22.03.2015 Views

Reproductive Ecology and Body Burden of Resident ... - The Love Lab

Reproductive Ecology and Body Burden of Resident ... - The Love Lab

Reproductive Ecology and Body Burden of Resident ... - The Love Lab

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Channel region. Miller <strong>and</strong> Shanks (2004) found that Mg concentrations, <strong>and</strong> Zn <strong>and</strong> Pb concentrations<br />

to a lesser extent, in otoliths <strong>of</strong> black rockfish (Sebastes melanops) were good discriminators <strong>of</strong> open coast<br />

habitats along the Washington <strong>and</strong> Oregon coasts. Nishimoto (2009) examined the variability in otolith<br />

chemistry in relation to temperature <strong>and</strong> salinity <strong>and</strong> determined that Ba, Mg, <strong>and</strong> Fe concentrations in<br />

otoliths distinguished shortbelly rockfish (Sebastes jordani) from geographically distant regions with contrasting<br />

oceanographic conditions.<br />

Brown (2006) found that Pacific s<strong>and</strong>dab living in estuaries <strong>and</strong> s<strong>and</strong>y coastal habitats along the central<br />

California coast had different elemental signatures defined by Sr, Li, Ba, <strong>and</strong> Mn. <strong>The</strong> signatures defining<br />

the two habitats for Pacific s<strong>and</strong>dab were similar for English sole (Pleuronectes vetulus), another flatfish species<br />

that resides in the same habitats. Sr was consistently higher <strong>and</strong> Li consistently lower in estuarine fish.<br />

Ba <strong>and</strong> Mn differed between habitats in only some years.<br />

Forrester <strong>and</strong> Swearer (2002) compared Cu, Sr, Ba, <strong>and</strong> Pb concentrations in otoliths <strong>of</strong> California halibut<br />

from bay <strong>and</strong> open coast habitats in the southern California Bight including the Santa Barbara Channel.<br />

In contrast to Brown (2006), Sr <strong>and</strong> Ba showed no significant difference in concentration in juveniles from<br />

bays <strong>and</strong> open coast habitats. Mn, Cu, <strong>and</strong> Pb were higher in otoliths from bays than from coastal habitats<br />

in the single year, 1998, when fish were collected from both kinds <strong>of</strong> habitats. Forrester <strong>and</strong> Swearer (2002)<br />

also compared the otolith element concentrations from one year <strong>of</strong> sampling open coast habitats with four<br />

previous years <strong>of</strong> sampling fish from bays. Mn was ruled out as a good marker, because otolith concentrations<br />

from the open coast habitat in 1998 did not differ from otolith Mn from bays the four previous years.<br />

Although Ba concentrations in otoliths did not differ between bay <strong>and</strong> open coast habitats in 1998; Ba in<br />

otoliths from bay habitats in some years were significantly higher than coastal habitats sampled in 1998.<br />

Otolith concentrations <strong>of</strong> Pb varied less than Cu between years among the bay sites. Findings from these<br />

studies indicate that some elements may be more temporally stable than others in otolith elemental signatures.<br />

Success in discriminating otoliths from the two different habitat types in this study was not associated<br />

with observed seawater element concentrations. Regression analysis showed variability in otolith element<br />

concentration among sites was not related to the concentration <strong>of</strong> the elements in our seawater samples<br />

from kelp rockfish <strong>and</strong> s<strong>and</strong>dab habitats.<br />

<strong>The</strong> variability in seawater sample concentrations <strong>of</strong> most elements within sites (platform or natural<br />

habitat) was substantial (Fig. 8) indicating a source <strong>of</strong> error may have been our seawater collection method.<br />

<strong>The</strong> seawater samples were taken from aboard an unanchored boat at the platforms <strong>and</strong> natural s<strong>and</strong>dab<br />

habitat sites. Although the boat was repositioned between casts to adjust for drift particularly when near<br />

a platform, <strong>and</strong> movement may have been (tens <strong>of</strong> meters at platforms; tens <strong>of</strong> meters to several hundred<br />

meters from natural s<strong>and</strong>dab habitat collection sites). Although care was taken to minimize contamination<br />

<strong>of</strong> the seawater collected from the Niskin bottle sampler, we cannot fully rule out contamination from the<br />

bottle which was not acid-leached. For some trace elements (e.g., Ba, V, As, Se) contamination is relatively<br />

easy to control, whereas for other elements (e.g., Pb, Zn, Fe, Hg, <strong>and</strong> Sn) more painstaking procedures are<br />

required to collect uncontaminated samples (Donat <strong>and</strong> Brul<strong>and</strong> 1995).<br />

Another source <strong>of</strong> error in estimating the relationship between element concentrations in otoliths <strong>and</strong><br />

seawater is that seawater was sampled only during a single visit to each site; whereas, the otolith elemental<br />

concentration was measured from ablated samples integrating months <strong>of</strong> recent growth preceding capture<br />

<strong>of</strong> the fish. We suspect that the element concentrations from the ablated otolith sample is affected by temporal<br />

variability in seawater element concentrations over multiple time scales ranging from hours to months<br />

due to changes in the rate <strong>of</strong> produced water discharge from a platform <strong>and</strong> oceanographic variability.<br />

Produced water is the primary discharge associated with oil <strong>and</strong> gas recovery <strong>and</strong> is the second largest<br />

non-drilling associated discharge from oil platforms. Cooling water discharges comprise the largest volume<br />

60

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!