Comments on Lowe et al. “Otolith Microchemistry Reveals Substantial Use of Freshwater by Southern Flounder in the Northern Gulf of Mexico”

Lowe et al. (Estuaries and Coasts, 34:630–639, 2011) hypothesized that juvenile southern flounder Paralichthys lethostigma (Jordan and Gilbert 1884) would migrate from the Gulf of Mexico into the Mobile-Tensaw River Delta (AL, USA) and use low-salinity (oligohaline/freshwater) habitats during, at least, a portion of their first year of life. Thus, they analyzed the Sr/Ca ratio profiles along the sagittal otoliths of southern flounder collected in the Mobile-Tensaw River Delta and observed that one third of the flounders had low Sr/Ca levels in the otoliths’ core and throughout the otolith, suggesting that these fishes hatched in freshwater or low-salinity habitats where they spend the majority of their life. The other two thirds of southern flounder showed high levels of Sr/Ca ratio in the otoliths’ core following a marked decline of Sr/Ca ratio, which then maintained along the remainder of the otolith. This pattern was interpreted as larvae hatched in higher salinity waters before entering the Mobile-Tensaw River Delta; however, in this paper, I list several arguments to support an alternative interpretation for this pattern. I suggest that the high levels of Sr/Ca ratios in the otoliths’ core of southern flounder does not reflect the saline conditions where larvae hatched, instead it reflects the location where the female progenitor hydrated the eggs. Thus, adding my interpretation on the data of Lowe et al. (Estuaries and Coasts, 34:630–639, 2011), it seems that southern flounder might hatch in or near freshwater habitats and the migration of southern flounder into an estuarine ecosystem to spawn might exist.     

Reply to “Oxygen isotope heterogeneity of the mantle beneath the Canary Islands: a discussion of the paper of Gurenko et al.”

The comment by Day et al. (Contrib Mineral Petrol, 2012) (1) discusses the validity of the previously obtained oxygen isotope data for El Hierro and La Palma (Canary Island) olivines, (2) questions the approach by Gurenko et al. (Contrib Mineral Petrol 162:349–363, 2011) of using weakly correlated variations of δ¹⁸O_olivine values with X _px (proportion of pyroxenite-derived melt in the parental magma), and (3) provides reasons why oxygen isotope data by secondary ion mass spectrometry (SIMS) “offer sensitive means for detecting melt-crust interactions.” We respond these comments and report a new set of oxygen isotope measurements performed by SIMS and single-grain laser fluorination methods. These measurements confirm our previous data and conclusions and demonstrate the ability of the SIMS technique to analyze O isotopes in terrestrial samples with 2-sigma uncertainty better than ±0.25 ‰.     

Comments on Buzan et al. “Positive Relationships between Freshwater Inflow and Oyster Abundance in Galveston Bay,Texas”

Buzan et al. critique Turner’s (Estuaries and Coasts 29:345–352, 2006) analysis of the relationship between freshwater inflow and oyster productivity in the Gulf of Mexico, using 16 years of fisheries-independent data for Galveston Bay. They conclude that the catch-per-unit effort (CPUE; number h⁻¹) of marketable oysters increase 1 to 2 years after years with increased freshwater inflows, and they express concerns that water supply managers may mis-apply the results of Turner (Estuaries and Coasts 29:345–352, 2006) to justify a reduced freshwater inflow to Galveston Bay. I find no relationship between the CPUE of oyster spat or marketable oyster density and the commercial harvest, but do find a strong inverse relationship between harvest and river discharge in Galveston Bay. There are three possible factors that may explain why the annual variations in the fisheries-independent data are not coherent with the annual variations in commercial harvest: variable levels of water quality, inconsistent fishing effort, and the fact that the fisheries-independent data are not prorated for the area of the reefs actually fished. I concur, completely, with the apprehension that reductions in freshwater inflow will be implemented without examining the full set of assumptions and consequences, and thereby compromise estuarine ecosystem quality, and perhaps permanently, before mistakes can be seen or reversed.     

Application of the Ti-in-quartz thermobarometer to rutile-free systems. Reply to: a comment on: ‘TitaniQ under pressure: the effect of pressure and temperature on the solubility of Ti in quartz’ by Thomas et al.

The premise of the Wilson et al. comment is that the Ti-in-quartz solubility calibration (Thomas et al. in Contrib Mineral Petrol 160:743–759, 2010) is fundamentally flawed. They reach this conclusion because P–T estimates using the Ti-in-quartz calibration differ from their previous interpretations for crystallization conditions of the Bishop and Oruanui rhyolites. If correct, this assertion has far-reaching implications, so a careful assessment of the Wilson et al. reasoning is warranted. Application of the Ti-in-quartz calibration as a thermobarometer in rutile-free rocks requires an estimation of TiO₂ activity in the liquid ( (liquid–rutile); referenced to rutile saturation) and an independent constraint on either P or T to obtain the crystallization temperature or pressure, respectively. The foundation of Wilson et al.’s argument is that temperature estimates obtained from Fe–Ti oxide thermometry accurately reflect crystallization conditions of quartz in the two rhyolites discussed. We maintain that our experimental approach is sound, the thermodynamic basis of the Ti-in-quartz calibration is fundamentally correct, and our experimental results are robust and reproducible. We suggest that the reason Wilson et al. obtain implausible pressure estimates is because estimates for T and they used as input values for the Ti-in-quartz calibration are demonstrably too high. Numerous studies show that Fe–Ti oxide temperature estimates of some rhyolites are substantially higher than those predicted by well-constrained phase equilibria. In this reply, we show that when reasonable input values for T and (liquid–rutile) are used, pressure estimates obtained from the Ti-in-quartz calibration are well aligned with phase equilibria and essentially identical to melt inclusion volatile saturation pressures.     

The Volgian Praechetaites exoticus Zone: Geochronological range, stratigraphic position and interregional correlation (a Response to the Paper by S.V. Meledina et al. “On the Position of the Praechetaites exoticus Zone in the Volgian Stage”)

The Praechetaites exoticus Zone is characterized; its definition, geographical range and correlation in the Panboreal Superrealm are discussed. New evidence supports the Middle Volgian age of the Exoticus Zone. It is shown that the presence of the characteristic ammonoid assemblage allows the recognition of this zone in the sections of North Siberia and Spitzbergen. The suggested key characters defining the zone include the appearance of the ammonites from the P. exoticus group at the lower boundary and Craspedites ex gr. okensis at the upper boundary. The stratigraphic distribution of boreal genera of ammonites at the Middle-Upper Volgian boundary is discussed.