The Paleontological/Present Day Chondricthyan diversity of the Mississippi River

[Joseph Fossil]

The Mississippi River has (in one form or another since the shrinking of the Western Interior Seaway) been flowing for 70 Million Years.

 

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/geological-history-mississippi-river-180975509/

 

This may be more of a current biological rather than paleontological question, but I'm curious about the origin of the current chondricthyan diversity in the Mississippi River? Now a fair amount of you might be confused when I say "Chondricthyan diversity in the Mississippi River", but this is truly a cool case of truth stranger than fiction. The most famous species in this case is the Bull Shark (Carcharhinus leucas), a requiem shark able to tolerate both fresh and saltwater that had been confirmed to be recorded as far up the Mississippi River as Alton Illinois in 1935.

 

 

Image credit: https://www.thetelegraph.com/insider/article/Researchers-affirm-two-bull-shark-sightings-16308838.php

 

Shell, R., & Gardner, N. (2021, July 1). Movement of the Bull Shark (carcharhinus leucas) in the upper Mississippi River Basin, North America. Marine and Fishery Sciences (MAFIS). Retrieved February 12, 2023, from https://ojs.inidep.edu.ar/index.php/mafis/article/view/181

 

Shell, Ryan & Gardner, Nicholas & Hrabik, Robert. (2022). Updates on putative bull shark (Carcharhinus leucas) occurrences in the upper Mississippi River Basin of North America. 36. 10.47193/mafis.3612023010101. 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362847015_Updates_on_putative_bull_shark_Carcharhinus_leucas_occurrences_in_the_upper_Mississippi_River_Basin_of_North_America

 

 

But these are not the only cases of Chondricthyans found in the Mississippi River as shown by the reports and articles here:

 

http://chnep.wateratlas.usf.edu/upload/documents/Essential_habitat_of.pdf

(Specifically pg. 10)

 

Rafinesque, C.S. (1820) Ichthyologia ohiensis, or Natural history of the fishes inhabiting the river Ohio and its tributary

streams, preceded by a physical description of the Ohio and its branches. W.G. Hunt, Lexington, Kentucky, 90 pp.

https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.6892

 

Jordan, D.S. and Evermann, B.W. (1896). The fishes of North and Middle America. Bulletin of the US National Museum 47:1-1240.

 

https://www.actionnews5.com/story/12943330/memphis-woman-photographs-stingray-in-mississippi-river/

 

 

Today, the Mississippi River is one of the most industrialized rivers in the world, with many locks and dams in places that previously allowed Chondricthyans to enter as upstream as Alton Illinois. This is a phenomena that unfortunately is still occurring both in the US and across the world today from places as far away and China and Brazil, Pakistan to Russia, and Cambodia and Australia, disrupting natural river flows that make regions more prone to sever flooding effects and causing a terrifying decline in large bodied freshwater fish that migrant frequently across a whole rivers lengths (and also contributing to the Human induced climate crisis as all the dead animals that pile up at the bottom of these dams produce high amounts of methane). This phenomenon is also something I must add we as a species needs to address urgently and decisively by switching more to more renewable power sources like solar, install fish ladders and workable passages for fish to go around the dams, or legally breach the dams safely whenever possible.

 

But not to get off track here, I'm still curious about the paleontological date of chondricthyans from the Mississippi River. How many fossils of brackish water sharks and rays have been found in the areas of the Mississippi River, was there a historically larger or smaller amount of chondricthyans in the Mississippi during the Late Pleistocene-Early Holocene, and why isn't (at least that I know of) the chondricthyans diversity in the Mississippi River even historically been as high as places as the Amazon river in Brazil?

 

 

What do you guys think?

[JohnJ]

5 hours ago, Joseph Fossil said:

What do you guys think?

 

I love soapboxes...ask anyone on the staff.  But, some presumptive declarations are better suited for other websites.  Let's stick to the paleontology.  

[Doctor Mud]

Using paleontology to look at changes in river ecosystems is something I’ve thought a bit about. I’ve done this a lot to look at changes in wetland and lake ecosystems. 
 

The thing that makes it so difficult even “just” going back to late Pleistocene is the nature of rivers and river deposits. Rivers are constantly changing course and the river bed sediments are constantly on the move. You can get area within river systems like lakes etc. that have a much better chance of preserving a continuous long term record.

 

But - you usually need a process that concentrates shark remains in order to have a good chance of studying them and making meaningful observations. A lag deposit or similar. 
 

estuaries might be your best bet, but then finding outcrops would be tricky for holocene estuarine sediments. You would need to core, and then your chances. Of find shark remains? Very slim. 
 

Ancient DNA might be a solution, I was involved in a project recently where we looked at marine algal DNA spanning the holocene. The methods of extracting and analyzing DNA fragments are progressing rapidly. But you are still limited by the preservation of a sediment record and the abundance of your target species. 
 

 

 

 

[doushantuo]

Land loss in the Mississippi River Delta: Role of subsidence, global sea-level rise, and coupled atmospheric and oceanographic processes
Mike Blum , David Rahn , Bruce Frederick , Sara Mor´on Polanco 

Global and Planetary Change 222 (2023)

139703868_usafluvialerosmissideltasubsideoceanographyy1-s2.0GPC-S092180218-main.pdf

 

Read it,by all means

edit two: less than 10Mb

Edited February 13, 2023 by doushantuo

[doushantuo]

Comparing Aggradation, Superelevation, and Avulsion Frequency of Submarine and Fluvial Channels
Zane R. Jobe, Nick C. Howe,Kyle M. Straub, Dingxin Cai, Hang Deng, Fabien J. Laugier, Luke A. Pettinga and Lauren E. Shumaker

 

Front. Earth Sci., 13 May 2020
Sec. Sedimentology, Stratigraphy and Diagenesis
Volume 8 - 2020 | https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2020.00053s,

1938154752_feart-08-00053(2).pdf

 

 

just to further eloborate Mud's point:

autocyclic and allocyclic processes,avulsion frequency,flooding frequency,catchment hydrology,climate,halokinetic movement,growth faulting,difficulties in facies discrimination/interpretation ,local and secular eustasy(eustacy) all conspire to make fluvio(-deltaic) stratigraphy eeeuh

 

 

"difficult",let's just say

edit: did i mention uplift,nondepostion,susbsidence?

Edited February 13, 2023 by doushantuo

[Joseph Fossil]

On 2/12/2023 at 8:14 PM, Doctor Mud said:

Using paleontology to look at changes in river ecosystems is something I’ve thought a bit about. I’ve done this a lot to look at changes in wetland and lake ecosystems. 
 

The thing that makes it so difficult even “just” going back to late Pleistocene is the nature of rivers and river deposits. Rivers are constantly changing course and the river bed sediments are constantly on the move. You can get area within river systems like lakes etc. that have a much better chance of preserving a continuous long term record.

 

But - you usually need a process that concentrates shark remains in order to have a good chance of studying them and making meaningful observations. A lag deposit or similar. 
 

estuaries might be your best bet, but then finding outcrops would be tricky for holocene estuarine sediments. You would need to core, and then your chances. Of find shark remains? Very slim. 
 

Ancient DNA might be a solution, I was involved in a project recently where we looked at marine algal DNA spanning the holocene. The methods of extracting and analyzing DNA fragments are progressing rapidly. But you are still limited by the preservation of a sediment record and the abundance of your target species. 
 

 

 

 

@Doctor Mud I agree (and sorry for the late response)! Full body fossils of Chondrichyans as a whole aren't too common in the fossil record since most of there body is made up of cartilage (which makes their bodies more flexible and helped the group survive over millions of years, but breaks down once the animal dies). Teeth, spines of some Chondrichyans, and vertebra are the most common fossils of Chondricthyans someone is likely to find. You're also right the Mississippi River (with it's ever shifting banks and shape) is not exactly the best place for fossil preservation. Lag deposits and outcrops near or at estuaries while utilizing core sampling of the areas would probably be the best bet at finding Chondricthyan fossils of any kind in the Mississippi River area.

[Joseph Fossil]

On 2/12/2023 at 8:14 PM, Doctor Mud said:

Using paleontology to look at changes in river ecosystems is something I’ve thought a bit about. I’ve done this a lot to look at changes in wetland and lake ecosystems. 
 

The thing that makes it so difficult even “just” going back to late Pleistocene is the nature of rivers and river deposits. Rivers are constantly changing course and the river bed sediments are constantly on the move. You can get area within river systems like lakes etc. that have a much better chance of preserving a continuous long term record.

 

But - you usually need a process that concentrates shark remains in order to have a good chance of studying them and making meaningful observations. A lag deposit or similar. 
 

estuaries might be your best bet, but then finding outcrops would be tricky for holocene estuarine sediments. You would need to core, and then your chances. Of find shark remains? Very slim. 
 

Ancient DNA might be a solution, I was involved in a project recently where we looked at marine algal DNA spanning the holocene. The methods of extracting and analyzing DNA fragments are progressing rapidly. But you are still limited by the preservation of a sediment record and the abundance of your target species. 
 

 

 

 

 

@Doctor Mud But I think you hit the nail on the head with your analyzing Pleistocene-Holocene DNA suggestion. It's a pretty good idea! This would give any scientist studying this topic a chance to see how far back these populations of Mississippi River Chondricthyans inhabited the region and if they've been there for long (like at least Pliocene) or are relatively (in geologic terms, Late Pleistocene-early Holocene) recent arrivals?

 

This kinda reminds me of how the current freshwater stingray diversity in the rivers of South America is largely due to the drying up of the gigantic Lake Pebas around the Pliocene, resulting in the stingrays undergoing a rapid and impressive evolutionary diversification.

 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0182740

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0262407921005959

[Cam28]

As someone who's also been bitten by the "River loving" bug in recent years, this thread was a breath of fresh air. (Not that I needed confirmation, I've read books by people who must love some of the rivers I do- as much, if not more than I do)

 

& I had never expected to deeply love & lose plenty of peace of mind over environmental catastrophies/ declines over some of my fav rivers of my home state. Just letting you know you're not alone in those sentiments/ loathing some selfish actions of man... I would name drop which rivers I'm particularly fond of, but never know who's watching here and of their intentions. Just shoot me a message if ever need to chat (but I'll still always have a fondness of evolutionary history and modern presence of sharks, crocodilians, etc too). & Sure my fav rivers aren't as ancient as the Mississippi, but I know even 1 million years in an incomprehensible amount of time, with Loads of fluctuations and changes most anywhere

[NickG]

Unfortunately the fossil record along the Mississippi River simply is nearly nonexistent... We considered this but could find nothing in the published accounts that shed light on this issue. I would expect that if they were more common that we would see more utilization among indigenous people. One thing that bothers me is that this weird trivia is not a bigger deal in Alton. We corresponded with their local historical groups and got very little information we had not gotten ourselves reviewing the published lit and the gray lit.

[NickG]

Quote

Today, the Mississippi River is one of the most industrialized rivers in the world, with many locks and dams in places that previously allowed Chondricthyans to enter as upstream as Alton Illinois. This is a phenomena that unfortunately is still occurring both in the US and across the world today from places as far away and China and Brazil, Pakistan to Russia, and Cambodia and Australia, disrupting natural river flows that make regions more prone to sever flooding effects and causing a terrifying decline in large bodied freshwater fish that migrant frequently across a whole rivers lengths (and also contributing to the Human induced climate crisis as all the dead animals that pile up at the bottom of these dams produce high amounts of methane). 

 

I'm not sure we can say that this phenomenon of deep exploration into the Upper MRB is common or even deep exploration into the far reaches of the lower MRB NEAR the start of the upper MRB is that common. We couldn't find much evidence for it. And as we noted in our update, the one post Lock & Dam construction instance turned out to be a hoax (and not even a bull shark!). 

 

Deep exploration of freshwater systems never seems to run as far as the Alton, Illinois case. I can say as an author on both of those papers, I am personally deeply skeptical of the Alton, Illinois case not having a fishy explanation, even if I couldn't find evidence of that.

 

what is your source about dead fish pile ups at the bottom of dams? I would expect that given the water systems flow AWAY from the dams that any dead animals would flow downstream too.

 

Other large bodied fishes do seem to be able to migrate through the lock and dam system on the upper MRB. This was a point in our paper, I think the follow-up? The lack of VERIFIABLE reported cases of sharks in the upper MRB post lock and snarge construction suggests that the basin is no longer navigable for them for some reason. Other climatic factors could be affecting where they chose to explore, we simply don't have enough info. We do know that they periodically explore other coastal river systems (the Potomac, the Tombigbee, etc). We don't know exactly how often it occurs, only when people encounter them. There are lots of big questions still around this, they're just not the kind of questions that will get research grants or that someone could really do a thesis on.

Edited June 30, 2023 by Nick G.

[NickG]

On 2/12/2023 at 2:48 PM, Joseph Fossil said:

 

But these are not the only cases of Chondricthyans found in the Mississippi River as shown by the reports and articles here:

 

http://chnep.wateratlas.usf.edu/upload/documents/Essential_habitat_of.pdf

(Specifically pg. 10)

 

Rafinesque, C.S. (1820) Ichthyologia ohiensis, or Natural history of the fishes inhabiting the river Ohio and its tributary

streams, preceded by a physical description of the Ohio and its branches. W.G. Hunt, Lexington, Kentucky, 90 pp.

https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.6892

 

Jordan, D.S. and Evermann, B.W. (1896). The fishes of North and Middle America. Bulletin of the US National Museum 47:1-1240.

 

https://www.actionnews5.com/story/12943330/memphis-woman-photographs-stingray-in-mississippi-river/

 

 

 

It's misleading to cite the report on sawfish -- these are in the LOWER MRB and in the delta as it enters the gulf. A lot of brackish and saltwater fish go in and out of these transitional environments. Also, the deep exploration of sawfish into the Mississippi appears to have not much evidence. None of the cited authors are arguing for a deep exploration. Even if there were examples in the lower reaches of the Ohio, that doesn't tell us much. The Ohio River enters the Mississippi south of the lock and dam system.

[Joseph Fossil]

On 6/30/2023 at 12:57 PM, Nick G. said:

 

I'm not sure we can say that this phenomenon of deep exploration into the Upper MRB is common or even deep exploration into the far reaches of the lower MRB NEAR the start of the upper MRB is that common. We couldn't find much evidence for it. And as we noted in our update, the one post Lock & Dam construction instance turned out to be a hoax (and not even a bull shark!). 

 

Deep exploration of freshwater systems never seems to run as far as the Alton, Illinois case. I can say as an author on both of those papers, I am personally deeply skeptical of the Alton, Illinois case not having a fishy explanation, even if I couldn't find evidence of that.

 

what is your source about dead fish pile ups at the bottom of dams? I would expect that given the water systems flow AWAY from the dams that any dead animals would flow downstream too.

 

Other large bodied fishes do seem to be able to migrate through the lock and dam system on the upper MRB. This was a point in our paper, I think the follow-up? The lack of VERIFIABLE reported cases of sharks in the upper MRB post lock and snarge construction suggests that the basin is no longer navigable for them for some reason. Other climatic factors could be affecting where they chose to explore, we simply don't have enough info. We do know that they periodically explore other coastal river systems (the Potomac, the Tombigbee, etc). We don't know exactly how often it occurs, only when people encounter them. There are lots of big questions still around this, they're just not the kind of questions that will get research grants or that someone could really do a thesis on.

 

@Nick G. Here are some sources for the fish pile up at the dams. My apologizes for not including them earlier.

 

https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/bio-tech-guidance-hydroacoustic-effects-110215-a11y.pdf

 

https://www.cs.cornell.edu/gomes/udiscoverit/amazon-ecovistas/flecker_et_al_amazon_hydropower_science_submission_05-10-21.pdf

(Do not circulate this one)

 

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/environmental-conservation/article/abs/hydroelectric-dams-in-the-brazilian-amazon-as-sources-of-greenhouse-gases/B02E5246EF25F78DD96E05E9EBCC79CD

 

http://cybrary.fomb.org/FOSL/Research/Greenhouse Gases/Fearnside 2015 Emissions from tropical hydropower and the IPCC.pdf

 

http://philip.inpa.gov.br/publ_livres/2021/Fearnside_et_al-2021-Chapter-20-Aquataic_ecosystems-Amazon-Assessment-Report.pdf

[Joseph Fossil]

On 6/30/2023 at 3:03 PM, Nick G. said:

 

 

It's misleading to cite the report on sawfish -- these are in the LOWER MRB and in the delta as it enters the gulf. A lot of brackish and saltwater fish go in and out of these transitional environments. Also, the deep exploration of sawfish into the Mississippi appears to have not much evidence. None of the cited authors are arguing for a deep exploration. Even if there were examples in the lower reaches of the Ohio, that doesn't tell us much. The Ohio River enters the Mississippi south of the lock and dam system.

 

@Nick G. I appreciate your input and your right about the Rush Island Missouri shark case from 1995 (yes that was definitely a hoax with the specimen turning out to be an Atlantic Sharpnose Shark (Rhizoprionodon terraenovae) bought at a local market). However, the researchers from the 2022 paper who analyzed the Alton Bull Shark (Carcharhinus leucas) specimen looked into a story that it could've also been a hoax, but determined there was sufficient evidence to show that not only could the hoax story be unverified, but it's likely that the Individual from Alton was indeed real. 

 

 

Shell, Ryan & Gardner, Nicholas & Hrabik, Robert. (2022). Updates on putative bull shark (Carcharhinus leucas) occurrences in the upper Mississippi River Basin of North America. 36. 10.47193/mafis.3612023010101. 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362847015_Updates_on_putative_bull_shark_Carcharhinus_leucas_occurrences_in_the_upper_Mississippi_River_Basin_of_North_America

 

 

As for the potential Pristidae records in the Mississippi River, my apologizes if it appeared I wanted to misled anyone by including those examples as that was not my intention. My intention was to include every single example I could find of Chondricthyans records in the Mississippi River. I'll agree with you fully that the 1820s records are not the best in terms of detail or able to be verified, But I'll confess it is somewhat possible as this group has also been known to survive in freshwater environments such as the Amazon River of South America and the Fitzroy River of Australia.

[Joseph Fossil]

On 6/14/2023 at 8:41 PM, Cam28 said:

As someone who's also been bitten by the "River loving" bug in recent years, this thread was a breath of fresh air. (Not that I needed confirmation, I've read books by people who must love some of the rivers I do- as much, if not more than I do)

 

& I had never expected to deeply love & lose plenty of peace of mind over environmental catastrophies/ declines over some of my fav rivers of my home state. Just letting you know you're not alone in those sentiments/ loathing some selfish actions of man... I would name drop which rivers I'm particularly fond of, but never know who's watching here and of their intentions. Just shoot me a message if ever need to chat (but I'll still always have a fondness of evolutionary history and modern presence of sharks, crocodilians, etc too). & Sure my fav rivers aren't as ancient as the Mississippi, but I know even 1 million years in an incomprehensible amount of time, with Loads of fluctuations and changes most anywhere

 

@Cam28 Thank you so much bro for this! I appreciate the support (sorry I didn't see this sooner, I've been very busy with Construction in my house recently) and I'll definitely message you soon if you want to chat!  You've truly made my day!

[Joseph Fossil]

On 6/30/2023 at 12:57 PM, Nick G. said:

 

I'm not sure we can say that this phenomenon of deep exploration into the Upper MRB is common or even deep exploration into the far reaches of the lower MRB NEAR the start of the upper MRB is that common. We couldn't find much evidence for it. And as we noted in our update, the one post Lock & Dam construction instance turned out to be a hoax (and not even a bull shark!). 

 

Deep exploration of freshwater systems never seems to run as far as the Alton, Illinois case. I can say as an author on both of those papers, I am personally deeply skeptical of the Alton, Illinois case not having a fishy explanation, even if I couldn't find evidence of that.

 

what is your source about dead fish pile ups at the bottom of dams? I would expect that given the water systems flow AWAY from the dams that any dead animals would flow downstream too.

 

Other large bodied fishes do seem to be able to migrate through the lock and dam system on the upper MRB. This was a point in our paper, I think the follow-up? The lack of VERIFIABLE reported cases of sharks in the upper MRB post lock and snarge construction suggests that the basin is no longer navigable for them for some reason. Other climatic factors could be affecting where they chose to explore, we simply don't have enough info. We do know that they periodically explore other coastal river systems (the Potomac, the Tombigbee, etc). We don't know exactly how often it occurs, only when people encounter them. There are lots of big questions still around this, they're just not the kind of questions that will get research grants or that someone could really do a thesis on.

 

@Nick G. You made some good points (yes a follow up paper about the Alton specimen would be good) and I don't want to make you feel like I'm not acknowledging your points (seriously your points are pretty good).

 

I also just realized your one of the papers researchers....I'm so so so sorry I didn't recognize you sooner!

 

I am pretty curious though, when researching the Alton specimen what was the evidence (how little it maybe) about the specimen and verification of the Alton record?

[NickG]

The Thomerson et al. paper provides the most comprehensive review of the Alton case.¹ We didn't say it had been proven, but rather that it's never been satisfactorily falsified. The allegations made by Cousins... we sought follow-up from Cousins and his editor, but they did not reply to us. This makes me think that they had made a libelous claim vs having actual reason to believe the Alton case was a hoax. I would still possibly believe the Alton case was a hoax, but I want evidence for a hoax.

 

¹ The publisher copy of the paper is linked in that sentence. Mirrors to freely download available here: 
https://file.io/KK99oyejME0W (expires in 14 days)

https://filebin.net/22s048bg88j2e9pk (expires in 6 days)

https://www.transfernow.net/dl/20230703ksomuoWZ (expires in 7 days)