Nonindigenous biota on artificial structures: could habitat creation facilitate biological invasions?

By Tim Glasby, S. Connell, M. G. Holloway, C. Hewitt. 2007

502 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We identified different distributions of marine nonindigenous species (NIS) and native species on some artificial structures versus natural reefs and using experimental manipulations, revealed some possible causal mechanisms. In well-established subtidal assemblages, numbers of NIS were 1.5–2.5 times greater on pontoons or pilings than on rocky reefs, despite the local species pool of natives being up to 2.5 times greater than that of NIS. Conversely, on reefs and seawalls, numbers of native species were up to three times greater than numbers of NIS. Differential recruitment to different positions and types of surfaces appeared to influence distribution patterns. NIS recruited well to most surfaces, particularly concrete surfaces near the surface of the water, whilst natives occurred infrequently on wooden surfaces. The position of rocky reefs and seawalls close to the shore and to the seabed appeared to make them favourable for the recruitment of natives, but this positioning alone does not hinder the recruitment of NIS. We argue that pontoons and pilings represent beachheads (i.e. entry points for invasion) for many nonindigenous epibiota and so enhance the spread and establishment of NIS in estuaries. Habitat creation in estuaries may, therefore, be a serious threat to native biodiversity.

Subfields: Ecology, Global and Planetary Change, Oceanography

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a89c2ced2cd7a39d48c270f1ea353b6af02dcd43

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

1. G. Ruiz
2. E. Johnston
3. S. Hawkins
4. D. Booth
5. P. Fofonoff
6. T. Therriault
7. I. Davidson
8. C. Simkanin

In Global and Planetary Change

1. T. Therriault
2. G. Ruiz
3. I. Davidson
4. E. Johnston
5. C. Simkanin
6. G. Jamieson
7. J. Dower
8. D. Booth

In Oceanography

1. T. Therriault
2. E. Johnston
3. Louise B. Firth
4. I. Davidson
5. S. Hawkins
6. G. Ruiz
7. P. Fofonoff
8. C. Simkanin

Citations in the corpus

• Adventures of a sea squirt sleuth: unraveling the identity of Didemnum vexillum, a global ascidian invader (2009, background): “Evidence is accumu-lating that artificial structures may facilitate invasions (Lambert and Lambert 1998, 2003; Oren and Benayahu 1998; Glasby et al. 2007; Tyrell and Byers 2007), probably due to several factors: proximity to the location of introduction of propagules (usually harbors), reduced…”
• Concepts for biocontrol in marine environments: is there a way forward? (2015, unknown): “The latter application is of particular relevance to biofouling in marine transport hubs such as ports and marinas, whose extensive artificial habitats provided by structures such as piles and floating pontoons can be a significant reservoir for marine pests (Glasby et al. 2007; Ruiz et al. 2009).”
• Pollution reduces native diversity and increases invader dominance in marine hard‐substrate communities (2007, background): “Experiments were conducted at two sites within Sydney Harbour and two sites within Botany Bay, New South Wales, Australia (Fig.”
• The large-scale impact of offshore wind farm structures on pelagic primary productivity in the southern North Sea (2017, background): “Mediated through the associated epibenthic community, OWF constructions can act as stepping stones for the dispersal of exotic species (Glasby et al 2007).”
• Effects of ocean sprawl on ecological connectivity: impacts and solutions (2017, background): “This may be because non-indigenous species, with r-selected life history strategies, are able to rapidly colonise new substrates (Glasby et al., 2007), or because the vectors by which non-indigenous species are translocated select for species that are tolerant of the contaminants that typify…”
• Habitat Distribution and Heterogeneity in Marine Invasion Dynamics: the Importance of Hard Substrate and Artificial Structure (2009, background): “Working on fouling communities in Australia, Glasby et al. (2007) found that richness of non-native species was significantly greater on some types of artificial substrata, especially pontoons and pilings, than on nearby rocky reefs.”
• Anthropogenic structures and the infiltration of natural benthos by invasive ascidians (2012, background): “Similarly, within a bay or estuary, sampling of adjacent sites has shown that lower numbers of NIS, particularly sessile species, are found in natural habitats compared with nearby anthropogenic ones (Glasby et al. 2007; Marins et al. 2010).”
• Sydney Harbour: a review of anthropogenic impacts on the biodiversity and ecosystem function of one of the world’s largest natural harbours (2015, background): “In Sydney Harbour, the abundance of NIS on artificial structures can be more than twice that found on natural sandstone reefs (Glasby et al. 2007; Dafforn et al. 2012a), with these structures also serving as ‘stepping stones’ to NIS, facilitating their spread (e.g. Bulleri and Airoldi 2005).”