Port of Tauranga: Second baseline survey for non-indenous marine species. Inglis, G. J., Gust, N., Fitridge, I., Floerl, O., Woods, C., Kospartov, M., Hayden, B. J., & Fenwick, G. D. Technical Report NIWA, Christchurch, May, 2008. ![Port of Tauranga: Second baseline survey for non-indenous marine species [pdf]](https://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/pdf.svg "pdf")
Paper abstract bibtex Executive summary • This report describes the results of a repeat port baseline survey of the Port of Tauranga undertaken in April 2005. The survey provides a second inventory of native, non indigenous and cryptogenic marine species within the port and compares the biota with the results of an earlier port baseline survey of the Port of Tauranga undertaken in March 2002. • The survey is part of a nationwide investigation of native and non-native marine biodiversity in 13 international shipping ports and three marinas of first entry for yachts entering New Zealand from overseas. • To allow a direct comparison between the initial baseline survey and the resurvey of the Port of Tauranga, the survey used the same methodologies, occurred in the same season, and sampled the same sites used in the initial baseline survey. To improve the description of the biota of the port, some additional survey sites were added during the repeat survey. • Sampling methods used in both surveys were based on protocols developed by the Australian Centre for Research on Introduced Marine Pests (CRIMP) for baseline surveys of non-indigenous species (NIS) in ports. Modifications were made to the CRIMP protocols for use in New Zealand port conditions. These are described in more detail in the body of the report. • A wide range of sampling techniques was used to collect marine organisms from habitats within the Port of Tauranga. Fouling assemblages were scraped from hard substrata by divers, benthic assemblages were sampled using a sled and benthic grabs, and a gravity corer was used to sample for dinoflagellate cysts. Mobile predators and scavengers were sampled using baited fish, crab, starfish and shrimp traps. • Sampling effort was distributed in the Port of Tauranga according to priorities identified in the CRIMP protocols, which are designed to maximise the chances of detecting nonindigenous species. Most effort was concentrated on high-risk locations and habitats where non-indigenous species were most likely to be found. • Organisms collected during the survey were sent to local and international taxonomic experts for identification. • A total of 304 species or higher taxa were identified in the first survey of the Port of Tauranga in March 2002. They consisted of 202 native species, 10 non-indigenous species, 51 cryptogenic species (those whose geographic origins are uncertain) and 41 species indeterminata (taxa for which there is insufficient taxonomic or systematic information available to allow identification to species level). • During the repeat survey, 264 species or higher taxa were recorded, including 177native species, 9 non-indigenous species, 43 cryptogenic species and 35 species indeterminata. Many species were common to both surveys. Around 41% the native species, 44% of non-indigenous species, and 50% of cryptogenic species recorded during the repeat survey were also found in the earlier survey. • The 9 non-indigenous organisms found in the repeat survey of the Port of Tauranga included representatives of 3 major taxonomic groups. The non-indigenous species detected were: Bugula flabellata, Bugula neritina, Electra tenella, Watersipora subtorquata, Amathia distans, Zoobotryon verticillatum (Bryozoa); Monotheca pulchella, Sertularia marginata (Cnidaria); Cliona celata (Porifera). Five of these species – Electra tenella, Amathia distans, Zoobotryon verticillatum, Monotheca pulchella, Sertularia marginata – were not recorded in the earlier baseline survey of the Port of Tauranga. In addition, 5 non-indigenous species that were present in the first survey – Polydora hoplura, Clytia ?linearis, Eudendrium capillare, Apocorophium acutum, Monocorophium acherusicum – were not found during the repeat survey. • Twenty three species recorded in the repeat survey had not previously been described from New Zealand waters. This included 19 species of sponge that not correspond with existing descriptions from New Zealand or overseas and may be new to science. • None of the species recorded from the Port of Tauranga is on the New Zealand register of unwanted organisms. • Most non-indigenous species located in the Port are likely to have been introduced to New Zealand accidentally by international shipping or spread from other locations in New Zealand (including translocation by shipping). • Approximately 44 % (4 of 9 species) of NIS in the Port of Tauranga are likely to have been introduced in hull fouling assemblages, 44 % (4 species) by hull fouling or ballast water, and 1 species (12 %) via fouling on flotsam vectors. • The predominance of hull fouling species in the introduced biota of the Port of Tauranga (as opposed to ballast water introductions) is consistent with findings from similar port baseline studies overseas.
@techreport{inglis_port_2008-2,
address = {Christchurch},
type = {{NIWA} {Client} {Report}},
title = {Port of {Tauranga}: {Second} baseline survey for non-indenous marine species},
url = {https://niwa.co.nz/static/marine-biosecurity/Inglis%20et%20al%202008%20port%20of%20tauranga.pdf},
abstract = {\textit{Executive summary}
• This report describes the results of a repeat port baseline survey of the Port of Tauranga undertaken in April 2005. The survey provides a second inventory of native, non indigenous and cryptogenic marine species within the port and compares the biota with the results of an earlier port baseline survey of the Port of Tauranga undertaken in March 2002.
• The survey is part of a nationwide investigation of native and non-native marine biodiversity in 13 international shipping ports and three marinas of first entry for yachts entering New Zealand from overseas.
• To allow a direct comparison between the initial baseline survey and the resurvey of the Port of Tauranga, the survey used the same methodologies, occurred in the same season, and sampled the same sites used in the initial baseline survey. To improve the description of the biota of the port, some additional survey sites were added during the repeat survey.
• Sampling methods used in both surveys were based on protocols developed by the Australian Centre for Research on Introduced Marine Pests (CRIMP) for baseline surveys of non-indigenous species (NIS) in ports. Modifications were made to the CRIMP protocols for use in New Zealand port conditions. These are described in more detail in the body of the report.
• A wide range of sampling techniques was used to collect marine organisms from habitats within the Port of Tauranga. Fouling assemblages were scraped from hard substrata by divers, benthic assemblages were sampled using a sled and benthic grabs, and a gravity corer was used to sample for dinoflagellate cysts. Mobile predators and scavengers were sampled using baited fish, crab, starfish and shrimp traps.
• Sampling effort was distributed in the Port of Tauranga according to priorities identified in the CRIMP protocols, which are designed to maximise the chances of detecting nonindigenous species. Most effort was concentrated on high-risk locations and habitats where non-indigenous species were most likely to be found.
• Organisms collected during the survey were sent to local and international taxonomic experts for identification.
• A total of 304 species or higher taxa were identified in the first survey of the Port of Tauranga in March 2002. They consisted of 202 native species, 10 non-indigenous species, 51 cryptogenic species (those whose geographic origins are uncertain) and 41 species indeterminata (taxa for which there is insufficient taxonomic or systematic information available to allow identification to species level).
• During the repeat survey, 264 species or higher taxa were recorded, including 177native species, 9 non-indigenous species, 43 cryptogenic species and 35 species indeterminata. Many species were common to both surveys. Around 41\% the native species, 44\% of non-indigenous species, and 50\% of cryptogenic species recorded during the repeat survey were also found in the earlier survey.
• The 9 non-indigenous organisms found in the repeat survey of the Port of Tauranga included representatives of 3 major taxonomic groups. The non-indigenous species detected were: Bugula flabellata, Bugula neritina, Electra tenella, Watersipora subtorquata, Amathia distans, Zoobotryon verticillatum (Bryozoa); Monotheca pulchella, Sertularia marginata (Cnidaria); Cliona celata (Porifera). Five of these species – Electra tenella, Amathia distans, Zoobotryon verticillatum, Monotheca pulchella, Sertularia marginata – were not recorded in the earlier baseline survey of the Port of Tauranga. In addition, 5 non-indigenous species that were present in the first survey – Polydora hoplura, Clytia ?linearis, Eudendrium capillare, Apocorophium acutum, Monocorophium acherusicum – were not found during the repeat survey.
• Twenty three species recorded in the repeat survey had not previously been described from New Zealand waters. This included 19 species of sponge that not correspond with existing descriptions from New Zealand or overseas and may be new to science.
• None of the species recorded from the Port of Tauranga is on the New Zealand register of unwanted organisms.
• Most non-indigenous species located in the Port are likely to have been introduced to New Zealand accidentally by international shipping or spread from other locations in New Zealand (including translocation by shipping).
• Approximately 44 \% (4 of 9 species) of NIS in the Port of Tauranga are likely to have been introduced in hull fouling assemblages, 44 \% (4 species) by hull fouling or ballast water, and 1 species (12 \%) via fouling on flotsam vectors.
• The predominance of hull fouling species in the introduced biota of the Port of Tauranga (as opposed to ballast water introductions) is consistent with findings from similar port baseline studies overseas.},
institution = {NIWA},
author = {Inglis, G. J. and Gust, N. and Fitridge, I. and Floerl, O. and Woods, C. and Kospartov, M. and Hayden, B. J. and Fenwick, G. D.},
month = may,
year = {2008},
keywords = {Biosecurity, Cryptogenic, Introduced taxa, MAF, Marine species, NIS, New Zealand, Non-indigenous marine species, Port surveys, Tauranga, biological invasions},
pages = {145 pp.},
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"M5tbMqHiLt7mWFXpu","bibbaseid":"inglis-gust-fitridge-floerl-woods-kospartov-hayden-fenwick-portoftaurangasecondbaselinesurveyfornonindenousmarinespecies-2008","author_short":["Inglis, G. J.","Gust, N.","Fitridge, I.","Floerl, O.","Woods, C.","Kospartov, M.","Hayden, B. J.","Fenwick, G. D."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"techreport","type":"NIWA Client Report","address":"Christchurch","title":"Port of Tauranga: Second baseline survey for non-indenous marine species","url":"https://niwa.co.nz/static/marine-biosecurity/Inglis%20et%20al%202008%20port%20of%20tauranga.pdf","abstract":"<i>Executive summary</i> • This report describes the results of a repeat port baseline survey of the Port of Tauranga undertaken in April 2005. The survey provides a second inventory of native, non indigenous and cryptogenic marine species within the port and compares the biota with the results of an earlier port baseline survey of the Port of Tauranga undertaken in March 2002. • The survey is part of a nationwide investigation of native and non-native marine biodiversity in 13 international shipping ports and three marinas of first entry for yachts entering New Zealand from overseas. • To allow a direct comparison between the initial baseline survey and the resurvey of the Port of Tauranga, the survey used the same methodologies, occurred in the same season, and sampled the same sites used in the initial baseline survey. To improve the description of the biota of the port, some additional survey sites were added during the repeat survey. • Sampling methods used in both surveys were based on protocols developed by the Australian Centre for Research on Introduced Marine Pests (CRIMP) for baseline surveys of non-indigenous species (NIS) in ports. Modifications were made to the CRIMP protocols for use in New Zealand port conditions. These are described in more detail in the body of the report. • A wide range of sampling techniques was used to collect marine organisms from habitats within the Port of Tauranga. Fouling assemblages were scraped from hard substrata by divers, benthic assemblages were sampled using a sled and benthic grabs, and a gravity corer was used to sample for dinoflagellate cysts. Mobile predators and scavengers were sampled using baited fish, crab, starfish and shrimp traps. • Sampling effort was distributed in the Port of Tauranga according to priorities identified in the CRIMP protocols, which are designed to maximise the chances of detecting nonindigenous species. Most effort was concentrated on high-risk locations and habitats where non-indigenous species were most likely to be found. • Organisms collected during the survey were sent to local and international taxonomic experts for identification. • A total of 304 species or higher taxa were identified in the first survey of the Port of Tauranga in March 2002. They consisted of 202 native species, 10 non-indigenous species, 51 cryptogenic species (those whose geographic origins are uncertain) and 41 species indeterminata (taxa for which there is insufficient taxonomic or systematic information available to allow identification to species level). • During the repeat survey, 264 species or higher taxa were recorded, including 177native species, 9 non-indigenous species, 43 cryptogenic species and 35 species indeterminata. Many species were common to both surveys. Around 41% the native species, 44% of non-indigenous species, and 50% of cryptogenic species recorded during the repeat survey were also found in the earlier survey. • The 9 non-indigenous organisms found in the repeat survey of the Port of Tauranga included representatives of 3 major taxonomic groups. The non-indigenous species detected were: Bugula flabellata, Bugula neritina, Electra tenella, Watersipora subtorquata, Amathia distans, Zoobotryon verticillatum (Bryozoa); Monotheca pulchella, Sertularia marginata (Cnidaria); Cliona celata (Porifera). Five of these species – Electra tenella, Amathia distans, Zoobotryon verticillatum, Monotheca pulchella, Sertularia marginata – were not recorded in the earlier baseline survey of the Port of Tauranga. In addition, 5 non-indigenous species that were present in the first survey – Polydora hoplura, Clytia ?linearis, Eudendrium capillare, Apocorophium acutum, Monocorophium acherusicum – were not found during the repeat survey. • Twenty three species recorded in the repeat survey had not previously been described from New Zealand waters. This included 19 species of sponge that not correspond with existing descriptions from New Zealand or overseas and may be new to science. • None of the species recorded from the Port of Tauranga is on the New Zealand register of unwanted organisms. • Most non-indigenous species located in the Port are likely to have been introduced to New Zealand accidentally by international shipping or spread from other locations in New Zealand (including translocation by shipping). • Approximately 44 % (4 of 9 species) of NIS in the Port of Tauranga are likely to have been introduced in hull fouling assemblages, 44 % (4 species) by hull fouling or ballast water, and 1 species (12 %) via fouling on flotsam vectors. • The predominance of hull fouling species in the introduced biota of the Port of Tauranga (as opposed to ballast water introductions) is consistent with findings from similar port baseline studies overseas.","institution":"NIWA","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Inglis"],"firstnames":["G.","J."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Gust"],"firstnames":["N."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Fitridge"],"firstnames":["I."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Floerl"],"firstnames":["O."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Woods"],"firstnames":["C."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Kospartov"],"firstnames":["M."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Hayden"],"firstnames":["B.","J."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Fenwick"],"firstnames":["G.","D."],"suffixes":[]}],"month":"May","year":"2008","keywords":"Biosecurity, Cryptogenic, Introduced taxa, MAF, Marine species, NIS, New Zealand, Non-indigenous marine species, Port surveys, Tauranga, biological invasions","pages":"145 pp.","bibtex":"@techreport{inglis_port_2008-2,\n\taddress = {Christchurch},\n\ttype = {{NIWA} {Client} {Report}},\n\ttitle = {Port of {Tauranga}: {Second} baseline survey for non-indenous marine species},\n\turl = {https://niwa.co.nz/static/marine-biosecurity/Inglis%20et%20al%202008%20port%20of%20tauranga.pdf},\n\tabstract = {\\textit{Executive summary}\n•\tThis report describes the results of a repeat port baseline survey of the Port of Tauranga undertaken in April 2005. The survey provides a second inventory of native, non indigenous and cryptogenic marine species within the port and compares the biota with the results of an earlier port baseline survey of the Port of Tauranga undertaken in March 2002.\n•\tThe survey is part of a nationwide investigation of native and non-native marine biodiversity in 13 international shipping ports and three marinas of first entry for yachts entering New Zealand from overseas.\n•\tTo allow a direct comparison between the initial baseline survey and the resurvey of the Port of Tauranga, the survey used the same methodologies, occurred in the same season, and sampled the same sites used in the initial baseline survey. To improve the description of the biota of the port, some additional survey sites were added during the repeat survey.\n•\tSampling methods used in both surveys were based on protocols developed by the Australian Centre for Research on Introduced Marine Pests (CRIMP) for baseline surveys of non-indigenous species (NIS) in ports. Modifications were made to the CRIMP protocols for use in New Zealand port conditions. These are described in more detail in the body of the report.\n•\tA wide range of sampling techniques was used to collect marine organisms from habitats within the Port of Tauranga. Fouling assemblages were scraped from hard substrata by divers, benthic assemblages were sampled using a sled and benthic grabs, and a gravity corer was used to sample for dinoflagellate cysts. Mobile predators and scavengers were sampled using baited fish, crab, starfish and shrimp traps.\n•\tSampling effort was distributed in the Port of Tauranga according to priorities identified in the CRIMP protocols, which are designed to maximise the chances of detecting nonindigenous species. Most effort was concentrated on high-risk locations and habitats where non-indigenous species were most likely to be found.\n•\tOrganisms collected during the survey were sent to local and international taxonomic experts for identification.\n•\tA total of 304 species or higher taxa were identified in the first survey of the Port of Tauranga in March 2002. They consisted of 202 native species, 10 non-indigenous species, 51 cryptogenic species (those whose geographic origins are uncertain) and 41 species indeterminata (taxa for which there is insufficient taxonomic or systematic information available to allow identification to species level).\n•\tDuring the repeat survey, 264 species or higher taxa were recorded, including 177native species, 9 non-indigenous species, 43 cryptogenic species and 35 species indeterminata. Many species were common to both surveys. Around 41\\% the native species, 44\\% of non-indigenous species, and 50\\% of cryptogenic species recorded during the repeat survey were also found in the earlier survey.\n•\tThe 9 non-indigenous organisms found in the repeat survey of the Port of Tauranga included representatives of 3 major taxonomic groups. The non-indigenous species detected were: Bugula flabellata, Bugula neritina, Electra tenella, Watersipora subtorquata, Amathia distans, Zoobotryon verticillatum (Bryozoa); Monotheca pulchella, Sertularia marginata (Cnidaria); Cliona celata (Porifera). Five of these species – Electra tenella, Amathia distans, Zoobotryon verticillatum, Monotheca pulchella, Sertularia marginata – were not recorded in the earlier baseline survey of the Port of Tauranga. In addition, 5 non-indigenous species that were present in the first survey – Polydora hoplura, Clytia ?linearis, Eudendrium capillare, Apocorophium acutum, Monocorophium acherusicum – were not found during the repeat survey.\n•\tTwenty three species recorded in the repeat survey had not previously been described from New Zealand waters. This included 19 species of sponge that not correspond with existing descriptions from New Zealand or overseas and may be new to science.\n•\tNone of the species recorded from the Port of Tauranga is on the New Zealand register of unwanted organisms.\n•\tMost non-indigenous species located in the Port are likely to have been introduced to New Zealand accidentally by international shipping or spread from other locations in New Zealand (including translocation by shipping).\n•\tApproximately 44 \\% (4 of 9 species) of NIS in the Port of Tauranga are likely to have been introduced in hull fouling assemblages, 44 \\% (4 species) by hull fouling or ballast water, and 1 species (12 \\%) via fouling on flotsam vectors.\n•\tThe predominance of hull fouling species in the introduced biota of the Port of Tauranga (as opposed to ballast water introductions) is consistent with findings from similar port baseline studies overseas.},\n\tinstitution = {NIWA},\n\tauthor = {Inglis, G. J. and Gust, N. and Fitridge, I. and Floerl, O. and Woods, C. and Kospartov, M. and Hayden, B. J. and Fenwick, G. D.},\n\tmonth = may,\n\tyear = {2008},\n\tkeywords = {Biosecurity, Cryptogenic, Introduced taxa, MAF, Marine species, NIS, New Zealand, Non-indigenous marine species, Port surveys, Tauranga, biological invasions},\n\tpages = {145 pp.},\n}\n\n","author_short":["Inglis, G. J.","Gust, N.","Fitridge, I.","Floerl, O.","Woods, C.","Kospartov, M.","Hayden, B. J.","Fenwick, G. D."],"key":"inglis_port_2008-2","id":"inglis_port_2008-2","bibbaseid":"inglis-gust-fitridge-floerl-woods-kospartov-hayden-fenwick-portoftaurangasecondbaselinesurveyfornonindenousmarinespecies-2008","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"https://niwa.co.nz/static/marine-biosecurity/Inglis%20et%20al%202008%20port%20of%20tauranga.pdf"},"keyword":["Biosecurity","Cryptogenic","Introduced taxa","MAF","Marine species","NIS","New Zealand","Non-indigenous marine species","Port surveys","Tauranga","biological invasions"],"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}}},"bibtype":"techreport","biburl":"https://api.zotero.org/groups/1780128/items?key=mkYJdVcVZD5yyS6bAqdHVlVs&format=bibtex&limit=100","dataSources":["DzoRvg3v4wt7w44ED"],"keywords":["biosecurity","cryptogenic","introduced taxa","maf","marine species","nis","new zealand","non-indigenous marine species","port surveys","tauranga","biological invasions"],"search_terms":["port","tauranga","second","baseline","survey","non","indenous","marine","species","inglis","gust","fitridge","floerl","woods","kospartov","hayden","fenwick"],"title":"Port of Tauranga: Second baseline survey for non-indenous marine species","year":2008}