Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Application of hydrogeophysical techniques to study the distribution of a burrowing crayfish in a wetland

Abstract

Crayfish are important in wetland systems because of their function in soil nutrient turnover. Since many crayfishes are imperiled by anthropogenic activities, it is important to understand factors that are associated with their distribution within and among wetlands. This study investigated the soil and hydrogeological characteristics of a wetland and related them to the spatial distribution of crayfish burrows found within it. The study utilized field-collected soil cores, electrical resistivity, and ground penetrating radar to map subsurface characteristics at Bartram Forest, Baldwin County, Georgia. Wetland delineation was also conducted in the field to establish the wetland boundaries. Both 2D and 3D geophysical profiles were created. Soils samples were analyzed for grain size distribution, porosity, and hydraulic conductivity in the lab. Hydraulic conductivity of the wetland soils was also determined in the field using slug tests. Results show subsurface physical differences between crayfish inhabited zones of the wetland and those that do not have crayfish burrows.The Ambiguous Crayfish, Cambarus striatus was found in soils with a hydraulic conductivity of 0.01–0.4 m/day where soils outside of their colony boundary had a hydraulic conductivity of 0.4–1.2 m/day. Areas where C. striatus were located had a higher porosity (0.36) than areas without crayfish (0.26). Subsurface stratigraphy varied between the areas with and without burrows. C. striatus was found to live in a subsurface with relatively gradual stratigraphical boundaries when compared to surrounding areas.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

References

  1. Belaval M, Lane JW, Lesmes DP, Kineke GC (2003) Continuous-resistivity profiling from coastal ground-water investigations: three case studies. In: Proceedings Denver, Colorado, Environmental and Engineering Geophysics Society. Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems (SAGEEP). April 6–10, 2003. San Antonio, Texas, CD-ROM. 14

  2. Bouchard RW (1978) Taxonomy, ecology and phylogeny of the subgenus Depressicambarus, with the description of a new species from Florida and redescriptions of Cambarus graysoni, Cambarus latimanus and Cambarus striatus (Decapoda: Cambaridae). Bull Ala Mus Nat Hist 3(1):27–29

  3. Bouwer H, Rice RC (1976) A slug test method for determining hydraulic conductivity of unconfined aquifers with completely or partially penetrating wells. Water Resour Res 12(3):423–428

  4. Camp MA, Skelton CE, Zehnder CB (2011) Population dynamics and life-history characteristics of the Ambiguous Crayfish (Cambarus striatus). Freshw Crayfish 18(1):75–83

  5. Cunningham KJ, Locker SD, Hine AC, Bukry D, Barron JA, Guertin LA (2001) Surface-geophysical characterization of groundwater systems of the Caloosahatchee River Basin, Southern Florida. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 01-4084

  6. Dodds WK, Evans-White MA, Gerlanc NM, Gray L, Gudder DA, Kemp MJ, Lopez AL, Stagliano D, Strauss EA, Tank JL, Whiles MR, Wollheim WM (2000) Quantification of the nitrogen cycle in a prairie stream. Ecosystems 3:574–589

  7. ESRI (2014) Digital globe raster. http://goto.arcgisonline.com/maps/World_Imagery

  8. Georgia Department of Natural Resources (2003) DNR Basins. Georgia GIS Clearinghouse. Unpublished Materials. https://data.georgiaspatial.org/

  9. Gómez-Ortiz D, Martín-Crespo T, Martín-Velázquez S, Martínez-Pagán P, Higueras H, Manzano M (2010) Application of ground penetrating radar (GPR) to delineate clay layers in wetlands. A case study in the Soto Grande and Soto Chico watercourses, Doñana (SW Spain). J Appl Geophys 72(2):107–113

  10. Grow L, Merchant H (1980) The burrow habitat of the crayfish Cambarus diogenes diogenes (Girard). Am Midl Nat 103(2):231–237

  11. GSSI (2009) SIR 3000 Manual: http://www.uvm.edu/~lewebb/CCLI/Manuals/MN72433J1%20SIR-3000%20Operation%20Manual.pdf

  12. GSSI (2012) Radan 7 Manual. http://www.uvm.edu/~lewebb/CCLI/Manuals/Radan7UserManual.pdf

  13. Hobbs HH Jr (1981) The crayfishes of Georgia. Smithson Contrib Zool 318:1–549

  14. Hobbs HH Jr (1988) Crayfish distribution, adaptive radiation, and evolution. In: Holdich DM, Lowery RS (eds) Freshwater crayfish: biology, management, and exploitation. Timber press, Portland, pp 52–82

  15. L & R Instruments (2010) MiniRes Manual. http://www.landrinstruments.com/home/ultra-minires/additional-information-1

  16. Lodge DM, Taylor CA, Holdich DM, Skurdal J (2000) Nonindigenous crayfishes threaten North American freshwater biodiversity: lesson from Europe. Fisheries 25(8):7–20

  17. Loke MH (2001) Tutorial: 2-D and 3-D electrical imaging surveys. www.geoelectrical.com. Accessed 10 Mar 2012

  18. Musgrave H, Binley A (2011) Revealing the temporal dynamics of subsurface temperature in a wetland using time-lapse geophysics. J Hydrol 396(3–4):258–266

  19. Mutiti S, Levy J, Mutiti C, Gaturu NS (2010) Assessing ground water development potential using Landsat Imagery. Ground Water 48(2):295–305

  20. Reynolds JM (1997) An introduction to applied and environmental geophysics. Wiley, Chichester

  21. Slater L, Reeve A (2002) Investigating peatland stratigraphy and hydrogeology using integrated electrical geophysics. Geophysics 67(2):365–378

  22. Stoeckel J, Helms BS, Cash E (2011) Evaluation of a crayfish burrowing chamber design with simulated groundwater flow. J Crustac Biol 31(1):50–58

  23. Taylor CA, Schuster GA, Cooper JE, DiStefano RJ, Eversole AG, Hamr P, Hobbs HH III, Robison HW, Skelton CE, Thoma RF (2007) Distribution and conservation status of crayfishes of the United States and Canada after 10 + years of increased awareness. Fisheries 32(8):372–389

  24. USDA (1972) Soil survey of Baldwin, Jones, and Putnam counties, Georgia. University of Georgia, College of Agriculture Experiment Stations, Athens

  25. USEPA (1993) Use of Airborne, surface, borehole geophysical techniques at contaminated sites. (R-92). Eastern Research Group, Lexington

  26. Welch SM, Eversole AG (2006) The occurrence of primary burrowing crayfish in terrestrial habitat. Biol Conserv 130(3):459–464

  27. Wojnar JA, Mutiti S, Levy J (2013) Assessment of geophysical surveys as a tool to estimate riverbed hydraulic conductivity. J Hydrol 482:40–45

  28. Wu M, Kalma D, Treadwell-Steitz C (2014) Differential assessment of designations of wetland status using two delineation methods. Environ Manag 54:23–29

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Georgia College & State University, The College of Arts and Sciences, and the Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences for partial funding of this project. The authors would like to acknowledge Christine Mutiti, Brady Bennett, Matthew Sweat, Houston Chandler, John Rigdon, Judson Pittman, Clay Windsor, Brent Jones, Tyler Mattix, and Taylor Upole for their assistance with field work and data collection.

Author information

Correspondence to Sarah C. Sweat.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sweat, S.C., Mutiti, S. & Skelton, C.E. Application of hydrogeophysical techniques to study the distribution of a burrowing crayfish in a wetland. Wetlands Ecol Manage 25, 149–158 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-016-9525-8

Download citation

Keywords

  • Crayfish
  • Geophysics
  • Hydrogeology
  • Wetland