Conservation Status of Marine Biodiversity in Oceania: An Analysis of Marine Species on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species

Given the economic and cultural dependence on the marine environment in Oceania and a rapidly expanding human population, many marine species populations are in decline and may be vulnerable to extinction from a number of local and regional threats. IUCN Red List assessments, a widely used system for quantifying threats to species and assessing species extinction risk, have been completed for 1190 marine species in Oceania to date, including all known species of corals, mangroves, seagrasses, sea snakes, marine mammals, sea birds, sea turtles, sharks, and rays present in Oceania, plus all species in five important perciformfish groups. Many of the species in these groups are threatened by themodification or destruction of coastal habitats, overfishing fromdirect or indirect exploitation, pollution, and other ecological or environmental changes associated with climate change. Spatial analyses of threatened species highlight priority areas for both site- and species-specific conservation action. Although increased knowledge and use of newly available IUCN Red List assessments for marine species can greatly improve conservation priorities for marine species in Oceania,many important fish groups are still in urgent need of assessment

Conservation Status of Marine Biodiversity in Oceania: An Analysis of Marine Species on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species

Given the economic and cultural dependence on the marine environment in Oceania and a rapidly expanding human population, many marine species populations are in decline and may be vulnerable to extinction from a number of local and regional threats. IUCN Red List assessments, a widely used system for quantifying threats to species and assessing species extinction risk, have been completed for 1190 marine species in Oceania to date, including all known species of corals, mangroves, seagrasses, sea snakes, marine mammals, sea birds, sea turtles, sharks, and rays present in Oceania, plus all species in five important perciform fish groups. Many of the species in these groups are threatened by the modification or destruction of coastal habitats, overfishing from direct or indirect exploitation, pollution, and other ecological or environmental changes associated with climate change. Spatial analyses of threatened species highlight priority areas for both site- and species-specific conservation action. Although increased knowledge and use of newly available IUCN Red List assessments for marine species can greatly improve conservation priorities for marine species in Oceania, many important fish groups are still in urgent need of assessment

Geographic Variation of Persistent Organic Pollutant Levels in Humpback Whale (\u3ci\u3eMegaptera novaeangliae\u3c/i\u3e) Feeding Areas of the North Pacific and North Atlantic

Seasonal feeding behavior and high fidelity to feeding areas allow humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) to be used as biological indicators of regional contamination. Biopsy blubber samples from male individuals (n=67) were collected through SPLASH, a multinational research project, in eight North Pacific feeding grounds. Additional male samples (n=20) were collected from one North Atlantic feeding ground. Persistent organic pollutants were measured in the samples and used to assess contaminant distribution in the study areas. North Atlantic (Gulf of Maine) whales were more contaminated than North Pacific whales, showing the highest levels of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), and chlordanes. The highest dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) levels were detected in whales feeding off southern California, USA. High-latitude regions were characterized by elevated levels of hexachlorocyclohexanes (HCHs) but generally nondetectable concentrations of PBDEs. Age was shown to have a positive relationship with ΣPCBs, ΣDDTs, Σchlordanes, and total percent lipid. Contaminant levels in humpback whales were comparable to other mysticetes and lower than those found in odontocete cetaceans and pinnipeds. Although these concentrations likely do not represent a significant conservation threat, levels in the Gulf of Maine and southern California may warrant further study

Ten public goals and sub-goals showing benefit measured under each.

<p>Ten public goals and sub-goals showing benefit measured under each.</p

Overall Index, goal and sub-goal scores for Brazil (country) and each Brazilian coastal state.

<p>Empty cells are goals not relevant to that region. Goals (two-letter codes) and sub-goals (three-letter codes) are reported separately; LE, SP and BD goals are the average of sub-goal scores; FP scores are the weighted average of sub-goal scores. Acronyms are the same as in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0092589#pone-0092589-t001" target="_blank">Table 1</a>.</p

Goal and sub-goal scores for Brazil regional analysis (left), and Brazil global analysis (right).

<p>Key differences are found in Artisanal Fishing Opportunities, Tourism and Recreation, Lasting Special Places and Iconic Species. Overall Index scores (center) for the regional study are remarkably similar to global results for Brazil.</p

Current and likely future status for each state's overall Index score (axis values) and the value from an independent measure of development status (IFDM) used in Brazil (size of data point).

<p>Points below the dashed line are trending negatively into the future, and above are trending positively. IFDM scores range from 0 to 1 (low development =  0–0.4, average development  =  0.4–0.6, moderate development =  0.6–0.8, and high development =  0.8–1).</p

Brazil study region showing coastal states, colored by final OHI score and listed in legend by ranked score.

<p>The following islands were considered within the jurisdiction of states specified in parenthesis: 1. São Pedro & São Paulo Archipelago (PE), 2. Rocas Atoll (RN), 3. Fernando de Noronha (PE), 4. Abrolhos Archipelago (BA), 5. Trindade & Martim Vaz (ES).</p

Assessing Global Marine Biodiversity Status within a Coupled Socio-Ecological Perspective

<div><p>People value the existence of a variety of marine species and habitats, many of which are negatively impacted by human activities. The Convention on Biological Diversity and other international and national policy agreements have set broad goals for reducing the rate of biodiversity loss. However, efforts to conserve biodiversity cannot be effective without comprehensive metrics both to assess progress towards meeting conservation goals and to account for measures that reduce pressures so that positive actions are encouraged. We developed an index based on a global assessment of the condition of marine biodiversity using publically available data to estimate the condition of species and habitats within 151 coastal countries. Our assessment also included data on social and ecological pressures on biodiversity as well as variables that indicate whether good governance is in place to reduce them. Thus, our index is a social as well as ecological measure of the current and likely future status of biodiversity. As part of our analyses, we set explicit reference points or targets that provide benchmarks for success and allow for comparative assessment of current conditions. Overall country-level scores ranged from 43 to 95 on a scale of 1 to 100, but countries that scored high for species did not necessarily score high for habitats. Although most current status scores were relatively high, likely future status scores for biodiversity were much lower in most countries due to negative trends for both species and habitats. We also found a strong positive relationship between the Human Development Index and resilience measures that could promote greater sustainability by reducing pressures. This relationship suggests that many developing countries lack effective governance, further jeopardizing their ability to maintain species and habitats in the future.</p> </div