sudeep and lars 5-19-11

8/6/2019 Sudeep and Lars 5-19-11

1/84

AIS Science Forum

Corbicula fluminea (Asian)clam

Didymosphenia geminata

( )rock snot

Potamogenton crispus

( -curly leaf)pondweed

Pacifastacus leniusculus ( ) signal crayfish


2/84

Four ImportantRelationships


3/84

Defining Risk-The AIS Matrix

5Rating Scale- Rate

AIS Presentl

Agency Affiliation:

User Data-4


4/84

A calcium-based invasion risk assessment for zebra and quagga mussels (Dr

Calcium Based Rick Assessment-ZM & QM

Whittier et al 2008: Main hypothesis is lowcalcium waters resist invasion

Provide guidance for the allocation of

management resources Very Low Risk (12mg/l), Low Risk (12-

20mg/l), Moderate Risk (20-28mg/l),High Risk (28 mg/l)

Majority of ZM in HR, exceptions in HighlyVariable areas, Low Risk occurrencesnear calcium rich waters

Flaw-little QM data


5/84

A calcium-based invasion risk assessment for zebra and quagga mussels (Dr

-1995 2006 Prior 1995 Low Alkalinity ME High Alkalinity

NY VT NH

MA

CT RI

NJ-Eight states with low alkalinity areas

( ),pale yellow where calcium concentrations were expected to be

.too low to support ZM Blue dots indicateZM

, .occurrences in inland lakes prior to 1995.Red dots indicate new ZM populations

: - /Low Alkalinity 6 9 mg l: /High Alkalinity 10mg l& higher


6/84

Potential Distribution of Zebra Mussels (Dreissena polymorpha) and Quagga

Cohen DFG 2008 Report Provide guidance for the allocation of management

resources Calcium threshold: minimum calcium needed to support a

population

Embryonic or larval life stages may be more vulnerable tocertain environmental stresses than are adults For population expansion, habitat must be suitable for

survival and growth, gonad development,gametogenesis, spawning, fertilization, embryonic andlarval development, and settlement

Calcium at 25 mg/l is high priority, 15 to 24 mg/l is mediumpriority, 12-15 mg/l is low priority, less than 12 mg/l arerated as not vulnerable.

Most WQ data based on near surface samples

Very little data on QM


7/84

Invasive species:

concerns and issueswithin lake waterways of the Lower Truckee River

. & .r Sudeep Chandra Dr LarsAnderson

-SDA ARS Exotic and nvasive Weed Research

,avis CA

,nivers ity of NevadaReno

,eno NVA griculturalR esearchS ervice


8/84

Outline: , ,Invasive species definition process

,transport and costs

Species of concern but not yet,established their potential impact and

possibility of management

Influences of boats on dispersal to the,Lake Tahoe region efficacy of

inspections and boat washing

Known invasive species in lakes of the,Lower Truckee River watershed their

potential impact and possibility ofmanagement


9/84

Invasive species

a species that has been moved byhuman activities to an area where itwas historically absent and where it

did not evolve akanonnative or alien species Results in significant ecological and/ or

economic damages cross natural barriers (oceans,

mountains) due to increaseddevelopment and modernization of transportation systems


10/84

Transported

Death orCaptivity

Released

Fail toEstablish Established

RemainLocal

Spread ( &e c t o r s P a t h w a y s )

low high

Impact

ecoming invasive is a processTransportStage

EstablishmentStage

SpreadStage

ImpactStage

umanvalues


11/84

Preventing horticultural introductions of invasive plants: potential efficacy of voluntary initiatives

Jennifer W. Burt Adrianna A. Muir Jonah Piovia-Scott Kari E. Veblen Andy L. Chang Judah D. Grossman Heidi W. Weiskel 2007 Biol. Invasions


12/84

ebra mussel- infestation, clogging,cuts!

,Lubner Wisconsin Sea Grant


13/84

Hydrilla infestation leads to cloggingof waterways and boat motors ,

habitat modification changes ecologyincluding fishing


14/84

, ,g e r i a d e n s a E i c h h o r n i a c r a s s i p e s, . ,y r i o p h y l l u m s p i c a t u m M a q u a t i c u m

o t a m o g e t o n c r i s p u s -n the Sacramento San Joaquin Delta


15/84

ajorvectors contributing to nintentional spread of

nvasive species Boats (recreational, commercial)

Fishing equipment (waders, boots, lures, bait)

Waterway connections (rivers, canals)

Waterfowl

Aquarium or ornamental use Construction, repair and maintenance

operations


16/84

R e cre a tio n a lb o a tin g

A main vector of interlake (andintralake ) spread of aquatic species Minnesota, Wisconsin, Washington,

Northeast, etc.

.Photo Alberta Transportation Dept. . . .www trans gov ab ca


17/84

Nonnative species: a costlyproblem!

The approximately 50,000nonindigenous species in the U.S.cause major environmentaldamage and losses totalingapproximately $137 billion peryear.

-Pimental et al. Bioscience (2000)

Aquatic Invasive Plants (US): $2-4billion


18/84

O u tlin e: , ,Invasive species definition process









19/84

2010- Survey results

K i i i i l


20/84

Known invasive species- potentialimpacts & management

possibility(Asian clam Corbicula fluminea )

-Impact stimulates algae

productionmay influence native,invertebrate biodiversity

facilitate the invasion by other

species by providing structure( . . & ),e g quagga zebra mussels clogs

,intake pipes aesthetic

-Elimination No-


21/84

nown nvas ve spec es- po en aimpacts & managementpossibility?

(Signal crayfish Pacifasticus leniusculus )

-Impact stimulates algae

,production facilitates invasive,warm water fishes controls native

,invertebrate biodiversity competes

with amphibians for food and preys

.on their eggs

-Elimination No

-Control Yes


22/84


Eurasian watermilfoil( Myriophyllum spicatum ) - ,Impact clogs boat motors reduces

&native fish habitat increases,habitat for nonnative warmwater,fishes releases nutrients possibly

,increasing algae growth aesthetic(pumps P from sedimnts to water)column

-Elimination ?-Manageable Yes


23/84


Curlyleaf pondweed( Potamogeton ) crispus

- ,Impact clogs boat motors reduces native fish and native plant habitat & increases habitat for

, ,nonnative warmwater fishes releases nutrients possibly,increasing algae growth aesthetic

- (Eradication Possibly if early

)stages -


24/84

-Curlyleaf pondweed Typical Dense

Canopy


25/84

Outline: , ,Invasive species definition process








ew ea an mu sna potent a


26/84

ew ea an mu sna potent aestablishment

. .Rapid expansion of mudsnail invasions in the U S

( , , )Kolosovich and Chandra Aquatic Invasions in review

Will l i i


27/84

Will quagga mussel survive in ourlow calcium waters?

March/ April 2008- Discussion whether or not quagga couldestablish in the region Previously published literature suggests low risk based on

calcium levels

( Whittier et al 2008

Will l i i


28/84

Will quagga mussel survive inour low calcium waters?

Lake Tahoe AIS working group and the TRPA adopteda need to know approach since once establishedquagga can not be controlled

Data gaps included calcium information gaps alongthe nearshore where introductions are likely tooccur

1990s- zebra establishment at Lake George- similarcalcium levels as Tahoe but currently managed

October 2008- Quagga detection at Lake Granby,

calcium levels similar to Lake Tahoe


29/84

p o s u y was con uc ein 2009

Quagga potential survival, growth, and establishment questions:

Based on previous calcium based, risk models what areas of Lake Tahoe may exhibit survival? What areas in the local region may exhibit survival based on

previous calcium based risk models? What is the adult survival and growth potential of quagga in

Lake Tahoe water? What is the reproductive potential after living in in Lake Tahoe

water? What potential water quality impacts may occur due to quagga

establishment?

Asian clam and quagga interactions Will Asian clam beds infesting Lake Tahoe facilitate theestablishment of quagga?


30/84

L k T h l i l l l i h h


31/84

Lake Tahoe calcium levels are low with thegreatest levels in the Tahoe Keys

Previous calciumbased modelssuggest low to lowrisk for Lake Tahoe


32/84

Based on previous calciumbased, risk models what areas in

the local region may exhibitsurvival?

Eastern slope ecosystems exhibit the highest


33/84

Eastern slope ecosystems exhibit the highestcalcium levels

Previous calcium based

models suggestmoderate to high riskfor LahontanReservoir, WalkerRiver, & Walker Lake

While these lakes do nothave quagga, boatsarrive to Lake Tahoefrom these lakes


34/84

What is the survival and growthof adult quagga in Lake Tahoe

water?

86% survival over 52 days with positive growth


35/84

86% survival over 52 days with positive growthover the project period

:1 1 m ainten an ce

lin e fo rco m p a rison


36/84

What is the reproductivepotential after living in lower

calcium waters?


37/84


38/84

What potential water qualityimpacts may occur due to

quagga establishment?

Quagga substantially decrease algal biomass in


39/84

Quagga substantially decrease algal biomass ina short period of time


40/84

Some clam beds are elevated in calcium and


41/84

41

Some clam beds are elevated in calcium and provide hard substrate habitat for growth

Quagga mixed with clams appear not to be


42/84

42

Quagga mixed with clams appear not to bedoing well Experimental issue of not

enough food


43/84

Conflicting information or cautionarymanagement practices?

Previous calcium based models suggest low to low risk survival inLake Tahoe water Our results suggest

86% survival over 52 days Positive growth Potential for reproduction or at least holding onto developed

gametes in low calcium waters Previous models need to be developed further for conservation

purposes for systems in the Western US since ecosystems (e.g.Colorado) with similar Ca concentration are have veligers

Risk of adult survival is likely in waters of Lake Tahoe (5-15 ppmcalcium with sediment beds of Asian clams at 20+ ppm)

Argument for cautionary management practices and the urgentneed to prevent infected boats from arriving at Lake Tahoe

Starting in Sept 2011, UNR-DRI funded to conduct a life cycle riskassessment and survival study from adults to veligers under lowand elevated calcium levels


44/84

Examples of Invasive AquaticPlant that Threaten the Truckee

Watershed

Primary Target Invasive Species


45/84

Est. Annual Management Costs or Losses-California

Egeria densa: $4 million per year (Management) Myriophyllum spicatum: $500,000. Hydrilla verticillata: $2 million per year (Calif. Eradication)

(ca. $30 million in Florida, La, TX, IN)

Eichhornia crassipes: $4.5 million per year (Management) Yellow starthistle: $60 million (Management) Algae in rice (alt.to Cu): est. $100,000. (Management) Caulerpa taxifolia: $7 million total ( Seaweed Eradication-Success !)

Undaria pinnatifida $50K (Seaweed- hand removal now) Ludwigia hexapetela $????? (Flood Control, Mosquito control /West

Nile virus)

NEW: Limnobium laevigatum (S. American sponge plant) ($50k/year now)

Primary Target Invasive SpeciesEstimates for US Aquatic Weed Impacts : $1 to 2 billion per year.

USDA- ARS


46/84

Exotic and Invasive Weed Research-Riparian Weed Management Research Projects

Riparian vegetation ( Ludwigia spp . Arundo donax ): phenology/ecological roles, biological control, herbicide control)

Submersed and floating aquatic weed in canals, lakes, and theSacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Egeria densa H. verticillata, M. spicatum, M. aquaticum, P. crispus, E. crassipes,L. laevigatum )

Modeling plant growth (e.g. Arundo donax )Assessing potential for new types of herbicides (lakes, canals)Biological control of E. densa (explorations in S. America)Invasive weed survey as part of restoration in the San Joaquin River Invasive marine vegetation ( Undaria pinnatifida , Caulerpa taxifolia)Microbial functions in the Rhizosphere (root-zone interactions)

Typical Habitat Requirements for Submersed Aquatic Plants


47/84

Typical Habitat Requirements for Submersed Aquatic Plants

Substrate stability: But only extremely high flowslimit plants; Periodic scouring can suppress biomass

Substrate type: Only solid, rock, large cobble bottom(and sufficient scouring) will eliminate establishment>Most types of sand, silt, clay will support some

growth ; maximum biomass typically found on silt, clayand with


48/84

Foliage in Air

Foliage- in Water

Rootsin Water

General Types of Aquatic Plant Growth Forms:

Roots in the

Sediment

Submersed Plants

Emergent Plants Floating Plants

Aquatic Plant Resource Requirements for Establishment, Growth and DispersalFig.1


49/84

(3)SedimentCharacteristics

(4)Nutrient insediments

(5)Anchoring

(8)LocalFlow

Conditions

(1)High Light Levels(2)AtmosphericCarbon Dioxide

Management Actions Can act on any of these drivers to shift population abundance

(6)Low Light Levels(7)DissolvedCarbon (DIC)

Sources

(9)Water Quality

(10)Nutrientsin Water

Floating Plants Emergent Plants

Drivers are

shown in blueboxes. Click onthe boxes for more details andreferences.

Submersed Plants

Light and Plant Growth


50/84

Light and Plant Growth

Interactions Between SAV, FAV and EAV Affecting Establishment and Growth


51/84

Floating Plants

Emergent Plants

Submersed Plants

Red (dashed)=Negative effect (causes reduced growth Green (solid)=Positive effect (more growth)Double Arrows= Competitive Interactions Light: shading whole

plants

Light:shadingwhole plants

Light:shadingwholeplants

Light:Shadingseedlings,vegetativepropagules

Sediment-bornenutrients

water-bornenutrients

Accretion of organic matter

Long-termaccretion of organic matter

Reduced velocity,increased SubstrateStability

Can Carbon and Nutrients Limit Aquatic Vascular Plants?


52/84

q

Probably NOT nutrients in most urban settings:>Tissue levels 1 to 4 % N are typical

>P is cycled rapidly and is seasonallyreplenished; sediments provide a majorreserve of nutrients

Carbon could limit submersed plants- butPhotosynthetic plasticity can compensate for changesin species of carbon that dominate

What then limits establishment and growth ?>Substrate stability/type, water velocity and

inter-species competition for space and lightare primary drivers

Sources of Carbon and Nutrients for Aquatic Vascular Plants


53/84

Floating Plants: Dissolved N, P, K, micronutrients in water ;Atm. CO 2 (increasing !)

Water hyacinth, S. Amer. Spongeplantand NATIVE PLANTS

Emergent Plants : Sedimen t NPK, micronutrients, Atm.CO 2 ( Now increasing )

Arundo donax , Phragmite s, Lythrum salicaria (Purple loosestrife), Ludwigia species

and NATIVE PLANTS

Submersed (rooted) Plants :(Physiological plasticity) 80-95+% Sediment NP(K), micronutrients 10-20% Dissolved N, P,K, micronutrients in water

Dissolved CO 2, HCO 3(increasing) (C-3, C-4, CAM-like PS) E. densa, P. crispus, M. spicatum and NATIVE PLANTS

Distribution of Major Aquatic Weeds


54/84

H

Lepidium latifolia, Spartina

alterniflora,Codium sp., Lythrum salicoria

Eichhornia crassipes, Salvinia.molesta, Limnobium spongia,

Hydrocotyle, Cabomba caroliniana, Ipomea aquatica, Arundo donax, Phragmites spp.Spartina alterniflora(hybrids), Caulerpa taxifolia,

Undaria pinnatifida,

T r ap a natan s, Hy d ro cha ris mor sus -ran ae , Ly t hr um

salic a ri a , P hra gm it e s s p p.

Cabomba carolaniana, Panicum repens, Hygrophila polysperma, Pistia stratiotes, Salviniamolesta, Eichhorniacrassipes,Colocasia

esculeta, Ipomoeaaquatica, Landoltia

punctata, Caulerpa spp, Maleleuca quinquenervia, Schinus terrebenthifolius, Solanum viarum .


55/84

-uras an waterm o ower ng a e( )Tahoe Tallac Lagoon


56/84

Colony of Curlyleaf Pondweed-


57/84

Colony of Curlyleaf PondweedSouth Shore, Lake Tahoe (Sept. 2006)

urlyleaf -Lake Tahoe Sproutingturions


58/84

ypondweed( o t a m o g e t o nc r i s p u s )

Turion: vegetative

propagule- produced inspring; disperses insummer/fallsprouts infall-winter.

Fleur du lac- Nov. 2009


59/84

Myriophyllum spicatum

Elodea canadensis

Eurasian watermilfoil


60/84

Eurasian watermilfoil

Water Hyacinth ( Eichhornia crassipes )


61/84

Egeria/ Brazilian waterweed ( Egeria densa )

Waterprimrose willows


62/84

Hydrilla verticillata M. spicatum, P.crispus


63/84

Hydrilla verticillata

Egeria densa Salvinia molesta

M. spicatum, P.crispus

Hydrilla Tuber (formed on shoots that grown downinto the sediment from 2 in to 24 in deep!)


64/84

into the sediment from 2 in. to 24 in deep!)Tubers can stay viable for 7 to 10 year. One plant can

produce 2,0000 tubers in one season.


65/84

Egeria densa near Franks Tract- 2005


66/84

Egeria densa

Didymosphenia geminata


67/84

(Didymo/Rock Snot)

( : ; :Light microscopy Lars Anderson SEM Sarah)Kiemle

S th A i S l t


68/84

South American Spongeplant(Limnobium laevigatum )

:Flower Many seeds are;produced seedling

float and disperseeasily

Underside of leaves showing-spongy air filled tissues

( )aerenchyma


69/84

Lagarosiphon major Trapa natans

NOT IN

USA

YET (?)

Northeast

USA

Only


70/84

Current Trapa natans Populations

When?

M t f A ti Pl t


71/84

Movement of Aquatic PlantsThrough the Horticultural Trade

In s. New England 76% of non-nativeaquatic plants are escapes fromcultivation (Les and Mehrhoff, 1999)

In NZ 75% of aquatic invasive plantsare of horticultural origin (Champion andClayton, 2000)

The 1 st monoecious hydrilla in CA wastraced to a contaminated lily shipment


72/84

Findings of Maki and Galatowitsch, 2003

92% - Fed. Noxious Weeds acquired 93% - plant/animal not requested 18% - misidentified plants 43% - unordered seeds Plants received but not ordered: purple

loosestrife, hydrilla, giant salvinia, curly-leaf PW aquatic inverts found in 30 of 40 plant orders;

fish found in two orders

Many other invasive species


73/84

Many other invasive speciesare moving towards the region

Common name Impact Manageable

Spiny waterflea Competes with

fishes for food

no

Rusty crayfish Preys on nativeecology and changesalgal production inthe nearshore

No but it depends onlake sizeRound goby Competed with fishfor food and changesnutrient dynamics

no

Outline


74/84

: , ,Invasive species definition process,transport and costs








75/84

Lake Tahoe region willbe infected by boatsarriving from otherregions

In turn it may infectlakes within our region

. . ,M E Wittmann UC Santa Barbara dissertation


76/84

. . ,M E Wittmann UC Santa Barbara dissertation

How to minimize the spread &


77/84

introduction? (M in im ize in fe ction p o te n tia l a ka

)in tro d u ctio n s

Agricultural checkpoints on major highways( , , .)California Baja etc Boat washing stations at select entry points into the

/watershed and or stations at boat ramps( , , ,New England Lakes Minnesota Wisconsin) Washington

,Photo ME Wittmann UC Santa Barbara

is a reliable


78/84

is a reliablemethods for

identifying plantand otherinvasives

Boat washing is anff i l


79/84

effective removalmethod

Components of IntegratedComponents of Integrated


80/84

Rapid Response TriadRapid Response Triad

Invasive Plant

IdentificationBiology and Ecology

Experience and knowledge to:

Implementcontainment, control or

eradication

Knowledge of infested site:

Invasion pathways, Habitats,

Uses, Nontarget effects,Laws, Stakeholders

Resource :

FundsPersonnelEquipment

after Anderson 2005


81/84

Matrix Data Before and after scores, are they different? Compare AIS-which scores highest? Did the scores go up or down for specific AIS? Are the scores for waterbodies significantly different? Did the scores go up or down for specific

waterbodies?

Neogobius melanostomus(round goby)


82/84

Future Meeting ScheduleTruckee Ranger District Office

June 23 10 AM Begin to review managementalternatives and budgets, MatrixanalysisJuly 21 10 AM Identify the preferred managementalternative(s)and link to a funding plan.Start the strategic planning processAugust 18 10 AM Continue the strategic planning processand develop a funding strategy

September 15 10 AM Implement the strategic plan andcoordinate with fundraising


83/84

Thank you for attending the

TRAISPP Science Forum and for filling out the AIS Matrix

Mt. Tallac, Desolation Wilderness


84/84

sudeep and lars 5-19-11

Documents