SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 15
Download to read offline
A Shellfish Study for the Proposed Expansion of Fish Finder Marine
    3645 Atlantic Brigantine Boulevard, Brigantine, New Jersey
                       December 8th & 9th 2011




                         Survey Conducted For:

                          Fish Finder Marine
                      Joe & Kim Fumo, Owner(s)
                   3645 Atlantic Brigantine Boulevard
                     Brigantine, New Jersey 08203

                         Survey Conducted By:

                Richard Stockton College of New Jersey’s
                        Coastal Research Center
                           30 Wilson Avenue
                        Port Republic, NJ. 08241
                             (609) 652-4245
                        December 8th & 9th, 2011
Fish Finder   1


A Shellfish Study for the Proposed Expansion of Fish Finder Marine
    3645 Atlantic Brigantine Boulevard, Brigantine, Atlantic County, New Jersey
                                   December 8th & 9th, 2011


Introduction
A shellfish study was performed on December 8th & 9th 2011 to determine if Fish Finder
Marine’s environmental conditions support a viable shellfish population. The shellfish study
was designed and implemented using the Shellfish Survey Guidelines published by the New
Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) as authorized by Jeffrey C. Lockwood,
1991 National Marine Fisheries Service, Habitat and Protected Resources Division. The
proposed expansion of Fish Finder Marine involves extending the existing (western) fixed pier to
a distance 260 feet from the existing bulkhead. The pier would extend in the south to north
direction and would have 5 finger piers spaced 20 feet apart. The proposed marina is bordered
on both sides by existing dock structures. The bay floor slopes from a depth at the bulkhead of -
0.5 feet out to a depth of -17.7 feet NGVD 27. The target species are those which fall under the
NJAC’s Coastal Zone Management Rules under Shellfish habitat. They include: Hard Clam
(Mercenaria mercenaria), Soft Clam (Mya arenaria), Easter Oyster (Crassostrea virginica), Bay
Scallops (Argopecten irradians), and Blue Mussels (Mytilus edulis), all of which are shellfish of
commercial and biological significance.

Methods and Materials
The study area was selected by analyzing the area of the proposed marina expansion and evenly
distributing the entire study area into uniform sub-sections (chart 1). The range of water depths
was from -0.5 to -17.7 feet below the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1927 shown in
Catalano’s USACOE Permit Plan.

Using ESRI ArcGIS 9.3.1 a virtual grid was set up in the same approximate position of the
proposed dock system with corresponding known locations totaling 24 points (chart 1). These
points within the grid served as the locations for both the juvenile and adult shellfish survey.
Using the Leica RTK GPS system 1200, the positions of all the data points for both the juvenile
shellfish study and the adult shellfish study were obtained.

To conduct the juvenile shellfish study the 24 data point locations stored on the GPS system
were used as waypoints to locate each sample site (chart 1, table 3). At each location, a single
anchor was set to help stabilize the boat. A Wildco Ponar grab sample; with an area of 0.75 sq.
ft., was used to acquire the samples. Replicate grabs were often necessary to obtain a full sample
size. Once a full sample was obtained, the material was sifted through a 5mm sieve and
inspected for juvenile shellfish. This process was repeated at each individual location.
Additional variables such as sediment type, additional bivalve mollusks, as well as aquatic
vegetation were also noted at each site. At each location the abundance per square foot (ft2) and
size distribution (mean and range) were also reported (tables 1 and 2).

To conduct the adult shellfish study, the site locations stored on the GPS were again used to
navigate to the pre-established locations (chart 1, table 3). At twelve locations two anchors were
set, one at the bow and one at the stern. The anchor lines were let out equally and incrementally
in 10’ sections. Each 10’ section was raked using a 16” x 3” toothed bull rake at each location
Fish Finder   2


until a 30’ transect distance was achieved. At all 24 locations a Wildco Ponar grab sample; with
an area of 0.75 sq. ft., was used to acquire samples. Replicate grabs were often necessary to
obtain a full sample size. Additional variables such as sediment type, other bivalve mollusks, as
well as aquatic vegetation were also noted at each site. At each location, the abundance per ft2
and size distribution (mean and range) was also reported (Tables 1 and 2).


Results

A total of 20 Hard Clams (Mercenaria mercenaria) were found in the study area. The size
frequency distribution of the clams found revealed that multiple year classes were present at the
site. This indicates that natural recruitment is taking place in the study area (table 1, chart 2).

Juvenile Shellfish
As reported above the study area was sampled for juvenile shellfish by utilizing a Wildco Ponar
Grab Sample with an area of 0.75 sq. ft. Twenty four sites were established and sampled
representing the area of the proposed marina expansion. One juvenile Hard Clam (Mercenaria
mercenaria) was found at location S4 resulting in a density 1.333 clams/sq. ft. at that location A
total of 18 sq. ft. was sampled producing an overall Hard Clam density of 0.055 clams/sq. ft.
across the total surface area. Only one juvenile Hard Clam was collected so the mean size was
1.2 cm with a range of 0 (table 1).

Adult Shellfish
As reported above the twelve sites were sampled using a 16” x 3” toothed bull rake and all 24
sites were sampled using a Wildco Ponar Grab Sample with an area of 0.75 sq.ft.. A total of 19
adult Hard Clams (Mercenaria mercenaria) were found in the entire area. Each raked site was
raked a distance of 30’. Clams were found in 11 of the 24 sites. Locations S5 (1.333 clams/sq.
ft.), S11 (4 clams/sq. ft.), and S23 (1.333 clams/sq. ft.), have densities which indicate viable
shellfish habitat. However, a total of 497.88 square feet was sampled with an overall density of
0.038 clams/sq. ft. across the entire area. The mean size of the clams collected was 6.37 cm with
an overall range of 4.6 from 4.3 to 8.9 cm (table 1).

Sedimentology
The sedimentology of the area consisted of fine sandy black mud, very fine sandy black mud,
fine muddy black/grey sand, fine muddy black sand, medium muddy black/grey sand, and black
mud (table 2).

Aquatic Vegetation
There were 2 major species of aquatic vegetation in the study area, Sea Lettuce (Ulva lactuca),
and Agardh’s Red Weed (Agardhiella tenera). At 8 locations Phragmites roots were found,
indicating that at one time a marsh existed here. The installation of the bulkhead likely resulted
in shoreline retreat as a result of scouring (table 2).

Other Shellfish
A total of, 3 Rock Crab (Cancer irroratus), 3 Mud Dog Whelk (Nassarius obsoletus), 2 juvenile
Blue Crab (Callinectes sapidus), and 1 adult Blue Crab (Callinectes sapidus), were found in the
process of locating shellfish (table 1).
Fish Finder   3




Conclusion
The study area at 3645 Atlantic Brigantine Boulevard, Brigantine, Atlantic County, NJ is the
location of the proposed expansion of Fish Finder Marine. The area was surveyed by utilizing
ArcGIS software, GPS equipment, grab sampling techniques, and a clam rake to help isolate
shellfish in accordance with the NJAC’s Coastal Zone Management Rules. It states that “a
shellfish habitat area is defined as an area which… has a current shellfish density equal to or
greater than 0.20 shellfish per square foot”. Both the juvenile and the adult shellfish study had
densities values (averaged across the total surface area) below the cited threshold. Hard Clam
(Mercenaria mercenaria) was the only relevant shellfish species found in the study area. There
were small areas which did support zones of viable habitat according to the cited density
threshold. Location S4 yielded 1.333 juvenile Hard Clams per square foot. Location S5 yielded
1.333 adult Hard Clams per square foot. Location S11 yielded 4 adult Hard Clams per square
foot. Location S23 yielded 1.333 Hard Clams per square foot. The juvenile clams (those
surveyed with the 5mm sieve screen) produced a value averaged across the total surface area
sampled by the ponar grab samples (18.0 ft2) at 0.055 clams per square foot. The adults
recovered in the rake and ponar grab sample produced a value averaged across the total surface
area of 497.88 square feet yielded 0.038 clams per square foot. These numbers indicate that the
clam density within the area delineated for the installation of a marina expansion at Fish Finder
Marine does not substantiate a viable Hard Clam habitat.
Fish Finder   4




     Water Quality Characteristics for Fish Finder Marine,
                      Brigantine, NJ.
                       Site of the Proposed Marina Expansion

  Temperature, Salinity, Dissolved Oxygen, Depth, pH, Specific Conductivity, and
                       Turbidity Data for Shellfish Habitat

Introduction:

The Richard Stockton Coastal Research Center (CRC) completed a juvenile and adult hard clam
study for the proposed development of Fish Finder Marine, Brigantine, NJ in December 2011.
Twenty four sites were survey for juvenile and adult hard clams. In this study, one juvenile clams
was observed and 19 adult clams were obtained within 497.88 square feet of space raked in the
project area. A water quality assessment was also included in the proposal based on the follow
variables: temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen, depth, pH, specific conductivity, and turbidity
for the water just above the sediment surface.

Water Quality at the Site:

The CRC complied the data on December 8th & 9th 2011 with a study of the water quality
parameters for the 24 sites subjected to clam raking or grab sampling using a YSI water quality
probe to obtain the results listed in table 7, below. The table lists the site location using the same
designations used in the clam study. The dissolved oxygen values are shown as both a percentage
of the maximum level in seawater and as milligrams per liter of water. The depth of
measurement at the mid-tidal elevation stage the work was done is also listed. The specific
conductivity is given as well although the salinity is the most common expression of the salt
content of the water.

Conclusions:

The average temperature of 10.92 degrees Celsius is normal for the time of year within the bay
environment of Atlantic County. The salinity is also within normal ranges for mid-tide
conditions behind the barrier island, however, the average value of 28.0 ppt failed to fall within
the optimal range for the Hard Clam of 26.5 to 27.5 ppt. The dissolved oxygen levels are
excellent with average values of 9.66 mg/L, and 105.80% respectively. The pH value of 7.91 is
within the normal range for all stages of Hard Clam development. None of the remaining water
quality parameters including depth, specific conductivity (44.32 mS/cm), and turbidity (9.30
NTU), would dictate that shellfish could not live in the waters of the proposed development of
Fish Finder Marine (see appendix at end).
Fish Finder   5
Fish Finder   6




                 Chart 2: Length Frequency for Hard Clams Collected During Site
              Inspection at Fish Finder Marine, Brigantine, NJ. December 8th & 9th
         8



         7



         6



         5



Frequency 4



         3



         2



         1



         0
                  0-25         25-38        38 51                51-63   63-76       76-102
                                               Data Bin Ranges (mm)
Fish Finder   7


                           Table 1: Sample Sites Used to Determine the Density of Adult and Juvenile Hard Clams
Transect   Juvenile Clams (live)      Adult Clams (live)      Clams Per Site        Other Shellfish            Observations         Transect Length   Grab Sample Area   Juvenile Hard Clam Density   Adult Hard Clam Density   Mean   Range

  S1                 -               1 Hard Clam: 8.4 cm            1                      -                       Rocks                 30'               0.75'                     -                        0.024             8.4      0

                                                                                                            1 Adult Hard Clam
  S2                 -               1 Hard Clam: 5.5 cm            1                      -                                             30'               0.75'                     -                        0.024             5.5      0
                                                                                                                  Shell
                                   2 Hard Clam: 7.2 cm, 7.4                                                 2 Adult Hard Clam
  S3                 -                                              2                      -                                             30'               0.75'                     -                         0.05             7.3     0.2
                                             cm                                                                Shells, Rocks
  S4       1 Hard Clam: 1.2 cm                -                     1                      -                         -                     -               0.75'                   1.333                         -              1.2      0
                                                                                                            Razor Clam Shell,
  S5                 -               1 Hard Clam: 4.8 cm            1                      -                                               -               0.75'                     -                        1.333             4.8      0
                                                                                                            Gravel in substrate
                                                                                     1 Blue Crab
                                                                                                           Blue Mussel Shells,
  S6                 -                        -                     0           (Callinectes sapidus ):                                    -               0.75'                     -                           -               -       -
                                                                                                            Hard Clam Shells
                                                                                        4.2 cm

                                                                                                             1 Adult Hard Clam
  S7                 -               1 Hard Clam: 7.1 cm            1                      -                Shell, 1 Adult Razor         30'               0.75'                     -                        0.024             7.1      0
                                                                                                                 Clam Shell


                                                                                 2 Rock Crabs (Cancer        Rocks, Hard Clam
                                   3 Hard Clam: 4.6 cm, 4.3
  S8                 -                                              3           irroratus ): 3.7 cm, 4.1    shells, Tube worm            30'               0.75'                     -                        0.073             4.6     0.8
                                         cm, 5.1 cm
                                                                                          cm               casings, Oyster shells

                                   5 Hard Clam: 5.7 cm, 6.3
  5.7                -              cm, 8.3 cm, 8.0 cm, 5.7         5                      -                         -                   30'               0.75'                     -                        0.123             6.8     2.6
                                              cm
                                                                                 1 Mud Dog Whelk           Blue Mussel Shells,
  S10                -                        -                     0                                                                      -               0.75'                     -                           -               -       -
                                                                                (Nassarius obsoletus)      Jingle Clam Shells
                                   3 Hard Clam: 7.4 cm, 4.4                      1 Rock Crab (Cancer
  S11                -                                              3                                       Tube worm casings              -               0.75'                     -                          4               5.86     3
                                          cm, 5.8 cm                               irroratus): 3.5 cm
                                                                                 1 Juvenile Blue Crab
                                                                               (Callinectes sapidus): 2.6 Significant amount of
  S12                -                        -                     0                                                                      -               0.75'                     -                           -               -       -
                                                                                cm, 2 Mud Dog Whelk        Tube worm casings,
                                                                                 (Nassarius obsoletus)


  S13                -                        -                     0                      -                         -                   30'               0.75'                     -                           -               -       -



                                                                                                           Tube worm, Juvenile
  S14                -                        -                     0                      -                                             30'               0.75'                     -                           -               -       -
                                                                                                             Hard Clam Shells
                                                                                                            Blue mussel Shells,
  S15                -               1 Hard Clam: 6.2 cm            1                      -                tube worm casings,           30'               0.75'                     -                        0.024             6.2      0
                                                                                                                   rocks
                                                                                                           1 Tube Worm, Tube
  S16                -                        -                     0                      -               Worm Casings, Snail             -               0.75'                     -                           -               -       -
                                                                                                                   shells
                                                                                                              24 Tube Worms,
  S17                -                        -                     0                      -               Crushed Blue Mussel             -               0.75'                     -                           -               -       -
                                                                                                                   Shells
                                                                                                           Crushed Blue Mussel
  S18                -                        -                     0                      -                Shells, Snail Shells,          -               0.75'                     -                           -               -       -
                                                                                                           Tube Worm Casings

  S19                -                        -                     0                      -                         -                   30'               0.75'                     -                           -               -       -
  S20                -                        -                     0                      -                         -                   30'               0.75'                     -                           -               -       -

  S21                -                        -                     0                      -               36 Blue mussel shells         30'               0.75'                     -                           -               -       -

                                                                                                             24 juvenile clam
                                                                               1 Blue Crab (Callinectes     shells, Hard Clam
  S22                -                        -                     0                                                                      -               0.75'                     -                           -               -       -
                                                                                   sapidus): 2.9 cm        Shells, Blue Mussel
                                                                                                                  Shells

                                                                                                           Crushed Blue Mussel
  S23                -               1 Hard Clam: 8.9 cm            1                      -                Shells, 12 Juvenile            -               0.75'                     -                        1.333             8.9      0
                                                                                                            Hard Clam Shells

                                                                                                           Clam Shells, Crushed
  S24                -                        -                     0                      -               Blue Mussel Shells, 1           -               0.75'                     -                           -               -       -
                                                                                                               Tape Worm

           Adult Shellfish Study: 497.88 sq. ft. sampled, 19 adult Hard Clams = 0.038 clams/sq. ft.; Juvenile Shellfish Study: 18 sq. ft. sampled, 1 Juvenile Hard Clams = 0.055 clams/ sq. ft.
Fish Finder   8



         Table 2: Aquatic Vegetation & Sediment Type
Site #          Species & viability of aquatic vegetation                               Sediment
         Agardh's Red Weed (Agardhiella tenera), and Minimal amounts of Sea
 S1                                                                             Fine Muddy Sand, Black/Grey
                              Lettuce (Ulva lactua)
          Minimal amounts of Sea Lettuce (Ulva lactua ), and Agardh's Red
 S2                                                                                Fine Muddy Sand, Black
                            Weed (Agardhiella tenera )
           Agardh's Red Weed (Agardhiella tenera) , and Sea Lettuce (Ulva
 S3                                                                            Medium Muddy Sand, Black/Grey
                                    lactua)
  S4                              Phragmities Roots                                Fine Sandy Mud, Black

  S5                              Phragmities Roots                                Fine Sandy Mud, Black

  S6                              Phragmities Roots                                Fine Sandy Mud, Black

 S7         Ahardh's Red Weed (Agardhiella tenera) , and Phragmities Roots     Medium Muddy Sand, Black/Grey


 S8                               Phragmities Roots                              Very Fine Sandy Mud, Black

 S9                Sea Lettuce (Ulva lactua) , and Phragmities Roots             Very Fine Sandy Mud, Black
 S10                              Phragmities Roots                              Very Fine Sandy Mud, Black
 S11                          Sea Lettuce (Ulva lactua)                          Very Fine Sandy Mud, Black
 S12                             no vegitation found                             Very Fine Sandy Mud, Black
 S13                               no vegitation found                                  Mud, Black
         Sea Lettuce (Ulva lactua), and Minimal amounts of Agardh's Red Weed
 S14                                                                             Very Fine Sand Mud, Black
                                  (Agardhiella tenera)
 S15                            Sea Lettuce (Ulva lactua)                        Very Fine Sand Mud, Black
 S16                             no vegitation found                             Very Fine Sandy Mud, Black
 S17                             no vegitation found                             Very Fine Sandy Mud, Black
 S18                              Phragmities Roots                              Very Fine Sandy Mud, Black
 S19                Minimal amounts of Sea Lettuce (Ulva lactua )                Very Fine Sand Mud, Black
 S20                             no vegitation found                             Very Fine Sand Mud, Black
 S21                             no vegitation found                                    Mud, Black
 S22                             no vegitation found                             Very Fine Sandy Mud, Black
 S23                             no vegitation found                             Very Fine Sandy Mud, Black
 S24                             no vegitation found                               Fine Sandy Mud, Black
Fish Finder   9




Table 3: Fish Finder Marine Shellfish Study
   December 8th & 9th Survey Points

    Transect    Easting     Northing
       S1      522756.72   204668.65
       S2      522731.79   204667.87
       S3      522706.71   204667.10
       S4      522756.20   204683.68
       S5      522731.22   204682.92
       S6      522706.17   204682.07
       S7      522755.80   204698.64
       S8      522730.74   204697.95
       S9      522705.79   204697.06
      S10      522755.25   204713.77
      S11      522730.26   204712.78
      S12      522705.27   204712.09
      S13      522754.72   204728.62
      S14      522729.79   204727.72
      S15      522704.86   204727.05
      S16      522754.30   204743.53
      S17      522729.30   204742.92
      S18      522704.30   204742.04
      S19      522753.88   204758.60
      S20      522728.83   204757.86
      S21      522703.78   204757.03
      S22      522753.36   204773.60
      S23      522728.38   204772.81
      S24      522703.36   204772.10
Fish Finder   10



           Table 4: Fish Finder Marine Shellfish Study Water Quality Data


                                                                                   Specific
     Temperature Salinity Dissolved Oxygen   Dissolved Oxygen   Depth           Conductivity
Site   (Celsius)  (ppt)        (as a %)           (mg/L)        (feet)   pH       (mS/cm)      Turbidity (NTU)
 S1     10.89      27.41        111.1              10.07        0.638    7.90      44.21            9.30
 S2     11.34      27.55        112.6              10.17        1.490    7.90      44.51            8.90
 S3     11.23      27.64        121.5              10.80        1.150    7.86      44.48            8.76
 S4     11.24      27.54        102.9               9.45        0.951    7.93      44.05            9.60
 S5     11.40      27.55        102.8               9.40        1.468    7.92      44.49            9.55
 S6     11.36      27.53        101.0               9.17        1.167    7.93      44.12            9.90
 S7     10.80      28.81        103.8               9.32        2.760    7.94      44.74            8.60
 S8     10.89      28.77        111.0              10.14        2.993    7.92      44.66            9.20
 S9     10.79      28.74        114.6              10.40        3.842    7.75      44.62            9.00
S10     10.83      28.57        116.0              10.20        3.813    7.93      44.45            9.80
S11     10.77      28.43        97.5                9.08        3.150    7.93      44.31            8.80
S12     10.69      28.71        109.8               9.95        4.569    7.88      44.60            10.10
S13     10.81      28.46        107.3               9.74        2.701    7.95      44.25            8.20
S14     10.76      28.49        104.7               9.51        5.844    7.95      44.33            9.20
S15     10.64      28.42        105.1               9.63        3.841    7.94      44.27            8.50
S16     10.61      28.28        102.6               9.45        6.261    7.93      44.00            9.10
S17     10.56      28.17        102.3               9.42        6.449    7.95      43.89            9.70
S18     10.54       28.1        101.5                9.4        2.874    7.94      43.76            10.50
S19     11.08      27.41         90.7               8.90        7.801    7.92      44.18             9.10
S20     11.07      27.45        102.8               9.41        6.070    7.92      44.78             8.80
S21     11.19      27.45        106.4               9.56        2.680    7.92      44.09             9.30
S22     10.84      27.49         99.9               9.25        14.800   7.91      44.65            10.10
S23     10.93      27.48        109.7               9.97        15.230   7.90      44.23            9.80
S24     10.85      27.52        101.7               9.39        8.760    7.91      44.10            9.50

Avg     10.92      28.00        105.80             9.66          4.64    7.91      44.32             9.30
Fish Finder   11




                                   References

1. J. C. Lockwood, “Shellfish Survey Guidelines”, National Marine Fisheries Service,
   Habitat and Protected Resources Division, Highlands, N.J., 1991.

2. N.J.A.C., “Coastal Zone Management Rules”, 7:7E-3.2, 19-22, (2009).

3. R. J. Catalano. PE., “Fish Finder Marine USACOE Permit Application Plan”, (2011).
Fish Finder   12




   APPENDIX OF LITERATURE FOUND DISCUSSING HARD
             CLAM HABITAT PARAMETERS
The References Below Cover Specific Parameters for Mercenaria mercenaria clams


Hill, K. (2004). Smithsonian Marine Station at Fort Pierce. Retrieved January
       13, 2012, from http://www.sms.si.edu/irlspec/mercen_mercen.htm
Abundance:

“In the IRL as in other areas within its range, Mercenaria mercenaria is most abundant in shell-
containing soft bottoms. They are also found (in decreasing order of abundance) on sand flats,
sand/mud flats and on muddy bottoms (Wells 1957; Pratt 1953). A study by Peterson et al.,
(1984) also showed that densities of 0 - 2 year old hard clams in eelgrass (Zostera marina) beds
of North Carolina was more than 5 times the average density of clams in nearby sand flats (9 per
square meter in eelgrass, vs. 1.6 per square meter in nearby sand flats. Further, hard clams from
Zostera beds appeared to be somewhat larger, on average, than those from sand flats.
Hydrodynamic baffling by seagrasses may be at least partially responsible for the observed result
(Peterson et al., 1984). Reduction in currents near the benthos enhances the deposition of fine
sediments and suspended materials between blades of seagrass, especially near patch edges.
Hydrodynamic baffling therefore provides a rich food source for juvenile clams.”

Mann, R., Harding, J. M., Southworth, M. J., Wesson, J. A. (2005). Northern
    Quahog (hard clam) Mercenaria mercenaria abundance and habitat use
    in Chesepeake Bay. Journal of Shellfisheries Research, 24(2), 509-516.
“Clam densities decreased significantly across the four types of substrate with the highest
densities observed in shell substrate followed by sand, mud and anoxic muds in order of
decreasing occupation (Kruskal Wallis, H = 1,414.27, DF = 3, P < 0.01; Fig. 3). Less than 1% of
all clams collected were from anoxic mud substrates whereas shell, sand, and mud substrates
contained 11%, 68% and 21% of clams, respectively. Although shell and sand substrates
contained the highest observed densities of hard clams, these substrate types were only present in
38% of patent tong samples collected from potential clam habitats.”

Mulholland, R. (1984). Habitat Suitability Index Models: Hard Clam. Florida
    Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit. FWS/OBS-82/10.77
SPECIFIC HABITAT REQUIREMENTS:
Embryo, Larva, Juvenile

pH. “Calabrese (1972) observed that the successful recruitment of mercenaria requires that
the pH of estuarine waters not fall below 7.0; he found no significant decrease in the number of
clam embryos developing normally within the pH range of 7.0-8.75, but that number was greatly
reduced at pH 9.0. Survival of clam larvae was normal at pH 6.25-8.75, but the range for normal
Fish Finder   13




growth was 6.75-8.50. Although clam larvae can survive at pH 6.25, a pH of 7.0 is required for
normal development of the embryo. Levels of pH below 7.0 limit recruitment of the species
(Calabrese 1972).”

Dissolved oxygen. “Morrison (1971) found that growth of shelled veligers of M. mercenaria was
normal when dissolved oxygen concentration was 4.2 mg/l or greater. Growth essentially ceased
at concentrations of 2.4 mg/l and less. Larvae survived extended exposures (14 days) to 1 mg/l
dissolved oxygen but grew little. Prolonged exposure to levels of less than 4.0 mg/l lengthened
the clam's planktonic stage and decreased its probability of survival. Embryos developed
normally at oxygen levels as low as 0.5 mg/l; however, 100% mortality occurred at 0.2 mg/l.
Fluctuations in dissolved oxygen do not affect adult hard clams as much as do fluctuations in
temperature and salinity (Stanley and DeWitt 1983). The burrowing ability of M. mercenaria was
neither severely nor permanently impaired by exposure to reduced oxygen levels (less than
1mgl1 seawater) for up to 3 weeks (Savage 1976). Pratt and Campbell (1956) found no
correlation between growth rates and various concentrations of dissolved oxygen. All life stages
tolerate nearly anoxic conditions for long periods, though they may cease growing (Stanley and
DeWitt 1983).”

Salinity. “Salinity appears to be most critical for M. mercenaria during the egg and larval stages
(Stanley and DeWitt 1983). At Long Island Sound, New York, eggs developed into straight-
hinged veligers only within the relatively narrow salinity range of 20.0 to 32.5 parts per thousand
(ppt ), The optimum for development of clam eggs was about 26.5 to 27.5 ppt (Davis 1958).
Growth of larvae, once they attained the straight-hinged stage, was comparatively good at
salinities as low as 20 ppt (Davis 1958), but Chanley (1958) found that growth of juvenile M.
mercenaria was retarded at salinities of 22.5 ppt or lower. Castagna and Chanley (1973) found
that metamorphosis of M. mercenaria from veliger to seed clam (byssal plantigrade stage) was
inhibited below 17.5 to 20 ppt.”

Temperature. “Davis and Ca1abrese (1964) noted that 1aboratory-rea red straight-hinged
veligers of M. mercenaria were capable of ingestion, but not digestion, at 10°C (50°F),- and
consequently did not grow. Growth was positively related to temperature at 18.0° to 30.0°C (64°
to 86°F). Growth of straighthinged veligers of M. mercenaria was little affected by temperature
differences within the range of 20° to 30°C (68° to 86°F). Although the optimum temperature for
growth of M. mercenaria larvae was not well defined, growth was optimum at the following
temperature/salinity combinations: 30°C (86°F)/22.5 ppt and higher, 27.5°C (81.5°F)/17.5 and
20.0 ppt, and 25°C (77°F)/15.0 ppt.”

Substrate. “The nature of the bottom substrate seems to be the main factor responsible for
settling of larvae and for the qualitative composition of bottom communities (Thorson 1955).
Keck et ale (1974) reported from laboratory studies that significantly higher (P ~ 0.05) numbers
of M. mercenaria larvae set in sand than in mud; they suggested that the addition of organic
material to the sediment may be responsible for reduced setting because of increased bacteria
levels, reduced dissolved oxygen, and increased production of hydrogen sulfide. Carriker (1959)
recommended that the substrate be firm and free of excessive organic mud for larval clam
culture; muddy bottoms can be surfaced with shells, sand, or gravel. Adult Clams were most
abundant in predominantly fine sediments, but in these sediments their abundance was generally
Fish Finder   14




a function of the coarseness of the minor constituents. Clams do not grow well in silty substrates.
Pratt and Campbell (1956) found an inverse relationship between growth of M. mercenaria and
the fineness of the sediment (expressed as percentage of silt and clay). The inferior growth was
attributed to frequent gi1l clearing, which expended energy and interfered with feeding. Johnson
(1977) also reported slower growth of M. mercenaria in finer sediment due to increased
expulsion of pseudofeces.”

Suspended solids. “Davis (1960) noted that both the larvae and egg stage are affected by
suspended solids. “Eggs did not develop correctly at silt concentrations of 3.0 or 4.0 g/L, and
straight-hinged veligers was normal at silt concentrations of 0.75g/L, retarded at 1.0 to 2.0g/L,
and negligible at 3.0 and 4.0g/L”. ”

More Related Content

What's hot

Evaluation of the oyster farming potential of the Cintra bay (southern Morocco)
Evaluation of the oyster farming potential of the Cintra bay (southern Morocco)Evaluation of the oyster farming potential of the Cintra bay (southern Morocco)
Evaluation of the oyster farming potential of the Cintra bay (southern Morocco)Origins publication
 
2000PhD dissertation Options for Co-management of an Indonesian Coastal Fishery
2000PhD dissertation Options for Co-management of an Indonesian Coastal Fishery2000PhD dissertation Options for Co-management of an Indonesian Coastal Fishery
2000PhD dissertation Options for Co-management of an Indonesian Coastal FisheryLida Pet
 
Aspects of life-history strategy of Marcusenius senegalensis (Pisces: Osteogl...
Aspects of life-history strategy of Marcusenius senegalensis (Pisces: Osteogl...Aspects of life-history strategy of Marcusenius senegalensis (Pisces: Osteogl...
Aspects of life-history strategy of Marcusenius senegalensis (Pisces: Osteogl...AI Publications
 
Jarvisetal bsb movements_01_mar10
Jarvisetal bsb movements_01_mar10Jarvisetal bsb movements_01_mar10
Jarvisetal bsb movements_01_mar10KerriL
 
Essential Fish Habitats
Essential Fish HabitatsEssential Fish Habitats
Essential Fish HabitatsJoan Moranta
 
Carrying Capacity for Pinctada maxima (Jameson 1901) Farming in Sathean Bay, ...
Carrying Capacity for Pinctada maxima (Jameson 1901) Farming in Sathean Bay, ...Carrying Capacity for Pinctada maxima (Jameson 1901) Farming in Sathean Bay, ...
Carrying Capacity for Pinctada maxima (Jameson 1901) Farming in Sathean Bay, ...IJAEMSJORNAL
 
Ridlen Journal of Coastal Zone Management
Ridlen Journal of Coastal Zone ManagementRidlen Journal of Coastal Zone Management
Ridlen Journal of Coastal Zone ManagementLindsay Ridlen
 
Redwood Ancient Forest Protecting and Restoring Marbled Murrelet Habitat
Redwood Ancient Forest Protecting and Restoring Marbled Murrelet HabitatRedwood Ancient Forest Protecting and Restoring Marbled Murrelet Habitat
Redwood Ancient Forest Protecting and Restoring Marbled Murrelet Habitat6D45520z848622K444
 
First Census of Marine Life 2010
First Census of Marine Life 2010First Census of Marine Life 2010
First Census of Marine Life 2010Juan Sarasua
 
fishing down gulf of california coastal foodwebs (Sala et al, 2004)
fishing down gulf of california coastal foodwebs (Sala et al, 2004)fishing down gulf of california coastal foodwebs (Sala et al, 2004)
fishing down gulf of california coastal foodwebs (Sala et al, 2004)Luis Gerardo López Lemus
 
Evidence for impacts by jellyfish on north sea
Evidence for impacts by jellyfish on north seaEvidence for impacts by jellyfish on north sea
Evidence for impacts by jellyfish on north searatupura
 
C2.03: Identifying essential fish habitats using oceanographic process - Grin...
C2.03: Identifying essential fish habitats using oceanographic process - Grin...C2.03: Identifying essential fish habitats using oceanographic process - Grin...
C2.03: Identifying essential fish habitats using oceanographic process - Grin...Blue Planet Symposium
 
Species Diversity of Mangroves in Catarman, Northern Samar
Species Diversity of Mangroves in Catarman, Northern SamarSpecies Diversity of Mangroves in Catarman, Northern Samar
Species Diversity of Mangroves in Catarman, Northern Samarijtsrd
 
Aspects of the Geomorphology and Limnology of some molluscinhabited freshwate...
Aspects of the Geomorphology and Limnology of some molluscinhabited freshwate...Aspects of the Geomorphology and Limnology of some molluscinhabited freshwate...
Aspects of the Geomorphology and Limnology of some molluscinhabited freshwate...iosrjce
 
Caribbean coral reefs_-_status_report_1970-2012
Caribbean coral reefs_-_status_report_1970-2012Caribbean coral reefs_-_status_report_1970-2012
Caribbean coral reefs_-_status_report_1970-2012Dr Lendy Spires
 
KMRS October Newsletter 2015
KMRS October Newsletter 2015KMRS October Newsletter 2015
KMRS October Newsletter 2015Hayley Woodland
 

What's hot (20)

Evaluation of the oyster farming potential of the Cintra bay (southern Morocco)
Evaluation of the oyster farming potential of the Cintra bay (southern Morocco)Evaluation of the oyster farming potential of the Cintra bay (southern Morocco)
Evaluation of the oyster farming potential of the Cintra bay (southern Morocco)
 
2000PhD dissertation Options for Co-management of an Indonesian Coastal Fishery
2000PhD dissertation Options for Co-management of an Indonesian Coastal Fishery2000PhD dissertation Options for Co-management of an Indonesian Coastal Fishery
2000PhD dissertation Options for Co-management of an Indonesian Coastal Fishery
 
Aspects of life-history strategy of Marcusenius senegalensis (Pisces: Osteogl...
Aspects of life-history strategy of Marcusenius senegalensis (Pisces: Osteogl...Aspects of life-history strategy of Marcusenius senegalensis (Pisces: Osteogl...
Aspects of life-history strategy of Marcusenius senegalensis (Pisces: Osteogl...
 
Jarvisetal bsb movements_01_mar10
Jarvisetal bsb movements_01_mar10Jarvisetal bsb movements_01_mar10
Jarvisetal bsb movements_01_mar10
 
Essential Fish Habitats
Essential Fish HabitatsEssential Fish Habitats
Essential Fish Habitats
 
Carrying Capacity for Pinctada maxima (Jameson 1901) Farming in Sathean Bay, ...
Carrying Capacity for Pinctada maxima (Jameson 1901) Farming in Sathean Bay, ...Carrying Capacity for Pinctada maxima (Jameson 1901) Farming in Sathean Bay, ...
Carrying Capacity for Pinctada maxima (Jameson 1901) Farming in Sathean Bay, ...
 
Ridlen Journal of Coastal Zone Management
Ridlen Journal of Coastal Zone ManagementRidlen Journal of Coastal Zone Management
Ridlen Journal of Coastal Zone Management
 
Jessica DeJean THESIS 2-26-10
Jessica DeJean THESIS 2-26-10Jessica DeJean THESIS 2-26-10
Jessica DeJean THESIS 2-26-10
 
Redwood Ancient Forest Protecting and Restoring Marbled Murrelet Habitat
Redwood Ancient Forest Protecting and Restoring Marbled Murrelet HabitatRedwood Ancient Forest Protecting and Restoring Marbled Murrelet Habitat
Redwood Ancient Forest Protecting and Restoring Marbled Murrelet Habitat
 
First Census of Marine Life 2010
First Census of Marine Life 2010First Census of Marine Life 2010
First Census of Marine Life 2010
 
fishing down gulf of california coastal foodwebs (Sala et al, 2004)
fishing down gulf of california coastal foodwebs (Sala et al, 2004)fishing down gulf of california coastal foodwebs (Sala et al, 2004)
fishing down gulf of california coastal foodwebs (Sala et al, 2004)
 
Evidence for impacts by jellyfish on north sea
Evidence for impacts by jellyfish on north seaEvidence for impacts by jellyfish on north sea
Evidence for impacts by jellyfish on north sea
 
Pfz ppt
Pfz pptPfz ppt
Pfz ppt
 
C2.03: Identifying essential fish habitats using oceanographic process - Grin...
C2.03: Identifying essential fish habitats using oceanographic process - Grin...C2.03: Identifying essential fish habitats using oceanographic process - Grin...
C2.03: Identifying essential fish habitats using oceanographic process - Grin...
 
Species Diversity of Mangroves in Catarman, Northern Samar
Species Diversity of Mangroves in Catarman, Northern SamarSpecies Diversity of Mangroves in Catarman, Northern Samar
Species Diversity of Mangroves in Catarman, Northern Samar
 
BPJ11-09_Wolfe_et_al
BPJ11-09_Wolfe_et_alBPJ11-09_Wolfe_et_al
BPJ11-09_Wolfe_et_al
 
The status of fish angela
The status of fish   angelaThe status of fish   angela
The status of fish angela
 
Aspects of the Geomorphology and Limnology of some molluscinhabited freshwate...
Aspects of the Geomorphology and Limnology of some molluscinhabited freshwate...Aspects of the Geomorphology and Limnology of some molluscinhabited freshwate...
Aspects of the Geomorphology and Limnology of some molluscinhabited freshwate...
 
Caribbean coral reefs_-_status_report_1970-2012
Caribbean coral reefs_-_status_report_1970-2012Caribbean coral reefs_-_status_report_1970-2012
Caribbean coral reefs_-_status_report_1970-2012
 
KMRS October Newsletter 2015
KMRS October Newsletter 2015KMRS October Newsletter 2015
KMRS October Newsletter 2015
 

Viewers also liked

A Small Number of Pluses and Minuses of the Fishin' Buddy Depth Finders
A Small Number of Pluses and Minuses of the Fishin' Buddy Depth FindersA Small Number of Pluses and Minuses of the Fishin' Buddy Depth Finders
A Small Number of Pluses and Minuses of the Fishin' Buddy Depth FindersBill Ulbrik
 
Procesos de Biblioteca Automatizados
Procesos de Biblioteca AutomatizadosProcesos de Biblioteca Automatizados
Procesos de Biblioteca AutomatizadosEdutiva
 
20140616 19 depestele-physical_impact_vfinalpresented
20140616 19 depestele-physical_impact_vfinalpresented20140616 19 depestele-physical_impact_vfinalpresented
20140616 19 depestele-physical_impact_vfinalpresentedJochen Depestele
 
Wi Fish Finder Defcon 17 Ahmadand Dhyani
Wi Fish  Finder   Defcon 17  Ahmadand DhyaniWi Fish  Finder   Defcon 17  Ahmadand Dhyani
Wi Fish Finder Defcon 17 Ahmadand DhyaniMd Sohail Ahmad
 
Marine Products In India
Marine Products In IndiaMarine Products In India
Marine Products In IndiaPraveen Kumar
 
Angling for the Prize: A Look at Fish Finders
Angling for the Prize: A Look at Fish FindersAngling for the Prize: A Look at Fish Finders
Angling for the Prize: A Look at Fish FindersAnchor Express
 
Expert on thermal camera and ptz laser camera from sheenrun
Expert on thermal camera and ptz laser camera from sheenrunExpert on thermal camera and ptz laser camera from sheenrun
Expert on thermal camera and ptz laser camera from sheenrunMary Tian
 
4 3-3 frequency-modulation
4 3-3 frequency-modulation4 3-3 frequency-modulation
4 3-3 frequency-modulationlcborja57
 
Basics of radio frequency techniques in pain management jadon.a
Basics of radio frequency techniques in pain management  jadon.aBasics of radio frequency techniques in pain management  jadon.a
Basics of radio frequency techniques in pain management jadon.aAshok Jadon
 

Viewers also liked (19)

Echo
EchoEcho
Echo
 
A Small Number of Pluses and Minuses of the Fishin' Buddy Depth Finders
A Small Number of Pluses and Minuses of the Fishin' Buddy Depth FindersA Small Number of Pluses and Minuses of the Fishin' Buddy Depth Finders
A Small Number of Pluses and Minuses of the Fishin' Buddy Depth Finders
 
Procesos de Biblioteca Automatizados
Procesos de Biblioteca AutomatizadosProcesos de Biblioteca Automatizados
Procesos de Biblioteca Automatizados
 
Cables
CablesCables
Cables
 
20140616 19 depestele-physical_impact_vfinalpresented
20140616 19 depestele-physical_impact_vfinalpresented20140616 19 depestele-physical_impact_vfinalpresented
20140616 19 depestele-physical_impact_vfinalpresented
 
Wi Fish Finder Defcon 17 Ahmadand Dhyani
Wi Fish  Finder   Defcon 17  Ahmadand DhyaniWi Fish  Finder   Defcon 17  Ahmadand Dhyani
Wi Fish Finder Defcon 17 Ahmadand Dhyani
 
Marine Products In India
Marine Products In IndiaMarine Products In India
Marine Products In India
 
Nitya Marine, Bhavnagar, Navigation Equipment
Nitya Marine, Bhavnagar, Navigation EquipmentNitya Marine, Bhavnagar, Navigation Equipment
Nitya Marine, Bhavnagar, Navigation Equipment
 
Angling for the Prize: A Look at Fish Finders
Angling for the Prize: A Look at Fish FindersAngling for the Prize: A Look at Fish Finders
Angling for the Prize: A Look at Fish Finders
 
Expert on thermal camera and ptz laser camera from sheenrun
Expert on thermal camera and ptz laser camera from sheenrunExpert on thermal camera and ptz laser camera from sheenrun
Expert on thermal camera and ptz laser camera from sheenrun
 
Marine radar
Marine  radarMarine  radar
Marine radar
 
STUDY OF RADAR
STUDY OF RADARSTUDY OF RADAR
STUDY OF RADAR
 
4 3-3 frequency-modulation
4 3-3 frequency-modulation4 3-3 frequency-modulation
4 3-3 frequency-modulation
 
Digital Radar Processing and the New Low Power Radars
Digital Radar Processing and the New Low Power RadarsDigital Radar Processing and the New Low Power Radars
Digital Radar Processing and the New Low Power Radars
 
Basics of radio frequency techniques in pain management jadon.a
Basics of radio frequency techniques in pain management  jadon.aBasics of radio frequency techniques in pain management  jadon.a
Basics of radio frequency techniques in pain management jadon.a
 
MBES_ Taicheng Report
MBES_ Taicheng ReportMBES_ Taicheng Report
MBES_ Taicheng Report
 
ECDIS - A change in direction
ECDIS - A change in directionECDIS - A change in direction
ECDIS - A change in direction
 
Theory of Gyrocompass
Theory of GyrocompassTheory of Gyrocompass
Theory of Gyrocompass
 
Time lrg
Time lrgTime lrg
Time lrg
 

Similar to Fish Finder Marine Shellfish Study

Penny Lane Shellfish Study
Penny Lane Shellfish StudyPenny Lane Shellfish Study
Penny Lane Shellfish StudyStockysmith
 
All Seasons Shellfish
All Seasons ShellfishAll Seasons Shellfish
All Seasons ShellfishStockysmith
 
FAITH.WARREN.BIOASSESSMENTPAPER.4.21.14
FAITH.WARREN.BIOASSESSMENTPAPER.4.21.14FAITH.WARREN.BIOASSESSMENTPAPER.4.21.14
FAITH.WARREN.BIOASSESSMENTPAPER.4.21.14Faith Warren
 
Introduction for NOAA lesson by Susan Kaiser, TAS 2012: One Fish, Two Fish
Introduction for NOAA lesson by Susan Kaiser, TAS 2012: One Fish, Two Fish Introduction for NOAA lesson by Susan Kaiser, TAS 2012: One Fish, Two Fish
Introduction for NOAA lesson by Susan Kaiser, TAS 2012: One Fish, Two Fish skaiser4800
 
Examples of ideas for the training
Examples of ideas for the trainingExamples of ideas for the training
Examples of ideas for the trainingAhmed Tarek Fahmy
 
Local Water Quality Assessment
Local Water Quality AssessmentLocal Water Quality Assessment
Local Water Quality AssessmentKenneth Goodson
 
Fish scavenging behaviour in recently trawled areas
Fish scavenging behaviour in recently trawled areasFish scavenging behaviour in recently trawled areas
Fish scavenging behaviour in recently trawled areasratupura
 
DouglasFishBull2014
DouglasFishBull2014DouglasFishBull2014
DouglasFishBull2014Ver Iriarte
 
Fiji Butterflyfish Presentation at FICSF
Fiji Butterflyfish Presentation at FICSFFiji Butterflyfish Presentation at FICSF
Fiji Butterflyfish Presentation at FICSFStuart Gow
 
One Fish, Two Fish, Blue Crab, Pompano- An Analysis of Marine and Estuarine S...
One Fish, Two Fish, Blue Crab, Pompano- An Analysis of Marine and Estuarine S...One Fish, Two Fish, Blue Crab, Pompano- An Analysis of Marine and Estuarine S...
One Fish, Two Fish, Blue Crab, Pompano- An Analysis of Marine and Estuarine S...Cody Gramlin
 
sqsw-seaquest-summary-report-2014
sqsw-seaquest-summary-report-2014sqsw-seaquest-summary-report-2014
sqsw-seaquest-summary-report-2014Tom Horton
 
IT REPORT-2012 (RYAN IVARAMI-DFMR YEAR 3)
IT REPORT-2012 (RYAN IVARAMI-DFMR YEAR 3)IT REPORT-2012 (RYAN IVARAMI-DFMR YEAR 3)
IT REPORT-2012 (RYAN IVARAMI-DFMR YEAR 3)Ryan Ivarami
 
AISES-poster influences of lamprey
AISES-poster influences of lampreyAISES-poster influences of lamprey
AISES-poster influences of lampreyEva Carl
 
Integrated cultivation of the red alga kappaphycus alvarezii and the pearl oy...
Integrated cultivation of the red alga kappaphycus alvarezii and the pearl oy...Integrated cultivation of the red alga kappaphycus alvarezii and the pearl oy...
Integrated cultivation of the red alga kappaphycus alvarezii and the pearl oy...Usman Madubun
 
A study on the biodiversity of snake island in South Andaman - JBES
A study on the biodiversity of snake island in South Andaman - JBESA study on the biodiversity of snake island in South Andaman - JBES
A study on the biodiversity of snake island in South Andaman - JBESInnspub Net
 
24752-D, RSG Grantee Stephanie J. Rousso Conference Poster, Western Society N...
24752-D, RSG Grantee Stephanie J. Rousso Conference Poster, Western Society N...24752-D, RSG Grantee Stephanie J. Rousso Conference Poster, Western Society N...
24752-D, RSG Grantee Stephanie J. Rousso Conference Poster, Western Society N...StephanieRousso1
 
Terrill_Sean_Poster_Final
Terrill_Sean_Poster_FinalTerrill_Sean_Poster_Final
Terrill_Sean_Poster_FinalSean Terrill
 

Similar to Fish Finder Marine Shellfish Study (20)

Penny Lane Shellfish Study
Penny Lane Shellfish StudyPenny Lane Shellfish Study
Penny Lane Shellfish Study
 
All Seasons Shellfish
All Seasons ShellfishAll Seasons Shellfish
All Seasons Shellfish
 
FAITH.WARREN.BIOASSESSMENTPAPER.4.21.14
FAITH.WARREN.BIOASSESSMENTPAPER.4.21.14FAITH.WARREN.BIOASSESSMENTPAPER.4.21.14
FAITH.WARREN.BIOASSESSMENTPAPER.4.21.14
 
Introduction for NOAA lesson by Susan Kaiser, TAS 2012: One Fish, Two Fish
Introduction for NOAA lesson by Susan Kaiser, TAS 2012: One Fish, Two Fish Introduction for NOAA lesson by Susan Kaiser, TAS 2012: One Fish, Two Fish
Introduction for NOAA lesson by Susan Kaiser, TAS 2012: One Fish, Two Fish
 
Examples of ideas for the training
Examples of ideas for the trainingExamples of ideas for the training
Examples of ideas for the training
 
Local Water Quality Assessment
Local Water Quality AssessmentLocal Water Quality Assessment
Local Water Quality Assessment
 
G0343038043
G0343038043G0343038043
G0343038043
 
Fish scavenging behaviour in recently trawled areas
Fish scavenging behaviour in recently trawled areasFish scavenging behaviour in recently trawled areas
Fish scavenging behaviour in recently trawled areas
 
DouglasFishBull2014
DouglasFishBull2014DouglasFishBull2014
DouglasFishBull2014
 
Conch Poster
Conch Poster Conch Poster
Conch Poster
 
Fiji Butterflyfish Presentation at FICSF
Fiji Butterflyfish Presentation at FICSFFiji Butterflyfish Presentation at FICSF
Fiji Butterflyfish Presentation at FICSF
 
One Fish, Two Fish, Blue Crab, Pompano- An Analysis of Marine and Estuarine S...
One Fish, Two Fish, Blue Crab, Pompano- An Analysis of Marine and Estuarine S...One Fish, Two Fish, Blue Crab, Pompano- An Analysis of Marine and Estuarine S...
One Fish, Two Fish, Blue Crab, Pompano- An Analysis of Marine and Estuarine S...
 
sqsw-seaquest-summary-report-2014
sqsw-seaquest-summary-report-2014sqsw-seaquest-summary-report-2014
sqsw-seaquest-summary-report-2014
 
IT REPORT-2012 (RYAN IVARAMI-DFMR YEAR 3)
IT REPORT-2012 (RYAN IVARAMI-DFMR YEAR 3)IT REPORT-2012 (RYAN IVARAMI-DFMR YEAR 3)
IT REPORT-2012 (RYAN IVARAMI-DFMR YEAR 3)
 
UWV draft 3
UWV draft 3UWV draft 3
UWV draft 3
 
AISES-poster influences of lamprey
AISES-poster influences of lampreyAISES-poster influences of lamprey
AISES-poster influences of lamprey
 
Integrated cultivation of the red alga kappaphycus alvarezii and the pearl oy...
Integrated cultivation of the red alga kappaphycus alvarezii and the pearl oy...Integrated cultivation of the red alga kappaphycus alvarezii and the pearl oy...
Integrated cultivation of the red alga kappaphycus alvarezii and the pearl oy...
 
A study on the biodiversity of snake island in South Andaman - JBES
A study on the biodiversity of snake island in South Andaman - JBESA study on the biodiversity of snake island in South Andaman - JBES
A study on the biodiversity of snake island in South Andaman - JBES
 
24752-D, RSG Grantee Stephanie J. Rousso Conference Poster, Western Society N...
24752-D, RSG Grantee Stephanie J. Rousso Conference Poster, Western Society N...24752-D, RSG Grantee Stephanie J. Rousso Conference Poster, Western Society N...
24752-D, RSG Grantee Stephanie J. Rousso Conference Poster, Western Society N...
 
Terrill_Sean_Poster_Final
Terrill_Sean_Poster_FinalTerrill_Sean_Poster_Final
Terrill_Sean_Poster_Final
 

Fish Finder Marine Shellfish Study

  • 1. A Shellfish Study for the Proposed Expansion of Fish Finder Marine 3645 Atlantic Brigantine Boulevard, Brigantine, New Jersey December 8th & 9th 2011 Survey Conducted For: Fish Finder Marine Joe & Kim Fumo, Owner(s) 3645 Atlantic Brigantine Boulevard Brigantine, New Jersey 08203 Survey Conducted By: Richard Stockton College of New Jersey’s Coastal Research Center 30 Wilson Avenue Port Republic, NJ. 08241 (609) 652-4245 December 8th & 9th, 2011
  • 2. Fish Finder 1 A Shellfish Study for the Proposed Expansion of Fish Finder Marine 3645 Atlantic Brigantine Boulevard, Brigantine, Atlantic County, New Jersey December 8th & 9th, 2011 Introduction A shellfish study was performed on December 8th & 9th 2011 to determine if Fish Finder Marine’s environmental conditions support a viable shellfish population. The shellfish study was designed and implemented using the Shellfish Survey Guidelines published by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) as authorized by Jeffrey C. Lockwood, 1991 National Marine Fisheries Service, Habitat and Protected Resources Division. The proposed expansion of Fish Finder Marine involves extending the existing (western) fixed pier to a distance 260 feet from the existing bulkhead. The pier would extend in the south to north direction and would have 5 finger piers spaced 20 feet apart. The proposed marina is bordered on both sides by existing dock structures. The bay floor slopes from a depth at the bulkhead of - 0.5 feet out to a depth of -17.7 feet NGVD 27. The target species are those which fall under the NJAC’s Coastal Zone Management Rules under Shellfish habitat. They include: Hard Clam (Mercenaria mercenaria), Soft Clam (Mya arenaria), Easter Oyster (Crassostrea virginica), Bay Scallops (Argopecten irradians), and Blue Mussels (Mytilus edulis), all of which are shellfish of commercial and biological significance. Methods and Materials The study area was selected by analyzing the area of the proposed marina expansion and evenly distributing the entire study area into uniform sub-sections (chart 1). The range of water depths was from -0.5 to -17.7 feet below the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1927 shown in Catalano’s USACOE Permit Plan. Using ESRI ArcGIS 9.3.1 a virtual grid was set up in the same approximate position of the proposed dock system with corresponding known locations totaling 24 points (chart 1). These points within the grid served as the locations for both the juvenile and adult shellfish survey. Using the Leica RTK GPS system 1200, the positions of all the data points for both the juvenile shellfish study and the adult shellfish study were obtained. To conduct the juvenile shellfish study the 24 data point locations stored on the GPS system were used as waypoints to locate each sample site (chart 1, table 3). At each location, a single anchor was set to help stabilize the boat. A Wildco Ponar grab sample; with an area of 0.75 sq. ft., was used to acquire the samples. Replicate grabs were often necessary to obtain a full sample size. Once a full sample was obtained, the material was sifted through a 5mm sieve and inspected for juvenile shellfish. This process was repeated at each individual location. Additional variables such as sediment type, additional bivalve mollusks, as well as aquatic vegetation were also noted at each site. At each location the abundance per square foot (ft2) and size distribution (mean and range) were also reported (tables 1 and 2). To conduct the adult shellfish study, the site locations stored on the GPS were again used to navigate to the pre-established locations (chart 1, table 3). At twelve locations two anchors were set, one at the bow and one at the stern. The anchor lines were let out equally and incrementally in 10’ sections. Each 10’ section was raked using a 16” x 3” toothed bull rake at each location
  • 3. Fish Finder 2 until a 30’ transect distance was achieved. At all 24 locations a Wildco Ponar grab sample; with an area of 0.75 sq. ft., was used to acquire samples. Replicate grabs were often necessary to obtain a full sample size. Additional variables such as sediment type, other bivalve mollusks, as well as aquatic vegetation were also noted at each site. At each location, the abundance per ft2 and size distribution (mean and range) was also reported (Tables 1 and 2). Results A total of 20 Hard Clams (Mercenaria mercenaria) were found in the study area. The size frequency distribution of the clams found revealed that multiple year classes were present at the site. This indicates that natural recruitment is taking place in the study area (table 1, chart 2). Juvenile Shellfish As reported above the study area was sampled for juvenile shellfish by utilizing a Wildco Ponar Grab Sample with an area of 0.75 sq. ft. Twenty four sites were established and sampled representing the area of the proposed marina expansion. One juvenile Hard Clam (Mercenaria mercenaria) was found at location S4 resulting in a density 1.333 clams/sq. ft. at that location A total of 18 sq. ft. was sampled producing an overall Hard Clam density of 0.055 clams/sq. ft. across the total surface area. Only one juvenile Hard Clam was collected so the mean size was 1.2 cm with a range of 0 (table 1). Adult Shellfish As reported above the twelve sites were sampled using a 16” x 3” toothed bull rake and all 24 sites were sampled using a Wildco Ponar Grab Sample with an area of 0.75 sq.ft.. A total of 19 adult Hard Clams (Mercenaria mercenaria) were found in the entire area. Each raked site was raked a distance of 30’. Clams were found in 11 of the 24 sites. Locations S5 (1.333 clams/sq. ft.), S11 (4 clams/sq. ft.), and S23 (1.333 clams/sq. ft.), have densities which indicate viable shellfish habitat. However, a total of 497.88 square feet was sampled with an overall density of 0.038 clams/sq. ft. across the entire area. The mean size of the clams collected was 6.37 cm with an overall range of 4.6 from 4.3 to 8.9 cm (table 1). Sedimentology The sedimentology of the area consisted of fine sandy black mud, very fine sandy black mud, fine muddy black/grey sand, fine muddy black sand, medium muddy black/grey sand, and black mud (table 2). Aquatic Vegetation There were 2 major species of aquatic vegetation in the study area, Sea Lettuce (Ulva lactuca), and Agardh’s Red Weed (Agardhiella tenera). At 8 locations Phragmites roots were found, indicating that at one time a marsh existed here. The installation of the bulkhead likely resulted in shoreline retreat as a result of scouring (table 2). Other Shellfish A total of, 3 Rock Crab (Cancer irroratus), 3 Mud Dog Whelk (Nassarius obsoletus), 2 juvenile Blue Crab (Callinectes sapidus), and 1 adult Blue Crab (Callinectes sapidus), were found in the process of locating shellfish (table 1).
  • 4. Fish Finder 3 Conclusion The study area at 3645 Atlantic Brigantine Boulevard, Brigantine, Atlantic County, NJ is the location of the proposed expansion of Fish Finder Marine. The area was surveyed by utilizing ArcGIS software, GPS equipment, grab sampling techniques, and a clam rake to help isolate shellfish in accordance with the NJAC’s Coastal Zone Management Rules. It states that “a shellfish habitat area is defined as an area which… has a current shellfish density equal to or greater than 0.20 shellfish per square foot”. Both the juvenile and the adult shellfish study had densities values (averaged across the total surface area) below the cited threshold. Hard Clam (Mercenaria mercenaria) was the only relevant shellfish species found in the study area. There were small areas which did support zones of viable habitat according to the cited density threshold. Location S4 yielded 1.333 juvenile Hard Clams per square foot. Location S5 yielded 1.333 adult Hard Clams per square foot. Location S11 yielded 4 adult Hard Clams per square foot. Location S23 yielded 1.333 Hard Clams per square foot. The juvenile clams (those surveyed with the 5mm sieve screen) produced a value averaged across the total surface area sampled by the ponar grab samples (18.0 ft2) at 0.055 clams per square foot. The adults recovered in the rake and ponar grab sample produced a value averaged across the total surface area of 497.88 square feet yielded 0.038 clams per square foot. These numbers indicate that the clam density within the area delineated for the installation of a marina expansion at Fish Finder Marine does not substantiate a viable Hard Clam habitat.
  • 5. Fish Finder 4 Water Quality Characteristics for Fish Finder Marine, Brigantine, NJ. Site of the Proposed Marina Expansion Temperature, Salinity, Dissolved Oxygen, Depth, pH, Specific Conductivity, and Turbidity Data for Shellfish Habitat Introduction: The Richard Stockton Coastal Research Center (CRC) completed a juvenile and adult hard clam study for the proposed development of Fish Finder Marine, Brigantine, NJ in December 2011. Twenty four sites were survey for juvenile and adult hard clams. In this study, one juvenile clams was observed and 19 adult clams were obtained within 497.88 square feet of space raked in the project area. A water quality assessment was also included in the proposal based on the follow variables: temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen, depth, pH, specific conductivity, and turbidity for the water just above the sediment surface. Water Quality at the Site: The CRC complied the data on December 8th & 9th 2011 with a study of the water quality parameters for the 24 sites subjected to clam raking or grab sampling using a YSI water quality probe to obtain the results listed in table 7, below. The table lists the site location using the same designations used in the clam study. The dissolved oxygen values are shown as both a percentage of the maximum level in seawater and as milligrams per liter of water. The depth of measurement at the mid-tidal elevation stage the work was done is also listed. The specific conductivity is given as well although the salinity is the most common expression of the salt content of the water. Conclusions: The average temperature of 10.92 degrees Celsius is normal for the time of year within the bay environment of Atlantic County. The salinity is also within normal ranges for mid-tide conditions behind the barrier island, however, the average value of 28.0 ppt failed to fall within the optimal range for the Hard Clam of 26.5 to 27.5 ppt. The dissolved oxygen levels are excellent with average values of 9.66 mg/L, and 105.80% respectively. The pH value of 7.91 is within the normal range for all stages of Hard Clam development. None of the remaining water quality parameters including depth, specific conductivity (44.32 mS/cm), and turbidity (9.30 NTU), would dictate that shellfish could not live in the waters of the proposed development of Fish Finder Marine (see appendix at end).
  • 7. Fish Finder 6 Chart 2: Length Frequency for Hard Clams Collected During Site Inspection at Fish Finder Marine, Brigantine, NJ. December 8th & 9th 8 7 6 5 Frequency 4 3 2 1 0 0-25 25-38 38 51 51-63 63-76 76-102 Data Bin Ranges (mm)
  • 8. Fish Finder 7 Table 1: Sample Sites Used to Determine the Density of Adult and Juvenile Hard Clams Transect Juvenile Clams (live) Adult Clams (live) Clams Per Site Other Shellfish Observations Transect Length Grab Sample Area Juvenile Hard Clam Density Adult Hard Clam Density Mean Range S1 - 1 Hard Clam: 8.4 cm 1 - Rocks 30' 0.75' - 0.024 8.4 0 1 Adult Hard Clam S2 - 1 Hard Clam: 5.5 cm 1 - 30' 0.75' - 0.024 5.5 0 Shell 2 Hard Clam: 7.2 cm, 7.4 2 Adult Hard Clam S3 - 2 - 30' 0.75' - 0.05 7.3 0.2 cm Shells, Rocks S4 1 Hard Clam: 1.2 cm - 1 - - - 0.75' 1.333 - 1.2 0 Razor Clam Shell, S5 - 1 Hard Clam: 4.8 cm 1 - - 0.75' - 1.333 4.8 0 Gravel in substrate 1 Blue Crab Blue Mussel Shells, S6 - - 0 (Callinectes sapidus ): - 0.75' - - - - Hard Clam Shells 4.2 cm 1 Adult Hard Clam S7 - 1 Hard Clam: 7.1 cm 1 - Shell, 1 Adult Razor 30' 0.75' - 0.024 7.1 0 Clam Shell 2 Rock Crabs (Cancer Rocks, Hard Clam 3 Hard Clam: 4.6 cm, 4.3 S8 - 3 irroratus ): 3.7 cm, 4.1 shells, Tube worm 30' 0.75' - 0.073 4.6 0.8 cm, 5.1 cm cm casings, Oyster shells 5 Hard Clam: 5.7 cm, 6.3 5.7 - cm, 8.3 cm, 8.0 cm, 5.7 5 - - 30' 0.75' - 0.123 6.8 2.6 cm 1 Mud Dog Whelk Blue Mussel Shells, S10 - - 0 - 0.75' - - - - (Nassarius obsoletus) Jingle Clam Shells 3 Hard Clam: 7.4 cm, 4.4 1 Rock Crab (Cancer S11 - 3 Tube worm casings - 0.75' - 4 5.86 3 cm, 5.8 cm irroratus): 3.5 cm 1 Juvenile Blue Crab (Callinectes sapidus): 2.6 Significant amount of S12 - - 0 - 0.75' - - - - cm, 2 Mud Dog Whelk Tube worm casings, (Nassarius obsoletus) S13 - - 0 - - 30' 0.75' - - - - Tube worm, Juvenile S14 - - 0 - 30' 0.75' - - - - Hard Clam Shells Blue mussel Shells, S15 - 1 Hard Clam: 6.2 cm 1 - tube worm casings, 30' 0.75' - 0.024 6.2 0 rocks 1 Tube Worm, Tube S16 - - 0 - Worm Casings, Snail - 0.75' - - - - shells 24 Tube Worms, S17 - - 0 - Crushed Blue Mussel - 0.75' - - - - Shells Crushed Blue Mussel S18 - - 0 - Shells, Snail Shells, - 0.75' - - - - Tube Worm Casings S19 - - 0 - - 30' 0.75' - - - - S20 - - 0 - - 30' 0.75' - - - - S21 - - 0 - 36 Blue mussel shells 30' 0.75' - - - - 24 juvenile clam 1 Blue Crab (Callinectes shells, Hard Clam S22 - - 0 - 0.75' - - - - sapidus): 2.9 cm Shells, Blue Mussel Shells Crushed Blue Mussel S23 - 1 Hard Clam: 8.9 cm 1 - Shells, 12 Juvenile - 0.75' - 1.333 8.9 0 Hard Clam Shells Clam Shells, Crushed S24 - - 0 - Blue Mussel Shells, 1 - 0.75' - - - - Tape Worm Adult Shellfish Study: 497.88 sq. ft. sampled, 19 adult Hard Clams = 0.038 clams/sq. ft.; Juvenile Shellfish Study: 18 sq. ft. sampled, 1 Juvenile Hard Clams = 0.055 clams/ sq. ft.
  • 9. Fish Finder 8 Table 2: Aquatic Vegetation & Sediment Type Site # Species & viability of aquatic vegetation Sediment Agardh's Red Weed (Agardhiella tenera), and Minimal amounts of Sea S1 Fine Muddy Sand, Black/Grey Lettuce (Ulva lactua) Minimal amounts of Sea Lettuce (Ulva lactua ), and Agardh's Red S2 Fine Muddy Sand, Black Weed (Agardhiella tenera ) Agardh's Red Weed (Agardhiella tenera) , and Sea Lettuce (Ulva S3 Medium Muddy Sand, Black/Grey lactua) S4 Phragmities Roots Fine Sandy Mud, Black S5 Phragmities Roots Fine Sandy Mud, Black S6 Phragmities Roots Fine Sandy Mud, Black S7 Ahardh's Red Weed (Agardhiella tenera) , and Phragmities Roots Medium Muddy Sand, Black/Grey S8 Phragmities Roots Very Fine Sandy Mud, Black S9 Sea Lettuce (Ulva lactua) , and Phragmities Roots Very Fine Sandy Mud, Black S10 Phragmities Roots Very Fine Sandy Mud, Black S11 Sea Lettuce (Ulva lactua) Very Fine Sandy Mud, Black S12 no vegitation found Very Fine Sandy Mud, Black S13 no vegitation found Mud, Black Sea Lettuce (Ulva lactua), and Minimal amounts of Agardh's Red Weed S14 Very Fine Sand Mud, Black (Agardhiella tenera) S15 Sea Lettuce (Ulva lactua) Very Fine Sand Mud, Black S16 no vegitation found Very Fine Sandy Mud, Black S17 no vegitation found Very Fine Sandy Mud, Black S18 Phragmities Roots Very Fine Sandy Mud, Black S19 Minimal amounts of Sea Lettuce (Ulva lactua ) Very Fine Sand Mud, Black S20 no vegitation found Very Fine Sand Mud, Black S21 no vegitation found Mud, Black S22 no vegitation found Very Fine Sandy Mud, Black S23 no vegitation found Very Fine Sandy Mud, Black S24 no vegitation found Fine Sandy Mud, Black
  • 10. Fish Finder 9 Table 3: Fish Finder Marine Shellfish Study December 8th & 9th Survey Points Transect Easting Northing S1 522756.72 204668.65 S2 522731.79 204667.87 S3 522706.71 204667.10 S4 522756.20 204683.68 S5 522731.22 204682.92 S6 522706.17 204682.07 S7 522755.80 204698.64 S8 522730.74 204697.95 S9 522705.79 204697.06 S10 522755.25 204713.77 S11 522730.26 204712.78 S12 522705.27 204712.09 S13 522754.72 204728.62 S14 522729.79 204727.72 S15 522704.86 204727.05 S16 522754.30 204743.53 S17 522729.30 204742.92 S18 522704.30 204742.04 S19 522753.88 204758.60 S20 522728.83 204757.86 S21 522703.78 204757.03 S22 522753.36 204773.60 S23 522728.38 204772.81 S24 522703.36 204772.10
  • 11. Fish Finder 10 Table 4: Fish Finder Marine Shellfish Study Water Quality Data Specific Temperature Salinity Dissolved Oxygen Dissolved Oxygen Depth Conductivity Site (Celsius) (ppt) (as a %) (mg/L) (feet) pH (mS/cm) Turbidity (NTU) S1 10.89 27.41 111.1 10.07 0.638 7.90 44.21 9.30 S2 11.34 27.55 112.6 10.17 1.490 7.90 44.51 8.90 S3 11.23 27.64 121.5 10.80 1.150 7.86 44.48 8.76 S4 11.24 27.54 102.9 9.45 0.951 7.93 44.05 9.60 S5 11.40 27.55 102.8 9.40 1.468 7.92 44.49 9.55 S6 11.36 27.53 101.0 9.17 1.167 7.93 44.12 9.90 S7 10.80 28.81 103.8 9.32 2.760 7.94 44.74 8.60 S8 10.89 28.77 111.0 10.14 2.993 7.92 44.66 9.20 S9 10.79 28.74 114.6 10.40 3.842 7.75 44.62 9.00 S10 10.83 28.57 116.0 10.20 3.813 7.93 44.45 9.80 S11 10.77 28.43 97.5 9.08 3.150 7.93 44.31 8.80 S12 10.69 28.71 109.8 9.95 4.569 7.88 44.60 10.10 S13 10.81 28.46 107.3 9.74 2.701 7.95 44.25 8.20 S14 10.76 28.49 104.7 9.51 5.844 7.95 44.33 9.20 S15 10.64 28.42 105.1 9.63 3.841 7.94 44.27 8.50 S16 10.61 28.28 102.6 9.45 6.261 7.93 44.00 9.10 S17 10.56 28.17 102.3 9.42 6.449 7.95 43.89 9.70 S18 10.54 28.1 101.5 9.4 2.874 7.94 43.76 10.50 S19 11.08 27.41 90.7 8.90 7.801 7.92 44.18 9.10 S20 11.07 27.45 102.8 9.41 6.070 7.92 44.78 8.80 S21 11.19 27.45 106.4 9.56 2.680 7.92 44.09 9.30 S22 10.84 27.49 99.9 9.25 14.800 7.91 44.65 10.10 S23 10.93 27.48 109.7 9.97 15.230 7.90 44.23 9.80 S24 10.85 27.52 101.7 9.39 8.760 7.91 44.10 9.50 Avg 10.92 28.00 105.80 9.66 4.64 7.91 44.32 9.30
  • 12. Fish Finder 11 References 1. J. C. Lockwood, “Shellfish Survey Guidelines”, National Marine Fisheries Service, Habitat and Protected Resources Division, Highlands, N.J., 1991. 2. N.J.A.C., “Coastal Zone Management Rules”, 7:7E-3.2, 19-22, (2009). 3. R. J. Catalano. PE., “Fish Finder Marine USACOE Permit Application Plan”, (2011).
  • 13. Fish Finder 12 APPENDIX OF LITERATURE FOUND DISCUSSING HARD CLAM HABITAT PARAMETERS The References Below Cover Specific Parameters for Mercenaria mercenaria clams Hill, K. (2004). Smithsonian Marine Station at Fort Pierce. Retrieved January 13, 2012, from http://www.sms.si.edu/irlspec/mercen_mercen.htm Abundance: “In the IRL as in other areas within its range, Mercenaria mercenaria is most abundant in shell- containing soft bottoms. They are also found (in decreasing order of abundance) on sand flats, sand/mud flats and on muddy bottoms (Wells 1957; Pratt 1953). A study by Peterson et al., (1984) also showed that densities of 0 - 2 year old hard clams in eelgrass (Zostera marina) beds of North Carolina was more than 5 times the average density of clams in nearby sand flats (9 per square meter in eelgrass, vs. 1.6 per square meter in nearby sand flats. Further, hard clams from Zostera beds appeared to be somewhat larger, on average, than those from sand flats. Hydrodynamic baffling by seagrasses may be at least partially responsible for the observed result (Peterson et al., 1984). Reduction in currents near the benthos enhances the deposition of fine sediments and suspended materials between blades of seagrass, especially near patch edges. Hydrodynamic baffling therefore provides a rich food source for juvenile clams.” Mann, R., Harding, J. M., Southworth, M. J., Wesson, J. A. (2005). Northern Quahog (hard clam) Mercenaria mercenaria abundance and habitat use in Chesepeake Bay. Journal of Shellfisheries Research, 24(2), 509-516. “Clam densities decreased significantly across the four types of substrate with the highest densities observed in shell substrate followed by sand, mud and anoxic muds in order of decreasing occupation (Kruskal Wallis, H = 1,414.27, DF = 3, P < 0.01; Fig. 3). Less than 1% of all clams collected were from anoxic mud substrates whereas shell, sand, and mud substrates contained 11%, 68% and 21% of clams, respectively. Although shell and sand substrates contained the highest observed densities of hard clams, these substrate types were only present in 38% of patent tong samples collected from potential clam habitats.” Mulholland, R. (1984). Habitat Suitability Index Models: Hard Clam. Florida Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit. FWS/OBS-82/10.77 SPECIFIC HABITAT REQUIREMENTS: Embryo, Larva, Juvenile pH. “Calabrese (1972) observed that the successful recruitment of mercenaria requires that the pH of estuarine waters not fall below 7.0; he found no significant decrease in the number of clam embryos developing normally within the pH range of 7.0-8.75, but that number was greatly reduced at pH 9.0. Survival of clam larvae was normal at pH 6.25-8.75, but the range for normal
  • 14. Fish Finder 13 growth was 6.75-8.50. Although clam larvae can survive at pH 6.25, a pH of 7.0 is required for normal development of the embryo. Levels of pH below 7.0 limit recruitment of the species (Calabrese 1972).” Dissolved oxygen. “Morrison (1971) found that growth of shelled veligers of M. mercenaria was normal when dissolved oxygen concentration was 4.2 mg/l or greater. Growth essentially ceased at concentrations of 2.4 mg/l and less. Larvae survived extended exposures (14 days) to 1 mg/l dissolved oxygen but grew little. Prolonged exposure to levels of less than 4.0 mg/l lengthened the clam's planktonic stage and decreased its probability of survival. Embryos developed normally at oxygen levels as low as 0.5 mg/l; however, 100% mortality occurred at 0.2 mg/l. Fluctuations in dissolved oxygen do not affect adult hard clams as much as do fluctuations in temperature and salinity (Stanley and DeWitt 1983). The burrowing ability of M. mercenaria was neither severely nor permanently impaired by exposure to reduced oxygen levels (less than 1mgl1 seawater) for up to 3 weeks (Savage 1976). Pratt and Campbell (1956) found no correlation between growth rates and various concentrations of dissolved oxygen. All life stages tolerate nearly anoxic conditions for long periods, though they may cease growing (Stanley and DeWitt 1983).” Salinity. “Salinity appears to be most critical for M. mercenaria during the egg and larval stages (Stanley and DeWitt 1983). At Long Island Sound, New York, eggs developed into straight- hinged veligers only within the relatively narrow salinity range of 20.0 to 32.5 parts per thousand (ppt ), The optimum for development of clam eggs was about 26.5 to 27.5 ppt (Davis 1958). Growth of larvae, once they attained the straight-hinged stage, was comparatively good at salinities as low as 20 ppt (Davis 1958), but Chanley (1958) found that growth of juvenile M. mercenaria was retarded at salinities of 22.5 ppt or lower. Castagna and Chanley (1973) found that metamorphosis of M. mercenaria from veliger to seed clam (byssal plantigrade stage) was inhibited below 17.5 to 20 ppt.” Temperature. “Davis and Ca1abrese (1964) noted that 1aboratory-rea red straight-hinged veligers of M. mercenaria were capable of ingestion, but not digestion, at 10°C (50°F),- and consequently did not grow. Growth was positively related to temperature at 18.0° to 30.0°C (64° to 86°F). Growth of straighthinged veligers of M. mercenaria was little affected by temperature differences within the range of 20° to 30°C (68° to 86°F). Although the optimum temperature for growth of M. mercenaria larvae was not well defined, growth was optimum at the following temperature/salinity combinations: 30°C (86°F)/22.5 ppt and higher, 27.5°C (81.5°F)/17.5 and 20.0 ppt, and 25°C (77°F)/15.0 ppt.” Substrate. “The nature of the bottom substrate seems to be the main factor responsible for settling of larvae and for the qualitative composition of bottom communities (Thorson 1955). Keck et ale (1974) reported from laboratory studies that significantly higher (P ~ 0.05) numbers of M. mercenaria larvae set in sand than in mud; they suggested that the addition of organic material to the sediment may be responsible for reduced setting because of increased bacteria levels, reduced dissolved oxygen, and increased production of hydrogen sulfide. Carriker (1959) recommended that the substrate be firm and free of excessive organic mud for larval clam culture; muddy bottoms can be surfaced with shells, sand, or gravel. Adult Clams were most abundant in predominantly fine sediments, but in these sediments their abundance was generally
  • 15. Fish Finder 14 a function of the coarseness of the minor constituents. Clams do not grow well in silty substrates. Pratt and Campbell (1956) found an inverse relationship between growth of M. mercenaria and the fineness of the sediment (expressed as percentage of silt and clay). The inferior growth was attributed to frequent gi1l clearing, which expended energy and interfered with feeding. Johnson (1977) also reported slower growth of M. mercenaria in finer sediment due to increased expulsion of pseudofeces.” Suspended solids. “Davis (1960) noted that both the larvae and egg stage are affected by suspended solids. “Eggs did not develop correctly at silt concentrations of 3.0 or 4.0 g/L, and straight-hinged veligers was normal at silt concentrations of 0.75g/L, retarded at 1.0 to 2.0g/L, and negligible at 3.0 and 4.0g/L”. ”