D t i i di t ib ti f l l P ifi d k l i Q t t H b i Determining distribution of larval Pacific geoduck clams in Quartermaster Harbor using a Determining distribution of larval Pacific geoduck clams in Quartermaster Harbor using a g g gl t ki hnovel tracking approachnovel tracking approachg pp

B L M * Y Sh li * B J B k * M B h ** C H l *** d E H l d***B LeMay* Y Shevalier* B J Becker* M Behrens** C Henzler*** and E Hoaglund***B. LeMay , Y. Shevalier , B.J. Becker , M. Behrens , C. Henzler , and E. HoaglundOPTIONAL

*University of Washington Tacoma **Pacific Lutheran University ***University of California Santa BarbaraOPTIONAL

LOGO HEREUniversity of Washington, Tacoma. Pacific Lutheran University. University of California, Santa Barbara. LOGO HERE

Introduction and Goals Sample Processing DiscussionIntroduction and Goals Sample Processing Discussion

The Pacific geoduck clam is both commercially important and highly managed in the Puget Sound T t i d b i d l d d th t k b k t th l b f filt i Alth h d lt d k f d i th t d iddl ti f QMH l The Pacific geoduck clam is both commercially important and highly managed in the Puget Sound. Traps were retrieved as new ones were being deployed, and then taken back to the lab for filtering Although adult geoduck are found in the outer and middle sections of QMH, more larvae were Wild commercial harvest of geoduck in 2010 was worth over $36 million (Washington Department of and preservation. The contents of each tube was run through a series of filters and then rinsed until found in the Inner and Middle stations than at the mouth of the harbor. This implies that at least g $ ( g pFish and Wildlife 2011)

p gall visible DMSO was removed The sample was then preserved using modified salt ethanol

psome of the larvae are retained in this part of the harbor throughout their planktonic larval durationFish and Wildlife 2011). all visible DMSO was removed. The sample was then preserved using modified salt ethanol

l tisome of the larvae are retained in this part of the harbor throughout their planktonic larval duration.

solution.To effectively manage shellfish populations we must: y g p p

• Understand and quantify their larval dispersal and connectivity (Fairweather 1991 Orensanz et Samples were then sent to UCSB to determine how many geoduck larvae were in each FISH CS Project Success:• Understand and quantify their larval dispersal and connectivity (Fairweather 1991, Orensanz et l 2006)

Samples were then sent to UCSB to determine how many geoduck larvae were in each. FISH-CS f d di t th th d f H l t l (2010) T if th bi l l t d

Project Success:al. 2006). was performed according to the methods of Henzler et al. (2010). To verify the bivalve larvae sorted

• Be able to map and predict the movement of individuals throughout an area (reviewed in Levin from the samples were geoduck, DNA was extracted individually from a subset of sorted larvae • FISH-CS allowed geoducks to be rapidly identified and sorted from samples (Henzler et al. p p g (2006 Cowen & Sponaugle 2009)

from the samples were geoduck, DNA was extracted individually from a subset of sorted larvae using the protocol of Gloor et al (1993)

FISH CS allowed geoducks to be rapidly identified and sorted from samples (Henzler et al. 2010)2006, Cowen & Sponaugle 2009). using the protocol of Gloor et al. (1993). 2010).

ResultsThere is a large quantity of information about geoduck larval biology in the laboratory, but little is • Our passive trap design allowed for time-integrated samples of the water column, and functioned ResultsThere is a large quantity of information about geoduck larval biology in the laboratory, but little is known about the distribution behavior or in situ dispersal (Straus et al 2008)

Our passive trap design allowed for time integrated samples of the water column, and functioned well in the estuarine environmentknown about the distribution, behavior, or in situ dispersal (Straus et al. 2008). well in the estuarine environment.

We captured and identified over 2000 geoduck larvae throughout the sampling periodGoals of this project: We captured and identified over 2000 geoduck larvae throughout the sampling period• We have a better idea of the temporal and spatial distribution of geoduck larvae Goals of this project:

• Determine the temporal and spatial distribution of geoduck larvae throughout most of their We have a better idea of the temporal and spatial distribution of geoduck larvae

• Determine the temporal and spatial distribution of geoduck larvae throughout most of their d ti The Inner and Middle stations had greater relative larval abundances than the Outer station W h d i d h i i lik l h i l hi i h h ifi i reproductive season The Inner and Middle stations had greater relative larval abundances than the Outer station

(F =11 345 p=0 003) The bottom traps caught significantly fewer larvae than those at the • We have determined that it is unlikely physical oceanographic properties other than stratification (F1,18=11.345, p=0.003). The bottom traps caught significantly fewer larvae than those at the f d t 4 (F 8 661 0 004) (Fi 3)

y p y g p p pindex have any effect on geoduck larval abundance

• Compare this distribution to water conditions to determine whether any physical parameters are surface and at 4 m (F1,108=8.661, p=0.004) (Figure 3). index have any effect on geoduck larval abundance

I li i• Compare this distribution to water conditions to determine whether any physical parameters are

i t d ith d k l ti l l b d1,108

Implicationsassociated with geoduck relative larval abundance Only stratification index showed a significant association with relative abundance of larvae pOnly stratification index showed a significant association with relative abundance of larvae. Sampling Site and Design

W hi t St t h i ifi t b t th ff t f d k f i ild p g g

There was no significant association of relative larval abundance with temperature salinity Washington State has a significant concern about the effects of geoduck farming on wild Quartermaster Harbor (QMH) was selected as our site due to the high probability of capturing

There was no significant association of relative larval abundance with temperature, salinity, fluorescence or dissolved oxygen (Figure 4) populations, and more needs to be understood about their larval ecology in situ. Quartermaster Harbor (QMH) was selected as our site due to the high probability of capturing

geoduck larvae there the retentive nature of the hydrology and the existence of a large source fluorescence, or dissolved oxygen (Figure 4). populations, and more needs to be understood about their larval ecology in situ.

geoduck larvae there, the retentive nature of the hydrology and the existence of a large source Th i f ti d t i th t d d d t di ipopulation of adult geoduck. There is a range of conservation and management issues that depend on understanding species-p p gspecific pre-recruitment processes. These include:

We established three replicate buoys at three stations in QMH: Inner Middle and Outer Traps specific pre recruitment processes. These include: • management of invasive speciesWe established three replicate buoys at three stations in QMH: Inner, Middle, and Outer. Traps • management of invasive species

i diwere deployed at three depths: surface (approximately 1 m down), 4 m (where the thermocline was • emerging diseasesp y p ( pp y ), (expected to be) and bottom (within 1 m of the sea floor) (Figure 1)

g g• genetic diversityexpected to be), and bottom (within 1 m of the sea floor) (Figure 1). genetic diversity• harvest closure placements• harvest closure placements• marine reserves and restoration sites• the effects of climate change the effects of climate change.

Our sampling approach and empirically-determined larval distribution data can be used to combat p g pp p ysome of these issuessome of these issues.

Figure 3: Mean number (± standard error) of geoduck larvae per tube g ( ) g pacross all stations. A- mean number of larvae at stations. B – mean number of larvae at sampling depths.p g p

h // b ihttp://montereybayaquarium.org

R fReferencesCowen R.K. & S. Sponaugle. 2009. Larval dispersal and marine population connectivity. In: Annual review of marine science. Vol. 1. Palo Alto: Annual Reviews. P 443 466Pp. 443-466.

Fairweather P 1991 Implications of supply-size ecology for environmental assessment and management Trends Ecol Evol 6:60=63Fairweather P. 1991. Implications of supply-size ecology for environmental assessment and management. Trends Ecol. Evol. 6:60=63.

Gaines S. & M. Bertness. 1993. The dynamics of juvenile dispersal – why field ecologists must integrate. Ecology 74:2430-2435.

Gloor G., C. Preston, D. Johnsonschlitz, N. Nassif, R. Phillis, W. Benz, H. Robertson & W. Engels. 1993. Type-I repressors of P-element mobility. Genetics135 81 95

Fi 2 B d P i l l t d i B i t d f 135:81-95.

Figure 2: Buoy and Passive larval trap design. Buoys consisted of f fl t b f fl t d h Thi h Henzler C.M., E.A. Hoaglund, & S.D. Gaines. 2010. FISH-CS-a rapid method for counting and sorting species of marine zooplankton. Mar. Ecol-Prog. Ser.a surface float, a subsurface float, and an anchor. This scheme

k t f d 4 t t th d th l ti t th Henzler C.M., E.A. Hoaglund, & S.D. Gaines. 2010. FISH CS a rapid method for counting and sorting species of marine zooplankton. Mar. Ecol Prog. Ser.410:1-11.

kept our surface and 4 m traps at the same depth relative to the f d i ll tid l ttsurface during all tidal patterns. Levin L. 2006. Recent progress in understanding larval dispersal: new directions and digressions. Integr. Comp. Biol. 46:282-297.

Orensanz J A Parma T Turk & J Valero 2006 Dynamics assessment and management of exploited natural populations In: Shumway S & J Parsons Figure 1: Map of sampling locations in QMH Sampling design Orensanz J., A. Parma, T. Turk & J. Valero. 2006. Dynamics, assessment, and management of exploited natural populations. In: Shumway S. & J. Parsons, editors Scallops: Biology ecology and aquaculture Vol 35 2nd ed Developments in Aquaculture and Fisheries Science San Diego California: Elsevier Pp

Figure 1: Map of sampling locations in QMH. Sampling design included three stations (Inner Middle and Outer) each with three editors. Scallops: Biology, ecology, and aquaculture. Vol. 35. 2 ed. Developments in Aquaculture and Fisheries Science. San Diego, California: Elsevier. Pp.

765-867.included three stations (Inner, Middle, and Outer), each with three replicate buoysreplicate buoys.

Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association. 2009. Shellfish Production on the West Coast. [Internet] Available from: http://www.pcsga.net/

L l t b t ( i il t th d ib d b Y d t l (1991)) d f l hi i t b Straus K M L M Crosson & B Vadopalas 2008 Effects of geoduck aquaculture on the environment: a synthesis of current knowledge Washington Sea Grant Larval tube traps (similar to those described by Yund et al. (1991)) made from clear shipping tubes Straus K.M., L.M. Crosson & B. Vadopalas. 2008. Effects of geoduck aquaculture on the environment: a synthesis of current knowledge. Washington Sea Grant Technical Report #WSG-TR 08-01 Seattle WA: Washington Sea Grant 64ppp ( y ( )) pp g

with a dense fixative (DMSO) at the bottom were constructed to capture larvae passively Two traps Technical Report #WSG TR 08 01. Seattle, WA: Washington Sea Grant. 64pp.

with a dense fixative (DMSO) at the bottom were constructed to capture larvae passively. Two traps were attached to a PVC frame In order to monitor relative water flux at each trap a calcium sulfate Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2011. Commercial wild stock geoduck fishery findings and ex-vessel value in Washington. [Internet] Available from: were attached to a PVC frame. In order to monitor relative water flux at each trap, a calcium sulfate

(f G & ) f ( )http://wdfw.wa.gov.offcampus.lib.washington.edu/fishing/commercial/geoduck/geoduck_historic_landings_value_table.pdf

“puck” (following Gaines & Bertness 1993) was attached to each frame (Figure 2)Yund P S Gaines & M Bertness 1991 Cylindrical tube traps for larval sampling Limnol Oceanogr 36:1167 1177

p ( g ) ( g )Yund P., S. Gaines & M. Bertness. 1991. Cylindrical tube traps for larval sampling. Limnol. Oceanogr. 36:1167-1177.

AcknowledgementsTraps were deployed by SCUBA divers weekly from March 2 through June 8 2010 and one AcknowledgementsTraps were deployed by SCUBA divers weekly from March 2 through June 8, 2010, and one additional week from July 7 through July 14. J Hill (Tacoma SCUBA) J Barney (Citizens for a Healthy Bay) D Bahrens E Jones (Taylor y g y J. Hill (Tacoma SCUBA), J. Barney (Citizens for a Healthy Bay), D. Bahrens, E. Jones (Taylor

At each deployment and retrieval water column properties (temperature salinity fluorescence and Shellfish), A. Moore, EJ. Rauschl, S. Staggers, J. Brokenshire, J. Patterson, J. Roach, S. Troyer, M. At each deployment and retrieval, water column properties (temperature, salinity, fluorescence, and ), , , gg , , , , y ,Maltese J Gruber J Chang S Ayers K Baird K Reneman B Compton C Greengrove J dissolved oxygen) were measured with a Seabird 19 CTD in the middle of each sampling station. Maltese, J. Gruber, J. Chang, S. Ayers, K. Baird, K. Reneman, B. Compton, C. Greengrove, J. M P S lki L W t t i J A l d M O l d d C K t yg ) p g Masura, P. Selkin, L. Wetzstein, J. Asplund, M. Orlando, and C. Kuwata.

Figure 4: Physical parameters measured weekly via CTD at the Middle station from March 9 2010 to July 17 2010 Size of bubblesFunding provided by UWT Chancellors Fund for Research and UW Royalty Research Fund

Figure 4: Physical parameters measured weekly via CTD at the Middle station from March 9, 2010 to July 17, 2010. Size of bubblesrepresents average number of larvae captured per trap during the week between the CTD casts at a given depth Funding provided by UWT Chancellors Fund for Research and UW Royalty Research Fund.represents average number of larvae captured per trap during the week between the CTD casts at a given depth.

TEMPLATE DESIGN © 2008

www.PosterPresentations.com