Valvata utahensis

Call, 1884

Desert Valvata

G2Imperiled Found in 1 roadless area NatureServe Explorer →
G2ImperiledGlobal Rank
VulnerableIUCN
MediumThreat Impact
Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.118665
Element CodeIMGASE5090
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryInvertebrate Animal
IUCNVulnerable
Endemicendemic to a single nation
KingdomAnimalia
PhylumMollusca
ClassGastropoda
OrderHeterostropha
FamilyValvatidae
GenusValvata
Concept Reference
Turgeon, D. D., J. F. Quinn, Jr., A. E. Bogan, E. V. Coan, F. G. Hochberg, W. G. Lyons, P. M. Mikkelsen, R. J. Neves, C. F. E. Roper, G. Rosenberg, B. Roth, A. Scheltema, F. G. Thompson, M. Vecchione, and J. D. Williams. 1998. Common and scientific names of aquatic invertebrates from the United States and Canada: Mollusks. 2nd Edition. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 26, Bethesda, Maryland. 526 pp.
Taxonomic Comments
Subtle variation in shell morphology between Valvata utahensis and Valvata humeralis reflects a long-term evolutionary divergence based on a recent genetic study (Miller et al., 2006). Miller et al. (2006) showed that comparable levels of nuclear genetic variation exist within each of six locations examined, however, reduced mitochondrial sequence diversity was observed at Thousand Springs compared with the other locations examined. Miller et al. (2006) further illustrated that the species shows no genetic structure within locations over relatively small physical distances (up to 3 km) and suggest active dispersal of individuals (via crawling) and pssive dispersal (downstream displacement) may have produced this pattern.
Conservation Status
Review Date2010-10-04
Change Date2010-10-04
Edition Date2010-10-04
Edition AuthorsCordeiro, J. (2010)
Threat ImpactMedium
Range Extent1000-5000 square km (about 400-2000 square miles)
Number of Occurrences6 - 20
Rank Reasons
The range was previously thought to have been reduced to only a handful of sites in Idaho with one of six sites having unique genetic structure; extirpated from former range in Utah; subfossil in California. The species has recently been found to be discontinuously distributed over 410 km of the Snake River and tributaries and occurs in a variety of habitats (including reservoirs). Threats such as competition from the New Zealand mudsnail, dewatering, hydropower projects, and degraded water quality, have been shown to have a much lower impact than was initially presumed.
Range Extent Comments
Historically known from the Snake River in Idaho and from northern Utah. Known from fossils in Honey Lake, Lassen County, California (Taylor and Smith, 1981). Although it was formerly thought to be limited to a few springs and mainstem Snake River sites in the Hagerman Valley, Idaho, and a few sites above and below Minidoka Dam and immediately downstream of American Falls Dam (USFWS, 1992), it is now known to be discontinuously distributed in at least 410 km of the Snake River in Idaho and some associated tributary streams (increase of 196 km) (USFWS, 2010).
Occurrences Comments
Although previously only known from a few sites in the Hagerman Valley and at a few sites below American Falls Dam in Idaho; extirpated in Utah (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992; Hovingh, 2004); recent specimens were collected in 2002 from six locations within the Snake River mainstem ranging from Lower Walcott to American Falls Reservoir about 50 river km away as well as at Thousand Springs near Bliss and in the Big Wood River near Bliss, Idaho (Miller et al., 2006). Miller et al. (2006) noted of the six locations, the Thousand Springs population was genetically distinct from those at Snake River Vista, Coldwater, Lower Walcott, American Falls Reservoir, and north fork of Big Wood River. Current distribution includes the Snake River from RM 585 upstream to the confluence of the Henry's Fork with the Snake River (RM 837) with colonies near the towns of Firth (RM 777.5), Shelley (RM 784.6), Payne (RM 802.6), and Roberts (RM 815), and in the Henry's Fork 15 km upstream from the Snake River confluence (at RM 8342.3); as well as tributaries such as Box Canyon Creek (RM 588), and one location in the Big Wood River (USFWS, 2010).
Threat Impact Comments
In the laboratory, increasing densities of New Zealand mudsnails (Potomopyrgus antipodarum) limited the growth rate and absolute growth of this species (Lysne and Koetsier, 2008); however 10 years of coexistence has shown no evidence of local extirpations due to competition between the species (USFWS, 2010). Although dewatering of the Snake River has been considered a potential threat, the species is able to re-colonize most submerged zones during summer high flows (USFWS, 2010). Proposed hydropower projects discussed in USFWS (1992) are no longer moving forward plus recent studies have shown the snail is not as limited geographically or in regard to habitat as was once thought making it less susceptible to the threat from existing hydropower dams (USFWS, 2010). Similarly, the current known tolerance of wide habitat types and water quality no longer makes it as susceptible to degraded water quality than was once thought (USFWS, 2010).
Ecology & Habitat

Diagnostic Characteristics

Polymorphic species exhibiting a wide range of forms: (1) conspicuously bicarinate (dorsal and ventral; Valvata utahensis morph horatii) in Bear Lake, Utah; (2) conspicuously dorsal carinated with ventral angulations; (3) whorls with a flat, angular appearance; and (4) dorsal carina and angulation absent, whorls rounded but with ventral angulation (Hovingh, 2004). Valvata utahensis is distinguished from Valvata humeralis based on the much taller shell spire and prominant carinae (as opposed to a flatter, noncarinate shell in V. humeralis) (Miller et al., 2006).

Habitat

This snail was initially found in deep pools adjacent to rapids, or flowing waters associated with large spring complexes among submergent aquatic plants on fine silt substrate and not found on pure gravel-bottoms (USFWS, 1992), but this limited habitat type has been shown to be false (USFWS, 2010). Lysne and Koetsier (2006) found this species preferred pebble substrates in the laboratory but has generally been observed in the field in deep waters (2-8 m) with silt substrates although is also known from shallow waters (<2 m) in free-flowing reaches of the Snake River on larger-diameter substrates similar to what was found in their laboratory study. It is now known from a greater number of habitat types including mainstem, springs, channels, reservoirs, and tributaries in variable substrates (fine sediments and more coarse substrates in areas with and without macrophytes), depths (1-14 m, ideally 5.6 m) and temperature (37.4-75.2F, ideally 63F) (USFWS, 2009).

Reproduction

This species is hermaphroditic. Miller et al. (2006) showed that outcrossing is likely common in natural populations, but could not eliminate the possibility that this species is capable of producing offspring via self-fertilization.
Other Nations (1)
United StatesN2
ProvinceRankNative
UtahSXYes
IdahoS2Yes
WyomingSNRYes
Threat Assessments
ThreatScopeSeverityTiming
7 - Natural system modificationsLarge - restrictedModerate - slightHigh - moderate
7.2 - Dams & water management/useLarge - restrictedModerate - slightHigh - moderate
8 - Invasive & other problematic species, genes & diseasesRestricted (11-30%)Slight or 1-10% pop. declineHigh - moderate
8.1 - Invasive non-native/alien species/diseasesRestricted (11-30%)Slight or 1-10% pop. declineInsignificant/negligible or past
9 - PollutionLarge - restrictedSlight or 1-10% pop. declineHigh - moderate
9.2 - Industrial & military effluentsLarge - restrictedSlight or 1-10% pop. declineHigh - moderate
9.3 - Agricultural & forestry effluentsLarge - restrictedSlight or 1-10% pop. declineHigh - moderate

Roadless Areas (1)
Utah (1)
AreaForestAcres
Clarkston Mtn.Caribou National Forest7,099
References (15)
  1. Freshwater Mollusk Conservation Society (FMCS). 2021. The 2021 checklist of freshwater gastropods (Mollusca: Gastropods) of the United States and Canada. Considered and approved by the Gastropods Names Subcommittee December 2020. Online: https://molluskconservation.org/MServices_Names-Gastropods.html
  2. Frest, T. J. and E. J. Johannes. 1992. Distribution and Ecology of the Endemic and Relict Mollusc Fauna of Idaho TNC's Thousand Springs Preserve. Final Report Prepared for The Nature Conservancy of Idaho.
  3. Hovingh, P. 2004. Intermountain freshwater mollusks, USA (<i>Margaritifera</i>, <i>Anodonta</i>, <i>Gonidea</i>, <i>Valvata</i>, <i>Ferrissia</i>): geography, conservation, and fish management implications. Monographs of the Western North American Naturalist, 2: 109-135.
  4. Lysne, S. 2009. A Guide to Southern Idaho's Freshwater Mollusks. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 43 pp.
  5. Lysne, S. and P. Koetsier. 2006a. Experimental studies on habitat preference and tolerances of three species of snails from the Snake River of southern Idaho, U.S.A. American Malacological Bulletin 21(1/2): 77-85.
  6. Lysne, S. and P. Koetsier. 2006b. Growth rate and thermal tolerance of two endangered Snake River snails. Western North American Naturalist 66(2): 230-238.
  7. Lysne, S. and P. Koetsier. 2008. Comparison of desert valvata snail growth at three densitites of the invasive New Zealand mudsnail. Western North American Naturalist, 68(1): 103-106.
  8. Miller, M.P., D.E. Weigel, and K.E. Mock. 2006b. Patterns of genetic structure in the endangered aquatic gastropod <i>Valvata utahensis</i> (Mollusca: Valvatidae) at small and large spatial scales. Freshwater Biology 51: 2362-2375.
  9. Miller, M.P, D.E. Weigel, K.E. Mock, and B. Roth. 2006a. Evidence for an outcrossing reproductive strategy in the hermaphroditic heterobranch gastropod <i>Valvata utahensis</i> (Valvatidae), with notes on the genetic differentiation of <i>V. utahensis</i> and <i>V. humeralis</i>. Journal of Molluscan Studies 72: 397-403.
  10. Taylor, D.W. and G.R. Smith. 1981 [1982]. Pliocene molluscs and fishes from northeastern California and northwestern Nevada. Contributions from the Museum of Paleontology, The University of Michigan 25(18):339-413.
  11. Turgeon, D. D., J. F. Quinn, Jr., A. E. Bogan, E. V. Coan, F. G. Hochberg, W. G. Lyons, P. M. Mikkelsen, R. J. Neves, C. F. E. Roper, G. Rosenberg, B. Roth, A. Scheltema, F. G. Thompson, M. Vecchione, and J. D. Williams. 1998. Common and scientific names of aquatic invertebrates from the United States and Canada: Mollusks. 2nd Edition. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 26, Bethesda, Maryland. 526 pp.
  12. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1990. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed Endangered Status for Five Idaho Aquatic Snails. Proposed Rule. Federal Register 55(243):51931-36.
  13. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1992. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Endangered Status or Threatened Status for Five Aquatic Snails in South Central Idaho. Final Rule. Federal Register. 57(240):59244-56.
  14. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1995. Snake River Aquatic Species Recovery Plan. Snake River Basin Office, Ecological Services, Boise, Idaho. 92 pp.
  15. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2010. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; removal of the Utah (desert) Valvata snail from the federal list of endangered and threatened wildlife. Federal Register 75(164):52272-52282