Ecosystem services are generally defined as benefits that humans derive from nature, and though human reliance on nature is timeless, the scientific study of these services has become part of mainstream ecology only in the last two decades. From the mid-19th to the mid-20th Centuries, freshwater mussel populations in North America (Unionida) were valued and exploited for their material uses in the pearling and button-making industries. However, the depletion of mussel populations through exploitation, habitat destruction, and water quality degradation reduced their availability, utility, and visibility to human communities, leaving native mussels largely forgotten by most people. However, freshwater mussel populations and human populations are inextricably linked through their mutual dependence on water. Several modern studies have revealed that freshwater mussels perform a host of functions that are integral to maintaining surface water quality and keeping rivers and lakes properly functioning as ecosystems. These functions provide important ecosystem services related to maintaining water quality for human uses, but the capacity of mussels to contribute appropriately to ecosystem functioning and services is hampered because a majority of mussel populations are declining or imperiled. Furthermore, most aquatic species are not readily perceived by the public, and people may not realize their relevance in regulating waterways for human use and well-being. One area of ecosystem services research that has been underexplored is the role of native mussels in reducing aquatic pollution. Thus, I sought to advance the knowledge on ecosystem services of freshwater mussels from a contaminants perspective at both organismal and population scales, and I further explored human perceptions of floral and faunal influences on water quality.
First, I explored the feasibility of using existing data on mussel populations along with tissue concentrations of pollutants to estimate population-level pollutant sequestration as a potential ecosystem service. I investigated three scenarios that were selected based on my direct access to the rare resource of tissue contaminant data from mussels collected in the wild, and the availability of population estimates at these sites from the literature or from colleagues. These scenarios included Upper Mississippi River navigation pools, the Upper Neuse River watershed (North Carolina), and a polluted compared to a healthy mussel site in the Clinch River (Virginia and Tennessee). These scenarios represented a range of spatial scales, from wadeable streams to large river systems; contaminant datasets from metals to organic contaminants; mussel population sizes from tens of thousands to hundreds of millions; and population estimates based on data types that ranged from qualitative techniques (e.g., visual search of mussels) to robust, quantitative techniques (e.g., systematic sampling). Estimates of contaminant sequestration differed based on spatial scale, population size, and the kind of contaminant under consideration. We estimated that mussels in two navigation pools of the Upper Mississippi River sequestered approximately 15.6 tons of metals; mussels in the Upper Neuse River watershed sequestered between 2.4 and 5.8 billion ng of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs); and Clinch River mussels at the polluted Pendleton Island site sequestered 24.2 billion ng of PAHs compared to 210 billion ng of PAHs sequestered by mussels at the healthier sites outside a mussel zone of decline – 10X greater capacity despite having much lower tissue concentrations. Estimating population-level sequestration by mussels using existing data varied in difficulty, from straightforward to highly conditional, based on the types of available population data. These efforts offer a proof-of-concept demonstration of the magnitude of pollution mussels are filtering out of the environment through their incidental exposure to contaminants. My findings suggest that contaminant sequestration may be interpreted as an ecosystem service, but mussels will only be able to remove contaminants so long as aquatic ecosystems are healthy enough to support their persistence.
After exploring population-level contaminant sequestration, I then addressed a central question in the discourse of contaminant related ecosystem services among mussel biologists: what happens to contaminants after mussels ingest them? Though there is scientific understanding that contaminants collect in soft tissue, as they do for humans and other exposed organisms, one area of research that has not been explored is the role of mussels in ecological partitioning of pollutants. I conducted 28-d laboratory experiments exposing mussels to environmentally relevant concentrations of Ni (0 to 100 µg/L) and Cd (0 to 2 µg/L) – two toxic heavy metals of both human and environmental health concern – to answer the following questions: what percentage of metals do mussels remove from water; how much is sequestered in soft tissue; how much is egested in biodeposits; how are filtration rates affected by metal exposure; and finally, how are these estimates affected by metal concentration or exposure duration? Mussels removed up to 36% of waterborne Ni and up to 77% of waterborne Cd and they sequestered metals in their soft tissue. Mussels also bound and bioconcentrated metals in egested biodeposits (e.g., feces). Ni concentrations in biodeposits were 2 to 7X higher than exposure concentrations, and Cd concentrations in biodeposits were 7 to 40X higher than Cd in the exposure water. These pollutant-processing functions fluctuated significantly within the environmentally relevant ranges of Ni and Cd concentrations over the course of 28-d exposures. Fluctuations in functional processing manifested differently for Ni and Cd. Mussels were more efficient at processing Ni at lower concentrations (i.e., when exposed to less pollution), while the duration of exposure was an important factor for Cd processing; these trends generally held for each metal even when mussels were exposed to both Ni and Cd. Moreover, this ability of mussels to influence the environmental fate and transport of metals was in turn affected by the metal concentrations to which they were exposed, suggesting that pollution may impede other beneficial ecosystem services that mussels provide. Ni exposure significantly reduced mussel filtration capacity at concentrations higher than 5 µg Ni/L. Filtration rates of mussels exposed to Cd were significantly reduced in the first two weeks of exposure compared to the last two weeks, but Cd concentration had no effect. Filtration rates of mussels under the stress of both metals were affected by metal concentration and exposure duration, suggesting an additive effect of the two pollutants. This work demonstrates the active role of mussels in environmental fate and transport of toxic heavy metals in aquatic ecosystems, and that pollution negatively affects freshwater mussel filtration and the ecosystem services they provide.
Finally, I engaged with local communities to investigate public perceptions of water quality’s mediating factors. Though aquatic species are integral to ecosystem functioning and maintenance of water quality, most are not readily perceivable by the public, and people may not realize the relevance of these ecosystem components in regulating healthy waterways for human use and well-being. It is imperative to capture how these resources are valued by communities because improved understanding of community values is a critical component of promoting effective watershed management. Social science research methods are increasingly employed to investigate public understanding and beliefs about conservation and natural resource issues. A first step in understanding the community valuation of ecosystem services related to water quality is investigating public perceptions of water quality’s mediating factors. Thus, I engaged 57 residents of central and eastern North Carolina in six focused small group discussions, using a series of photographs of plants and animals, including freshwater mussels, to examine communities’ beliefs about whether and how those flora and fauna relate to maintenance of water quality. Several prevailing themes emerged from the focus group discussions, including positive effects that flora and fauna have on water quality, dualistic “good and bad” or negative impacts, flora and fauna as indicators of water quality, and balance in nature. Participants also expressed uncertainty at times, and we identified a number of misconceptions about flora and fauna. Participants also offered some comments on impacts to water quality by humans, and the photographs sparked some commentary about connections to values or well-being related to waterways and water quality. Participants regularly relied on their prior experiences to explain their understanding of factors affecting water quality. Findings from these focus group discussions provide baseline understanding of public beliefs and knowledge of ecosystem functioning related to water quality. Participants identified several effects that flora and fauna have on water quality, including ecosystem functions that provide essential ecosystem services (e.g., regulating services, such as water purification through filtering and cleaning, and provision of habitat for aquatic species). These findings suggest an encouraging congruence of public beliefs with expert science, offering some common ground, similar language, and opportunities for connecting with communities on important issues that highlight or threaten ecosystem functioning and resulting ecosystem services that link environmental and human well-being.
**Available at: https://www.lib.ncsu.edu/resolver/1840.20/37311**