Collection Data

Page Contents: Section | Significance | Background | Location & Dates | Taxonomic Contents | Documentation | Description of Collection | Collection Inventory | Collection Assets | Specimen Condition | Container Condition | Label Condition | Label Content | Level of Taxonomic Identification

San Francisco Bay Invasive Species Study 2010

Section Responsible for Processing (Top)

MBC

Significance (Top)

The California Department of Fish & Game is required by state law to conduct investigations to assess the presence of non-native aquatic species. From 2004 to 2007 they funded several large scale biodiversity surveys along the outer coast (2004 & 2007), San Francisco Bay (2005), and bays & harbors (2006). Stations along the outer coast were selected for access to both sandy & rocky intertidal & subtidal areas while the other two surveys focused on subtidal fouling on hard substrates & adjacent subtidal benthic habitat. Data resulting from the studies has been incorporated into the USFWS's California Aquatic Non-native Organism Database (CANOD), NOAA/USGS's Pacific Coast Ecosystem Information System (PCEIS), and SERC's National Exotic Marine Estuarine Species Information System (NEMESIS).Background. This particular set of samples comes from a second survey of San Francisco Bay and consist of the polychaetes from station replicates identified by Dot Norris.

Background (Top)

The work was overseen by Ashleigh Lyman and Zea Walton at Moss Landing Marine Laboratories. Each taxonomist was required to provide 2 voucher lots of each taxon they identified in 2005 and 2010. Vouchers from 2005 have already been deposited at LACM. These are bulk samples (material identified & then returned to the original vial)

Collection Location and Dates (Top)

53 stations throughout the greater San Francisco Bay were visited. Specific subareas of the bay were New York Point, Suisan Bay, San Pablo Bay, Central San Francisco Bay, and South San Francisco Bay. Collecting was done from May to July 2010.

Taxonomic Contents (Top)

All specimens are polychaetes.

Documentation (Top)

Excel spreadsheet received from Moss Langing Labs is available here.

Description of Collection (Top)

Wet preserved collection. The specimens were fixed in 10% formalin-seawater, briefly rinsed in fresh water, then transferred to 70% ethanol.

Collection Inventory (Top)

133 vials or jars.

Collection Assets (Top)

Date Click to View Image Information
10/05/2011 View [63.0 kB] Raw data from Moss Landing.

Specimen Condition (Top)

Date 4: New alcohol needed immediately (specimens will otherwise be irreparably damaged) 3: Containers need to be 'topped off' 2: New alcohol needed within next 6-12 months 1: No curation needed at present
10/05/2011 0% 0% 0% 100%
Alcohol topped-off in all containers.

Container Condition (Top)

Date 4: Immediate short-term (less than 5 years) storage container replacement needed. Present containers are inadequate. Curate in the short-term with plastic buckets, whirltop bags, or similar. 3: Specimens contained in museum-grade long-term (greater than 5 years) storage containers. Jars need new closures (e.g. replace Bakelite and metal lids). 2: Transfer to museum-grade long-term storage containers. Replace or transfer to new jars and glass vials, replace cotton and closures. 1: Containers are museum-grade and meet highest curation standards.
10/05/2011 0% 100% 0% 0%

Label Condition (Top)

Date 4: New labels needed immediately (original labels in poor condition, paper torn/worn, legibility poor). 3: New labels needed within next 1-2 years (original labels beginning to wear, pencil writing fading, low quality paper was used). 2: New labels needed are as a result of curation and accretion of collection. 1: No new labels needed at present.
10/05/2011 100% 0% 0% 0%

Label Content (Top)

Date 2: New label or additional label needed because original label data is incomplete and supporting documentation provides additional collection data which greately enhances significance and value of each lot. 1: Label content complete. All collection data are contained on label.
10/05/2011 100% 0%

Level of Taxonomic Identification (Top)

Date 7: Not identified 6: Phylum 5: Class 4: Order 3: Family 2: Genus 1: Species
10/05/2011 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%
All material was identified but only vouchers were separated from the bulk samples. Material needs to be eventually re-separated for maximum value. L. Harris has a spreadsheet of identifications for each station replicate.