Advertisement

Marine Biology

, Volume 111, Issue 1, pp 55–64 | Cite as

Behavior and growth ofMercenaria mercenaria during simulated storm events

  • E. J. Turner
  • D. C. Miller
Article

Abstract

Experiments were conducted in April–August 1989 on juvenileMercenaria mercenaria (L.) in an oscillatory water tunnel to simulate resuspension of bottom sediments by waves and to determine the effects of shortterm storm events on particle ingestion, pseudofeces production, and shell growth. Juveniles (mean length = 19.2 mm) were subjected to identical concentrations of algae in both low-flow, gentle waves (maximum velocity = 7 cm s−1) and high-velocity storm waves (maximum velocity = 22 cm s−1). Suspended sediment levels reached 193 mg 1−1 at 1 cm above the bed during storms. Shell growth decreased by a maximum of 38% during the storm when levels of phytoplankton were high (average cell concentration = 43 × 106 cells 1−1), and by 18% when phytoplankton levels were low (av cell conc = 6 × 106 cells 1−1). Orientation of clam siphons was not related to flow direction. Significantly more pseudofeces were produced when the clams were subjected to increased sediment resuspension under waves, and in troughs of sand ripples. The size of sediment grains ingested did not vary significantly among the flow treatments. The decrease in shell growth during storms may be due to a reduction in filtration rate coupled with a decrease in net energy gained from filtration due to costs of pseudofeces production. The magnitude of the decrease seems to be related to concentration of algae, water temperature, age of clams and sediment transport mode (bed load or suspended load). Thus, the interpretation of growth increments must be made in the context of these environmental variables.

Keywords

Phytoplankton Sediment Transport Storm Event Sediment Resuspension Shell Growth 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature cited

  1. Anderson, F. E. (1972). Resuspension of estuarine sediments by small amplitude waves. J. sedim. Petrol. 42: 602–607Google Scholar
  2. Ashley, G. M., Grizzle, R. E. (1988). Interactions between hydrodynamics, benthos and sedimentation in a tide-dominated coastal lagoon. Mar. Geol. 82: 61–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bayne, B. L. (1981). Physiological adaptation in bivalves. In: Calow, P. (ed.) Physiological ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p. 178–189Google Scholar
  4. Bayne, B. L., Hawkins, A. J. S., Navarro, E. (1987). Feeding and digestion by the musselMytilus edulis L. (Bivalvia: Mollusca) in mixtures of silt and algal cells at low concentrations. J. exp. mar. Biol. Ecol. 111: 1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bricelj, V. M., Malouf, R. E. (1984). Influence of algal and suspended sediment concentrations on the feeding physiology of the hard clamMercenaria mercenaria. Mar. Biol. 84: 155–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bricelj, V. M., Malouf, R. E., de Quillfeldt, C. (1984). Growth of juvenileMercenaria mercenaria and the effect of resuspended bottom sediments. Mar. Biol. 84: 167–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Craig, M. A., Bright, T. J., Gittings, S. R. (1988). Growth ofMercenaria mercenaria andMercenaria mercenaria texana seed clams planted in two Texas bays. Aquaculture, Amsterdam 71: 193–207Google Scholar
  8. Eckman, J. E., Peterson, C. H., Cahalan, J. A. (1989). Effects of flow speed, turbulence and orientation on growth of juvenile by scallopsArgopecten irradians concentricus (Say). J. exp. mar. Biol. Ecol. 132: 123–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Eldridge, P. J., Eversole, A. G., Whetstone, J. M. (1979). Comparative survival and growth rates of hard clamsMercenaria mercenaria, planted in trays subtidally and intertidally at varying densities in a South Carolina estuary. Proc. natn. Shellfish. Ass. 69: 30–39Google Scholar
  10. Fréchette, M., Bourget, E. (1985). Food-limited growth ofMytilus edulis L. in relation to the benthic boundary layer. Can. J. Fish. aquat. Sciences 42: 1166–1170Google Scholar
  11. Gordon, J., Carriker, M. R. (1978). Growth lines in a bivalve mollusk: subdaily patterns and dissolution of the shell. Science, N.Y. 202: 519–521Google Scholar
  12. Grizzle, R. E., Morin, P. J. (1989). Effect of tidal currents, seston, and bottom sediments on growth ofMercenaria mercenaria: results of a field experiment. Mar. Biol. 102: 85–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Grant, J., Enright, C. T., Griswold, A. (1990). Resuspension and growth ofOstrea edulis: a field experiment. Mar. Biol. 104: 51–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Grant, J., Mills, E. L., Hopper, C. M. (1986). A chlorophyll budget of the sediment-water interface and the effect of stabilizing biofilms on particle fluxes. Ophelia 26: 207–219Google Scholar
  15. Grizzle, R. E., Lutz, R. A. (1989). A statistical model relating horizontal seston fluxes and bottom sediment characteristics to growth ofMercenaria mercenaria. Mar. Biol. 102: 95–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hibbert, C. J. (1977). Growth and survivorship in a tidal-flat population of the bivalveMercenaria mercenaria from Southampton Water. Mar. Biol. 44: 71–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kennish, M. J. (1980). Shell microgrowth analysis:Mercenaria mercenaria as a type example for research in population dynamics. In: Rhoads, D. C.., Lutz, R. A. (eds.) Skeletal growth of aquatic animals: biological records of environmental change. Plenum Press, New York, p. 255–294Google Scholar
  18. Laing, I., Utting, S. D., Kilada, R. W. S. (1987). Interactive effect of diet and temperature on the growth of juvenile clams. J. exp. mar. Biol. Ecol. 113: 23–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lam, R. K., Frost, B. W. (1976). Model of copepod filtering responses to changes in size and concentration of food. Limnol. Oceanogr. 21: 490–500Google Scholar
  20. Lehman, J. T. (1976). The filter-feeder as an optimal forager and the predicted shapes of feeding curves. Limnol. Oceanogr. 21: 501–516Google Scholar
  21. Lofquist, K. E. B. (1977). A positive displacement water tunnel. National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va. (Misc. Rep. No. MR 77-1 to U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers Coastal Engineering Research Center; CERC Agreement 76-30)Google Scholar
  22. Lofquist, K. E. B. (1978). Sand-ripple growth in an oscillatory water tunnel. National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va. (Tech. Pap. No. 78-5 of U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers Coastal Engineering Research Center)Google Scholar
  23. Loosanoff, V. L. (1937). Development of the primary gonad and sexual phases inVenus mercenaria Linnaeus. Biol. Bull. mar. biol. Lab., Woods Hole 72: 389–405Google Scholar
  24. Miller, D. C., Sternberg, R. W. (1988). The fluid and sediment-dynamic environment of a benthic deposit-feeder. J. mar. Res. 46: 771–796Google Scholar
  25. Monismith, S. G., Koseff, J. R., Thompson, J. K., O'Riordan, C. A., Nepf, H. M. (1990). A study of model bivalve siphonal currents. Limnol. Oceanogr. 35: 680–696Google Scholar
  26. Moore, P. G. (1977). Inorganic particulate suspensions in the sea and their effects on marine animals. Oceanogr. mar. Biol. A. Rev. 15: 225–363Google Scholar
  27. Peterson, C. H., Fegley, S. R. (1986). Seasonal allocation of resources to growth of shell, soma and gonads inMercenaria mercenaria. Biol. Bull. mar. biol. Lab., Woods Hole 171: 597–610Google Scholar
  28. Peterson, C. H, Summerson, H. C., Duncan, P. B. (1984). The influence of seagrass cover on population structure and individual growth rate of a suspension-feeding bivalve,Mercenaria mercenaria. J. mar. Res. 42: 123–138Google Scholar
  29. Pratt, D. M. (1953). Abundance and growth ofVenus mercenaria andCallocarda morhuana in relation to the character of the bottom sediments. J. mar. Res. 12: 60–74Google Scholar
  30. Pratt, D. M., Campbell, D. A. (1956). Environmental factors affecting growth inVenus mercenaria. Limnol. Oceanogr. 1: 2–17Google Scholar
  31. Purchon, R. D. (1968). Feeding methods and evolution in the Bivalvia. Chapter 3. The biology of the Mollusca. Pergamon Press, Oxford, p. 101–145Google Scholar
  32. Rhoads, D. C. (1974). Organism-sediment relations on the muddy sea floor. Oceanogr. mar. Biol. A. Rev. 12: 263–300Google Scholar
  33. Rhoads, D. C., Boyer, L. F., Welsh, B. L., Hampson, G. R. (1984). Seasonal dynamics of detritus in the benthic turbidity zone (BTZ): implications for bottom-rack mariculture. Bull. mar. Sci. 35: 536–549Google Scholar
  34. Rhoads, D. C., Lutz, R. A. (eds.) (1980). Skeletal growth of aquatic animals: biological record of environmental change. Plenum Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. Rhoads, D. C., Pannella, G. A. (1970). The use of molluscan shell growth patterns in ecology and paleoecology. Lethaia 3: 143–161Google Scholar
  36. Turner, E. J. (1990). Suspension feeding in oscillatory flows with resuspended bottom sediments. Ph.D. dissertation; College of Marine Studies, University of Delaware, Lewes, DelawareGoogle Scholar
  37. Turner, E. J., Miller, D. C. (1991). Behavior of a passive suspension feeder (Sphiochaetopterus oculatus (Webster)) under oscillatory flow. J. exp. mar. Biol. Ecol. 149: 123–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Winter, J. E. (1977). A review on the knowledge of suspension-feeding in lamellibranchiate bivalves, with special reference to artificial aquaculture systems. Aquaculture, Amsterdam 13: 1–33Google Scholar
  39. Zar, J. H. (1984). Biostatistical analysis. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New JerseyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. J. Turner
    • 1
  • D. C. Miller
    • 1
  1. 1.College of Marine StudiesUniversity of DelawareLewesUSA

Personalised recommendations