Invasion
Invasion Description
Type Locality: Fort Wool/VA/Hampton Roads (Chesapeake Bay) (Clarke 1882, Calder 2019)
Geographic Extent
Woods Hole/MA/ Buzzards Bay-Vineyard Sound (Hargitt 1909, cited by Fraser 1944); India Point, Providence/RI/Providence River (2000, establishment unknown, MIT Sea Grant 2003); Woodland Beach/DE/Delaware Bay (Watling and Maurer 1972); Bayside/DE/Broadkill River (Watling and Maurer 1972); Rehoboth/DE/Indian River Bay (Watling and Maurer 1972); Slaughter Beach/DE/Mispillon River (Watling and Maurer 1972); DE/Murderkill River (Watling and Maurer 1972); DE/St. Jones River (Watling and Maurer 1972); Lower Cedar Point/MD/Potomac River (Frey 1946); Morgantown/MD/Potomac River (Pfitzenmeyer 1976; Lippson et al. 1979); Chalk Pt./MD/Patuxent River (1963, Cory 1967); Solomons/MD/Patuxent River (1963, Cory 1967); Norfolk/VA/Hampton Roads (1965, Calder 1971; Thompson 1993); Deep Water Shoal/VA/James River (Calder 1971; Thompson 1993); Surry Power Station (Hog Island)/VA/James River (1965, Virginia Power, Stone and Webster Engineering Corp. 1992; Thompson 1993); VA/York River (Calder 1971); VA/Rappahannock River (Calder 1971); Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant/MD/Chesapeake Bay (1967, Abbe 1987); Smithsonian Environmental Research Center dock, Edgewater/MD/Rhode River (1997, Ruiz et al., unpublished data); VA/James River (2008, Llanso and Sillet 2009, abundant, on hulls of disused ships, 'Pride', 'Scan', and 'Cape Charles', pre and post-cleaning); Norfolk Naval Station/VA/Hampton Roads (2000, Ruiz et al., unpublished data)
Vectors
| Level | Vector |
|---|
Regional Impacts
| Economic Impact | Industry | |
| Calyptospadix cerulea is a major fouling organism in the Chesapeake Bay region. The organism with the highest quantified cost to power plants in the Chesapeake Bay is C. cerulea, which is a major fouler of power plants along mesohaline waters of Chesapeake Bay (Cory 1967; Virginia Power 1992) and elsewhere in the world (Simkina 1963). At two power plants in Chesapeake Bay, Chalk Point (Patuxent River) and Morgantown (Potomac River), the cost of biocides to control fouling dominated by C. cerulea was 95,000 to $180,000 per year in 1995-97 (Krueger 1997, personal communication). At the Surry Nuclear Power Plant on the lower James River, the weight of the hydroids caused breakdowns of the traveling screens which remove debris. Aggregates of hydroids blocked water flow in the main condensers, in the circulating water systems used for cooling during routine operation, and in the service water systems, which would be used in shutdown after an accident. 'Almost daily' cleaning was required during warm weather to keep water flowing through the service system. In 1992, the projected cost of 'doing nothing' about the biofouling problem, except routine cleaning and repairs was $37.5 million projected over the plant's remaining license period (to the year 2013), or $3.4 million per year. The operators of the plant instead undertook an extensive reconstruction of the cooling and screen system, which was intended to reduce fouling problems, with a projected cost of $23.6, or $2.1 million per year (Virginia Power 1992). One major consequence of the invasion of exotic fouling organisms is the increased use of biocides and antifouling coatings in power plants and industrial water systems. These chemicals are toxic substances used to kill microbial and invertebrate organisms on surfaces exposed to natural waters. Among coatings used in power plants are copper oxide paints, organotin compounds, as well as nontoxic coatings that inhibit attachment of organisms (Virginia Power 1992). At the Surry Nuclear Power Plant, several biocides in addition to chlorine were tested against G. franciscana, including ammonium hydroxide, hydrogen peroxide, sodium bromide-hypochlorite mixture, a surfactant mixture ('ClamTrol'), and chemically induced anoxia. However, at doses allowed by their U.S. EPA permit, these were ineffective (Virginia Power 1992). | ||
| Economic Impact | Fisheries | |
| Fisheries- Costs: Fouling by Calyptospadix cerulea has been a major problem on fishing gear, including crab pots and oyster tayCalyptospadix ceruleaCalyptospadix cerulea probably benefits commercial and sport fisheries by providing habitat for juvenile and bait fishes, shrimps, crabs, and other motile organisms (Thompson 1993). | ||
| Ecological Impact | Competition | |
| Competition- Although Calyptospadix cerulea (Rope Grass Hydroid) is an abundant and sometimes dominant part of the fouling community in parts of Chesapeake Bay, its ecological impacts are largely unknown. Calyptospadix cerulea and Victorella pavida overgrew most other organisms on fouling panels at Calvert Cliffs, Maryland, in summer (Abbe 1987). | ||
| Ecological Impact | Habitat Change | |
| Growths of Calyptospadix cerulea provide cover for numerous amphipods, mud crabs, and other organisms in the Patuxent River (Cory 1967) and James River (Thompson 1993). | ||
| Ecological Impact | Food/Prey | |
| Food/Prey- Calyptospadix cerulea is fed on by nudibranchs, particularly Tenellia sp. (Cory 1967; Abbe 1987; Thompson 1993). | ||