An integrated assessment of the continued spread and potential impacts of the colonial ascidian, Didemnum sp. A, in U.S. waters

Didemnum sp. A is a colonial ascidian or “sea squirt” of unknown geographic origin. Colonies of Didemnum sp. A were first documented in U.S. waters in 1993 at Damariscotta River, Maine and San Francisco Bay, California. An alarming number of colonies have since been found at several locations in New England and along the West Coast of the contiguous continental United States. Originally believed to be restricted to artificial structures in nearshore habitats, such as ports and marinas, colonies of Didemnum sp. A have also been discovered on a gravel-pavement habitat on Georges Bank at depths of 40-65m. The wide distribution of Didemnum sp. A, the presence of colonies on an important offshore fishing ground, and the negative economic impacts that other species of noninidigenous ascidians have had on aquaculture operations have raised concerns about the potential impacts of Didemnum sp. A. We reviewed the available information on the biology and ecology of Didemnum sp. A and potentially closely related species to examine the environmental and socioeconomic factors that may have influenced the introduction, establishment and spread of Didemnum sp. A in U.S. waters, the potential impacts of this colonial ascidian on other organisms, aquaculture, and marine fisheries, and the possibility that it will spread to other U.S. waters. In addition, we present and discuss potential management objectives for minimizing the impacts and spread of Didemnum sp. A. Concern over the potential for Didemnum sp. A to become invasive stems from ecological traits that it shares with other invasive species, including the ability to overgrow benthic organisms, high reproductive and population growth rates, ability to spread by colony fragmentation, tolerance to a wide range of environmental conditions, apparent scarcity of predators, and the ability to survive in human dominated habitats. At relatively small spatial scales, species of Didemnum and other nonindigenous ascidians have been shown to alter the abundance and composition of benthic assemblages. In addition, the Canadian aquaculture industry has reported that heavy infestations of nonindigenous ascidians result in increased handling and processing costs. Offshore fisheries may also suffer where high densities of Didemnum sp. A may alter the access of commercially important fish species to critical spawning grounds, prey items, and refugia. Because colonial ascidian larvae remain viable for only 12–24hrs, the introduction and spread of Didemnum sp. A across large distances is thought to be predominantly human mediated; hull fouling, aquaculture, and ballast water. Recent studies suggest that colony growth rates decline when temperatures exceed 21 ºC for 7 consecutive days. Similarly, water temperatures above 8 to 10 ºC are necessary for colony growth; however, colonies can survive extended periods of time below this temperature threshold as an unidentified overwintering form. A qualitative analysis of monthly mean nearshore water temperatures suggest that new colonies of Didemnum will continue to be found in the Northeast U.S., California Current, and Gulf of Alaska LMEs. In contrast, water temperatures become less favorable for colony establishment in subarctic, subtropical, and tropical areas to the north and south of Didemnum’s current distribution in cool temperate habitats. We recommend that the Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force serve as the central management authority to coordinate State and Federal management activities. Five objectives for a Didemnum sp. A management and control program focusing on preventing the spread of Didemnum sp. A to new areas and limiting the impacts of existing populations are discussed. Given the difficulty of eradicating large populations of Didemnum sp. A, developing strategies for limiting the access of Didemnum sp. A to transport vectors and locating newly established colonies are emphasized. (PDF contains 70 pages)

Historia de la piscicultura del pejerrey en Chascomús

El pejerrey Odontesthes bonariensis es uno de los peces de aguas continentales más emblemáticos de la Argentina y una de las especies más estudiada desde diferentes aspectos: ecológico, sistemático, morfológico, fisiológico, genético, etc. (López et al. 1991). Durante los años 1891 y 1892 se realizaron las primeras experiencias de piscicultura,lográndose por primera vez la reproducción artificial en 1904. Su amplia distribución actual es consecuencia de las siembras que se realizaron desde el antiguo Vivero de Piscicultura del Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería de la Nación y de la Estación Hidrobiológica del Ministerio de Asuntos Agrarios de la provincia de Buenos Aires, ambos establecimientos ubicados en la ciudad de Chascomús. En el presente trabajo se realiza una aproximación a la historia de la piscicultura del pejerrey en Chascomús, la que se divide en tres períodos: 1) Antecedentes de piscicultura, importancia de la pesca comercial en el sistema de lagunas Encadenadas de Chascomús y primeras medidas tomadas para conservar la explotación de las lagunas hacia fines del siglo XIX. 2) Etapa del antiguo Vivero (Ministerio de Agricultura de la Nación), desde 1904 hasta 1939. 3) Etapa de la Estación Hidrobiológica (Ministerio de Asuntos Agrarios, provincia de Buenos Aires), desde 1943 hasta el presente.

Historical knowledge of sharks: ancient science, earliest American encounters, and American science, fisheries, and utilization

In western civilization, the knowledge of the elasmobranch or selachian fishes (sharks and rays) begins with Aristotle (384–322 B.C.). Two of his extant works, the “Historia Animalium” and the “Generation of Animals,” both written about 330 B.C., demonstrate knowledge of elasmobranch fishes acquired by observation. Roman writers of works on natural history, such as Aelian and Pliny, who followed Aristotle, were compilers of available information. Their contribution was that they prevented the Greek knowledge from being lost, but they added few original observations. The fall of Rome, around 476 A.D., brought a period of economic regression and political chaos. These in turn brought intellectual thought to a standstill for nearly one thousand years, the period known as the Dark Ages. It would not be until the middle of the sixteenth century, well into the Renaissance, that knowledge of elasmobranchs would advance again. The works of Belon, Salviani, Rondelet, and Steno mark the beginnings of ichthyology, including the study of sharks and rays. The knowledge of sharks and rays increased slowly during and after the Renaissance, and the introduction of the Linnaean System of Nomenclature in 1735 marks the beginning of modern ichthyology. However, the first major work on sharks would not appear until the early nineteenth century. Knowledge acquired about sea animals usually follows their economic importance and exploitation, and this was also true with sharks. The first to learn about sharks in North America were the native fishermen who learned how, when, and where to catch them for food or for their oils. The early naturalists in America studied the land animals and plants; they had little interest in sharks. When faunistic works on fishes started to appear, naturalists just enumerated the species of sharks that they could discern. Throughout the U.S. colonial period, sharks were seldom utilized for food, although their liver oil or skins were often utilized. Throughout the nineteenth century, the Spiny Dogfish, Squalus acanthias, was the only shark species utilized in a large scale on both coasts. It was fished for its liver oil, which was used as a lubricant, and for lighting and tanning, and for its skin which was used as an abrasive. During the early part of the twentieth century, the Ocean Leather Company was started to process sea animals (primarily sharks) into leather, oil, fertilizer, fins, etc. The Ocean Leather Company enjoyed a monopoly on the shark leather industry for several decades. In 1937, the liver of the Soupfin Shark, Galeorhinus galeus, was found to be a rich source of vitamin A, and because the outbreak of World War II in 1938 interrupted the shipping of vitamin A from European sources, an intensive shark fishery soon developed along the U.S. West Coast. By 1939 the American shark leather fishery had transformed into the shark liver oil fishery of the early 1940’s, encompassing both coasts. By the late 1940’s, these fisheries were depleted because of overfishing and fishing in the nursery areas. Synthetic vitamin A appeared on the market in 1950, causing the fishery to be discontinued. During World War II, shark attacks on the survivors of sunken ships and downed aviators engendered the search for a shark repellent. This led to research aimed at understanding shark behavior and the sensory biology of sharks. From the late 1950’s to the 1980’s, funding from the Office of Naval Research was responsible for most of what was learned about the sensory biology of sharks.

Impact of the invasive colonial tunicate Didemnum vexillum on the recruitment of the bay scallop (Argopecten irradians irradians) and implications for recruitment of the sea scallop (Placopecten magellanicus) on Georges Bank

The invasive colonial tunicate Didemnum vexillum has become widespread in New England waters, colonizing large areas of shell-gravel bottom on Georges Bank including commercial sea scallop (Placopecten magellanicus) grounds. Didemnum vexillum colonies are also fouling coastal shellfish aquaculture gear which increases maintenance costs and may affect shellfish growth rates. We hypothesized that D. vexillum will continue to spread and may affect shellfish larval settlement and survival. We conducted a laboratory experiment to assess interactions between larval bay scallops (Argopectin irradians irradians) and D. vexillum. We found that larval bay scallops avoid settling on D. vexillum colonies, possibly deterred by the low pH of the tunicate’s surface tissue. The results of this study suggest that widespread colonization of substrata by D. vexillum could affect scallop recruitment by reducing the area of quality habitats available for settlement. We propose that the bay scallop can serve as a surrogate for the sea scallop in estimating the negative impact D. vexillum could have on the recruitment of sea scallops on Georges Bank.