Partnering to Improve Early Detection of Marine Pest Threats Marine Pests
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Partnering to improve early detection of marine pest threats Marine pests • Significant environmental, economic and social impacts • Can travel long distances as biofouling or in ballast water • Can travel long distances on floating debris = an un-manageable pathway • Once established are extremely difficult to eradicate Prevention and early detection and intervention provide the best chance for control or eradication Marine pest prevention and preparedness project • Move from responsive management to proactive protection • Improve marine biosecurity capability and capacity in Queensland • Key deliverables: ‒ Education and awareness ‒ Marine pest emergency response exercise ‒ Port-based marine pest surveillance pilot program Queensland ports marine pest surveillance pilot program • Started out as a concept for development at one port • Queensland port authorities all wanted to be involved • Now implementing the program at: ‒ Brisbane – Port of Brisbane ‒ Gladstone – Gladstone Ports Corporation ‒ Mackay – North Queensland Bulk Ports ‒ Townsville – Port of Townsville ‒ Cairns – Ports North Pilot program development • WA State-wide Array Surveillance Program (SWASP) • Traditional methods v modern molecular approach Molecular techniques ‒ No need for visual taxonomic identification ‒ Robust, easier, faster, cheaper, safer ‒ More accurate - able to detect cryptic species, small life-stages and species in low abundance ‒ Ability to detect species earlier • Worked closely with WA colleagues and Qld port authorities • Ports expectations for the program ‒ Simple ‒ Effective ‒ Scalable/Adaptable – not overly prescriptive ‒ Achievable ‒ Affordable Target species Colonising Planktonic Species Habitat Spawn substrate larval stage Mid- Asian green mussel Any artificial intertidal to Annually 14-21 d (2-3 w) Perna viridis surfaces subtidal Soft Asian bag mussel Intertidal to sediments, Autumn 45-55 d (6-7 w) Arcuatula senhousia 20 m hard substrates Black-striped mussel Shallow & Vertical Autumn/ Few days only Mytilopsis sallei intertidal surfaces winter Subtidal & Brown mussel Hard rocky low Winter 10-12 d (1-2 w) Perna perna substrates shoreline Autumn/ River banks Chinese mitten crab Muddy winter. Eggs & shallow Zoea 2-8 weeks Eriocheir sinensis sediments hatch in coast summer Harris’ mud crab Sheltered Subtidal Rhithropanopeus structures, Summer 16 d (2 w) estuaries harrisii sandy/muddy Japanese seaweed Tidal zone to Any hard Spring/ 11-43 d (2-6 w) Undaria pinnatifidia 15 m surface Summer Target species Colonising Planktonic Species Habitat Spawn substrate larval stage Mid- Asian green mussel Any artificial intertidal to Annually 14-21 d (2-3 w) Perna viridis surfaces subtidal Soft Asian bag mussel Intertidal to sediments, Autumn 45-55 d (6-7 w) Arcuatula senhousia 20 m hard substrates Black-striped mussel Shallow & Vertical Autumn/ Few days only Mytilopsis sallei intertidal surfaces winter Subtidal & Brown mussel Hard rocky low Winter 10-12 d (1-2 w) Perna perna substrates shoreline Autumn/ River banks Chinese mitten crab Muddy winter. Eggs & shallow Zoea 2-8 weeks Eriocheir sinensis sediments hatch in coast summer Harris’ mud crab Sheltered Subtidal Rhithropanopeus structures, Summer 16 d (2 w) estuaries harrisii sandy/muddy Japanese seaweed Tidal zone to Any hard Spring/ 11-43 d (2-6 w) Undaria pinnatifidia 15 m surface Summer Target species Colonising Planktonic Species Habitat Spawn substrate larval stage Mid- Asian green mussel Any artificial intertidal to Annually 14-21 d (2-3 w) Perna viridis surfaces subtidal Soft Asian bag mussel Intertidal to sediments, Autumn 45-55 d (6-7 w) Arcuatula senhousia 20 m hard substrates Black-striped mussel Shallow & Vertical Autumn/ Few days only Mytilopsis sallei intertidal surfaces winter Subtidal & Brown mussel Hard rocky low Winter 10-12 d (1-2 w) Perna perna substrates shoreline Autumn/ River banks Chinese mitten crab Muddy winter. Eggs & shallow Zoea 2-8 weeks Eriocheir sinensis sediments hatch in coast summer Harris’ mud crab Sheltered Subtidal Rhithropanopeus structures, Summer 16 d (2 w) estuaries harrisii sandy/muddy Japanese seaweed Tidal zone to Any hard Spring/ 11-43 d (2-6 w) Undaria pinnatifidia 15 m surface Summer Surveillance methodologies Settlement arrays ‒ Targets settling species ‒ 2 - 4 arrays per port ‒ 8 plates per array and spat ropes ‒ 2 month soak time Plankton tows ‒ Captures early life stages and non-settling species ‒ Captures living biota and fragments of organisms DNA ‒ Concentrates samples from large volumes of water Shoreline searches ‒ Focused on known deposition sites Two seasonal surveillance events Port specific considerations • Surveillance site selection ‒ Proximity to high risk vectors ‒ Access/Security ‒ Ease of deployment and retrieval ‒ Safety • Environmental conditions ‒ Currents ‒ Tides ‒ Shelter from physical disturbance • Resources ‒ People and time ‒ Financial Molecular detection DNA eDNA • DNA ‒ Biofouling on plates or plankton ‒ Detect cryptic species and species at low abundance ‒ Detect specimens too small to identify visually ‒ DNA is relatively stable Laboratory • Environmental DNA (eDNA) ‒ Plankton tows ‒ Detect cryptic species and species at low abundance ‒ Detect any life stage of a species (that may not be detected using other traditional methods) ‒ Samples more sensitive to degradation (preservation and handling important) DNA barcoding Molecular diagnostic techniques qPCR Metabarcoding ‒ Rapid and cost effective ‒ Uses next generation sequencing (NGS) ‒ Identifies targeted species only ‒ Provides DNA sequences for all organisms in ‒ Highly specific and sensitive the sample detection ‒ Enables screening for more species – not ‒ Cheaper than metabarcoding just target species ‒ Limited suppliers with validated ‒ Requires reference library of sequences marine pest assays ‒ Provides rapid biodiversity assessment ‒ Can’t always get resolution to species level Molecular diagnostics - considerations • Sample integrity – quantity of DNA in sample, collection and preservation methods • Limited research on detection rates and optimal sampling methods for marine pest surveillance • Commercial laboratories with capability are scarce • Application of techniques to new geographical locations involves some risk • Closely related species may interfere – requires validated genetic sequence libraries Approach in the event of a positive detection • A positive detection does not signify incursion but indicates risk • A stepwise, triage approach will be adopted for interpretation of results • Follow-up investigations may be required • “No-panic” response Looking beyond the pilot project • The program will be reviewed, refined and improved • A consistent and coordinated approach to marine pest monitoring for Queensland ports • Port operators have the capability to continue marine pest surveillance activities • Marine biosecurity becomes part of business as usual for port operators • Marine pest biosecurity will be jointly delivered and managed to achieve best outcomes • Reduced risk of potentially devastating impacts from invasive marine pests Marine Biosecurity – Get on board Acknowledgements • Carolyn Trewin – Biosecurity Queensland • Paul Doyle – North Queensland Bulk Ports/Queensland Ports Association • Dr Justin McDonald – WA DPIRD • Dan Pedersen – Pilbara Ports • Craig Wilson and Nadene Perry – Port of Brisbane • Megan Ellis – Gladstone Ports Corporation • Melinda Louden and Alana Obrien – Port of Townsville • Nicola Stokes and Kevin Kane – North Queensland Bulk Ports • Adam Fletcher – Ports North Thank you.