Research Article |
|
Corresponding author: Peter D. Hazelton ( phaze@uga.edu ) Academic editor: Ian Duggan
© 2026 Zachary M. Schumber, Michael A. Baker, Brian J. Irwin, Martin J. Hamel, Peter D. Hazelton.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC0 Public Domain Dedication.
Citation:
Schumber ZM, Baker MA, Irwin BJ, Hamel MJ, Hazelton PD (2026) Habitat and landscape variables affecting Corbicula fluminea presence in the upper Savannah River drainage (USA). Aquatic Invasions 21(2): 111-126. https://doi.org/10.3391/ai.2026.21.2.189571
|
Aquatic invasive species (AIS) are amongst the greatest threats to native aquatic biodiversity. These introduced species often thrive in human-altered environments and spread through human-mediated pathways to invade new watersheds. Corbicula fluminea is a freshwater bivalve native to southeastern Asia first introduced in North America in Seattle, WA, in 1938 and has spread to nearly every major watershed in the southeastern United States. In the present study, we use an information theoretic framework to compare landscape and stream habitat variables associated with C. fluminea presence across five HUC10 watersheds in the upper Savannah River basin of South Carolina and Georgia, USA. Predictive models included landscape-level and site-level habitat variables associated with agricultural, developed, and forested landscapes. Models with variables associated with forested and developed landscapes were the top performing models based on AICc values. In top performing models C. fluminea presence was positively correlated with increased stream width, but negatively correlated with substrates dominated by cobble. Lower performing models highlight positive correlations with the presence of upstream reservoirs and increased developed landscape surrounding the site. Identification of habitat and landscape correlates with invasive species presence may lead to more efficient introduction monitoring efforts for conservation managers.
Freshwater golden clam, basket clam, land-use change, early detection, ecosystem vulnerability, habitat suitability, passive dispersal, aquatic hitch-hikers
Less than 1% of the Earth is covered by freshwater ecosystems, yet these environments contain nearly 10% of all recognized animal species (
The Basket Clam (Corbicula fluminea Müller, 1774) is a freshwater bivalve native to southeast Asia and introduced to North America, South America, Europe, and some countries of North Africa (
Aquatic invasive species (AIS) invade new habitats through vectors such as shipping ballast water (
Early detection and prevention of invasive species are more cost-effective solutions than removal or sustained management (
Our objective in this study is to understand the habitat and landscape variables that affect C. fluminea dispersal and presence in the upper Savannah River watershed in Georgia and South Carolina. Based on previous literature, we expect C. fluminea presence to be positively associated with the amount of agricultural land cover (
The upper Savannah River basin begins in the Blueridge region of North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. The Savannah River forms at the convergence of the Seneca and Tugaloo rivers. This portion of the Savannah River drainage is home to five of the largest reservoirs in South Carolina, including Lake Hartwell (227 km2) and Lake Keowee (75 km2) (
Study area detailing the boundaries of the five Hydrologic Unit Code 10 (HUC10) watersheds and land use classification. The northern region of the study area is dominated by forest, while the southern regions contain more of an agricultural and developed landscape. Inset map shows location of study area within southeastern United States.
We selected study sites and conducted biotic and habitat surveys using the methods of the Brook Floater Rapid Assessment Protocol (
Visual and tactile surveys were conducted along longitudinal transects (i.e., lanes) running the length of the stream reach. The number of lanes was equal to the number of observers (n ≥ 3). The width of each lane was equal to the stream width divided by the number of observers, where lane width was a minimum of 1 meter and a maximum of 3 meters. Surveys were standardized to a total of 2-person hours, and surveyors were trained to maintain a survey search rate of approximately 10 m2 per minute. Surveyors initiated the search at the downstream origin of the transect and moved in the upstream direction searching the benthos of their lane until the 2-person hours limit was reached, at which point the surveyors would be at the end (upstream) of the transect. Each observer used snorkeling or view buckets to scan the stream substrate within their lane and documented the presence of either shell or live C. fluminea. Due to the density of C. fluminea at sites where they were present, it was not practical to enumerate shells/individuals, but rather to only record presence/absence. Evidence supports snorkeling as a more effective method for detecting freshwater mussels (
Habitat variables at each site were assessed as means of lane-specific habitat characteristics, or data collected at the reach level. Stream depth variation at a site was a measure of the coefficient of variation between all measurements of depth at a site. Depth measurements were taken from five locations in each lane (start, 25%, 50%, 75%, end). Similarly, the dominant substrate was measured at the same five locations along each lane. Surveyors classified the substrate into a substrate size class (ranging from fine silt [≤ 0.06 mm] to bedrock [> 4 m]) as characterized by the National Rivers and Streams Assessment 2013–2014 (
We classified land cover data for each site at a spatial resolution of 10 m using two metrics, the landcover within a 3 km buffer of the site and the landcover within the delineated catchment of a site. Analysis was conducted using the U.S. Geological Survey (
We used the
We used binomial logistic regression models to evaluate the effects that site specific habitat and landscape variables have on the presence of C. fluminea. We developed multiple competing models for each landscape category (i.e., agricultural, forested, developed), each containing variables shown to be affected by these land use patterns (
A priori models used to predict C. fluminea site presence by combining habitat and landscape variables.
| Model | Model predictors |
|---|---|
| Agriculture 1 | % agriculture catchment + sand + variation in depth + run |
| Agriculture 2 | % agriculture surrounding + sand + fine gravel + canopy cover + stream width |
| Agriculture 3 | sand + fine gravel + stream width |
| Forest 1 | % forest catchment + cobble + riffle + pool |
| Forest 2 | % forest surrounding + riffle + canopy cover + LWD + stream width |
| Forest 3 | cobble + riffle + stream width |
| Develop 1 | % developed surrounding + upstream reservoir presence + sand + stream width |
| Develop 2 | % developed catchment + upstream reservoir presence + reservoir distance |
| Develop 3 | upstream reservoir presence + sand + stream width |
| Develop 4 | canopy cover + sand + variation in depth |
We found C. fluminea at 20 of the 50 sites sampled (Table
Attributes of 5 HUC10 watersheds surveyed for C. fluminea. Ten survey sites were selected within each HUC10 watershed.
| Watershed | # of sites w/ C. fluminea present | % Developed | % Forest | % Agriculture | # Sites w/ Reservoir Upstream | # Reservoirs ≥ 0.05km2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chauga | 4 | 7.5 | 86.7 | 5.1 | 6 | 6 |
| Little | 5 | 15.5 | 67.2 | 8.3 | 3 | 6 |
| Coneross | 8 | 21.9 | 53.0 | 21.9 | 8 | 5 |
| Chattooga | 0 | 6.9 | 89.8 | 2.6 | 1 | 2 |
| Lower Tugaloo | 3 | 13.1 | 47.6 | 29.4 | 3 | 5 |
Models associated with forest and developed environments ranked as the top two models with a cumulative AICc weight of 0.949 (Table
Generalized linear model (GLM) predictions of the probability of C. fluminea presence across various habitat and landscape variables. Each subplot represents the relationship between C. fluminea presence (binary response) and a specific predictor variable from the best fitting model containing that predictor: (a) cobble substrate composition, (b) developed land within a 3 km radius (%), (c) stream width (meters). The y-axis displays the predicted probability of C. fluminea presence, with 95% confidence intervals indicated by the shaded bands. Variables were selected based on their ecological relevance to C. fluminea habitat preferences.
Results from logistic regression models to predict C. fluminea presence at a site. Models were created using a specific set of habitat and landscape variables (see Table
| Model | K | LogLik | AICc | ΔAICc | AICcWT | Cum.Wt |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forest 3 | 4 | -18.657 | 46.203 | 0.000 | 0.906 | 0.906 |
| Develop 1 | 5 | -20.463 | 52.289 | 6.086 | 0.043 | 0.949 |
| Forest 2 | 6 | -19.590 | 53.132 | 6.929 | 0.028 | 0.977 |
| Develop 3 | 4 | -23.309 | 55.506 | 9.303 | 0.009 | 0.986 |
| Develop 2 | 4 | -23.631 | 56.152 | 9.949 | 0.006 | 0.992 |
| Agriculture 3 | 4 | -24.021 | 56.930 | 10.727 | 0.004 | 0.996 |
| Agriculture 2 | 6 | -21.809 | 57.572 | 11.369 | 0.003 | 0.999 |
| Forest 1 | 5 | -25.437 | 62.238 | 16.035 | < 0.001 | 0.999 |
| Develop 4 | 4 | -30.009 | 68.906 | 22.703 | < 0.001 | 0.999 |
| Agriculture 1 | 5 | -29.344 | 70.053 | 23.850 | < 0.001 | 1.000 |
Best fitting models, model statistics, and parameter estimates for logistic regression models of habitat and landscape variables affecting C. fluminea presence. Parameter estimates provided on the scale of the model using the logit link. AICc = Akaike information criterion corrected for small sample size, LogLik = Log likelihood for a given model. K = the number of parameters in a model. AICc weight (AICcWT) is also shown.
| Model | AICc | LogLik | AICcWT | K |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forest 3 | 46.203 | -18.657 | 0.906 | 4 |
| Parameter | Estimate | Standard error | z value | p value |
| Intercept | -1.815 | 1.184 | -1.534 | 0.125 |
| Cobble | -0.181 | 0.070 | -2.589 | 0.009 |
| Riffle | -0.056 | 0.031 | -1.818 | 0.069 |
| Stream width | 0.512 | 0.197 | 2.603 | 0.009 |
| Develop 1 | 52.289 | -20.463 | 0.043 | 5 |
| Parameter | Estimate | Standard error | z value | p value |
| Intercept | -5.155 | 1.551 | -3.324 | <0.001 |
| Upstream reservoir presence | 1.677 | 0.837 | 2.002 | 0.045 |
| % developed surrounding | 0.107 | 0.050 | 2.143 | 0.032 |
| Sand | 0.022 | 0.015 | 1.397 | 0.112 |
| Stream width | 0.200 | 0.106 | 1.891 | 0.058 |
Habitat variables related to substrate composition and mesohabitat descriptions appeared as positive and negative predictors of C. fluminea site presence. The amount of site composed of cobble was a significant negative predictor of C. fluminea site presence in the top model (Table
The presence of a reservoir upstream of a site was a significant variable in one of the top models (Develop 1, Table
Probability of C. fluminea presence and the relationship with upstream reservoir presence. The points represent the observed site occurrences in a corresponding upstream reservoir scenario. The lines with black points indicate the predicted probabilities from a logistic regression model (±95% confidence intervals).
Corbicula fluminea are an AIS currently found throughout most major watersheds in the United States (
It is important to note that our study only evaluated presence of C. fluminea, but not abundance or density. We believe that presence only data can be helpful in defining suitable habitat for an invader, but may be improved upon to evaluate optimal habitat through the inclusion of quantitative estimates of density or abundance. We also did not evaluate detection probability in our study, and therefore cannot be certain that a recorded absence of C. fluminea is representative of true absence or imperfect detection. We used a rapid assessment protocol to maximize the number of sites that can be surveyed within a day, using a search rate of 10 m2 per minute (
Our findings suggest that stream size was the most important factor associated with the presence of C. fluminea. As stream size increased, the probability of C. fluminea presence also increased (Fig.
In our best explanatory model, we found a negative association between C. fluminea presence and increasing proportion of cobble as the dominant substrate (Fig.
Freshwater ecosystems are often affected by changing land use (
Human activity within and between reservoirs also serves as a potential mechanism of overland dispersal for aquatic hitch-hikers. Reservoirs have been shown to act as stepping stones for AIS invasions by providing accessible environments for human activities serving as introduction vectors (
Our findings suggest that some landscape variables related to forest and developed environments may play a role in determining C. fluminea presence; however, site level habitat characteristics including substrate and stream width showed clearer relationships to C. fluminea absence or presence. Differences in our results from those previously published may simply be a result of differences in habitat and landscape processes that predict presence vs. abundance. Whereas habitat and landscape correlates of abundance or density are more indicative of optimal or quality habitat, presence data may be helpful in identifying suitable habitat where an invasion may initially occur. Given support in the literature, future research on C. fluminea may benefit from further evaluation of upstream reservoirs and developed landscapes on clam presence and abundance.
ZS: research conceptualization, sample design & methodology, investigation and data collection, data analysis and interpretation, writing – original draft, writing – revisions; MB: research conceptualization, sample design & methodology, investigation and data collection, data analysis and interpretation, writing – revisions; MH: data analysis and interpretation, writing – revisions; BI: data analysis and interpretation, writing – revisions; PH: research conceptualization, sample design & methodology, investigation and data collection, data analysis and interpretation, writing – revisions, funding.
Ericah Beason and Morgan Kern of the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (SCDNR) assisted with permits, site selection and access permission. We are indebted to Regina Mondibrown, Molly Martin, Amanda Van Buskirk, Jake Smith, and Hayley Robinson for assistance in data collection, and Robert Ratajczak for logistical support. The authors benefitted from early feedback from Allison Roy (Massachusetts Cooperative Fish & Wildlife Research Unit) and members of the Brook Floater Working Group. We also thank our two anonymous reviewers for their constructive feedback.
Funding for this project was provided by a United States Fish & Wildlife Service State Wildlife Grant to the SCDNR, and graduate assistant support from the University of Georgia Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources. The Georgia Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit is sponsored jointly by the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, the University of Georgia, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Geological Survey, and the Wildlife Management Institute. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the United States Government.
All sampling activities were permitted by SCDNR under permit number F – 23 – 058, as well as written permission for stream access from private landowners and the United States Forest Service Francis Marion and Sumter National Forest.
All of the data that support the findings of this study are available in the main text or Supplementary material.
Additional information
Data type: docx
Explanation note: table SS1. Summary table describing all potential predictor variables analyzed to find their effect on C. fluminea site presence. table SS2. Hypothesized pathways for how major land-use types could experience different factors that cause changes in stream habitat and result in decreases (-) or increases (+) of several potential predictor variables used in the candidate model set for predicting the probability of C. fluminea site presence. table SS3. Additional models, model statistics, and parameter estimates for logistic regression models of habitat and landscape variables affecting C. fluminea presence. fig. S1. Correlation matrix of all predictor variables that we considered using in final models for C. fluminea presence. A correlation level of 0.6 was chosen to eliminate redundancy within models. Predictor variables with a value of 0.6 or greater were not used in the same model.