Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Specialized Grooming as a Mechanical Method to Prevent Marine Invasive Species Recruitment and Transport on Ship Hulls

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Impacts of Invasive Species on Coastal Environments

Part of the book series: Coastal Research Library ((COASTALRL,volume 29))

Abstract

Biofouling on ship hulls is one of the primary vectors of non-indigenous species transport. The most common method to prevent biofouling settlement is through the application of ship hull coatings. However, there is no perfect coating and the ship hull will eventually become colonized by biofouling. Hull husbandry techniques are often employed to remove the biofouling from the ship hull, which adds in restoring the ships functional abilities and prevents the transport of biofouling organism as invasive species. Two such techniques are in-water cleaning and grooming. The cleaning of a ship hull may damage hull coatings, release both biocides and fouling organisms into the local environment, and is regulated or banned in many ports around the world. A more recent mechanical approach to biofouling, is grooming, a frequent and gentle wiping of the hull, which works in synergy with ship hull coatings to prevent the growth of biofouling organisms. By incorporating grooming into the ship maintenance, invasive species recruitment and transport is prevented.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Apte S, Holland B, Godwin L, Gardner J (2000) Jumping ship: a stepping stone event mediated transfer of a non-indigenous species via a potentially unsuitable environment. Biol Invasions 2:75–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bax N, Williamson A, Aguero M, Gonzalez E, Geeves (2003) Marine invasive alien species: a threat to global biodiversity. Mar Policy 27:313–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brock R, Bailey-Brock J, Goody J (1999) A case study of efficacy of freshwater immersion in controlling introduction of alien marine fouling communities: the USS Missouri. Pac Sci 53:223–231

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell M, Hewitt C (2011) Assessing the port to port risk of vessel movements vectoring non-indigenous marine species within and across domestic Australian borders. Biofouling 27:631–644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Canning-Clode J, Fofonoff P, Riedel G, Torchin M, Ruiz G (2011) The effects of copper pollution on fouling assemblage diversity: a tropical-temperate comparison. PLoS One 6:e18026. https://doi.org/10.1371/journalpone.0018026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers LD, Stokes KR, Walsh FC, Wood RJK (2006) Modern approaches to marine antifouling coatings. Surf Coat Technol 201:3642–3652

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen A, Carlton J (1998) Accelerating invasion rate in a highly invaded estuary. Science 279:555–558

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coutts A, Taylor M (2004) A preliminary investigation of biosecurity risks associated with biofouling on merchant vessels in New Zealand. N Z J Mar Freshwat Res 38:215–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coutts ADM, Piola RF, Hewitt CL, Connell SD, Gardner JPA (2010) Effect of vessel speed on survival of biofouling organisms: implications for translocation of non-indigenous marine species. Biofouling 26(1):1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crooks J, Chang A, Ruiz G (2011) Aquatic pollution increases the relative success of invasive species. Biol Invasions 13:165–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dafforn K, Glasby T, Johnston E (2008) Differential effects of tributyltin and copper antifoulants on recruitment of non-indigenous species. Biofouling 24:23–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dafforn K, Johnston E, Glasby T (2009a) Shallow moving structures promote marine invader dominance. Biofouling 25:277–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dafforn K, Glasby T, Johnston E (2009b) Links between estuarine condition and spatial distributions of marine invaders. Divers Distrib 15:807–821

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dafforn K, Lewis J, Johnston E (2011) Antifouling strategies: history and regulation, ecological impacts and mitigation. Mar Pollut Bull 62:453–465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidson I, McCann L, Sytsma M, Ruiz G (2008) Interrupting a multi-species bioinvasion vector: the efficacy of in-water cleaning for removing biofouling on obsolete vessels. Mar Pollut Bull 56:1538–1544

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidson I, Brown C, Sytsma M, Ruiz G (2009) The role of containerships as transfer mechanisms of marine biofouling species. Biofouling 25:645–655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drake JM, Lodge DM (2007) Hull fouling is a risk factor for intercontinental species exchange in aquatic ecosystems. Aquat Invasions 2:121–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira C, Goncalves J, Coutinho R (2004) Ship hulls and oil platforms as potential vectors to marine species introduction. J Coast Res 39:1340–1345

    Google Scholar 

  • Floerl O, Inglis G (2005) Starting the invasion pathway: the interaction between source populations and human transport vectors. Biol Invasions 7:589–606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Floerl O, Pool T, Inglis G (2004) Positive interactions between nonindigenous species facilitate transport by human vectors. Ecol Appl 14:1724–1736

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Floerl O, Inglis G, Marsh H (2005) Selectivity in vector management: an investigation of the effectiveness of measures used to prevent transport of non-indigenous species. Biol Invasions 7:459–475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glasby T, Connell S, Holloway M, Hewitt C (2007) Nonindigenous biota on artificial structures: could habitat creation facilitate biological invasions. Mar Biol 151:887–895

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halpern B et al (2013) Cumulative human impact on the ocean as a result of shipping. National Center for Ecological Analaysis and Synthesis. https://www.nceas.ucsb.edu/globalmarine/panel/impactbyactivity

  • Hearin J, Hunsucker KZ, Swain G, Stephens A, Gardner H, Lieberman K, Harper M (2015) Analysis of long-term mechanical grooming on large-scale test panels coated with an antifouling and a fouling release coating. Biofouling 31(8):625–638

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hearin J, Hunsucker KZ, Swain G, Gardner H, Stephens A, Lieberman L (2016) Analysis of mechanical grooming at various frequencies on a large scale test panel coated with a fouling-release coating. Biofouling 32(5):561–569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt C, Campbell M (2010) The relative contribution of vectors to the introduction and translocation of marine invasive species. Report commissioned by The Australian Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, p 42

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins G, Forrest B (2008) Management options for vessel hull fouling: an overview of risks posed by in-water cleaning. ICES J Mar Sci 65:811–815

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins G, Forrest B (2010) Challenges associated with pre-border management of biofouling on oil rigs. Mar Pollut Bull 60:1924–1929

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins G, Forrest B, Coutts A (2010) The effectiveness of rotating brush devices for management of hull fouling. Biofouling 26:555–566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins G, Forrest B, Piola R, Gardner J (2011) Factors affecting survivorship of defouled communities and the effect of fragmentation on establishment success. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 396:233–243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunsucker KZ, Gardner H, Swain G (2017) Using hydrodynamic testing to assess the performance of five fouling control coatings immersed at two field sites along the East Coast of Florida. American Towing Tank Conference, Bethesda

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchings P, Hilliard R, Coles S (2002) Species introductions and potential for marine pest invasions into tropical marine communities, with special reference to the indo-Pacific. Pac Sci 56:223–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Maritime Organization (2001) International convention on the control of harmful antifouling systems on ships. London, 18 October 2001

    Google Scholar 

  • International Maritime Organization (2006) International shipping and world trade. Facts and figures. See http://www.imo.org/

  • Jackson L (2008) Marine biofouling: an assessment of risks and management initiatives. Report for global invasive species programme, 68 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Mack R, Simberloff D, Lonsdale W, Evans H, Clout M, Bazzaz F (2000) Biotic invasions: causes, epidemiology, global consequences, and control. Ecol Appl 10:689–710

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKenzie L, Brooks R, Johnston E (2011) Heritable pollution tolerance in a marine invader. Environ Res 111:926–932

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molnar J, Gamboa R, Revenga C, Spalding M (2008) Assessing the global threat of invasive species to marine biodiversity. Front Ecol Environ 6:485–492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moser C, Wier T, Grant J, First M, Tamburri M, Ruiz GM, Miller AW, Drake LA (2016) Quantifying the total wetted surface area of the world fleet: a first step in determining the potential extent of ships’ biofouling. Biol Invasions 18:265–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Omae I (2003) General aspects of tin-free antifouling paints. Chem Rev 103:3431–3448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piola R, Johnston E (2008) The potential for translocation of marine species via small-scale disruptions to antifouling surfaces. Biofouling 24:145–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piola R, Johnston E (2009) Comparing differential tolerance of native and non-indigenous marine species to metal pollution using novel assay techniques. Environ Pollut 157:2853–2864

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piola R, Dafforn K, Johnston E (2009) The influence of antifouling practices on marine invasions. Biofouling 25:633–644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ralston E, Swain G (2014) The ghost of fouling communities past: the effect of original community on subsequent recruitment. Biofouling 30:458–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz G, Carlton J, Grosholz E, Hines A (1997) Global invasions of marine and estuarine habitats by non-indigenous species: mechanisms, extent, and consequences. Am Zool 37:621–632

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz GM, Rawlings TK, Dobbs FC, Drake LA, Mullady T, Huq A, Colwell RR (2000) Global spread of microorganisms by ships. Nature 408:49–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz G, Fofonoff P, Steves B, Carlton J (2015) Invasion history and vector dynamics in coastal marine ecosystems: a North American perspective. Aquat Ecosyst Health Manag 18:299–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sakai A, Allendorf F, Holt J, Lodge D, Molofsky J, With KA, Baughman S, Cabin RJ, Cohen JE, Ellstrand NC, McCauley DE, O’Neil P, Parker IM, Thompson JN, Weller SG (2001) The population biology of invasive species. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 32:305–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sammarco P, Atchison A, Boland G (2004) Expansion of coral communities within the Northern Gulf of Mexico via offshort oil and gas platforms. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 280:129–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schimanski KB, Piola RF, Goldstein SJ, Floerl O, Grandison C, Atalah J, Hopkins GA (2016) Factors influencing the en route survivorship and post-voyage growth of a common ship biofouling organism, Bugula neritina. Biofouling 32(8):969–978

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz MP, Bendick JA, Holm ER, Hertel WM (2011) Economic impact of biofouling on a naval surface ship. Biofouling 27(1):87–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swain G (1999) Redefining antifouling coatings. J Prot Coating Lining 16(9):26–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Swain G (2010) The importance of ship hull coatings and maintenance as drivers for environmental sustainability. In: Proceedings of Ship Design Operation Environmental Sustainability. RINA, London, 10–11 March, 2010

    Google Scholar 

  • Swain GW, Kovach B, Touzot A, Casse F, Kavanagh CJ (2007) Measuring the performance of today’s antifouling coatings. J Ship Production 23(3):164–170

    Google Scholar 

  • Sylvester F, Kalaci O, Leung B, Lacoursiere-Roussel A, Murray C, Choi FM, Bravo MA, Therriault TW, HJ MI (2011) Hull fouling as an invasion vector: can simple models explain a complex problem? J Appl Ecol 48:415–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas KV, Brooks S (2010) The environmental fate and effects of antifouling paint biocides. Biofouling 26(1):73–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tribou M, Swain G (2010) The use of proactive in-water grooming to improve the performance of antifouling coatings. Biofouling 26(1):47–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tribou M, Swain G (2015) Grooming using rotating brushes as a proactive method to control ship hull fouling. Biofouling 31(4):309–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tribou M, Swain G (2017) The effects of grooming on a copper ablative coating: a six year study. Biofouling 33(6):494–504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyrrell M, Byers J (2007) Do artificial substrates favor nonindigenous fouling species over native species? J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 342:54–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • US Navy (2006) Naval ships’ technical manual chapter 081:waterborne underwater hull cleaning of Navy ships (5th rev). US Naval Sea Systems Command. Washington (DC). Pub#S9086-CQ-STM-010/CH-081

    Google Scholar 

  • Wanless R, Scott S, Sauer W, Andrew T, Glass J, Godfrey B, Griffiths C, Yeld E (2010) Semi-submersible rigs: a vector transporting entire marine communities around the world. Biol Invasions 12:2573–2583

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wasson K, Fenn K, Pearse J (2005) Habitat differences in marine invasions of Central California. Biol Invasions 7:935–948

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss C (1947) The comparative tolerances of some fouling organisms to copper and mercury. Biol Bull 93:56–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westphal M, Browne M, McKinnon K, Noble I (2008) The link between international trade and the global distribution of invasive alien species. Biol Invasions 10:391–398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Ocean Review (2010) Living with the oceans. A report on the state of world’s oceans. Maribus, Hamburg, 232p

    Google Scholar 

  • Wyatt A, Hewitt C, Walker D, Ward T (2005) Marine introductions in the Shark Bay World Heritage Property, Western Australia: a preliminary assessment. Divers Distrib 11:33–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Corrosion and Biofouling Control, Florida Insitute of Technology, Melbourne, FL, USA

    Kelli Z. Hunsucker, Emily Ralston, Harrison Gardner & Geoffrey Swain

Authors
  1. Kelli Z. Hunsucker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Emily Ralston
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Harrison Gardner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Geoffrey Swain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kelli Z. Hunsucker .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Coastal Education and Research Foundation (CERF), Coconut Creek, Florida, USA

    Christopher Makowski

  2. Coastal Education and Research Foundation (CERF), Asheville, North Carolina, USA

    Charles W. Finkl

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Hunsucker, K.Z., Ralston, E., Gardner, H., Swain, G. (2019). Specialized Grooming as a Mechanical Method to Prevent Marine Invasive Species Recruitment and Transport on Ship Hulls. In: Makowski, C., Finkl, C. (eds) Impacts of Invasive Species on Coastal Environments. Coastal Research Library, vol 29. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91382-7_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation