Starfish die off in the NW Pacific

[RobertEarl]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by cyberswede (a host of the Editorials & Other Articles group).

We've all heard about how the starfish have been dying in the waters in the NW Pacific Ocean. Divers claim to have seen them melt away right before their eyes. Melting is what happens when a starfish dies. So what is making the starfish die? No one seems to know. So I have done a bit of research and in the following posts will share that research with you.

In summary, starfish are known to be an umbrella specie. That means that if the starfish were to go extinct, many other species that are dependent on starfish would also be in danger. Starfish are fairly unique in that they can regenerate parts of their bodies. How they do that is not exactly clear. But in that sense they are very special.

Starfish eat many things. Mostly bottom dwelling things. Like mussels. It has been discovered that if starfish are removed from some locations, mussel populations explode. In one report linked below, it has been discovered that mussels near Alaska have very high concentrations of radioisotopes. The starfish eat these mussels and the radioisotopes then are in the starfish. Known as moving up the food chain.

How do mussels get the plutonium in them? Mussels are filter feeders. Mussels feed by filtering water and taking suspended solids from that water. Plutonium, and other heavy metals drift to the bottom where the mussels are, and the mussels, in their feeding, filter out the plutonium which ends up in the mussel's meat which the starfish eat.

Conclusion: Atmospheric deposition of radioisotopes from Fukushima is established. Plutonium from Fukushima has been found in mussels in the NW Pacific. Starfish eat mussels. Starfish are dying and causing researchers great alarm. It is possible that plutonium is killing the starfish.

[RobertEarl]

1. Department of Energy report of sampling finds Fukushima deposition

In this report from the DOE, US government, it is described why they test for radioisotopes, where they test, when they test and some test findings. Note the bolded listing for plutonium found in the mussels that were tested. This finding confirms the idea that plutonium can be passed up the food chain to the starfish.
*********************

US Gov’t: Alaska island “appears to show impacts from Fukushima” — “Significant cesium isotope signature” detected — Scientists anticipate more marine life to be impacted as ocean plume arrives

http://enenews.com/us-govt-headline-alaska-island-appears-to-show-impacts-from-fukushima-significant-cesium-isotope-signature-detected-video


Department of Energy: Biological Monitoring at Amchitka Appears to Show Impacts from Fukushima Dai-ichi Incident.

The U.S. Department of Energy Office Legacy Management (LM) has a long-term stewardship mission to protect human health and the environment from the legacy of underground nuclear testing conducted at Amchitka Island, Alaska, from 1965 to 1971. Atmospheric monitoring in the United States showed elevated cesium activities shortly after the nuclear incident. LM scientists anticipated that atmospheric transport of cesium would potentially increase the cesium activities in the 2011 biological samples collected near Amchitka. Because cesium-134 has a relatively short half-life of 2 years and indicates leakage from a nuclear reactor, it is a clear indicator of a recent nuclear accident.

Because the Amchitka 2011 sampling event occurred soon after the Fukushima nuclear accident, the biota impacted by atmospheric precipitation showed the greatest impact (e.g., species that live in freshwater or shallow ocean waters) when compared to marine biota living in deeper water. This is because ocean currents are a slower transport process than wind currents. LM scientists anticipate that the marine biota will show the impacts of Fukushima during the next sampling event, currently scheduled to occur in 2016.

* Plutonium-239 — .039 pCi/kg Dolly Varden
* Plutonium-239 — .186 pCi/kg Goose Egg no shell
* Plutonium-239 — .104 pCi/kg Gull egg
* Plutonium-239 — .298 pCi/kg Chiton
* Plutonium-239 — .093 pCi/kg Dragon Kelp
* Plutonium-239 — .084 pCi/kg Rockweed
* Plutonium-239 — .379 pCi/kg Greeling
* Plutonium-239 — .038 pCi/kg Halibut
* Plutonium-239 — 4.194 pCi/kg Horse Mussel tissue
* Plutonium-239 — .378 pCi/kg Irish Lord
* Plutonium-239 — .036 pCi/kg Octopus
* Plutonium-239 — .05 pCi/kg Pacific Cod
* Plutonium-239 — .279 pCi/kg Rockfish
* Plutonium-239 — .152 pCi/kg Reindeer Lichen
* Plutonium-239 — .195 pCi/kg Sea Urchin

[FBaggins]

5. What makes you think that any of the plutonium is from Fukushima?

The levels are no higher than they were in readings there from 2004.

As you've been told several times... we used to set off nuclear bombs in the Pacific - releasing tons (not milligrams) of Plutonium. Plutonium has a half-life in the tens of thousands of years... so virtually all of that release is still around.

[RobertEarl]

2. Other starfish facts

***************
Diet of the starfish >> source wikipedia

Most species are generalist predators, eating microalgae, sponges, bivalves, snails and other small animals.[26][57] Some species are detritivores, eating decomposing organic material and faecal matter.[57][58] The crown-of-thorns starfish consumes coral polyps.[59] The processes of feeding and capture may be aided by special parts; Pisaster brevispinus, the short-spined pisaster from the West Coast of America, can use a set of specialized tube feet to dig itself deep into the soft substrate to extract prey (usually clams).[60] Grasping the shellfish, the starfish slowly pries open the prey's shell by wearing out its adductor muscle, and then inserts its everted stomach into the crack to digest the soft tissues. The gap between the valves need only be a fraction of a millimetre wide for the stomach to gain entry.[19]


*****************
Ecological impact of starfish >>>> source whikipedia

Starfish devouring mussel
Pisaster ochraceus consuming a mussel in central California

Starfish are keystone species in their respective marine communities. Their relatively large sizes, diverse diets and ability to adapt to different environments makes them ecologically important.[61] The term "keystone species" was in fact first used by Robert Paine in 1966 to describe a starfish, Pisaster ochraceus.[62] When studying the low intertidal coasts of Washington state, Paine found that predation by P. ochraceus was a major factor in the diversity of species. Experimental removals of this top predator from a stretch of shoreline resulted in lower species diversity and the eventual domination of Mytilus mussels, which were able to outcompete other organisms for space and resources.[63] Similar results were found in a 1971 study of Stichaster australis on the intertidal coast of the South Island of New Zealand. S. australis was found to have removed most of a batch of transplanted mussels within two or three months of their placement, while in an area from which S. australis had been removed, the mussels increased in number dramatically, overwhelming the area and threatening biodiversity.[64]



Survival of ocean warming and ph change for mussels

A 2009 study found that P. ochraceus is unlikely to be affected by ocean acidification as severely as other marine animals with calcareous skeletons. In other groups, structures made of calcium carbonate are vulnerable to dissolution when the pH is lowered. Researchers found that when P. ochraceus were exposed to 21 °C (70 °F) and 770 ppm carbon dioxide (beyond rises expected in the next century), they were relatively unaffected. Their survivability is likely due to the nodular nature of their skeletons, which are able to compensate for a shortage of carbonate by growing more fleshy tissue.[81]



*****

Links and other sources

Lead Researcher: Fukushima pollution may be causing sea star epidemic on West Coast — Sea urchins, sea cucumbers also affected — “Something’s making them susceptible”… “It’s unlike anything we’ve seen”… “Populations go locally extinct overnight, literally”
http://enenews.com/lead-researcher-fukushima-pollution-a-cause-of-epidemic-wiping-out-starfish-along-west-coast-sea-urchins-and-sea-cucumbers-also-affected-something-is-making-them-susceptible-infection-it

Experts: Fukushima can’t be excluded as factor in sea stars turning to goo along West Coast; It hasn’t been ruled out — They’re “particularly proficient” at absorbing radioisotopes; 1,000 times more plutonium than fish
http://enenews.com/colonies-of-starfish-turning-to-mush-disintegrating-into-white-goo-experts-we-cant-exclude-fukushima-radiation-it-hasnt-been-ruled-out-starfish-particularly-proficient-at-absorbing-ra

[FBaggins]

3. You posted this in Good Reads

What article, blog, or other recently-published material are you citing?

[newfie11]

4. We will be the last to know

Every other excuse they can think up will be used first.

[uppityperson]

6. Link? Please check out SOP, need article, blog or other published material.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=about&forum=1016

[Aldo Leopold]

7. For your edification, it's "species"

both in singular and plural form. "Specie" is a kind of coin, I believe, but correct me if I'm wrong.

[longship]

23. The grammar is the least of this post's problems. nt

[jeff47]

8. Minor problem with your hypothesis

The die off started before the Fukushima disaster.

[longship]

9. Yup. Documented back in the 1980's

Here's a link with the actual science on the subject: http://www.eeb.ucsc.edu/pacificrockyintertidal/data-products/sea-star-wasting/

The first paragraph at the link:

Sea star wasting disease is a general description of a set of symptoms that are found in sea stars. Typically, lesions appear in the ectoderm followed by decay of tissue surrounding the lesions, which leads to eventual fragmentation of the body and death. A deflated appearance can precede other morphological signs of the disease. All of these symptoms are also associated with ordinary attributes of unhealthy stars and can arise when an individual is stranded too high in the intertidal zone (for example) and simply desiccates. “True” wasting disease will be present in individuals that are found in suitable habitat, often in the midst of other individuals that might also be affected. The progression of wasting disease can be rapid, leading to death within a few days, and its effects can be devastating on sea star populations. The proximal cause of the disease, when pathological studies have been done, is typically a bacterium (vibrio), although a recent wasting event on the east coast of the United States has been attributed to a virus. The ultimate cause is not clear although such events are often associated with warmer than typical water temperatures as was the case for the major die off in southern California in 1983-1984 and again (on a lesser scale) in 1997-98. Following the 1983-1984 event, the ochre star, Pisaster ochraceus, was virtually absent along southern California shorelines for years.

That won't stop people from falsely claiming a link to Fukushima.

[RobertEarl]

10. Interesting

""...The proximal cause of the disease, when pathological studies have been done, is typically a bacterium (vibrio), although a recent wasting event on the east coast of the United States has been attributed to a virus. The ultimate cause is not clear..."""

Unclear what is causing this. Lawd knows it just can't be nuclear waste tho!!

[longship]

11. Not clear does not mean people get to make up anything they want.

One tests the hypothesis, taking into account plausibility.

Fukushima caused sea star wasting!!!

Nope, it goes back to the 1980's.

But, but, but, it's still radiation!!!!

Where's your data?

I am done, again.

[RobertEarl]

14. The DOE has found Fukushima material in the Pacific.

It's right there in the first reply. Did you read the first reply?

And like I state below, and FB states above, we have been polluting the Pacific with nuclear waste since the 1950's.

Next question.

[longship]

16. Where's your data that sea stars are being effected by Fukushima?

Correlation does not equal causation. And in the case of sea star meltdown, whose science goes back to the 1980's, there isn't even a correlation, let alone any plausible mechanism to have Fukushima's effects to go back in time to the 1980's.

This myth is busted.

Sea star meltdown is not caused by radiation, let alone Fukushima Daiichi. I would gladly admit that I am wrong about this if there was compelling data, or indeed any data, to support that position.

That's how science works. One takes a position until the evidence compels one to another one.

Where is the data that shows a connection between sea star meltdown and any radioactive element?

None of the marine biologists studying this seem to be endorsing that hypothesis.

That's why I am skeptical. Pray don't tell me that it's some kind of grand conspiracy.

[jeff47]

12. So the nuclear waste has a time machine?

So the waste from Fukushima is so dangerous that it traveled 30 years back through time to start killing starfish?

[RobertEarl]

13. Yep

Like FB states upthread, we have been polluting the Pacific for many years with nuclear waste. More than 30 years ago.

And some of that waste lasts a long time.

Next question.

[jeff47]

15. And that's why your OP blame it on Fukushima?

Uh-huh.

You know, I don't think it was Oswald. Fukushima killed JFK.

[RobertEarl]

18. Let's refresh your memory

The US government, specifically the Department of Energy, has found, through biological sampling, material from Fukushima in aquatic life around Alaska, in and near the Pacific ocean.

The way it got to the water was from rainfall, or precipitation, from the air.

It, the Fukushima material, ran off land into the lower parts of the land mass, into pools where from they pulled the aquatic creatures.

And common sense tells us that what happened in Alaska also happened in the NW Pacific off Washington, Oregon, and California.

[longship]

21. Common sense???????

Last edited Wed Jan 8, 2014, 01:46 AM - Edit history (1)

Common sense says that Sol orbits Terra.

It takes real scientific methodology to find out what nature tells us.

So where is that data that connects radiation -- let alone Fukushima Daiichi -- to sea star meltdown? The marine biologists who have been studying this for decades disagree with your hypothesis.

The data that supports it, please?

Still waiting.

(Crickets)

On edit: more crickets.

[FBaggins]

25. Which, of course is why they're dying in larger numbers...

...and you get closer to Fukushima.

Oh wait... that's right - they aren't.

[jeff47]

29. Common sense also tells us that time runs in one direction.

You are using a starfish die-off as evidence of pollution from Fukushima along the West coast.

That starfish die-off started before Fukushima blew up.

Common sense also tells us that geography is relevant. There are not more dead starfish the closer you get to Fukushima. And the same wasting disease is affecting starfish on the East coast.

I'm fully aware that anti-nuclear-power is your current reason for being, but you still need to base your claims in reality.

[longship]

17. Funny. No marine biologists agree with that hypothesis.

Huh?

[FBaggins]

26. More problems

In no case was plutonium detected in higher concentrations than in 2004. And in 85% of the cases, even Cesium 137 levels were lower than in 2004.

[X_Digger]

19. Err...

http://deepseanews.com/2014/01/is-the-sea-floor-littered-with-dead-animals-due-to-radiation-no/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

Starfish were dying *before* fukushima.

[RobertEarl]

20. Yes.

We have been dumping nuclear waste in the Pacific for years and years.

The waste settles to the bottom, it being mainly heavy metals, becoming part of the sediment. Bottom feeders such as mussels eat sediments.

That's why they found such a high quantity of plutonium in mussels. Then the mussels get eaten by starfish. Up the food chain go the heavy metals.

Over time the metals drop out and get buried too deep for most bottom feeders and the food cycle of metals moving up is greatly reduced. Then, something like Fukushima happens and there begins another round of heavy metals in the top layer of sediment. The mussels eat it up and the starfish eat the mussels. Up the food chain go the heavy metals.

It may not be that radiation is causing the die off, but the fact that man-made heavy metals are being introduced into the food cycle with each bomb test, and now Fukushima. But I could be wrong, it could be radiation causing the most problems.

[longship]

22. Of course, it HAS to be radiation.

First, it was Fukushima. But when that was shown to be false, the claim shifts to "it's still radiation".

That is called moving the goalposts, a well known logical fallacy and a technique used by folks who put ideology above fact.

This myth is utterly busted.

The argument fails like the Black Knight.

on edit: Occasionally, ridicule is the best argument, as more than one in this thread has observed.

[Bonobo]

24. Three Reasons Why Fukushima Radiation Has Nothing to Do with Starfish Wasting Syndrome

http://deepseanews.com/2013/12/three-reasons-why-fukushima-radiation-has-nothing-to-do-with-starfish-wasting-syndrome/

This invited post is authored by Chris Mah, a Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History researcher. Chris is one of the world’s leading experts on starfish and echinoderms in general. He created and writes for Echinoblog, a one stop reading place for everything echinoderm. You can find him at Twitter at @echinoblog.

1. Starfish Wasting Disease/Syndrome (SWD/SWS) pre-Dates Fukushima by 3 to 15 years. This is probably the most self-evident of reasons. One of the earliest accounts of starfish wasting disease was recorded from Southern California (Channel Islands) in 1997 (pdf). The account of SWS in British Columbia was first documented by Bates et al. in 2009, and their data was collected in 2008. Fukushima? March 2011.

2. Starfish Wasting Syndrome Occurs on the East Coast as well as the Pacific. Many of the accounts alleging a Fukushima connection to Starfish Wasting Syndrome forget that there are also accounts of SWS on the east coast of the United States affecting the asteriid Asterias rubens. There is no evidence (or apparent mechanism) for Fukushima radiation to have reached the east coast and therefore the Fukushima idea is again not supported.

3. No other life in these regions seems to have been affected. If we watch the original British Columbia Pycnopodia die-off videos, and the later Washington state die-off vidoes, one cannot help but notice that other than the starfish, EVERYTHING else remains alive. Fish. Seaweed, encrusting animals. etc.

More Likely Reasons?

Speculation has suggested bacterial or viral sources. But invertebrate diseases can be complicated. The disease only seems to affect sea stars. Nothing else. This implies a biological cause with a very specific relationship. Possibly a bacteria or virus. But just as possibly some other type of infection resulting from a protist or fungi?

It also seems possible that it could be a disease similar to coral bleaching, where subcuticular bacteria of sea stars (as documented here) might be affected adversely. Or perhaps a combination? In conjunction with some environmental change, such as water temperature? The original series of papers by Amanda Bates indicated there was an association of the diseae with water temperature.

[A HERETIC I AM]

27. So...your "conclusion" is....that something is "possible"?

This is Nobel prize winning material, at the very least!

[Agschmid]

28. Can you post some links for this?

[zappaman]

30. I thought this was "Good Reads"

Not "make some bullshit up reads"?

[cyberswede]

31. Locking

Good Reads Statement of Purpose:

Post excerpts from articles, blogs, and other recently-published material related to politics, issues, and current events. No posts about Israel/Palestine, religion, guns, showbiz, or sports unless there is really big news. No conspiracy theories. No whining about DU.