Non-Indigenous Species on Artificial Coastal Environments: Experimental Comparison between Aquaculture Farms and Recreational Marinas

Abstract

Globally, there is growing concern regarding the effects of the increasing anthropogenic pressures in marine communities. Artificial structures such as marinas and aquaculture facilities serve as invasion hotspots; hence, monitoring fouling communities on these structures can be valuable for detecting new invasions. In the current study, 24 settlement PVC plates were deployed for three months to compare the recruitment ability of these two artificial environments along the south coast of the offshore island of Madeira (NE Atlantic). The results showed higher variations in the species richness between regions (SW vs. SE) than between artificial habitats (sea-cages vs. marinas), although the community composition differed. Cnidaria and Bryozoa were the most representative groups in the aquaculture systems, while Bryozoa and Chordata were in the marinas. A sum of 18 NIS was recorded for the study, accounting for between 21.88% and 54.84% of the total number of species in the aquaculture facilities and marinas, respectively. The higher NIS percentage from the marinas was even more explicit in the SE coast, where Cradoscrupocellaria bertholletii, Parasmittina alba, and Botrylloides niger distinctly dominated fouling populations. The results suggest that at least some particular NIS previously reported in the studied marinas successfully colonized sea-cages. Future assessments need to address the potential role of aquaculture facilities as drivers for the secondary spread of NIS. Additionally, two new records are considered for Madeira: Eudendrium capillare and Ericthonius punctatus.

DNA metabarcoding-based detection of non-indigenous invertebrates in recreational marinas: influence of sample type and seasonal variation

“…Some organisms colonize surfaces forming biofouling communities that change over time, while others are benthic (living on the sea floor), or possess larval stages that inhabit temporarily the water column and may be mostly found in zooplankton, depending on the sampled season (Vinagre et al 2020). In addition, and due to the presence of many artificial substrates (e.g., floating pontoons, cables, boats, buoys) and higher availability of nutrients, recreational marinas are highly prone to be colonized by biofouling communities (e.g., mussel lines) which per se can also constitute an augmented surface of potential niches available for NIS settlement (Png-Gonzalez et al 2021).…”

“…This is also important when monitoring non-indigenous invertebrate species as organisms introduced by hull fouling can pass to the hard artificial substrates of the marinas and harbours, through hull cleaning operations; or from the water column through larval stages or propagules (European Environment Agency 2021). Recent studies have shown that recreational marinas are more relevant for the spreading of NIS than it was supposed, as they present communities that diverge from those recovered in the nearest harbours, and some even present a higher number of NIS, or different NIS than those detected in the harbours (Ferrario et al 2017; Chebaane et al 2019; Afonso et al 2020; Png-Gonzalez et al 2021). This suggests that recreational vessels, and not only larger industrial vessels, are very relevant vectors for NIS spreading (Ferrario et al 2017; Chebaane et al 2019; Afonso et al 2020; Png-Gonzalez et al 2021).…”

“…Recent studies have shown that recreational marinas are more relevant for the spreading of NIS than it was supposed, as they present communities that diverge from those recovered in the nearest harbours, and some even present a higher number of NIS, or different NIS than those detected in the harbours (Ferrario et al 2017;Chebaane et al 2019;Afonso et al 2020;Png-Gonzalez et al 2021). This suggests that recreational vessels, and not only larger industrial vessels, are very relevant vectors for NIS spreading (Ferrario et al 2017;Chebaane et al 2019;Afonso et al 2020;Png-Gonzalez et al 2021). This can also be explained due to the larger docking times of these vessels in the recreational marinas, as NIS spreading can vary with the origin of the vessels, as well as the duration of time moored to the marina (Martínez-laiz et al 2019;Tempesti et al 2022).…”

From Plates to Baits: Using a Remote Video Foraging System to Study the Impact of Foraging on Fouling Non-Indigenous Species

“…The identified fouling species were classified by major taxa, morphology (encrusting, massive and arborescent) and status (native, cryptogenic and NIS). Species status was assigned based on the existing literature [44,[51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64][65][66][67].…”

New species and new records of bryozoan species from fouling communities in the Madeira Archipelago (NE Atlantic)

“…Indeed, hull fouling is the most significant vector of the introduction of marine NIS in the Madeira Archipelago coastal waters (Canning-Clode et al 2013a ; Ramalhosa et al 2014 , 2017a , 2017b , 2019 ; Ramalhosa and Canning-Clode 2015 ; Souto et al 2018 ). Moreover, offshore aquaculture activities facilitate the local dispersion of NIS (Nunes et al 2014 ; Campbell et al 2017 ), posing a serious environmental threat to biodiversity and ecosystem function (Mack et al 2000 ; Png-Gonzalez et al 2021 ). Aquaculture artificial substrates may serve as stepping stones, offering novel niches for opportunistic colonizers, including NIS, favoring their dispersal (De Mesel et al 2015 ) and supplying substrate to establish other NIS (Rius et al 2011 ; Png-Gonzalez et al 2021 ).…”