Ecosystem models of bivalve aquaculture: Implications for supporting goods and services

In this paper we focus on the role of ecosystem models in improving our understanding of the complex relationships between bivalve farming and the dynamics of lower trophic levels. To this aim, we review spatially explicit models of phytoplankton impacted by bivalve grazing and discuss the results of three case studies concerning an estuary (Baie des Veys, France), a bay, (Tracadie Bay, Prince Edward Island, Canada) and an open coastal area (Adriatic Sea, Emilia-Romagna coastal area, Italy). These models are intended to provide insight for aquaculture management, but their results also shed light on the spatial distribution of phytoplankton and environmental forcings of primary production. Even though new remote sensing technologies and remotely operated in situ sensors are likely to provide relevant data for assessing some the impacts of bivalve farming at an ecosystem scale, the results here summarized indicate that ecosystem modelling will remain the main tool for assessing ecological carrying capacity and providing management scenarios in the context of global drivers, such as climate change

Farmed bivalve loss due to seabream predation in the French Mediterranean Prevost Lagoon

Bivalve predation by seabream has been observed worldwide and is a major concern for bivalve farmers. Farmed bivalve-seabream interactions must be better understood to ensure the sustainability of bivalve aquaculture. The objectives of this study were to characterize gilthead seabream Sparus aurata presence in a bivalve farm in Prevost Lagoon (Mediterranean Sea) using acoustic telemetry and to evaluate monthly losses of mussels Mytilus galloprovincialis and oysters Crassostrea gigas due to seabream predation over an 18 mo period inside the farm and at an unprotected experimental platform. Large (281 to 499 mm TL) seabream were more commonly detected in the bivalve farm than were small (200 to 280 mm TL) seabream. In contrast to small seabream, 90% of large seabream returned to and spent extended periods in the study area the following year, suggesting inter-annual site fidelity for large fish that used the bivalve farm as a feeding site. Signs of predation were observed on mussels and oysters throughout the year at the unprotected experimental platform. Farmers noted losses in the farm from April to September. Maximal losses (90 to 100%) were observed post-oyster ‘sticking’ and mussel socking. Despite the deployment of nets as mechanical protection to reduce predation, oyster losses represented 28% of the annual value of oysters sold while mussel losses were estimated at ca. 1%. These results suggest that bivalves must be protected by nets throughout the year to avoid predation, particularly post-handling. A collaboration between shellfish farmers and fishermen could be a sustainable solution for bivalve farming, by regularly fishing for seabream in farms, between tables and inside protective nets

Interpopulation variation in the prevalence and intensity of parasitic mite infection in the land snail Arianta arbustorum

The parasitic mite Riccardoella limacum sucks blood in the lung of its host, the land snail Arianta arbustorum. The infection of various host populations was examined in Switzerland. In a lowland snail population, prevalence of infection did not vary among seasons. However, intensity of mite infection in dissected individuals of A. arbustorum was high in autumn, but low in winter and spring when ≤100 mite eggs were found attached to the lung epithelium. A novel, non-invasive parasite screening method was used to estimate the number of mites on living host snails. An analysis of repeatability revealed that 92.9% of the snails were correctly classified as infected or non-infected with this non-invasive method. Prevalence of mite infection was examined in 997 adults of A. arbustorum from 11 natural populations distributed over an altitudinal gradient ranging 335–2360 m. No infected snails were found in 7 populations, while in the remaining 4 populations the prevalence of mite infection ranged 45.8–77.8%. Intensity of infection also differed among the 4 host populations. No geographic pattern in prevalence of infection was found. However, parasitic mites did not occur in snail populations situated at elevations of 1290 m or higher. A possible explanation for this finding could be that the host's hibernation period may be too long at high elevations for mites and their eggs to survive. At low elevations, other factors may affect the presence of R. limacum in the lung of A. arbustorum