Marine Biology

, Volume 162, Issue 12, pp 2481–2492 | Cite as

Influence of seawater temperature and shipping on the spread and establishment of marine fouling species

  • Joshua P. LordEmail author
  • Jeremy M. Calini
  • Robert B. Whitlatch
Invasive Species - Original Paper
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Invasive Species


This study assessed the influence of summer seawater temperature and shipping on the introduction, establishment, and spread of nonindigenous fouling species on both local and regional scales in coastal regions of the USA. Using photographic surveys of 80 marinas on the east and west coasts of the USA, we defined thermal niches and ranges of summer sea surface temperature (SSST) for 27 abundant fouling species. We calculated percent cover of all abundant tunicates and bryozoans across sites and correlated species richness with water temperature and cargo shipping volume in each region. We quantified the relative importance of cargo shipping, seawater temperature, and distance between sites using Jaccard similarity between paired sites. Native species richness was positively correlated with SSST, while nonindigenous species (NIS) richness displayed a parabolic relationship with a peak at 20 °C. Temperature and cargo shipping traffic explained 53 % of variability in NIS richness, and only temperature was correlated with similarity between sites. We also found no link between similarity and distance between sites, and site–site comparisons showed no effect of NIS on native species richness on the scale of this study. It appears that cargo shipping may play a regional role in introduction of new species, but on local scales NIS distributions are more haphazard, possibly driven by local recreational boat traffic and associated larval dispersal or by other vectors affecting the local spread of these species. Our study demonstrates the importance of seawater temperature in allowing spread of NIS and influencing similarity between sites and regions.


Dock Seawater Temperature Automatic Identification System Cargo Shipping Native Species Richness 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



Thanks to all of the individuals and institutions that allowed the use of laboratory space to gather data for this study and that provided help with taxonomic identifications. These include but are not limited to: Lon Garrison at the Sitka Sound Science Center, Dr. Richard Emlet at the Oregon Institute of Marine Biology, Karl Menard and Dr. Brian Gaylord at Bodega Marine Laboratory, Dr. Jennifer Smith at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Tim Miller and Linda Healy at Darling Marine Center, Charles Woods at University of Connecticut, Dr. Dan Rittschof at Duke Marine Laboratory, and Hugh Reichardt and Sherry Reed at Smithsonian Marine Station. In addition, this survey work could not have been completed without voluntary cooperation from 80 marinas. This manuscript was greatly improved with input from Dr. Rick Osman. Funding was provided by Connecticut Sea Grant Project Number PD-12-17 and by the University of Connecticut Department of Marine Science Pre-doctoral Fellowship.


  1. Altman S, Whitlatch RB (2007) Effects of small-scale disturbance on invasion success in marine communities. J Exp Mar Bio Ecol 342:15–29. doi: 10.1016/j.jembe.2006.10.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Carman MR, Morris JA, Karney RC, Grunden DW (2010) An initial assessment of native and invasive tunicates in shellfish aquaculture of the North American east coast. J Appl Ichthyol 26:8–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clarke Murray C, Pakhomov EA, Therriault TW (2011) Recreational boating: a large unregulated vector transporting marine invasive species. Divers Distrib 17:1161–1172. doi: 10.1111/j.1472-4642.2011.00798.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Clarke Murray C, Gartner H, Gregr EJ, Chan K, Pakhomov E, Therriault TW (2014) Spatial distribution of marine invasive species: environmental, demographic and vector drivers (B Leung, Ed.). Divers Distrib 20:824–836. doi: 10.1111/ddi.12215 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Darling J, Herborg L, Davidson I (2012) Intracoastal shipping drives patterns of regional population expansion by an invasive marine invertebrate. Ecol Evol 2:2557–2566. doi: 10.1002/ece3.362 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. de Juan S, Thrush SF, Hewitt JE (2013) Counting on β-diversity to safeguard the resilience of estuaries. PLoS ONE 8:1–11. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0065575 Google Scholar
  7. Dijkstra J, Sherman H, Harris LG (2007) The role of colonial ascidians in altering biodiversity in marine fouling communities. J Exp Mar Bio Ecol 342:169–171. doi: 10.1016/j.jembe.2006.10.035 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dijkstra JA, Westerman EL, Harris LG (2011) The effects of climate change on species composition, succession and phenology: a case study. Glob Chang Biol 17:2360–2369. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02371.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dukes JS, Mooney HA (1999) Does global change increase the success of biological invaders? Trends Ecol Evol 14:135–139CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Engle VD, Summers JK (1999) Latitudinal gradients in benthic community composition in Western Atlantic estuaries. J Biogeogr 26:1007–1023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Floerl O, Rickard G (2013) Predicted effects of climate change on potential sources of non-indigenous marine species (H MacIsaac, Ed.). Divers Distrib 19:257–267. doi: 10.1111/ddi.12048 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Grosberg RK (1987) Limited dispersal and proximity-dependent mating success in the colonial ascidian Botryllus schlosseri. Evolution (N Y) 41:372–384Google Scholar
  13. Hejda M, Pyšek P, Jarošík V (2009) Impact of invasive plants on the species richness, diversity and composition of invaded communities. J Ecol 97:393–403. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2745.2009.01480.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Helmuth B, Harley CDG, Halpin PM, Donnell MO, Hofmann GE, Blanchette CA, O’Donnell M (2002) Climate change and latitudinal patterns of intertidal thermal stress. Science 298:1015–1017. doi: 10.1126/science.1076814 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hulme PE (2009) Trade, transport and trouble: managing invasive species pathways in an era of globalization. J Appl Ecol 46:10–18. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01600.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2007) Climate change 2007: synthesis report. In: Contribution of working groups I, II and III to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. IPCC, Geneva, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  17. Karlson RH, Osman RW (2012) Species composition and geographic distribution of invertebrates in fouling communities along the east coast of the USA: a regional perspective. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 458:255–268. doi: 10.3354/meps09767 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kelly NE, Wantola K, Weisz E, Yan ND (2013) Recreational boats as a vector of secondary spread for aquatic invasive species and native crustacean zooplankton. Biol Invasions 15:509–519. doi: 10.1007/s10530-012-0303-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kim T, Micheli F (2013) Decreased solar radiation and increased temperature combine to facilitate fouling by marine non-indigenous species. Biofouling 29:501–512. doi: 10.1080/08927014.2013.784964 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lambert CC, Lambert G (2003) Persistence and differential distribution of nonindigenous ascidians in harbors of the Southern California Bight. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 259:145–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lewis PN, Riddle MJ, Smith SDA (2005) Assisted passage or passive drift: a comparison of alternative transport mechanisms for non-indigenous coastal species into the Southern Ocean. Antarct Sci 17:183–191. doi: 10.1017/S0954102005002580 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lindeyer F, Gittenberger A (2011) Ascidians in the succession of marine fouling communities. Aquat Invasions 6:26–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lord JP, Whitlatch RB (2015) Predicting competitive shifts and responses to climate change based on latitudinal distributions of species assemblages. Ecology 96:1264–1274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Miller A, Ruiz G (2014) Arctic shipping and marine invaders. Nat Clim Chang 4:413–416. doi: 10.1038/nclimate2244 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Molnar JL, Gamboa RL, Revenga C, Spalding MD (2008) Assessing the global threat of invasive species to marine biodiversity. Front Ecol Environ 6:485–492. doi: 10.1890/070064 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pauli H, Gottfried M, Reiter K, Klettner C, Grabherr G (2007) Signals of range expansions and contractions of vascular plants in the high Alps: observations (1994–2004) at the GLORIA* master site Schrankogel, Tyrol, Austria. Glob Chang Biol 13:147–156. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2006.01282.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pianka ER (1966) Latitudinal gradients in species diversity: a review of concepts. Am Nat 100:33–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Reinhardt JF, Osman RW, Whitlatch RB (2012) A phenological mid-domain analysis of non-native and native species recruitment richness. J Ecosyst Ecography 2:4–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rohde K (1992) Latitudinal gradients in species diversity: the search for the primary cause. Oikos 65:514–527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sagarin RD, Barry JP, Gilman SE, Baxter CH (1999) Climate-related change in an intertidal community over short and long time scales. Ecol Monogr 69:465–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sebens KP (1986) Spatial relationships among encrusting marine organisms in the New England subtidal zone. Ecol Monogr 56:73–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Seebens H, Gastner MT, Blasius B (2013) The risk of marine bioinvasion caused by global shipping. Ecol Lett 16:782–790. doi: 10.1111/ele.12111 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Shanks A (2009) Pelagic larval duration and dispersal distance revisited. Biol Bull 216:373–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sorte C, Stachowicz J (2011) Patterns and processes of compositional change in a California epibenthic community. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 435:63–74. doi: 10.3354/meps09234 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sorte CJB, Fuller A, Bracken MES (2010) Impacts of a simulated heat wave on composition of a marine community. Oikos 119:1909–1918. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2010.18663.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Stachowicz JJ, Whitlatch RB, Osman RW (1999) Species diversity and invasion resistance in a marine ecosystem. Science 286:1577–1579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sutherland JP (1978) Functional roles of Schizoporella and Styela in the fouling community at Beaufort, North Carolina. Ecology 59:257–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sutherland JP, Karlson RH (1977) Development and stability of the fouling community at Beaufort, North Carolina. Ecol Monogr 47:425–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tittensor DP, Mora C, Jetz W, Lotze HK, Ricard D, Vanden Berghe E, Worm B (2010) Global patterns and predictors of marine biodiversity across taxa. Nature 466:1098–1101. doi: 10.1038/nature09329 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Vance T, Lauterbach L, Lenz M, Wahl M, Sanderson R, Thomason C (2009) Rapid invasion and ecological interactions of Diplosoma listerianum in the North Sea, UK. Mar Biodivers Rec 2:1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Vitousek PM, D’Antonio CM, Loope LL, Westbrooks R (1996) Biological invasions as global environmental change. Am Sci 84:468–478Google Scholar
  42. Vitousek PM, Mooney HA, Lubchenco J, Melillo JM (1997) Human domination of Earth’s ecosystems. Science 277:494–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wasson K, Zabin CJ, Bedinger L, Diaz MC, Pearse JS (2001) Biological invasions of estuaries without international shipping: the importance of intraregional transport. Biol Conserv 102:143–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joshua P. Lord
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jeremy M. Calini
    • 2
  • Robert B. Whitlatch
    • 2
  1. 1.Monterey Bay Aquarium Research InstituteMoss LandingUSA
  2. 2.Department of Marine SciencesUniversity of Connecticut Avery PointGrotonUSA

Personalised recommendations