header image

On my last post, I mentioned that we were breaking down the 90-day experiment, where we exposed mussels to environmentally relevant levels (0, 0.3, 3.0, 30.0, and 300 ng/L) of fluoxetine. We had measured mussel length and width as well as mass and water clearance rates, so see if fluoxetine had an effect on mussel physiology. After some preliminary analyses, we found that mussels grew at a slower rate when exposed to the highest levels of fluoxetine (30 and 300 ng/L). While all mussels survived the exposure, some did exhibit negative growth with respect to total mass. I am currently looking at the other data to see if there were similar trends. We are also assessing body condition using a condition and gonadosomatic indices. These indices assess mussel health by measuring the the dry weight of mussel tissue over the length and width of its shell and the proportion of gonad and somatic tissues for each individual mussel, respectively. Once we get the dry weights of each individual mussel, we will have the results from comparing the values between treatments.

The next exciting part of this study is how fluoxetine may affect mussel shell thickening in response to a predator cue. The experiment is designed to test four fluoxetine treatments (0, 0.3, 3, and 30 ng/L) with and without the presence of whelk predator cues (+/-). In total there are 8 treatment types with 10 mussels per treatment, and 2 whelks per (+) treatment. Our facilities have limited space and holding tanks, so I decided to construct an experimental water table to house 800 mussels and 40 whelks that will be used in the experiment (Figure 1). This water table holds fresh water that is chilled at 12.5 °C, and has an air manifold that connects to each vessel housing mussels and whelks (n=80, 10 replicates per treatment).

IMG_2395

Figure 1. Experimental Water Table set up. Each vessel houses 10 mussels and is independent from the neighboring vessels.

The individual vessels are simply a 32 oz. wide mouth mason jars. This was a cost effective way to increase replication and ensure independence between replicates. To each fluoextine treatment jar we will add 0.75L of filtered saltwater and the appropriate volume of fluoxetine. In (+) predator cue jars, we cage the whelks in plastic 50mL perforated sample vials (Figure 2).

IMG_2397

Figure 2. Example of individual vessel. This treatment will be dosed with Fluoxetine to maintain a concentration of 0.3 ng/L and will include predator cues from 2 whelks.

We will be monitoring this experiment over the next few months. I will be inform you on our progress when it has completed. If you would like to follow my more frequent posts, please visit my new personal website: josephrpeters.weebly.com. Also, please comment here if you have have questions or suggestions about the experiment.

under: Uncategorized

PrinciplesBack in December, I posted a blog about how I think about and apply resilience to my research on hazards and the business community. From the high-level questions of “resilience of what” and “resilience to what,” this post will drill down into specific principles of resilience, and how they are applied to this topic.

The Stockholm Resilience Centre has developed seven resilience principles, which form the basis of my evaluation of economic resilience to hazards. Economic resilience to hazards is the ability of the local business community to handle natural hazards. By focusing in on how resilience principles can be applied to that specific intersection of stress and system, we can identify targeted ways to increase resilience and therefore reduce the vulnerability of the business community. This post will look at the first three resilience principles, and how they apply to the more narrow focus of economic resilience to hazards.

The first principle is “maintain diversity and redundancy.” Diversity helps because not all things are impacted in the same way by the same disruption when they have different qualities. Redundancy helps because functions are covered by multiple elements. If one system fails, the function is not completely lost; there are backups. From an economic resilience to hazards perspective, this becomes “support multiple types of businesses and back-up resources.” A community with different industries, locations and sizes of businesses can withstand hazards better. A community with multiple sources of power, water, and transportation options can get back on its feet sooner.

The second principle is “manage connectivity.” Connectivity is tricky, because you want enough connectivity for mutual support, but not such tight connections that breakdowns spill over. For economic resilience to hazards, this principle became “strengthen supportive networks.” By thinking about the networks that provide resources and support to businesses, we can focus on the connections that will serve businesses around hazards.

The third principle is “manage slow variables and feedbacks.” When systems change slowly, it can be hard to notice it happening, and even harder to determine the point at which the change is irreversible. Declining populations of fish or the pollution levels in a river are examples of this type of change. Another challenge is that there are infinite systems in our communities, and we cannot track all of them. This principle, when applied to economic resilience to hazards, became “identify and track areas of vulnerability.” By focusing on areas of vulnerability, the particular systems that businesses rely on, we are more likely to catch shifts that will have significant impact.

These three principles focus on the outcomes that resilience planning seeks to accomplish. The principles in my next post will focus on the process of pursuing those outcomes. Both are important in creating resilience.

under: Sarah Allison

Four years after the earthquake and tsunami in Japan, we still have a lot to learn as we prepare for a Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquake:

http://www.opb.org/news/article/four-years-later-japans-earthquake-still-offers-lessons-for-oregon/

under: Geoff Ostrove, Natural Resources Policy Fellow, Uncategorized

It took me a few tries, but I’m finally able to log in and post, so here is my first blog entry as a Sea Grant Scholar! With the legislative session underway, things are moving at an incredibly fast pace. I’m working out of Rep Caddy McKeown’s office as she’s chairing the Coastal Caucus this session. Before session started, the Rep hosted her two legislative staffers and I at her home in Coos Bay. We met with Port and city officials in the district, got a great tour of the area, admired the beautiful southern Oregon coast scenery, and ate the best smoked fish I’ve ever had.

Back in Salem, we hit the ground running. One of my primary focuses is helping craft an Oregon Shellfish Initiative aimed at enhancing opportunities for shellfish aquaculture, protecting wild shellfish habitat and commercial and recreational shellfish fisheries, and promoting research on ocean acidification. California and Washington have passed Shellfish Initiatives, so we’re able to look to those as templates, but Oregon has unique challenges, largely due to having much less available land for shellfish aquaculture. This initiative is bringing together industry, agencies, fisheries, and researchers to identify the best practices and priorities and is serving as a crash course in policy making for this biologist. And as a great admirer of the humble mollusk, I’m honored to be its champion. More updates to come. IMG_5797

under: Uncategorized

There are some moments in this fellowship that I feel particularly fortunate, particularly needing of a stern pinch to believe I do this for a living. In mid-January of this year, I experienced one of these moments. Between January 12th-14th intergovernmental ocean and coastal leaders from across the West Coast representing tribes, state, and federal agencies convened in Portland, Oregon for the first time to communicate ocean health priorities as an entire region.

The days began with the first in-person meeting of West Coast tribal, state, and federal representatives engaged in discussions around regional marine planning and the potential formation of a West Coast Regional Planning Body, an entity geared at implementing the National Ocean Policy through a region-wide marine planning dialog. An audience of a variety of stakeholders, including NGOs, were also present. My anticipation and excitement for the events ahead were high as I personally welcomed and registered attendees to the meeting. After dynamic conversation from members and comments from the audience, it was agreed that the group would move forward with pursuing the formation a Regional Planning Body on the West Coast in hopes of creating an effective forum around marine planning activities.

That same evening marked the beginning of a 2.5 day West Coast Ocean Summit (WCOS) convened by a collaborative planning team with support from the West Coast Governors Alliance on Ocean Health (WCGA).

Manning my note-taking station at the Ocean Summit

Manning my note-taking station at the Ocean Summit

The first WCOS brought together 150 leaders in total from West Coast tribes, representatives from the Governors’ offices of California, Oregon, and Washington and state and federal agencies to share ocean health priorities and discuss regional ocean coordination and collaboration opportunities. The objectives of the Summit were to develop a shared understanding of common priorities, document issues of mutual importance, create strategies for identifying opportunities for intergovernmental coordination and overcoming challenges, and develop mechanisms for ongoing dialogue among federal and state agencies and tribes in the region. The 2.5 days were filled with robust conversations about priorities and collaborative possibilities. I was a member of the WCOS planning team, and I also assisted during the WCOS with a variety of tasks as needed (including general coordination and note-taking for future reports). Attendees revealed their ocean health priorities, which included ocean acidification, climate change, and the sharing of information through such mechanisms as the West Coast Ocean Data Portal to name just a few. Perhaps the more powerful message communicated by the end of the WCOS was that in moving forward the tribes, state, and federal agencies all agreed that collaboration among these entities would be the most effective means of managing West Coast ocean resources. While nongovernmental organizations, the private sector, academia, and citizens are also key players, strong relationships among the “three sovereigns” — tribal, state, and federal governments — is an essential foundation for broader collaboration.”

While there are still obstacles to overcome and questions to answer, I personally found the respect and camaraderie I witnessed over the course of these 2 events to be a promising foundation for the collaborative efforts to come. As these efforts evolve, I hope we all think back to how a variety of leaders came together for these 3 incredible days in solidarity around ocean health. In the end, all of these entities are stewards of the ocean. That is why I am so passionate about this work, at the core of everyone in attendance for these 3 days is a person who truly wants to protect one of our regions greatest assets for current and future generations. That is a truth we can all agree on.

under: Uncategorized

DOGAMI recently released Yumei Wang’s analysis of how the Cascadia earthquake will impact hospitals and water systems. I suggest checking out the executive summary: http://public.health.oregon.gov/Preparedness/Prepare/Documents/oha-earthquake-risk-report-2014.pdf

The main takeaway for me: “Both pilot study hospitals have seismic vulnerabilities and are expected to incur significant hospital bed shortages for over 90 days after a Cascadia earthquake… Lincoln City hospital is estimated to incur significant damage due to its proximity to the Cascadia subduction zone and will slowly recover to operate at about 52% bed capacity in 90 days. A number of bridges that connect the community and hospital, including bridges crossing the Siletz River, are expected to incur major damage and impede citizen access to the hospital complex. Although the McMinnville hospital has modern seismic structural engineering, design, and construction, it is expected to have a severe reduction in function due to shaking damage. It is expected to recover to about 76% bed capacity in 90 days. A number of bridges that connect the community and hospital, including the Three Mile Lane bridge and nearby Highway 18 bridges to the west of hospital complex, are expected to incur major damage and impede citizen access.”

under: Geoff Ostrove, Natural Resources Policy Fellow, Uncategorized

At approximately 9 p.m. Pacific Standard Time on Jan. 26, 1700, a magnitude 8 or 9 earthquake occurred on the Cascadia Subduction Zone, a 600-mile stretch between Vancouver Island, British Columbia and Cape Mendocino, California. 315 years later, we are preparing for another Cascadia Subduction Zone event to occur.  Check out these OPB articles to learn more:

Can Coastal Communities Survive a Tsunami?

Japanese Earthquake Holds Lessons For Oregon Coast

Jan. 26, 1700: How Scientists Know When the Last Big Earthquake  Happened Here

Why Would You Build A Hospital In A Tsunami Zone?

under: Geoff Ostrove, Natural Resources Policy Fellow, Uncategorized

A Fleet of Meetings

Posted by: | January 6, 2015 | 2 Comments |

How do you talk about issues like ocean acidification and habitat preservation and changing land use patterns? Where do you even start? Having now coordinated two such meetings, I can answer that question: Start with a working coffee machine. At the first of these meetings, the snazzy built-in coffee machine provided by the meeting place malfunctioned and flooded so we had to abandon the idea of making a pot of coffee– and the look on people’s faces as they tried to get coffee out of an empty pot can only be described as “crestfallen.” But eventually we got it working, and the meeting took off from there. That first day our topic was water quality issues. During the second meeting, we tackled the larger and somewhat more amorphous category of “habitat” issues.

Why were we meeting at all? As an Oregon Sea Grant Natural Resources Policy Fellow placed at the Tillamook Estuaries Partnership for a year, it is my job to coordinate the revision of the organization’s Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan, or CCMP. The original CCMP came out in 1999, and devotes a chapter each to habitat, water quality, erosion and sedimentation, flooding, citizen involvement, and monitoring. These early meetings are a way to meet with many of the agencies we partner with and get a sense of the issues they feel are most pressing; what they feel has changed since the original CCMP was written; and how these evolving policies can best be implemented.

It’s very satisfying to get twenty people in a room—a feat in itself because of so many busy schedules—and talking about these big issues and the long-term plans for addressing them. For me, this experience has really driven home how important it is to, well, talk to people. Reading and solo research is important, but nothing can quite substitute for the understanding that comes from conversing with the players who have been involved with the issue at hand for two, five, ten years. In fact, some of the meeting participants were involved in the drafting of the original plan back in the mid-90’s. Because they were starting from scratch, that process was much more intense. The people involved met every week for five years.

For the revision, we’re condensing that time frame. We’ll be holding another couple of meetings in February to narrow down and clarify the brainstorming list produced by the first meetings, and then we’ll be holding public information sessions in March to present a rough draft of the management plan and ask for input from the community. In early May, my time at TEP ends. I may not leave with the plan finalized, but I do think I’ll be able to produce a solid rough draft or outline at the very least before I leave TEP. Certainly I’ll leave with a better understanding of the process of planning an organization’s future and a knack for jury-rigging reluctant coffee machines.

under: Natural Resources Policy Fellow, Rose Rimler, Uncategorized

December 18 marked the end of a 90-day exposure study. During this time, we exposed the mussel Mytilus Californianus to regular doses of the drug, Fluoxetine which is the active ingredient in Prozac, a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressant. For this project, we wanted to determine if environmentally relevant levels of fluoxetine affect the mussels’ biological functions, namely their ability to grow and clear algae from the water column. We set up the experiment with different exposure levels to cover a spectrum of concentrations measured in water samples worldwide.  We wondered if the higher exposure levels would cause more disruption to the biological functions we were measuring. We were most interested in whether fluoxetine affects the mussels ability to clear algae from the water. The reason is because this important function, when magnified across an area of mussel bed, has been shown to be an important ecosystem service. While mussels are an important fishery on their own, some might argue that their role in the rocky intertidal community far exceeds their value as seafood. Since mussels are sessile filter-feeders they filter the water of algae, excess nutrients, and frankly anything in the water that passes by their gills. This makes them highly vulnerable to contamination from toxins in the environment. As other organisms consume mussels (e.g. sea stars and whelks) any contaminant stored in their tissues could accumulate in the tissues in higher trophic organisms. Run off that contain the chemical residues of pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) could affect marine life dramatically, and warrants more intensive study.

While there are numerous studies that show negative effects of PPCPs on aquatic organisms, they are mostly acute toxicity studies lasting only 7-10 days. Very few have done chronic exposure trials lasting longer than 30 days, and even fewer have looked at marine organisms. We wanted our study to mimic how fluoxetine could be persistent in the rocky intertidal environment. Often contaminants enter the coast through ‘pulse’ events, where rain drives more run-off and the compounds are essentially ‘flushed’ into estuaries and neighboring nearshore communities. We housed our mussels in tanks and dosed the mussels with fluoxetine every 10 days, to mimic these pulse events rather than constant exposure at the same concentration. We coordinated our measurements around the days we dosed the tanks. We measured mussel clearance rates using a Coulter Cell Counter. This involved feeding the mussels and taking water samples just after feeding and another sample 3 hours after the first sample was taken. The cell counter allowed us to process each water sample in under 15 seconds, which was terrific given that each algal sample day yielded 60 samples that needed immediate processing! We also measured growth by taking the length and width of each mussels every 30 days. While not as exciting as algal clearance rates, we wanted this baseline data to see if this fluoxetine could affect mussel growth. On days 30, 60, and 90 we harvested mussels to save their tissues for additional biological and chemical analyses.  We were interested in how mussels body condition might be affected, so we compared the biomass of tissues necessary for the gonadosomatic index.

Currently, we are in the beginning stages of another experiment that will assess how mussels ability to induce defenses (e.g. thicker shells) in response to predator cues may be affected by the presence of fluoxetine in the water. This experiment should be finished in April or May. Also, our undergraduate student Dylan Dayrit who has been assisting with sample processing throughout the course of this experiment, is currently developing his Honors Thesis to determine the concentrations of fluoxetine in the mussel tissues. This is a big undertaking because we currently have 500 frozen mussels to process. We feel that this information could be very important in determining how much of the fluoxetine in water is taken into the mussels tissues.

I will be filling you in on the findings of this first experiment in the next post.

Have a good new year!

Joey

under: Uncategorized

SRGP Awards Announced

Posted by: | December 29, 2014 | 1 Comment |

For this round, the SRGP has awarded 22 emergency service buildings a total of $13.4 million and 13 public schools a total of $14.7 million.  Complete lists of these awards are attached here (School Award List Names and Amounts & Emergency Service Buildings Awards), along with a press release from Oregon’s Senate President Peter Courtney(PR-seismicgrantawards).

under: Geoff Ostrove, Natural Resources Policy Fellow, Uncategorized

Older Posts »

Categories