Eastern Illinois University The Keep Masters Theses Student Theses & Publications Spring 2020 Dam Effects on Freshwater Mussel Growth and Recruitment in a Midwestern Stream Taylor Lyndon Fagin Eastern Illinois University Follow this and additional works at: https://thekeep.eiu.edu/theses Part of the Biology Commons Recommended Citation Fagin, Taylor Lyndon, "Dam Effects on Freshwater Mussel Growth and Recruitment in a Midwestern Stream" (2020). Masters Theses. 4768. https://thekeep.eiu.edu/theses/4768 This Dissertation/Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Theses & Publications at The Keep. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of The Keep. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DAM EFFECTS ON FRESHWATER MUSSEL GROWTH AND RECRUITMENT IN A MIDWESTERN STREAM A Thesis by Taylor Lyndon Fagin Submitted to the Graduate School Eastern Illinois University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES February 2020 Department of Biological Sciences i Acknowledgments This thesis became a reality with the support and help of many individuals. I would like to extend my sincere thanks to all of them. Foremost, I would like to offer my sincere gratitude to the Sanitary District of Decatur by providing funding for this study and the opportunity to conduct research throughout central Illinois. I would like to thank Grand Prairie Friends and Fox Ridge State Park for providing access to their property. I’m grateful for the help and support given to me by Jeremy Tiemann, Alison Stodola, Rachel Vinsel, and all the other staff at Illinois Natural History Survey. I’m appreciative to the Department of Biological Sciences at Eastern Illinois University as well as the Fisheries and Aquatic Research Team for the help, support, and overwhelming amount of resources given to conduct this research. My thanks and appreciation go out to my committee members; Robert Colombo, Chuck Pederson and Jeffery Laursen for providing guidance and knowledge to complete this study. ii Copyright by Taylor Lyndon Fagin All Rights Reserved iii Abstract DAM EFFECTS ON FRESHWATER MUSSEL GROWTH AND RECRUITMENT IN A MIDWESTERN STREAM There have been many studies that examine the negative impact of dams on freshwater mussel populations. However, recent studies suggest that some dams may create more suitable growing conditions immediately below some dams. This study’s main objectives were to 1) document where faster growth of mussels is found in relation to the Charleston Dam, 2) determine if sites with faster growth have higher recruitment and 3) investigate which water quality variable(s) could be correlated with faster growth. Live Corbicula sp. were set in cages in multiple sites at varying distances from the dam and shells of two native mussel species were thin sectioned and aged to document growth patterns. A survey was conducted to estimate recruitment at each site and water quality testing was conducted every season. Results indicated that mussels grew faster below the dam than above the dam; however, evidence was found to suggest mussels grow slower immediately below the dam. Recruitment was found to be significantly higher downstream in one species and not the other but other factors may play a more important role than mussel growth. No water quality variable was conclusively determined to correlate with mussel growth patterns. These data suggest mussels do grow faster below the Charleston Dam, but these effects are not likely a direct effect of the dam. iv Table of Contents Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................................... ii Abstract ........................................................................................................................................................ iv Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 1 Methods ........................................................................................................................................................ 5 Study Sites ................................................................................................................................................ 5 Caged Corbicula sp. .................................................................................................................................. 5 Double Systematic Sampling Survey ........................................................................................................ 6 Mussel Sectioning ..................................................................................................................................... 7 Water Quality Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 10 Results ......................................................................................................................................................... 12 Double Systematic Sample Survey ......................................................................................................... 12 Caged Corbicula sp. ................................................................................................................................ 13 Mussel Sectioning ................................................................................................................................... 13 Recruitment ............................................................................................................................................. 14 Water Quality Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 14 Discussion ................................................................................................................................................... 16 Double Systematic Sample Survey ......................................................................................................... 16 Growth Patterns ...................................................................................................................................... 16 Water Analysis ........................................................................................................................................ 19 Works Cited ................................................................................................................................................ 36 Appendix A ................................................................................................................................................. 42 Appendix B ................................................................................................................................................. 51 List of Figures and Tables Tables 1. All 332 freshwater mussels found during the double sample survey at each site on the Embarras River. 2. Parameters of the Von Bertalanffy Growth Model for Cyclonaias pustulosa and Truncilla truncata by site on the Embarras River. 3. Juveniles of Cyclonaias pustulosa and Truncilla truncata by site and recruitment estimates as percent juveniles of the population of the Embarras River. 4. Three additional species aged to compare growth over multiple size classes to verify if other species show the same growth patterns found in the VBGM. v Figures 1. Five mussel sites established on the Embarras River in Illinois to assess how a medium sized dam effects mussel growth. 2. Jig used to thin-section mussel shells made from plexiglass sheets and hot glued to fit into a Buehler Isomet Low-Speed saw. 3. Annulus rings from a Cyclonaias pustulosa. Age during this study was defined as the number of annuli originating from the umbo (top) and terminating at the periostracum (bottom). 4. Diagram relating the parameters of the Von Bertalanffy Growth model (Villaseñor- Derbez 2018). 5. Results from the double-systematic mussel survey on the Embarras River shows downstream sites have a generally higher species richness as well as Shannon-Weiner Index. 6. Averaged growth in length of caged Corbicula sp. over time during the summer of 2018. 7. Estimated growth curve of the upstream and downstream reach for C. pustulosa on the Embarras River. 8. Estimated growth curve of the upstream and downstream reach for T. truncata on the Embarras River. 9. Principle component analysis of 10 water quality parameters: dissolved oxygen, pH, specific conductivity, ammonia, nitrate, nitrite, total phosphate, alkalinity, fixed suspended solids and volatile suspended solids. ANOSIM revealed no significant difference between reaches (p> 0.9, R= -0.09) but did show a significance difference between seasonal sampling events designated by the circles above (p< 0.001, R= 0.84). 10. Average weekly temperature at each site on the Embarrass River taken continuously by temperature loggers. 11. Average weekly temperature during the summer months between sites on the Embarrass River. vi Introduction North America has the richest fauna of freshwater mussels [Bivalvia: Unionidae] in the world, comprising almost 300 species (Graf and Cummings 2007, Haag 2012). However, over 220 of these species are listed as endangered, threatened or of special concern in the United States (Williams et al. 2003, Neves et al. 1997). The first widespread