Freshwater mussel records collected by the Maryland Department of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

List of Tables Table Number Page 1. Number of sites sampled by MANTA where live and dead freshwater mussels were collected in 2009...………………………………………………….7 2. Frequency of occurrence for fishes collected at sites throughout the range of A. heterodon (AH) in Maryland. Non-native fishes are indicated with an asterisk (*)…………………………………………………………………………9 3. Frequency of occurrence for fishes collected at sites throughout the range of E. complanata (EC) in Maryland. Non-native fishes are indicated with an asterisk (*)……......................................................................................................19 4. Frequency of occurrence for fishes collected at sites throughout the range of E. fisheriana (EF) in Maryland. Non-native fishes are indicated with an asterisk (*)……......................................................................................................26 5. Frequency of occurrence for fishes collected at sites throughout the range of P. cataracta (PC) in Maryland. Non-native fishes are indicated with an asterisk (*)…..........................................................................................................40 v
ABSTRACT We summarized freshwater mussel data collected by the Monitoring and Nontidal Assessment Division (MANTA) of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources from 1995-2009. Distributional accounts for 14 species of mussels were produced. We compared water chemistry, physical habitat, biological, and land use data collected at sites sampled with freshwater mussels to sites where mussels were not encountered. Alasmidonta heterodon (dwarf wedgemussel), Elliptio complanata (eastern elliptio), E. fisheriana (northern lance), and Pyganodon cataracta (eastern floater) were present in streams with lower gradient, greater mean width and discharge, and larger upstream catchments with minimal urban land cover or impervious surfaces compared to streams where they were absent. All four species were also found in streams with different concentrations of total nitrogen and nitrate than streams were they were absent. Physical habitat metrics provided a narrative of the conditions where mussels were present, but were poor indicators of an ecological tolerance. Our results indicate that freshwater mussels may be intolerant to anthropogenic disturbances, such as land use alteration and subsequent water quality or biological impairment. Fish community data were analyzed to identify potential fish hosts of freshwater mussels and limitations upon their recruitment. Some known host fish were rare or absent at sites with mussels, suggesting host availability may locally limit mussel populations. Several fishes commonly occurred with mussels, were known glochidial hosts of congeneric mussels or congenerics of previously confirmed host fish. We recommend further investigation into potential host of freshwater mussels to better understand and manage this resource in Maryland. 1
Page 1 and 2: Freshwater mussel records collected
Page 3: Freshwater mussel records collected
Page 6 and 7: List of Figures Figure Number Page
Page 11 and 12: INTRODUCTION The diversity of fresh
Page 13 and 14: species richness, host abundance, a
Page 15 and 16: Table 1. Number of sites sampled by
Page 17 and 18: Table 2. Frequency of occurrence fo
Page 19 and 20: Figure 3. continued A P A P A P p =
Page 21 and 22: Figure 3. continued A P A P A P 0 5
Page 23 and 24: Since 2007, A. undulata Say 1817 ha
Page 25 and 26: Anodonta implicata Say 1829 was enc
Page 27 and 28: Table 3. Frequency of occurrence fo
Page 29 and 30: Figure 8. continued A P A P A P p =
Page 31 and 32: Figure 8. continued A P A P A P 0 5
Page 33 and 34: In 2009, E. fisheriana was collecte
Page 35 and 36: Figure 10. Box-and-whisker plots of
Page 37 and 38: Figure 10. continued. A P A P A P 0
Page 39 and 40: Figure 10. continued A P A P A P 0
Page 41 and 42: Elliptio producta Conrad 1836 has p
Page 43 and 44: Lampsilis radiata radiata Gmelin 17
Page 45 and 46: Leptodea ochracea Say 1817 has been
Page 47 and 48: Pyganodon cataracta had previously
Page 49 and 50: Figure 19. Box-and-whisker plots of
Page 55 and 56: Corbicula fluminea is a non-native
Page 57 and 58: (Black 2001, Wang 2007b). A lack of
Page 59 and 60:
Maryland (Cummings and Watters 2009
Page 61 and 62:
REFERENCES Allan, J.D., & A.S. Flec
Page 63 and 64:
Kelly, M.W., & J.M. Rhymer. 2005. P
Page 65 and 66:
——. 1999a. Effects of alien spe
Page 67 and 68:
Young, D. 1911. The implantation of
Page 70 and 71:
8-digit watershed Number 8-digit wa
show all

Freshwater mussel records collected by the Maryland Department of ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?