Photo by: L. Brian Stauffer.

‘A species of giant crayfish native to Tennessee in the United States has been scientifically described and given the name Barbicambarus simmonis.

Barbicambarus simmonis can reach a size of at least 5 inches (12,5 cm) which is twice the size of an average North American crayfish.

The researchers behind the paper in which Barbicambarus simmonis was described are Christopher Taylor from University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana and Guenter Schuster from Eastern Kentucky University.

The first specimen was found by Tennessee Valley Authority scientist Jeffrey Simmons in 2010, and that is why the species bears his name. This specimen, as well as the specimen encountered by Taylor and Schuster, lived in Shoal Creek, a stream in southern Tennessee that ultimately drains into the Tennessee River. The creek has attracted the attention of researchers for at least half a century, which makes it reasonable to assume that Barbicambarus simmonis is either rare or very difficult to find.

You can find out more about Barbicambarus simmonis in the paper “Monotypic no more, a description of a new crayfish of the genus Barbicambarus Hobbs, 1969 (Decapoda: Cambaridae) from the Tennessee River drainage using morphology and molecules”  published in the journal Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington.

Barbicambarus simmonsi

Barbicambarus is a genus of freshwater crayfish that up until now had only one member: Barbicambarus cornutus. Barbicambarus cornutus is known only from the Barren River and Green River systems of Tennessee. The largest known specimens are 23 cm (9 inches) long, so this crayfish is even larger than Barbicambarus simmonis and one of the largest species of crayfish in North America*. It was scientifically described in 1884, but not seen again by scientists until the 1960s.

North America is rich in crayfish and also a comparatively well explored part of the world. Of the roughly 600 scientifically described species of crayfish, roughly 50% are native to North America. However, even though North America is such a well surveyed part of the world, new species are regularly described by scientists. The Pearl Map Turtle, Graptemys pearlensis, was for instance described in the summer of 2010. Just like Barbicambarus simmonis, this turtle is native to the southern part of the U.S. It lives in the Pearl River in Louisiana and Mississippi.

Yesterday, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and its Hawaiian partners announced the first marine debris action plan to be implemented in the United States. The goal of the plan is to actively assess and remove man-made debris such as plastics and lost fishing gear from Hawaii’s coastal waters. Each year, thousands of pounds of marine debris wash ashore on this delicate island chain.

“We’ve all been working to address marine debris in Hawai‘i in our own way for years. It’s great to have a plan that we can all contribute to and work together on to tackle marine debris in Hawaii,” said Marvin Heskett, member of the Surfrider Foundation’s Oahu Chapter.

The plan establishes a cooperative framework for marine debris activities and aims to reduce

• the current backlog of marine debris
• fishing gear and solid waste disposal at sea
• land-based debris in waterways
• the number of abandoned and derelict vessels

“For too long marine debris has marred the natural beauty of our ocean and threatened our marine ecosystem,” said Senator Daniel K. Inouye of Hawaii. “I have long championed a coordinated effort to mitigate the many tons of debris that suffocate our coral, kill our fish and aquatic mammals and blanket our coastlines. This is a critical issue for our state and I am proud that Hawaii is taking the lead in finding a solution to this global problem.”

The Marine Debris Program has been developed by NOOA in cooperation with Hawaiian governmental agencies, NGO’s, academia, and private business partners. The plan builds on ongoing and past marine debris community efforts.

You can find the plan here. The site also has a video for download.

According to predictions made by a team of NOAA-supported scientists from the Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium, Louisiana State University, and the University of Michigan, the Gulf of Mexico “dead zone” is likely to become record big this summer. If there predictions are true, we will see a dead zone the size of New Jersey (7,450 to 8,456 square miles). Additional flooding of the Mississippi River since May can however increase these numbers even further.

What is the Gulf of Mexico ‘dead zone’?

The dead zone is an area off the coast of Louisiana and Texas in the Gulf of Mexico where the oxygen level seasonally drops so low that most life forms living in and close to the bottom dies.

Dead zones are the result of large amounts of nutrients reaching the water, e.g. through waterways polluted by sewage and agricultural runoff. The excess nutrients stimulate rapid and massive algae growth in the affected area, a so called algae bloom. When the algae die, they sink to the bottom where oxygen dependant bacteria begin to break them down. The decomposition process consumes vast amounts of oxygen and soon the bottom and near-bottom waters become so oxygen depleted that all sorts of oxygen breathing organisms begin to die. This so called hypoxic area (an area where the oxygen levels are low to non-existent) is not just a problem for wildlife; it can also damage the economy of nearby states since it destroys habitat necessary for commercial and recreational Gulf fisheries.

The largest dead zone on record appeared in 2002 and measured 8,484 square miles.

Mississippi and Atchafalaya Rivers too rich in nutrients

During April and May this year, the Mississippi and Atchafalaya Rivers experienced heavy water flows that were 11 percent above average.

“The high water volume flows coupled with nearly triple the nitrogen concentrations in these rivers over the past 50 years from human activities has led to a dramatic increase in the size of the dead zone,” said Gene Turner, Ph.D., a lead forecast modeler from Louisiana State University.

“As with weather forecasts, this forecast uses multiple models to predict the range of the expected size of the dead zone“, said Robert Magnien, Ph.D., director of NOAA’s Center for Sponsored Coastal Ocean Research. “The strong track record of these models reinforces our confidence in the link between excess nutrients from the Mississippi River and the dead zone.”

A new study funded by the U.S. navy and the Office of Naval Research show that Beaked whales are at higher risk of developing decompression sickness since they live with extremely high levels of nitrogen in their blood and body tissues. This may explain why beaked whales seem to be especially susceptible to naval sonar. If the sonar causes the animals to surface more rapidly than they would normally do, e.g. because they are frightened by the underwater sounds, it may lead to decompression sickness which may in turn explain the strandings associated with naval sonar exercises.

Decompression sickness, commonly referred to as “the bends” among scuba divers, is a consequence of the sudden drop in pressure that occurs when you ascend rapidly from the deep. When mammals dive, nitrogen builds in our bodies. If we ascend slowly the nitrogen isn’t dangerous, but if we ascend too quickly the nitrogen forms bubbles inside the body. Tiny bubbles might not sound like anything to fuzz about, but within the body it can be lethal.

Beaked whales are believed to accumulate large amounts of nitrogen within their bodies since they make repeated dives to such great depths. They can stay submerged without breathing for long periods of time and are capable of descending down to nearly 1,500 metres. Having this inclination for decompression sickness may explain why beaked whales seem to be more vulnerable to naval sonar than other marine mammals.

“It provides more evidence that beaked whales that are being found dead in association with naval sonar activities are likely to be getting decompression sickness,” said Robin Baird, a marine biologist at Cascadia Research Collective and one of the report’s authors.

The study has focused on three species of beaked whale: Cuvier’s beaked whale (Ziphius cavirostris), Blainville’s beaked whale (Mesoplodon densirostris), and the Northern bottlenose whale (Hyperoodon ampullatus). The Northern bottlenose whale was studied off the cost of Nova Scotia, Canada while the two others were observed around Hawaii, U.S.

According to a 2006 report in the Journal of Cetacean Research and Management, 41 known cases of mass strandings of Cuvier’s beaked whales have occurred since 1960. Some of them have happened at the same time as naval sonar exercises in the area, including Greece in 1996, the Bahamas in 2000, and the Canary Islands in 2002. When the beaked whales stranded in Bahamas were autopsied, they turned out to have bleedings around their brains and ears; bleedings which may have been caused by nitrogen bubbles.

The U.S. navy has agreed to adopt certain practises to protect whales, but is resisting more stringent restrictions until more scientific evidence is at hand. The navy has budgeted 26 million US per year over the next five years to fund marine mammal research on how these animals are affected by sound.

If you wish to find out more about the beaked whale study, it is published online this week in the journal Respiratory Physiology and Neurobiology.

Two years after destroying part of the Belize barrier reef, an U.S. skipper has been ordered by a Belize court to pay BZ$3.4 million, roughly equivalent of US$1.7 million, for the damage.

On May 2, 2007, the skipper was trying to reach harbour in his double hull catamaran when it ran aground in the Lighthouse Reef Atoll, causing damage to a piece of the reef measuring 125 feet by 75 feet.

Belizean magistrate Ed Usher ruled that the skipper did not exercise due diligence in navigating the atoll. Since the catamaran was so large, 37 feet x 21 feet, the person in charge should have hired a pilot and sufficient crew to navigate the reef safely. By neglecting to do so, the skipper recklessly caused a disaster that resulted in a loss to the environment.

The skipper must pay BZ$50,000 (US$25,000) within two months, but have been given a five year respite for the remainder of the fine. His catamaran, estimated to be worth around US$300,000, will however be held by Belizean authorities until he comes up with the money.

A New Jersey woman whose diet consisted almost exclusively of canned tuna for five years can sue a tuna fish producer over the mercury poisoning she allegedly suffered from, the U.S. Supreme Court said Monday.

Deborah Fellner sued Tri-Union Seafoods LLC under the New Jersey Product Liability Act for failing to warn her of the dangers of eating the company’s canned albacore tuna. She claimed that the Tri-Union Seafoods tuna products that she ate from 1999 to 2004 contained methylmercury and other harmful compounds which caused her injury.

California-based Tri-Union Seafoods LLC, who market their products under the “Chicken of the Sea” brand, said the company was not responsible for her claimed illness, arguing that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration does not consider canned tuna fish worthy of mercury warnings to consumers. The company referenced a 2005 letter the FDA sent former California Attorney General Bill Lockyer* that said state-mandated mercury warning labels were pre-empted by federal law.

The law suit was thrown out by U.S. District Court Judge Dennis Cavanaugh, but the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the class action.

“State law is not pre-empted whenever an agency has merely ‘studied’ or ‘considered’ an issue; state law is pre-empted when federal law conflicts with state law,” 3rd U.S. Circuit Senior Judge Walter Stapleton wrote for the appeals court.

In response to the ruling of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Tri-Union Seafoods asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case and the justices have now allowed the appeals court ruling to stand. The U.S. Supreme Court has not commented on their decision.

* Lockyer was trying to sue three tuna producers (one of them being Tri-Union Seafoods) for not complying with California’s Proposition 65. According to Proposition 65, businesses must provide “clear and reasonable” warnings before exposing people to known carcinogens or reproductive toxins.

A six-month long investigation by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission (FWC) has led to the arrest of seven adults and one juvenile in Tampa. The arrested persons are believed to have been involved in various illegal activates concerning marine life, including catching protected sharks, sea horses, peppermint shrimp and bay scallops in Floridian waters, and exporting illegally obtained marine life to Europe. They are also suspected of having sold bait fish and bait shrimp as food for human consumption.

According to the FWC, the ring is believed to have operated for at least five years before attracting the attention of FWC. The ring lost a lot of animals due to poor maintenance, but the FWC still believes the group managed to sell $600,000 worth of peppermint shrimp alone.

The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission came into existence on July 1, 1999. The Investigations Section of the commission conducts both overt (uniform) and covert (plainclothes) investigations, and one of their tasks is to target hard-core commercial violators by conducting long-term undercover investigations. In 2003, the Investigations Section made 554 arrests/warnings and seized 130 illegally possessed specimens of fish and wildlife including a cougar, tigers, leopards, primates, exotic deer, venomous reptiles, protected birds and exotic aquatic species.

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation is now carrying out tests in hope of finding out if bacteria can aid them in their struggle against invasive mussel species that are threatening to spread across the West’s waterways.

During the summer of 2008, a preliminary test was executed at Davis Dam on the Colorado River at Laughlin in Nevada. In this dam, Quagga mussels (Dreissena rostriformis bugensis) were exposed to dead bacteria of the Pseudomonas fluorescens species, a non-infectious bacterium that is commonly found in water, soil and food.

Quagga Mussels

During the first test the mussels where exposed to bacteria in jars, but the next test will take place in 10-20 gallon aquariums to in order to more accurately mimic real dam conditions. Water will flow through the aquariums, but will not be released back into the river – it will instead be disposed of through an evaporation pond. A third experiment is also planned, where bacteria will be released in a domestic water intake line which is currently encrusted with a 2-3 inches thick layer of mussels (approximately 5-7.5 cm).

“We are always looking for new, more effective techniques for managing mussels, and this one looks very safe and very promising,” says Reclamation scientist Fred Nibling. “We’ll have a series of tests where we’re going to be testing off-line, off the river, so we can have the data to where we can apply for the permits to test elsewhere.

If the initial testing proves to be successful, the Bureau of Reclamation hopes to have a larger scale test approved by the Environmental Protection Agency.

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation got the idea to use Pseudomonas fluorescens from Daniel Molloy, a researcher at the New York State Museum who discovered that both zebra and quagga mussels died if they ingest the bacterium. He confirmed the effect in 1998 and the method was patented by the museum. Eventually, the Californian firm Marrone Organic Innovations was awarded a National Science Foundation grant to commercialize the technology.

According to Molloy’s research, a mussel needs to ingest a high density of a strain of the bacteria in order for the bacteria to be lethal. If the density is high enough, a toxin inside the bacterium cell will efficiently devastate the digestive tract of the animal.

One advantage with Pseudomonas fluorescens compared to conventional anti-mussel treatments like chlorine is that mussels recognize chlorine as dangerous and close their feeding valves to keep the chemical out. They do however happily devour Pseudomonas fluorescens. Another important aspect is that research has found that Pseudomonas fluorescens does not kill fish or shellfish.

If large scale testing also proves successful, the Bureau of Reclamation say they wish to meet with municipal public works and water authority officials before the bacterium is put into general use. “We want to make sure they’re very comfortable and they have a chance to ask questions,” says Nibbling.

Zebra mussels