Mytilus galloprovincialis (Mediterranean mussel)
Index
- Pictures
- Identity
- Summary of Invasiveness
- Taxonomic Tree
- Description
- Distribution
- Distribution Table
- Introductions
- Habitat List
- Biology and Ecology
- Water Tolerances
- Natural enemies
- Pathway Causes
- Pathway Vectors
- Impact Summary
- Environmental Impact
- Risk and Impact Factors
- Uses List
- References
- Contributors
- Distribution Maps
Don't need the entire report?
Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.
Generate reportIdentity
Top of pagePreferred Scientific Name
- Mytilus galloprovincialis Lamarck, 1819
Preferred Common Name
- Mediterranean mussel
Other Scientific Names
- Mytilus edulis form galloprovincialis
- Mytilus edulis galloprovincialis
International Common Names
- English: black mussel; Black Sea mussel; blue mussel; common mussel; edible mussel; European mussel; mussel
- Spanish: mejillón; mejillón Mediterráneo
- French: moule; moule commune; moule Méditerranéenne
- Arabic: tamr el bahr
Local Common Names
- Canada: gallo mussel
- Croatia: dagnja
- Germany: Miesmuschel; Mittelmeer-Miesmuschel
- Greece: mýdi
- Israel: zidpit galit
- Italy: mitilo
- Spain: clotxina; musclo
- Turkey: midye
- Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro): dagnja
Summary of Invasiveness
Top of pageThe Mediterranean mussel, Mytilus galloprovincialis, has been introduced to various regions around the world outside its native Mediterranean range, both unintentionally through shipping and through cultivation. It is considered highly invasive, at least in some parts of the world, due to its quick rate of spread and its ability to displace and outcompete native mussels.
Taxonomic Tree
Top of page- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Metazoa
- Phylum: Mollusca
- Class: Bivalvia
- Subclass: Pteriomorphia
- Order: Mytiloida
- Unknown: Mytiloidea
- Family: Mytilidae
- Genus: Mytilus
- Species: Mytilus galloprovincialis
Description
Top of pageAll Mytilus species have distinctive shells ranging in colouration from black with blue or purplish hues to dark brown and occasionally light brown. Although Mytilus galloprovincialis differs in shape from other Mytilus species, in practice analyses of multiple morphological characters in combination (i.e. morphometrics) are most frequently used to reliably distinguish it from other Mytilus species (McDonald et al., 1991; Beaumont, 2008; Gardner and Thompson, 2009). In Puget Sound (Pacific North America), Elliot et al. (2008) report that ratios of shell height to length can be used to identify M. galloprovincialis and M. trossulus. In the Sea of Japan, Semenikhina et al. (2008) describe morphological differences between M. galloprovincialis and M. trossulus larvae. According to ISSG (2019), M. galloprovincialis tends to grow larger than other species, up to 15 cm, although typically it only reaches 5-8 cm.
Distribution
Top of pageMytilus galloprovincialis lives on hard substrates from the intertidal zone to depths of 40 m. It is found along coasts and rocky shores, and in sheltered harbours and estuaries. The native range is in the Mediterranean (Barsotti and Meluzzi, 1968) and the eastern Atlantic, from Ireland and the United Kingdom (Gosling, 1992) to northern Africa (Comesana et al., 1998); presumably range expansion into the Atlantic has been natural. This species is also found on the Pacific coast of North America (McDonald and Koehn, 1988) and in Japan (Wilkins et al., 1983), Hong Kong (Lee and Morton, 1985), South Africa (Grant and Cherry, 1985), Chile (Hilbish et al., 2000; Gérard et al., 2008), and Australia (Hilbish et al., 2000; Gérard et al., 2008). Introduction to these regions has undoubtedly been due to human activities, unless the native Australian mussels are considered to be part of the same species as M. galloprovincialis (McDonald et al., 1991; Daguin and Borsa, 2000; Gérard et al., 2008; Hilbish et al., 2000). Historical introductions have probably been accidental, but this species is actively cultivated so aquaculture may also be the source of secondary introductions; it was introduced into Washington State through hatcheries because of its putative greater resistance to disseminated-hemic neoplasia than the native M. trossulus, and its subsequent spread in the region has probably been through shipping and boating (Wonham, 2004). Fly et al. (2015) provide a paper on the physiology and biogeography of European mussels (including M. galloprovincialis) in response to climate change.
Delineating the exact range of Mytilus galloprovincialis is complicated by the lack of reliable morphological differences between Mytilus species and by hybridization. For example, in France, Britain and Ireland, M. galloprovincialis is sympatric with M. edulis and the two interbreed (Gosling, 1992). Outside its native range, M. galloprovincialis is known to hybridize with M. trossulus in the Pacific (Rawson and Hilbish, 1995; Brannock et al., 2009). In Chile, Australia, and New Zealand there is evidence for two distinct types of mussels, one of which is M. galloprovincialis (Hilbish et al., 2000; Gérard et al., 2008), but whether or not they are hybridizing is unknown.
Mytilus galloprovincialis is cultivated in Albania, Bulgaria (where it is one of the most important commercial species -- Merdzhanova et al., 2016), China, Croatia, Egypt, France, Greece, Italy, Morocco, Portugal, the Russian Federation, Spain, South Africa, Turkey, Ukraine, the former Yugoslavia (Hickman, 1992; FIGIS, 2005), Canada (J Shields, University of Queensland, Australia, personal communication, 2010), and Scotland (UK) (Beaumont, 2008). Because of the difficulties of species identification, it is likely that some farms may be inadvertently rearing M. galloprovincialis in addition to native Mytilus species. Aquaculture facilities may use new techniques to produce triploid and tetraploid mussels, which are functionally sterile, thereby eliminating the risk of wild populations establishing (McEnnulty et al., 2001).
Distribution Table
Top of pageThe distribution in this summary table is based on all the information available. When several references are cited, they may give conflicting information on the status. Further details may be available for individual references in the Distribution Table Details section which can be selected by going to Generate Report.
Last updated: 10 Feb 2022Continent/Country/Region | Distribution | Last Reported | Origin | First Reported | Invasive | Reference | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Africa |
|||||||
Algeria | Present | Native | Wild | ||||
Egypt | Present | Native | |||||
Libya | Present | Native | Wild | ||||
Morocco | Present | Native | |||||
Namibia | Present | Introduced | First reported: 1990 - 1999 | ||||
South Africa | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
Tunisia | Present | Cultured in Bizerta Lagoon | |||||
Asia |
|||||||
China | Present | ||||||
Hong Kong | Present | Introduced | 1983 | ||||
Japan | Present | Introduced | 1926 | ||||
North Korea | Present | Introduced | Wild | ||||
South Korea | Present | Introduced | |||||
Turkey | Present | Native | Wild and cultured | ||||
Europe |
|||||||
Albania | Present | Native | |||||
Bosnia and Herzegovina | Present | Native | Wild | ||||
Bulgaria | Present | Native | |||||
Croatia | Present | Native | Wild and cultured | ||||
France | Present | Native | |||||
Greece | Present | Native | Includes aquaculture | ||||
Ireland | Present | Introduced | Wild | ||||
Italy | Present | Native | |||||
Netherlands | Present | Introduced | Wild | ||||
Portugal | Present | Native | |||||
Romania | Present | Native | Wild | ||||
Russia | Present | ||||||
Serbia and Montenegro | Present | Native | |||||
Spain | Present | Native | |||||
Ukraine | Present | ||||||
United Kingdom | Present | Introduced | 1924 | ||||
North America |
|||||||
Canada | Present | Present based on regional distribution. | |||||
-British Columbia | Present | Introduced | |||||
Mexico | Present | Introduced | |||||
United States | Present | Introduced | First reported: 1940s | ||||
-California | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
-Hawaii | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
-Washington | Present | Introduced | |||||
Oceania |
|||||||
Australia | Present | ||||||
-Tasmania | Present | ||||||
-Victoria | Present | Wild and cultured | |||||
-Western Australia | Present | ||||||
New Zealand | Present | ||||||
Sea Areas |
|||||||
Atlantic - Eastern Central | Present | ||||||
Atlantic - Northeast | Present | ||||||
Atlantic - Southeast | Present | Introduced | |||||
Indian Ocean - Eastern | Present | ||||||
Mediterranean and Black Sea | Present | Native | |||||
Pacific - Eastern Central | Present | Introduced | |||||
Pacific - Northeast | Present | Introduced | |||||
Pacific - Northwest | Present | ||||||
Pacific - Southeast | Present | ||||||
Pacific - Southwest | Present | ||||||
South America |
|||||||
Chile | Present | Introduced | 2000 |
Introductions
Top of pageIntroduced to | Introduced from | Year | Reason | Introduced by | Established in wild through | References | Notes | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Natural reproduction | Continuous restocking | |||||||
Hong Kong | 1983 | Unknown | Yes | No | ||||
Japan | 1926 | Unknown | Yes | No | ||||
Mexico | Mediterranean and Black Sea | Unknown | Yes | No | ||||
Namibia | 1990s | Aquaculture (pathway cause) | Unknown | No | No | |||
South Africa | Mediterranean and Black Sea | 1970s | Unknown | Yes | No | |||
USA | Mediterranean and Black Sea | 19th century | Unknown | Yes | No | |||
Netherlands | France | Self-propelled (pathway cause) | No | No | FAO (2017) |
Habitat List
Top of pageCategory | Sub-Category | Habitat | Presence | Status |
---|---|---|---|---|
Brackish | Estuaries | Present, no further details | ||
Marine | Inshore marine | Principal habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) | |
Marine | Inshore marine | Principal habitat | Natural | |
Marine | Inshore marine | Principal habitat | Productive/non-natural | |
Marine | Benthic zone | Principal habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) | |
Marine | Benthic zone | Principal habitat | Natural |
Biology and Ecology
Top of pageReproductive Biology
Genetics
There have been numerous population genetic studies of M. galloprovincialis, motivated by the poor resolution of morphology for species identification and the propensity of this species to hybridize with other mussels – with M. edulis in the natural species range, and M. trossulus in its introduced range.
Genetic markers have been developed to differentiate these species, but each marker varies in its ability to distinguish between them:
- ITS – distinguishes between M. trossulus and M. galloprovincialis/M. edulis, but not between M. galloprovincialis and M. edulis (Heath et al., 1995).
- PLIIa – distinguishes between M. trossulus and M. galloprovincialis/M. edulis, but not between M. galloprovincialis and M. edulis (Heath et al., 1995).
- Glu5’ (same as Me15/16 (Inoue et al., 1995)) – a nuclear DNA locus that produces three alleles diagnostic for M. edulis, M. galloprovincialisand M. trossulus. Hybrid mussels are identified as heterozygous (Rawson et al., 1996).
Genomic research of M. galloprovincialis has recently been advanced by the latest next-generation pyrosequencing technology (Craft et al., 2010). This recent pyrosequencing has provided extensive genomic information for M. galloprovincialis and identified novel expression differences among various tissues, mitochondria and associated microorganisms (Craft et al., 2010). It will also facilitate the much needed production of an oligonucleotide microarray for M. galloprovincialis, further advancing genomic research of this organism.
Water Tolerances
Top of pageParameter | Minimum Value | Maximum Value | Typical Value | Status | Life Stage | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bicarbonate (mg/l) | <=5 | >=30 | Egg | Harmful outside this range | ||
Salinity (part per thousand) | 27 | 40 | Optimum | Egg | ||
Water temperature (ºC temperature) | 13 | 25 | Optimum | Adult | ||
Water temperature (ºC temperature) | 15 | 20 | Optimum | Egg |
Natural enemies
Top of pageNatural enemy | Type | Life stages | Specificity | References | Biological control in | Biological control on |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Arcotheres atrinae | Parasite | Sun et al. (2006) | ||||
Asterias rubens | Predator | |||||
Aves | Predator | |||||
Carcinus maenas | Predator | |||||
Charybdis japonica | Predator | Oikawa et al. (2004) | ||||
Diplodus sargus sargus | Predator | |||||
Ectopleura crocea | Aquatic|Adult; Aquatic|Larval | Fitridge and Keough (2013) | ||||
Hexaplex trunculus | Predator | Güler and Lök (2016) | ||||
Imogine mediterranea | Predator | Gammoudi et al. (2017) | ||||
Pisaster ochraceus | Predator | Wonham (1999) | ||||
Sparus aurata | Predator | Glamuzina et al. (2014) | ||||
Telmessus acutidens | Predator | Oikawa et al. (2004) |
Pathway Vectors
Top of pageVector | Notes | Long Distance | Local | References |
---|---|---|---|---|
Ship ballast water and sediment | Yes | |||
Ship hull fouling | Yes |
Impact Summary
Top of pageCategory | Impact |
---|---|
Fisheries / aquaculture | Positive |
Native fauna | Positive and negative |
Environmental Impact
Top of pageImpact on Habitats
A number of studies have looked at the impact of mussel farming on the surrounding natural habitat, e.g. Neofitou et al. (2014) and Nizzoli et al. (2006).
Impact on Biodiversity
The effect of Mytilus galloprovincialis on native species is an area of active study. The effects of introduced M. galloprovincialis at the community level have been best studied in South Africa, where since introduction for aquaculture in the 1970s it has now become the dominant intertidal organism over 1500 km from Namibia to the eastern Cape (Griffiths and Robinson, 2003). North of the Cape of Good Hope, it has displaced a native mussel (Aulacomya atra) and polychaete (Gunnarea gaimardi, formerly Gunnarea capensis) from exposed shorelines, adversely affected one native limpet (Scutellastra argenvillei) in more exposed habitats but not less exposed ones, and caused mass mortality of the crab Ovalipes trimaculatus (Griffiths et al., 1992; Branch and Steffani, 2004); it has had mixed but net positive effects on the abundance of another limpet (Scutellastra granularis) (Branch et al., 2010) and provided an additional source of food for the rare and endangered African black oystercatcher, Haematopus moquini (Branch and Steffani, 2004). On the southern coast of South Africa, M. galloprovincialis and the resident dominant bivalve Perna perna coexist with some niche displacement of each species (Bownes and McQuaid, 2006).
In the Aegean Sea, juveniles of the endangered fan mussel Pinna nobilis have been found growing on M. galloprovincialis in long line and rope aquaculture (Theodorou et al., 2015a).
On the Pacific coast of North America, research has primarily focused on habitat competition and hybridization of Mytilus galloprovincialis with its congener M. trossulus (Heath et al., 1995; Dutton and Hofmann, 2008; Shields et al., 2008, 2010). Historically, M. trossulus was abundant along much of this coast (Geller, 1999), but current distribution is now more restricted to central California and northwards. M. galloprovincialis hybridizes with M. trossulus forming multiple discrete hybrid zones along the entire coast from California up through Puget Sound in Washington (Wonham, 2004) and into Canada (Heath et al., 1995; Yanick et al., 2003; Shields et al., 2008, 2010). In southern California, M. galloprovincialis has become the dominant mussel (Dutton and Hofmann, 2008) and the transition between M. galloprovincialis and M. trossulus appears to be near 40° or 41°N latitude (Suchanek et al., 1997). On Vancouver Island, Canada, hybrid (M. galloprovicialis x M. trossulus) mussels have a higher fitness than either parental species in certain environments (Shields et al., 2008).
Risk and Impact Factors
Top of page- Proved invasive outside its native range
- Abundant in its native range
- Highly adaptable to different environments
- Benefits from human association (i.e. it is a human commensal)
- Fast growing
- Has high reproductive potential
- Reduced native biodiversity
- Threat to/ loss of native species
- Competition - monopolizing resources
- Hybridization
- Rapid growth
- Highly likely to be transported internationally accidentally
- Highly likely to be transported internationally deliberately
Uses List
Top of pageEnvironmental
- Pollution indicator
General
- Research model
Human food and beverage
- Canned meat
- Fresh meat
- Frozen meat
- Meat/fat/offal/blood/bone (whole, cut, fresh, frozen, canned, cured, processed or smoked)
References
Top of pageBeaumont AR, Turner G, Wood AR, Skibinski DOF, 2004. Hybridisation between Mytilus edulis and Mytilus galloprovincialis and performance of pure species and hybrid veliger larvae at different temperatures. J. Ex. Mar. Biol. Ecol., 302(2):177-188
Branch GM, Steffani CN, 2004. Can we predict the effects of alien species? A case history of the invasion of South Africa by Mytilus galloprovincialis (Lamarck). J. Ex. Mar. Biol. Ecol., 300(1/2):189-215
Daguin C, Borsa P, 2000. Genetic relationships of Mytilus galloprovincialis Lamarck populations worldwide: evidence from nuclear-DNA markers. In: Harper EM, Taylor JD, Crane JA, eds. The evolutionary biology of the bivalvia. Geological Society of London Special Publications 111, 389-397
FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department, 2019. Mytilus galloprovincialis (Lamarck, 1819). Rome, Italy: Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations.http://www.fao.org/fishery/species/3529/en
FAO, 2019. FAO yearbook of fishery and aquaculture statistics, 2017: aquaculture production. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.vii + 244 pp. http://www.fao.org/fishery/static/Yearbook/YB2017_USBcard/navigation/index_content_aquaculture_e.htm
FIGIS, 2005. Fisheries Global Information System. Online at www.fao.org. Accessed 25 July 2005
Gosling EM, 1992. Systematic and geographic distribution of Mytilus. In: Gosling EM, ed. The mussel Mytilus: ecology, physiology, genetics and culture. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier, 1-20
Government of British Columbia, 2005. Species list. Online at www.agf.gov.bc.ca/fish_stats/species_list.htm. Accessed 22 July 2005
Grant WS, Cherry MI, 1985. Mytilus galloprovincialis Lmk. In southern Africa. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol., 90:179-191
Griffiths CL, Robinson TB, 2003. Status and impacts of marine alien species in South Africa. In: Proceedings of the third International Conference on Marine Bioinvasions, La Jolla, California, USA [Third International Conference on Marine Bioinvasions, La Jolla, California, USA], 47.
Gutierrez A, Lozano G, Hardisson A, Rubio C, Gonzalez T, 2004. Content of toxic and essential metals in canned mussels commonly consumed in Tenerife, Canary Islands, Spain. J. Food Protection, 67(7):1526-1532
Hickman RW, 1992. Mussel cultivation. In: Gosling E, ed. The mussel Mytilus: ecology, physiology, genetics and culture. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science Publishers BV, 465-510
ISSG, 2005. Global invasive species database. Online at www.issg.org. Accessed 1 July 2005
Lee SY, Morton BS, 1985. The introduction of the Mediterranean mussel Mytilus galloprovincialis into Hong Kong. Malacol. Rev., 18:107-109
Mason J, 1991. Production of mussels. In: Nash CE, ed. World Animal Science C: Production-system approach. Production of Aquatic Animals: Crustaceans, mollusks, amphibians and reptiles. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier, 121-138
Matson SE, Davis JP, Chew KK, 2003. Laboratory hybridization of the mussels, Mytilus trossulus and M. galloprovincialis: larval growth, survival and early development. J. Shellfish Res., 22(2):423-430
McDonald JH, Koehn RK, 1988. The mussels Mytilus galloprovincialis and Mytilus trossulus on the Pacific coast of North America. Mar. Biol., 99:111-118
McDonald JH, Koehn RK, Balakirev ES, Manchenko GP, Pudovkin AI, Sergiyevskii SO, Krutovskii KV, 1990. Species identity of the common mussel inhabiting Asiatic coats of the Pacific Ocean. Biol. Morya, 1990(1):13-22
McDonald JH, Seed R, Koehn RK, 1991. Allozymes and morphometric characters of 3 species of Mytilus in the northern and southern hemispheres. Marine Biology, 111:323-333. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01319403
Oceans Alive, 2005. Online at www.oceansalive.org. Accessed 22 July 2005
Oikawa H, Fujita T, Saito K, Watabe S, Satomi M, Yano Y, 2004. Comparison of paralytic shellfish poisoning toxin between carnivorous crabs (Telmessus acutidens and Charybdis japonica) and their prey mussel (Mytilus galloprovincialis) in an inshore food chain. Toxicon, 43(6):713-719
Ranninger N, 2005. Market outlook - European Perspective. Second International Mussel Forum, Aquaculture Association of Canada. Online at www.aquacultureassociation.ca. Accessed 4 July 2005
Tang QS, Fang JG, Liu H, 2002. Development of mussel aquaculture in China. Bull. Aqua. Assoc. Can., 103(2):66-74
Thébault H, 2005. The Mediterranean Mussel Watch program. Online at www.ciesm.org. Accessed 22 July 2005
Wonham M, 1999. Predicting the spread of an invasive mussel: the changing roles of competition and predation. First National Conference on Marine Bioinvasions, 24-27 January 1999, MIT, Cambridge, MA, USA
WoRMS Editorial Board, 2020. World Register of Marine Species. http://www.marinespecies.org/ doi: 10.14284/170
Distribution References
CABI, 2020. CABI Distribution Database: Status as determined by CABI editor. Wallingford, UK: CABI
CABI, Undated. CABI Compendium: Status inferred from regional distribution. Wallingford, UK: CABI
CABI, Undated a. CABI Compendium: Status as determined by CABI editor. Wallingford, UK: CABI
Daguin C, Borsa P, 2000. Genetic relationships of Mytilus galloprovincialis Lamarck populations worldwide: evidence from nuclear-DNA markers. In: The evolutionary biology of the bivalvia, 111 [ed. by Harper EM, Taylor JD, Crane JA]. Geological Society of London Special Publications. 389-397.
FIGIS, 2005. Fisheries Global Information System., http://www.fao.org
Gosling EM, 1992. Systematic and geographic distribution of Mytilus. In: The mussel Mytilus: ecology, physiology, genetics and culture, [ed. by Gosling EM]. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier. 1-20.
Government of British Columbia, 2005. Species list., http://www.agf.gov.bc.ca/fish_stats/species_list.htm
Grant WS, Cherry MI, 1985. Mytilus galloprovincialis Lmk. In southern Africa. In: J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 90 179-191.
Hickman RW, 1992. Mussel cultivation. In: The mussel Mytilus: ecology, physiology, genetics and culture, [ed. by Gosling E]. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science Publishers BV. 465-510.
ISSG, 2005. Global invasive species database., http://www.issg.org
Lee SY, Morton BS, 1985. The introduction of the Mediterranean mussel Mytilus galloprovincialis into Hong Kong. In: Malacol. Rev. 18 107-109.
McDonald JH, Koehn RK, 1988. The mussels Mytilus galloprovincialis and Mytilus trossulus on the Pacific coast of North America. In: Mar. Biol. 99 111-118.
McDonald JH, Koehn RK, Balakirev ES, Manchenko GP, Pudovkin AI, Sergiyevskii SO, Krutovskii KV, 1990. Species identity of the common mussel inhabiting Asiatic coats of the Pacific Ocean. In: Biol. Morya, 1990 (1) 13-22.
McDonald JH, Seed R, Koehn RK, 1991. Allozymes and morphometric characters of 3 species in the northern and southern hemispheres. In: Marine Biology, 111 323-333.
Wonham M, 1999. Predicting the spread of an invasive mussel: the changing roles of competition and predation. In: First National Conference on Marine Bioinvasions, 24-27 January 1999, Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT.
WoRMS Editorial Board, 2020. World Register of Marine Species. http://www.marinespecies.org/ DOI:10.14284/170
Contributors
Top of page31/10/2017 Updated by:
Vicki Bonham, consultant, UK
30/03/2010 Updated by:
Jody Shields, The University of Queensland, Australia
Cynthia Riginos, The University of Queensland, Australia
29/05/2005: Original text by:
Vicki Bonham, consultant, UK
Distribution Maps
Top of pageSelect a dataset
Map Legends
-
CABI Summary Records
Map Filters
Unsupported Web Browser:
One or more of the features that are needed to show you the maps functionality are not available in the web browser that you are using.
Please consider upgrading your browser to the latest version or installing a new browser.
More information about modern web browsers can be found at http://browsehappy.com/