DOCSLIB.ORG

060731 Godwin Et Al Invasives Final Draft

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
060731 Godwin Et Al Invasives Final Draft Reducing Potential Impact of Invasive Marine Species in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands Marine National Monument Scott Godwin, Ku‘ulei S. Rodgers and Paul L. Jokiel Hawai‘i Coral Reef Assessment and Monitoring Program (CRAMP) Hawai‘i Institute of Marine Biology P.O. Box 1346 Kane‘ohe, HI 96744 Phone: 808-236-7440 e-mail: [email protected] Report to: Northwest Hawaiian Islands Marine National Monument Administration 6600 Kalaniana‘ole Hwy. Suite 300 Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96825 This report available from the National Technical Information Service (NTIS) (http://www.fedworld.gov/onow/) and from the Hawaii Coral Reef Assessment and Monitoring Program (CRAMP) at http://cramp.wcc.hawaii.edu/ This research conducted under DOI, NOAA, National Ocean Service MOA 2005-008/6882 Amendment No. 001, “Research in Support of the NWHI Coral Reef Ecosystem Reserve, HIMB, SOEST, UH Manoa” (Dr. Jo-Ann Leong, PI) 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures and Tables ...............................................................................................4 0.0 Conclusions and Recommendations ......................................................................5-8 0.1 Conclusions...........................................................................................................5 0.2 Recommendations.................................................................................................5 0.2.1 Transport Mechanisms....................................................................................5-7 0.2.2 Information Collection and Dissemination.....................................................7-8 1.0 Introduction..........................................................................................................8-14 1.1 A Primer for Marine Non-indigenous Species Introductions ..............................8 1.1.1 Species Invasions – Natural and Anthropogenic ........................................9 1.1.2 Dynamics of Non-indigenous Species Introductions ...........................9-12 1.1.3 Marine Non-indigenous Species Invasions ........................................12-14 2.0 Pathways and Mechanisms of Dispersal............................................................14-19 2.1 Natural...............................................................................................................15 2.1.1 Larval Competence and Dispersal Range ...........................................15-16 2.1.2 Natural Dispersal by Rafting ....................................................................16 2.1.3 Migration of Adults ..................................................................................16 2.1.3.1 Fishes......................................................................................16-17 2.1.3.2 Algae ............................................................................................17 2.1.3.3 Monk Seals...................................................................................18 2.1.3.4 Green Sea Turtles...................................................................18-19 2.2 Anthropogenic .............................................................................................19-27 2.2.1 Ship Movement.........................................................................................21 2.2.1.1 Ballast water.................................................................................21 2.2.1.2 Sediments .....................................................................................22 2.2.1.3 Hull Fouling ................................................................................23 2.2.2 Marine Debris Transport...........................................................................24 2.2.2.1 Biofouling on Marine Debris ..........................................................24 2.2.2.2 Rafting of Organisms with Debris ..................................................25 2.2.3 Fisheries Activities and Other Pathways ............................................25-26 3.0 Marine Non-indigenous Species in the Hawaiian Archipelago.........................26-30 3.1 Marine Non-indigenous Species and the NWHI.........................................26-27 3.2 Fish....................................................................................................................28 3.2.1 Introduction...............................................................................................28 3.2.2 Lutjanus kasmira ...............................................................................28-29 3.2.3 Cephalopholis argus ..........................................................................29-30 3.3 Invertebrates ................................................................................................30-34 3.3.1 Introduction................................................................................................30 3.3.2 Carijoa riisei ......................................................................................31-32 3.3.2 Chthamalus proteus ............................................................................32-34 3.4 Algae............................................................................................................35-51 3.4.1 Introduction..........................................................................................35-36 3.4.2 Algal invasion patterns ........................................................................36-37 3.4.3 Growth rates...............................................................................................37 2 3.4.4 Means of dispersal...............................................................................37-38 3.4.5 Spread ..................................................................................................38-40 3.4.6 Ecological consequences ...........................................................................40 3.4.7 Hypnea musciformis ............................................................................41.43 3.4.7 Avrainvillea amadelpha ......................................................................43-45 3.4.8 Kappaphycus and Eucheuma spp .......................................................45-49 3.4.9 Acanthophora spicifera ......................................................................49-51 4.0 Management Options ........................................................................................51-58 4.1 Prevention...........................................................................................................51 4.1.1 Ballast Water .......................................................................................51-52 4.1.2 Sediments...................................................................................................52 4.1.3 Hull Fouling.........................................................................................52-54 4.1.4 Other Sources.......................................................................................54-55 4.2 Legislation and Administrative Rules ........................................................55-56 4.3 Limitations and Information Needs .............................................................56-57 4.4 Eradication...................................................................................................57-58 5.0 Literature Cited .................................................................................................58-66 3 LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES Figures 2.1.3.1-1. Biomass (%) and number of individual fishes (%) by endemic status ..............17 2.1.3.3-1. Female Hawaiian monk seal Monachus schauinslandi nursing pup at Kalaupapa, Moloka‘i..........................................................................................................18 2.1.3.4-1. The green sea turtle Chelonia midas migrates extensively throughout the archipelago ...............................................................................................................19 3.2.2-1. Blue-lined snapper (also known as Ta‘ape or Lutjanus kasmira) ........................28 3.2.3-1. The Peacock Grouper, Cephalopholis argus, introduced into Hawai‘i in the 1950’s.....................................................................................................................29 3.3.1-1. The anemone Diadumene lineata ........................................................................31 3.3.2-1. The octocoral Carijoa riisei ................................................................................32 3.3.3-1. The barnacle Chthamalus proteus .......................................................................33 3.4.7-1. Hypnea musciformis ............................................................................................41 3.4.7-2. Current Distribution-Hypnea musciformis ..........................................................42 3.4.7-3. Mokumanamana (Necker Island), Northwestern Hawaiian Islands ....................43 3.4.8-1. Avrainvillea amadelpha .......................................................................................43 3.4.8-2. Current Distribution-Avrainvillea amadelpha .....................................................44 3.4.9-1. Kappaphycus .......................................................................................................45 3.4.9-2. Current Distribution-Kappaphycus ......................................................................46 3.4.10-1. Acanthophera spicifera ......................................................................................49 3.4.10-2. Current Distribution-Acanthophera
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Reef Snappers (Lutjanidae)
    #05 Reef snappers (Lutjanidae) Two-spot red snapper (Lutjanus bohar) Mangrove red snapper Blacktail snapper (Lutjanus argentimaculatus) (Lutjanus fulvus) Common bluestripe snapper (Lutjanus kasmira) Humpback red snapper Emperor red snapper (Lutjanus gibbus) (Lutjanus sebae) Species & Distribution Habitats & Feeding The family Lutjanidae contains more than 100 species of Although most snappers live near coral reefs, some species tropical and sub-tropical fi sh known as snappers. are found in areas of less salty water in the mouths of rivers. Most species of interest in the inshore fi sheries of Pacifi c Islands belong to the genus Lutjanus, which contains about The young of some species school on seagrass beds and 60 species. sandy areas, while larger fi sh may be more solitary and live on coral reefs. Many species gather in large feeding schools One of the most widely distributed of the snappers in the around coral formations during daylight hours. Pacifi c Ocean is the common bluestripe snapper, Lutjanus kasmira, which reaches lengths of about 30 cm. The species Snappers feed on smaller fi sh, crabs, shrimps, and sea snails. is found in many Pacifi c Islands and was introduced into They are eaten by a number of larger fi sh. In some locations, Hawaii in the 1950s. species such as the two-spot red snapper, Lutjanus bohar, are responsible for ciguatera fi sh poisoning (see the glossary in the Guide to Information Sheets). #05 Reef snappers (Lutjanidae) Reproduction & Life cycle Snappers have separate sexes. Smaller species have a maximum lifespan of about 4 years and larger species live for more than 15 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural History and Conservation Genetics of the Federally Endangered Mitchell’S Satyr Butterfly, Neonympha Mitchellii Mitchellii
    NATURAL HISTORY AND CONSERVATION GENETICS OF THE FEDERALLY ENDANGERED MITCHELL’S SATYR BUTTERFLY, NEONYMPHA MITCHELLII MITCHELLII By Christopher Alan Hamm A DISSRETATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Entomology Ecology, Evolutionary Biology and Behavior – Dual Major 2012 ABSTRACT NATURAL HISTORY AND CONSERVATION GENETICS OF THE FEDERALLY ENDANGERED MITCHELL’S SATYR BUTTERFLY, NEONYMPHA MITCHELLII MITCHELLII By Christopher Alan Hamm The Mitchell’s satyr butterfly, Neonympha mitchellii mitchellii, is a federally endangered species with protected populations found in Michigan, Indiana, and wherever else populations may be discovered. The conservation status of the Mitchell’s satyr began to be called into question when populations of a phenotypically similar butterfly were discovered in the eastern United States. It is unclear if these recently discovered populations are N. m. mitchellii and thus warrant protection. In order to clarify the conservation status of the Mitchell’s satyr I first acquired sample sizes large enough for population genetic analysis I developed a method of non- lethal sampling that has no detectable effect on the survival of the butterfly. I then traveled to all regions in which N. mitchellii is known to be extant and collected genetic samples. Using a variety of population genetic techniques I demonstrated that the federally protected populations in Michigan and Indiana are genetically distinct from the recently discovered populations in the southern US. I also detected the presence of the reproductive endosymbiotic bacterium Wolbachia, and surveyed addition Lepidoptera of conservation concern. This survey revealed that Wolbachia is a real concern for conservation managers and should be addressed in management plans.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishery Bulletin of the Fish and Wildlife Service V.55
    CHAPTER VIII SPONGES, COELENTERATES, AND CTENOPHORES Blank page retained for pagination THE PORIFERA OF THE GULF OF MEXICO 1 By J. Q. TIERNEY. Marine Laboratory, University of Miami Sponges are one of the dominant sessile inverte­ groups. The. floor of the Gulf between the bars brate groups in the Gulf of Mexico: they extend is sparsely populated. The majority of the ani­ from the intertidal zone down to the deepest mals and plants are concentrated on the rocky Parts of the basin, and almost all of the firm or ledges and outcroppings. rocky sections of the bottom provide attachment The most abundant sponges on these reefs are for them. of several genera representing most of the orders Members of the class Hyalospongea. (Hexacti­ of the class Demospongea. Several species of nellidea) are, almost without exception, limited to Ircinia are quite common as are Verongia, Sphecio­ the deeper waters of the Gulf beyond the 100­ spongia, and several Axinellid and Ancorinid fathom curve. These sponges possess siliceous sponges; Cliona is very abundant, boring into spicules in which (typically) six rays radiate from molluscan shells, coral, and the rock itself. The II. central point; frequently, the spicules are fused sponge population is rich both in variety and in ~gether forming a basket-like skeleton. Spongin number of individuals; for this reason no attempt 18 never present in this group. is made to discuss it in taxonomic detail in this In contrast to the Hyalospongea, representa­ r~sum~. ti\Tes of the clasa Calcispongea are seldom, if Some of the sponges of the Gulf are of world­ ~\Ter, found in deep water.
    [Show full text]
  • Anthopleura and the Phylogeny of Actinioidea (Cnidaria: Anthozoa: Actiniaria)
    Org Divers Evol (2017) 17:545–564 DOI 10.1007/s13127-017-0326-6 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Anthopleura and the phylogeny of Actinioidea (Cnidaria: Anthozoa: Actiniaria) M. Daly1 & L. M. Crowley2 & P. Larson1 & E. Rodríguez2 & E. Heestand Saucier1,3 & D. G. Fautin4 Received: 29 November 2016 /Accepted: 2 March 2017 /Published online: 27 April 2017 # Gesellschaft für Biologische Systematik 2017 Abstract Members of the sea anemone genus Anthopleura by the discovery that acrorhagi and verrucae are are familiar constituents of rocky intertidal communities. pleisiomorphic for the subset of Actinioidea studied. Despite its familiarity and the number of studies that use its members to understand ecological or biological phe- Keywords Anthopleura . Actinioidea . Cnidaria . Verrucae . nomena, the diversity and phylogeny of this group are poor- Acrorhagi . Pseudoacrorhagi . Atomized coding ly understood. Many of the taxonomic and phylogenetic problems stem from problems with the documentation and interpretation of acrorhagi and verrucae, the two features Anthopleura Duchassaing de Fonbressin and Michelotti, 1860 that are used to recognize members of Anthopleura.These (Cnidaria: Anthozoa: Actiniaria: Actiniidae) is one of the most anatomical features have a broad distribution within the familiar and well-known genera of sea anemones. Its members superfamily Actinioidea, and their occurrence and exclu- are found in both temperate and tropical rocky intertidal hab- sivity are not clear. We use DNA sequences from the nu- itats and are abundant and species-rich when present (e.g., cleus and mitochondrion and cladistic analysis of verrucae Stephenson 1935; Stephenson and Stephenson 1972; and acrorhagi to test the monophyly of Anthopleura and to England 1992; Pearse and Francis 2000).
    [Show full text]
  • Fragmentation and Seed Dispersal in Freshwater Wetlands
    Fragmentation and seed dispersal in freshwater wetlands Fragmentatie en zaadverspreiding in zoetwaterwetlands ISBN: 978-94-6108-290-9 Cover: Hester Soomers Grafische vormgeving: Gildeprint Enschede Figuren: Geomedia, Faculteit Geowetenschappen, Universiteit Utrecht Foto’s: Hester Soomers Printed by: Gildeprint, Enschede Printed on FSC certified paper © 2012 Alle rechten voorbehouden. Niets uit deze uitgave mag worden verveelvoudigd, opgeslagen in een geautomatiseerd gegevensbestand, of openbaar gemaakt, in enige vorm of op enig wijze, hetzij elektronisch, mechanisch, door fotokopieën, opnamen, of op enig andere manier, zonder voorafgaande schriftelijke toestemming van de rechthebbende. Fragmentation and seed dispersal in freshwater wetlands Fragmentatie en zaadverspreiding in zoetwaterwetlands (met een samenvatting in het Nederlands) Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Universiteit Utrecht op gezag van de rector magnificus, prof.dr. G.J. van der Zwaan, ingevolge het besluit van het college voor promoties in het openbaar te verdedigen op woensdag 30 mei 2012 des middags te 4.15 uur door Hester Soomers geboren op 5 augustus 1977 te Heerlen Promotoren: Prof.dr. M.J. Wassen Prof.dr. J.T.A. Verhoeven Co-promotor: Dr. P.A. Verweij CONTENTS Chapter 1 Introduction 7 Chapter 2 The effect of habitat fragmentation and abiotic factors on fen plant occurrence 29 Chapter 3 Factors influencing the seed source and sink functions of a floodplain nature reserve in the Netherlands 51 Chapter 4 The dispersal and deposition of hydrochorous
    [Show full text]
  • Spore Dispersal Vectors
    Glime, J. M. 2017. Adaptive Strategies: Spore Dispersal Vectors. Chapt. 4-9. In: Glime, J. M. Bryophyte Ecology. Volume 1. 4-9-1 Physiological Ecology. Ebook sponsored by Michigan Technological University and the International Association of Bryologists. Last updated 3 June 2020 and available at <http://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/bryophyte-ecology/>. CHAPTER 4-9 ADAPTIVE STRATEGIES: SPORE DISPERSAL VECTORS TABLE OF CONTENTS Dispersal Types ............................................................................................................................................ 4-9-2 Wind Dispersal ............................................................................................................................................. 4-9-2 Splachnaceae ......................................................................................................................................... 4-9-4 Liverworts ............................................................................................................................................. 4-9-5 Invasive Species .................................................................................................................................... 4-9-5 Decay Dispersal............................................................................................................................................ 4-9-6 Animal Dispersal .......................................................................................................................................... 4-9-9 Earthworms ..........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Morphology and Early Life History Pattern of Some Lutjanus Species: a Review
    INT. J. BIOL. BIOTECH., 8 (3): 455-461, 2011. MORPHOLOGY AND EARLY LIFE HISTORY PATTERN OF SOME LUTJANUS SPECIES: A REVIEW *Zubia Masood and Rehana Yasmeen Farooq Department of Zoology, University of Karachi, Karachi-75270, Pakistan. *email: [email protected] ABSTRACT The present study was based on the literature review of the fishes belonging to the snapper family Lutjanidae. Data parameters about the morphology and early life history pattern not measured during the survey were taken from the FishBase data base (see www.fishbase.org and Froese et al., 2000). These data parameters included, Lmax (maximum length), Linf (length infinity); K (growth rate); M (natural mortality); LS (life span); Lm (length at maturity); tm (age at first maturity); to (age at zero length); tmax (longevity) and also the morphological data. Morphological and life history data were taken only for five species of fishes belongs to genus Lutjanus i.e., L.johnii, L.malabaricus, L.lutjanus, L.fulvus, L.russellii. The main objective of this study was to review some aspects of distribution, morphology and feeding habits, spawning and also acquired and analyze information on selected life history variables to described patterns of variation among different species of snappers. Keywords: Lutjanidae, morphology, life history. INTRODUCTION This family is commonly known as “Snappers” are perch-like fishes, moderately elongated, fairly compressed (Allen and Talbot, 1985). Small to large fishes, ranging from 15cm-120cm or 1m in length and 40 kg in weight. Mouth is terminal, jaw bear large canine teeth (no canines in Apherius); Preopercle usually serrate. Dorsal fin continuous or slightly notched with 10-12 spines and 10-17 soft rays; anal fin with 3 spines and 7-11 soft rays; pelvic fins originating just behind pectoral base.
    [Show full text]
  • R on Anew British Sea Anemone. by T
    [ 880 ~ r On aNew British Sea Anemone. By T. A~ Stephenson, D.Se., Department of Zoology, University Oollege, London With 1 Figure in the Text. IT is a curious fact that the majority of the British anemones had been discovered by 1860, and that half of them, as listed at that date, had been established during a burst of energy on the part of Gosse and his collectingfriends. Gosseadded 28 speciesto the BritishFauna himself. It is still more surprising that since Gosse ceased work, no authentic new ones have been added, other than more or less offshore forms, with'the ex- ception of Sagartia luci()3,'and this species appears to have been imported from abroad. There is, however, an anemone which occurs on the Break- water and Pier at Plymouth, which has not yet been described. Dr. Allen tells me it has been on the Breakwater as long as he can remember, and to him I am indebted for the details of its habitat given further on. Whether it occurs elsewhere than in the Plymouth district and has been seen but mistaken for the young of Metridiurn dianthus, is as yet unknown. The anemone in question, which is the subject of this paper, is a small creature, bright orange or fawn in colour, and presenting at first sight some resemblance to. young specimens of certain colour-varieties of Metridium. When the two forms are observed carefully, however, and irnder heaJ:thy conditions, it becomes evident that they are perfectly distinct from each other; and a study of their anatomy bears out this fact.
    [Show full text]
  • Molluscan Subfossil Assemblages Reveal the Long-Term Deterioration of Coral Reef Environments in Caribbean Panama ⇑ Katie L
    Marine Pollution Bulletin xxx (2015) xxx–xxx Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Marine Pollution Bulletin journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/marpolbul Molluscan subfossil assemblages reveal the long-term deterioration of coral reef environments in Caribbean Panama ⇑ Katie L. Cramer a,b, , Jill S. Leonard-Pingel c, Félix Rodríguez a, Jeremy B.C. Jackson b,a,d a Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Balboa, Panama b Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA 92093-0244, United States c Washington and Lee University, Rm 123 Science Addition, Lexington, VA 24450, United States d Department of Paleobiology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC 20013, United States article info abstract Article history: Caribbean reef corals have declined sharply since the 1980s, but the lack of prior baseline data has hin- Received 24 February 2015 dered identification of drivers of change. To assess anthropogenic change in reef environments over the Revised 9 May 2015 past century, we tracked the composition of subfossil assemblages of bivalve and gastropod mollusks Accepted 12 May 2015 excavated from pits below lagoonal and offshore reefs in Bocas del Toro, Panama. The higher prevalence Available online xxxx of (a) infaunal suspension-feeding bivalves and herbivorous and omnivorous gastropods in lagoons and (b) epifaunal and suspension-feeding bivalves and carnivorous and suspension-feeding gastropods off- Keywords: shore reflected the greater influence of land-based nutrients/sediments within lagoons. Temporal Barbatia cancellaria changes indicated deteriorating environmental conditions pre-1960 in lagoons and post-1960 offshore, Bocas del Toro Dendostrea frons with offshore communities becoming more similar to lagoonal ones since 1960.
    [Show full text]
  • Decapoda: Brachyura)
    ^^z^ JOURNAL OF CRUSTACEAN BIOLOGY, 16(3): 556-563, 1996 r PARTIAL REVISION OF PINNOTHERID CRAB GENERA WITH A TWO-SEGMENTED PALP ON THE THIRD MAXILLIPED (DECAPODA: BRACHYURA) Ernesto Campos ABSTRACT Two new genera in the Pinnotheridae are recognized from the northwestern Atlantic, Gem- motheres, new genus (type species Pinnotheres chamae Roberts, 1975) and Tunicotheres, new genus (type species Pinnotheres moseri Rathbun, 1918). These genera shared a 2-segmented palp on the third maxilliped with Calyptraeotheres Campos, 1990, Dissodactylus Smith, 1870, Ostracotheres H. Milne Edwards, 1853, and Xanthasia White, 1846. They differ in shape, texture, and hardness of the carapace, shape and relative length of third maxilliped articles, relative length of the walking legs, and relative length and shape of their articles. Comparisons among these genera are provided in a dichotomous key based on adult female characters. During the last five years I have studied Museum, Leiden, and Museum National d'Histoire the systematics of a subgroup of pinnothe- Naturelle, Paris; and Calyptraeotheres granti (Glassell, 1933), O. subglobosus (Baker, 1907), O. holothuriensis rid crabs which are characterized by a two- (Baker, 1907), Epulotheres sp., and other genera with segmented palp on the third maxilliped a three-segmented palp (see Campos, 1993; Manning, (lacking a dactylus). The first result of this 1993a), including P. pisum (Linnaeus, 1767) (type spe­ study was the erection of the genus Calyp­ cies of Pinnotheres Bosc, 1802), from the Inverte­ traeotheres Campos, 1990 (type species brates Collection, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Autonoma de Baja California, Mexico. Original figures Fabia granti Glassell, 1933) from the Mex­ were made with a camera lucida.
    [Show full text]
  • Diversity and Distribution of Sea-Anemones (Cnidaria : Actiniaria) in the Estuaries and Mangroves of Odisha, India
    ISSN 0375-1511 Rec. zool. Surv. India: 113(Part-3): 113-118,2013 DIVERSITY AND DISTRIBUTION OF SEA-ANEMONES (CNIDARIA : ACTINIARIA) IN THE ESTUARIES AND MANGROVES OF ODISHA, INDIA SANTANU MITRA* AND J.G. PATTANAYAK Zoological Survey of India 27, J. L. Nehru Road, Kolkata-700 016, West Bengal, India * [email protected] INTRODUCTION anemone Paracondylactis sinensis (Carlgren) was Actiniarians, popularly called as 'Sea­ collected by digging the sandy mud 20-25 cm around the specimens up to depth of about 70-120 Anemones', belongs to the phylum Cnidaria form cm depending on the size of the anemone. The an important group of intertidal invertebrate animals were detached from the substratum by distinguished by their habit, habitat and beautiful lifting the basal disc manually and narcotized colouration. This group was not elaborately with 1 % formalin for the period of 6-8 hours. The studied from India. However Annandale (1907 & narcotized anemones with fully expanded 1915), Carlgren (1925 & 1949), Parulekar (1968 & condition were preserved in 10% formalin for 1990), Seshyia and Cuttress (1971), Misra (1975 & further studies. 1976) and Bairagi (1998, 2001) worked on this SYSTEMATIC ACCOUNTS group and a total 40 species of sea anemones belongs to 33 genera and 17 families so far Phylum CNIDARIA Class ANTHOZOA recorded from India. During the recent faunal Subclass HEXACORALLIA survey (2010-2011) of Estuaries and Mangrove Order ACTINIARIA fringed coastal districts of Odisha, the authors Family EDW ARDSIIDAE encountered a quite good number of specimens of 1. Edwardsia jonesii Seshaiya & Cuttress, 1969 this group. After proper identification these 2. Edwardsia tinctrix Annandale, 1915 reveals 5 species belonging to 4 genera and 3 Family HALIACTIIDAE families.
    [Show full text]
  • SPECIAL PUBLICATION 6 the Effects of Marine Debris Caused by the Great Japan Tsunami of 2011
    PICES SPECIAL PUBLICATION 6 The Effects of Marine Debris Caused by the Great Japan Tsunami of 2011 Editors: Cathryn Clarke Murray, Thomas W. Therriault, Hideaki Maki, and Nancy Wallace Authors: Stephen Ambagis, Rebecca Barnard, Alexander Bychkov, Deborah A. Carlton, James T. Carlton, Miguel Castrence, Andrew Chang, John W. Chapman, Anne Chung, Kristine Davidson, Ruth DiMaria, Jonathan B. Geller, Reva Gillman, Jan Hafner, Gayle I. Hansen, Takeaki Hanyuda, Stacey Havard, Hirofumi Hinata, Vanessa Hodes, Atsuhiko Isobe, Shin’ichiro Kako, Masafumi Kamachi, Tomoya Kataoka, Hisatsugu Kato, Hiroshi Kawai, Erica Keppel, Kristen Larson, Lauran Liggan, Sandra Lindstrom, Sherry Lippiatt, Katrina Lohan, Amy MacFadyen, Hideaki Maki, Michelle Marraffini, Nikolai Maximenko, Megan I. McCuller, Amber Meadows, Jessica A. Miller, Kirsten Moy, Cathryn Clarke Murray, Brian Neilson, Jocelyn C. Nelson, Katherine Newcomer, Michio Otani, Gregory M. Ruiz, Danielle Scriven, Brian P. Steves, Thomas W. Therriault, Brianna Tracy, Nancy C. Treneman, Nancy Wallace, and Taichi Yonezawa. Technical Editor: Rosalie Rutka Please cite this publication as: The views expressed in this volume are those of the participating scientists. Contributions were edited for Clarke Murray, C., Therriault, T.W., Maki, H., and Wallace, N. brevity, relevance, language, and style and any errors that [Eds.] 2019. The Effects of Marine Debris Caused by the were introduced were done so inadvertently. Great Japan Tsunami of 2011, PICES Special Publication 6, 278 pp. Published by: Project Designer: North Pacific Marine Science Organization (PICES) Lori Waters, Waters Biomedical Communications c/o Institute of Ocean Sciences Victoria, BC, Canada P.O. Box 6000, Sidney, BC, Canada V8L 4B2 Feedback: www.pices.int Comments on this volume are welcome and can be sent This publication is based on a report submitted to the via email to: [email protected] Ministry of the Environment, Government of Japan, in June 2017.
    [Show full text]