Ocean News – Page 30 – Shark Research & Conservation Program (SRC)

Real-Time Spatial Management as a Bycatch Mitigation Measure

October 9, 2014/0 Comments/in Conservation, Ocean News /by aanstett

By Hannah Calich, RJD Graduate Student

Bycatch, or the unintentional capture of non-target species, has negative biological, economical and social consequences (figure 1). Reducing bycatch has been a fisheries management priority in the US for many years and is increasingly becoming a priority in European fisheries as well. While technical, regulatory and social approaches have all been recognized as ways to reduce bycatch, they are not always effective (Little et al., 2014).

Bycatch from the Gulf of Mexico shrimp trawl fishery. Photo credit: Elliott Norse, Marine Conservation Institute/Marine Photobank

Currently, the primary methods of reducing bycatch involve either creating fishing closures or improving the selectivity of fishing gear. The primary problems with fishing closures are that they can be difficult to enforce and are unresponsive to changes in fish stocks (Little et al., 2014). Increasing the selectivity of fishing gear can create problems when the technology decreases catch of the target species (see figure 2 for an example of a successful gear modification). If the profitability of the fishery is negatively impacted fishers are less inclined to use selective fishing gear (Little et al., 2014). Alternatively, real-time spatial management plans are responsive to changes in stock dynamics and have been proposed as a way for fisheries to reduce their bycatch without impacting the catch of their target species (Little et al., 2014).

Figure 2. A loggerhead sea turtle escapes from a trawl through a turtle exclusion device. Photo credit: http://www.sefsc.noaa.gov/labs/mississippi/images/loggerhead_ted-noaa.jpg

Real-time spatial management plans have been introduced in select European and American fisheries to help encourage vessels to leave areas of high bycatch. Since these plans are relatively new, Little et al., (2014) reviewed ten fisheries across the US and Europe to summarize how real-time spatial management has been successful and where improvements can be made.

While each real-time spatial management plan was tailored for it’s respective fishery, all of the fisheries used their own catch and discard observations to identify areas of high bycatch. Once bycatch levels were identified fishery closures were updated and the news was communicated to the fleet. The time it took fishery closures to be updated varied from hours to weeks depending on the fishery. Real-time spatial management plans benefit fisheries because once areas of high bycatch are identified fishers can avoid them, thus saving time and money. Additionally, there is a positive feedback loop that gives fishers a sense of empowerment and responsibility in managing the natural resources they depend on for their livelihoods (Little et al., 2014).

While real-time spatial management sounds promising, its success depends on the existence of strong leadership and infrastructure (Little et al., 2014). Strong governmental or local leadership is necessary to create and manage fisheries management plans. A strong infrastructure is required to create a real-time communication system that facilitates the collection and monitoring of findings. Additionally, participation, enforcement, and the physical and ecological characteristics of the fishery also influence the success of the plan (Little et al., 2014).

Under the right circumstances real-time spatial management has the potential to greatly assist in mitigating bycatch. However, until the plans are fully developed they should be used in conjunction with other bycatch mitigation measures. Future research is required to determine if using real-time spatial management plans can help mitigate fisheries bycatch over the long term.

Reference:

Little, A.S., Needle, C.L., Hilborn, R., Holland, D.S., & Marshall, C.T. (2014). Real-time spatial management approaches to reduce bycatch and discards: experiences from Europe and the United States. Fish and Fisheries. First published online: 18 March 2014. DOI: 10.1111/faf.12080

Whale Conservation in the Mediterranean

October 6, 2014/0 Comments/in Conservation, Ocean News /by aanstett

By Jessica Wingar, RJD Intern

Conservation of threatened species is very critical in order to maintain the state of our oceans. There is a wide range of reasons for why the species needs to be conserved from threat of boat strikes to disease outbreak. However, humans cause many of these threats. In an effort to protect these threatened species from humans, marine protected areas, or MPAs, can be established. In this study, researchers were looking at whether it would be more effective to establish a series of MPAs or to restrict shipping through the International Maritime Organization, IMO, in order to protect the Mediterranean fin whale. The researchers looked at the advantages and disadvantages to all of the options available to determine what would be the best method of protection for a wide-ranging cetacean such as this species of fin whale.

Current distribution of the Mediterranean fin whale in the Mediterranean Sea.

Researchers from University College London and Stockholm University looked at the current state of the Mediterranean fin whale and the causes of its need for conservation to devise the most effective course of action to protect this species. This species of fin whale is on the IUCN’s red list as Vulnerable. The main threat facing this species is collisions with ships. One of the issues facing the protect of Mediterranean fin whales is that a lot of the Sea is not governed by any particular country. However, some of the countries bordering the Mediterranean are currently trying to create a collection of MPAs to protect these waters.

Current protected areas in the Mediterranean

In the study, the researchers concluded that including IMO in the conservation of whales would lead to increased protection of these animals. One of these reasons is that this organization has the tools to monitor the area in order to decrease factors that lead to whale and boat collisions. One of these ways would be to order a reduction in boat speed. If IMO puts this law into place, it becomes mandatory for all of the member nations of IMO to follow this. IMO is also respected in the shipping industry, so by them recognizing the threat of ships to whales, other vessels will follow creating a cascading effect. In addition, changes can occur quickly under IMO and ships are more likely to feel inclined to follow the rules of IMO than if the area was a MPA.

Studies of this nature are very important because they discuss an alternative plan for protection and start a discussion about the pros and cons of each plan. IMO and the governments of the countries involved will, hopefully implement the plan for conservation that the researchers devised. Thus causing greater plans for the protection of the Mediterranean fin whale.

Reference

Geijer, C. K.A., and Peter J.S. Jones. “A network approach to migratory whale conservation: Are MPAs the way forward or do all roads lead to the IMO?” Marine Policy 51 (2014): 1-12.

Fuel consumption of global fishing fleets

October 2, 2014/0 Comments/in Conservation, Ocean News /by aanstett

By Gabi Goodrich, RJD Intern

Everyone is well aware of the problem of overfishing. Fishing fleets go out and fish until they meet their quota. While over fishing is a major problem for the oceans health, another, less talked about side of the issue is the fuel consumption of those fishing fleets. As the “fight to fish” grows, fleets have become bigger and more powerful fleets. With the public concern for green products, the use of high emission energy sources has been put into the spotlight. In an article titled “Fuel Consumption of Global Fishing Fleets: Current Understanding and Knowledge Gaps,” Robert W R Parker and Peter H Tyedmers studied more than 1,600 records of fuel use by fleets worldwide using all types of fishing methods.

A shrimp trawler hauling in nets. Photo Credit – Robert Brigham, NOAA Photo Library

It is apparent that some are bigger offenders than others. Some of the most popular foods hold the top ten spots, with shrimp and lobster coming in at number one for worst offenders. It is interesting to see that the global difference between fishing practices. While globally, shrimp and lobster hold an average of 2932 liters per ton, the fuel use intensity (FUI) is 783 liters of fuel to catch one ton of Maine Lobsters from traps, while the Norway Lobster takes 17,000 liters of fuel per ton in the North Sea (Parker 2014). These variations, however, can be attributed to different fishing styles, gear, and availability and magnitude of what they are trying to catch. Those to have to travel farther and longer distances to find the desired catch use more fuel than those who have to travel shorter distances and have greater potential to land the desired catch. Catches like the Peruvian Anchovy, Atlantic Mackerel, and Australian Sardine are some of the most efficient fisheries and are some of the largest fisheries globally, by volume of landings. The use of purse seine gear or other surrounding nets average an FUI of 71 liters per ton while trawling for small pelagic fish has an FUI of 169 liters per ton (Parker 2014).

A boat and lobster pots. Photo credit – Bob Jones

So what does this all mean? According to the FUI records, the median value is 239 liters per ton. That’s roughly an average of two kilograms of carbon dioxide produced per kilogram of seafood caught and landed. To put that into perspective, beef has an average of just over 10 kilograms of CO₂ per kilogram produced, pork has just less than 6 kilograms of CO₂ per kilogram. While compared to other sources of food, the production and fishing of seafood is relatively low. The study does have some serious implications. The most efficient sources of fishing (small pelagic fisheries) are often overlooked as a viable food source in developing countries and are instead used for aquaculture and livestock. Furthermore, with fuel prices on the rise and carbon emission regulations and laws growing stricter, the profitability of the fishing industry will be compromised. Parker and Thyedmers say the most effective way to improve the energy performance of fisheries is to rebuild stocks and manage capacity effectively.

Patterns of serial exploitation of sea cucumbers in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park

September 30, 2014/0 Comments/in Conservation, Ocean News /by aanstett

By Jake Jerome, RJD Graduate Student and Intern

There is no doubt that overfishing is a major threat to ocean ecosystems. When most people think of overfishing, they think of the over harvesting of fish species that many in the world rely on. However, there are species besides fish that face the threat of exploitation. Eriksson and Byrne found in 2013 that the tropical sea cucumber fishery in Australia’s Great Barrier Reef Marine Park (GBRMP) is following patterns of overexploitation.

To reach this conclusion, the authors performed a meta-analysis of catches in the fishery from 1991 to 2011 by reviewing data published in peer reviewed literature and fisheries reports. From their analysis they found that the sea cucumber fishery initially focused only on harvesting high-valued species but shifted towards lower-valued species over time. The initial target was black teatfish (Holothuria whitmaei) until 1999, when a 70% decline in the catch of black teatfish was noted, and subsequent effort then shifted towards the white teatfish (H. fuscogilva). The fishery was subsequently diversified after the collapse of the black teatfish to include other species of medium and low-value. Despite the addition of these new species into fishery efforts in 1999, most of them no longer appeared on catch lists as of 2005. Two new key target species prompted an increase in the harvest during the 2004 to 2011 period, though they were species of lower value than the teatfish.

Catch records from the Queensland East Coast bêche-de-mer fishery (ECBDMF). The three areas indicated in the figure are conceptual periods in the fishery based on the composition of catch. (Eriksson and Byrne 2013)

A major problem with the sea cucumber fishery in the GBRMP is the lack of information about the original population sizes of the species targeted. Without a baseline of knowledge, predicting the critical threshold beyond which a species can no longer recovery is extremely difficult. Because of this, many of these species may have been fished past their critical threshold and may not be able to avoid extinction.

With Australia being a developed high-income country, it is expected that management of fisheries is better resourced then it would be in low developed countries. This study showed that serial expansion and the quick replacement of high-valued species with lesser valued individuals is not limited to fishing practices in low-income developing countries and is a common trend in the overexploited global sea cucumber fishery. This is important to the fishery because it points out gaps in the management of sea cucumbers. Although Australia tried to manage this particular fishery with a rotational zoning scheme (RZS) in 2004, it proved to be either too late or ineffective. In addition, this study illustrates that providing relatively few fishermen access to a large fishing area through licensing, does not necessarily transfer to sustainable sea cucumber harvest.

White teat sea cucumber (Holothuria fuscogilva). (Stacy Jupiter/Marine Photobank)

In the end, it is clear that more studies need to be done on population sizes of tropical sea cucumbers to accurately assess their vulnerability. Without being able to monitor populations as they are harvested, effectively managing the many now threatened or endangered sea cucumbers will continue to be a problem.

Reference

Eriksson, H. and Byrne, M. (2013), The sea cucumber fishery in Australia’s Great Barrier Reef Marine Park follows global patterns of serial exploitation. Fish and Fisheries. doi: 10.1111/faf.12059

The Evolution of a Discard Policy in Europe

September 26, 2014/0 Comments/in Conservation, Ocean News /by aanstett

Hannah Armstrong, RJD Intern

When discussing matters of conserving the ocean and the resources therein, overfishing has continued to be a significant problem. To compensate, those in charge of fisheries management often implement catch quotas, or ban fishing overall, most often in protected areas. In Europe, however, where public awareness of ocean conservation has increased, another issue has become the leading topic of discussions in recent years: fisheries discards, and discard policies.

Discards are the portion of a fisherman’s catch that is not kept on board and landed, but instead thrown back into the ocean, usually dead or dying. In the waters surrounding the European Union, this practice is currently legal, and typically happens as a result of other management measures such as minimum landing sizes, total allowable catches and quota limitations and by-catch restrictions (Borges). But with European Union fisheries management shifting from focusing on single-species sustainability to maintaining and protecting the entire ecosystem (ecosystem-based fisheries management), understanding the effects of discarding unwanted species is critical (Borges).

Discards are the portion of a fisherman’s catch that is not kept on board and landed, but instead thrown back into the ocean. (Image source: EUReferendum.com)

The European Commission, the “executive body of the European union with the mandate to propose future policies in fisheries management” (Borges), originally began regulating total allowable catches around the year 1980, followed by the first Common Fisheries Policy regulation, which aimed to restrict fishing effort by catch limits, however it never made any reference to discards. It wasn’t until 1992 that discards were deliberately mentioned in the context of needing improved fishing practices and technology as a means of limiting discards.

By the end of 2004, with a new European Commissioner for Fisheries and Maritime Affairs, discards once again became a heated topic amongst European fisheries managers. Then, in 2008, when video was released of a UK vessel dumping nearly five tons of commercial sized fish just outside waters where discarding is banned, there was a public outcry for a total ban on fisheries discards (Borges). A review process for the Common Fisheries Policy began in 2009, which addressed issues such as over-exploitation of fish stocks, strategies and goals for ecosystem-based management, among other things. Finally, following a 2010 campaign that focused primarily on the issue of discards, the public once again petitioned for more attention regarding this issue, eventually resulting in a discard summit to fully address the problem (Borges).

Looking to the future, there is a plan for the Common Fisheries Policy to include a discard ban for several species, “starting with pelagic species in 2014 and followed by demersal species to be fully implemented by 2016” (Borges). Still, even with a discard ban, there remain questions as to whether it will prove to be effective fisheries management if it is not monitored and enforced, and if other conservation efforts are not implemented as well. The evolution of the European Union’s discard policy certainly highlights the impact of public awareness and opinion as a means of informing policy discussion and implementation.

Reference:

Borges, L. “The evolution of a discard policy in Europe.” Fish and Fisheries (2013)

The Zoo Debate: Educators or Entertainers?

September 24, 2014/0 Comments/in Conservation, Ocean News /by aanstett

Evidence for the Positive Contributions of Zoos and Aquariums to Aichi Biodiversity Target 1

By Emily Rose Nelson, RJD Intern

The UN Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020, adopted by the Convention on Biological Diversity in 2010, is a ten-year model aiming to protect biodiversity and the benefits it provides. The plan is essential in global efforts to halt and, optimistically, reverse the current loss of biodiversity. 20 target goals, known as the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, have been put in place with intent to increase value people put on biodiversity, maintain ecosystem services and support global action for a healthy planet. The first of these targets is as follows, “ by 2020, at the latest, people are aware of the values of biodiversity and the steps they can take to conserve and use it sustainably.” Achieving such an ambitious goal as this will not be possible without work from zoos and aquariums.

The United Nations General Assembly has declared this the “Decade on Biodiversity.”

Annually zoos and aquariums around the world receive over 700 million visitors (Gusset and Dick, 2011) providing them with the potential to make a huge impact in achieving Aichi Target 1. A 2007 study found that 131 out of 136 zoo mission statements reference education and 118 out 136 specifically mention conservation (Patrick et al, 2007). However, many of these institutions market themselves for entertainment and weaken messages of environmental education.

Moss and collaborators (2014) set out to evaluate the educational impacts of zoos and aquariums. 5,661 visitors to 26 zoos in 19 different countries all over the world were given the same open-ended surveys before and after their visit. Participants were asked to list up to five things that came to mind when they thought about biodiversity and list two actions they could take to help save animal species. Content analysis was used to provide quantitative data from these responses.

Results of the study showed that understanding of biodiversity and knowledge of actions to help protect biodiversity both significantly increased over the course of zoo and aquarium visits, providing evidence that zoos and aquariums are largely serving their role as educators as well as entertainers. The outcome shown by Moss et. al calls attention to the importance of zoos and aquariums in achieving Aichi Target 1.

Both dependent variables, biodiversity understanding and knowledge of actions to protect biodiversity, show significant difference between surveys before and after visiting a zoo or aquarium.

However, an increase in knowledge regarding biodiversity is not necessarily an indicator of a related change in behavior to protect biodiversity. Zoos and aquariums face the challenging task of moving people to action. One way in which they are already doing this is providing people with a connection to nature. If one feels attached to something they are more likely to care about its conservation (Falk et al, 2007). Additionally, zoos and aquariums can play a part in pro-conservation action by advocating for policy changes that protect land and wildlife, targeting and providing alternatives to threatening social norms, and serving as a role model for their visitors and other institutions.

Works Cited:

Falk, J. H., E. M. Reinhard, C. L. Vernon, K. Bronnenkant, N. L. Deans, and J. E. Heimlich. 2007. Why zoos and aquariums matter: assessing the impact of a visit to a zoo or aquarium. Association of Zoos & Aquariums, Silver Spring, MD.

Gusset, M., and G. Dick. 2011. The global reach of zoos and aquariums in visitor numbers and conservation expenditures. Zoo Biology 30:566–569.

Moss, Andrew, Eric Jensen, and Markus Gusset. “Evaluating the Contribution of Zoos and Aquariums to Aichi Biodiversity Target 1.” Conservation Biology (2014).

Patrick, P. G., C. E. Matthews, D. F. Ayers, and S. D. Tunnicliffe. 2007. Conservation and education: prominent themes in zoo mission statements. Journal of Environmental Education 38:53–60.

Shark Conservation in the Galapagos Islands

May 17, 2014/0 Comments/in Conservation, Ocean News /by aanstett

By Daniela Escontrela, RJD Intern

The Galapagos Islands are a popular tourist destination for many people around the world. The pristine environment combined with the vast amounts of life and different species make many people come to the Galapagos every year. However, one of the most important species people come to watch are the scalloped hammerheads and the whale sharks, along with other sharks.

Living on the islands for over two months I can say I have seen most of the iconic animals that the Galapagos are known for. However, one of the best experiences I’ve had is snorkeling and diving with the sharks here. On a snorkel trip to Punta Morena, we were riding back to Puerto Villamil after a long day of snorkeling. All of a sudden, our boat slowed down and veered off to the right. It took me a second to realize why we were going in that direction, and then I saw it. A huge dorsal and caudal fin were sticking out of the water. Being marine biologists, everyone’s first instinct was to jump in the water with this massive creature. However, our boat captain and first mate were wary about this. They kept saying it was a “Tiburon gato” which we gathered was a tiger shark. However, we were positive it was a whale shark as the dorsal fin had the characteristic white spots of a whale shark. After much debate about what it was, the boat captain rode over closer to the shark and in that moment the shark swam right under our boat, and that’s when we were one hundred percent sure that it was a whale shark. The boat captain and first mate were still very skeptical, but regardless we all quickly suited up and jumped in the water to swim with this huge, majestic creature. We swam with it for at least ten minutes as it circled the boat several times. My favorite part was its gorgeous white spots that were running down its body. But as quickly as this adventure began, it then ended as the whale shark dove deep into the abyss. It was interesting, the men working on this boat run snorkel trips almost on a daily basis and have definitely seen a whale shark before, but had never jumped into the water with one.

An image of me swimming along the whale shark spotted on our way back from a snorkeling trip to Punta Morena. Photo credits to Emily Rose Nelson.

Another incredible experience with sharks was when we were diving in San Cristobal at Kicker Rock (Leon Dormido). The dive began with more sharks than I had ever seen in one dive, small blacktips and Galapagos sharks casually swam by, eyeing us with caution. Towards the end of the dive I was filming two Galapagos sharks that were directly below me when I heard a clinking noise. I looked up, expecting to see another small Galapagos or blactip shark, but what I saw was something I was not expecting. A school of at least ten scalloped hammerheads swimming towards me, one of them coming within five feet of me. They were magnificent, something I had wanted to see my whole life. There slender bodies, big dorsal fins and beautiful cephalofoil were enthralling. They surrounded us for a couple of minutes, some swimming under me, some above me. I didn’t know where to look, they were too beautiful. But they soon swam away and I was out of air from all the excitement.

An image taken of one of the scalloped hammerheads spotted on a dive at San Cristobal as it swam away from us. Photo taken by me.

I have always been a strong advocate of shark conservation. Back in the states, I am part of the RJ Dunlap program which focuses on shark research and conservation. However, this trip gave me an insight into the shark finning problem that I had never had before. Besides being able to see these majestic creatures underwater, I have also lived with a host family the past two months where my host dad used to be a shark fisherman here in the Galapagos. It was interesting to hear his story, he had been a pepino diver, and when the pepino fishery was banned, he switched to shark finning. He says he didn’t have an alternative, he had to feed his family and the shark fishing brought in good money for him and his family to survive. Eventually, shark fishing was also banned in the Galapagos and he had to find another job. Luckily, he was able to find a job with the government. However, he tells me he would like shark fishing to continue. This time not because of the money, but because a lot of the locals are terrified of the sharks. He himself is scared of sharks, every time I tell him about my day’s stories involving sharks, he cringes and tells me to be careful.

It’s interesting, on one hand I love sharks and would love for the massive killing of sharks to end completely. However, then there’s the people that rely on these jobs to support their family; this is something I had never fully considered before. You can’t ask someone to stop their job when it’s the only source of income they have and the only way they can get through life. It made me realize that banning shark finning all together is unrealistic. However, other things can be done to reduce the number of sharks that are killed every year. We need to set up a comprehensive education program to teach locals of these small fishing communities about sharks. From talking to many locals and hearing their stories, I have come to realize that a lot of them don’t have much education when it comes to things about the natural world, especially sharks. People need to be educated about sharks, the threats they face and how catastrophic it could be to lose sharks. They need to learn that taking out sharks from the environment could cause environmental impacts, such as throwing the food web off balance. In addition, removing sharks from the environment could cause ecotourism to cease, causing them to lose a crucial part of their income.

In addition, we can’t just ask shark fishermen to stop fishing without giving them alternatives, especially when this is their only source of income. When the park banned shark finning and pepino fishing, they started to set up a lot of road blocks so the fishermen couldn’t use their boats for tourism and ferrying people between islands. The park needs to help those fishermen displaced by the ban to find new jobs, this way it will be less likely that the fishermen will go back to illegally fishing for sharks.

There also needs to be more enforcement against illegal fishing. The park currently only has one patrol boat for the island of Isabela. It’s not only enforcement to prevent local fishermen from fishing sharks. They also need to have more stringent penalties for foreign vessels that come into the Galapagos Marine Reserve to fish for sharks.

A combination of education, alternative jobs and enforcement could help the Galapagos in their conservation effort for sharks. It is imperative that these issues be faced because if the Galapagos Islands were to lose sharks, the rest of the marine reserve could be severely affected. One of the major things that attracted me to the Galapagos was the idea that I would be able to see iconic species like the whale shark and the scalloped hammerhead. Luckily, I had that experience along with the chance to meet people that once depended on these species; future generations should get the chance I had of seeing all these incredible animals and sights.

Bioactive Compounds Derived from Marine Algal Species

May 9, 2014/0 Comments/in Conservation, Ocean News /by aanstett

By Kyra Hartog, RJD Intern

1. Introduction

Marine algal species produce a variety of compounds that are ultimately beneficial to human health. These compounds are often produced as secondary metabolites [1], meaning they are not essential to the algal species’ survival but benefit the organism in some way. These compounds include, but are not limited to, polyunsaturated fatty acids and carotenoids, as well as compounds with antibiotic and antifungal activity. Those compounds with antibiotic and antifungal activity are being investigated for use as components in anti-fouling paints for maritime industries around the world [1]. Polyunsaturated fatty acids are being studied in relation to their benefits to human health including their potential anticancer activity [2] and their potential for treatment of the symptoms of cystic fibrosis [3]. Carotenoids also have great potential for benefits to human health including treatment of degenerative diseases like macular degeneration and the development of cataracts [4, 5]. Both polyunsaturated fatty acids and carotenoids can be found in algal species, which may provide a less expensive, more efficient mode of production for these compounds [6, 7]. Various algal species are also being studied as bases for biofuels that are more sustainable than current terrestrial options including oil palms, corn, and sugar cane [8].

Though marine products appear to have limited historical use as herbal remedies and medicinal products, a few instances have been reported in the case of marine algal species. Algal metabolites have been studied and developed further as technology to extract and bioassay these metabolites has developed. Marine algae are defined as eukaryotic macroalgae and microalgae for the purpose of this review. Prokaryotic “blue-green algae” (Cyanobacteria) are beyond the scope of this review.

2. Historical use of algae as herbal remedies and supplements

Of the many plant-based herbal remedies used throughout history, only a few have been derived from algal species. Inuit tribes in Nunavut, Canada used parts of a brown algae Laminaria solidungula as a general health supplement [9]. Members of the Rhodophyta division, Chondrus crispus and Mastocarpus stellatus, were used in Irish folk medicine as part of a beverage popular for treating colds, sore throats, and chest infections, including Tuberculosis [10]. They were also boiled in milk or water as remedies for burns and kidney issues [10]. Juice from another red algae, Porphyra umbilicalis, was used as a cancer remedy, particularly breast cancer. It was also used in the Aran Islands as a remedy for indigestion in people and constipation relief in cows [10].

3. Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids (PUFAs)

One typically thinks of marine polyunsaturated fatty acids (ω-3 and ω-6) as coming from oily fish like salmon and anchovies. Marine microalgae also represent a great source of these long chain PUFAs including docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and eicosapentanoic acid (EPA) which play several important roles in the human body. DHA has been linked to brain development support in infants and may offer other protective functions to the brain later in life [11]. EPA gives rise to anti-inflammatory eicosanoids, which play crucial roles in the immune system, cardiovascular function, and cell communication in general [12].

3.1. PUFAs and Cancer

Marine derived PUFAs have three potential avenues for use in relation to cancer treatment: as an adjuvant for chemotherapy treatment, as compounds with direct anti-cancer effects, or as supplements to ameliorate the secondary effects of radiation and chemotherapy treatments [2]. The direct anti-cancer effects are specifically against tumors through inhibition of angiogenesis and metastasis [13]. These PUFAs were originally thought to have anti-cancer activity due to the low incidences of cancer reported in areas like Japan and the Mediterranean, where n-3 and n-6 levels are high in the diet [14]. The anti-inflammatory nature of the eicosanoids form from the metabolism of EPA is likely the source of the anti-cancer effects seen with these PUFAs. The eicosanoids reduce damage caused by oxidative stress and inhibit the COX-2 inflammatory pathway [2]. EPA and DHA have also been shown to protect tissues that are not the targets of chemotherapy treatment and increase tumor sensitivity to certain cancer treatments [13]. EPA was also shown to increase muscle mass in patients with wasting syndrome, or cachexia, associated with chemotherapy [15]. Though the correlation between increased muscle and body mass and PUFA supplementation may not have been significant in each and every study conducted, overall quality of life was certainly improved in all patients who received supplements [2].

3.2. Algal DHA and Treatment of Cystic Fibrosis Symptoms

Cystic fibrosis is a genetic disease in which mucous membranes, namely in the lung and intestines, do not function properly, causing mucous build-up. Patients with this disease have been found to have lower than normal levels of DHA and arachidonic acid (ARA) in their mucous membrane tissues as well as the blood [3]. This may be due to incomplete digestion of PUFAs as algal DHA supplements appear to be efficiently absorbed by patients with the disease [16]. Lung disease associated with CF is very inflammatory (high levels of ARA) so an increase in DHA derived anti-inflammatory compounds may lead to improvements in lung function by decreasing the ratio between ARA and DHA [3]. Algal DHA is beneficial to CF patients because it manifests fewer gastrointestinal side effects and is more compliant than similar doses of fish oil derived DHA. The doses of algal DHA can also be delivered without increasing pancreatic enzymes doses as well [3]. Algal DHA was found to deliver to red blood cells and plasma at an equal level to fish oils from cooked salmon [11].

3.3. Production of Algal PUFAs

Marine microalgae are a very good source of various PUFAs including EPA, DHA, ARA, and γ-linolenic acid. Certain species and algal strains can be selected for the type and quantities of the PUFAs they produce by manipulating the conditions in which the algae are cultured [6]. Ward and Singh [18] outlined the various species and the compounds they produce in their review of alternate sources of omega 3/6 oils: microalgae of the genera Phaeodatylum and Monodus are good sources of EPA; Schizotrychium species are stable sources of DHA for use in aquaculture, poultry and livestock feeds [19]. One of the problems with algal EPA production is that those species that accumulate EPA in the most available form, triglycerides, are obligate phototrophs, which require expensive photobioreactors for growth [19]. This may be remedied by genetic engineering technology that allows phototrophic species to be converted to heterotrophic species that require much less expensive fermenters for growth and are not hampered by the need for sunlight [18]. Heterotrophic cells can also grow in much higher cell densities compared to phototrophic bacteria because they don’t need sunlight for growth [18].

A photbioreactor set-up for the cultivation of microalgae
Image source: Wikimedia Commons

4. Antibiotic and Antifouling Activity

A study of extracts from Puerto Rican seaweed species showed 64% of the compounds assayed had some level of antibiotic activity [20]. These levels ranged from activity against a single species to activity against the entire range of bacterial species tested. This activity can be contributed to a variety of compounds with the most highly active being brominated compounds in Asparagopsis taxiformis solutions. Though the majority of species tested for antibiotic activity exhibited inhibition against only 1 or 2 microorganisms, 61% of the algae were active against the Gram-positive bacteria Bacilus subtiles and Staphylococcus aureus. Antibiotic activity was evenly distributed against the species in the divisions Rhodophyta, Chlorophyta, and Phaeophyta [20].

Secondary metabolites from marine algae also have activity against bacteria, other algae, fungi, protozoans, and macro species like barnacle larvae. These activities may contribute to algal metabolites making a good source for anti-fouling compounds as all the groups listed above participate in the formation of biofilms on maritime industry properties [1]. Two compounds from the red algae Laurencia rigida, elatol and deschlorelatol, were found to have strong activity against settlement of invertebrate larvae like that of barnacles and oysters [21]. A lactone compound from the brown algae Lobophora variegata, known as lobophorolide, has strong promise as an anti-fungal agent that is environmentally friendly for use in anti-fouling paints [21]. Compounds must meet the standards of the EC Biocide Directive for safety of registered toxins if they are to be used in commercial anti-fouling paints. Isolation of these compounds is very expensive but the solution may lie in genetic engineering. It allows for a safe supply and the potential for development of new compounds to remedy the ever-present problem of biofouling in the maritime industry [1].

5. Carotenoids

Carotenoids are pigment compounds that generally give a yellow, orange, or red color. They are synthesized by plants and algae and may play a role in photosynthesis. These compounds act as antioxidants, reducing stress from oxidative damage. Their bioactivity lies in their physiochemical properties, which depend on the structure of the molecule. Carotenoids also contribute to algae’s nutritive value in feed for aquaculture and animal farming. These values have made algae a potential nutraceutical for human use [7]. Some microalgae of the division Chlorphyta accumulate carotenoids as part of their biomass, including Dunaliella and Haematococcus species [22]. Dunaliella salina is a particularly good natural source of β-carotene, which has been shown to reduce the risk of cancer and degenerative diseases in humans [4, 23]. D. salina is currently being grown for production in open ponds [4, 6]. Haematococcus pluvialisis is one of the richest natural sources of astaxanthin and can be cultivated at a large scale for production of the compound [23]. Lutein is one of the most important carotenoids in foods and for humans. It is used as an additive in aquaculture and poultry operations and may be effective against a variety of disease including cataracts, macular degeneration, and early stages of atherosclerosis [5, 7]. Strains of the green microalga Muriellopsis are the most promising source for algal lutein accumulation and production systems are being developed [7].

Good candidates for algal production of carotenoids will have the same properties as those for production of PUFAs: high cell densities, efficient growth with minimal light, high percentage of desired compounds per cell. Genetic engineering is also an option for carotenoid production but no significant improvements in manipulation of eukaryotic microalgae has been seen so far. Further research and growth studies are required to realize marine algae’s potential for large-scale production [7].

[D. Salina.jpg] Natural salt ponds containing Dunaliella salina. The red color is due to their high levels of β-carotene.

6. Biofuels

Most biofuels on the market today are derived from terrestrial sources like oil palms and corn. These biofuels are disadvantageous in that they put a strain on food markets, contribute to water shortages by taking water away from other operations, and further the already rampant destruction of rainforests for resources. Microalgae offer a more economical and environmentally friendly option for the production of biofuels. They have several characteristics that make them more viable biofuel source compared to terrestrial options: they can produce oils year round, they grow in aqueous media and need less water, they can be cultivated on otherwise agriculturally unusable land, and they have a high oil content based on dry mass (20-50%). They may also be able to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and their nitrogen waste may be used as fertilizer [8]. Oil yields may be increased through manipulation of algal growth conditions including temperature, pH, light, carbon dioxide levels, and harvesting methods [6]. Different strains will have the highest oil yield, the highest carbon dioxide fixation rate, the most efficient growth cycle, etc. so strains must be selected for a balance of these traits to create the best overall strains for biofuel production [8]. Once the various strains are produced and a biomass is obtained, the mass must be converted, either thermochemically or biochemically into the usable products for biofuels. There are a variety of conversion methods depending on the starting product and the desired end product [24]. Microalgal production methods are still relatively expensive so further research and engineering are needed in order to choose strains that will be the most effective for biofuel production. The environmentally friendly nature of algae-based fuels is perhaps the most attractive aspect of their use as current options such as palm oil require clear-cutting of rainforests, killing thousands of endangered animals.

7. Conclusions

Microalgae are a vast, largely untapped resource for a variety of natural products. These products may be used for everything from human health supplements to animal feeds to biofuels. Some of the most valuable compounds derived from marine algae are the polyunsaturated fatty acids, carotenoids, antibiotic compounds, antifungal compounds, antifouling compounds, and oils for biofuels. These compounds may come from macroalgae and microalgae of various divisions including Chlorphyta, Rhodophyta, and Phaeophyta. Though beyond the scope of this review, prokaryotic Cyanobacteria also produce the already listed valuable compounds in addition to some others including neurotoxins.

Further examination of already studied marine algal species and their relatives is necessary for marine algae to truly become one of the great, well-known marine resources. Luckily, they are abundant and offer very little chance for over-exploitation. Their potential for production in an aquaculture setting is also a huge benefit in addition to their valuable secondary actions and products including carbon dioxide fixation and nitrogen waste production for fertilizer. When production becomes more economically feasible and more efficient, marine algae may represent the biggest breakthrough in marine natural product development for medicine and other products.

References

1. Bhadury, Punyasloke, and Phillip C Wright. “Exploitation of Marine Algae: Biogenic Compounds for Potential Antifouling Applications.” Planta 219.4 (2004): 561–78.

2. Vaughan, V C, M-R Hassing, and P a Lewandowski. “Marine Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids and Cancer Therapy.” British Journal of Cancer 108.3 (2013): 486–92.

3. Lloyd-Still, John D et al. “Bioavailability and Safety of a High Dose of Docosahexaenoic Acid Triacylglycerol of Algal Origin in Cystic Fibrosis Patients: A Randomized, Controlled Study.” Nutrition (Burbank, Los Angeles County, Calif.) 22.1 (2006): 36–46.

4. Ben-Amotz, A. “Production of-carotene from Dunaliella.” Chemicals from microalgae (1999): 196-204.

5. Krinsky, Norman I., and Elizabeth J. Johnson. “Carotenoid actions and their relation to health and disease.” Molecular aspects of medicine 26.6 (2005): 459-516.

6. Borowitzka, Michael A. “Microalgae as Sources of Pharmaceuticals and Other Biologically Active Compounds.” Journal of Applied Phycology 7 (1994): 3–15.

7. Del Campo, José a, Mercedes García-González, and Miguel G Guerrero. “Outdoor Cultivation of Microalgae for Carotenoid Production: Current State and Perspectives.” Applied microbiology and biotechnology 74.6 (2007): 1163–74.

8. Brennan, Liam, and Philip Owende. “Biofuels from microalgae—A Review of Technologies for Production, Processing, and Extractions of Biofuels and Co-Products.” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14.2 (2010): 557–577.

9. Black, Paleah L., John T. Arnason, and Alain Cuerrier. “Medicinal Plants Used by the Inuit of Qikiqtaaluk (Baffin Island, Nunavut)This Paper Was Submitted for the Special Issue on Ethnobotany, Inspired by the Ethnobotany Symposium Organized by Alain Cuerrier, Montréal Botanical Garden, and Held in Montréal at .” Botany 86.2 (2008): 157–163.

10. Dias, Daniel a., Sylvia Urban, and Ute Roessner. “A Historical Overview of Natural Products in Drug Discovery.” Metabolites 2.4 (2012): 303–336.

11. Arterburn, Linda M et al. “Algal-Oil Capsules and Cooked Salmon: Nutritionally Equivalent Sources of Docosahexaenoic Acid.” Journal of the American Dietetic Association 108.7 (2008): 1204–9.

12. Tapiero, H et al. “Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids (PUFA) and Eicosanoids in Human Health and Pathologies.” Biomedicine & pharmacotherapy = Biomédecine & pharmacothérapie 56.5 (2002): 215–22.

13. Baracos, Vickie E., Vera C. Mazurak, and David WL Ma. “n-3 Polyunsaturated fatty acids throughout the cancer trajectory: influence on disease incidence, progression, response to therapy and cancer-associated cachexia.” Nutrition research reviews 17.02 (2004): 177-192.

14. Gerber, Mariette. “Omega-3 fatty acids and cancers: a systematic update review of epidemiological studies.” British Journal of Nutrition 107.S2 (2012): S228-S239.

15. Weed, Harrison G., et al. “Lean body mass gain in patients with head and neck squamous cell cancer treated perioperatively with a protein‐and energy‐dense nutritional supplement containing eicosapentaenoic acid.” Head & neck 33.7 (2011): 1027-1033.

16. Freedman, Steven D., et al. “Association of cystic fibrosis with abnormalities in fatty acid metabolism.” New England Journal of Medicine 350.6 (2004): 560-569.

17. Ward, Owen P, and Ajay Singh. “Omega-3/6 Fatty Acids: Alternative Sources of Production.” Process Biochemistry 40 (2005): 3627–3652.

18. Apt, Kirk E., and Paul W. Behrens. “Commercial developments in microalgal biotechnology.” Journal of Phycology 35.2 (1999): 215-226.

19. Ballantine, David L. et al. “Antibiotic Activity of Lipid-Soluble Extracts from Caribbean Marine Algae.” Hydrobiologia 151-152.1 (1987): 463–469.

20. Falch, B. S., et al. “Antibacterial and cytotoxic compounds from the blue-green alga Fischerella ambigua.” Planta Medica 58 (1992).

21. Kubanek, Julia, et al. “Seaweed resistance to microbial attack: a targeted chemical defense against marine fungi.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 100.12 (2003): 6916-6921.

22. Ben-Amotz, Ami, and Mordhay Avron. “The biotechnology of cultivating the halotolerant alga Dunaliella.” Trends in Biotechnology 8 (1990): 121-126.

23. Guerin, Martin, Mark E. Huntley, and Miguel Olaizola. “Haematococcus astaxanthin: applications for human health and nutrition.”TRENDS in Biotechnology 21.5 (2003): 210-216.

24. McKendry, Peter. “Energy production from biomass (part 1): overview of biomass.” Bioresource technology 83.1 (2002): 37-46.

A True Environmental Success Story

May 1, 2014/0 Comments/in Conservation, Ocean News /by aanstett

By Patrick Goebel, RJD Intern

The amount of derelict fishing gear lost by commercial and recreational fishing is astonishing. Derelict fishing gear includes nets, lines, crab/lobster and shrimp traps/pots, and other recreational or commercial harvest equipment that has been accidentally lost or intentionally discarded in the marine environment. In the report, A Rising Tide of Ocean Debris, volunteers collected 36,910 fishing lines, 11,059 fishing lures/light sticks, 5,539 fishing nets, and 5,285 crab/lobster traps in the United States alone in 2012.

Derelict fishing gear has the potential to continue fishing (entangling and killing marine life). This uncontrolled process is known as ghost fishing. The time and extent it fishes for depends on the type of fishing gear. The time frame, however, is getting longer and longer as highly durable fishing gear made of long-lasting synthetic material is being used. Since this gear continues to fish, there are large financial losses to the fishing industry. Ghost fishing of some commercial stocks has been estimated to catch amounts equal to 5%-30% of the annual landing levels (Laist 1995). In 2013, Puget Sound dungeness crab harvests totaled 9 million pounds. This would have resulted in 2,700,000 pounds of crab lost last year. However, that number is most likely an over estimate because of The Northwest Straits Derelict Fishing Gear Removal Program.

Species found in derelict fishing gear in Puget Sound (Gilardi et al 2010).

In 2002, the Washington State Legislature passed SB 6313, establishing the Derelict Fishing gear removal program in Puget Sound. Over the years, this program has become a true success story. The Northwest Straits Initiative (NWSI) working in cooperation with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and the Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) has developed a comprehensive derelict fishing gear removal program for Washington State (A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Derelict Fishing Gear Removal In Puget Sound, Washington). Since its creation, this program has removed 4,605 derelict fishing nets and 3,173 crab pots and 47 shrimp pots, within a depth of 105ft (~32m), from Puget Sound.

There are several reason why this program has become a true success story. The first is the process in which it was created. The legislation called for the development of a database, protocols for removal and disposal, and an evaluation of methods to reduce further losses. The first step in this process was removing any penalties associated with the reporting of lost gear. This allows gear to be removed quickly. This was so important to the program that on March 29, 2012 Gregoire signed into law Senate Bill 5561, making it mandatory for commercial fisherman to report lost nets to the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife within 24 hours of loss (derelictgear.org).

Derelict fishing gear being removed from the ocean.

Locating derelict fishing gear is either done through fisherman and citizen reports or directed surveys. The surveys performed by this commission take place in areas of high commercial fishing. The program uses a high-resolution side-scan sonar survey technique, which has had a profound effect on locating derelict fishing nets and traps. At the moment removal of derelict fishing gear occurs less than 105ft deep.

The program is now in the home stretch of clearing all nets within 105ft. In 2013, the state budgeted $3.5 million dollars to ensure the completion of the project. It is their goal that they will have cleared all derelict fishing gear within 105ft from Puget Sound by 2015. There is nowhere else but up from here… Wrong… the program is heading down. There are unknown number of nets, pots and etc. in deeper water. This program is currently testing deep-water net removal strategies, such as remotely operated vehicles, grapplers, and deep-water divers. By expanding their range and removal techniques, this program can continue to lead and set an example for other programs throughout the world. The success of this program can be used to set an example for the rest of the world.

References

Laist, D.W., 1995. Marine debris entanglement and ghost fishing: A cryptic and significant type of Bycatch? Solving Bycatch. Proceedings of the Solving Bycatch Workshop, Sept. 25-27, Settle, Washington, pp: 1-1.

“A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Derelict Fishing Gear Removal In Puget Sound, Washington.” (2009): n. pag. Print. “Northwest Straits Derelict Fishing Gear Removal Program.”Northwest Straits Derelict Fishing Gear Removal Program. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Jan. 2013. <http://www.derelictgear.org/>.

Gilardi, K. V., Carlson-Bremer, D., June, J. A., Antonelis, K., Broadhurst, G., & Cowan, T. (2010). Marine species mortality in derelict fishing nets in Puget Sound, WA and the cost/benefits of derelict net removal. Marine pollution bulletin, 60(3), 376-382.

A Rising Tide of Ocean Debris and What We Can Do about It: 2009 Report. Washington, D.C.: International Coastal Cleanup, Ocean Conservancy, 2009. Print.

Five Keys to Effective Marine Protected Areas

April 28, 2014/0 Comments/in Conservation, Ocean News /by aanstett

By Lindsay Jennings, RJD Intern

Marine Protected Areas, or MPAs, are areas of the ocean which have a degree of restricted human use for the purpose of protecting its natural resources as well as its ecosystem. Over the past years, the number of MPAs has grown rapidly as conservation efforts push the need for these critical refuges for vulnerable species. But the threat of overfishing still prevails in both coastal areas and in the open ocean, where these MPAs exist.

Salomon Atoll located in the Chagos Archipelago, the world’s largest marine reserve. Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons

Unfortunately, too often, MPAs fall short of reaching their full potential due to a host of problems including illegal harvesting, poor management, and the presence of animals which can move freely across the boundaries to be fished outside of the MPA. But Graham Edgar, from the University of Tasmania, along with 24 other researchers took on the first global study of its kind to identify what key factors produce effective MPAs and allow them to reach their full potential.

The researchers, along with trained volunteer divers surveyed 964 sites across 87 established MPAs identifying the key indicators of healthy MPAs such as species richness (i.e. how many unique fish species are found) and biomass (i.e. the total number of fish in a survey site). They compared these sites with non-MPA sites that are open to fishing. The results highlight the magnitude of how fishing can affect these species and ecosystems.

Distribution of sites surveyed with colored circles representing NOELI features. Photo courtesy of Edgar et al., 2014

Outside of MPAs (areas where fishing is allowed), Edgar et al. found total fish abundance drastically reduced, with upwards of an 80% reduction in large fish, including sharks, groupers, and jacks as compared to fish abundance within the MPAs. Inside these protected MPAs, the number of unique fish species found was 36% greater than that outside the MPAs in fished waters.

The outcome of the MPAs investigated resulted in the researchers concluding that conservation benefits increased greatly with five key features, which they named NOELI features.

No take (no fishing or harvesting allowed)
Well-enforced
Old (>10 years)
Large (> 100 km)
Isolated

While not every MPA will meet all five criteria, it is crucial that future MPAs implement better design and management and compliance to ensure that these refuges achieve their full ecological potential and conservation value.

MPAs are remarkable conservation tools, if developed and managed properly. The researchers in this study stress that by removing the threat of fishing coupled with sufficient will among stakeholders, managers, and politicians, there can be increased levels of compliance, ultimately allowing the MPAs to reach their full conservation potential and fulfill their role of safeguarding populations of vulnerable species.