What Works in Conservation 2021
| , , ,13. Subtidal benthic invertebrate conservation
13.6 Threat: Pollution
Texte intégral
13.6.1 General
Unknown effectiveness
Add chemicals or minerals to sediments to remove or neutralise pollutants
1Two studies examined the effects of adding chemicals or minerals to sediments to remove or neutralise pollutants on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. Both studies evaluated the use of coal ash in Hiroshima Bay (Japan).
2COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY)
3Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One controlled, before-and-after study in Hiroshima Bay found that adding coal ash increased invertebrate species richness in winter but not summer compared to untreated sites.
4POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES)
5Overall abundance (2 studies): One controlled, before-and-after study in Hiroshima Bay found that adding coal ash increased invertebrate abundance in winter but not summer compared to untreated sites. One controlled study in Hiroshima Bay found that one of two types of coal ash increased combined invertebrate and fish abundance, but not biomass.
6Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 40 %; certainty 20 %; harms 0 %).
https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2176
No evidence found (no assessment)
7We have captured no evidence for the following interventions:
-
Establish pollution emergency plans
-
Transplant/translocate ‘bioremediating’ species.
13.6.2 Domestic and urban wastewater
Likely to be beneficial
Limit, cease or prohibit the dumping of sewage sludge
8Two studies examined the effects of ceasing or prohibiting the dumping of sewage sludge on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. One study was in the New York Bight (USA), one in the North Sea (UK).
9COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES)
10Overall community composition (2 studies): One before-and-after, site comparison study in the New York Bight found that after ceasing sewage sludge dumping, overall invertebrate community composition became more similar to less disturbed sites. One replicated, site comparison study in the North Sea found that overall invertebrate community composition changed but remained different to that of natural sites.
11POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES)
12Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the North Sea found that after ceasing sewage sludge dumping, overall invertebrate abundance became similar to that of natural sites.
13Worm abundance (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in the New York Bight found that after ceasing sewage sludge dumping, abundance of pollution-indicator polychaete worms decreased and became similar to that of natural sites.
14Assessment: likely to be beneficial (effectiveness 70 %; certainty 47 %; harms 0 %).
https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2179
Unknown effectiveness
Set or improve minimum sewage treatment standards
15One study examined the effects of improving minimum sewage treatment standards on subtidal benthic invertebrates. The study was in the Bay of Biscay (Spain).
16COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY)
17Overall community composition (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Bay of Biscay found that after introducing a secondary treatment of sewage wastewaters, invertebrate community composition at an impacted site did not significantly change compared to unimpacted sites. Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Bay of Biscay found that after introducing a secondary treatment of sewage wastewaters, invertebrate richness and diversity at an impacted site did not significantly change compared to unimpacted sites.
18POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)
19Overall abundance (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Bay of Biscay found that after introducing a secondary treatment of sewage wastewaters, total cover of invertebrates significantly increased at an impacted site at 8 m but not 3 m depth, compared to unimpacted sites. Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 23 %; certainty 28 %; harms 0 %).
http://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2180
No evidence found (no assessment)
20We have captured no evidence for the following interventions:
-
Limit the amount of storm wastewater overflow
-
Limit, cease or prohibit the dumping of untreated sewage.
13.6.3 Industrial and military effluents
Unknown effectiveness
Remove or clean-up oil pollution following a spill
21One study examined the effects of removing and cleaning-up oil pollution following a spill on subtidal benthic invertebrates. The study was in the Baltic Proper (Sweden).
22COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)
23POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)
24Mollusc condition (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the Baltic Proper found that after cleaning-up spilled oil using high pressure hot water, crude oil content increased in mussels and did not naturally decrease over time, and was higher than in mussels from an uncleaned contaminated and a non-contaminated site.
25Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 20 %; certainty 26 %; harms 30 %).
https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2183
No evidence found (no assessment)
26We have captured no evidence for the following interventions:
-
Set regulatory ban on marine burial of nuclear waste
-
Use double hulls to prevent oil spills.
13.6.4 Aquaculture effluents
Unknown effectiveness
Cease or prohibit aquaculture activity
27Two studies examined the effects of ceasing or prohibiting aquaculture activity on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. Both studies were in the Mediterranean Sea (Italy and Spain).
28COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES)
29Overall community composition (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Mediterranean Sea found that after ceasing aquaculture activity invertebrate community composition remained different to that of an unfarmed site.
30Worm community composition (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Mediterranean Sea found that after ceasing aquaculture activity worm community composition community composition remained different to that of an unfarmed site.
31POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES)
32Overall abundance (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Mediterranean Sea found that after ceasing aquaculture activity overall invertebrate abundance was similar to an unfarmed site.
33Worm abundance (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Mediterranean Sea found that after ceasing aquaculture activity abundance of health-indicating worms increased, and abundance of pollution-indicating worms decreased.
34Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 25 %; certainty 20 %; harms 0 %).
https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2185
Leave a fallow period during fish/shellfish farming
35Three studies examined the effects of leaving a fallow period during fish farming on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. Two studies were in the Tasman Sea (Australia), and one in the North Pacific Ocean (USA).
36COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES)
37Overall community composition (2 study): Two replicated, before-and-after, site comparison study in the Tasman Sea found that after a fallow period invertebrate community composition became similar to that occurring before the fish were added but remained different to communities at sites without fish farms. fish farms
38Worm community composition (1 study): One replicated, before-and-after, site comparison study in the North Pacific Ocean found that after a fallow period polychaete worm community composition changed but remained different to communities at sites without fish farms.
39Worm richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, before-and-after, site comparison study in the North Pacific Ocean found that after a fallow period polychaete worm diversity did not change and remained lower compared to sites without fish farms.
40POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES)
41Worm abundance (2 studies): Two replicated, before-and-after, site comparison studies in the Tasman Sea and the North Pacific Ocean found that following a fallow period, abundances of pollution-indicator polychaete worms decreased, but remained higher compared to sites without fish farms.
42Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 40 %; certainty 35 %; harms 0 %).
https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2191
No evidence found (no assessment)
43We have captured no evidence for the following interventions:
-
Improve fish food and pellets to reduce aquaculture waste production
-
Locate aquaculture systems in areas with fast currents
-
Locate aquaculture systems in already impacted areas
-
Locate aquaculture systems in vegetated areas
-
Locate artificial reefs near aquaculture systems (and vice versa) to act as biofilters
-
Moor aquaculture cages so they move in response to changing current direction
-
Reduce aquaculture stocking densities
-
Reduce the amount of antibiotics used in aquaculture systems
-
Reduce the amount of pesticides used in aquaculture systems
-
Use other bioremediation methods in aquaculture
-
Use species from more than one level of a food web in aquaculture systems.
13.6.5 Agricultural and forestry effluents
No evidence found (no assessment)
44We have captured no evidence for the following interventions:
-
Create artificial wetlands to reduce the amount of pollutants reaching the sea
-
Establish aquaculture to extract the nutrients from run-offs
-
Regulate the use, dosage and disposal of agrichemicals
-
Treat wastewater from intensive livestock holdings.
13.6.6 Garbage and solid waste
No evidence found (no assessment)
45We have captured no evidence for the following interventions:
-
Bury electricity cables to reduce electromagnetic fields
-
Install stormwater traps or grids
-
Limit, cease or prohibit discharge of solid waste overboard from vessels
-
Recover lost fishing gear
-
Remove litter from the marine environment
-
Use biodegradable panels in fishing pots.
13.6.7 Excess energy
No evidence found (no assessment)
46We have captured no evidence for the following interventions:
-
Limit, cease or prohibit industrial and urban lighting at night
-
Limit, cease or prohibit the discharge of cooling effluents from power stations
-
Limit, cease or prohibit the use of sonars
-
Reduce underwater noise (other than sonar).
13.6.8 Other pollution
Likely to be beneficial
Restrict the use of tributyltin or other toxic antifouling coatings
47Four studies examined the effects of restricting the use of tributyltin as an antifouling coating on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. One study was located in the English Channel (UK), two in the River Crouch estuary (UK), and one in Otsuchi Bay (Japan).
48COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES)
49Overall community composition (1 study): One replicated, before-and-after study in the River Crouch estuary found that after restricting the use of tributyltin, invertebrate community composition changed, but that changes varied with locations.
50Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, before-and-after study in the River Crouch estuary found that after restricting the use of tributyltin, overall invertebrate species richness and diversity increased.
51POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES)
52Molluscs condition (1 study): One replicated, before-and-after study in the English Channel found that after restricting the use of tributyltin, there was a decrease in its concentration in dogwhelks and the penis length of female dogwhelks.
53Crustacean condition (1 study): One study in Otsuchi Bay found that after restricting the use of tributyltin its concentration decreased in skeleton shrimps. Assessment: likely to be beneficial (effectiveness 69 %; certainty 45 %; harms 0 %).
https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2214
Unknown effectiveness
Remove and clean-up shoreline waste disposal sites
54One study examined the effects of removing and cleaning-up shoreline waste disposal sites on subtidal benthic invertebrates. The study was in the Southern Ocean (Antarctica).
55COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY)
56Overall community composition (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the Southern Ocean found that after removing and cleaning-up a disused waste disposal site, invertebrate community composition changed, and no further negative impacts were detected, but communities remained different to natural sites.
57Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the Southern Ocean found that after removing and cleaning-up a disused waste disposal site, invertebrate species richness did not change over time and remained different to that of natural sites, but no further negative impacts were detected.
58Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 49 %; certainty 35 %; harms 0 %).
https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2215
No evidence found (no assessment)
59We have captured no evidence for the following interventions:
-
Limit, cease or prohibit the discharge of waste effluents overboard from vessels
-
Use non-toxic antifouling coatings on surfaces.
Table des illustrations
![]() | |
---|---|
URL | http://books.openedition.org/obp/docannexe/image/25260/img-1.jpg |
Fichier | image/jpeg, 30k |
![]() | |
URL | http://books.openedition.org/obp/docannexe/image/25260/img-2.jpg |
Fichier | image/jpeg, 38k |
![]() | |
URL | http://books.openedition.org/obp/docannexe/image/25260/img-3.jpg |
Fichier | image/jpeg, 28k |
![]() | |
URL | http://books.openedition.org/obp/docannexe/image/25260/img-4.jpg |
Fichier | image/jpeg, 69k |
![]() | |
URL | http://books.openedition.org/obp/docannexe/image/25260/img-5.jpg |
Fichier | image/jpeg, 30k |
![]() | |
URL | http://books.openedition.org/obp/docannexe/image/25260/img-6.jpg |
Fichier | image/jpeg, 33k |
![]() | |
URL | http://books.openedition.org/obp/docannexe/image/25260/img-7.jpg |
Fichier | image/jpeg, 29k |
![]() | |
URL | http://books.openedition.org/obp/docannexe/image/25260/img-8.jpg |
Fichier | image/jpeg, 39k |
© Open Book Publishers, 2021
Creative Commons - Attribution 4.0 International - CC BY 4.0