news and events - nesp marine · temperate reefs in tasmania 15 > contacts 16 news and events...
TRANSCRIPT
w w w.m a r i n e h u b . o r g July 2009 1
NEWSLETTERJuly 2009
this
issu
e > News and Events
Keeping marine pests out of Australian waters – new website launched 1
$120m for new marine research vessel 1
Adaptation Research Network for Marine Biodiversity and Resources 2
Atlas of Living Australia 2
Encyclopedia of Life 2
How did you observe World Oceans Day? 2
> Perspective 2
> In focus – Biodiversity: patterns, origins and connectivity 3
Crustaceans as indicators of marine biodiversity 4
What can polychaete worms tell us? 5
Roles of climate and geology in invertebrate distributions 6
Geological history of the seafloor near Australia 7
Genetic data are helping us to understand biodiversity and connectivity in the deep sea 8
Faunal turnover in Neogene Indo-Pacific scleractinian corals 9
> Publications 10
“The analysis of biodiversity using rank abundance distributions” 10
“Why environmentalism needs high finance” 10
Papers in Press 11
> Profile – Scholarship holders 11
> Surveys 14
South-eastern Tasmania 14
Temperate reefs in Tasmania 15
> Contacts 16
News and eventsKeeping marine pests out of Australian waters – new website launched
Over 250 introduced marine plants and animals have hitch-hiked to Australian waters on vessels of all types from yachts to commercial ships. Some have taken over habitats from our native species, changing our coastal areas and damaging our fishing, aquaculture and tourism industries.
To protect our marine environment and industries, the Australian and state/territory governments, along with marine industries and marine scientists, are implementing the National System for the Prevention and Management of Marine Pest Incursions.
A marine pest website http://www.marinepests.gov.au/ is now available providing detailed information on the National System and sector specific marine pest management measures, including:
• marine pests and their impacts on industry and the environment;
• identifying marine pests;
The Federal Budget has delivered $120m in funds for a new “blue-water” marine research vessel to replace the Southern Surveyor. The vessel will be a National Facility available for use by Australian and overseas research organisations.
Marine Biodiversity Hub researchers are active users of the Southern Surveyor, and much of the material and data that we are working up originates from surveys that we have led or contributed to on the National Facility. n
• distribution of marine pests in Australia (interactive map);
• current marine pest outbreaks;
• managing ballast water
• managing biofouling on recreational vessels, fishing vessels, commercial ships, non-trading vessels and petroleum vessels equipment and infrastructure; and
• the National System. n
Media release: http://maff.gov.au/media/media_releases/2009/may/working_with_boat_owners_to_help_manage_marine_pests
Banner photo: Erythrotrichia ligulata, a red algal epiphyte currently known from only 3 localities in southern Australia (Fiona Scott, Marine Biodiversity Hub PhD scholarship student) – see Profile of scholarship recipients.
Australia’s Marine Biodiversity Research Hub
$120m for new marine research vessel12 May 2009
2 July 2009 w w w .m a r i n e h u b . o r g
Adaptation Research Network for Marine Biodiversity and Resources
Atlas of Living Australia
Over the next four years, the marine adaptation network will work closely with the National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility (NCCARF) to advance knowledge about climate change adaptation, and adaptation options for stakeholders, of Australia’s marine biodiversity and resources.
The network will foster an inclusive collaborative and interdisciplinary research environment that generates outputs relevant for policy-makers and managers to develop appropriate climate change adaptation. The Marine Adaptation Network and the Marine Biodiversity Hub agree that both groups provide crucial input and knowledge to climate change adaption and that close collaboration is required. We will profile the network in a future newsletter.
The announcement of a $30 million increase in funding for the Atlas of Living Australia ($10 m in 2009-10) provides an important foundational step in the deeper understanding of national biodiversity.
Hosted by CSIRO and in collaboration with partners in government, museums and the universities, the program is developing a biodiversity data management system which will link Australia’s biological knowledge with its scientific and agricultural reference collections and other custodians of biological information.
The program will develop search interfaces and web services to facilitate discovery of biological information resources and to support the use of biological data in scientific research, policy-making and education.
Media release: http://www.csiro.au/news/Funds-for-Atlas-of-Living-Australia.html
“The Encyclopedia of Life (EOL) is an ambitious, even audacious project to organize and make available via the Internet virtually all information about life present on Earth. At its heart lies a series of Web sites—one for each of the approximately 1.8 million known species—that provide the entry points to this vast array of knowledge. The entry-point for each site is a species page suitable for the general public, but with several linked pages aimed at more specialized users. Marine Biodiversity Hub taxonomists are contributing to this initiative.
The EOL dynamically synthesizes biodiversity knowledge about all known species, including their taxonomy, geographic distribution, collections, genetics, evolutionary history, morphology, behaviour, ecological relationships, and importance for human well being, and distributes this information through the Internet.
It serves as a primary resource for a wide audience that includes scientists, natural
Encyclopedia of Life resource managers, conservationists, teachers, and students around the world. It is believed that the EOL’s encompassing scope and innovation will have a major global impact in facilitating biodiversity research, conservation, and education.
EOL staff include scientists and non-scientists working from museums and research institutions around the world.”
http://www.eol.org/
How did you observe World Oceans Day?The idea of celebrating World Oceans Day on 8 June was a Canadian initiative at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. On 5 December 2008, the UN General Assembly resolved that starting in 2009 the UN would formally observe World Oceans Day on the 8th of June each year. The theme of this year’s World Oceans Day was “Our oceans, our responsibility”.
http://www.un.org/Depts/los/reference_files/worldoceansday.htm
Perspectiveby Prof Nic Bax, Director, CERF Marine Biodiversity Hub
The Fisheries and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) celebrated the inaugural World Oceans Day on 8 June by releasing technical guidelines on deep sea fishing, aimed at helping the fisheries sector reduce its impact on fragile deep sea fish species and ecosystems.
The guidelines recommend that deep sea fishing should cease in any area where significant adverse impacts to vulnerable marine ecosystems are taking place. Of course, this begs the question of how to identify vulnerable marine ecosystems and it is instructive to compare the FAO approach with those recently developed by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) – COP IX/20 Annex II. Jake Rice (Fisheries and Oceans Canada) did this at a workshop on the High Seas at the recent International Marine Conservation Congress (IMCC) in Washington DC, and I have recreated his analysis below: There are clear overlaps between the two sets of criteria, with the CBD criteria focusing to a larger extent on function and outcomes (including productivity), while the FAO criteria are targeted more at features.
While criteria like these are useful, we have also to ask whether or not they
are practical, and how we could identify them with the data at hand. Australia’s leadership in developing large-scale marine reserves and reserve networks provides a good opportunity to see how successful we are at identifying and protecting vulnerable or biologically significant areas.
At this Congress, I presented a paper with Alan Williams on this topic. Our conclusions were briefly that while the Commonwealth South-east Marine Reserve Network was successful in identifying and protecting many vulnerable or biologically significant areas, it had also missed some, especially smaller ones. Many of these smaller areas were discovered on scientific surveys targeted at other questions or through interviews with fishers – there is no synoptic survey data that would identify them. Thus it was clear that even in this relatively well-studied area there was much left unknown, which requires a degree of
w w w.m a r i n e h u b . o r g July 2009 3
humility on the part of scientists if we are not to mislead managers on the accuracy or comprehensiveness of our knowledge.
Managing the unknown is one of the major challenges of marine biodiversity management and there are some interesting approaches underway in Australia and overseas. The South Australian government has dealt with the unknown in designing their marine protected areas (MPA) network by including unknown habitat in their MPA design. European Union countries deal with impacts on vulnerable deep sea coral habitats by requiring their vessels to move on from uncharted vulnerable areas to a new area if a trawl collects more than 100 kg of “live” corals or 1,000 kg of “live”
sponge. These are two quite different approaches to the same problem of dealing with uncertainty. In the Marine Biodiversity
Hub, we are exploring a complementary method – how to extrapolate from known physical data to patterns in biodiversity.
Managing under uncertainty is a problem
that is well studied in fisheries management (at least for the target species), but less so in biodiversity management, where there
is strong temptation to resort to untested rules of thumb, like setting aside 30% of habitat in MPAs. We need to clearly distinguish science fact from opinion (from scientists and non-scientists) and ensure that the advice scientists provide is based on a well-reasoned analysis of available data. Dealing with uncertainty in biodiversity management is a research area that is ripe for development. Early signs of a way forward include approaches such as ecosystem based marine spatial planning where the entire seascape is managed to achieve clearly specified objectives. The research we are conducting in the Hub on predicting marine biodiversity with uncertainty, and management options that can deal with uncertainty, are highly relevant to these developments.
In this newsletter we focus on reducing the uncertainty in our knowledge of biodiversity through describing current patterns in the cortex of their origins and functional requirements. In our next newsletter we will focus on how to manage the uncertainty, by using options such as offsets and incentives to manage areas outside or marine reserves. n
FAO Criteria for Identifying Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems
1. Uniqueness or rarity – unique ecosystem or containing rare, endemic or threatened and endangered species
2. Functional significance – discrete areas necessary for survival of fish species, especially rare, threatened or endangered
3. Fragility – an ecosystem highly susceptible to degradation
4. Component species have life history traits that make recovery difficult
5. Structural complexity – complex physical structures resulting from biotic and abiotic features
CBD IX/20 Scientific criteria for ecologically and biologically significant areas (reordered, original order provided)
Uniqueness or rarity – species, communities, habitats, ecosystems, geomorphological, oceanographic (1)
Special importance for life history stages of species (2)
Vulnerability, fragility, sensitivity, or slow recovery (4)
Importance for threatened, endangered or declining species and/or habitats (3)
Biological diversity (6)
Biological productivity (5)
Naturalness (7)
Table: Comparison of the FAO and CBD guidelines for identifying vulnerable or significant marine ecosystems or areas.
(Sources FAO. 2009. International guidelines for the management of deep-sea fisheries in the high seas. Rome. FAO 73p. and CBD. IX/20 Annex II. Scientific guidance for selecting areas to establish a representative network of marine protected areas, including in open ocean waters and deep sea habitats.)
In focus – Biodiversity: patterns,origins and connectivityAlan Butler - Leader, CERF Biodiversity Program
We are discovering more of Australia’s marine biodiversity, describing its current distribution (the science of biogeography), how it got to be the way it is, what maintains it, and how it might change with future changes in climate.
A key activity of biogeographers is to seek patterns in the distribution of plants and animals. These are of huge practical value. Australia uses “bioregionalisations” on land and sea to assist in a range of planning
and conservation measures (for further information see web links at the end of this article). The Biodiversity program has refined the bioregionalisation for shelf waters, based on the distributions of fish
species with results on depth biomes already being used by the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA), while refinement of the provincial structure is continuing.
At the same time, we are taking the opportunity to test how representative fish are of the broader marine biodiversity. Alan Williams reported in the last newsletter that the distributions of five
“Limited information about Australia’s marine biodiversity, especially for the species and ecosystem of the more remote and deeper areas, has been a barrier to developing a strategic approach to the sustainable management of our oceans.”
Peter Garrett, Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts, 2009.
4 July 2009 w w w .m a r i n e h u b . o r g
Crustaceans as indicators of marine biodiversityGary Poore, Museum Victoria – CERF Biodiversity Program
major invertebrate taxa broadly aligned with those of fish but with some intriguing differences. Anna McCallum also reported in the last newsletter on her PhD research. She is finding that breaks in community composition along the western margin are consistent between decapods and fishes on the shallow upper slope. (See http://www.marinehub.org/index.php/site/newsletter_archive/C18/)
Australia is megadiverse and this includes its marine environment. Biogeographic research relies on detailed analyses of taxonomic records and samples. The resources required would be prohibitive without pre-existing data and samples, and the Marine Biodiversity Hub is making extensive use of both. The fish data were mostly already available as records or samples, but had not been worked up consistently or collated into a single format and database. Our work has increased the number of fish species
available for bioregionalisation research from 1,500 to over 7,500 – a five-fold increase. At an earlier stage in the scientific process of biogeography, it is necessary to discover what’s there and to describe new species – this is especially the case with marine invertebrates. Some projects in the Hub are working rapidly all the way from discovery and identification, to analysis of patterns. Gary Poore and Robin Wilson report in this newsletter on the Hub’s progress on the biogeography of crustaceans and polychaete worms.
Detailed biodiversity data developed and used in the Marine Biodiversity Hub are being used to update and test current assumptions used in marine bioregionalisation, but there’s another phase in biogeography – to ask how the species themselves, and their distributions, got the way they are. Understanding the similarity of the current biota to those of adjacent regions of the Indo-Pacific will enable us to determine patterns and processes controlling their origins. In addition, our work on evolutionary processes and origins uses molecular and morphological phylogenetics to unravel the historical processes responsible for the current diversity and distribution of selected crustaceans and fish.
Changes in sea level, plate tectonics, geomorphology and palaeocurrents (see item on Geological History by Scott Nichol in this newsletter) will be used to construct a picture of how the current broad-scale biodiversity patterns developed. The point, of course, is that these processes are continuing, so this work will better
place us to make predictions about the future of Australia’s marine fauna.
On finer scales of both space and time, Hub researchers are asking what maintains the current observed biodiversity patterns. This requires analysis of fine-scale patterns in biodiversity, and we have been collaborating with researchers in Australia and New Zealand to collect and provide samples for this work. In particular, Hub researchers are assessing connectivity among seamounts of the South-east Marine Region by integrating population genetics, spatial statistics and oceanographic modelling. This comparative approach will help us estimate general patterns of ecological connectivity among seamounts, which will provide robust and much needed data for the science-based design and management of marine reserve networks. Karen Miller and Phillip England give an update in this newsletter. n
Links:
Maps of Australia’s bioregions (IBRA): http://www.environment.gov.au/parks/nrs/science/bioregion-framework/ibra/index.html
The Integrated Marine and Coastal Regionalisation of Australia (IMCRA 4.0): http://environment.gov.au/coasts/mbp/publications/imcra
National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas (NRSMPA): http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/mpa/nrsmpa/
Marine Bioregional Planning: http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/mbp/index.html
Crustaceans (crabs, shrimps, lobsters and their many smaller relatives) are contributing to Marine Biodiversity Hub objectives in many ways. This is not surprising because these animals dominate many marine environments. Getting useful data from samples of crustaceans depends on being able to tell one species from another, in itself not a trivial task, and turning the resulting identifications into biogeographic and ecological patterns.
At least one third of the decapod species sampled from the continental slope of Western Australia are new to science. These collections now reside at Museum Victoria and we are actively promoting them for taxonomic and phylogenetic research. Already, a new species of shrimp (Bruce,
2008), two new spider crabs (Richer de Forges and Poore, 2008), and one new deepwater goneplacid crab (Ahyong, 2008) have been described. In progress are descriptions of eight new chirostylid squat lobsters and two new crested hippolytid shrimps by Anna McCallum, two new
species of crangonid sand shrimps by Joanne Taylor, and at least ten species of axioid mud lobsters by me and research assistant, David Collins. Publication of these new taxa is expected by the end of 2009. This total of 26 out of the 200 new decapods doesn’t seem like much but we have promises from taxonomic experts to work up other groups in the future and will continue to chip away at the most speciose families. The old-fashioned taxonomic descriptions have a first objective of providing the language we use to talk about taxonomy. But more so, identifying animals as endemic or widespread enables
Continental shelf biomes of Australia developed in bioregionalisation research by the CERF Marine Biodiversity Hub.
w w w.m a r i n e h u b . o r g July 2009 5
At least one third of the decapod species sampled from the continental slope of Western Australia are new to science.
What can polychaete worms tell us?Robin Wilson, Museum Victoria – CERF Biodiversity Program
A recent synthesis of polychaete diversity in Australia, based primarily on sampling from the Eastern seaboard (Wilson et al., 2003), provides an ideal baseline for comparison with the Hub collections from the Western Australian continental margin.
Questions to be addressed with these data include:
• Do the collections from the Western Australian continental margin contain taxa not known from elsewhere in Australia?
• Are levels of diversity comparable with collections known from the best-sampled region elsewhere in Australia (South-east Australia)?
Polychaete studies within the Marine Hub Biodiversity Program use taxonomic information to characterise benthic communities on the Western Australian continental margin. Polychaetes (segmented worms belonging to the phylum Annelida) provide ideal subjects because of their abundance and diversity in most marine benthic habitats.
• Do the collections from the Western Australian continental margin reveal patterns of diversity consistent with bioregional analyses from other marine taxa (fish, ophiuroid echinoderms, decapod crustaceans)?
Although data are still being generated from northern-most stations, at least 51
polychaete families are now recorded, including several families rarely or never before recorded in Australian waters, including Fauveliopsidae, Lacydoniidae and Polygordiidae. Recent explorations of shelf depths in the Arafura Sea, Great Australian Bight and Tasmanian seamounts also revealed Polygordiidae (Avery et al., 2009) and added two further families new to Australia: Iphitimidae (commensal worms occurring in the gill chambers of crabs) and Hartmaniellidae (Wilson, 2008). The Australian polychaete fauna
was thought to be relatively well known at family level in 2003, so discovery within
biogeographic patterns to be understood. And, it provides the background against which the reality of molecular-based phylogenies can be assessed.
An important series of grab samples was taken along the WA coast during 2005 and 2007. These target the small invertebrates of soft sandy and muddy sediments. All recognisable animals have been now extracted in the laboratory
and sorted to major taxon. (See the article by Robin Wilson on one of these invertebrates, the polychaete worms.) About half the animals are crustaceans, small amphipods, isopods, cumaceans, tanaidaceans and the like, individuals of the order of 3–5 mm long. During 2009, these are being identified to morpho-species. It is no surprise to us that while it is possible to place many in a known family and most in a genus almost none can be assigned a species name. The principal reason for this is that we are working in an unexplored environment
and that previous taxonomic research on these taxa has been confined to eastern states or to shallow water. Museum Victoria has engaged expert taxonomists to help: Magdalena Blazewicz-Paszkowycz from Poland for tanaidaceans and Genefor Walker-Smith for the remaining groups. The objective is to seek biogeographic patterns and to correlate these with the physical and historical environment, so actual species names are not critical. The
only similar study in Australia concentrated on isopod crustaceans (Poore et al., 1994). The preliminary data for Cumacea are indicative of what can be anticipated for other groups. Cumaceans have been relatively well studied taxonomically in South Australia and Bass Strait. The figures (right) are of species described in the 1930s by Herbert Hale and are similar, if not the same, as those from the WA material.
So far, at least 50 species of cumaceans have been distinguished. Most occur in only one, two or three of the more than 100 grab samples. This indicates once
again that most species are either very rare or have limited distributions or are hard to catch. Our sampling is only beginning to gain an insight into total biodiversity but will be sufficient to explore gross patterns. It remains to be seen if these patterns mirror those shown by fishes or decapods or correlates with environmental variables. All of the crustaceans taken in these samples are brooders so differ in life-history strategy from decapods which have a planktonic larval stage. n
References are available in the online version of this newsletter: http://www.marinehub.org/index.php/site/newsletters/
The Australian polychaete fauna was thought to be relatively well known at family level in 2003, so discovery within a few years of 5 families new to the fauna shows that these have indeed been “voyages of discovery”.
6 July 2009 w w w .m a r i n e h u b . o r g
a few years of 5 families new to the fauna shows that these have indeed been “voyages
of discovery”. Studies at lower taxonomic levels are incomplete but in at least some families, genera and species new
to Australia are also being identified which is an early indication that polychaetes from the WA margin may show levels of endemism comparable with that now known for decapod crustacea (Poore et al., 2008).
Complete data sets will soon allow quantitative analyses of patterns of diversity of polychaetes along the WA coast. Biogeographic studies can offer historical explanations for these patterns, so collaboration with colleagues in other institutions now undertaking phylogenetic revisions of polychaete families will be significant linkages in the final stages of Hub studies. For example, Wilson & Glasby (in prep), in a biogeographic study of the polychaete family Nereididae, identify a significant component of
endemism among species of coastal bays (recently drowned estuaries) suggesting speciation associated with sea level changes may partly explain modern patterns of diversity. Other
historical processes may be significant on the shelf and slope, and polychaete families that are numerically significant in samples from the WA coast will form the focus for such studies. Likely candidates include Eunicidae and Polynoidae.
Data from these studies are also anticipated to link with research activities in the Surrogates and Predictions Programs within the Hub. Polychaete families such as Spionidae and Opheliidae (both highly ranked by abundance among Hub samples from WA) are often faithful to a narrow set of feeding modes (Pagliosa, 2005). It is also intended, therefore, to investigate relationships between polychaete diversity data from grab samples and acoustic profiles and other physical variables available from the same sites. n
References are available in the online version of this newsletter: http://www.marinehub.org/index.php/site/newsletters/
CERF Hub stations on the WA continental margin from which polychaetes are recorded.
Perinereis vallata (Nereididae) Photo: R. Wilson.
Roles of climate and geology in invertebrate distributionsNikos Andreakis, Australian Institute of Marine Science – CERF Biodiversity Program
Molecular phylogeography and evolutionary biology are being used by Hub postdoctoral researcher Nikos Andreakis to evaluate climatic and geological events responsible for the distribution of marine biota along the western and southern Australian coasts.
Molecular phylogeography and evolutionary biology approaches are being applied to selected animal taxa, to describe their recent bio-geographical patterns of distribution and temporal levels of sequence divergence. For
Speciation associated with sea level changes may partly explain modern patterns of diversity.
example, 77 families of over 500 nominal decapod crustacean species are today encountered along the tropical to temperate continental margin of Southern and central Western Australia; thirty-three per cent of those are thought to be new
to science. Amongst them, decapod species of the families Chirostylidae and Galatheidae constitute an exceptional model system for evaluating historical processes responsible at the present observed distribution patterns of the Western Australian fauna. This is because Chirostylids and Galatheids are among the most numerous and diverse groups of crustaceans commonly encountered on seamounts, continental margins and shelf habitats at all depths. Moreover,
w w w.m a r i n e h u b . o r g July 2009 7
Nikos Andreakis completed his degree in Biological Sciences in 1999 at the University “Federico II” of Naples in Italy. He thereafter attained a one-year postgraduate student fellowship at the department of Agronomy for the development of molecular markers for DNA fingerprinting as
indicators of quality for local agricultural products (supervisor R. Rao). Nikos started his studies in molecular ecology and genetics of marine species in 2002 at the “Stazione Zoologica A. Dohrn” of Naples (Italy). In 2006, he completed his PhD thesis in life sciences at the same institute (title: phylogeny, phylogeography and population genetics of the invasive red seaweed Asparagopsis (supervisors G. Procaccini, W.H.C.F. Kooistra, C.A. Maggs), awarded by the Open University of London (UK). After his PhD, Nikos stayed in Naples for two more years as a postdoctoral research fellow to investigate cryptic speciation events (by means of population genetics and phylogenetics) in the ascidian model-species Ciona intestinalis and for the development of isogenic/semi-isogenic lineages for microsatellite positional mapping in the same species (supervisor P. Sordino). He was then offered a 3 year CERF post-doctoral position at the Australian Institute of Marine Science in the laboratory of Dr Madeleine van Oppen. His main scientific interests, related to gene phylogeny and evolution, population genetics, phylogenetics, biogeography, cryptic speciation and adaptation, have been developed mainly within marine species.
they exhibit a high level of morphological diversity across their native distribution range, believed to be the result of a relatively old radiation event.
Chirostylid and Galatheid squat lobsters have therefore been collected from several localities along the continental margin of central Western Australia and they have been morphologically identified to the species and genus levels by experts at Museum Victoria. A combination of mitochondrial and nuclear loci are used to infer robust phylogenies within families in order to (a) delineate taxonomic units and elucidate spatial patterns of diversity and distribution of the selected species, (b) formulate hypotheses of distribution on the basis of large or provincial
scale geological events (such as historical changes in sea level and geomorphology), and (c) identify the evolutionary events responsible for the observed patterns by means of molecular clock estimates. These results will provide key insights on how contemporary biodiversity patterns may respond to current environmental changes.
So far, the application of mitochondrial markers has been successful in validating morphological taxonomy, revealing new species and delineating several cryptic morpho-species among Chirostylidae and Galatheidae of Western Australian origin. Since the phylogeographic and phylogenetic relationships of the Western Australia crustacean fauna to that of the remaining East and South-Western Pacific relatives are not fully resolved, a consequence of this project is to compare patterns and levels of diversity encountered in Western Australia and patterns of diversity recently described in South-Western Pacific scale within these two families to further explore the derivation and origins of the western Australian squat lobsters. n
References are available in the online version of this newsletter: http://www.marinehub.org/index.php/site/newsletters/
These results will provide key insights on how contemporary biodiversity patterns may respond to current environmental changes.
Phylogenetic relationships among 30 of the 255 sequences of Chirostylidae and Galatheidae squat lobsters inferred from the mitochondrial Cytochrome oxidase subunit I gene. Sequences belonging to South-Western Pacific specimens were downloaded from NCBI.
Geological history of the seafloor near AustraliaDr Scott Nichol, Geoscience Australia – CERF Biodiversity Program
The biodiversity projects in the Marine biodiversity Hub have concentrated on the taxonomic, genetic, and biogeographic work that underpin an accurate biogeography of Australia’s marine fauna. Our aim in the final year is to interpret this new biogeography in terms of the history (and possible future) of Australia’s marine biodiversity.
To do that, we must not merely look at a map of diversity on the present continent and seafloor. We have to think about how the geology – and with it the sea-level and ocean currents – have changed over time. Here is a brief account of the geological changes that were happening whilst the fauna was dispersing and evolving to the patterns we see today.
8 July 2009 w w w .m a r i n e h u b . o r g
Geological history of the Tasman Sea
The breakup of East Gondwana and subsequent opening of the Tasman Sea spans the Late Cretaceous to Eocene Epochs, an interval of about 50 million years (Ma) between ~100 Ma and 52 Ma before present. Breakup involved gradual separation of South-east Australia from Antarctica and a series of 13 microplates, incorporating Lord Howe Rise as the main
continental fragment. Seafloor spreading commenced between ~95 Ma and ~83 Ma and propagated in a south-west to north-east direction, forming the Tasman Basin and allowing the development of major ocean current patterns along the eastern margin of Australia. The rate of northward spreading was initially about 4 mm/yr, accelerating to 22 mm/yr after 79 Ma. Seafloor spreading in the Tasman Sea ended by 52 Ma, by which time it had extended to the present continental margin of southern Queensland and the modern configuration of the Tasman Sea was established.
Since seafloor spreading ended, the whole eastern Australian margin and Tasman Sea region has drifted northward at a rate of ~7 cm per year as part of the tectonic drift of the Australian plate. In the process, the plate drifted across three mantle hotspots resulting in the formation of two volcanic seamount chains in the Tasman Sea (Tasmantid seamount chain and Lord Howe seamount chain) and a third volcanic chain along the mainland east coast.
Seamount ages are best constrained for the Tasmantid seamount chain, where ages increase northward from 6.4 Ma
(Late Miocene) at Taupo Bank seamount to ~24 Ma (Early Miocene) at Queensland seamount, a pattern consistent with northward plate movement. The age of the Lord Howe Seamount chain is also considered to be Miocene, based on ages of 6.9 – 6.4 Ma for the Lord Howe Island volcano. Following their formation, the seamounts in both chains have subsided with some then capped by a platform of reef limestone.
Geological history of the Southern Margin
The southern margin of the Australian continent is a rifted margin resulting from the breakup of Australia and Antarctica that began during the Cretaceous Period. The timing of breakup is debated, with various estimates ranging from ~125 Ma to ~83 Ma, though a recent review of evidence suggests the younger end of this range is more likely. Separation occurred in a northwest-southeast direction accompanied by seafloor spreading that resulted in the formation of oceanic crust and the opening of the Australo-Australian Gulf between Australia and Antarctica. Seafloor spreading began very slowly in the Late Cretaceous and accelerated to ~10 mm/yr (half-spreading rate) by the Middle Eocene (~48 Ma), then doubled to ~20 mm/yr after 43 Ma in a north-south direction along the Tasman Fracture Zone, located to the west of the South Tasman Rise.
During the initial spreading phase, the South Tasman Rise and Tasmania formed a land bridge between the continents. But by the Eocene/Oligocene boundary (~33.5 Ma) the South Tasman Rise had subsided, marking the final separation of Australia from Antarctica and the opening of the Tasmanian Gateway. This allowed the development of the Antarctic Circumpolar Current. In turn, deepwater circulation between the southern Indian and Pacific Oceans was established, Antarctica became fully thermally isolated from warm surface currents and the ice cap began to form. n
Hub scientists from the University of Tasmania (Dr Karen Miller). CSIRO (Dr Phillip England and Dr Rasanthi Gunasekera), Museum Victoria (Dr Tim O’Hara) and colleagues from NIWA are using genetics to understand ecological processes in seamount corals, crustaceans and brittle stars.
Our aim in the final year is to interpret this new biogeography in terms of the history (and possible future) of Australia’s marine biodiversity.
Genetic data are helping us to understand biodiversity and connectivity in the deep seaKaren Miller, University of Tasmania and Phillip England, CSIRO – CERF Biodiversity Program
Like tropical coral reefs, deep sea corals are an important component of seamount communities as they are abundant and provide important habitat for hundreds of other marine invertebrate species including the abundant squat lobster and brittle star.
The only known method for dispersal in these species is via their planktonic larvae; however we know very little about how or where the larvae disperse. Importantly, these coral-based habitats are under threat from a range of sources, including fishing and climate change, so it is important that we understand more about their larval dispersal as this will be one of the most important aspects of the recovery and persistence of these unique marine populations.
This project builds on previous work by Karen Miller, who has used genetic data specifically to understand connectivity among seamount coral populations in the Pacific and Indian Oceans. So far, this work shows that ocean expanses are likely to be effective barriers to larval dispersal. For example, DNA sequence data show that colonies of the black coral Stichopathes variabilis on the Lord Howe Rise off the east cost of Australia are genetically different to those on the Norfolk and Kermadec Ridges to the north and west of New Zealand.
Interestingly, for two widespread stony coral species (Solenosmilia variabilis and Desmophyllum dianthus), we have found only low levels of DNA sequence variation
The largest known cluster of submarine volcanoes in Australian waters which are located south of Tasmania.
w w w.m a r i n e h u b . o r g July 2009 9
The origin of marine biodiversity in the Indo-Pacific is poorly known. Faunal turnover in scleractinian reef corals has been hypothesised over the Miocene-Pliocene boundary (5 Ma), in the Malay Archipelago. However, there is no
in three different genes between coral populations separated by thousands of kilometres in Australia, New Zealand and Chile. It could be that larval dispersal in these corals occurs frequently enough over these vast ocean expanses to have prevented genetic divergence. Alternatively, it may be due to the limited resolution of the genetic markers we are using. Some genes are known to be conserved (less varied) in corals and this may be exacerbated in the deep-sea where ecological and evolutionary
processes may be occurring slowly – which may explain why we have not been able to detect any genetic differences between coral populations of these two species, even across ocean basins.
In addition to providing information about connectivity among seamount coral populations, our DNA sequence data have revealed cryptic species within most of the coral collections from Australian and New Zealand seamounts especially in the black coral genera Stichopathes and Parantipathes which have few morphological taxonomic features.Some of these new species appear to be endemic to certain geographic regions such as the Lord Howe Rise. We are now working with international taxonomists to properly describe the new coral species. So far our genetic studies have identified geographic variation (population
structure) within many wide-ranging species, as well as the discovery of many new coral species. Overall it appears that levels of seamount coral biodiversity are likely to have been, and continue to be, underestimated and that genetic data will be integral to understanding biodiversity in these systems.
Through the Marine Biodiversity Hub we are now expanding this seamount coral research by developing microsatellite DNA markers for these two coral species
and the decapod crustacean, Munida isos. Microsatellites represent non-coding regions of the DNA and these are usually highly variable even between different individuals. With these powerful genetic markers we will be better able to resolve the scale of larval dispersal in these corals. We are also developing DNA sequence markers to characterise genetic structure in multiple species of brittle stars (Ophiuroids) collected across a huge geographical range from Western Australia to New Zealand. Together this combination of approaches and species will provide a uniquely comprehensive picture of population connectivity at the range of spatial scales important for design of marine protected areas and management of biodiversity.
A novel and exciting aspect of the new work is the combining of sophisticated
hydrodynamic modelling with population genetic data. We are using 3 dimensional models of the deep sea currents to predict dispersal patterns of seamount species. These predicted connectivity patterns are then being compared with realised dispersal patterns as written in the spatial population genetic data, to better understand how large scale oceanographic processes influence dispersal and connectivity. n
Overall it appears that levels of seamount coral biodiversity are likely to have been, and continue to be, underestimated . . .
Photo of the stony coral Solenosmilia variabilis populations on a seamount south of Tasmania (photo: CSIRO).
Example of modelled dispersal of larvae from seamounts in the study. Larvae were “released” from depths between 800 m and 1200 m at three seamounts (one colour per seamount) during summer and tracked for 16 days.
Kate Bromfield’s PhD project (University of Queensland/CSIRO) is closely comparable with the work of the Marine Biodiversity Hub, and Kate has kept in touch with members of the team. Below is an abstract of her soon-to-be-submitted thesis on the history of corals in the region east and north of Australia.
Faunal turnover in Neogene Indo-Pacific scleractinian coralsKate Bromfield, University of Queensland/CSIRO
10 July 2009 w w w .m a r i n e h u b . o r g
Publications“The analysis of biodiversity using rank abundance distributions”by Foster, S D and Dunstan, P K (2009). Biometrics, DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2009.01263.x.
Biodiversity is an important topic of ecological research. A common form of data collected to investigate patterns of biodiversity is the number of individuals of each species at a series of locations.
These data contain information on the number of individuals (abundance), the number of species (richness), and the relative proportion of each species within the sampled assemblage (evenness). If there are enough sampled locations across an environmental gradient then the data should contain information on how these three attributes of biodiversity change over gradients. We show that the rank abundance distribution (RAD) representation of the data provides a convenient method for quantifying these three attributes constituting biodiversity. We present a statistical framework for modelling RADs and allow their multivariate distribution to vary according to environmental gradients. The method relies on three models: a negative binomial model, a truncated negative binomial model, and a novel model based on a modified Dirichlet-multinomial that allows for a particular type of heterogeneity observed in RAD data. The method is motivated by, and applied to, a large-scale marine survey off the coast of Western Australia, Australia. It provides a rich description of biodiversity and how it changes with environmental conditions. n
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/122377261/abstract
“Why environmentalism needs high finance” Essay by C Josh Donlan, James Mandel, & CERF marine hub researcher Chris Wilcox / April 22, 2009
“Conservationists may wish money were no object, but if nature is to survive, economic incentives and biological imperatives must align.” Is this workable?
See the essay published in Seed Magazine – one of the authors, Chris Wilcox, is a researcher from the CERF Marine Biodiversity Hub. http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/why_envronmentalism_needs_high_finance/
In the next hub newsletter, we will focus on the research undertaken by Chris Wilcox and his team on off-reserve management options – specifically how incentives and offsets can be used to reduce and mitigate impacts on marine biodiversity. We will also look at how consensus is built by diverse stakeholder groups involved in natural resource management. n
See other publications on our website
http://www.marinehub.org/index.php/site/publications/
information available on origination and extinction events in reef corals during the same period for the broader Indo-Pacific region. This is important because many species probably had a more cosmopolitan distribution than previously thought, and many more genera than has previously been estimated were probably present in the Indo-Pacific during the Neogene.
Here we begin to fill this gap by reporting on the taxonomic composition and diversity of Neogene reef coral communities sampled from Indonesia (Salayar), Papua New Guinea (New Britain), and Fiji (Vanua Balavu). Sampling locations were chosen on their reported age, fossil content and preservation quality. Ages were refined using foraminiferal assemblages and Strontium 87/86 isotope ages of samples collected at the sampling locations. This dual approach confirms a mid-Miocene to early Pleistocene age range for the collection.
We have described 154 species of reef forming corals collected across our Indo-Pacific longitudinal gradient. Twenty-four constitute new, extinct species from the genera Alveopora, Astreopora, Caulastrea, Cyphastrea, Echinopora, Euphyllia, Galaxea, Leptoria, Leptoseris, Madracis, Meandrina, Montipora, Platygyra, Symphyllia and Turbinaria. A further 42 taxa could not be assigned to species level due to poor preservation, but may well be additional new, extinct species.
We uncovered a general pattern of coral turnover across the Indo-Pacific. We investigated the degree to which coral communities (using both presence/absence and relative abundance of coral species) varied with water depth, global sea level, dO18 (to assess for correlation with global ice formation), dC13 (a measure for atmospheric CO2), time and geographical distribution. Coral communities were
found to vary with global sea level and time. Thus, global changes in sea level through time potentially drove extinction and origination in Indo-Pacific Neogene corals.
Inverse Lyellian analysis indicates that Papua New Guinea had the highest number of extinct species (mean = 41.8%); possibly resulting from restricted flow of oceanic currents in the region. Indonesia (mean = 9.4%) and Fiji (mean = 6.6%) both had significantly lower numbers of extinct species. However, there is a decline in the number of extinct species found at any location from the mid-Miocene (mean = 23.2%) to the early Pleistocene (mean = 1.8%).
This study supports previously proposed models of an early Pliocene origination event in scleractinia in the Indo-Pacific. n
w w w.m a r i n e h u b . o r g July 2009 11
Papers in Press Donlan, C.J. and C. Wilcox. (in press).
Offsets for bycatch: practical suggestions not panaceas. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment.
Harris, P.T.(in press). On marine ecosystem disturbance regimes, benthic habitat characterisation and applications for environmental management: a physical sedimentological perspective. In: Shelf Processes. International Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication.
Harris, P.T., Heap, A.D., Anderson, T.A, Brooke, B.P. (in press). Comment on: Williams et al. (2009) ‘Australia’s deep-water reserve network: implications of false homogeneity for classifying abiotic surrogates of biodiversity’, ICES Journal of Marine Science.
Lavers, J.L., C. Wilcox, C.J. Donlan. (in press). Are the demographic benefits resulting from predator removal sufficient to restore declining bird populations? Conservation Biology
Pascoe, S., R. Bustamante, C. Wilcox and M. Gibbs. 2009. Spatial fisheries management: a framework for multi-objective qualitative assessment. Ocean and Coastal Management 52:130-138.
Pascoe, W., W. Proctor, C. Wilcox, J. Innes, W. Rochester and N. Dowling (in press). Stakeholder objective preferences in Australian Commonwealth managed fisheries. Marine Policy.
Pascoe, S., W. Proctor, C. Wilcox, J. Innes, W. Rochester1 and N. Dowling. (in press). Stakeholder objective preferences in Australian Commonwealth managed fisheries. Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion working paper series. http://www.csiro.au/resources/SEED.html
Steele, K., Y. Carmel, J. Cross, and C. Wilcox (2009). Uses and Misuses of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) in Environmental Decision-Making. Risk Analysis 29:26-33.
Wilcox, C. and C.J. Donlan (in press). Fisheries Management Needs An Integrated Toolbox. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment.
Williams, A. and Bax, N. (in press). Remarks on “Comment on: Williams et al. (2009) Australia’s deep-water reserve network: implications of false homogeneity for classifying abiotic surrogates of biodiversity, ICES Journal of Marine Science, 66: 214-224.” By Peter T. Harris, Andrew D. Heap, Tara. J. Anderson, and Brendan Brooke. ICES Journal of Marine Science. n
Fiona J Scott
SCHOLARSHIP HOLDERS:
Pro
file
The University of Tasmania (UTAS) is the host institution for CERF Marine Biodiversity Hub PhD Scholarships which are available through its Centre for Marine Science. Eight scholarships have been made available to students wanting to work with Hub researchers. Current scholarship recipients and their topics include:
• Fiona’s PhD examines the existing geographical distribution of little-known species, and is undertaking field surveys of the actual distribution and habitat requirements of a selected model group of these. The results will help determine the benefits of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in safeguarding genuinely rare algal species. With a desire to better understand the nature of algal rarity in the marine environment, the project requires consideration of the following questions. Is the paucity of records of apparently rare algal species an artefact of collection techniques and areas surveyed? Are these species just naturally rare, but widespread? Or, do they have specific habitat requirements and co-occur with specific combinations of physical habitat characteristics? (Her supervisors include Dr Graham Edgar, Dr Neville Barrett (Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute) and Prof Jamie Kirkpatrick (School of Geography and Environmental Studies, UTAS.)
• Current progress – Her searching of Tasmanian Herbarium records and published data show that 142 species currently fit the nominated, apparently-rare criteria of having five or fewer verifiable records. By mapping and analysing specimen-based data sets and published accounts, centres of algal endemism, richness and (apparent) rarity can be detected. Moreover, by relating the locations of the centres of rarity to local environmental features, the location of additional centres of rarity in largely unstudied regions can perhaps be predicted. Testing the reality and underlying physical causes of “centres of rarity” is an important and challenging part of the project. Field survey work is currently being undertaken in Tasmania and involves underwater visual census in the form of timed swims recording the macroalgae at selected “hot spots”, at sites of similar physical characteristics to these centres, and at randomly selected sites.
Erythrotrichia ligulata, a red algal epiphyte currently known from only 3 localities in southern Australia.
“The conservation significance of macroalgae and their role in marine protected area planning” with specific emphasis on the apparently-rare, endemic macroalgae of southern Australia.”
12 July 2009 w w w .m a r i n e h u b . o r g
• Fiona’s work links with other Marine Biodiversity Hub projects under way at the University of Tasmania dealing with the ability to predict rarity in the marine environment and the extent that patterns of rarity may be explained by readily defined physical habitat characteristics.
• Fiona completed a BSc at Monash University, and an MSc from the Botany School, University of Melbourne. Her studies included marine macroalgal morphology and distribution at the University of Melbourne (with Dr Gerry Kraft), James Cook University of North Queensland (with Assoc Prof Ian Price),
the Compton Herbarium, Cape Town (with Prof Richard Norris), and more recent work in marine protistology at the Australian Antarctic Division (with Prof Harvey Marchant). n
Jan Seiler
• Jan’s seven-month visit to CMAR Hobart in 2007 culminated in the conception of a PhD proposal that would compare different non-extractive imaging methods and assess their strength and weaknesses to capture benthic biodiversity metrics – especially for rocky reefs beyond scuba-diving depths.
• Current progress – Since August 2008, Jan has been analysing AUV–borne (Autonomous Underwater Vehicle)
stereo stills and multibeam sonar data, BRUVS-borne (Baited Remote Underwater Video System) video footage, and towed camera platform and ROV video footage. Since almost all vehicles provide stereo imagery, precise quantitative assessments of species abundance will be possible. He will develop and compare several techniques for their effectiveness, including cost-effectiveness, to document and monitor benthic diversity.
Jan taking footage of an emperor penguin colony in Atka Bay, Antarctica for a daily online diary documenting the R/V ‘Polarstern’ expedition ANT XXIII/8 in 2006/2007.
“Non-extractive monitoring of biodiversity on temperate Australian deepwater reefs: using advanced vision-processing techniques to develop and test reliable biodiversity metrics.”
Matthew Cameron
• Matt’s PhD forms part of the larger Marine Biodiversity Hub project which aims to improve understanding of the ecological processes linking environmental variables with patterns in biodiversity across Australia’s marine environments. He hopes his work will add to the current scientific
understanding of the causal ecological processes operating behind patterns of fish biodiversity on Australia’s temperate reef systems and, in so doing, contribute to the effective development and implementation of a National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas.
• He recently moved to Tasmania after being awarded a joint CERF/Thomas Crawford Trust PhD scholarship to
“Relationships between fish populations and the physical structure of rocky reefs, including interaction with fishing pressure inside and outside marine protected areas.”
investigate the spatial patterns of fish distributions and assemblages and their associations with the physical structure and complexity of shallow sublittoral reef habitats around temperate Australia. His project will attempt to link causal ecological processes to the patterns of fish-habitat association and identify how physical reef structure and complexity affect the recovery of fish populations within Marine Protected Areas following the cessation of fishing.
• Jan completed a BSc in Applied Marine Biology at the University of Wales, United Kingdom, which gave him a broad exposure to applied marine science i.e. habitat mapping, fisheries management, and aquaculture. During semester breaks, Jan spent his time on research vessels (Clam Survey 2005, NOAA, USA; MATSIS Cruise 2006, UK/Ireland; RV ‘Polarstern’ 2006-2007, Antarctica) and laboratories (Alfred-Wegener Institute 2005, Germany; CMAR 2007, Hobart, Australia) around the world to further his fieldwork and laboratory expertise, and apply knowledge acquired during term time. Towards the end of his undergraduate studies, he focused on imaging techniques to study benthic communities. This work involved being part of the various steps such as deployment, image acquisition, video scoring, and data analysis, mainly ROV (Remotely Operated Vehicle) video transects off the Antarctic Peninsula and stereo towed video camera platform footage off the coast of Western Australia. n
w w w.m a r i n e h u b . o r g July 2009 13
Jessica Ford
• Jess’ PhD will involve developing new approaches to account for individual heterogeneity (in capture probability and movement patterns) in spatially explicit population-models and inferring population density from individual-level movement data. (Her supervisors are Chris Wilcox and Mark Bravington of CSIRO and Mark Hindell of the School of Zoology at UTAS.)
• Jess received her BSc in Mathematics and Neuroscience from the University
“Understanding animal movement using stochastic models to integrate multiple data types.”
of Queensland in Brisbane and subsequently embarked on a Masters in Medical Statistics. During her Masters, she worked full time as a Research Assistant at the School of Population Health (UQ).
• In 2005, Jess took some time off to explore the Middle East and Eastern Europe, ending up in Switzerland where she worked as a clinical trial statistician for Novartis Pharmaceuticals for several years.
• Jess decided that the UTAS Quantitative Marine Science PhD program and the Marine Biodiversity Hub offered her the opportunity to join statistics with her love of the ocean and marine life. n
• Matt completed a BSc (Hons.) in Ecology at the University of Plymouth, UK, and an MSc in Marine Biology at the University of Wales, Bangor. His master’s project involved a dive-based investigation into the diversity and habitat associations of macro-invertebrates on temperate reefs in New Zealand. After completion of his master’s project, Matt remained and worked in New Zealand for another six months as a research assistant at the University of Auckland’s Leigh Marine Laboratories where he was involved in a wide range of projects including benthic estuarine monitoring and baited underwater video monitoring of deep reef fish populations.
• On returning to the UK, he took up a two year position as a junior marine ecologist for a large multinational environmental company, working on EIA and ecosystem monitoring of marine coastal developments and power generation projects. n
Kirrily Moore
• Kirrily’s PhD project will document the diversity of key octocoral groups found in the Southern Ocean, subantarctic and Antarctic waters, where many species will likely be undescribed. The degree of matching between morphological and genetic differences at a species level will be a key research aim. She will also be looking at the genetic relationship among octocorals found in habitats across the Southern Ocean. Existing samples from the Tasmanian Seamounts (CSIRO), Macquarie Ridge (National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research NZ), Heard Island and the Antarctic Continent (Australian Antarctic Division) and Macquarie Island (Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery) will be utilised. There will
also be opportunities for Kirrily to join upcoming research voyages in the Southern Ocean and Antarctic waters to collect new material for her project. Understanding the biodiversity of deep-sea ecosystems is recognised globally as an important area of research so opportunities for collaboration nationally and internationally are significant and exciting.
• Her two supervisors reflect the areas of research which the PhD will encompass. Dr Philip Alderslade is currently working for CSIRO identifying the octocoral samples collected from the Tasmanian Seamounts. He is an octocoral taxonomic specialist, having worked and published in the field for many years. He will be training Kirrily in the techniques and subtleties of morphometric taxonomic research on octocorals. Dr Karen Miller is a researcher based at
“Biodiversity in the Southern Ocean: A taxonomic review of key octocorallia families.”
UTAS and the Australian Antarctic Division (AAD) and is a specialist in using genetic diversity as a tool for understanding connectivity, phylogeograpy and species boundaries in marine invertebrates.
• Kirrily has come full circle having started her working career at CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, in the Centre for Introduced Marine Pests (CRIMP) in 1995, after completing an Honours degree at Sydney University. She subsequently worked for three years at the Australian Antarctic Division on benthic samples collected from around Heard Island. n
More info:
http://www.marinehub.org/index.php/site/postgraduate/
14 July 2009 w w w .m a r i n e h u b . o r g
SurveysDeep-water habitats of South-eastern Tasmania Tara Anderson, Matthew McArthur, Scott Nichol and Andrew Heap, Geoscience Australia Neville Barrett and Nicole Hill, Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute – CERF Surrogates Program
While near-shore habitats have received considerable attention from researchers using SCUBA diving equipment, deeper shelf habitats (> 30 m) that are logistically harder to survey have received considerably less attention. Offshore habitats, however, support numerous commercially and ecologically important species and may contribute substantially to the biodiversity of our marine ecosystems. Currently, this is an important gap in our knowledge and understanding of marine biodiversity in Australia that needs to be addressed.
As part of the Marine Biodiversity Hub’s surrogacy program, a team of researchers from Geoscience Australia and the Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute undertook a multibeam bathymetry and underwater video survey of deep-water habitats along the South-east Tasmanian coast during February and March this year aboard the RV Challenger (Figure 1). This research focused on acoustically mapping the physical structure of deep reefs using Geoscience Australia’s state of the art Kongsberg EM3002 multibeam system. The types of biological assemblages growing on, sheltering in, or swimming around these reefs were then recorded in real time along a series of
video-transects that traversed these reefs. The towed-video was tracked across the seabed using a USBL (Ultra-short Baseline) system to enable video data to be co-located with the bathymetric maps. Further surveys were completed with the Integrated Marine Observing System (IMOS) Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) operated by the Australian Centre for Field Robotics out of the University of Sydney. See the autonomous vehicles article by Nicole Hill in this issue.
High-resolution bathymetric maps and video footage of these reefs identified a variety of physically and biologically complex features. The Hippolyte Islands, for example, were surrounded by steep-sloping and highly fractured bedrock reef (Figure 2). The upper slopes (<45 m) of these islands were covered in moderate to dense kelp, Ecklonia radiata, but as we descended these slopes became covered in a dense
and highly colourful sponge assemblage (45-80 m). At the base of these reefs, areas of sand were interspersed by patch reefs covered in sponges and sea whips. Beyond these rocky reefs, a brief zone of bare sand was recorded, beyond which the introduced screw shell, Maoricolpus roseus, lined the seafloor. High density beds of dead screw shells created a novel and extensive substratum for encrusting invertebrates, such as sponges. The addition of this screw shell habitat has meant that sponge populations now extend out across the soft-sediment habitats of the inner and perhaps outer shelf. Similar patterns of kelp, sponge and screw-shell distributions were observed along the Fortescue coastal reefs, including the deep-reefs at O’Hara and Waterfall Bluff, and around the Nuggets off Freycinet Peninsula. It is unclear from our survey exactly how far offshore these invasive screw shell beds extend.
In contrast to the high-relief reefs of the Hippolytes, and the complex but less
So, what do our deep-water coastal habitats look like and what marine assemblages are associated with them?
Figure 1: Marine Biodiversity Hub researchers Matt McArthur (GA), Neville Barrett (TAFI), Tara Anderson and Andrew Heap (GA) onboard the RV Challenger having just finished collecting seabed characterisations and video footage from the Hippolyte Islands off South-east Tasmania.
Figure 2: High-resolution multibeam bathymetry map of the Hippolyte Islands, in South-eastern Tasmania with the distributions of dominant biological assemblages: a,b) kelp (green circle = Ecklonia radiata, green triangle = Caulerpa sp.); a,c) sponges (yellow circles); and a,d) the invasive screw shell, Maoricolpus roseus (brown circles). Bathymetric image produced by Cameron Buchanan and James Daniel (Geoscience Australia).
w w w.m a r i n e h u b . o r g July 2009 15
steep reefs of the Nuggets, deep-reefs off the Freycinet Peninsula were characterised by multibeam surveys as very low-lying bedrock habitats that rose only 2-3 m above the surrounding sediments. Video footage of these areas found flat, featureless, and silt-covered bedrock habitats that supported low densities of mixed-assemblage suspension-feeders such as sponges and ascidians. Other species recorded from these areas included brittle stars – found in high densities around reef edges – giant volutes, fan worms and sea pens. Other
Autonomous vehicles as a tool for surveying temperate reefs in Tasmania Nicole Hill and Neville Barrett, Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute
Tara Anderson (Geoscience Australia – CERF Surrogates Program
Fine-scale (centimetre) AUV imagery of offshore reefs enables Surrogates Program researchers from TAFI and Geoscience Australia to examine the ability of multibeam bathymetry and backscatter to differentiate distinct habitat features within shelf waters of this region. It will also allow researchers to investigate the links between biological communities and other physical components of the marine environment, such as temperature and salinity, at local scales. The AUV was built at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in the United States and is operated by The University of Sydney’s Australian Centre for Field Robotics’ (ACFR) marine robotics group headed by Dr Stefan Williams. Through surveys such as the Tasmanian reef survey, the ACFR group are developing smarter and more efficient methods of surveying the marine environment. This includes processes to automate the initial classification of digital images into distinct habitats prior to further analyses.
The AUV, called Sirius, is a national facility platform provided by IMOS (Integrated Marine Observing System) and is
In conjunction with the Australian Centre for field Robotics (University of Sydney), Marine Biodiversity Hub collaborators have been exploring the utility of an Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) for remotely surveying reefs beyond diving depths in Eastern Tasmania.
equipped with a suite of sophisticated cameras, sensors, and sonar equipment. A stereo still camera system takes geo-referenced photographs of the seafloor every second. A range of sensors measure environmental parameters such as conductivity, temperature, dissolved oxygen and chlorophyll-a. The AUV is also fitted with a multi-beam sonar unit that scans the seafloor returning depth and textural information that can be used to quantify very fine-scale habitat complexity. Importantly, these data are collected by the AUV simultaneously and are therefore co-located in space and time. This enables researchers to test how well biological patterns can be predicted from components of the physical environment – which is a priority question for the Hub’s Surrogates Program. AUV survey sites were chosen to correspond with areas covered by the Marine Biodiversity Hub multibeam mapping and video program. See the deep-water habitats article by Tara Anderson et al, in this issue.
To date, AUV transects have been completed on the Tasman Peninsula, including the Fortescue coast and the Hippolyte Islands, in Port Arthur and in the Huon Region. A further deployment is planned in the Freycinet Region later in the year to survey both shallow and deep reefs (down to 110 m depth).
Jan Seiler, a Hub PhD Student with TAFI, will be using some of this AUV data to examine how this non-extractive technique can be used to quantify and monitor the biodiversity on these temperate reefs. He will be evaluating the benefits and costs of
Figure 1: Deployment of the AUV for the SE Tasmanian surveys. (Photo: Justin Hulls)
Figure 2: 3D representation of the seafloor from a section of an AUV transect. Images are generated by stitching together the series of stereo still images.
areas mapped included deep reefs along a section of coast in the Fortescue region, including O’Hara and Waterfall Bluffs; Deep Reef, immediately north of the Hippolyte Islands; the deep complex reefs below The Friars, located off the southern end of Bruny Island; and soft-sediment habitats in the Huon and Port Arthur channels.
The co-located biological and physical data collected during this survey will be used to examine the fine-scale relationships between the marine flora and fauna and the physical nature
of these seabeds, and will evaluate the use of physical surrogates to predict the distribution of these marine assemblages. This is the first high resolution characterisation of Tasmania’s deep shelf habitats which will, with other Marine Biodiversity Hub surveys, contribute substantially to our understanding of biodiversity patterns and habitat representativeness. This knowledge will be used to inform local and regional managers, national regional marine planning, marine park area design, and marine conservation. n
a number of visual techniques including baited underwater videos (BUV) and a remotely operated vehicle (ROV) in addition to the AUV. He will also be investigating the relationship between the physical covariates measured by the AUV and various aspects of biodiversity. The data from the AUV look promising for answering a whole host of other ecological questions that are of interest to researchers at TAFI and the Marine Biodiversity Hub. So stay tuned for some exciting results soon! n
16 July 2009 w w w .m a r i n e h u b . o r g
ContactsDirector Professor Nic Bax Tel: +61 3 6232 [email protected]
Executive Officer Vicki Randell Tel: +61 3 6227 [email protected]
Knowledge BrokerPaul HedgeTel: +61 3 6232 [email protected]
Biodiversity Program LeaderDr Alan ButlerTel. +61 3 6232 [email protected]
Surrogates Program LeaderDr Brendan BrookeTel. +61 2 6249 [email protected]
Prediction Program LeaderDr Roland PitcherTel. +61 7 3826 [email protected]
Off-reserve Management Program LeaderDr Chris WilcoxTel. +61 3 6232 [email protected]
Newsletter items/mailing listAnnabel OzimecTel: +61 3 6232 [email protected]
Websitehttp://www.marinehub.org
www.marinehub.orgThis newsletter is produced by the CERF Marine Biodiversity Hub – a collaboration between the University of Tasmania, CSIRO Wealth from Oceans Flagship, Geoscience Australia, the Australian Institute of Marine Science and Museum Victoria. The Marine Biodiversity Hub is funded through the Commonwealth Environment Research Facilities Program (CERF), administered through the Australian Government’s Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. The key aim of CERF is to provide sound advice to inform environmental public policy objectives and to better the management of Australia’s unique environment.
The newsletter is available as a PDF and online version at www.marinehub.org with links to sources.
You are welcome to reproduce articles from this CERF newsletter as long as you acknowledge the CERF Marine Biodversity Hub, include the web address http://www.marinehub.org and advise us accordingly [email protected]