IMBRSea RPP 2020 - Blog Posts

Blog 7 - final in the series

How can such a beautiful creature cause so much devastation?

Biological invaders are found across a range of systems including wetlands, streams, rivers, bays, along our coasts and in our oceans. These invasive species can even be found up to thousands of feet in depth. In the 1980s, one particularly impactful invasion event involved the Indo-Pacific lionfish, which were the first truly invasive marine fish introduced in the Atlantic. It is believed that the introduction of the lionfish occurred from being deliberately released or from escaping a marine aquarium, but neither have been found as the exact culprit. You might be asking what makes a marine organism invasive? An invasive aquatic species is an organism that is found in or near water where it does not belong. When this occurs, a few things can happen: the organism may find the location to be uninhabitable and die off; the organism may be able to coexist in the location without any environmental impact; or in the case of the lionfish, the organism may excel in the new location, causing harm to the naturally existing wildlife. But just how devastating to the environment are these alien lionfish invaders?

Over the past two decades, lionfish, originally from the Indian and Western Pacific oceans, have expanded rapidly following their release in the tropical waters of the Western Atlantic and Caribbean, with the highest densities reportedly found on the coral reefs in the Bahamas. Having limited predators within these areas of the world, lionfish can flourish as effective predators themselves.

Lionfish are unique in two ways: one, appearance - camouflage coloration, and extended fin rays giving them an appearance of seaweed or a tube-worm; two, behaviour - they have slow movements, and while stalking their prey, lionfish fan their pectoral fins which slowly herds smaller fish, cornering them for quick consumption, with both of these tactics making them a very effective predator. These creatures are also unique in that they are less likely to develop parasites within their invaded area compared to the native fish present, which may translate to higher growth rates and greater fecundity for the lionfish.

In recent studies, the native prey fish of the Atlantic seem to take no evasive action against their previously unencountered Indo-Pacific predator. Coupling this with their high consumption rate, consuming anywhere between one and ten prey items a day, the lionfish can survive well in their new environment while also causing harm. It has been observed that a single lionfish residing on a coral reef, can reduce recruitment of native reef fish by approximately 80%. Sampling lionfish stomachs has led to the discovery that lionfish consume approximately 50 different species. By preying mostly on reef fish otherwise consumed by snapper, grouper, and other commercially important species, lionfish could cause negative effects to these valuable commercial and recreational fisheries through competition for food. Additionally, lionfish put stress on coral reefs. They eat herbivores, and herbivores eat algae from the coral reefs. Can you imagine how overgrown these algal species may become if there is nothing preying on them? Unfortunately, if algal growth becomes unbalanced it can become detrimental to coral health, potentially compromising the reef itself.

To date, options to lower the threat posed by lionfish are limited. Many areas have introduced fishing derbies specifically geared to reducing the lionfish population and divers are given permission to act on the issues in any way possible. However, the manual removal of this species is a labor-intensive process and is unlikely to fully eradicate them. There have been technological innovations helping towards better catching methods but improvements are still required. Lastly, some researchers have been experimenting with the idea that native predators, like groupers and sharks, can be taught to include lionfish in their diet, which could lead to a biological control for these invaders. Although, the research to date has shown little success with this potentially ingenious idea. Consequently, the lionfish has been identified as a major threat to biodiversity in the habitats it invades. If there is not a solution soon, this predator may continue to cause significant damage to these marine ecosystems.

What can you do to help? It is important that any marine organism (fish or other animal) obtained as a pet, is never released into the wild. The introduction of a species into an ecosystem that it is not native to could be the start of a serious issue. Additionally, scuba divers and other aquatic lovers are encouraged to get involved in removal efforts of invasive species. Always participate safely and let someone know if you have spotted an invader like the lionfish if you do not have the proper training in removing these organisms.

Add your comments by clicking here

References

Albins, M. A. (2013). Effects of Invasive Pacific Red Lionfish Pterois volitans Versus a Native Predator on Bahamian Coral-Reef Fish Communities. Biological Invasions, 15(1), 29-43.

Albins, M. A., & Hixon, M. A. (2013). Worst Case Scenario: Potential Long-Term Effects of Invasive Predatory Lionfish (Pterois volitans) on Atlantic and Caribbean Coral-Reef Communities. Environmental Biology of Fishes, 96(10-11), 1151-1157.

Spencer, E. (2017, December 15). Top 5 Myths About Lionfish. National Geographic.

When you think about the effects of sunscreen in the marine environment the first thing that comes to your mind is probably coral reefs. According to some studies the four major consequences of sunscreen toxins are: coral bleaching, DNA damage, abnormal skeleton growth (via endocrine disruption), and deformities of coral larvae. However, corals are not the only organisms being affected by these UV-filters. It has been confirmed that there are many other species being affected in different ways. Some of these include fish (decreased fertility and reproduction, female characteristics in male fish, negative evolution of fish embryos), marine mammals (chemicals accumulate in the tissue and can be transferred to their offspring with unknown effects), bivalves (defects in young), sea urchins (damage in immune and reproductive systems, deformation in juveniles), and even green algae (reduced growth and photosynthesis, accumulation and transfer of chemicals to organisms of higher trophic levels). This damage, along with harm from other stressors including ocean acidification, water pollution, rising sea temperatures, and disease, prevents marine organisms from successfully reproducing and surviving in our current marine environments.

When you put on your sunscreen and head into the ocean you can see that part of it drifts off in the currents and you may think that it is not a big deal. How could that little amount of product possibly have an effect? The problem is that it adds up! Especially in popular tourist areas this is becoming a problem. In 2017, Hawaii introduced a bill which would ban the use of all sunscreens containing oxybenzone and octinoxate (except under medical prescription). By doing so Hawaii hopes to protect and preserve the state’s tourism industry since Hawaii relies heavily on coral reefs as one of their main tourist attractions. This measure attracted attention from other regions with economies reliant on coral reefs, including Palau and the British Virgin Islands, and some of them are already taking measures to ban such products. Manufacturers argue that more evidence is needed to go ahead with a ban, however, Hawaii’s state senator clearly stated that since there are already sunscreens without those harmful UV-filters, a total ban on problematic sunscreens was justified.

However, it is not enough to only ban sunscreen in places with coral reefs. First of all, chemicals can spread to other areas since all water masses are connected by rivers and ocean currents. Secondly, corals are not the only organisms being affected. In addition, besides sunscreen there are many other factors that are affecting the health of the marine environment, for instance, plastic pollution, rise of global water temperatures, coastal runoffs and so on. It is our duty to preserve and protect the marine environment and reduce as much of the impact in the environment. But what can you do? Here are some ideas:

• See what is inside your sunscreen products and do your own research on what sunscreens are eco-friendly. Especially avoid creams which contain oxybenzone (Benzophenone-3), octinoxate (Ethylhexyl methoxycinnamate), octocrylene and 4-methylbenzylidene camphor (Enzacamene). Remember also watch for PABA and 3-benzylidene camphor if you buy sunscreen outside of the EU. You can find some examples here;
• Choose mineral sunscreens, especially lotions containing non-nano zinc dioxide as the primary active ingredient;
• No access to eco-friendly sunscreen? No problem just cover up! Put on clothes or use protective clothing during water-intensive activities to both increase skin protection and reduce the environmental impact;
• Make a stand! If your government does not have any regulation on what chemicals can be used in sunscreens, write them a letter informing them about this issue;
• And finally, share this post with your friends and family. The more people aware of the problem the better!

These tips may help you take care of the ocean while you enjoy your time outdoors, however, your health is also important and protecting your skin against UV radiation is fundamental. Next time you decide to go outside remember these tips and protect yourself.

Do you have any other ideas on how we can protect ourselves and marine life? Let us know.

References

Boden, A. (2019). Impacts of Cosmetic Ingredients on Larval Barnacles: A Study & Discussion of How Cosmetic Ingredients Affect Marine Life (Doctoral dissertation, Duke University).

Corinaldesi, C., Damiani, E., Marcellini, F., Falugi, C., Tiano, L., Brugè, F., & Danovaro, R. (2017). Sunscreen products impair the early developmental stages of the sea urchin Paracentrotus lividus. Scientific reports, 7(1), 1-12.

Karsten, U., Sawall, T., West, J., & Wiencke, C. (2000). Ultraviolet sunscreen compounds in epiphytic red algae from mangroves. Hydrobiologia, 432(1-3), 159-171.

Przeslawski, R., Benkendorff, K., & Davis, A. R. (2005). A quantitative survey of mycosporine-like amino acids (MAAs) in intertidal egg masses from temperate rocky shores. Journal of chemical ecology, 31(10), 2417-2438.

Tovar-Sánchez, A., Sánchez-Quiles, D., Basterretxea, G., Benedé, J. L., Chisvert, A., Salvador, A., ... & Blasco, J. (2013). Sunscreen products as emerging pollutants to coastal waters. PLoS One, 8(6).

Sánchez-Quiles, D., & Tovar-Sánchez, A. (2015). Are sunscreens a new environmental risk associated with coastal tourism?. Environment international, 83, 158-170.

Vesper, I. (2017) Hawaii seeks to ban ‘reef-unfriendly’ sunscreen. Nature. https://www.nature.com/news/hawaii-seeks-to-ban-reef-unfriendly-sunscreen-1.21332. Accessed May 26, 2020.

Blog 5

Eutrophication Continues to Threaten The Baltic Sea

Eutrophication is the increase of organic matter, particularly algae, in a body of water. Due to the accelerated algal production in these areas, impacts such as harmful algal blooms, depleted dissolved oxygen, and loss of underwater aquatic vegetation can occur. The results of eutrophication on these bodies of water, usually leads to inefficiencies in water quality and ecosystem health. The EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (EU 2008) states that “Eutrophication is a process driven by enrichment of water by nutrients, especially compounds of nitrogen and/or phosphorus, leading to: increased growth, primary production and biomass of algae; changes in the balance of organisms; and water quality degradation. The consequences of eutrophication are undesirable if they appreciably degrade ecosystem health and/or the sustainable provision of goods and service.” This complicated phenomenon is the result of both natural processes and anthropogenic activity. In the case of the Baltic Sea, eutrophication is usually considered as the outcome of anthropogenic activity, otherwise known as human activities on the environment.

The Baltic Sea is known for being one of the largest brackish water bodies on earth and contains permanent stratification among the area. The sea is characterized as brackish due to its immensely narrow connection with the North Sea and many freshwater inflows from rivers. Salinity levels range from 15-25 psu in the Kattegat Bay to 2-3 psu in the northern Bothnian Bay. For many marine organisms, there is a critical salinity limit that is between 5 and 6.5 psu, meaning that the Baltic Sea is not ideal for species enrichment. Since the beginning of the 20^th century, the total nitrogen levels have increased four times and the total phosphorus levels have increased eight times. Approximately 50% of both the nitrogen and phosphorus in the Baltic Sea is coming from the freshwater rivers Neva, Narva (Lake Peipus), Vistula, Daugava, Nemunas and Odra. This nutrient enrichment is leading to large eutrophication issues and is possibly the greatest threat to the Baltic Sea ecosystem.

In the Baltic Sea’s drainage basin, there are approximately 85 million residents over the arable land. It is strongly used for agriculture based on artificial fertilizers. Because of this area being used for agriculture and livestock, large emissions of nitrogen are released into the sea stimulating eutrophication. It can lead to many undesirable changes in the surrounding waters such as intense algal growth, increased production of organic matter, increase in oxygen consumption, oxygen depletion, and death of benthic organisms (including fish die offs).

As the eutrophication problems increase, there are many concerns about harmful algal blooms in the Baltic Sea. Since the 20^th century, massive blue-green algal blooming events have taken place that are mainly composed of cyanobacterial species. These species become harmful to fish and invertebrate species by damaging or clogging their gills. They also produce blooms that grow so large, they become harmful to fish and invertebrates because it depletes oxygen in the water column causing suffocation. Massive fish kills in the area are often a result of such oxygen depletion. Additionally, some algal blooms are known to be toxic to human health, and therefore people are advised to refrain from visiting the beaches of the Baltic Sea during certain times of the year where productivity is greatest. I bet you never considered that while eating shellfish, like oysters and mussels, you could be ingesting toxins making you very ill? Toxins consumed by filter feeding organisms can find their way through the food chain to humans, causing a myriad of gastrointestinal and neurological illnesses.

From the identification of these issues, the Baltic countries are looking towards mediating their eutrophication problems. In 1992, The Helsinki Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area (HELCOM) was developed. HELCOM is a convention that was created to protect the Baltic Sea, and which involves all the countries that border the Sea as well as the wider European community. One of the most important plans set in place was the HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan in 2007, which strived to move to a “Baltic Sea unaffected by eutrophication. This plan addresses four main areas of priority: eutrophication, hazardous substance, biodiversity, and promotion of environmentally friendly habits. When observing specifically the approach taken by Poland, their government is promoting the reduction of nutrient loads from agriculture in Poland. Since the realization that Poland is one of the largest sources of nutrients to the Baltic Sea, they are trying to meet agreements that aim to reduce emissions of nutrients from agriculture and households. One of the main improvements Poland has made in the last 20 years, is the implementation of the Water Law Act and the Fertilizing and Fertilizer Act. In the Water Law Act, the identification of nutrient pollutants in agriculture and regulation of these pollutants are heavily observed. In the Fertilizing and Fertilizer Act, regulations on the type of fertilizers and training in the use of fertilizers help to protect the waters from nutrient pollution. Overall, in a study conducted from 2011-2015, threshold values for individual eutrophication indicators within sub-basins in the Baltic Sea were observed. Only 17 of 247 coastal sub-basins achieved good status after the introduction of the HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan in 2007.

Mitigation efforts have helped in limiting anthropogenic nutrient emissions into the Baltic Sea, but eutrophication is an ongoing threat to the area. The Baltic Sea experiences delays that cause the eutrophication problems to continue, but why is it taking so long to start fixing and implementing protection measures against eutrophication in this area? As explained earlier, the eutrophication problems in the Baltic Sea is flourishing and causing many negative effects within the area. This brackish body of water is being fed enormous amounts of nitrogen and phosphorus loads from agriculture efforts surrounding it. It is causing issues from harmful algal blooms, to oxygen depleted water, to sitting at a dinner table and wondering if the seafood on your plate is contaminated with toxins. With the delays in the government system, introduction of nutrients from many different sources, and help of climate change, eutrophication in the Baltic Sea may not be fixed quickly and could take several decades to correct. This area needs a change in hopes for a better future.

Add your comments by clicking here

References

Andrulewicz, E. (2017, February 27). Eutrophication in the Baltic Sea – State and effects. EduCO2cean. https://www.educo2cean.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Andrulewicz.pdf

Backer, H., Leppänen, J. M., Brusendorff, A. C., Forsius, K., Stankiewicz, M., Mehtonen, J., Pyhälä, M., Laamanen, M., Paulomäki, H., Vlasov, N., & Haaranen, T. (2010). HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan–A Regional Programme of Measures for The Marine Environment Based on The Ecosystem Approach. Marine pollution bulletin, 60(5), 642-649.

Bonsdorff, E., Rönnberg, C., & Aarnio, K. (2002). Some ecological properties in relation to eutrophication in the Baltic Sea. In Nutrients and Eutrophication in Estuaries and Coastal Waters (pp. 371-377). Springer, Dordrecht.

Cederwall, H., & Elmgren, R. (1990). Biological effects of eutrophication in the Baltic Sea, particularly the coastal zone. Ambio. Stockholm, 19(3), 109-112.

Hallegraeff, G. M. (1993). A review of harmful algal blooms and their apparent global increase. Phycologia, 32(2), 79-99.

Varjopuro, R., Andrulewicz, E., Blenckner, T., Dolch, T., Heiskanen, A. S., Pihlajamäki, M., Brandt, U.S., Valman, M., Gee, K., Potts, T & Psuty, I. (2014). Coping with persistent environmental problems: systemic delays in reducing eutrophication of the Baltic Sea. Ecology and Society, 19(4).

The ocean is considered the largest ecosystem on Earth covering approximately 70% of the Earth’s surface. Approximately three billion people rely on marine and coastal ecosystems for their livelihoods. There are 200,000 known marine species that reside under the ocean surface, talk about biodiversity! A big problem that these vast oceans are facing is the overabundance of plastics and marine litter found in them (Wabnitz and Nichols 2010).

People produce approximately 1.3 billion tons of trash per year. To put that into perspective, that is more trash per minute than the weight of seven fully loaded Boeing 747s (Sadhguru 2019). Plastic is one type of trash that is most used in our everyday lives, from packaging to technological items, and often it is used once and then thrown away (Wabnitz and Nichols 2010). When reading that fact, think about how much of this trash ends up in our oceans? The plastics in our oceans impact organisms from the tiniest plankton to the largest of whales, where approximately 267 species have been reported to ingest or become entangled in plastic debris (Derraik 2002). Often, turtles get wrapped around fishing nets preventing them from diving to feed or surfacing to breathe (Wabnitz and Nichols 2010). Seabirds tend to mistake plastics in the ocean and on land for food. When ingested, seabirds and many other organisms do not have the capacity to digest plastics properly resulting in starvation. Although we have seen media stories of divers helping these suffering animals, it does not always end happily.

Plastics are a people problem with the production of plastic increasing from 0.5 to 260 million tonnes per year since 1950 (Heap 2009). You do not see dolphins drinking out of plastic water bottles or corals eating out of plastic yogurt cups, do you? So how can we now address the problem we have created? In society today, many people are set in their ways continuing habits that may or may not be beneficial to reducing the plastic problem in our oceans, but what if the option for people to use plastics were reduced or even taken away? It's advantageous for manufacturing companies, as major sources of the plastic issues in our oceans, to take a look into adopting greener habits, potentially reducing plastic material and designing products for reuse and/or end-of-life recyclability (Wabnitz and Nichols 2010). In my opinion, this is an important start to a new way of doing things. By adhering to a circular economy over a linear economy, companies are giving focus to repairing, reusing, and refurbishing materials that consumers want. With the introduction of a circular economy, attention is brought to further sustainable development and encourages environmental quality, economic prosperity, and social equity (Salvatori et al., 2019).

Until these major changes can be made, citizens should participate in making a difference in their own homes when avoiding plastic completely is not yet possible for most. One of the easiest ways is by disposing of our trash correctly. We have the ability to reduce plastics entering our oceans by recycling and reusing many products. Plastics cannot be recycled unless they are collected, sorted, and sent to a facility to be taken care of, and even then some plastic products are not suitable for recycling. For instance, cigarette butts, fishing lines, and fishing nets are common plastic containing items that are found in the ocean and pose a threat to marine life and human health. Did you know that cigarettes contain plastic? Littering of cigarette butts in marine environments not only allows plastic to be potentially ingested by organisms, but also subjects our seafood to nicotine, heavy metals, and chemicals left within that tiny piece of trash (National Geographic 2019). Those toxins do not just disappear. They eventually work their way up the food chain to humans (National Geographic 2019), so it is imperative to marine and human health to dispose of trash properly. Encourage people you know to keep streets, sidewalks, parking lots, and storm drains free of litter because our land and our ocean are closely connected.

References

Derraik, J. G. (2002). The pollution of the marine environment by plastic debris: a review. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 44(9), 842-852.

Heap, B. (2009). Preface. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 364, 1971.

Mckenna, P. (2015, August 6). Meet the companies trying to break our plastic addiction | Greenbiz. GreenBiz. https://www.greenbiz.com/article/meet-companies-trying-break-our-plastic-addiction

Sadhguru, I. (2019, October 5). Recycle Reduce Reuse – How you can help the environment. Retrieved from https://isha.sadhguru.org/global/en/blog/article/recycle-reduce-reuse-how-you-can-help-the-environment

Salvatori, G., Holstein, F., & Böhme, K. (2019, April 15). Circular economy strategies and roadmaps in Europe: Identifying synergies and the potential for cooperation and alliance building. European Economic and Social Committee. https://www.eesc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/files/qe-01-19-425-en-n.pdf

Wabnitz, C., & Nichols, W. J. (2010). Plastic pollution: An ocean emergency. Marine Turtle Newsletter, (129), 1.

Whitaker, H., & Whitaker, H. (2019, October 18). Cigarette butts are toxic plastic pollution. Should they be banned? National Geographic. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/08/cigarettes-story-of-plastic/

Blog 1

COVID-19: How Marine Science is Suffering from the Current Pandemic

The year 2020 was defined by many as the “Year of the Ocean” due to the many events and conventions that were scheduled to happen. Conservationists and the general public were hoping for this unique opportunity to negotiate climate change, biodiversity and the global ocean and perhaps develop a plan that would perform for people and nature together.

Furthermore, the United Nations had defined the period of 2021-2030 as the decade of studies and insights into marine science. The Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development “was proclaimed to support efforts to reverse the decline in ocean health and gather ocean stakeholders worldwide behind a common framework that will ensure ocean science can fully support countries in creating improved conditions for sustainable development of the ocean”.

However, the COVID-19 pandemic seems to have changed the priority of this year. Several of these events were cancelled and/or delayed as well as many research projects were postponed. We took the time to talk to some of our colleagues to get a better understanding of the impacts COVID-19 might have on marine science. We wanted to illustrate exactly what was happening to a few individuals who work daily on marine science-related topics. Many of them expressed how difficult it has been to move forward with their research projects while studying in the time of the COVID-19 pandemic.

One of the individuals interviewed, Maria Korzeniewskaa, is currently studying at the University of Algarve in Portugal. In the interview, she explained the aim of her thesis where she is evaluating the feasibility of using different fish explants (scales, gill rakers, gill filaments) for in vitro screening for environmental toxicants of anthropogenic origin such as Estradiol (E2), Fluoxetine (FLX) and Genistein (Gen), which are all considered endocrine disruptors. Since they occur in aquatic environments at very low concentrations it is necessary for her to use the juvenile stage of sea bass because they are more sensitive to the toxicants. Being a scientist and working on this particular master thesis during the COVID-19 pandemic has led to much greater problems for Maria other than, for example, not being able to eat at her favorite restaurant. She described in the interview, “the fish I was supposed to start working on in March were the “leftovers” from the previous project conducted by my supervisor. My main concern is that due to the closure of the University and postponed start of my project, the fish will be entering the mature stage of their life, causing me to have to redesign the project because mature sea bass are less sensitive to the toxicants used.”

In another marine science project, Stéphanie Roy, an IMBRSea student, is currently conducting her master thesis at Ghent University with her study site based in Argentina. Her project consists of studying the food web structure of benthic communities in the kelp forest and use of biomarkers, fatty acids, as a tool to identify potential trophic links in the food web. During our discussion, she explained that her project had to be postponed because her samples cannot be processed. Stéphanie also explained how the travel restrictions are currently affecting other projects that her supervisor is developing in South America since the research sites are physically in South America, but the samples are being analysed in Europe. She states that “because they are biological material, it is better if they are carried by someone because, in the post, they may be damaged or get lost”. During our exchange she demonstrated her concern for future experiments and said “in the future with COVID-19, it might be more difficult to carry out some international research, especially when samples have to be transported by scientists from one continent to the other”.

In addition to specific marine science projects, the ongoing situation is affecting the planned work experience and career progression of marine science students. We heard from Pol Sorigué and Erin Bowman, two first-year IMBRSea students, who are experiencing interruptions to their plans, as are many others, further highlighting some of the wide-ranging impacts of COVID-19 within marine science.

As marine scientists, it is apparent that at times we face much greater obstacles while being quarantined than what meets the eye. Marine science is a field of work that requires the completion of lab work, field work, collaboration, and often a lot of travel by scientists. When situations like the COVID-19 pandemic occur, there are impacts on marine science projects that might have long-term effects on our knowledge of biodiversity, management and overall health of the marine ecosystem. These effects can be detrimental because it lessens our ability to study what we urgently need to know about marine science and its importance to our environment.

How has the current pandemic been affecting your work as a marine scientist/student? Tell us in the comments!

Links within this blog:

http://blogs.edf.org/edfish/2019/12/18/after-the-blue-cop-why-2020-could-be-the-super-year-for-the-oceans/

https://en.unesco.org/news/covid-19-ocean-ally-against-virus

https://en.unesco.org/ocean-decade

http://blogs.edf.org/edfish/2020/04/14/hope-for-the-oceans-in-a-time-of-covid-19/

Add your comments by clicking here