Search for: All records

Among biocollections, mollusks are a particularly powerful resource for a wide range of studies, including biogeography, conservation, ecology, environmental monitoring, evolutionary biology, and systematics. U.S. mollusk collections are housed in stand-alone natural history museums, at universities, and in a variety of governmental and non-governmental institutions. Differing in their histories, specializations, and uses, they share common needs for long-term development, and collectively contribute to biodiversity knowledge at regional, national, and global scales. Commitment by dedicated staff, collectors, and volunteers, institutional investments, philanthropy, and governmental funding have built and maintained these collections and their support infrastructure. Efforts by the North American malacological collection community since the early 1970s led to coordination in database design but left the data isolated in individual institutions. Collection digitization developed through a combination of individual/institutional initiatives and federally supported projects funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS). Advances in digital technology enabled the shift toward nationally and globally unified collections. Networking and collaboration were greatly accelerated by NSF’s Advancing Digitization of Biodiversity Collections (ADBC) program, which created a central coordinating organization (iDigBio) and funded Thematic Collections Network (TCN) projects. One such TCN was developed to mobilize nearly 90% of the known U.S. museum-collections-based data of the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf coasts (Mobilizing Millions of Marine Mollusks of the Eastern Seaboard—ESB). The project, involving 16 museum collections (plus the Smithsonian Institution as federal partner), combines data from approximately 4.5 million specimens collected from the ESB region and makes them available to the TCN portal InvertEBase and other aggregators such as iDigBio and GBIF. In addition to fostering community and expanding the corpus of available digitized mollusk records through new data entry and georeferencing (GEOLocate, CoGe) and standardizing taxonomy, the project drove key innovations for the invertebrate collections community. For instance, it worked with the Biodiversity Information Standards (TDWG) group to create a new Darwin Core standard term, “Vitality”, expanded GEOLocate to support complex geospatial types, integrated global elevation and bathymetric datasets directly into georeferencing workflow, and developed various education and outreach public outreach products. Synthesizing from the 15 following articles with individual histories of ESB-participating mollusk collections, several topics are discussed—such as what defines a “good” mollusk collection in the digital age and the importance of federal support for this national resource. 

Abstract Framework‐building corals create the three‐dimensional structure of coral reefs and are subject to predation from fishes, echinoderms, and gastropods. Anthropogenic stressors can magnify the effects of such top‐down pressure on foundation species. The gastropodCoralliophilaviolacea(Kiener, 1836) depletes coral energy reserves via predation, potentially increasing coral susceptibility to land‐based pollution (i.e., sediment accumulation and nutrient pollution). We hypothesized that sedimentation would worsen coral mortality, while nutrient enrichment would mitigate the harmful effects of sediment and predation on coral mortality by increasing the densities of algal symbionts. To test these hypotheses, we conducted in situ surveys of the fringing reefs in Mo'orea, French Polynesia to explore the relationships among massivePoritesspp. cover,C. violaceadensities, and sediment accumulation on coral colonies across low and high nutrient sites. We also conducted a factorial field experiment to test the interactions among these stressors on coral tissue mortality, symbiont densities, and chlorophyll. MassivePoritescolonies at higher nutrient sites hadC. violaceadensities 13 times higher than at low nutrient sites but there was no difference in the amount of live tissue on coral colonies with or without snails among these sites. In our experiment, there were interactions between predation and nutrients as well as nutrients and sediment that impacted coral mortality. Sedimentation and predation byC. violaceaincreased coral tissue mortality independently by ~20%. Nutrient enrichment reduced this effect in corals under sedimentation or predation pressure by lowering coral tissue mortality by 18% and increasing algal symbiont densities by ~28%. Our results indicate that sediment does not magnify top‐down pressure on this coral, and that moderate nutrient enrichment may interact with predation in complex, unexpected ways to alter the responses of corals to top‐down pressure.