200203700 - Freshwater Mussel Research and Restoration
Sponsor: Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR)
ISRP recommendation: Response requested
The following CTUIR point-by-point responses are arranged in categories and order consistent with ISRP comments.
ISRP general questions and responses:
1. Identify hypothesized limiting factors for low recruitment.
Response: Low recruitment of freshwater mussels into existing mussel beds is often noted but causal factors are rarely explained. However, three possible factors have most likely negatively impacted mussel recruitment in the Umatilla River Basin. These factors are, 1) loss of suitable host fish, 2) significant habitat changes, such as damming, logging, agricultural activities, etc. [note: Brim Box and Mossa (1999) provided an overview of factors, including sedimentation and land use changes, that negatively impact mussels], and 3) significant historical changes in the hydrologic regime, which have been implicated in low recruitment in other western river systems (e.g., Howard and Cuffey 2006).
Although each of these factors is significant and likely played a role in the historical extirpation of mussels from the upper Umatilla River, present conditions in the river, and knowledge gained from previous work in this project will, in our opinion, help mitigate these limiting factors. Specifically, we have investigated and addressed each of these potential limiting factors as follows:
1. Loss of suitable host fish: Based on our extensive host fish experiments, we have determined that suitable host fish occur in the upper Umatilla River for two of the three genera of freshwater mussels historically found in the Umatilla River Basin. Specifically, three fish species (longnose dace, speckled dace, and margined sculpin) were identified as suitable host fishes (i.e., transformed juveniles were obtained from fish inoculated in host fish experiments) for Anodonta spp. Two fish species, the margined and shorthead sculpin, were identified as suitable host fishes for the western ridge mussel (Gonidea angulata). All four of these fish species occur in the Umatilla River.
Host fish for the third genus of mussel that occurs in the Columbia Basin, the western pearlshell (Margaritifera falcata) are well known, with experiments to determine the host fishes for the western pearlshell dating back to the early 1940s (Murphy 1942). Like other species of Margaritifera, salmonids are well-known hosts, and for M. falcata include Coho and Chinook salmon, and rainbow, cutthroat, and steelhead trout (Murphy 1942, Meyers and Millemann 1977, Karna and Millemann 1978, Fustish and Milleman 1978). In the early 1900s native Chinook and Coho were extirpated from the Umatilla River, and steelhead populations were severely reduced (Phillips et al. 2000). However, in the past few decades all three species have been either re-introduced or supplemented into the Umatilla River. Therefore, for all three genera of freshwater mussels that we are trying to reintroduce into the Umatilla River system, it is unlikely that lack of native host fishes poses a significant risk to restoration efforts. In addition, mussel introductions will only occur in river sections where their hosts are present.
2) significant habitat changes, such as damming, logging, agricultural activities, etc:
Since the early part of the century, the Umatilla River has undergone intensive channel modifications. Nearly 70% of its channel has been physically modified through straightening, mining, levee construction, or repositioning. Because freshwater mussels are relatively sedentary animals these direct channel modifications may have negatively impacted suitable freshwater mussel habitat in the Umatilla River system. In addition, seven dams are currently maintained on the main stem of the Umatilla River while in contrast, the main stems of the North and Middle forks of the John Day rivers, where large extant mussel beds occur, remain unimpounded.
Although it was difficult to explore the impacts of past channel modifications in the Umatilla River on freshwater mussels, we were able to examine possible correlations between freshwater mussel occurrence and channel modifications in the upper Middle Fork John Day River. McDowell (2001) divided the upper reaches of the Middle Fork John Day River into valley segments that were associated with major channel modifications. We found M. falcata was relatively less abundant in the channelized and/or mined reaches than in reaches with no modifications (Brim Box et al. 2006). Although these findings are preliminary, they do provide a nexus to examine process-based links between freshwater mussel populations and the local physical environment, in both the Umatilla River and the Middle and North Fork John Day rivers. To that end, predictive habitat models have been developed and tested for all three mussel genera, and the results are being synthesized as a MS thesis (at Utah State University) and report, which will be completed by the end of the fiscal year (September 2012).
Recent habitat restoration efforts in the Umatilla River Basin will most likely enhance mussel restoration efforts. For example, past activities on the Umatilla River (e.g., installing dikes to reduce flooding, physically diverting the river to increase farm land or to avoid road construction) may have destroyed or destabilized suitable habitat for mussels. Over time restored sections of the Umatilla, especially the upper Umatilla River where several habitat restoration projects are on-going, will increase the availability of suitable habitat for freshwater mussels. Our pilot translocation project, where M. falcata were translocated into and are now reproducing in the upper Umatilla, support these assertions.
3) significant historical changes in the hydrologic regime: Significant irrigation water withdrawals are made each year from the Umatilla River, with other less significant withdrawals occurring for municipal and other uses. How these withdrawals impact on native freshwater mussels in the Umatilla River is not known. However, the impact of irrigation water withdrawals on other macroinvertebrates in the Umatilla River ranged from negligible if water withdrawals followed winter high flows, to severe if discharge and physiochemical variables did not return to pre-withdrawal conditions within a short time period (Miller 2007). In other western streams, mussel recruitment was higher in low discharge years than high discharge years (Howard and Cuffey 2006). However, adult mussels appeared to benefit from high discharge events, which may have scoured fine sediments that can adversely impact mussels.
In 2010 the CTUIR mussel project contracted with Bryan Black of the Hatfield Marine Science Center to apply tree-ring techniques to establish the population age structure and climate sensitivities of mussels in the Middle Fork John Day River. Working with a large number of western ridged mussel (G. angulata) shells, Dr. Black found that the chronology was correlated with monthly records of precipitation, drought (Palmer Drought Severity Index), air temperature, and sea level pressure, and showed a strong sensitivity to environmental conditions in the late winter and spring months, especially February through April. Specifically, the chronology was negatively correlated with mean February and March precipitation and mean February through April drought index, and was positively correlated with April air temperatures and March sea level pressure. Overall, favorable mussel growth was characterized by late winters and springs with low precipitation and warm temperatures, as would occur with anomalously high atmospheric pressure off the northwest coast.
In other sites in the Pacific Northwest, mussel chronologies have been negatively related to precipitation and river discharge, and to a lesser extent, positively related to temperatures. Indeed, this Gonidea chronology is negatively related to John Day River discharge, which is the opposite trend that Howard and Cuffey (2006) detected for adult mussel chronologies in California. Even with a relatively small sample size, these Gonidea exhibited very highly synchronous growth and unusually strong relationships to climate, which indicates that they may serve well as a long-term ecological indicator of climate and the state of the river ecosystem. Many marine (rockfish) chronologies and high-elevation tree-ring chronologies are also sensitive to winter climate. For these freshwater mussels, winter climate and snowpack, and the resultant higher river flows and lower temperature later in the season, may affect growing season length. However, more work will need to be done to determine whether recruitment of mussel populations follow patterns similar to those in other river systems.
2. Explain how exotics could change host relationships.
Response: Most western drainages contain a number of non-indigenous fishes, and their impact on native freshwater mussel populations is unknown. For example, at least 13 species of non-indigenous fishes have been reported from the John Day and Umatilla River systems. These non-indigenous fishes could potentially affect freshwater mussel populations in either a positive or negative way. If non-indigenous fishes can serve as host fish in the absence of the original host fish, their presence may allow freshwater mussels to persist. In this case, programs aimed at eradicating these non-indigenous fishes may ultimately have a negative impact on freshwater mussel populations. Alternatively, if the original host fishes are still present in the system, the non-indigenous fishes may compete for these glochidia but serve as less efficient hosts (O’Brien and Brim-Box 1999).
If non-native fishes are predators on native fishes that serve as hosts for freshwater mussels, they may decrease the number of available host fish. For example, the large number of smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu) found in the John Day River system could affect native salmonid species, as has been reported in other parts of the Columbia River Basin (Tabor et al. 1993, Zimmerman 1999). Freshwater mussels living in streams where the host fish density is low may infest the same fishes repeatedly with their glochidia. Fish that are exposed to freshwater mussel glochidia multiple times have been known to develop glochidial immunity (Coker et al. 1921, Kirk and Layzer 1997). Fish populations with an acquired immunity to glochidia will no longer effectively serve as hosts. If a large percentage of fish present at a site are infected with glochidia, as has been found in the Middle Fork John Day River at some sites, there is a danger that these fish may develop immunity to further encystments. However, we know very little about the specific impacts exotics can have on host fish relationships. The first step in answering this type of question is to determine the native host fish for the freshwater mussels found in the Columbia River system – something we have undertaken successfully in the first phases of this project.
3. Identify hypothesis for the observed death of mussel beds.
Response: Beginning in 2003, the CTUIR freshwater mussel project began to monitor a large bed of freshwater mussels in the lower Middle Fork John Day River. This bed was significant in that it contained all three genera of freshwater mussels -- Margaritifera, Gonidea and Anodonta -- in densities that were higher than had been recorded in any other western river system (Brim Box et al. 2006). We made repeated visits to this bed in subsequent years, and in 2009 noticed that a significant algal bloom had occurred on and near the bed, and that a high percentage of mussels had died in situ. Approximately five decomposing mussel bodies were found while we were at the site, which indicated the die-off was on-going. Based on a combined 40+ years experience of the key personnel of this project, conducting mussel surveys in the north-eastern, south-eastern and western US, it was highly unusual to find dead mussels and shells still in situ in a bed (usually shells are scattered on the banks), as well as decomposing mussel tissue. In August 2009, the CTUIR project leader, as well as researchers from the University of Oregon and Utah State University, returned to the bed and collected mussel tissue from dead and dying animals. Additional sites were surveyed upstream to determine the extent of the mussel die off. Dead mussels (i.e., shells with the soft tissues still intact) were found ~ 10 km upstream of the initial die-off, indicating that the die-off was not a point phenomena, but fairly extensive. Subsequent trips in 2010 and 2011 revealed that by 2011, very few live mussels (< 1% of original population estimates) remained at the original site.
After the original die-off was discovered in 2009, we contacted nationally known toxicologists and malacologists to help us determine how best to investigate potential causal factors for the die-off. These individuals included:
Dr. Teresa J. Newton
USGS, Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center
2630 Fanta Reed Road, La Crosse, WI 54603
Dr. Chris Ingersoll
Columbia Environmental Research Center, U.S. Geological Survey
4200 New Haven Rd, Columbia, MO 65201
Dr. W. Gregory Cope, Aquatic Toxicologist
Leader, Department Extension
Coordinator, NC Agromedicine Institute
North Carolina State University
Department of Environmental & Molecular Toxicology
Box 7633, Raleigh, NC 27695-7633
It is difficult to hypothesize what may have caused, and continues to cause, this particular die-off. In many cases the causal factors for mussel die-offs are not easily detected. For example, Neves (1987) in a review of mussel die-offs in the United States, found that of 16 reported die-offs, in only two cases were the causal factors identified. In those two cases, weather was listed as one cause and unionicolid mites were listed as the other cause. Later, Fleming et al. (1995) attributed the die-off of thousands of mussels (including a federally listed endangered species) in a stream in North Carolina to acetylcholineterase poisoning, probably from pesticide runoff.
Hypothesis for Mussel Die-off:
1. Nutrient run off and algal blooms: The algal bloom that was noticed on site is consistent with an increase in nutrient run-off, that could potentially cause oxygen sags that cause mussel die-offs. The minimum dissolved oxygen (DO) requirements of western freshwater mussels is not known, although for some eastern species DO levels less than 5 ppm caused significant mortality, and species listed as endangered appeared to be more susceptible to mortality (Gagnon and Golladay 2004). However, in summer 2011 we tested ammonia levels at the site and they were negligible. This does not rule out nutrient run off as a contributing factor, but rather suggests that additional tests and monitoring are needed. These would include the possible deployment of data loggers, more sophisticated water analysis, and identification of the algal community present at the site (to rule out toxic algal blooms).
2. Infectious diseases or other pathogens: It is possible that an infectious disease may have caused the mussel die-off. However, the infectious diseases of freshwater mussels are not well know. In a review on this subject, Grizzle and Brunner (2009) pointed out that infectious diseases of freshwater mussels have received little attention. In addition, they noted that when environmental conditional are sub-optimal it is possible that pathogens may cause greater harm. However, they also noted that this potential has not been adequately evaluated. Because the impact of pathogens has received so little attention, the role of infectious diseases can not be ruled out.
Guidelines exist (see Grizzle and Brunner 2009) to help researchers determine if a die-off has really occurred and how to look for cause/effect relations. One of the next steps after a die-off has occurred is to determine whether that die-off is an acute or chronic event. To that end, our first step in addressing this die-off is to explore the annual growth-increment patterns of mussels in the years leading up to the mortality event, and compare these growth patterns to those in unaffected individuals from nearby beds. Such information will establish the year of death for dead-collected samples and help describe the progression and timing of mortality as well as any preceding growth declines. Thus, we will be able to determine if the mussel die-off was acute or chronic in nature. Growth-increment analysis will also help us to better establish the relationships between mussel shell growth and climate, including precipitation, temperature, and river discharge, and whether changes in these environmental variables may have contributed to the mortality event.
ISRP questions and responses on project deliverables:
Mussel declines are a great concern throughout North America and elsewhere because of pervasive changes to river systems. Mussels are excellent taxa for monitoring and for assessing environmental conditions. Developing a solid understanding of mussels in the Columbia Basin will be prudent and useful for better resource management. This project is under the guidance of scientists with considerable experience and a scientific publication record associated with this or similar projects. The development of the project follows a logical pathway to where they are now. The project has contributed greatly to our knowledge of freshwater mussel status and trends in the mid-Columbia, and the proposed work will likely be worthwhile.
In order to provide a more useful scientific review of the project, the ISRP needs additional details on monitoring protocols and methods in a response.
1. Deliverable 2, mussel reintroduction.
Is enough known about mussel glochidia to expose fish caught in the Umatilla River as a pilot project?
Response: Yes, we have successfully kept gravid adult mussels in our laboratory for several host fish projects. In that process, we were able to extract viable glochidia to inoculate fish. One of the key personnel of the project (Christine O’Brien) has written a protocol on the experimental procedure to determine host fishes. The protocol includes each step needed to successfully inoculate fish with mussel glochidia. For example, how to tell if an adult mussel is gravid, how to determine if the glochidia are viable (ready for encystment), how to maintain live glochidia in the laboratory, how to set up and maintain host fish experiments and gravid mussels, etc.
We have successfully used fish collected from the Umatilla River for our previous host fish studies. At least nine species of fish have been tested from the Umatilla River. Of these, four native fish species have been found to serve as suitable hosts (i.e., glochidia transformed on the fish fins or gills, completed metamorphosis, and dropped off as free-living juvenile mussels) for either Anodonta or Gonidea. The host fish species for Margaritifera falcata, based on past studies not conducted by CTUIR, indicate salmonids, including rainbow trout, serve as host fish. Salmonids are now plentiful in the Umatilla River system. Based on our previous work, speckled dace and longnose dace serve as host fishes for Anodonta spp., and shorthead sculpin and margined sculpin serve as host fishes for Gonidea angulata. All four of these fish species occur in reaches of the Umatilla River where we plan to reintroduce freshwater mussels.
2. Deliverable 3, apply and test predictive mussel-habitat models,
Response: These models have been developed and tested for all three mussel genera, and the results are being synthesized as a MS thesis and report, which will be completed by the end of the fiscal year (September 2012).
3. Deliverable 4, use of growth-increment chronologies, and
Response: (see response on hypothesis of mussel die-off above)
4. Deliverable 6, artificial propagation.
The proposal had two main thrusts, namely basic mussel research and restoration of mussels in the Umatilla. The mussel research component looks justified but restoration requires more justification. The project sponsors need to take a close look at the life history of the mussels.
If low recruitment is the primary problem, what are the limiting factors?
Response: (see detailed response above)
It was unclear if the sponsors had obtained adequate information to move into the next phase of translocation.
Does project staff know enough to proceed with restoration?
Response: Yes. The CTUIR mussel project has taken an extremely conservative approach to restoration. For example, although it was clear from the onset of the mussel project that Tribal members wanted mussels restored into the Umatilla and other mid-Columbia drainages, we felt that not enough information was available on several fronts to guide restoration efforts. For example, given that little was known about the genetic make-up or diversity of western freshwater mussels at the inception of this project, we undertook research to determined the genetic lineages of all three western genera. Without this information, it would have been impossible to understand which source populations should be used in our restoration effort. This is well illustrated with the Anodonta, where we found, using mitochondrial and nuclear data, that genetic structuring was inconsistent with morphologically-based species designations, but instead follows patterns of vicariance among major hydrogeologic basins (Mock et al. 2010). Similarly, we sought to understand habitat associations and host fish preferences for all three western genera before any attempts were made to relocate mussels. Lastly, we conducted a successful pilot reintroduction of the western pearlshell into the upper Umatilla River early in the project. Because these adult animals were marked, we were able to follow their survival and growth. In additional, juvenile mussels were later found at the site and based on a genetic analysis, are likely offspring of the mussels that were originally translocated. This suggests that the habitat and native host fishes are both available to allow for the successful reintroduction of freshwater mussels into the Umatilla River system.
How do exotics change the host relationships?
Response: See detailed response above. The introduction of exotic fish, especially if they are not hosts for the native mussel populations, has been and continues to be an issue. However, given the large number of exotic fish species (e.g., smallmouth bass) in the Middle Fork John Day River, it is possible that non-native fishes have a minimal impact on freshwater mussel populations in that system, because if non-native fishes did have an impact, it is likely that these impacts would have been noted. However, it is certainly possible that exotics are having impacts that have not been detected. Ideally, now that we know at least some of the host fishes of each western genus of freshwater mussels, it should be possible to start exploring some of the interactions between native host fishes and exotics.
Are the limiting factors understood? If these are not addressed before translocation, can success be expected? For example, what if there is unsuitable habitat or a lack of fish hosts?
Response: The limiting factors are understood to the best of our ability. In this case, success is expected because our pilot efforts suggest that both the host fish and habitat are suitable for our translocation efforts. The fact that previously translocated mussels have reproduced in the Umatilla River supports these assertions. Because not all areas of the Umatilla (and other mid-Columbia tributaries) are suitable habitat, we have developed a mussel-habitat model for each western mussel genus to guide our translocation efforts.
Evidence was presented on the death of the mussel bed in the John Day. Do project sponsors have a hypothesis for this finding that can help direct the project? This is an important project, one that will become more valuable with time.
Response: Please see detailed response above. We have contacted national experts on mussel mortality events. We will follow established protocols for determining whether this die-off is acute or chronic. We plan to collect tissue, water and algal samples in 2012 to help us determine a cause for this event. Tissue previously collected from dying mussels will be sent off to appropriate labs to help determine a cause for this die-off.
ISRP questions and responses on project other proposal sections:
1. Purpose: Significance to Regional Programs, Technical Background, and Objectives
The project addresses the status and trends of freshwater mussels in the Columbia River Basin and in particular the area of the mid-Columbia occupied by the Umatilla Indian Reservation, an issue of broad regional importance. Because mussels are long-lived they are particularly useful as long-term bio-indicators of watershed conditions and habitat quality, including sentinels for metals and organic contaminants. The sponsors have a good grasp of the published literature. Specifically, this project is now designed with four objectives that are important and clearly articulated. The goal is to restore mussels to Umatilla River and other mid-Columbia basins to rebuild ecosystem diversity function and traditional cultural opportunities. The objectives of the work are clearly stated.
The work has been generally divided into three emphasis areas: (1) determining the current status of three genera of freshwater mussels in the Umatilla and upper John Day Rivers, (2) conducting a genetic analysis of existing populations to determine taxonomic status and evolutionary relationships, and (3) determining the feasibility of re-introducing mussels to streams where they have been extirpated or have greatly diminished in abundance.
The project sponsors have provided an adequate description of the significance of the work to other projects dealing with freshwater mussels, although there are relatively few in the mid- and upper Columbia. They point out that mussels have historically been an important food resource for native cultures in the area, but that mussels have suffered serious declines just as in other areas of North America. Currently, scientific evidence suggests that freshwater mussels are the most imperiled group of animals in the United States, and some species could be ESA listed. The project will provide information to guide freshwater mussel restoration and monitoring efforts.
2. History: Accomplishments, Results, and Adaptive Management (ISRP Review of Results)
The proposal provides a thorough description of past accomplishments. The project sponsors are to be commended for publishing their research on mussel genetics and evolutionary relationships. Some basic questions concerning genetics and intermediate host fish have been at least partially answered. The current proposal continues the work previously undertaken by exploring the feasibility of reintroducing mussels to areas where different species have been extirpated, by developing and refining models relating mussel abundance to stream habitat features, and by investigating the cause(s) of mass mortality events. It also adds the elements of elucidating mussel effects on the habitats of other species and forecasting potential effects of climate change on the long-term environmental favorability of streams in the Umatilla Reservation for mussel populations.
From an adaptive management standpoint, the emphasis to date has been on knowledge acquisition and not on policy change. The proposal states that the emphasis will be refocused from research to restoration, but it appears that nearly all funding is to be spent on research at this stage of the project. The positive aspects are that the sponsors are developing predictive models to test assumptions, to improve understanding, and to generate knowledge and, working collaboratively with researchers from outside the region. A limiting aspect is that most of the work is being done locally. The ISRP notes that the researchers are listed to become involved with similar studies associated with Lake Roosevelt. Given the importance of mussels for ecosystem functioning, and the policy importance if they become ESA-listed, as they are elsewhere, it would be prudent to significantly expand the spatial scope of the work, especially the assessment and monitoring. Adaptive management needs to be greatly expanded. It is not clear how information from this project guides natural resource decisions. While it is true that the information has had some impacts, the adaptive management process is not developed to the point that efficient and knowledgeable decisions can be made in both policy as well as science to inform policy.
3. Project Relationships, Emerging Limiting Factors, and Tailored Questions for Type of Work (hatchery, RME, tagging)
The project appears to be well integrated into the relatively few other projects dealing with freshwater mussels in the Columbia River Basin; in fact, this project has been a major contributor to advances in knowledge of mussel distribution and evolutionary relationships. The project assisted with mussel salvage (5,000) before and during riverine habitat restoration projects including the dewatered channel of the John Day River and shared equipment and data with the lamprey population status project. While there are some relationships, these should be actively expanded to include cooperation with additional projects and agencies in the Basin.
Considerable research is needed before it will be possible to say with confidence why mussels have vanished from many reaches where they would be expected to exist. The proposal will examine habitat characteristics, intermediate hosts which appear to be mostly sculpins or cyprinids, and water quality. The water quality work focuses on water temperature changes, the ISRP understands that there has been 70 years of de-watering in the Umatilla Basin, but we wonder if exposure to toxins from a variety of potential sources might also be a factor for these long-lived organisms.
What is being done to look at agricultural chemicals and other substances that could cause lethal, sub-lethal, or reproductive impairment effects?
Response: The protocols and lines of inquiry that will be used to assess the mussel die-off documented in the Middle Fork John Day River could provide a segue into investigating other substances that may directly or indirectly harm mussels. Given that a new laboratory has been completed in Walla Walla and will house some components of the mussel project, it is plausible that additional research efforts can focus on toxicity testing and related fields of inquiry.
It would also seem that an evaluation of ages or age classes from current populations including recently dead specimens as well as an evaluation of ages from shells in middens might be particularly informative to form some ecological perspective on what may have transpired over time.
Has there been consistent reproduction during the post de-watering era, and if not, what were the water conditions during the successful reproduction years?
Response: The low number of extant mussels in the Umatilla River would make it difficult to undertake a meaningful evaluation of age classes or growth patterns over time. However, we are currently identifying, measuring and cataloguing thousands of mussel shell fragments from shell middens found at the Umatilla town site on the main stem Columbia River. One of the findings thus far is the anecdotal observation that mussel shells were much thicker historically than found today. This may indicate that historic levels of calcium were much higher in the Columbia River than they are today. In addition it may be possible to attempt to age some of this material.
In 2010 the CTUIR mussel project contracted with Bryan Black of the Hatfield Marine Science Center to apply tree-ring techniques to establish the population age structure and climate sensitivities of mussels in the Middle Fork John Day River. Working with a large number of western ridged mussel (G. angulata) shells, Dr. Black found that the chronology was correlated with monthly records of precipitation, drought (Palmer Drought Severity Index), air temperature, and sea level pressure, and showed a strong sensitivity to environmental conditions in the late winter and spring months, especially February through April. Specifically, the chronology was negatively correlated with mean February and March precipitation and mean February through April drought index, and was positively correlated with April air temperatures and March sea level pressure. Overall, favorable mussel growth was characterized by late winters and springs with low precipitation and warm temperatures, as would occur with anomalously high atmospheric pressure off the northwest coast.
In other sites in the Pacific Northwest, mussel chronologies have been negatively related to precipitation and river discharge, and to a lesser extent, positively related to temperatures. Indeed, this Gonidea chronology is negatively related to John Day River discharge, which is the opposite trend that Howard and Cuffey (2006) detected for adult mussel chronologies in California. Even with a relatively small sample size, these Gonidea exhibited very highly synchronous growth and unusually strong relationships to climate, which indicates that they may serve well as a long-term ecological indicator of climate and the state of the river ecosystem. Many marine (rockfish) chronologies and high-elevation tree-ring chronologies are also sensitive to winter climate. For these freshwater mussels, winter climate may affect growing season length or snowpack, with implications for river flow and temperature later in the season. However, more work will need to be done to determine whether recruitment of mussel populations follow patterns similar to those in other river systems, including the Umatilla.
Translocation of mussels from existing healthy populations such as from the Middle Fork John Day River to streams where habitat is suitable but mussels are absent might benefit from mark-recovery studies. However, the proposal did not contain many details about how success of the reintroductions would be determined. If the method of choice is determined to be release of glochidia-infested fishes, it may take a long time before results are observed because mussels are slow-growing and juveniles may be difficult to sample. What is the role of non-native fish species in the reintroduction?
Response: These are valid points. In the past we have marked both adult and juvenile mussels (see photos below). However, it will not be possible to mark glochidia. We could sacrifice some juvenile mussels, when found, and complete a genetic analysis to determine whether it is likely that the juvenile mussels are the progeny of the mussels that were used to collect glochidia. This could be done non-lethally by taking foot tissue from both adult and juvenile mussels. Alternatively, some juvenile mussels could be sacrificed. A genetic analysis was done on five juvenile mussels that were found in the Umatilla River in 2009. It was suspected that these individuals were the offspring of mussels that were originally translocated from the Middle Fork John Day River. The genetic analysis did confirm this assertion. Based on our sampling techniques, we have successfully found juvenile mussels that were still attached with a byssal thread, suggesting that these individuals were less than one-year-old. Therefore, it is possible to find very small mussels using the right survey techniques (which cause minimal disturbance to the substrate).
ISRP questions and responses on deliverables, work elements, metrics, and methods
Deliverables in general closely follow the objectives; however, there are some concerns:
1. DELV-6: If the technique has been successful in eastern United States applications, why would one expect the process to be different for similar efforts in the western United States?
Response: Good point. We wouldn’t expect the process to be different, although we would be vigilant that the animals we are working with are unique to the western US and that subtle differences might exist. Given that major differences probably don’t exist, we hope to not “reinvent the wheel” and use the expertise that has already been developed in the eastern United States. To that end, we have contacted and plan to visit Dr. Paul Johnson at the Alabama Aquatic Biodiversity Center (AABC) in Marion, Alabama. The center is the largest state non-game recovery program of its kind in the United States. Laboratory mussel propagation techniques will be learned at the lab and applied to the CTUIR’s new laboratory facility in Walla Walla. In addition, at least one site visit to USFWS White Sulphur Springs Fish Hatchery is planned. The hatchery’s manager, Cathernine Gatenby, has previously collaborated on freshwater mussel projects with the CTUIR. The hatchery has a long history of successfully propagating mussels in captivity, as well as culturing algae to feed juvenile mussels.
2. DELV-4: It is not clear how can this be accomplished if the environmental data are not available. It seems that the mussels are responding on a daily to annual scale whereas much of the environmental data, especially from historical periods, is available on annual to decadal scales which demonstrates a mismatch in scales.
Response: Mussel chronologies are developed from annual growth-increment widths. Environmental data are averaged with respect to month and related to the chronology in the knowledge that climate during a given season can affect the entire year of growth. For example, high-elevation tree-ring chronologies are sensitive to March temperatures because springtime warming provides an early start to the growing season, allowing the formation of a wide increment. Also, Pacific rockfish chronologies are highly correlated to February upwelling given that wintertime ocean conditions control growing-season length. An analogous process is true for freshwater mussels chronologies, which in other locations in the Pacific Northwest, strongly (and negatively) relate to late-winter and springtime river discharge. They also relate to associated variables including drought indices, precipitation, and sea-level pressure, which determines the onshore flows of moisture from the Pacific Ocean. Thus, environmental data on annual to monthly timescales provide strong matches to growth-increment data for a wide range of species.
The proposed work elements, metrics and methods were often inadequately described for scientific review. For some of the deliverables, for example genetic analysis and taxonomic revision, methods can be deduced from the section on past accomplishments. However, for the mussel reintroduction, predictive model development, and artificial propagation deliverables not enough information was given, and details in MonitoringMethods.org were either missing or unavailable to outside viewers. For the most expensive deliverable, that is artificial propagation of mussels, no work elements, metrics, or methods were provided other than a very brief mention of artificial propagation efforts in eastern United States. Thus, the proposal should provide more details on these three deliverables before their scientific adequacy can be assessed.
3. One work element in particular needs clarification. Why have salmonid fishes not been evaluated as potential intermediate hosts?
Response: Host fishes for the western pearlshell (Margaritifera falcata) are well known, with experiments to determine the host fishes for the western pearlshell dating back to the early 1940s (Murphy 1942). Like other species of Margaritifera, salmonids are well-known hosts, and for M. falcata include Coho and Chinook salmon, and rainbow, cutthroat, and steelhead trout (Murphy 1942, Meyers and Millemann 1977, Karna and Millemann 1978, Fustish and Milleman 1978). In the early 1900s native Chinook and Coho were extirpated from the Umatilla River, and steelhead populations were severely reduced (Phillips et al. 2000). However, in the past few decades all three species have been re-introduced into the river. Determining which salmonid species are most effective at producing juvenile mussels would be useful, but it should not hinder the reintroduction efforts of M. falcata in the Umatilla River. A recent host fish study by Alexa Maine indicated salmonids (cutthroat and coho) were not hosts for Anodonta spp. (unpublished thesis).
The survey of native fishes infested by glochidia was very revealing, but it was limited to non-salmonids. The need to protect salmonids from anthropogenic losses, including research activities, is understandable, but if glochidia can settle on salmonids, and if the overall goal of the project is to restore abundant mussel populations, it would be important to know what the host-parasite relationship of rearing salmonids to freshwater mussels is.
Regarding data management, very little information is provided on this subject, and that is a great concern. Data from this project have considerable value, now and in the future.
4. At a minimum, information should be provided on data storage, back-up strategies, availability, anticipated changes in management, for example cloud computing and routine statistical packages. What percentage of the budget is devoted to data management?
Response: About two percent of the budget is specifically devoted to data management. The following is a synopsis of the data sharing strategy used by the freshwater mussel project as per protocols implemented by the Confederate Tribes Umatilla Indian Reservation
Purpose and Scope
The purpose of data management for the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservations is to promote and facilitate the collection, maintenance and beneficial use of data within tribal government. Our goal is to create systems to maintain accurate, consistent and transparent data content, thereby allowing tribal board members and agency directors’ access to the best possible data for decision making and policy development. Fine tuning CTUIR’s polices will guide future direction of tribal programs and data collection.
CTUIR’s Information Technologies (IT) department is working with DNR to foster a culture that recognizes data as an asset and that a data management strategy as vital to support tribal goals. Its purpose is to: Ensure that information technology (IT) policies, systems, infrastructure, and capacity meet the needs of the core business functions of CTUIR government.
To meet the business need of the DNR department, OIT has developed a data management strategy that will help guide DNR policies by facilitating access to data necessary for the decision making process. CTUIR’s data management strategy has 5 components. We seek to describe the current data collection, analysis and reporting processes, integrate data collected from regional offices, maintain that data on our centralized database, assure data quality, and archive our data. This strategy creates pathways, for data to flow to decision makers for policy creation and a feedback loop to refine data collections.
Describe the current data collection, analysis and reporting processes: Data collection occurs throughout all programs within the Tribal Government. In most cases data is collected, analyzed and stored locally. The need for centralizing data to make it more useable, provide a more efficient methods for data storage, provide QA/QC protocols and a unified point of dissemination to the public has been recognized throughout the Government. Small pilot projects have proved successful in the Fisheries program as well as the Water Resources Program. Greater progress would be made with a dedicated staff person. This person would be a liaison between data collectors, data managers, database administrators, and policy analysts. Their primary responsibility would be ensuring that CTUIR DNR data are collected, stored, and distributed in a way that meets the needs of CTUIR Government, as well as the larger community.
Maintain data on our centralized database: CTUIR seeks to make it a common business practice to synchronize data collected from regional offices. OIT will help standardize the fisheries data collection and data entry. Currently CTUIR has over 15 TB capacity for storing spatial and tabular datasets.
Assure data quality: CTUIR seeks consistent and complete data and will work with regional biologists to create systems to QA/QC data. Currently tools are developed within a web browser which summarize and graph information making it easier to identify outliers and errors, and allowing the user to flag data and enter comments regarding the use of flagged data in analysis.
Archive DNR data: Using a centralized database OIT will make stored data easy to find and retrieve when needed. The archiving of data will consist of loading the data into the centralized database. Analysis and queries of this data will help ensure data quality.
This strategy will allow fisheries data to be accessible to inform fisheries policy. Fishery policy will in turn refine project goals and the data collection process.
Collaboration
CTUIR is prepared to collaborate with our co-managers to make sharing data a common business practice. CTUIR supports making available population level data for the three Viable Salmonid Population (VSP) indicators (Natural Origin Spawning Abundance, Smolt to Adult Return Ratios, and Recruits per Spawner Ratios). CTUIR is willing to adopt a common data exchange template and will continue to coordinate with the Coordinated Assessment Phase III work plan to manage DETs. CTUIR is ready to work with co-managers given that this template does not infringe on CTUIR’s tribal sovereignty rights; including the ability to house all raw data pertaining to resources in CTUIR’s traditional use areas. These data must be available in a format that supports query, synthesis and analysis in support of policy development. CTUIR supports the data exchange template as long as the duties and requirements of this project do not require a disproportionate or unmanageable cost to CTUIR employees and resources.
Data Sharing Strategy
This strategy provides a common vision of CTUIR to exchanging information between collectors, analysts, and end users for the purposes of effective evaluation of the tribal salmonid resource and progress toward the recovery of anadromous salmonids listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). This data sharing strategy outlines an approach that will ensure that data and information can be shared in a timely, efficient, and collaborative manner across the basin. CTUIR will implement a data sharing strategy which includes creating a data sharing policy, establishing a common trust environment, advancing data discovery and retrieval, and developing the tools necessary for data sharing.
Institute a data sharing policy: CTUIR is a sovereign nation and signatory to the accords of 2007. As a sovereign signatory to the accord, CTUIR will manage its own data to support decision making and policy development. A data sharing policy will be developed to outline in what format data are to be shared, document what the intentions of the sharing of the data are and identify what types of data will be shared.
Establish a Common Trust Environment: CTUIR will work with regional biologists, analysts and end users to put in place uniform, information security standards, information access rules, user authorization, and access control to promote common trust.
Advance data Discovery and Retrieval: CTUIR will manage and store regional fisheries data on a centralized database. CTUIR will develop a spatially based relational database and a custom designed user interfaces to query information, summarize data and automate reporting. CTUIR will document all data with Metadata dictionaries.
Develop the tools necessary for data sharing: CTUIR will continue to make fisheries data available through web access and will develop the tools necessary at the institutional, leadership, and workforce levels to collaborate and share knowledge, expertise and information.
Web access data sharing: CTUIR has created a repository for data at CTUIR’s central office in Mission Oregon. Fisheries data are currently reported on their website: http://data.umatilla.nsn.us/.
Data management processes: CTUIR retains the rights as a sovereign nation to collect, store, analyze and utilize data to develop policies and inform the Tribal public. A vision for information management has been developed through a collaborative process involving several Tribal departments. At the core of the vision is a process defined by the following tasks:
Document existing data collection efforts in a manner that is useful for the stakeholders.
Identify parameters collected
Identify metrics calculated
Identify the reporting interval.
Identify the decision makers.
Identify existing data flows.
Identify ideal data flows.
Coordinate with staff to conduct systematic needs assessments for all data flows identified. This includes identifying and interviewing all data collectors, data consumers, and other stakeholders in order to identify and prioritize needs.
Present the findings of the documentation effort and the data flow diagramming to the stakeholders. Identify junctures in the process where the benefits will be realized from having a central data management repository and customized user interfaces.
Work with staff to ensure that data are being maintained in centralized data systems in a timely fashion, and ensuring that basic QA/QC standards are being met.
Work with Database Developers to design user interfaces to meet the needs outlined in assessments. This would include mocking up conceptual designs and conducting QA/QC testing of user interfaces as they are produced by technical staff. This would also include working with end-users to ensure that the systems are meeting their needs.
5. Regarding key personnel, what are their responsibilities? A positive aspect is that the personnel listed have a strong record of publications in the peer-reviewed literature.
Response:
Jayne Brim Box (CTUIR freshwater mussel project leader): Oversee of all aspects of the project, including all six deliverables.
Karen Mock (Associate Investigator): Act as adviser to MS student who developed predictive models for mussel occurrence (DELV 3). Conduct research and advise research assistants on genetic analysis of freshwater mussels (DELV 5).
Christine O’Brien (Associate Investigator): Aid in all facets of the reintroduction of freshwater mussels into the Umatilla River and other mid-Columbia basins (DELV 2). Train, oversee and advise CTUIR technicians on how to transform juvenile mussels under laboratory conditions (DELV 6).
Bryan Black (Associate Investigator): Use growth-increment chronologies to inform restoration efforts and investigate on-going mussel mortality events (DELV 4).
6. Specific comments on protocols and methods described in MonitoringMethods.org
The protocols and methods in MonitoringMethods.org contained brief descriptions of the monitoring objectives, but there was essentially no information on the sampling methods or metrics. For some of the protocols, information was not available for viewing, stating that in order to see any information one needed to be logged in as a colleague of the owner. Sampling methods, frequencies, laboratory analyses, and statistical tests should be specified for the protocols and methods to be useful.
Method: 200850400: Population Genetic Analyses needs to be completed
Response: The population genetic analyses involve several steps: development of the markers, genotyping of populations, and analysis and synthesis of data. To date two publications have resulted from molecular marker development (Chong et al. 2009a, Molecular Ecology Resources; Chong et al. 2009b, Molecular Ecology Resources) and one publication has resulted from the analysis and synthesis of data for Anodonta (Mock et al. 2010 Molecular Ecology). Additional samples became available for both Anodonta and Margaritifera in 2010, and these are being analyzed presently. Genotyping for Gonidea samples will also proceed during the Spring and Summer 2012. A final report on all population genetic analyses and syntheses will be submitted before December 31, 2012, and multiple publications are expected to come from this work.
Literature Cited:
Brim Box, J. and J. Mossa. 1999. Sediment, land use, and freshwater mussels: prospects and problems. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 18:99-117.
Brim Box, J., J. Howard, D. Wolf, C. O’Brien, D. Nez and D. Close. 2006. Freshwater mussels (Bivalvia: Unionoida) of the Umatilla and Middle Fork John Day rivers in eastern Oregon. Northwest Science 80:95-107.
Coker, R.E., A.F. Shira, H.W. Clark, and A.D. Howard. 1921. Natural history and propagation of freshwater mussels. Bulletin of the U.S. Bureau of Fisheries 37:75-181.
Chong J.P, J.C. Brim Box D.A. Nez, and K.E. Mock. 2009. Isolation and characterization of microsatellite loci in the western pearlshell mussel Margaritifera falcata (Gould). Molecular Ecology Resources 9: 995-999.
Chong J.P, J.C. Brim Box D.A. Nez, and K.E. Mock. 2009. Isolation and characterization of microsatellite loci in western North American Anodonta species. Molecular Ecology Resources 9: 939-943.
Fleming, W.J., T.P. Augspurger, and J.A. Alderman. 1995. Freshwater mussel die-off attributed to anticholinesterase poisoning. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 14: 877-879.
Fustish, C.A., and R.E. Millemann. 1978. Glochidiosis of salmonid fishes. II.
Comparison of tissue response of coho and Chinook salmon to experimental infection with Margaritifera margaritifera (L.) (Pelecypoda: Margaritanidae). Journal of Parasitology 64(1):155-157.
Gagnon, P.M., and S.W. Golladay. 2004. Drought responses of freshwater mussels (Unionidae) in Coastal Plain tributaries of the Flint River basin, Georgia. Journal of Freshwater Ecology 19: 667-679.
Grizzle, J.M., and C.J. Brunner. 2009. Infectious diseases of freshwater mussels and other freshwater bivalve mollusks. Reviews in Fisheries Science 17:425-467.
Howard, J.K.. and K.M. Cuffey. 2006. Factors controlling the age structure of Margaritifera falcata in 2 northern California streams. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 25: 677-690.
Karna, D.W. and R.E. Millemann. 1978. Glochidiosis of salmonid fishes. III. Comparative susceptibility to natural infection with Margaritifera margaritifera (L.) (Pelycyopda: Margaritanidae) and associated histopathology. Journal of Parasitology 64:528-537.
Kirk, S. G. and J. B. Layzer. 1997. Induced metamorphosis of freshwater mussel
glochidia on nonhost fish. The Nautilus 110(3):102-106.
McDowell, P. F. 2001. Spatial variations in channel morphology at segment and reach scales, Middle Fork John Day River, Northeastern Oregon. Geomorphic processes and riverine habitat 4:159-172.
Meyers, T. R., and R. E. Millemann. 1977. Glochidiosis of salmonid fishes. I.
Comparative susceptibility to experimental infection with Margaritifera
margaritifera (L.) (Pelecypoda: Margaritanidae). Journal of Parasitology 63:728-733.
Miller, S.W. 2007. The effects of irrigation water withdrawls on macroinvertebrate community structure and life history strategies. Ph.D. thesis, Oregon State University.
Mock. K.E., J.C. Brim Box, J.P. Chong, J.K. Howard, D.A. Nez, D. Wolf, and R.S. Gardner. 2010. Genetic structuring in the freshwater mussel Anodonta in the western United States: correspondence with hydrologic basins but not current taxonomy. Molecular Ecology 19: 569–591.
Murphy, G. 1942. Relationship of the freshwater mussel to trout in the Truckee River. California Fish and Game 28:89-102.
Neves, R.J., editor. 1987. Proceedings of the workshop on die-offs of freshwater mussels in the United States. Davenport, Iowa. Sponsored by the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the Upper Mississippi River Conservation Committee.
O’Brien, C. A. and J. Brim Box. 1999. Reproductive biology and juvenile recruitment of the shinyrayed pocketbook, Lampsilis subangulata (Bivalvia: Unionidae) in the Gulf Coastal Plain. American Midland Naturalist 142:129-140.
Phillips, J. L., J. Ory, and A. Talbot. 2000. Anadromous salmonid recovery in the
Umatilla River Basin, Oregon: A case study. Journal of the American Water
Resources Association 36(6):1287-1308.
Tabor, R. A., R. S. Shively, and T. P. Poe. 1993. Predation on juvenile salmonids by
smallmouth bass and northern squawfish in the Columbia River near Richland,
Washington. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 13:831-838.
Zimmerman, M. P. 1999. Food habits of smallmouth bass, walleyes, and northern
pikeminnow in the lower Columbia River Basin during outmigration of juvenile
anadromous salmonids. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 128:1036-1054.
Help
Mitigation work
Reporting
Funding
Search
Log in
Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?
