Endothall species selectivity evaluation: northern latitude aquatic plant community

Species selectivity of the aquatic herbicide dipotassium salt of endothall (Aquathol® K) was evaluated on plant species typically found in northern latitude aquatic plant communities. Submersed species included Eurasian watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum L.), curlyleaf pondweed (Potamogeton crispus L.), Illinois pondweed (Potamogeton illinoensis Morong.), sago pondweed (Potamogeton pectinatus L.), coontail (Ceratophyllum demersum L.), elodea (Elodea canadensis Michx.) and wildcelery (Vallisneria americana L.). Emergent and floating-leaf plant species evaluated were cattail (Typha latifolia L.), smartweed (Polygonum hydropiperoides Michx.), pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata L.) and spatterdock (Nuphar advena Aiton). The submersed species evaluations were conducted in 7000 L mesocosm tanks, and treatment rates included 0, 0.5 1.0, 2.0, and 4.0 mg/L active ingredient (ai) endothall (dipotassium salt of endothall). The exposure period consisted of a 24-h flow through half-life for 7 d. The cattail and smartweed evaluation was conducted in 860 L mesocosm tanks, and the spatterdock and pickerelweed evaluations were conducted in 1600 L mesocosm tanks. Treatment rates for the emergent and floating-leafed plant evaluations included 0, 0.5, 2.0 and 4.0 mg/L ai endothall, and the exposure period consisted of removing and replacing half the water from each tank, after each 24 h period for a duration of 120 h. Biomass samples were collected at 3 and 8 weeks after treatment (WAT). Endothall effectively controlled Eurasian watermilfoil and curlyleaf pondweed at all of the application rates, and no significant regrowth was observed at 8 WAT. Sago pondweed, wildcelery, and Illinois pondweed biomass were also significantly reduced following the endothall application, but regrowth was observed at 8 WAT. Coontail and elodea showed no effects from endothall application at the 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 mg/L application rates, but coontail was controlled at 4.0 mg/L rate. Spatterdock, pickerelweed, cattail, and smartweed were not injured at any of the endothall application rates.

The State of Coral Reef Ecosystems of the United States and Pacific Freely Associated States: 2005

Executive Summary: For over three decades, scientists have been documenting the decline of coral reef ecosystems, amid increasing recognition of their value in supporting high biological diversity and their many benefits to human society. Coral reef ecosystems are recognized for their benefits on many levels, such as supporting economies by nurturing fisheries and providing for recreational and tourism opportunities, providing substances useful for medical purposes, performing essential ecosystem services that protect against coastal erosion, and provid-ing a diversity of other, more intangible contributions to many cultures. In the past decade, the increased awareness regarding coral reefs has prompted action by governmental and non-governmental organizations, including increased funding from the U.S. Congress for conservation of these important ecosystems and creation of the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force (USCRTF) to coordinate activities and implement conservation measures [Presidential Executive Order 13089]. Numerous partnerships forged among Federal agencies and state, local, non-governmental, academic and private partners support activities that range from basic science to systematic monitoring of ecosystem com-ponents and are conducted by government agencies, non-governmental organizations, universities, and the private sector. This report shares the results of many of these efforts in the framework of a broad assessment of the condition of coral reef ecosystems across 14 U.S. jurisdictions and Pacific Freely Associated States. This report relies heavily on quantitative, spatially-explicit data that has been collected in the recent past and comparisons with historical data, where possible. The success of this effort can be attributed to the dedication of over 160 report contributors who comprised the expert writing teams for each jurisdiction. The content of the report chapters are the result of their considerable collaborative efforts. The writing teams, which were organized by jurisdiction and comprised of experts from numerous research and management institutions, were provided a basic chapter outline and a length limit, but the content of each chapter was left entirely to their discretion. Each jurisdictional chapter in the report is structured to: 1) describe how each of the primary threats identified in the National Coral Reef Action Strategy (NCRAS) has manifested in the jurisdiction; 2) introduce ongoing monitoring and assessment activities relative to three major categories of inquiry – water quality, benthic habitats, and associated biological communities – and provide summary results in a data-rich format; and 3) highlight recent management activities that promote conservation of coral reef ecosystems.

An oceanographic atlas of the Eastern Tropical Pacific Ocean, based on data from EASTROPIC Expedition, October-December 1955.

ENGLISH: EASTROPIC Expedition was a cooperative oceanographic study of the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean conducted during the period 2 October through 16 December 1955. The five participating agencies and the ships they operated were: Scripps Institution of Oceanography (SIO), Spencer F. Baird and Horizon; Pacific Oceanic Fisheries Investigations (POFI) of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, now Honolulu Biological Laboratory (HBL) of the U. S. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, Hugh M. Smith; California Department of Fish and Game, N. B. Scofield; the Peruvian Navy, Bondu; and the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission which operated no vessels but supplied equipment and personnel. In addition to these planned participations in EASTROPIC Expedition, valuable information was provided by CCOFI Cruise 5512 of the California Cooperative Oceanic Fisheries Investigations, conducted during the period 29 November -16 December 1955 with the two vessels Stranger and Black Douglas. While the observational programs of most of the agencies involved, in part, special hydrographic-biological studies of known features and processes in the region (see reports listed under Data Sources) the deployment of ships and therefore of observations was sufficient that EASTROPIC Expedition could be considered a survey of the eastern tropical Pacific. This report is concerned with that aspect of the Expedition and is a presentation in atlas form of most of the hydrographic data collected. For reasons given below, emphasis has been placed on the upper 300 m of the water column. SPANISH: La Expedición EASTROPIC es un estudio oceanográfico cooperativo del Océano Pacífico Oriental Tropical llevado a cabo durante el período del 2 de octubre al 16 de dícíembre de 1955. Las cinco agencias participantes y los barcos operados por ellas son los siguientes: Scrípps Instítutíon of Oceanography (SIO) , Spencer F. Baird y Horizon; Pacific Oceanic Fisheries Investigatíons (PO'FI) del U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, ahora Honolulu Biological Laboratory (BHL) del U. S. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, Hugh M. Smith; California Department of Fish and Game, N. B. Scofield; la Marina Peruana, Bondu; y la Comisión Interamericana del Atún Tropical que no dirigió ningún barco pero proporcionó equipo y personal. Además de estas participaciones planeadas en la Expedición EASTROPIC, fué suministrada información de valor por el Crucero CCOFI 5512 del California Cooperative Fisheries Investigatíons, llevado a cabo durante el período del 29 de noviembre al 16 de diciembre de 1955 con los barcos Stranger y Black Douglas. Aunque los programas de observación de la mayoría de las agencias, comprendieron en parte estudios especiales hidrográficos y biológicos de las características y de los procesos conocidos de la región (véase los informes indicados bajo Fuente de Datos), el despliegue de los barcos, y por lo tanto, de las observaciones, fué suficiente para que la Expedición EASTROPIC pudiera ser considerada como una encuesta del Pacífico Oriental Tropical. Este informe se refiere a este aspecto de la Expedición y es una presentación, en forma de un atlas, de la mayoría de los datos hidrográficos recolectados. Por las razones que se dan a continuación, se le dió énfasis a los 300 m., superiores de la columna de agua. (PDF contains 136 pages.)

The U.S. Fish Commission Steamer Albatross: A History (Papers from a Symposium)

At her launch on 19 October 1882 in Wilmington, Del., the Albatross was the world’s first large deep-sea oceanographic and fisheries research vessel, and she would go on to have a distinguished 40-year career, ranging from the north Atlantic Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico, around Cape Horn in 1887–88, and into the North Pacific. By 1908, Deputy Fish Commissioner Hugh M. Smith reported that “The Albatross has contributed more to the knowledge of marine biology than has any other vessel.” And, of course, her career continued for another 13 years, being decommissioned in late 1921, serving later as a training vessel for nautical cadets, and disappearing from the records in Hamburg, Germany, in late 1928.

The Great Albatross Philippine Expedition and Its Fishes

The Philippine Expedition of 1907-10 was the longest and most extensive assignment of the Albatross's 39-year career. It came about because the United States had acquired the Philippines following the Spanish-American War of 1898 and the bloody Philippine Insurection of 1899-1902. The purpose of the expedition was to surbey and assess the aquatic resources of the Philippine Islands. Dr. Hugh M. Smith, the Deputy Commissioner of the U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, was the Director of the Expedition. Other scientific participants were Frederick M. Chamberlain, Lewis Radcliffe, Paul Bartsch, Harry C. Fasset, Clarence Wells, Albert Burrows, Alvin Seale, and Roy Chapman Andrews. The expedition consisted of a series of cruises, each beginning and ending in Manila and exploring a different part of the island group. In addition to the Philippines proper, the ship also explored parts of the Dutch East Indies and areas around Hong Kong and Taiwan. The expedition returned great quantities of fish and invertebrate speciments as well as hydrographic and fisheries data; most of the material was eventually deposited in the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of Natural History. The fisehs were formally accessioned into the museum in 1922 and fell under the car of Barton A. Bean, Assistant Curator of Fishes, who then recruited Henry W. Fowler to work up the material. Fowler completed his studies of the entire collection, but only part of it was ever published, due in part to the economic constraints caused by the Depression. The material from the Philippine Expedition constituted the largest single accession of fishes ever received by the museum. These speciments are in good condition today and are still being used in scientific research.

History of Whaling and Estimated Kill of Right Whales, Balaena glacialis, in the Northeastern United States, 1620–1924

This study, part of a broader investigation of the history of exploitation of right whales, Balaena glacialis, in the western North Atlantic, emphasizes U.S. shore whaling from Maine to Delaware (from lat. 45°N to 38°30'N) in the period 1620–1924. Our broader study of the entire catch history is intended to provide an empirical basis for assessing past distribution and abundance of this whale population. Shore whaling may have begun at Cape Cod, Mass., in the 1620’s or 1630’s; it was certainly underway there by 1668. Right whale catches in New England waters peaked before 1725, and shore whaling at Cape Cod, Martha’s Vineyard, and Nantucket continued to decline through the rest of the 18th century. Right whales continued to be taken opportunistically in Massachusetts, however, until the early 20th century. They were hunted in Narragansett Bay, R.I., as early as 1662, and desultory whaling continued in Rhode Island until at least 1828. Shore whaling in Connecticut may have begun in the middle 1600’s, continuing there until at least 1718. Long Island shore whaling spanned the period 1650–1924. From its Dutch origins in the 1630’s, a persistent shore whaling enterprise developed in Delaware Bay and along the New Jersey shore. Although this activity was most profi table in New Jersey in the early 1700’s, it continued there until at least the 1820’s. Whaling in all areas of the northeastern United States was seasonal, with most catches in the winter and spring. Historically, right whales appear to have been essentially absent from coastal waters south of Maine during the summer and autumn. Based on documented references to specific whale kills, about 750–950 right whales were taken between Maine and Delaware, from 1620 to 1924. Using production statistics in British customs records, the estimated total secured catch of right whales in New England, New York, and Pennsylvania between 1696 and 1734 was 3,839 whales based on oil and 2,049 based on baleen. After adjusting these totals for hunting loss (loss-rate correction factor = 1.2), we estimate that 4,607 (oil) or 2,459 (baleen) right whales were removed from the stock in this region during the 38-year period 1696–1734. A cumulative catch estimate of the stock’s size in 1724 is 1,100–1,200. Although recent evidence of occurrence and movements suggests that right whales continue to use their traditional migratory corridor along the U.S. east coast, the catch history indicates that this stock was much larger in the 1600’s and early 1700’s than it is today. Right whale hunting in the eastern United States ended by the early 1900’s, and the species has been protected throughout the North Atlantic since the mid 1930’s. Among the possible reasons for the relatively slow stock recovery are: the very small number of whales that survived the whaling era to become founders, a decline in environmental carrying capacity, and, especially in recent decades, mortality from ship strikes and entanglement in fishing gear.

Peces y aves del Paraguay natural ilustrado 1967. Manuscrito preparado bajo la dirección de Mariano N. Castex, 511 pp.

Este documento reproduce parte de la magnífica e importante obra del P. Francisco José Sánchez Labrador realizada durante su estadía en América desde su arribo en 1734 hasta la expulsión de la orden en 1767. Esta versión digital corresponde al libro editado por la Compañía General Fabril Editora S. A. en 1968 y cuyo manuscrito fuera preparado bajo la dirección del Dr. Mariano N. Castex (imagen).

National summary of NOAA's shallow-water benthic habitat mapping of U.S. coral reef ecosystems

Coral reef ecosystems are some of the most complex and important ecosystems in the marine environment. They are also among the most biologically diverse and economically valuable ecosystems on earth, producing billions of dollars in food, as well as providing a suite of ecological services, such as recreation and tourism activities and coastal protection from storm and wave action. Yet, despite their value and importance, these fragile ecosystems are declining at an alarming rate (Waddell and Clarke (eds.) 2008) due to a myriad of threats both natural and manmade, including climate change, fishing pressure, and runoff and sedimentation. In response, the Unites States Coal Reef Task Force was established in 1998 by Presidential Executive Order 13089 to lead U.S. efforts to preserve and protect the nation’s coral reef ecosystems. In order to better understand the current state of coral reef ecosystems and successfully mitigate the impacts of stressors, informational products, such as benthic (or sea floor) habitat maps, are critical. Benthic habitat maps support the ability to prioritize areas for further study and protection, and offer a baseline to evaluate the changes in ecosystems over time. In 2000, the United States Coral Reef Task Force charged NOAA with leading federal efforts to produce comprehensive digital maps of all U.S. shallow-water (approximately 0 to 30 m in depth) coral reef ecosystem habitats.

Developing alternative shoreline armoring strategies: the living shoreline approach in North Carolina

This paper reviews the scientific data on the ecosystem services provided by shoreline habitats, the evidence for adverse impacts from bulkheading on those habitats and services, and describes alternative approaches to shoreline stabilization, which minimize adverse impacts to the shoreline ecosystem. Alternative shoreline stabilization structures that incorporate natural habitats, also known as living shorelines, have been popularized by environmental groups and state regulatory agencies in the mid-Atlantic. Recent data on living shoreline projects in North Carolina that include a stone sill demonstrate that the sills increase sedimentation rates, that after 3 years marshes behind the sills have slightly reduced biomass, and that the living shoreline projects exhibit similar rates of fishery utilization as nearby natural fringing marshes. Although the current emphasis on shoreline armoring in Puget Sound is on steeper, higher-energy shorelines, armoring of lower-energy shorelines may become an issue in the future with expansion of residential development and projected rates of sea level rise. The implementation of regulatory policy on estuarine shoreline stabilization in North Carolina and elsewhere is presented. The regulatory and public education issues experienced in North Carolina, which have made changes in estuarine shoreline stabilization policy difficult, may inform efforts to adopt a sustainable shoreline armoring strategy in Puget Sound. A necessary foundation for regulatory change in shoreline armoring policy, and public support for that change, is rigorous scientific assessment of the variety of services that natural shoreline habitats provide both to the ecosystem and to coastal communities, and evidence demonstrating that shoreline armoring can adversely impact the provision of those services.

Coral health and disease in the Pacific: vision for action

Shallow coral reefs in the IndoPacific contain the highest diversity of marine organisms in the world, with approximately 1500 described species of fish, over 500 species of scleractinian corals, and an estimated 1-10 million organisms yet to be characterized (Reaka-Kudla et al. 1994). These centers of marine biodiversity are facing significant, multiple threats to reef community and habitat structure and function, resulting in local to wide-scale regional damage. Wilkinson (2004) characterized the major pressures as including (1) global climate change, (2) diseases, plagues and invasive species, (3) direct human pressures, (4) poor governance and lack of political will, and (5) international action or inaction. Signs that the natural plasticity of reef ecosystems has been exceeded in many areas from the effects of environmental (e.g., global climate change) and anthropogenic (e.g., land use, pollution) stressors is evidenced by the loss of 20% of the world’s coral reefs (Wilkinson 2004). Predictions are that another 24% (Wilkinson 2006) are under imminent risk of collapse and an additional 26% are under a longer term threat from reduced fitness, disease outbreaks, and increased mortality. These predictions indicate that the current list of approximately 30-40 fatal diseases impacting corals will expand as will the frequency and extent of “coral bleaching” (Waddell 2005; Wilkinson 2004). Disease and corallivore outbreaks, in combination with multiple, concomitant human disturbances are compromising corals and coral reef communities to the point where their ability to rebound from natural disturbances is being lost.

The state of coral reef ecosystems of the United States and Pacific Freely Associated States: 2008

In the past decade, increased awareness regarding the declining condition of U.S. coral reefs has prompted various actions by governmental and non-governmental organizations. Presidential Executive Order 13089 created the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force (USCRTF) in 1998 to coordinate federal and state/territorial activities (Clinton, 1998), and the Coral Reef Conservation Act of 2000 provided Congressional funding for activities to conserve these important ecosystems, including mapping, monitoring and assessment projects carried out through the support of NOAA’s CRCP. Numerous collaborations forged among federal agencies and state, local, non-governmental, academic and private partners now support a variety of monitoring activities. This report shares the results of many of these monitoring activities, relying heavily on quantitative, spatially-explicit data that has been collected in the recent past and comparisons with historical data where possible. The success of this effort can be attributed to the dedication of over 270 report contributors who comprised the expert writing teams in the jurisdictions and contributed to the National Level Activities and National Summary chapters. The scope and content of this report are the result of their dedication to this considerable collaborative effort. Ultimately, the goal of this report is to answer the difficult but vital question: what is the condition of U.S. coral reef ecosystems? The report attempts to base a response on the best available science emerging from coral reef ecosystem monitoring programs in 15 jurisdictions across the country. However, few monitoring programs have been in place for longer than a decade, and many have been initiated only within the past two to five years. A few jurisdictions are just beginning to implement monitoring programs and face challenges stemming from a lack of basic habitat maps and other ecosystem data in addition to adequate training, capacity building, and technical support. There is also a general paucity of historical data describing the condition of ecosystem resources before major human impacts occurred, which limits any attempt to present the current conditions within an historical context and contributes to the phenomenon of shifting baselines (Jackson, 1997; Jackson et al., 2001; Pandolfi et al., 2005).

Status of the coral reef ecosystems in the U.S. Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico: Florida, Flower Garden Banks, Puerto Rico, Navassa and USVI

This chapter covers coral reef areas under the jurisdiction of the USA in the Wider Caribbean: Florida; Flower Garden Banks; Puerto Rico; U.S. Virgin Islands; and Navassa. The following information is condensed from six chapters of The State of Coral Reef Ecosystems of the United States and Pacific Freely Associated States: 2008. Access to the full text of this comprehensive report is available at: http://ccma.nos.noaa.gov/stateofthereefs.

Atmospheric carbon dioxide and the climatic record

This paper is an attempt to provide a summary review of conclusions from previous studies on this subject. They have been organized under the following subject headings: Conceptualization of the greenhouse effect; The climatic effect of doubled carbon dioxide; Interpretation of the climatic record; Diagnosis of apparent and possible model deficiencies; The paleoclimatic record.

Effects of iso-nitrogenous and iso-phosphorus fertilizers as nutrient sources on carp polyculture in Bangladesh

A 120 day long experiment was conducted to find out the effects of cow manure with urea and triple super phosphate (CUT), poultry manure with urea and triple super phosphate (PUT) and cow manure with poultry manure (CP) having similar quantities of nitrogen and phosphorus on pond productivity and fish yield. The stocking fish were rohu (Labeo rohita), catla ( Catla catla) and mrigal ( Cirrhinus mrigala) in each treatment pond at the rate of 10000/ha. All ponds were fertilized fortnightly at the rate of 4000 kg/ha cow manure with 62 kg/ha urea and 65 kg/ha TSP, 2700 kg/ha poultry manure with 62 kg/ha urea and 16 kg/ha TSP, and 4000kg/ha cow manure with 2700 kg/ha poultry manure for the treatment CUT, PUT and CP respectively. Each treatment contained an iso-nitrogen and iso-phosphorus of 56 kg and 46 kg respectively. Though the physico-chemical parameters were more or less similar in all ponds, the chlorophyll-a content and abundance of total plankton were significantly higher (P< 0.05) in the ponds receiving the fertilizer treatment of PUT than those of other treatments. Final growth as well as per unit production of fish of treatment PUT (1773 kg/ha) was significantly higher (P< 0.05) than that of treatment CP (1528 kg/ha) followed by that of treatment CUT (1336 kg/ha). The over all results showed that poultry manure with urea and triple super phosphate proved to be superior to cow manure with urea and triple super phosphate, and poultry manure with cow manure, even when nitrogen and phosphorus content was similar, in carp polyculture system under prevailing conditions.