The use of benthic filter feeders to mitigate eutrophication in coastal systems
Download
1 / 14

The Use of Benthic Filter Feeders to Mitigate Eutrophication in Coastal Systems - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 112 Views
  • Uploaded on

The Use of Benthic Filter Feeders to Mitigate Eutrophication in Coastal Systems. Lynn Ficarra. Eutrophication. “an increase in the rate of supply of organic matter to an ecosystem.” (Nixon 1995) N & P land clearing, sewage, fertilizer, animals, fossil fuels, industry

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'The Use of Benthic Filter Feeders to Mitigate Eutrophication in Coastal Systems' - elvina


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
The use of benthic filter feeders to mitigate eutrophication in coastal systems

The Use of Benthic Filter Feeders to Mitigate Eutrophication in Coastal Systems

Lynn Ficarra


Eutrophication
Eutrophication

  • “an increase in the rate of

    supply of organic matter to

    an ecosystem.” (Nixon 1995)

  • N & P

    • land clearing, sewage, fertilizer, animals, fossil fuels, industry

  • Phytoplankton (Paerl1988, Diaz and Rosenberg 2008)

    • Block sun

    • Die, sink to bottom, microbial respiration, hypoxia


Filter feeders
Filter Feeders!

Remove phytoplankton, nutrients, organic materials, bacteria, and much much more!

(Ruesinket al. 2005, Gili and Coma 1998, Levinton 1972).


Particle capture
Particle Capture

  • Filtration rate

    • Depends on species, size, water velocity, temperature

  • Efficiency of particle retention

    • Depends on filtering structure

      (Comeauet al. 2008, Rice 2001, Eastern Oyster Biological Review Team 2007)


Bivalves
Bivalves

  • Gills (Riisgard1988)

    • Parallel filaments

    • Ciliary tracts: create current, capture particles

  • Particles sorted (Newell 2004)

    • Rejected: pseudofeces

    • Digested: feces

  • Mucus-coated aggregates

    • Released to benthos


The use of benthic filter feeders to mitigate eutrophication in coastal systems

Riisgard 1988


The use of benthic filter feeders to mitigate eutrophication in coastal systems

Gili and Coma 1998


Crassostrea virginica eastern oyster
Crassostreavirginica (Eastern Oyster)

  • Atlantic coast of U.S.

  • 0.6-5 m depth

  • 20-30°C optimal

    • Survive freezing and >45°C, feeding rate affected

  • Survive at salinities of 5-40 ppt

  • Filtration rate up to 30-40 L h-1

  • Create oyster reefs

    • Promotes biodiversity

    • Substrate for more suspension feeders

      (Ruesink 2005, MacKenzie 1996, Stanley and Sellars 1986, Galtsoff 1964, Shumway 1996, Eastern Oyster Biological Review Team 2007, Pechenik2005)


Mytilus edulis blue mussel
Mytilusedulis (Blue Mussel)

  • Coast of Canada to North Carolina

  • 1-10 m depth

  • 5-20°C optimal

    • Survive freezing and up to 29°C

  • >18 ppt ideal

    • Survive low salinities 4-18 ppt, growth slowed

  • Filtration rate 1.34-2.59 L h-1

  • Mussel beds

    • Increases biodiversity

    • Substrate for more filter feeders

      (Zagataet al. 2008, Goulletquer2012, Bayne and Widdows1978)


C v irginica vs m edulis
C. virginicavs. M. edulis

  • Filtration rates at 9°C (Comeauet al. 2008)

    • M. edulis: 1.82-2.90 L h-1

    • C. virginica: 0.05-1.21 L h-1

  • Optimal conditions: C. virginicafaster than M. edulis

  • Cold conditions: M. edulisfaster

  • Use both for eutrophication control


Other filter feeders
Other Filter Feeders

  • Average filtering rate at optimal conditions for 44 filter feeding species is 7.8 L g-1h-1 dry weight (Pomeroy, D’Elia, and Schaffner 2006)

  • Sponges (Milanese et al. 2003)

    • retain up to 80% suspended particles

    • Capture small particles that others miss (bacteria)


Case studies
Case Studies

  • Liverpool (Allen and Hawkins 1993)

    • Mussels introduced to eutrophic water surrounding docks

    • Two years later water quality and oxygen levels in water column and sediments improved

  • Chesapeake Bay (Newell 1988)

    • Pre-1870: oysters filter bay in 3-6 days

    • Now: 325 days


Negative impacts
Negative Impacts

  • Competitive exclusion (Ruesink2005)

  • Toxic shellfish (MacKenzie et al. 2004)

  • Invasive species (Ruesink2005)

    • Hitchhikers

  • Pathogens (Moss et al. 2007)

    • Asian oyster, Chesapeake Bay

    • 2 protist parasites not found in U.S. waters

    • Viruses, cestodes, other protist parasites


References
References

Refer to Accompanying Paper