I would like to put some crayfish in my pond to feed the LMB and maybe even reproduce. I would like to hear opinions on this.

We have 12 different crayfish species in MD, 8 native and 4 non-native. There are even crayfish in the next county over that we don't have here in my county. This is according to the DNR.

I would like to stock the native species from around here as my first choice. I don't want the burrower type. Already have those.

Every freshwater creek, pond, stream, swamp, ditch and waterhole around here has crayfish. They are easy and fun to catch with traps and nets. But trying to ID the exact species is a different story. All ponds and creeks around here have the holes on the bank with mud chimneys. I'm thinking they are devil crayfish. Not suppose to be common crayfish, or virile crayfish here in this county, but they are everywhere else.

The only choices I can see other than trapping wild crayfish is two choices for buying them, Papershells from Smith Creek or crayfish from Zetts.

Would papershells be OK here? Am I too far south?
Does anyone know the exact crayfish species that Zetts has?

I doubt that even Zetts knows or will truthfully admit they don't know the scientific name of their crayfish. They may have a farm name for them. Few people know how to identify crayfish without good training. Unless real well versed on crayfish it is very doubtful that their crayfish cultures are pure and their population have been contaminated by various sources, which is very common with many other fish farms due to lack of specific knowledge about crayfish identification. "A crab is a crab". If you are concerned about not introducing more burrowing crayfish then I think you should spend some time learning what specific external body features are unique to your preferred crayfish. If I had only two choices of Zetts and Smith Creek I would choose Smith's.

Since you mention Maryland DNR and crayfish you already may be aware of this very good identification guide the MD crayfish, but here is a link to it:
http://dnr.maryland.gov/streams/pdfs/keytothecrayfishesofmd_8_18_10.pdf

I can help with answers if you have questions about separating the crayfish genera and species. Just from casual perusal of the "key" it appears the best MD native crayfish for your location is the Orconectes virilis - Virile crayfish.

I've stocked ponds with crayfish from Smith Creek and have never seen a chimney.

I agree with Bill on people not knowing or caring what they sell. I know a bait dealer that is selling "softshell" crayfish that are freshly molted rustys.

Some super markets, at least here in Texas, sell crawfish live for like 5$ a pound and they usually say the specific species. They may not be native though... I'm thinking about adding some of them to my pond as well.

What would the best type of crayfish be for human consumption in a colder climate? I have a small pond, maybe 1/10 acre, with no fish. It would be fun for the boys to raise some crawfish in there for them to catch. Any suggestions?

Thanks for that info Bill. Yea that's the link about crayfish that I was looking at. As you can see there are species in the next county over that we don't have here. At least according to their maps.

I think those are usually reds here in Texas.

I had some ordered, but cancelled after several Pond Boss veterans told me it was not a good idea due to Reds being known for burrowing into pond dams.

I read that in Louisiana where they do big time crayfish farming for eating, they mostly use red swamp crayfish and to a lesser extent white river crayfish. We have both of these around here also. These have been introduced to many other areas but I dont know about way up where you are. I dont even know if all crayfish taste the same.

I found a good resource on crayfish farming-
aqua.ucdavis.edu/DatabaseRoot/pdf/CRAWPM.PDF

Seems like the burrowing would be a problem. Are they any situations where crayfish and embankment ponds could coexist in a practical way?

Adam seems like you are looking for the same thing as me. The kind of crayfish that don't burrow much.

I remember over 20 years ago I picked up a couple dozen crayfish at a fishing/bait store. They were in an aquarium, just like the minnows. They were big and red and I used them for bass fishing. Anyhow I had about 10 left at the end of the day and I dumped them in my friends pond. Anyhow, I went back fishing a few days later and I couldn't believe it, there was about 10 big holes on shore right in the exact spot I dumped them. They must have come right out of the pond and made holes immediately after I put them in.

Those Red Swamp Crayfish are good eating though. I caught them a bunch in California some years back. But I wont risk my embankment dam for a few meals nowadays!

The red swamp and white river crayfish are both raised for human food. Neither usually make deep burrows above water unless the pond is drying up which is mentioned a couple times in the link. White River one can get slightly larger than the Red swamp. So if you are interested in using a crayfish for food consider the red swamp or white river. Both get large and it would take a pretty big bass to eat the full grown adults. The following informative link provides more info than most of us would ever want about these two species. Note the info in the section about Burrow Ecology .
https://srac.tamu.edu/index.cfm/event/getFactSheet/whichfactsheet/195/

3.5 crawfish per pound??? Those are some baby lobsters!

It looks like papershells are the ideal crayfish for ponds if you don't want burrowing. I called Smith Creek yesterday, they said they cant ship until June. The guy said they have shipped as far South as Alabama, So I guess they would be OK here in Southern Maryland.

I live in Louisiana and catch crawfish part time I don't have fish yet but should start stocking in two weeks I was catching 40-50 sacks a day mostly red crawfish so I ended up putting around 5 sacks in my pond to give them a little head start I'm new at all this and have never owned a pond before so hopefully I'm not messing up

Bill I am on my third book of Alfred Russel Wallace who was a British naturalist, explorer, geographer, anthropologist, biologist & taxidermist with a similar education as yourself and did most of his work in the mid 1800's. I had been confused with genus and species. So I finally took the time to look it up after you mentioned it. The first scientific Latin word is for the genus and the second word is for the species. And this may change to what is called clade.

I was wondering if you have come across any new species in your work?

John - Yes, I found a new diatom that was assigned a new genus and specie. Two Univ of Michigan algae professors and I named it: Cyclotublicoalitus undatus from South Carolina - Par Pond.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0269249X.1990.9705101#.U8xtA_ldXTo

That's fantastic Bill. The forum is fortunate to have you.

Bill can you post a pic ?

Here are images of Cyclotublicoalitus undatus via Bill.

Cyclotubicoalitus undatus, Genus et Species Nova. E.F.Stoermer, J.P.Kociolek & W.Cody is the correct technical name for this diatom. It was described and published in Diatom Research 1990. Vol 5 (1), 171-177. It was found within a bloom of numerous other planktonic centric diatoms in an eutrophic cooling reservoir in South Carolina. I note this because there appears to be no images for this specie on the web. So maybe if the search engines gather this information it will now be available.

Bill I did try to Goggle Cyclotubicoalitus undatus and only found what was just posted on Pond Boss. I hope I don't sound too stupid but was this found by sorting through micro plants with a microscope and what might you have been looking for when this discovery was found?

John - Evidently the link to the pictures worked. Now all the freaky nerd diatom algae people will be visiting Pond Boss forum. The name referred to the circle of fused tubular processes on the valve rim.

This new species was found during an ecological water quality monitoring study of the cooling ponds. It basically bloomed at about 10% occurrence during the month of May and was growing with other centric diatoms indicative of eutrophic water: Stephanocyclus meneghiniana, Cyclostephanos tholiformis, and Aulacoseira granulata. If you want to see a picture of it with the other common diatoms in the bloom just let me know.

Ranges of Pond chemistries were (mg/L): alkalinity 14-16 mg/L, Ortho Phos 0.003-0.03, Total P 0.59-0.84, pH 7.0-9.3, Temp 69-73F.

I want a t-shirt with Cyclotublicoalitus undatus featured and autographed by the good Dr. Bill Cody. Jesse West foundation bid item for PB VI!

I'm sorry for hijacking the crawdad thread but Bills background was so similar to the book's author I was reading that I felt I was reading about Bill. One more question Bill. The diatom being an early part of the food chain and the two valve walls being inorganic silicon then I suppose the rest of the diatom would have to be organic to be a food source wouldn't it?

Organic chemistry

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Organic chemistry is a chemistry subdiscipline involving the scientific study of the structure, properties, and reactions of organic compounds and organic materials, i.e., matter in its various forms that contain carbon atoms.[1] Study of structure includes using spectroscopy (e.g., NMR), mass spectrometry, and other physical and chemical methods to determine the chemical composition and constitution of organic compounds and materials. Study of properties includes both physical properties and chemical properties, and uses similar methods as well as methods to evaluate chemical reactivity, with the aim to understand the behavior of the organic matter in its pure form (when possible), but also in solutions, mixtures, and fabricated forms. The study of organic reactions includes probing their scope through use in preparation of target compounds (e.g., natural products, drugs, polymers, etc.) by chemical synthesis, as well as the focused study of the reactivities of individual organic molecules, both in the laboratory and via theoretical (in silico) study.
The range of chemicals studied in organic chemistry include hydrocarbons, compounds containing only carbon and hydrogen, as well as myriad compositions based always on carbon, but also containing other elements,[1][2][3] especially:
• oxygen, nitrogen, sulfur, phosphorus (these, included in many organic chemicals in biology) and the radiostable of the halogens.
In the modern era, the range extends further into the periodic table, with main group elements, including:
• Group 1 and 2 organometallic compounds, i.e., involving alkali (e.g., lithium, sodium, and potassium) or alkaline earth metals (e.g., magnesium), or
• metalloids (e.g., boron and silicon) or other metals (e.g., aluminum and tin).
In addition, much modern research focuses on organic chemistry involving further organometallics, including the lanthanides, but especially the:
• transition metals (e.g., zinc, copper, palladium, nickel, cobalt, titanium, chromium, etc.).
, organic compounds form the basis of all earthly life and constitute a significant part of human endeavors in chemistry. The bonding patterns open to carbon, with its valence of four—formal single, double, and triple bonds, as well as various structures with delocalized electrons—make the array of organic compounds structurally diverse, and their range of applications enormous. They either form the basis of, or are important constituents of, many commercial products including pharmaceuticals; petrochemicals and products made from them (including lubricants, solvents, etc.); plastics; fuels and explosives; etc. As indicated, the study of organic chemistry overlaps with organometallic chemistry and biochemistry, but also with medicinal chemistry, polymer chemistry, as well as many aspects of materials science.[1]

Yes, mostly organic. The chloroplast inside the diatom shell is basically a plant with most of the typical algae components. The diatom is just a soft bodied algae (phytoplankter) with a glass shell. When consumed the organism digests the inside contents and expels the shell. Sometimes the shells are fractured depending on the thickness of the shell; some are thin, some are thick, some single and some in chains or linked together.

OK, I just have layman's questions. A diatom has a silica valve made up of two walls made of glass (sand) and I am guessing the valve sifts water for nourishment and wastes for the organic part of the diatom. I never knew that inorganic and organic materials together existed to make a living plant or animal. Is inorganic and organic combinations in life forms a rare thing or is it common? Wouldn't that be the unlikely prospect of a human heart having a glass valve? I wonder why a diatom evolved this way?

John asks - "Is inorganic and organic combinations in life forms a rare thing or is it common?" Inorganic and organic combine numerous times in living organisms. Inorganic minerals are incorporated into various types of hard surfaces. I will list a just a few examples. clams, snails, exoskeletons of crustaceans such as crayfish, crabs, lobster, and in higher animals teeth and bone have lots of inorganic structure. Otoliths of fish are inorganic. Many animals have hard structures that appear to be inorganic, but are really hard structures comprised of hardened organic proteins; examples are horns, toenails, porcupine quills, etc.

Thanks for your answers Bill. That was surprising to me and it leads to another question. Since DNA is the program instructions for all organic life from a flea to an elephant or a diatom, and a diatom's valve is made up of inorganic material, then it would seem to follow that inorganic material can be programmable by DNA as long as it has organic help. Or in the case of the diatom valve made of silica sand (glass) having the DNA instructions to reproduce itself. That would seem to imply some kind of life to inorganic material. So perhaps silica instructed by DNA could produce a glass bottle. Where am I going wrong in my thinking?

John - in theory you are probably correct. I'm not sure that your statement is sound: "That would seem to imply some kind of life to inorganic material." I'm not sure what you mean by "life". However "life" does utilize or incorporate inorganic elements such as calcium, iron, nitrogen, zinc, etc in the living cells, tissues, and organs that comprise living organisms.

The DNA of the diatom and other organisms is responsible for instructing specialized cells or organelles to produce specialized inorganic deposits. The software of a diatom does allow it to create a perforated glass bottle around itself. Aren't the wonders of nature amazing!? However it is probably much cheaper and easier for us to manufacture glass bottles and many other mechanical and electronic things. The potential of controlling DNA in cells has a lot of future benefits especially in the medical field where we cannot with machines manufacture replacement living body parts. Controlling DNA will be our salvation. Medical science is continually getting closer to this goal.

Bill the DNA instruction in the specialized cell would utilize calcium for making bones but then if you took a sample of that bone you would find the complete instructions for say a dog in the bone if it was a dogs bone. And we would call that bone organic. So I guess I am thinking if you sampled the glass diatom valve would you find find the complete instructions for a diatom in a glass valve we would call inorganic? Maybe the glass valve is impregnated also with organic cells and if so then that might be a kind of life. I probably need to get off this subject but thanks for your reply's Bill.

Think of this more like the outer covering of a caddisfly larvae.

http://chamisa.freeshell.org/caddis.htm

John, DNA in bone in located only in the inner bone aka bone marrow the living part or bone core. The silica shell itself of diatoms has no living part, it is pure silica thus no DNA. An animal bone and glass diatom shell have a completely different structure. The skeletal system is a complex living organ; multiple cell structure. Remember each diatom is a single cell. The glass diatom shell is not impregnated with DNA nor any organic material. The nucleic material and plant chloroplast are inside the inorganic shell. The glass shell of diatoms will withstand incineration to burn the inner organic contents and/or treatment with oxidizers such as nitric acid or strong hydrogen peroxide to digest the cell contents so one can better observe the shell structure.

RAH I will do some reading on the caddisfly larvae. I'm amazed how building a simple relaxing pond can lead to exciting thoughts about nature. And Bill I really appreciate you answering my questions.

Great questions John, enlightening science, Bill. Great thread...

I want to go back to my twenties...that's when I thought I knew everything. The older I get the dumber I get

Very cool stuff and thanks for the teaching!!!

This is why silica is a very important element in nature but it is very abundant as well.

Bills probably forgotten more than I know.

Cheers Don.