William stitson

International Journal of Environmental Protection

Investigation into the Biodiversity of Mooring Chains in the Fal Estuary in Three Locations William George Stitson, Claire Eatock, Harriet Knowles Cornwall College, Falmouth Marine School , Falmouth, Cornwall, England william.stitson900@falmouthmarineschool.ac.uk claire.eatock@falmouthmarineschool.ac.uk

Falmouth Harbour Commission Falmouth, Cornwall, England msdo@falmouthport.co.uk

Aim; Compare the biodiversity found on mooring chains in three areas of the Fal Estuary at different distances from the commercial docks.

Abstract- Biodiversity of the Fal Estuary using mooring chains as the substrate to measure this upon. Three locations were assessed at differing distances from the industrial A&P Dockyard, the furthest from this location was the mooring chain at the Prince of Wales Pier, the next was located just off Trefusis Point and the last was located in the A&P Dockyards waters itself. similar levels of biodiversity were found at all three of the mooring chain locations a total of 19 species were found 3 of these were invasive species.

Customs and Excise and the Royal Mail Post Offices coming in 1650 and 1688[1].

The Port has continued to grow since and now housing A&P group Falmouth handling over 100,000T of Product with a further 30 firms using the dockland, as well as over 40,000 cruise passengers visiting Cornwall through Falmouth.

The industrial docklands are a source of both industrial pollution [2] and invasive species[3], regulatory bodies are in place to both regulate the environmental effects and encourage a thriving port industry [4]. Another factor effecting benthic communities are commercial mussel farms like the one located on the Fal Estuary. This is a highly minimal affect and is due to the high levels of ammonia that the mussels produce [5].

A narrow definition of biodiversity is “the variety and abundance of species in a defined unit of study� [6]. However, this is a very narrow definition as it must take into account other factors including the systems in which they are a part of and the level of productivity [7]. Biodiversity can also be defined by the genetic resources of an area [8].

Biodiversity is not only an environmentally important asset but also

Keywords- Biodiversity; Fal Estuary; Mooring chains; Invasive species; Industrial docklands

I INTRODUCTION The Fal Estuary is the third deepest natural harbour in the World and the deepest in Western Europe. It has been an important Port in British history, with the castles built at either sides of the mouth of the estuary, Pendennis and St Mawes to defend it in 1540 [1]. It became a commercial and industrial port when Sir Walter Ralleigh saw the geographical opportunities it had in 1598 [1] the port remained small with additions of the

1

IJEP

International Journal of Environmental Protection the economic value is of huge importance, as is the human dependence on a healthy and productive natural system [9].

Restoring areas where the biodiversity must be considered the priority as [10].

Economic values of biodiversity are largely unknown and the main reason for them being used is to validate the cost of the protection measures that are in place [11]. However in the eyes of ecologist a healthy biodiversity is essential for the long term health of an ecosystem and the survival of the human species [11].

Modern research is going into understanding the benefits of restoring biodiversity in previously polluted and damaged ecosystems [12]. The link between high levels of productivity and stability in areas and high biodiversity are important, because of trophic level interaction damaging any part of the system would have a knock on effect of the rest of the ecosystem [13].

Monitoring an environment through biodiversity assessments is essential for the protection and sustainable management of any marine system [14].

The link between biodiversity and biological productivity on a local and global scale is only recently being explored with the use of remote sensing [15]. In order to successively asses the biodiversity of an area apart from looking at the flora and fauna of an area the uses of the area must also be taken into account [16]. I the Fal Estuary there are many stake holders with influences on the Fal Estuary biodiversity, commercial dockland being the Influencer studied in this assessment but recreational boating, commercial fishing through dredging, aquaculture of Mytilus edulis are all taking place on the Fal Estuary and can have the Potential to affect biodiversity.

Although invasive species are considered a major threat to marine biodiversity not been enough quantitative surveys have been done to assess the actual damage they cause [17]. Although the damage done is not known the Fal Estuary Like others has a conspicuous number of invasive species [18]. A principle of mechanism for the movement of invasive species is in the ballast water of large ships [19] this of key importance as the Fal Estuary has a substantial dock and shipping industry so the potential for the transfer of organisms is substantial. As well as this recreational boating is arguably the largest uncontrolled vector for the spread of marine non-indigenous species (NIS). They are transported through bio fouling the hulls of ships from one area to another [20]. The use of antifouling on the hulls of ships and vessels to prevent bio-fouling has for many years thought to stop the transfer of none invasive species (NIS) however the use of Cu (copper) as the toxin to prevent growth of sessile organism may now be an advantage with species growing tolerances to the Cu and having a distinct advantage over native species in areas of high metal pollution [21].

The objectives of this study were to (1) carry out a benthic biodiversity survey of the Fal Estuary using mooring chains, (2) to determine differences in benthic biodiversity of three areas on the Fal Estuary and (3) statistically analyse the data to understand differences of biodiversity on the Fal Estuary

2

IJEP

International Journal of Environmental Protection C. Building the Jig The JIG was built to enable the photographs of the mooring chain to be easily taken, from the same height constantly and provide the same depth of picture in each image. The second function of the jig was to easily allow the chain to feed through the grove built into the base to hold it steady on the boat in rougher weather conditions. The JIG allowed 1m sections of the chain to be photographed using a FinePix S400 30x superwide lens.

The photos that were taken were then used to analyse the biodiversity growing on the chain.

II. MATERIALS AND METHODS A. Description of the areas studied The 3 areas studied had a number of different immediate factors influencing them, the locations were: 1) the waters of the A&P dockyard in the location of what used to be the Jubilee Wharf grid reference (N50º09.237, W005º67.498) this location was the closest to the dock waters therefore was expected to be most polluted in this investigation only the biodiversity no water samples were taken to asses pollution. 2) Off Trefusis point grid reference (N50º09.550, W005º03.349) this location is more exposed than the two other moorings and is located adjacent to the main shipping channel into Falmouth.

3) Prince of Wales Pier grid reference (N50º09.414, W005º04.166), this mooring is amongst many moorings for recreational boot users, it is also a far shallow mooring so growth below 3m was soured off on the sea floor.

D. Collecting the data using the Jig In a boat with a low enough side to lift the mooring chain over (find size and make of boat). Move to the first of the moorings, when you get to the mooring one member of the crew marks down the GPS coordinates. The second will using a boathook, lift the first meter of chain into the boat, and lays it on the jig in the gutter.

Then fix in place over the top the chain the camera mount. When the chain is in place with the camera mount fixed over the top of it take a picture of the surface of the chain using the markers to distinguish the side on which you are taking a photo. If the markers are completely covered with growth hand signals can be used to show if you are taking the picture of 1st or 2nd side of the chain. Take a photo of both sides of the chain starting with the first 50cm below the mooring buoy and working down until you get to the area of chain where no growth is seen due to the scouring affect caused by the sea bed.

With a second camera take photographs of all species that you can see on the boat as well as using a scalpel and tweezers to take off samples too put into sample pots, for analysis in the laboratory

B. Preparing the mooring chain The dowel is cut into 300mm sections using a saw, then marked red and blue at either end with the permanent markers.

The dowel is then fixed to the mooring chain using zip ties, firstly 2 of the large zip ties attach the directly to the chain sticking out either side then the dowel is fixed in place. Push it through the link in the chain with the large zip ties on then using smaller zip ties to attach the dowel to the larger ones. Continue doing this on the this and the other mooring chains starting 1m down from the marker buoy and doing one every metre on from that until 5m from the marker buoy. Making sure the chain is lying flat so as to put the coloured markers on the same side.

3

IJEP

International Journal of Environmental Protection E. Laboratory Analysis In order to identify some of the organisms found they had to be taken to the lab for identification under a microscope. The microscope used was a binocular dissection microscope with a 10x magnification. The use of a dissection microscope enabled a light to be shone from above making identification easier.

Specimens were stored in ethanol over night to preserve them for later further identification as the specimens were only being stored for 24hours the concentration of ethanol was 70%, had we planned on keeping the specimens for longer than this then a 95% ethanol concentration would have been used [22].

IJEP

III RESULTS TABLE I SPECIES FOUND AT THE THREE LOCATIONS ON THE FAL ESTUARY

Species Found Grantia compressa Sacchoriza polchides Tricellaria inopinata Ascidella aspera Ulva intestinalis Diplosoma sp Ulva lactuca Mytilus edulis Laminaria digitata Caprella mutica Ciona Intestinalis Corella eumyota Styela clava Tubularia larynx Tubularia indivisia Facelina annulicornis Eubranchus farani Ischyroceridae sp Pterocladia capliacea

F. Statistical Analysis To analyse the data collected an Anova test was carried out on it.

Prince of A&P Wales Dockyards Pier Y Y

Trefusis Point Y

Y

Y

Y Y INV Y Y Y Y Y Y Y INV Y

Y

Y INV Y INV Y

Y Y

Y Y INV Y INV Y Y INVY Y Y Y Y Y

Y

Y

Y Y

Y

Y

A. Prince of Wales Pier The biodiversity at Prince of Wales Pier was the least well-established of the three sites with much of the biodiversity on it being smaller and less well developed than at the other 2 sites. With only 9 different species being located on the mooring chain, the most abundant species found here was a rhodaphyceae named Pterocladia capillacea this is a compressed red algae with a tufted appearance.

4

International Journal of Environmental Protection

IJEP Fig. 1 A column chart showing the biodiversity at the three locations studied on the Fal Estuary (Stitson, 2012)

B. Trefusis Point At Trefusis Point the biodiversity seemed better established with around 80% of the coverage being taken up by three species of invertebrate these were Tubularia larynx, Tubularia indivisia and Mytilus edulis. Overall at this location 14 species were found to be living on this mooring chain.

Fig 1 clearly shows the biodiversity is higher at A&P Dockyards and at trefusis point than at the Prince of Wales Pier, 14

C. A&P Dockyard A&P Dockyard mooring chain seemed to be the most well-established of the three sites. So much so it made handling and examining the mooring difficult the marker buoy itself was covered in large well developed fronds of Laminaria digitata.these large fronds prevented smaller Chlorophyceae to growing like that seen at the Prince of Wales Pier.

12

No. Species Found

10

A&P Dockyards Invasives

8

Trefusis Point

6

Trefusis Point Invasives

16

4

Prince of Wales Pier

14

2

Prince of Wales Pier Invasives

12 No. Species Found

A&P Dockyards

0

Locations of Mooring Chains

10

Fig. 2 A column chart showing the biodiversity of the mooring chains separated into native and invasive species (Stitson, 2012)

A&P Dockyards

8

Trefusis Point

6

Prince of Wales Pier 4

From Fig 2 it shows that the more invasive species are present the lower the biodiversity. At the Prince of Wales pier 3 invasive species were

2 0 Locations of Mooring Chains

5

International Journal of Environmental Protection IV DISCUSSION

IJEP B. Trefusis Point Trefusis Point had a different biodiversity to that of the other 2 locations. The majority of the coverage of the mooring chain was as mentioned in the analysis that of three species; were Tubularia larynx, Tubularia indivisia and Mytilus edulis all three of these species are filter feeders so the evidence suggest that these organisms prefer the more exposed location at which this mooring is set. Other possibilities for the high numbers of mytilus edulis could be down to the location of a mussel farm on the Fal Estuary at an area called King Harry Passage, which this mooring chain was closer too than the other two moorings [26]. This mooring was brought up previous to the final extraction of the moorings made on 23rd March 2012 one month before may have affected the range and amount of biodiversity present on this mooring

A. Prince of Wales Pier At this location the least abundance of biodiversity was found, with the biodiversity there being less established than at other locations on the Fal Estuary. The most abundant species that was found was Pterocladia capillacea a Rhodaphyceae it is able to thrive in calmer less exposed areas [23]. As well as this the Falmouth Harbour Commission from whom the mooring chains were loaned informed us that a recreational boat user had ignored the markers forbidding this chain from being used as a mooring and attached to it potentially damaging the growth of organisms upon the chain. As well as human impact on this mooring it was also sited at a shallower position in the Fal Estuary meaning that the space available for growth was reduced from around 4 metres at the two other sites down to around 2.5 metres. Here due to the scouring effect of the floor of the estuary as the tide moves in and out, any growth below this point would have been removed so would not have been able to be measured.

At this site more types of invasive species were found than at the other 2 locations these were Caprella mutica, Styela clava and Tricellaria inopinata .

Invasive species are known to have the ability to out compete native organism to the point of extinction [24]. The depletion of biodiversity due to invasive species is soon going to surpass that caused by the destruction of habitats [25].

C. A&P Dockyard The mooring chain at the A&P Dockyard appeared to be the most well developed, when arriving at it on the 23rd March identifying it as one of the test mooring chains was only possible down to the dowel markers that had been fixed to it.

Larger fronds of Laminaria digitata Oar Weed and Saccorhiza polychides were growing on the mooring buoy itself and had to be cut away in order to view the first 1.5m of the chain itself, this was the only chain that large Phaeophyceae (brown algae). Other moorings appearing to have only smaller specimens of both mentioned species. Both of these species inhabit the extreme lower shore and act as an important habitat for many other species in there fronds and holdfasts [23].

This may have affected the results

6

International Journal of Environmental Protection collected at this location on this chain as when the fronds were removed and discarded they were not properly examined. Large phaeophyceae may have thrived in this area due to the ability to easily absorb many industrial pollutants including heavy metals [27]. Where many of the more delicate rhodaphyceae and

[2]Greenwood, E. (1995). Ecology and Landscape development: A History of the Mersey Basin. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press [3]Bax, N. Williamson, A. Aguero, M. Gonzalez. Geeves, W. (2003) Marine Invasive alien species: a threat to global biodiversity.

Marine Policy. 27 (4) pp 313-323. [online] Available at: sciencedirect.com (accessed: 24/04/12) [4]Defra MSP find reference [5] Kaspar, F. Gillespie, p. Boyer, L. Mackenzie, L. (N/A). Effects of mussel Aquaculture on the Nitrogen cycle and Benthic communities in Kenpuru Sound, Marlbourgh sounds, New Zealand. Marine Biology. 85 (2). [online]. Available at: www.springerlink.com (Accessed 23/11/11) [6] Magurran, A. (2004) Measuring Biological Diversity. African Journal of Aquatic Science.

29 (2) [online] Available at: www.tandfonline.com (Accessed 30/11/11) [7] Gaston, K. (2009) Biodiversity.

Conservation Science and Action. [online] Available at: www.wiley.com (Accessed 30/11/11) [8] Morrand, S. (2010) Biodiversity: an International Perspective. Rev Sci Tech. 29 (1) [online] Available at: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (Accessed 07/12/11) [9] Pimm, S. Russel, G. Gittleman. Brooks, T. (1995). The Future of Biodiversity . Science.

269 (10) [online] Available at: www.sciencemag.com (Accessed 30/11/11) [10] Abivardi, C. Edwards, p. (1998) The value of biodiversity: Where ecology and economy blend. Biological conservation. 83 (3) [online] Available at: www.sciencedirect.com (Accessed 01/12/11) [11] Gowdy, J. (1997) the value of biodiversity: Markets, Society and Ecosystems. Land Economics.73 (1) [online] Available at: www.jstor.com (Accessed 30/11/11) [12] Franco, J. Pascaul, M. Borja, A. Burdon, D. Atkins, J. Elliott, M. (2011) What are the costs and benefits of biodiversity recovery in a highly polluted estuary?. Water Research. 46

chlorophyceae would have struggled to take hold due to the delicate nature of them [23]. The lack of filter feeders found on the A&P Dockyards mooring chain is caused by the sheltered location of this site it is surrounded on three sides by large wharfs and piers so the current flow over this point is limited comparing this to the high numbers of filter feeders found at the Trefusis Point mooring chain including Tubularia larynx and Tubularia indivisia [28].

V CONCLUSION After statistically analysing the collected data it showed no significant difference in the biodiversity at the three different locations. However from the results some assumptions are able to be made the further from the A&P Dockyards you move it seems the number of invasive species increases. At the Prince of Wales Pier 10 species were found and 3 of these were invasive species. At Trefusis Point 13 species were found 2 of these were invasive species. At the A&P Dockyards 13 species were found 2 of these were invasive species.

REFERENCES Journal References [1]Pond, L. (2007). Falmouth Port History.

Falmouth Harbour Commission. [online].

Available at: www.falmouthport.co.uk (accessed: 24/04/12)

7

IJEP

International Journal of Environmental Protection (1) [online] Available at: www.sciencedirect.com (Accessed 02/12/11) [13] Worm, B. Duffy, E. (2003). Biodiversity, Productivity and stability in real food webs.

Trends in Ecology and Evolution. 18 (12). [online] Available at: www.sciencedirect.com (Accessed 30/11/11) [14] Leonard, D. Clarke, R. Somerfield, P. Warwick, J. (2004) The Application of an indicator based on taxonomic distinctness for UK marine biodiversity assessments. Journal of Marine Management. 78 (1) [online] Available at: www.sciencedirect.com (Accessed 01/12/12) [15] Nichol, S. Mcarthur, M. Brooke, B. Przelawski, R. Ryan, D. Lucieer, V. Mcallum, A. Mellin, C. Cresswell, I. Redke, L. (2010) On the use of abiotic surrogates to describe marine benthic biodiversity. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science. 88 (1) [online] Available at: www.sciencedirect.com (Accessed 03/12/11) [16] Moore, S. Wegner, A. Bailey. (2004) considerations for biodiversity in environmental impact assessment in Western Australia: Practitioner perceptions.

Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 25 (2) [online] Available at: www.sciencedirect.com (Accessed 30/11/11) [17] Molnar, J. Gamboa, R. Revenga, C. Spalding, M. (2008) Assessing the Global threat of invasive species to marine biodiversity. Frontiers to Ecology and the Environment. 6 (9) [online] Available at: www.esajournals.org (Accessed 01/12/11) [18] Gregory, R. Carlton, J. Grolholz, E. Hines, A. (1997) Global invasion of Marine and Estuarine habitats by Non indigenous species: Mechanisms, Extent and Consequences. Integrative and Comparative Biology. 37 (6) [online] Available at: icb.oxfordjournals.org (Accessed 01/12/11) [19] Lavoie, D. Ruiz, G. Smith, L. (1999) The Potential for Intracoastal Transfer of Nonindigenous Species in the ballast water of Ships. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science.

48 (5) [online] Available at: www.sciencedirect.com (Accessed 01/12/11)

[20] Therriault, T. Murray, C. Evgeny, A. (2011) Recreational boating: a large unregulated vector transporting marine invasive species. Diversity and Distrubutions.

17 (6) [online] Available at: onlinelibrary.wiley.com (Accessed 07/12/11) [21] Piola, R. Dafforn, K. Johnston, E. (2009) The Influence of antifouling practices on marine invasions. Biofouling. 25 (7) [online] Available at: www.tandfonline.com (Accessed 07/12/11) [22] King, J. Porter, S. (2004).

Recommendations on the use of alchohols for preservation of ant specimens (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Insectes Sociaux. 51 (2). [online] Available at: www.springerlink.com (accessed: 27/04/12) [23] Campbell, A. 2007. Sea shores and Shallow seas of Western Europe and Great Britain. 4th edition. London:Bounty Books [24] Gurevitch, J. Padilla, D. (2004) Are Invasive species a major Cause of Extinctions?.Trends in Ecology and Evolution.

19 (9) pp 470-474. [online] Available at:www.springerlink.com (accessed: 02/05/12) [25] Sandlund, O. Schei, P. Viken, A. (2001).

InvasiveSpecies and Biodiversity Management.

2nd edition Dorrecht: Kleuwe Academic Publishers.

[26]Cornish mussels. (NO DATE). [online] Available at: www.cornishshellfish.co.uk (accessed: 03/05/12) [27] Davis, T. Volesky, B. Mucci, A. (2003).

A Review of the Biochemistry of Heavy metal Biosorption by Brown Algae. Water Research.

37 (18) pp 4311-4330. [online]. Availbale at: www.sciencedirect.com (accessed; 03/05/12) [28] Pyefinch, K. Downing, F. (1949). Notes on the General Biology of Tubularia larynx.

Journal of the Marine Biology Association. 28 (01). [online] Available at:journals.cambridge.org (accessed: 03/05/12)

8

IJEP

International Journal of Environmental Protection

9

IJEP