DOCSLIB.ORG

[Baseline Ecological Risk Assessment for San Jacinto

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
[Baseline Ecological Risk Assessment for San Jacinto BASELINE ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT SAN JACINTO RIVER WASTE PITS SUPERFUND SITE Prepared for McGinnes Industrial Maintenance Corporation International Paper Company U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6 Prepared by Integral Consulting Inc. 411 1st Avenue S, Suite 550 Seattle, Washington 98104 August 2012 Revised May 2013 BASELINE ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT SAN JACINTO RIVER WASTE PITS SUPERFUND SITE Prepared for McGinnes Industrial Maintenance Corporation International Paper Company U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6 Prepared by Integral Consulting Inc. 411 1st Avenue S, Suite 550 Seattle, Washington 98104 August 2012 Revised May 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1 Purpose ......................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Document Organization .............................................................................................. 1-2 2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Site Setting and General Conceptual Site Models ...................................................... 2-1 2.2 Baseline Risk Assessment Datasets and Data Treatment Rules ................................. 2-3 2.2.1 Baseline Dataset ...................................................................................................... 2-3 2.2.2 Data Treatment Rules ............................................................................................. 2-5 3 PROBLEM FORMULATION ........................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Chemicals of Potential Ecological Concern ................................................................ 3-2 3.2 Overview of Ecological Effects .................................................................................... 3-2 3.2.1 Evaluating Exposure and Toxicity of “Dioxin-Like” Compounds ....................... 3-3 3.2.2 TEQ Nomenclature ................................................................................................ 3-4 3.2.3 Mechanisms of Toxicity ......................................................................................... 3-5 3.2.4 Overview of Toxicity to Ecological Receptors...................................................... 3-6 3.2.4.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrates ......................................................................... 3-6 3.2.4.2 Fish ................................................................................................................. 3-7 3.2.4.3 Reptiles ........................................................................................................... 3-8 3.2.4.4 Birds ................................................................................................................ 3-9 3.2.4.5 Mammals ........................................................................................................ 3-9 3.3 Fate and Transport of Chemicals of Potential Ecological Concern ......................... 3-10 3.4 Ecosystems Potentially at Risk .................................................................................. 3-11 3.4.1 Upland Habitats .................................................................................................... 3-11 3.4.2 Upland Wildlife .................................................................................................... 3-12 3.4.3 Aquatic and Riparian Habitats ............................................................................. 3-12 3.4.3.1 Fish and Invertebrates ................................................................................. 3-13 3.4.3.2 Shorelines and Wetlands ............................................................................. 3-13 3.4.3.3 Aquatic Wildlife .......................................................................................... 3-14 3.4.3.4 Effect of TCRA Construction ...................................................................... 3-15 3.4.4 Endangered and Threatened Species at the Site ................................................. 3-16 Baseline Ecological Risk Assessment August 2012; Revised May 2013 San Jacinto River Waste Pits Superfund Site iii 090557-01 3.5 Ecological Receptors and Receptor Surrogates ......................................................... 3-18 3.6 Assessment Endpoints and Risk Questions ............................................................... 3-19 3.7 Ecological Conceptual Site Models ........................................................................... 3-20 3.8 Ecological Risk Analysis Plan .................................................................................... 3-21 3.8.1 Ecological Risk Assessment Approach ................................................................ 3-21 3.8.2 Exposure Assessment ............................................................................................ 3-23 3.8.2.1 Measures of Exposure .................................................................................. 3-23 3.8.2.2 Exposure Units and Calculation of Exposure Point Concentrations ........ 3-24 3.8.2.3 Exposure Algorithms ................................................................................... 3-25 3.8.2.4 Exposure Assumptions ................................................................................ 3-25 3.8.3 Effects Assessment ................................................................................................ 3-26 3.8.4 Risk Characterization and Uncertainty Analysis................................................ 3-27 3.8.4.1 Calculation of Hazard Quotients ................................................................ 3-27 3.8.4.2 Probabilistic Risk Evaluation ...................................................................... 3-28 3.8.4.3 Evaluation of Post-TCRA Risk ................................................................... 3-29 3.8.4.4 Risks to Populations of Ecological Receptors ............................................ 3-29 3.8.4.5 Comparison of Site Risks to Background ................................................... 3-29 4 EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................. 4-1 4.1 Exposure of Benthic Macroinvertebrates ................................................................... 4-1 4.1.1 Estimated Porewater Concentrations .................................................................... 4-2 4.1.2 Datasets Used to Evaluate Risk to Benthic Macroinvertebrates .......................... 4-4 4.1.3 Results of the Benthic Macroinvertebrate Exposure Evaluation ......................... 4-5 4.2 Exposure of Fish ........................................................................................................... 4-5 4.2.1 COPCE Concentrations in Fish Diets ..................................................................... 4-6 4.2.2 Estimated Concentrations of Selected COPCEs in Surface Water ....................... 4-7 4.2.3 Concentrations of PCBs and Dioxin-Like Compounds in Whole Fish ............... 4-8 4.2.4 Unit Conversions .................................................................................................... 4-9 4.2.5 Datasets Used to Evaluate Exposure to Fish ........................................................ 4-10 4.2.6 Results of Fish Exposure Assessment .................................................................. 4-11 4.3 Exposure of Reptiles, Mammals, and Birds ............................................................... 4-12 4.3.1 Wildlife Exposure Model ..................................................................................... 4-13 4.3.1.1 Ingestion of Multiple Prey Types ............................................................... 4-14 4.3.1.2 Relative Bioavailability Adjustment Factor ............................................... 4-15 Baseline Ecological Risk Assessment August 2012; Revised May 2013 San Jacinto River Waste Pits Superfund Site iv 090557-01 4.3.1.3 Unit Conversions ......................................................................................... 4-18 4.3.1.4 Estimation of Concentrations in Whole Fish ............................................ 4-19 4.3.1.5 Concentrations of COPCEs in Foods of Alligator Snapping Turtle, Killdeer, Raccoon, and Marsh Rice Rat .................................................................... 4-19 4.3.1.6 Wildlife Exposure Units .............................................................................. 4-25 4.3.1.7 Calculation of Exposure Point Concentrations .......................................... 4-27 4.3.1.8 Data Used ..................................................................................................... 4-29 4.3.1.9 Results .......................................................................................................... 4-29 4.3.2 Estimated TEQ Concentrations in Bird Eggs ...................................................... 4-30 4.3.2.1 Estimating Dioxins and Furans in Bird Eggs .............................................. 4-30 4.3.2.2 Estimating PCB Concentrations in Bird Eggs ............................................ 4-34 4.3.2.3 Egg Exposure Scenarios ............................................................................... 4-37 4.4 Probabilistic Exposure Assessment ..........................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Molluscs (Mollusca: Gastropoda, Bivalvia, Polyplacophora)
    Gulf of Mexico Science Volume 34 Article 4 Number 1 Number 1/2 (Combined Issue) 2018 Molluscs (Mollusca: Gastropoda, Bivalvia, Polyplacophora) of Laguna Madre, Tamaulipas, Mexico: Spatial and Temporal Distribution Martha Reguero Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Andrea Raz-Guzmán Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México DOI: 10.18785/goms.3401.04 Follow this and additional works at: https://aquila.usm.edu/goms Recommended Citation Reguero, M. and A. Raz-Guzmán. 2018. Molluscs (Mollusca: Gastropoda, Bivalvia, Polyplacophora) of Laguna Madre, Tamaulipas, Mexico: Spatial and Temporal Distribution. Gulf of Mexico Science 34 (1). Retrieved from https://aquila.usm.edu/goms/vol34/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by The Aquila Digital Community. It has been accepted for inclusion in Gulf of Mexico Science by an authorized editor of The Aquila Digital Community. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Reguero and Raz-Guzmán: Molluscs (Mollusca: Gastropoda, Bivalvia, Polyplacophora) of Lagu Gulf of Mexico Science, 2018(1), pp. 32–55 Molluscs (Mollusca: Gastropoda, Bivalvia, Polyplacophora) of Laguna Madre, Tamaulipas, Mexico: Spatial and Temporal Distribution MARTHA REGUERO AND ANDREA RAZ-GUZMA´ N Molluscs were collected in Laguna Madre from seagrass beds, macroalgae, and bare substrates with a Renfro beam net and an otter trawl. The species list includes 96 species and 48 families. Six species are dominant (Bittiolum varium, Costoanachis semiplicata, Brachidontes exustus, Crassostrea virginica, Chione cancellata, and Mulinia lateralis) and 25 are commercially important (e.g., Strombus alatus, Busycoarctum coarctatum, Triplofusus giganteus, Anadara transversa, Noetia ponderosa, Brachidontes exustus, Crassostrea virginica, Argopecten irradians, Argopecten gibbus, Chione cancellata, Mercenaria campechiensis, and Rangia flexuosa).
    [Show full text]
  • Oyster Research and Restoration in U.S
    ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This work is a result of research sponsored in part by NOAA Office of Sea Grant, U.S. Department of Commerce. The U.S. Government is authorized to produce and distribute reprints for governmental purposes notwithstanding any copyright notation that may appear hereon. VSG-03-03 http://www. virginia.edu/virginia-sea-grant MSG-UM-SG-TS-2003-01 http://www.mdsg.umd.edu OYSTER RESEARCH AND RESTORATION IN U.S. COASTAL WATERS WORKSHOP PURPOSE AND GOALS The NOAA National Sea Grant College program has made a substantial commitment to research on numerous aspects of the domestic oyster fishery. 1bis commitment represents a long-term, focused effort that has led to greater understanding of the biological, molecular genetic and ecological characteristics of these bivalves and the diseases that now impact them in U.S. coastal waters. The achievements of the Oyster Disease Research Program (ODRP) cover multiple areas, including the development of new tools for disease diagnosis, the successful breeding of disease resistant oyster strains, the development of new models of the interaction of disease and environmental factors and the development of a new understanding of the disease process at the cellular level. The Gulf Oyster Industry Program (GOIP) has extended this research to the Gulf of Mexico fishery and in addition has supported innovative research focused on numerous aspects of pathogens in oysters-including rapid detection and enumeration, new processing methods to ensure public health - while gaining an understanding of the impact ofharmful algal species. A strong, collaborative interaction with industry partners has been a hallmark of this program.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • Studies on Molluscan Shells: Contributions from Microscopic and Analytical Methods
    Micron 40 (2009) 669–690 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Micron journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/micron Review Studies on molluscan shells: Contributions from microscopic and analytical methods Silvia Maria de Paula, Marina Silveira * Instituto de Fı´sica, Universidade de Sa˜o Paulo, 05508-090 Sa˜o Paulo, SP, Brazil ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Article history: Molluscan shells have always attracted the interest of researchers, from biologists to physicists, from Received 25 April 2007 paleontologists to materials scientists. Much information is available at present, on the elaborate Received in revised form 7 May 2009 architecture of the shell, regarding the various Mollusc classes. The crystallographic characterization of Accepted 10 May 2009 the different shell layers, as well as their physical and chemical properties have been the subject of several investigations. In addition, many researches have addressed the characterization of the biological Keywords: component of the shell and the role it plays in the hard exoskeleton assembly, that is, the Mollusca biomineralization process. All these topics have seen great advances in the last two or three decades, Shell microstructures expanding our knowledge on the shell properties, in terms of structure, functions and composition. This Electron microscopy Infrared spectroscopy involved the use of a range of specialized and modern techniques, integrating microscopic methods with X-ray diffraction biochemistry, molecular biology procedures and spectroscopy. However, the factors governing synthesis Electron diffraction of a specific crystalline carbonate phase in any particular layer of the shell and the interplay between organic and inorganic components during the biomineral assembly are still not widely known. This present survey deals with microstructural aspects of molluscan shells, as disclosed through use of scanning electron microscopy and related analytical methods (microanalysis, X-ray diffraction, electron diffraction and infrared spectroscopy).
    [Show full text]
  • Full Text in Pdf Format
    MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES Vol. 118: 167-177, 1995 Published March 9 Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. Prey preferences of blue crabs Callinectes sapidus feeding on three bivalve species Elizabeth L. Ebersole*, Victor S. Kennedy*' University of Maryland System, Horn Point Environmental Laboratory, PO Box 775, Cambridge. Maryland 21613. USA ABSTRACT: Individual blue crabs Callinectes sapidus were allowed to forage on 3 bivalve species (soft clam Mya arenaria; Atlantic rangia clam Rangia cuneata; hooked mussel Ischadium recurvum), with 2 of the 3 species made available together at one time in 220 1 aquaria. In 3 separate sets of experiments, we examined the blue crab's consumption and preferences between 2 bivalve species of different prof- itabilities [(netenergy intake)/(handling time); J S-']: M. arenaria and R. cuneata, M. arenaria and I. recurvum, and R. cuneata and I. recurvum. These experiments also examined the effects of 3 additional factors on prey consumption and prey preference: prey location (near to or distant from point of intro- duction of crab), prey refuge availability (shallow or deep sand for the clams; detached or clustered for the hooked mussel), and prey density (high or low numbers). Profitability curves correctly predicted that the blue crab preferred the highly profitable soft clam over the less energetically profitable Atlantic rangm clam. When the difference between prey profitabllities was not as great (i.e. between the soft dam and the hooked mussel, and between the Atlantic rangia clam and the hooked mussel) profitability alone was not a clear predictor of blue crab preference. Prey refuge availability signifi- cantly affected prey preference; deep sand provided (1)a greater refuge for the soft clam than for the Atlantic rangia clam and (2) a greater refuge for the soft clam than clustering provided for the hooked mussel.
    [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]
  • Effects of Short-Duration and Diel-Cycling Hypoxia on Predation
    diversity Article Effects of Short-Duration and Diel-Cycling Hypoxia on Predation of Mussels and Oysters in Two Tributaries of the Chesapeake Bay Ellen Neff 1, Jessica MacGregor 2 and Keryn B. Gedan 2,* 1 Lab Animal, Nature Research, Springer Nature, New York, NY 10004, USA; [email protected] 2 Biological Sciences, George Washington University, Washington, DC 20052, USA; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-617-519-9834 Received: 10 February 2020; Accepted: 23 February 2020; Published: 26 February 2020 Abstract: Although the effects of persistent hypoxia have been well established, few studies have explored the community-level effects of short-duration and diel-cycling hypoxia, for example on predator–prey interactions. Consumer stress models predict that mobile predators will flee hypoxia, while prey stress models predict that sessile species, unable to avoid hypoxic water, will be more susceptible to predation. To test these hypotheses, we studied the effects of diel-cycling hypoxia on predation of the hooked mussel, Ischadium recurvum, and eastern oyster, Crassostrea virginica, in field experiments in two Chesapeake Bay, USA tributaries. We conducted a complementary laboratory experiment that tested the impact of short-duration hypoxia on predation of the two bivalve species by the ecologically and commercially important blue crab, Callinectes sapidus. Although we did not observe a significant effect of diel-cycling hypoxia on predation in the field, we did observe an effect of short-duration hypoxia in the laboratory. Callinectes sapidus exhibited depressed feeding rates and reduced preference for I. recurvum in hypoxic conditions. In both field and lab results, we observed a strong preference of predators for I.
    [Show full text]
  • Biology of the Oyster Sam Weller Was Speaking of the Flat Oyster (Ostrea Edulis) and the Poor in England
    NOTE: To make this publication searchable, the text in this pdf was scanned from the original out-of-print publication. It is possible that the scanning process may have introduced text errors. If there is a question about accuracy, please check a copy of the orginal printed document at libraries or download an electronic, non- searchable version from the Pell Depository: http://nsgd.gso.uri.edu/aqua/ mdut81003.pdf Biology It’s a wery remarkable circumstance, sir,” said Sam, “that poverty and oysters always seems to go togeth - er.” “I don’t understand, Sam,” said Mr. Pickwick. “What I mean, sir,” said Sam, “is, that the poorer a place is, the greater call there seems to be for oysters. Look here, sir; here’s a oyster stall to every half- dozen houses. The streets lined vith ‘em. Blessed if I don’t think that ven a man’s wery poor, he rushes out of his lodgings and eats oysters in reg’lar despera - tion.” —Pickwick Papers, C. Dickens (1836) Biology of the Oyster Sam Weller was speaking of the flat oyster (Ostrea edulis) and the poor in England. At that time, about 500 million oysters were sold at Billingsgate every year, resulting in a cheap and readily available foodstuff (Gross and Smyth 1946). However, the production of the fishery declined throughout Europe until the oys- ter became too expensive for the poor. Eventually, flat oysters were maintained mainly by culture in areas representing only a portion of their former range. In discussing this decline, Gross and Smyth (1946) felt that two major and interre- lated causes for the decline were (1) overfishing and (2) the resultant conse- quence of a severely reduced population of oysters.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Microplastic Ingestion on the Bivalve Filtration Efficiency of the Hooked Mussel (Ischadium Recurvum)
    The Impact of Microplastic Ingestion on the Bivalve Filtration Efficiency of the Hooked Mussel (Ischadium recurvum) Matthew Betsill - Computer Science Juan Gonzalez - Environmental Horticulture & Crop/Soil Sciences Allison Woods - Computational Modeling and Data Analytics Research Proposal for UH 1604: Honors Research Practices at Virginia Tech May 1, 2019 ABSTRACT Microplastic pollution is an increasing issue as sea animals are observed with pollutants within their bodies and cells. Mussels and other marine bivalves have the capability to filter phytoplanktonic organisms and chemical pollutants, but cannot break down microplastics if ingested. Because bivalves filter pollutants out of the water, many kinds of debris enter their systems. It is hypothesized that microplastics will reduce the efficiency of the Ischadium recurvum and its ability to filter toxins that deteriorate water quality. This study will determine the effect of intaking 5 to 50-micrometer diameter plastic on the filtering efficiency of Ischadium recurvum. The experiment will prepare two 10-gallon water samples with 34% salinity and water turbidity of ~100 NTU from the algae concentration for mussels’ environment. Twelve mussels will be collected from the York River to measure the nutrient concentration, dissolved oxygen concentration, water transparency, and chlorophyll concentration to determine the water quality before and after the filtration in both the controlled and polluted environment. A comparison of the two water quality results will determine how microplastics have affected the mussels’ filtration. The mussels are expected to completely filter out the contaminants in the control test and experimental trial with microplastic contaminants, albeit at a slower rate. With a bivalve system, mussels can capture particles at a low nutritive value, which will slow down consumption, but leave little filtration difference.
    [Show full text]
  • Noaa 13648 DS1.Pdf
    r LOAI<CO Qpy N Guide to Gammon Tidal IVlarsh Invertebrates of the Northeastern Gulf of IVlexico by Richard W. Heard UniversityofSouth Alabama, Mobile, AL 36688 and CiulfCoast Research Laboratory, Ocean Springs, MS39564" Illustrations by rimed:tul""'"' ' "=tel' ""'Oo' OR" Iindu B. I utz URt,i',"::.:l'.'.;,',-'-.,":,':::.';..-'",r;»:.",'> i;."<l'IPUS Is,i<'<i":-' "l;~:», li I lb~'ab2 Thisv,ork isa resultofreseaich sponsored inpart by the U.S. Department ofCommerce, NOAA, Office ofSea Grant, underGrani Nos. 04 8 Mol 92,NA79AA D 00049,and NA81AA D 00050, bythe Mississippi Alabama SeaGrant Consortium, byche University ofSouth Alabama, bythe Gulf Coast Research Laboratory, andby the Marine EnvironmentalSciences Consortium. TheU.S. Government isauthorized toproduce anddistribute reprints forgovern- inentalpurposes notwithstanding anycopyright notation that may appear hereon. *Preseitt address. This Handbook is dedicated to WILL HOLMES friend and gentleman Copyright! 1982by Mississippi hlabama SeaGrant Consortium and R. W. Heard All rightsreserved. No part of thisbook may be reproduced in any manner without permissionfrom the author. Printed by Reinbold Lithographing& PrintingCo., BooneviBe,MS 38829. CONTENTS 27 PREFACE FamilyMysidae OrderTanaidacea Tanaids!,....... 28 INTRODUCTION FamilyParatanaidae........, .. 29 30 SALTMARSH INVERTEBRATES ., FamilyApseudidae,......,... Order Cumacea 30 PhylumCnidaria =Coelenterata!......, . FamilyNannasticidae......,... 31 32 Class Anthozoa OrderIsopoda Isopods! 32 Fainily Edwardsiidae. FamilyAnthuridae
    [Show full text]
  • (Bivalvia: Mytilidae) Reveal Convergent Evolution of Siphon Traits
    applyparastyle “fig//caption/p[1]” parastyle “FigCapt” Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2020, XX, 1–21. With 7 figures. Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/advance-article/doi/10.1093/zoolinnean/zlaa011/5802836 by Iowa State University user on 13 August 2020 Phylogeny and anatomy of marine mussels (Bivalvia: Mytilidae) reveal convergent evolution of siphon traits Jorge A. Audino1*, , Jeanne M. Serb2, , and José Eduardo A. R. Marian1, 1Department of Zoology, University of São Paulo, Rua do Matão, Travessa 14, n. 101, 05508-090 São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil 2Department of Ecology, Evolution & Organismal Biology, Iowa State University, 2200 Osborn Dr., Ames, IA 50011, USA Received 29 November 2019; revised 22 January 2020; accepted for publication 28 January 2020 Convergent morphology is a strong indication of an adaptive trait. Marine mussels (Mytilidae) have long been studied for their ecology and economic importance. However, variation in lifestyle and phenotype also make them suitable models for studies focused on ecomorphological correlation and adaptation. The present study investigates mantle margin diversity and ecological transitions in the Mytilidae to identify macroevolutionary patterns and test for convergent evolution. A fossil-calibrated phylogenetic hypothesis of Mytilidae is inferred based on five genes for 33 species (19 genera). Morphological variation in the mantle margin is examined in 43 preserved species (25 genera) and four focal species are examined for detailed anatomy. Trait evolution is investigated by ancestral state estimation and correlation tests. Our phylogeny recovers two main clades derived from an epifaunal ancestor. Subsequently, different lineages convergently shifted to other lifestyles: semi-infaunal or boring into hard substrate.
    [Show full text]
  • Restoration Potential of Several Native Species of Bivalve Molluscs for Water Quality Improvement in Mid-Atlantic Watersheds
    Journal of Shellfish Research, Vol. 37, No. 5, 1121–1157, 2018. RESTORATION POTENTIAL OF SEVERAL NATIVE SPECIES OF BIVALVE MOLLUSCS FOR WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT IN MID-ATLANTIC WATERSHEDS DANIELLE A. KREEGER,1* CATHERINE M. GATENBY2 AND PETER W. BERGSTROM3 1Partnership for the Delaware Estuary, 110 S. Poplar Street, Suite 202, Wilmington, DE 19063; 2U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Lower Great Lakes Fish and Wildlife Conservation Office, 1101 Casey Road, Basom, NY 14013; 3PO Box 504, Saxtons River, VT 05154 ABSTRACT Bivalve molluscs provide water quality benefits throughout mid-Atlantic watersheds, such as Chesapeake Bay and the Delaware River basins. Whereas most of the attention has focused on the role of the eastern oyster Crassostrea virginica, there are many other bivalve species, in both salt and fresh waters, that provide similar benefits. This review summarizes current knowledge regarding the capacity of diverse mid-Atlantic bivalves to filter particles and potentially enhance water clarity and quality. Species with the greatest clearance rates and population carrying capacity were also considered for their restoration and enhancement potential. Compared with eastern oysters, several additional species of saltwater bivalves and freshwater mussels are reported to filter water at rates that merit restoration attention and have been shown to attain significant population sizes. More work is needed to estimate system-carrying capacity and to eliminate restoration bottlenecks for some species—all bivalve species have constraints on their distribution and abundance. Nevertheless, a diversified, watershed-wide bivalve restoration strategy is likely to be more successful than a monospecific focus because it would address pollutant issues in more diverse places and multiple habitats along the river to estuary continuum.
    [Show full text]