Description
Bousfield and Hoover (1997) split the genus Corophium into 13 genera, 3 of which are represented in Chesapeake Bay. This division follows long-recognized divisions within the former genus (e.g. Shoemaker 1934; Crawford 1937), which is now treated as a subfamily (Corophinae), by Bousfield and Hoover.
This species, described by Costa in 1851, may be a nomen nudum (inadequate original description). However Bousfield and Hoover (1997) consider that the name should continue to be used, under the International Committee on Zoological Nomenclature's 50-year rule.
Synonymy - Say (1818) described 'Podocerus cylindricus' from Egg Harbor NJ. The original type material was lost, but Verrill and Smith (1873) assigned the name Corophium cylindricum to a common corophiid of southern New England, and this form was formally described by Holmes (1905). Subsequently, this name was very widely applied on the Atlantic Coast of the United States. However, it is not clear that Say's material was a a menmber of the subfamily Corophiinae (Shoemaker 1934). Shoemaker re-identified all available vouchered specimens of 'C. cylindricum' as ''C. acherusicum', but some of these amphipods may have been the very similar M. insidiosum, described by Crawford in 1937 (Bousfield and Hoover 1997; Crawford 1937; Shoemaker 1947). Bousfield and Hoover (1997) treat 'Podocerus cylindricus' and 'Corophium cylindricum' as synonyms of M. insidiosum. Therefore, the identity of amphipods identified as 'Corophium cylindricum' is uncertain. In recent Chesapeake collections, M. acherusicum greatly outnumbers M. insidiosum. Therefore, we have assumed that early records of 'C. cylindricum' in Chesapeake Bay refer to M. acherusicum.
Taxonomy
Kingdom | Phylum | Class | Order | Family | Genus |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Animalia | Crustacea | Malacostraca | Amphipoda | Corophiidae | Monocorophium |
Synonyms
Invasion History
Chesapeake Bay Status
First Record | Population | Range | Introduction | Residency | Source Region | Native Region | Vectors |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1920 | Established | Stable | Cryptogenic | Regular Resident | Western Atlantic | Eastern Atlantic | Shipping(Fouling Community, Ballast Water),Natural Dispersal(Natural Dispersal) |
History of Spread
Monocorophium acherusicum, an epifaunal tube-building amphipod, has been so widely dispersed by shipping that its original range is unknown. 'However, the eastern North Atlantic, from which it was originally described, seems the most probable source region' (Bousfield and Hoover 1997). However, Chapman (2000) considers M. acherusicum to be native to the Northwest Atlantic, and introduced to the coast of Europe. This amphipod was originally described from Italy by Costa in 1851 and was subsequently collected from southern Europe, the Atlantic coasts of France and Holland, and West Africa (Senegal) (Crawford 1937). [It may have been described from the Atlantic Coast of the U.S. by Say in 1818 (Say 1818), but the identity of his 'Podocerus cylindricus' is uncertain (Shoemaker 1934; Bousfield and Hoover 1997)]. By 1937, Monocorophium acherusicum had also been collected from the Suez Canal, East Africa, the Falkland Islands, Hong Kong, and New Zealand (Crawford 1937; Shoemaker 1934), and later from Australia (Fearn-Wannan 1968); Hawaii (Shoemaker 1947) and Japan (Onbe 1966). 'It is noteworthy that its present known distribution traces out some of the major shipping routes ...' (Hurley 1954). This species has been collected from ship fouling in England (Crawford 1937) and Hong Kong (Shoemaker 1947), and is abundantly found on wharves, pilings, buoys, etc. (Crawford 1937; Lincoln 1979). In the eastern Pacific, M. acherusicum was collected as early as 1905 in Yaquina Bay Oregon and now ranges from British Columbia to Baja California (Cohen and Carlton 1995).
In the western Atlantic, the date of first record is uncertain because of taxonomic confusion. If Say's (1818) 'Podocerus cylindricus' was identical with Smith and Verrill's 'Corophium cylindricum' (Smith and Verrill 1873), and most or all of these specimens were M. acherusicum, as asserted by Shoemaker (1934), then M. acherusicum may have been present on the Atlantic coast of North America (Little Egg Harbor, NJ) before 1818. Smith and Verrill's 'C. cylindricum' may have been either M. acherusicum (Shoemaker 1934) or M. insidiosum (Bousfield and Hoover 1997). We've chosen 1873 as the date of first record, since specimens of 'C. cylindricum' from Smith and Verrill's (1873) Martha's Vineyard survey probably were deposited in the National Museum and identified by Shoemaker (1934) as C. acherusicum. However, some of these specimens may have been M. insidiosum, described by Crawford in 1937 (Shoemaker 1947). Most of the specimens of M. acherusicum examined by Shoemaker are no longer in the catalogs of the United States National Museum of Natural History, and so cannot be checked.
We regard the Monocorphium acherusicum in the western Atlantic as cryptogenic. Its widespread introduction by shipping elsewhere in the world suggests that it could have been transported from the coast of Europe. If so, it became widely established long before it could be accurately identified and its movements tracked. By 1934 it ranged from at least as far north as New England to Brazil (Shoemaker 1934). [Shoemaker gives the northern limit as 'Baffins Bay', but Bousfield (1973) reported it as found north only to central ME.]
Shoemaker identified 'Corophium cylindricum' from one cruise in lower Chesapeake Bay (May, 1920), collected between Cape Charles City and New Point Comfort (Cowles 1930). These were probably C. acherusicum, which was found in that area by Feeley and Wass (1971). However, no specific mention of Chesapeake specimens was made in Shoemaker's later papers (1934; 1947). The oldest definitely identified specimen in the United States National Museum of Natural History catalog is dated 1958 from Norfolk VA.
Chesapeake Bay records are summarized below:
Adjacent Coastal Waters - Monocorophium acherusicum was abundant in Indian River and Rehoboth Bays, just north of our study area (Maurer 1977; Watling and Maurer 1972), and was reported as common in Atlantic coastal bays [from Rehoboth Bay DE to northern Chincoteague Bay (MD)], north of the mouth of the Chesapeake, but was absent in dead-end canals in areas developed for housing (Maxted et al. 1997). It was collected on pilings at Wachapreague Inlet VA (Feeley and Wass 1991).
Lower Chesapeake Bay - Monocorphium acherusicum was probably collected as 'Corophium cylindricum' in 1920 (see above). It was reported as common by Wass (1963), but Feeley and Wass (1971) found it scarce in the Bay proper, with only two collections, one from Middle Ground in the lower James and one from the pilings of the Chesapeake Bay bridge-tunnel. However, it was apparently common at some sites in Hampton Roads (Boesch, cited by Feeley and Wass 1971) and the lower York River (Marsh 1973). This amphipod was collected from fouling plates in summer of 1995 in Lynnhaven Bay, Gloucester Point, Norfolk, Mobjack Bay (Ruiz et al. unpublished data).
History References - Bousfield 1973; Bousfield and Hoover 1997; Cohen and Carlton 1995; Chapman 2000; Cowles 1930; Crawford 1937; Fearn-Wannan 1968; Feeley and Wass 1971; Hurley 1954; Lincoln 1979; Marsh 1973; Maurer 1977; Maxted et al. 1997; Onbe 1966; Ruiz et al. unpublished data; Say 1818; Shoemaker 1934; Shoemaker 1947;Verrill and Smith 1873; United States National Museum of Natural History collections; Wass 1963; Watling and Maurer 1972
Invasion Comments
Ecology
Environmental Tolerances
For Survival | For Reproduction | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Minimum | Maximum | Minimum | Maximum | |
Temperature (ºC) | ||||
Salinity (‰) | 6.0 | 38.0 | ||
Oxygen | well-oxygenated | |||
pH | ||||
Salinity Range | poly-eu |
Age and Growth
Male | Female | |
---|---|---|
Minimum Adult Size (mm) | 1.3 | 2.2 |
Typical Adult Size (mm) | 2.3 | 3.8 |
Maximum Adult Size (mm) | 4.5 | 6.0 |
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
Monocorophium acherusicum is a common food of juvenile commercial fishes (Onbe 1966), but probably does not differ in this role from native species, to our knowledge.
References- Onbe 1966
Economic Impacts Outside of Chesapeake Bay
In Los Angeles Harbor, Monocorophium acherusicum dominated the biomass of the fouling community on pilings(Barnard 1958). Barnard (1958) suggested that high densities of mat-forming fouling organisms such as corophiids (M. acherusicum; M. insidosum) and the polychaete Polydora spp. might deter the settlement of marine borers on wooden pilings. His suggestion of deliberately releasing small quantities of organic material near pilings, in order to encourage these suspension feeders has not been tested, to our knowledge.
Where it is abundant, Monocorophium acherusicum is probably an important prey of juvenile commercial fishes (Onbe 1966).
References- Barnard 1958; Onbe 1966
Ecological Impacts on Chesapeake Native Species
Monocorophium acherusicum is locally common in Chesapeake Bay, and could have some impacts on native biota. However, the invasion status of the species is uncertain (cryptogenic), and if it is an invader, it could have simply displaced native corophiids.
Herbivory - Together with other tube-building, suspension-feeding amphipods, M. acherusicum could have a local effect on densities of phytoplankton and suspended detritus (Barnard 1958).
Competition - Competition among corophiin species in Chesapeake Bay has been suggested as a factor influencing their distributions (Feeley and Wass 1971). However, this has not been tested experimentally.
Habitat Change - Tubes of corophiids represent a considerable modification of surfaces, which could affect other fouling taxa. Construction of tubes on vegetation could affect the plants' photosynthesis, masses of tubes on hard surfaces could provide habitat for meiofauna and smaller infauna.
Food/Prey - Monocorophium acherusicum is a frequent, and sometimes primary prey of juvenile fishes in Japan (Onbe 1966) and probably elsewhere.
References - Barnard 1958; Feeley and Wass 1971; Onbe 1966
Ecological Impacts on Other Chesapeake Non-Native Species
Monocorophium acherusicum is a potential competitor with the cryptogenic M. insidiosum, but interactions of the two species have not been studied experimentally, to our knowledge.
References
Barnard, J. Laurens (1958) Amphipod crustaceans as fouling organisms in Los Angeles-Long Beach Harbors, with reference to the influence of seawater turbidity, California Fish and Game 44: 161-170Bellan-Santini, Denise; Karaman, Gordon; Krapp-Schickel, Gertraud; Ledoyer, Michel; Myers, Alan A.; Ruffo, Sandro; Schiecke, Ulrich (1982) The Amphipoda of the Mediterranean: Part 1. Gammaridea (Acanthonotozomatidae to Gammaridae), Memoires de l'Institut Oceanographique (Monaco) 13: 1-364
Bousfield, E. L.; Hoover, P. M. (1997) The amphipod superfamily Corophioidea on the Pacific coast of North America. Part V. Family Corophiidae: Corophiinae, new subfamily. Systematics and distributional ecology., Amphipacifica 2: 67-139
Bousfield, E.L. (1973) Shallow-water gammaridean Amphipoda of New England., , Ithaca, NY. Pp.
Chapman, John W. (2000) Climate effects on the geography of nonindigenous peracaridan crustacean introductions in estuaries., In: Pederson, Judith(Eds.) Marine Bioinvasions. , Cambridge MA. Pp. 66-80
Cohen, Andrew N.; Carlton, James T. (1995) Nonindigenous aquatic species in a United States estuary: a case study of the biological invasions of the San Francisco Bay and Delta, , Washington DC, Silver Spring MD.. Pp.
Cowles, R.P. (1930) A biological study of the offshore waters of Chesapeake Bay, United States Bureau of Fisheries Bulletin 46: 277-381
Crawford, G. I. (1937) A review of the amphipod genus Corophium, with notes on the British species., Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 21: 589-630
Fearn-Wannan, H. J. (1968) Littoral Amphipoda of Victoria, Proceedings of the Royal Society of Victoria 81: 127-135
Feeley, James B.; Wass, Marvin L. (1971) The distribution and ecology of the Gammaridea (Crustacea: Amphipoda) of the lower Chesapeake estuaries., Special Papers in Marine Science 2: 1-58
Fox, Richard S.; Bynum, Kenneth H. (1975) The amphipod crustaceans of North Carolina estuarine waters, Chesapeake Science 16: 223-237
Grabe, Stephen A. (1981) Occurence of Mysidopsis almyra Bowman, 1964 (Mysidacea) in the Patapsco River estuary (Upper Chesapeake Bay), Maryland, U.S.A., Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 94: 863-865
Grabe, Stephen A. (1996) Composition and seasonality of nocturnal peracarid zooplankton from coastal New Hampshire (USA) waters, 1978-1980., Journal of Plankton Research 18: 881-894
Hurley, D. E. (1954) Studies of the New Zealand Amphipodan fauna. No. 7. The family Corophiidae, including a new species of Paracorophium, Transactions of the Royal Society of New Zealand 82: 431-460
Lincoln, Roger J. (1979) British Marine Amphipoda: Gammaridea., In: (Eds.) . , London. Pp.
Long, Edward R. (1968) The associates of four species of marine sponges of Oregon and Washington, Pacific Science 22: 347-351
Marsh, G. Alex (1973) The Zostera epifaunal community in the York River, Virginia, Chesapeake Science 14: 87-97
Maurer, Don (1977) Estuarine benthic invertebrates of Indian River and Rehoboth Bays, Delaware, Internationale Revue der Gesamten Hydrobiologie 62: 591-629
Maxted, J. A.; Weisberg, S. B.; Chaillou, J. C.; Eskin, R. A.; Kutz, F. W. (1997) The ecological condition of dead-end canals of the Delaware and Maryland coastal bays, Estuaries 20: 319-327
Nair, K. K. C.; Anger, K. (1979) Life cycle of Corophium insidiosum (Crustacea, Amphipoda) in laboratory culture, Helgoländer Wissenschaftliche Meeresuntersuchungen 32: 279-294
Onbe, Takashi (1966) Observations on the tubicolous amphipod, Corophium acherusicum, in Fukuyama harbor area, Journal of the Faculty of Fisheries and Animal Husbandry of Hiroshima University 6: 323-338
Say, Thomas (1817) An account of the Crustacea of the United States., Journal of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 1: 57-63, 65-80, 97-101
Shoemaker, Clarence R. (1934a) The amphipod genus Corophium on the east coast of America, Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 47: 23-32
Shoemaker, Clarence R. (1947) Further notes on the amphipod genus Corophium, from the east coast of North America, Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences 37: 47-63
Verrill, A.E.; Smith, S.I. (1873) VIII. Report upon the invertebrate animals of Vineyard Sound and the adjacent waters, with an account of the physical characters of the region., 1 , . Pp. 1-757
Wass, Melvin L. (1963) Check list of the marine invertebrates of Virginia., Special Scientific Report, Virginia Institute of Marine Science 24: 1-56
Watling, Les; Maurer, Don (1972) Marine shallow water amphipods of the Delaware Bay area, U.S.A., Crustaceana : 251-266