Description
Potentially Misidentified Species - Ferguson and Jones' (1949) record of Brachidontes exustus (Scorched Mussel, found south of Cape Hatteras) is probably Ischadium recurvum .
Taxonomy
| Kingdom | Phylum | Class | Order | Family | Genus |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Animalia | Mollusca | Bivalvia | Mytiloida | Mytilidae | Ischadium |
Synonyms
Invasion History
Chesapeake Bay Status
| First Record | Population | Range | Introduction | Residency | Source Region | Native Region | Vectors |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1886 | Established | Stable | Native | Regular Resident | Western Atlantic | Western Atlantic | Shipping(Fouling Community) |
History of Spread
Ischadium recurvum (Hooked Mussel) was first described by Rafinesque (as Mytilis recurvus) in 1820, from the Mississippi River near New Orleans (Johnson 1915). Say in 1822 gave it (as Mytilus hamatus) a similar distribution: 'Inhabits the Gulf of Mexico, frequently carried to New Orleans attached to the common oyster' (Say 1858). Although he and Conrad (1831) collected in MD, VA, and other southeast Atlantic states, they did not report I. recurvum from Atlantic estuaries. Conrad (1830) included I. recurvum (as M. hamatus) with Rangia cuneata as 'inhabitants of much more southern latitudes than their fossil locality'; and 'species rarely found beyond Florida and the Gulf of Mexico'. I. recurvum was not among the Mollusca found in Native American archaeological sites (A.D. 200-1600) near Virginia Beach VA or on the Potomac River, although oysters and many associated organisms were present (Waselkov 1982; Whyte 1988). Dall (1889) gave its continuous distribution as being from NJ to Costa Rica.
DeKay (1843) reported I. recurvum as an extralimital species in a study of the Mollusca of NY state. From 1869 to 1938, there were numerous reports of I. recurvum from NJ to Cape Cod, usually on newly transplanted oysters (Johnson 1915; Richards 1938; Smith and Prime 1970). It was apparently introduced in Barnegat Bay and northwards with transplanted oysters (Richards 1938) but there seem to be few recent records north of the Chesapeake (Gosner 1979). However, they are locally common in brackish tributaries of Narragansett Bay RI (Pratt 1997). We regard I. recurvum as native in the Gulf of Mexico, and probably also in Atlantic estuaries south of Cape Hatteras, but as cryptogenic in the Chesapeake Bay region.
I. recurvum was collected in fouling on ships on the East Coast of the United States, but was apparently not listed as occurring on the first 100 ships examined (Visscher 1928).
Northwest Atlantic records are summarized below:
Gulf of Mexico- Ischadium recurvum was described by Rafinesque in 1820 and by Say 1822 (Say 1858); both in the vicinity of New Orleans. Its range was later given as TX to FL and south to Costa Rica (Dall 1889).
Atlantic Coast south of Chesapeake Bay- Ischadium recurvum was reported to occur from East FL to GA by Dall (1889), and from Fort Macon NC (Coues 1871; cited by Porter (1974).
Chesapeake Bay- Ischadium recurvum was not found by Say (before 1822) or Conrad (before 1831) in MD and VA (Conrad 1831; Say 1858), and was not listed by Dall (1889) for VA. However, the oldest dated United States National Museum of Natural History specimen from Chesapeake Bay is 1886 from MD (United States National Museum of Natural History collections). However, this mussel has been found in recent excavations of pre-Columbian archaeological sites on Chesapeake Bay and thus appears to be native to the Bay (Torben Rick, US National Musuem of Ntural Historyunpublished data).
Delaware Bay- A specimen (1934) is in United States National Museum of Natural History collections. Ischadium recurvum was described as 'at one time frequently collected above the Cohansy River; but is now very rare' (Maurer et al. 1974).
Barnegat Bay- Richards (1938) described I. recurvum as 'abundant from Chesapeake Bay southward; local in NJ and southern New England; probably introduced into Barnegat Bay with seed oysters from the Chesapeake'. However, it is not included on more recent faunal lists (Loveland and Shafto 1986; Loveland and Vaughlitois 1986).
NY and Northwards- Smith and Prime (1870) reported it from New York Harbor, as 'Alive, attached to oysters recently brought from the South, in all likelihood recently'. There are United States National Museum of Natural History specimens from Long Island Sound dated 1911 and 1934. But it apparently was not common later and not included in Jacobson and Emerson (1961). In New Haven, it 'occurs in abundance on southern oysters which are planted here; whether it is naturalized is doubtful' (Perkins 1871). It was reported from Narragansett Bay (Dall 1889; Johnson 1915) and Cape Cod (Abbott 1974), probably also on or near transplanted oysters. A specimen from Welfleet MA (Cape Cod), dated 1879 is in US National Museum of Natural History collections. I. recurvum has few recent reports from the northeast, but is locally common in brackish tributaries of Narragansett Bay (Pratt 1997).
In the Chesapeake Bay region:
Chincoteague and Hog Island Bay - A specimen of I. recuruvum from Northampton County VA (undated; probably Hog Island Bay) is in United States National Museum of Natural History collections. Iin 1916 and 1934 specimens were collected by trawl from the vicinity of Chincoteague (United States National Museum of National History collections). It was not found on Assateague Island by Henderson and Bartsch in 1913 (Henderson and Bartsch 1914), but was collected in a 1989 survey (Counts and Bashore 1991).
Norfolk, Hampton Roads- Ischadium recurvum was reported as Brachidontes exustus (misidentification) from Lynnhaven Inlet (Ferguson and Jones 1949). Calder (1966) found it to be rare on fouling plates in Hampton Roads.
James River- Ischadium recurvum was present to common on oyster bars, and was abundant at one upstream site (Larsen 1985).
Rappahannock River- Ischadium recurvum was abundant at mesohaline salinities, and was found 16-60 km from mouth of estuary (Davies 1972).
Potomac River- The oldest dated specimen of I. recurvum in the United States National Museum Natural History collections was from Point Lookout MD, 1886. It was abundant on all oyster bars examined (Frey 1946).
Patuxent River- Ischadium recurvum was abundant on the lower Patuxent estuary, from Eagle Bridge to Solomons (Cory 1967).
Middle and Upper Bay- Ischadium recurvum was abundant in some years at Calvert Cliffs (Abbe 1987), and common in Choptank River (Humphries et al. 1985), Broad Creek, and Tred Avon Rivers (Kennedy 1980). One was found on a settling plate in Chester River in 1995 (Ruiz et al. unpublished data). This mussel was abundant at Hacketts Bar at the mouth of Annapolis Harbor, but heavy mortality occurred in 1951 due to low salinities (Allen 1960) and presumably in later years.
History References - Abbe 1987; Abbott 1974; Allen 1960; Calder 1966; Conrad 1830; Cory 1967; Counts and Bashore 1991; Dall 1889; Davies 1972; DeKay 1843; Ferguson and Jones 1949; Frey 1946; Henderson and Bartsch 1914; Humphries et al. 1985; Jacobson and Emerson 1961; Johnson 1915; Kennedy 1980; Larsen 1985; Loveland and Shafto 1986; Loveland and Vaughlitois 1986; Maurer et al. 1974; Perkins 1871; Porter 1974; Richards 1938; Ruiz et al. unpublished data; Say 1858; Smith and Prime 1870; Waselkov 1982; Whyte 1988; United States National Museum of Natural History collections
Invasion Comments
Invasion Status- We consider this species to be cryptogenic in Chesapeake and Delaware Bays. Its absence in the collections of Say and Conrad on the Atlantic coast in the early 1800's is significant. I. recurvum's prolonged reproductive cycle, in which mature eggs are produced as late as December, only to die (Allen 1962a), is suggestive of a lack of adaptation to a Mid-Atlantic climate similar to that noted in Cyrenoida floridana (Kat 1982; see the C. floridana species account). Further investigations of this mussel in historical collections and archaeological sites, as well as an investigation of its genetics, are desirable.
Likely Vector of Introduction- Oyster transplants into Chesapeake Bay are not documented for the late 1800's (Ruiz, personal communication 1996), so ship fouling is considered the likeliest mechanism of transport.
Ecology
Environmental Tolerances
| For Survival | For Reproduction | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Minimum | Maximum | Minimum | Maximum | |
| Temperature (ºC) | 11.6 | 24.5 | ||
| Salinity (‰) | 4.5 | 36.0 | 8.0 | 36.0 |
| Oxygen | ||||
| pH | ||||
| Salinity Range | meso-eu |
Age and Growth
| Male | Female | |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum Adult Size (mm) | 20.0 | 20.0 |
| Typical Adult Size (mm) | 25.4 | 25.4 |
| Maximum Adult Size (mm) | 63.5 | 63.5 |
| Maximum Longevity (yrs) | ||
| Typical Longevity (yrs |
Reproduction
| Start | Peak | End | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reproductive Season | |||
| Typical Number of Young Per Reproductive Event |
|||
| Sexuality Mode(s) | |||
| Mode(s) of Asexual Reproduction |
|||
| Fertilization Type(s) | |||
| More than One Reproduction Event per Year |
|||
| Reproductive Startegy | |||
| Egg/Seed Form |
Impacts
Economic Impacts in Chesapeake Bay
Ischadium recurvum (Hooked Mussel) is abundant in Chesapeake Bay, and an important component of fouling communities in mesohaline waters.
Fisheries- This mussel 'often 'wraps up' oysters in low salinities' (Andrews 1956). Competition for food and space with oysters is likely. 'In one recorded instance, a typical bushel of oysters from a state planting which was ready for harvesting was found, when all mussels had been shaved off, to consist of 1/2 bushel of oysters and 1/2 bushel of mussels, thus greatly lowering the market value of oysters procured on this bar' (Beaven 1947).
Industry- Ischadium recurvum is a potential fouling organism in powerplants (Cory 1967; Abbe 1987).
Boating- Ischadium recurvum is a common fouling organism on pilings, boats, and ships (Visscher 1928; Lippson and Lippson 1984).
References - Abbe 1987; Andrews 1956; Beaven 1947; Cory 1967; Lippson and Lippson 1984; Visscher 1928
Economic Impacts Outside of Chesapeake Bay
Ischadium recurvum (Hooked Mussel) is abundant from Chesapeake Bay southwards (Abbott 1974; Gosner 1978), and is an important fouling organism on oysters and other hard surfaces. When abundant, it can be pest and competitor, overgrowing oysters and reducing their quality (White and Wilson 1996).
References - Abbott 1974; Gosner 1978; White and Wilson 1996
Ecological Impacts on Chesapeake Native Species
Ischadium recurvum (Hooked Mussel) is abundant in Chesapeake Bay, and an important component of fouling communities in mesohaline waters.
Competition- Ischadium recurvum (Hooked Mussel) is often an abundant fouling organism; may 'wrap up' oysters when abundant (Andrews 1956), causing them to grow in a misshapen fashion (Allen 1962a). Ischadium recurvum may compete with oyster spat for space (Andrews 1956; Beaven 1947; Shaw 1967). Competition for food with oysters and other suspension-feeding fouling organisms is possible, especially when large biomasses of I. recurvum are present.
References - Allen 1962a; Andrews 1956; Beaven 1947; Shaw 1967
Ecological Impacts on Other Chesapeake Non-Native Species
As a sometimes abundant member of the fouling community in mesohaline waters, Ischadium recurvum (Hooked Mussel) is a possible competitor for space with organisms such as the introduced hydroids Garveia franciscana and Cordylophora caspia, and the cryptogenic bryozoan Victorella pavida. However, these interactions have not been studied in detail (Ruiz et al., unpublished data).
References- Ruiz et al., unpublished data
References
Abbe, George R. (1987) Epifauna, In: Heck, Kenneth L.(Eds.) Ecological studies in the middle reach of Chesapeake Bay- Calvert Cliffs. , Berlin. Pp. 82-91Allen, J. Frances (1960) Effect of low salinity on survival of the curved mussel, Brachidontes recurvus, Nautilus 74: 1-8
Allen, J. Frances (1962) Gonad development and spawning of Brachidontes recurvus in Chesapeake Bay, Nautilus 75: 149-156
Allen, J. Frances (1962) Gonad development and spawning of Brachidontes recurvus in Chesapeake Bay, Nautilus 76: 9-16
Andrews, J. D. (1953) Fouling organisms of Chesapeake Bay, , Baltimore, Maryland. Pp.
Beaven, G. Francis (1947) Observations on fouling of shells in the Chesapeake area., Proceedings of the National Shellfisheries Association 1947: 11-15.
Calder, Dale R.; Brehmer, Morris L. (1967) Seasonal occurrence of epifauna on test panels in Hampton Roads, Virginia., International Journal of Oceanology and Limnology 1: 149-164
Calder, Dale Ralph (1966) Ecology of marine invertebrate fouling organisms in Hampton Roads, Virginia., , Williamsburg, VA. Pp.
Conrad, T. A. (1830) On the geology and organic remains of a part of the peninsula of Maryland, Journal of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 6: 205-223
Conrad, Timothy A. (1831) American Marine Conchology or Descriptions and Colored Figures of the Shells of the Atlantic Coast of North America, , Philadelphia. Pp.
Cory, Robert L. (1967) Epifauna of the Patuxent River Estuary, Chesapeake Science 8: 71-89
Counts, Clement L. III; Bashore, Terry L. (1991) Mollusca of Assateague Island, Maryland and Virginia: A reexamination after seventy-five years., Veliger 34: 214-221
Dall, William Healey (1889) A preliminary catalogue of the shell-bearing marine mollusks and brachiopods of the south-eastern coast of the United States, Bulletin of the United States National Museum 37: 1-221
Davies, Tudor T. (1972) Effect of environmental gradients in the Rappahannock River estuary on the molluscan fauna, Memoirs of the Geological Society of America. 133: 263-290
De Kay, James E. (1843) Mollusca, Vol. 5, Zoology of New-York., In: (Eds.) Zoology of New-York. , Albany. Pp.
Ferguson, F. F.; Jones, E. R. (1949) A survey of the shoreline fauna of the Norfolk Peninsula., American Midland Naturalist : 436-446
Frey, David G. (1946) Oyster bars of the Potomac., United States Fish and Wildlife Service Special Scientific Report 32: 1-93
Gosner, Kenneth L. (1978) A field guide to the Atlantic seashore., In: (Eds.) . , Boston. Pp.
Henderson, John B.; Bartsch, Paul (1914) Littoral marine mollusks of Chincoteague Island, Virginia, Proceedings of the United States National Museum 47: 411-421
Humphries, Edythe M.; Duedall, Iver W.; Jordan, Stephen J. (1985) Coal-waste blocks as a fouling substrate in estuarine water., In: (Eds.) Energy Wastes in the Ocean. , New York. Pp. 613-649
Jacobson, Morris K.; Emerson, William K. (1971) Shells from Cape Cod to Cape May, , New York. Pp.
Johnson, Charles W. (1915) Fauna of New England. 13. List of the Mollusca, Occasional Papers of the Boston Society of Natural History 7: 1-223
Kat, Pieter W. (1982) Reproduction in a peripheral population of Cyrenoida floridana (Bivalvia: Cyrenoididae), Malacologia 23: 47-54
Kennedy, Victor S. (1980) Comparison of recent and past patterns of oyster settlement and seasonal fouling in Broad Creek and Tred Avon River, Maryland, Proceedings of the National Shellfisheries Association 70: 36-46
Larsen, Peter F. (1985) The benthic fauna associated with the oyster reefs of the James River estuary, Virginia, U. S. A., Internationale Revue der Gesamten Hydrobiologie 70: 707-814
Lippson, Alice J.; Haire, Michael S.; Holland, A. Frederick; Jacobs, Fred; Jensen, Jorgen; Moran-Johnson, R. Lynn; Polgar, Tibor T.; Richkus, William (1979) Environmental Atlas of the Potomac Estuary, , Baltimore, MD. Pp.
Lippson, Alice Jane; Lippson, Robert L. (1984) Life in the Chesapeake Bay, , Baltimore. Pp.
Loveland, Robert E.; Shafto, Sylvia S. (1984) Fouling Organisms, In: Kennish, Michael J., and Lutz, Richard A.(Eds.) Ecology of Barnegat Bay, New Jersey.. , Berlin. Pp. 226-20
Loveland, Robert E.; Vouglitois, James J. (1984) Benthic fauna., In: Kennish, Michael J./, and Lutz, Richard A.(Eds.) Ecology of Barnegat Bay, New Jersey.. , Berlin. Pp. 135-170
Maurer, Don; Watling, Les; Aprill, Glenn (1974) The distribution and ecology of common marine and estuarine pelecypods in the Delaware Bay area, Nautilus 88: 38-45
Perkins, George H. (1871) Molluscan fauna of New Haven. A critical review of all the marine, fresh water and land Mollusca of the region, with descriptions of many of the living animals and of two new species. Part II: Acephala and Bryozoa., Proceedings of the Boston Society of Natural History 13: 138-163
Porter, Hugh J. (1974) The North Carolina Marine and Estuarine Mollusca: An Atlas of Occurrence, , Morehead City. Pp.
Reed, Clyde F. (1964) A flora of the chrome and manganese ore piles at Canton, in the port of Baltimore, Maryland and at Newport News, Virginia, with descriptions of genera and species new to the flora of the eastern United States., Phytologia 10: 321-406
Richards, Horace Gardiner (1938) Animals of the Seashore, , Boston. Pp.
Say, Thomas (1858) The Complete Writings of Thomas Say on the Conchology of the United States, , New York. Pp.
Shaw, William N. (1967) Seasonal fouling and oyster setting on asbestos plates in Broad creek, Talbot County, Maryland, 1963-65., Chesapeake Science 8: 228-236
Smith, Sanderson; Prime, Temple (1870) Report on the Mollusca of Long Island, N. Y., and of its dependencies, Annals of the Lyceum of Natural History 9: 377-407
Visscher, J. Paul (1927) Nature and extent of fouling of ship's bottoms., Bulletin of the Bureau of Fisheries 43: 193-252
Waselkov, Gregory A. (1982) Shellfish gathering and shell midden archaeology, , Chapel Hill NC. Pp.
White, Marie E.; Wilson, Elizabeth A. (1996) Predators, pests, and competitors., , College Park. Pp. 559-579
Whyte, Thomas R. (1988) Fish and shellfish use in the woodland period on the Virginia coast, Journal of Middle Atlantic Archaeology 4: 105-120