Validation of annual growth rings in freshwater mussel shells using cross dating

Abstract

We examined the usefulness of dendrochronological cross-dating methods for studying long-term, interannual growth patterns in freshwater mussels, including validation of annual shell ring formation. Using 13 species from three rivers, we measured increment widths between putative annual rings on shell thin sections and then removed age-related variation by standardizing measurement time series using cubic splines. Initially, cross dating was a valuable quality control technique allowing us to correct interpretive and measurement errors in 16% of specimens. For all species, growth varied among years but was highly synchronous among individuals. Standardized measurement time series of 94% of individuals were significantly correlated with species master chronologies, and mean interseries correlations ranged from 0.37 to 0.96. Growth was also synchronous among species, even from different rivers, and growth was negatively correlated with mean annual streamflow for most species except Quadrula pustulosa from a regulated dam tailrace. Highly synchronous growth and the strong relationship to streamflow showed that large-scale environmental signals generated non-age-related variation in mussel growth giving strong support for annual formation of the growth increments we measured. Cross dating can be a valuable technique for studying freshwater mussel growth providing quality control, validation of annual rings, and reconstruction of long-term growth histories.

Determining Optimum Temperature for Growth and Survival of Laboratory‐Propagated Juvenile Freshwater Mussels

“…Factors that have been found to correlate with mussel growth and survival rates include, but are not limited to, substrate type and size (Hinch et al 1986;Liberty et al 2007), flows and sediment load (Beaty 1997;Zimmerman 2003;Jones et al 2005;Liberty et al 2007;Rypel et al 2008), toxicant exposure (Pandolfo et al 2010a), mussel density (Hanson et al 1988;Beaty 1997;Beaty and Neves 2004;Negishi and Kayaba 2009), food availability (Hanlon 2000), sampling frequency (Beaty 1997;Zimmerman 2003;Liberty et al 2007), maturity of larvae (Jones et al 2005), and temperature (Hanson et al 1988;Buddensiek 1995;Beaty 1997;Hanlon 2000;Zimmerman and Neves 2002;Zimmerman 2003;Liberty 2004;Hanlon and Neves 2006;Pandolfo et al 2010aPandolfo et al , 2010bNegishi and Kayaba 2010). These studies have helped define requirements for mussel propagation and culture by advancing understanding of factors affecting growth and survival and have shown that mussels are useful biological indicators of environmental change.…”

Climate-driven synchrony in otolith growth-increment chronologies for three Bering Sea flatfish species

“…Crossdating is the process of matching synchronous growth patterns among individuals, beginning at the marginal increment formed during the known year of capture and proceeding toward the core. If a growth increment has been missed or falsely added, the growth pattern for that individual will be offset by a year relative to that in the other specimens, thereby identifying the mistake (see Black et al 2005, 2008b, Rypel et al 2008 for crossdating procedures in aquatic organisms). At no time did we 'force' crossdating on an otolith, and corrections were only made when the accidentally missed or falsely added increment was obviously visible upon reinspection of the specimen.…”

Size‐specific growth patterns and estimated longevity of the unionid mussel (Pronodularia japanensis)

“…The same species could exhibit variable growth patterns depending on the characteristics of habitat types (Parada et al 1989;Bauer 1992; Morris and Corkum 1999;Griffiths and Cyr 2006). Such differences in growth patterns among different habitat types (growth variability) have been attributed to various external environmental conditions such as substrate type (Kat 1982;Kesler and Downing 1997), mussel density (Bolden and Brown 2002;Negishi and Kayaba 2009), food resource availability (Morris and Corkum 1999;Griffiths and Cyr 2006), and annual streamflow (Rypel et al 2008). Temperature might be one of the most important factors having correlated with intra-annual growth patterns (Negus 1966: Dettman et al 1999Goewert et al 2007;Haag and Commens-Carson 2008) as well as annual growth rates (Negus 1966; but see Rypel et al 2008).…”