1. NOAA’s Non-native Oyster Research Program in Support of an EIS
Jamie L. King, Ph.D.
NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office
November 16, 2006
Science, Service, & Stewardship
NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office

2. To Introduce or Not to Introduce?
Economic damages associated with alien invasive species in the United States: Cost of $120 billion/year (Pimentel et al. 2004)
Species introduced as food crops or livestock provide >98% of U.S. food supply: Value of $800 billion/year (US Bureau of the Census 1998)
In 2002 the National Research Council (research arm of the National Academy of Sciences) was commissioned to conduct a study of the possible risks and benefits of the proposed introduction.
They concluded that the proposed introduction in Chesapeake Bay may or may not be beneficial, judging from case studies of other shellfish introductions around the globe.
A review of case studies of intentional shellfish introductions indicates that there are both benefits and risks dependent on the region (National Research Council 2003)

3. Proposed Oyster Introduction
Joint Maryland/Virginia Proposal
Crassostrea ariakensis (Asian or Suminoe oyster)
”Oregon strain” or “West Coast ariakensis (WCA)”
Purpose: Oyster population that would support sustainable harvests comparable to harvest levels
Potential inter-state issues, effects beyond Chesapeake Bay
EIS Lead Agencies: Army Corps of Engineers
Maryland Dept. of Natural Resources
Virginia Marine Resources Commission
Cooperating Agencies: NOAA, USEPA, USF&WS

4. Current EIS Activities
Research
Research projects underway since 2004
Funding from NOAA, MDNR, VASG, PRFC
Ecological Risk Assessment
Identifying ecological risk factors
Developing qualitative/quantitative estimates of risk
Developing Assessment Tools
Demographic model
Larval dispersal model
Filtration and water quality modeling

5. NOAA Research Program 3-year, $6M competitive research program
Designed to support information needs of Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
Priorities identified by NRC and STAC
Funded FY04-FY06
Work continues through late early 2008

6. Biological Research Topics
Understanding C. ariakensis in its native range
Taxonomy, population genetics, pathogens, ecology
Potential for population growth/sustainability
Data to parameterize demographic & larval transport models
Susceptibility to known diseases
Bonamia, MSX, Dermo, Herpes virus, Polydora (shell disease)
Interactions with native oyster
Competition, hybridization, gamete sink
Human consumption risks
Uptake/clearance of bacterial, viral, protozoan human pathogens
Potential to be fouling nuisance or invasive
Ecosystem services
Reef building, water filtration, food web dynamics

7. Economic Research Topics
Product quality and marketability
shelf life, taste tests, consumer acceptance
Production or implementation costs
hatchery seed production costs
infrastructure capital investments
industry buy-out, enforcement
Economic feasibility
feasibility of various production methods (aquaculture, leased grounds, public fishery)
Economic impacts
dockside value, jobs, secondary revenue
dollar value of nutrient reductions

8. Institutions Involved in Research
University of Maryland
UMCES Horn Point Laboratory
UMCES Chesapeake Biological Lab
Biotechnology Institute, COMB
College Park
Virginia Institute of Marine Science
Gloucester Point
Eastern Shore Laboratory
Smithsonian Env. Research Center
Harbor Branch Oceanographic
Institute of Oceanology Chinese Academy of Sciences
Rutgers University
Haskin Shellfish Research Lab
University of North Carolina
Institute of Marine Science
North Carolina
Division of Marine Fisheries
Johns Hopkins University
Bloomberg School Public Health
Cooperative Oxford Lab
Main Street Economics
Hainan University

9. Available online at http://noaa.chesapeakebay.net
Quarterly Reviews
Spring Various topics – taxonomy, disease, etc.
Summer Aquaculture alternatives
Fall 2005 Potential for interspecific interactions
Winter Human health risks
Spring NSA session (JSR volume in prep.)
Summer Comparative growth & mortality
Available online at
Rapidly share information for discussion/synthesis
Build consensus on what we do/don’t know
Modify projects underway to maximize utility of data

10. Taxonomy & Genetics
Development of diagnostic molecular tools  now able to discriminate among Crassostrea species in Asia
2 species have been called C. ariakensis
True C. ariakensis has 2 strains: northern and southern
“Oregon strain” has less genetic diversity than wild C. ariakensis

11. Oyster Diseases
C. ariakensis acquires Dermo, but does not die from infection (data limited to “ideal” aquaculture conditions)
2 Bonamia species discovered in North Carolina, only 1 infects C. ariakensis
Small C. ariakensis (<40mm) experience mass mortalities, larger oysters are less susceptible

12. Life History & Ecology Larval behavior Substrate preference
C. ariakensis – at the bottom
C. virginica – upper water column
Substrate preference
Both species prefer natural substrates
C. ariakensis is 10x more likely to settle on fiberglass
Fertilization
Cross-fertilization, but inviable hybrid offspring
Gamete sink will occur if spawning is synchronous

13. Life History & Ecology Early post-settlement growth Later growth rates
Evidence for interspecific competition for space
Later growth rates
High salinity: C. ariakensis >>> C. virginica
Low salinity: C. ariakensis > C. virginica
C. ariakensis seems to exhibit:
Extended growing season in winter months (November – January)
Susceptibility to low dissolved oxygen
Inability to tolerate intertidal exposure

14. Aquaculture – Native oyster
Little investment in research & development to promote native oyster aquaculture in the mid-Atlantic
C. virginica triploids showing better growth, survival, and meat quality relative to diploids
Virginia field trials: 22-78% of triploids market size in 18 months

15. Aquaculture – C. ariakensis
Bioeconomic analysis of triploid C. ariakensis in NC suggests profitability is possible under certain conditions
Industry trials with triploids underway in Chesapeake Bay
Concerns about C. ariakensis shelf life – gaping, shell splintering/cracking, leaking or “bleeding”
Similar rates of Polydora (mud worm) infestations, but C. ariakensis exhibits more mud blisters and knobs

16. EIS Evaluations = Synthesis
Potential for C. ariakensis – C. virginica interactions
Larval Substrate Selection
Both species prefer to settle on natural substrates (shell, granite)  Likely they will settle together and co-occur
Post-settlement Competition
Both species have slower growth rates when crowded, and growth rates decrease further with interspecific competition 
Likely they will compete for space
Fertilization Interference
Inviable hybrid offspring result in >50% reduction in reproductive capacity of each species 
Likely they will have greatly diminished reproductive output

17. http://noaa.chesapeakebay.net/ Jamie.King@noaa.gov 410-267-5655
Science, Service, & Stewardship
NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office
NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office