 March 2011 / Accepted: 26 May 2011 / Published online: 6 June 2011 Abstract In order to evaluate the effects of the golden mussel Limnoperna fortunei on phytoplankton density and composition and nutrient recycling we conducted a 24 h filtration experiment in Río Tercero Reservoir (Argentina) using four 400 L mesocosms, two of them stocked with 1700-1800 adult mussels each, and two controls (without mussels). Nutrient concentrations and phytoplankton composition and density were evaluated at 0, 3, 6, 12, and 24 h. Estimated filtration rates were 1.48-3.14 mL mg DW-1 h-1. Grazing pressure by the mussel was not associated with algal taxonomy or cell size.
    [Show full text]
  • Limnoperna Fortunei (Dunker, 1857)
    Limnoperna fortunei (Dunker, 1857) Diagnostic features Limnoperna fortunei is very similar to Xenostrobus securis. Limnoperna is typically yellowish in colour (it is commonly known as the golden mussel), while Xenostrobus is typically brown to black. Also, young specimens of X. securis have zig-zag brown markings not seen in Limnoperna. Xenostrobus securis has been Limnoperna fortunei (adult size up to 45 mm) referred to Limnoperna by several authors, however this relationship requires further investigation. Classification Limnoperna fortunei(Dunker, 1857) Common name: Golden mussel Class Bivalvia I nfraclass Pteriomorphia Cohort Mytilomorphi Order Mytilida Superfamily Mytiloidea Family Mytilidae Genus Limnoperna (Type species Dreissena siamensis Morelet, 1866 = L. fortunei). Original name: Volsella fortunei Dunker, 1857. Dunker, G. (1857).Mytilacea nova collections Cumingianae Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 24: 358-366. Type locality: China. Synonyms: Dreissena siamensis Morelet, 1866; Modiola lacustris Martens, 1875; Limnoperna lemeslei Rochebrune, 1882; Modiola cambodjensis Clessin, 1889; Mytilus martensi Neumayer, 1898; Limnoperna depressa Brandt & Temcharoen, 1971; Limnoperna supoti Brandt, 1974 (and others). Biology and ecology Limnoperna fortunei is a filter feeder found in brackish and fresh water. t can occur in great numbers, and populations can grow very rapidly. The preferred habitat of Limnoperna fortunei is on rocks and gravel, or any other hard surface, where it attaches to the substrate with a byssus. Distribution Native to China, but introduced into other parts of Asia as well as South America. Notes Limnoperna fortunei isan invasive brackish and freshwater species. There is often an associated decline in the presence of native freshwater bivalves in areas where it has invaded.
    [Show full text]
  • Plano De Recursos Hídricos Da Bacia Hidrográfica Do Rio Camboriú E Bacias Contíguas Secretaria De Estado Do Desenvolvimento Econômico Sustentável – SDS ______
    Plano de Recursos Hídricos da Bacia Hidrográfica do Rio Camboriú e Bacias Contíguas Secretaria de Estado do Desenvolvimento Econômico Sustentável – SDS ___________________________________________________________________ PLANO DE RECURSOS HÍDRICOS DA BACIA HIDROGRÁFICA DO RIO CAMBORIÚ E BACIAS CONTÍGUAS ETAPA B: DIAGNÓSTICO SOCIOECONÔMICO E AMBIENTAL DA ÁREA DE ABRANGÊNCIA DO PLANO DE RECURSOS HÍDRICOS DA BACIA HIDROGRÁFICA DO RIO CAMBORIÚ E BACIAS CONTÍGUAS Preparado para: (Agosto/2017) Plano de Recursos Hídricos da Bacia Hidrográfica do Rio Camboriú e Bacias Contíguas Secretaria de Estado do Desenvolvimento Econômico Sustentável – SDS ___________________________________________________________________ IDENTIFICAÇÃO E CODIFICAÇÃO DO RELATÓRIO Código do Documento: PBHC-ETAPA_B-Diagnóstico-Socioambiental- CERTI-CEV-2017_final Título do Relatório Diagnóstico socioeconômico e ambiental da área de abrangência do plano de Recursos Hídricos da Bacia Hidrográfica do Rio Camboriú e Bacias Contíguas Aprovação Inicial por: Data de aprovação inicial: Controle de Revisões Aprovação Revisão n° Natureza Data Nome Rubrica 0 Minuta 05/09/2016 1 Relatório Final 22/11/2016 2 Relatório Final 24/02/0217 3 Relatório Final 08/08/0217 Plano de Recursos Hídricos da Bacia Hidrográfica do Rio Camboriú e Bacias Contíguas Secretaria de Estado do Desenvolvimento Econômico Sustentável – SDS ___________________________________________________________________ SUMÁRIO Plano de Recursos Hídricos da Bacia Hidrográfica do Rio Camboriú e Bacias Contíguas Secretaria de Estado
    [Show full text]