Aquaculture Europe 2021

October 4 - 7, 2021

Funchal, Madeira

Add To Calendar 05/10/2021 12:10:0005/10/2021 12:30:00Europe/LisbonAquaculture Europe 2021PERCEPTIONS AND INTERACTIONS OF MARINE LITTER AND OPEN-OCEAN AQUACULTURE FACILITIES: MADEIRA ISLAND AS CASE STUDYView Room-CasinoThe European Aquaculture Societywebmaster@aquaeas.orgfalseDD/MM/YYYYaaVZHLXMfzTRLzDrHmAi181982

PERCEPTIONS AND INTERACTIONS OF MARINE LITTER AND OPEN-OCEAN AQUACULTURE FACILITIES: MADEIRA ISLAND AS CASE STUDY

 

Parretti P1,2,*, Martins M3, Monteiro J1, Almeida S1, Pombo A3, Andrade C4,5,6 , Canning-Clode J1

 

1- MARE - Marine and Environmental Sciences Centre, Agência Regional para o Desenvolvimento da Investigação Tecnologia e Inovação (ARDITI)  Funchal, (Portugal)

2- CIBIO, Research Center in Biodiversity and Genetic Resources, InBIO Associate Laboratory and Faculty of Sciences and Technologies, University of the Azores, Ponta Delgada (Portugal)

3-  Escola Superior de Turismo e Tecnologias do Mar, Peniche (Portugal)

4- CIIMAR Interdisciplinary Centre of Marine and Environmental Research, Matosinhos(Portugal)

5-Madeira Oceanic Observatory - ARDITI/OOM, Funchal (Portugal)

6-Mariculture Centre of Calheta, Madeira, Portugal

 

 Mail: paola.parretti@gmail.com

 



Introduction

Anthropogenic litter on the sea surface, beaches and seafloor has been significantly increasing over recent decades (Galgani et al. 2015). In present days, marine litter is worldwide distributed, and the Atlantic Island of Madeira is no exception (Álvarez et al. 2020). This accumulation of litter in the ocean is severely affecting ocean and coastal ecosystems in numerous ways, with impacts ranging from debris ingestion and entanglement that directly endangers marine life (i.e., seabirds, fishes, mussels, turtles and marine mammals) to smothering benthic communities (Kühn S et al. 2015) or spreading pest species and diseases (De la Torre et al. 2021; Lamb et al. 2018). In addition, there are also known economic impacts that may increase the cost associated with marine and coastal activities (Mouat et al. 2010). The aquaculture sector, widely recognised as an ocean-based source of marine litter (Bringer et al. 2021) but is also likely to be affected by marine litter. However, the impact of marine litter on open-ocean marine aquaculture facilities has received little attention. In this context, the present study combines information from video inspections of the cages, macro plastic in stomach contents and interview-based perception surveys to evaluate interactions between marine litter and open-ocean aquaculture of  Sparus aurata in the south coast of Madeira Island.

Material and Methods

To assess the presence of marine litter in the proximity of offshore seabream aquaculture cages, video recording techniques were employed. The recorded videos were visually inspected and manually annotated to record presence of marine litter items and classify them following OSPAR hierarchical classification (OSPAR commission 2010). In addition, to assess correlation between macro plastic ingestion and the survivorship of aquaculture’ fishes, gastrointestinal contents were inspected on specimens collected alive (n=164) and dead (n=233). Morphometric data from specimen was collected and p lastic fragments were classified according to the Fulmar EcoCO methodology (MSFD 2013). Finally, a survey questionnaire was designed for aquaculture facilities’ personnel to assess the perception of interference between marine litter and aquaculture activities. Data were gathered both through in-person and online interviews. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise results from the surveys, and statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS statistic version 27.

Results

From 103 video surveys conducted, only 10.68% showed plastic debris around the offshore cages. A total of 12 plastic items was identified, being the category OSPAR2 (i.e. bags) the most frequent one (66.7%).  While none of the specimens collected alive (n=164) contained macroplastic in their gastrointestinal tracts, a small percentage of individuals collected dead (5.15%, n= 12) contained plastics in their gastrointestinal content. All plastic debris found corresponds to the category “plastic sheet” of Fulmar EcoCO classification (e.g. remains from bag, agricultural sheets or rubbish bags). A maximum of 1 piece of debris was found in each individual of 0.96 ±0.59g (mean ±ST) and 9.19±3.81cm (mean ±ST). No particular relationship was found between fish and debris sizes (g nor cm). Overall, data gathered from the survey questionnaire showed low marine litter interference with daily aquaculture activities (7.2%). Respondents believed that presently, marine debris does not particularly affect the aquaculture sector in Madeira. However, it was the general opinion that marine litter can become a real threat to this activity in the future (96.3%). Respondents believe that marine litter represents a significant risk for the native fauna and flora in general and that local fisheries are the most affected economic activity. Respondents also identify fishing activities as the major source of marine litter and consider that aquaculture is currently an irrelevant source of marine litter production. Overall, respondents showed a weak willingness to pay for a tax on marine litter (55.6%), but they revealed a stronger willingness to participate in voluntary initiatives to reduce and collect marine debris (88.9%). Moreover, the majority of respondent (68%) believed that action to reduce marine litter should be done globally and further suggested that the aquaculture sector should reduce plastic use.                       

Discussion

The present case-study provides baseline information on the interactions and impacts of marine litter and offshore aquaculture facilities and activities. The results of this study are limited to the specificities of Madeira Island and existing facilities, warranting particular care in drawing general conclusions. The perception that marine litter currently has low interference with open-ocean aquaculture facilities is compatible and in line with the findings from  video inspection of cages and gastrointestinal content examination. However, it is important to underline that the video inspection and ingestion assessments included in the present study were focused on macro-plastics and did not take into consideration the presence, abundance and effects of microplastic (<0.5 cm) contamination and their accumulation in the trophic chain. Finally, results of survey questionnaire highlight the need to develop a dedicated monitoring program to assess the management of waste generated from aquaculture activities.

References

 Álvarez S, Gestoso I, Herrera A, Riera L, Canning-Clode J (2020) A Comprehensive First Baseline for Marine Litter Characterization in the Madeira Archipelago (NE Atlantic). Water, Air, & Soil Pollution 231(4): 182, DOI: 10.1007/s11270-020-04517-x

 Bringer A, Le Floch S, Kerstan A, Thomas H (2021) Coastal ecosystem inventory with characterization and identification of plastic contamination and additives from aquaculture materials, Marine Pollution Bulletin, Volume 167,112286,ISSN 0025-326X, DOI: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.112286

 De la Torre GE, Dioses-Salinas DC, Pérez-Baca BL, Cumpa LAM, Pizarro-Ortega CI, torres FG, Gonzales KN, Santillán L (2021) Marine macroinvertebrates inhabiting plastic litter in Peru. Marine Pollution Bulletin, Volume 167,112296, ISSN 0025-326X, DOI: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.112296

Galgani F, Hanke G, Maes T (2015) Global Distribution, Composition and Abundance of Marine Litter. In: Bergmann M, Gutow L, Klages M (eds) Marine Anthropogenic Litter. Springer, Cham.  DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-16510-3_2

Kühn S, Bravo Rebolledo EL, van Franeker JA (2015) Deleterious Effects of Litter on Marine Life. In: Bergmann M., Gutow L., Klages M. (eds) Marine Anthropogenic Litter. Springer, Cham.  DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-16510-3_4

 Lamb JB, Willis BL, Fiorenza EA, Couch CS, Howard R, Rader DN, True JD, Kelly La, Ahmad A, Jompa J, Harvell CD (2018) Plastic waste associated with dis ease on coral reefs. Science V 359, 6374, pp : 460-462, DOI: 10.1126/science.aar3320

Mouat J, Lozano RL, Bateson H (2010) Economic Impacts of marine litter. KIMO International, pp. 105

MSFD Technical Subgroup on Marine Litter (2013) Guidance on monitoring of marine litter 540 in European seas. Joint Research Centre Scientific and Policy Reports. European 541 Commission

OSPAR Commission (2010) Guideline for monitoring marine litter on the beaches in the OSPAR maritime area