Evaluation of caging designs and a fingernail clam for use in an in situ bioassay

Two cage designs and fingernail clams(Sphaerium fabale) were evaluated for theirsuitability for use in in situ bioassays toassess the ecological condition of a stream andpredict ecological recovery potential. One design(referred to as tray design) was a modified plastictray about one-fourth full of small gravels andcovered with 1 mm fiberglass mesh. The second design(referred to as tube-plates) consisted of shortplexiglass tubes about one-third full of small gravelsand attached horizontally to a plexiglass plate. Oneend of each tube faced into the current; both endswere covered with mesh. Cages containing clams weredeployed at reference and impacted (test) sites forperiods of 70 to 135 d. Growth and survival were theprimary endpoints evaluated, but the tube-platesallowed isolation of individual clams so that natalityalso could be evaluated as an endpoint. Results ofbenthic macroinvertebrate surveys, performed foranother study, were included to help validate bioassayresults. Both cage designs yielded good quantitative,site-specific results for clam survival and growth;results for natality, though, were less conclusive. Clam survival and growth results were in good generalagreement with the results for the benthicmacroinvertebrate community surveys. At a site wherethe macroinvertebrate community was the mostdepauperate, clam mortality was always rapid. At asite where the condition of the macroinvertebratecommunity was only slightly less impacted than themost impacted site, clam growth was almost alwayssignificantly lower than at reference sites. Survivalof clams was significantly reduced in <25 d at thissite in some trials, but in other trials there waslittle mortality. At a minimally impacted site, clamsurvival was similar to that found at reference sites,and differences in clam growth were not detectableuntil after 40 to 50 d of exposure. The tube-platedesign was easier to use, allowed more flexibility inselection of response parameters, and required lesshandling time of test animals, thus, this was thepreferred design. Our results demonstrated thateither in situ bioassay design can be used toaugment monitoring and assessment programs. Their useas a predictor of ecological recovery, however,requires further evaluation.