Conservation of Deep Pelagic Biodiversity

Abstract:  The deep ocean is home to the largest ecosystems on our planet. This vast realm contains what may be the greatest number of animal species, the greatest biomass, and the greatest number of individual organisms in the living world. Humans have explored the deep ocean for about 150 years, and most of what is known is based on studies of the deep seafloor. In contrast, the water column above the deep seabed comprises more than 90% of the living space, yet less than 1% of this biome has been explored. The deep pelagic biota is the largest and least-known major faunal group on Earth despite its obvious importance at the global scale. Pelagic species represent an incomparable reservoir of biodiversity. Although we have yet to discover and describe the majority of these species, the threats to their continued existence are numerous and growing. Conserving deep pelagic biodiversity is a problem of global proportions that has never been addressed comprehensively. The potential effects of these threats include the extensive restructuring of entire ecosystems, changes in the geographical ranges of many species, large-scale elimination of taxa, and a decline in biodiversity at all scales. This review provides an initial framework of threat assessment for confronting the challenge of conserving deep pelagic biodiversity; and it outlines the need for baseline surveys and protected areas as preliminary policy goals.     

Effectiveness of Marine Protected Areas in the Philippines for Biodiversity Conservation

Abstract: Quantifying the extent to which existing reserves meet conservation objectives and identifying gaps in coverage are vital to developing systematic protected‐area networks. Despite widespread recognition of the Philippines as a global priority for marine conservation, limited work has been undertaken to evaluate the conservation effectiveness of existing marine protected areas (MPAs). Targets for MPA coverage in the Philippines have been specified in the 1998 Fisheries Code legislation, which calls for 15% of coastal municipal waters (within 15 km of the coastline) to be protected within no‐take MPAs, and the Philippine Marine Sanctuary Strategy (2004), which aims to protect 10% of coral reef area in no‐take MPAs by 2020. We used a newly compiled database of nearly 1000 MPAs to measure progress toward these targets. We evaluated conservation effectiveness of MPAs in two ways. First, we determined the degree to which marine bioregions and conservation priority areas are represented within existing MPAs. Second, we assessed the size and spacing patterns of reserves in terms of best‐practice recommendations. We found that the current extent and distribution of MPAs does not adequately represent biodiversity. At present just 0.5% of municipal waters and 2.7–3.4% of coral reef area in the Philippines are protected in no‐take MPAs. Moreover, 85% of no‐take area is in just two sites; 90% of MPAs are <1 km². Nevertheless, distances between existing MPAs should ensure larval connectivity between them, providing opportunities to develop regional‐scale MPA networks. Despite the considerable success of community‐based approaches to MPA implementation in the Philippines, this strategy will not be sufficient to meet conservation targets, even under a best‐case scenario for future MPA establishment. We recommend that implementation of community‐based MPAs be supplemented by designation of additional large no‐take areas specifically located to address conservation targets.     

Economic Growth and Marine Biodiversity: Influence of Human Social Structure on Decline of Marine Trophic Levels

Abstract:  We assessed the effects of economic growth, urbanization, and human population size on marine biodiversity. We used the mean trophic level (MTL) of marine catch as an indicator of marine biodiversity and conducted cross-national time-series analyses (1960–2003) of 102 nations to investigate human social influences on fish catch and trends in MTL. We constructed path models to examine direct and indirect effects relating to marine catch and MTL. Nations' MTLs declined with increased economic growth, increased urbanization, and increased population size, in part because of associated increased catch. These findings contradict the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis, which claims that economic modernization will reduce human impact on the environment. To make informed decisions on issues of marine resource management, policy makers, nonprofit entities, and professional societies must recognize the need to include social analyses in overall conservation-research strategies. The challenge is to utilize the socioeconomic and ecological research in the service of a comprehensive marine-conservation movement.     

Seventy‐One Important Questions for the Conservation of Marine Biodiversity

The ocean provides food, economic activity, and cultural value for a large proportion of humanity. Our knowledge of marine ecosystems lags behind that of terrestrial ecosystems, limiting effective protection of marine resources. We describe the outcome of 2 workshops in 2011 and 2012 to establish a list of important questions, which, if answered, would substantially improve our ability to conserve and manage the world's marine resources. Participants included individuals from academia, government, and nongovernment organizations with broad experience across disciplines, marine ecosystems, and countries that vary in levels of development. Contributors from the fields of science, conservation, industry, and government submitted questions to our workshops, which we distilled into a list of priority research questions. Through this process, we identified 71 key questions. We grouped these into 8 subject categories, each pertaining to a broad component of marine conservation: fisheries, climate change, other anthropogenic threats, ecosystems, marine citizenship, policy, societal and cultural considerations, and scientific enterprise. Our questions address many issues that are specific to marine conservation, and will serve as a road map to funders and researchers to develop programs that can greatly benefit marine conservation. Setenta y Un Preguntas Importantes para la Conservación de la Biodiversidad Marina     

Ecological Biodiversity of Marine Nematodes in Samples from Temperate, Tropical, and Deep-Sea Regions

Little is known about the biodiversity of free-living nematodes. We have attempted to provide baseline information about the natural diversities (those not influenced by pollution) that might be expected in six biotopes. Seventeen marine nematode data sets consisting of 197 samples were standardized to allow a comparison of alpha diversity, or sample diversity, from temperate estuarine, tropical sublittoral, temperate sublittoral, bathyal, abyssal, and hadal biotopes, which were selected on criteria of depth and latitude. The diversity analysis methods we employed were rarefaction curves; three weighted diversity indices of species richness, SR, H', and ES(X); and two equitability indices, J' and V. Diversity was significantly different in the six biotopes. The weighted indices of species richness were more capable of resolving differences between the biotopes than were the equitability indices, whose large standard errors suggested that they were more influenced by local, small-scale ecological factors. This suggests that species richness is a better measure than equitability for large-scale comparisons of biotopes or regions. The ES(X), which is robust to sample size variations, was more efficient than the weighted indices of species richness, which were easily influenced by sample size. There was a nonlinear relationship between depth and diversity with the bathyal and abyssal biotopes displaying the highest diversity. The tropical sublittoral biotope was not more diverse than the temperate sublittoral biotope. The lowest diversities were found in the physically challenging temperate estuarine and hadal biotopes.     

Species Extinction in the Marine Environment: Tasmania as a Regional Example of Overlooked Losses in Biodiversity

Abstract:  We used Tasmania as a case example to question the consensus that few marine species have recently become extinct or are approaching extinction. Threats to marine and estuarine species—primarily in the form of climate change, invasive species, fishing, and catchment discharges—are accelerating, fully encompass species ranges, and are of sufficient magnitude to cause extinction. Our ignorance of declining biodiversity in the marine environment largely results from an almost complete lack of systematic broad-scale sampling and an overreliance on physicochemical data to monitor environmental trends. Population declines for marine species approaching extinction will generally go unnoticed because of the hidden nature of their environment and lack of quantitative data.     

Striking a Balance between Biodiversity Conservation and Socioeconomic Viability in the Design of Marine Protected Areas

Abstract: The establishment of marine protected areas is often viewed as a conflict between conservation and fishing. We considered consumptive and nonconsumptive interests of multiple stakeholders (i.e., fishers, scuba divers, conservationists, managers, scientists) in the systematic design of a network of marine protected areas along California's central coast in the context of the Marine Life Protection Act Initiative. With advice from managers, administrators, and scientists, a representative group of stakeholders defined biodiversity conservation and socioeconomic goals that accommodated social needs and conserved marine ecosystems, consistent with legal requirements. To satisfy biodiversity goals, we targeted 11 marine habitats across 5 depth zones, areas of high species diversity, and areas containing species of special status. We minimized adverse socioeconomic impacts by minimizing negative effects on fishers. We included fine‐scale fishing data from the recreational and commercial fishing sectors across 24 fisheries. Protected areas designed with consideration of commercial and recreational fisheries reduced potential impact to the fisheries approximately 21% more than protected areas designed without consideration of fishing effort and resulted in a small increase in the total area protected (approximately 3.4%). We incorporated confidential fishing data without revealing the identity of specific fisheries or individual fishing grounds. We sited a portion of the protected areas near land parks, marine laboratories, and scientific monitoring sites to address nonconsumptive socioeconomic goals. Our results show that a stakeholder‐driven design process can use systematic conservation‐planning methods to successfully produce options for network design that satisfy multiple conservation and socioeconomic objectives. Marine protected areas that incorporate multiple stakeholder interests without compromising biodiversity conservation goals are more likely to protect marine ecosystems.     

The Power of Bioenergy‐Related Standards to Protect Biodiversity

Abstract: The sustainable production of bioenergy is vital to avoiding negative impacts on environmental goods such as climate, soil, water, and especially biodiversity. We propose three key issues that should be addressed in any biodiversity risk‐mitigation strategy: conservation of areas of significant biodiversity value; mitigation of negative effects related to indirect land‐use change; and promotion of agricultural practices with few negative impacts on biodiversity. Focusing on biodiversity concerns, we compared principles and criteria set to address biodiversity and other environmental and social issues in seven standards (defined here as commodity‐based standards or roundtables, or relevant European legislation): five voluntary initiatives related to bioenergy feedstocks, the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (United Kingdom), and the European Renewable Energy Source Directive. Conservation of areas of significant biodiversity value was fairly well covered by these standards. Nevertheless, mitigation of negative impacts related to indirect land‐use change was underrepresented. Although the EU directive, with its bonus system for the use of degraded land and a subquota system for noncrop biofuels, offered the most robust standards to mitigate potential negative effects, all of the standards fell short in promoting agricultural practices with low negative impacts on biodiversity. We strongly recommend that each standard be benchmarked against related standards, as we have done here, and that efforts should be made to strengthen the elements that are weak or missing. This would be a significant step toward achieving a bioenergy industry that safeguards Earth's living heritage.