Date:         Tue, 9 Sep 2008 21:51:51 -0400
Reply-To:     Conchologists List <CONCH-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
Sender:       Conchologists List <CONCH-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:         "Harry G. Lee" <shells@HGLEE.COM>
Subject:      Re: my last on U. imbecillis
In-Reply-To:  <091020080101.21488.48C71C4D0003DC95000053F022218675169B0A0
              2D2089B9A019C04040A0DBF9D0A030E9D0C0E06@att.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;

Dear John,

Maybe not quite the "last;" there are at least three more elements
that may contribute to a solution for your initial "unanswerable,"
or, at least unanswered, question as to the ID or your farm pond naiad:

(1) Is a history of deliberate fish stock introductions to your
sister-in-law's pond available?

(2) Can you muster an image (photo-, scan, etc.) of the subject 153
mm anodontine mussel shell? If so, I can have it posted to our
<jaxshells.org> website, and some people may offer more informed
opinions as to its ID. As the maxim goes: "A picture is worth a
thousand words."

(3) Although a "trout stream" is incompatible with Utterbackia
imbecillis habitat, into which Virginia river system is your South
River bound; the Rapahannock or some other?

Harry


At 09:01 PM 9/9/2008, you wrote:
>Thanks, Harry, for those unanswerable questions.  There's room for
>lots more work.
>For myself, I'm going to be sure to walk and snorkel all over my
>sister-in-law's pond next summer and sample the mussel
>populations.  There are sure to be more of them, whatever they
>are.  'Should have done it long ago.  The South River is a main
>border of their property, and it has lots of a snail species I have
>never ID'ed, but the river, too, should have mussels appropriate to
>a trout stream.

[text/html]