Size matters: variations in seagrass seed size at local scales affects seed performance

Seed size can have an impact on angiosperm reproductive fitness. Ecological theory predicts plants that will produce larger seeds in stressful environments to increase the chances of seedling survival and numerous small seeds in favourable conditions to increase the number of recruits. We measured seed morphology of the seagrass Heterozostera nigricaulis from four populations under differing environmental conditions in South East Australia. Seed size and mass among sites showed consistent differences over four flowering seasons. Seeds from exposed, ephemeral meadows (Blairgowrie, Edwards Point) were 19%–53% heavier than those from larger, stable meadows at more sheltered sites (Swan Bay, Point Henry). Overall, heavier seeds from exposed sites performed better in germination experiments and persisted (remained viable) longer compared to small seeds from sheltered sites. Seeds from sheltered sites showed contrasting levels of seed performance. Small seeds from Swan Bay had the lowest germination but the proportion of viable seeds after 12 months were much higher (41%) than similar sized seeds from Point Henry (0%). There are clear life history benefits of large seeds that facilitate seed persistence and germination at exposed sites; however, the performance of smaller seeds varied between sites and may be a function of other site-specific advantages

Seed germination in a southern Australian temperate seagrass

In a series of experiments, seeds from a temperate seagrass species, Zostera nigricaulis collected in Port Phillip Bay, Victoria, Australia were exposed to a range of salinities (20 PSU pulse/no pulse, 25 PSU, 30 PSU, 35 PSU), temperatures (13 °C, 17 °C, 22 °C), burial depths (0 cm, 1 cm, 2 cm) and site specific sediment characteristics (fine, medium, coarse) to quantify their impacts on germination rate and maximum overall germination. In southern Australia the seagrass Z. nigricaulis is a common subtidal species; however, little is known about the factors that affect seed germination which is a potential limiting factor in meadow resilience to natural and anthropogenic disturbances. Overall seed germination was low (<20%) with germination decreasing to <10% when seeds were placed in the sediment. When germination of Z. nigricaulis seeds was observed, it was enhanced (greater overall germination and shorter time to germination) when seeds were exposed to a 20 PSU pulse for 24 h, maintained at salinity of 25 PSU, temperatures <13 °C, in sediments with fine or medium grain sand and buried at a depth of <1 cm. These results indicate that germination of Z. nigricaulis seeds under in situ conditions may be seasonally limited by temperatures in southern Australia. Seed germination may be further restricted by salinity as freshwater pulses reaching 20 PSU are typically only observed in Port Phillip Bay following large scale rainfall events. As a result, these populations may be particularly susceptible to disturbance with only a seasonally limited capacity for recovery

Best practice guidelines for environmental DNA biomonitoring in Australia and New Zealand

Environmental DNA (eDNA)- based methods are increasingly used by government agencies to detect pests and threatened species, and for broader biodiversity monitor-ing. Given rapid technological advances and a growing number of commercial service providers, there is a need to standardize methods for quality assurance and to main-tain confidence in eDNA- based results. Here, we introduce two documents to pro-vide best- practice guidelines for Australian and New Zealand eDNA researchers and end- users (available from https://sedna socie ty.com/publications ): the Environmental DNA protocol development guide for biomonitoring provides minimum standard consid-erations for eDNA and environmental RNA projects across the complete workflow, from ethical considerations and experimental design to interpreting and communicat-ing results. The Environmental DNA test validation guidelines outline key steps to be used in assay development and validation for species-specific testing and metabar-coding. Both guidelines were developed as an initiative of the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry and led by the Southern eDNA Society in a collaborative process including multiple consultation rounds with eDNA experts, end-users, and stakeholders to adapt the guidelines to Australian and New Zealand needs. The aim of these guidelines is not to be prescriptive, but to set mini-mum standards to support a consistent and best- practice approach to eDNA testing. We anticipate that the guidelines will be reviewed and regularly updated as required. Our aspiration is that these best- practice guidelines will ensure environmental man-agers are provided with robust scientific evidence to support decision- making

A horizon scan of priorities for coastal marine microbiome research

Research into the microbiomes of natural environments is changing the way ecologists and evolutionary biologists view the importance of microbes in ecosystem function. This is particularly relevant in ocean environments, where microbes constitute the majority of biomass and control most of the major biogeochemical cycles, including those that regulate the Earth's climate. Coastal marine environments provide goods and services that are imperative to human survival and well-being (e.g. fisheries, water purification), and emerging evidence indicates that these ecosystem services often depend on complex relationships between communities of microorganisms (the ‘microbiome’) and their hosts or environment – termed the ‘holobiont’. Understanding of coastal ecosystem function must therefore be framed under the holobiont concept, whereby macroorganisms and their associated microbiomes are considered as a synergistic ecological unit. Here we evaluated the current state of knowledge on coastal marine microbiome research and identified key questions within this growing research area. Although the list of questions is broad and ambitious, progress in the field is increasing exponentially, and the emergence of large, international collaborative networks and well-executed manipulative experiments are rapidly advancing the field of coastal marine microbiome research

Seagrass restoration is possible: insights and lessons from Australia and New Zealand

Seagrasses are important marine ecosystems situated throughout the world's coastlines. They are facing declines around the world due to global and local threats such as rising ocean temperatures, coastal development and pollution from sewage outfalls and agriculture. Efforts have been made to reduce seagrass loss through reducing local and regional stressors, and through active restoration. Seagrass restoration is a rapidly maturing discipline, but improved restoration practices are needed to enhance the success of future programs. Major gaps in knowledge remain, however, prior research efforts have provided valuable insights into factors influencing the outcomes of restoration and there are now several examples of successful large-scale restoration programs. A variety of tools and techniques have recently been developed that will improve the efficiency, cost effectiveness, and scalability of restoration programs. This review describes several restoration successes in Australia and New Zealand, with a focus on emerging techniques for restoration, key considerations for future programs, and highlights the benefits of increased collaboration, Traditional Owner (First Nation) and stakeholder engagement. Combined, these lessons and emerging approaches show that seagrass restoration is possible, and efforts should be directed at upscaling seagrass restoration into the future. This is critical for the future conservation of this important ecosystem and the ecological and coastal communities they support

An expert-driven framework for applying eDNA tools to improve biosecurity in the Antarctic

Signatories to the Antarctic Treaty System’s Environmental Protocol are committed to preventing incursions of non-native species into Antarctica, but systematic surveillance is rare. Environmental DNA (eDNA) methods provide new opportunities for enhancing detection of non-native species and biosecurity monitoring. To be effective for Antarctic biosecurity, eDNA tests must have appropriate sensitivity and specificity to distinguish non-native from native Antarctic species, and be fit-for-purpose. This requires knowledge of the priority risk species or taxonomic groups for which eDNA surveillance will be informative, validated eDNA assays for those species or groups, and reference DNA sequences for both target non-native and related native Antarctic species. Here, we used an expert elicitation process and decision-by-consensus approach to identify and assess priority biosecurity risks for the Australian Antarctic Program (AAP) in East Antarctica, including identifying high priority non-native species and their potential transport pathways. We determined that the priority targets for biosecurity monitoring were not individual species, but rather broader taxonomic groups such as mussels (Mytilus species), tunicates (Ascidiacea), springtails (Collembola), and grasses (Poaceae). These groups each include multiple species with high risks of introduction to and/or establishment in Antarctica. The most appropriate eDNA methods for the AAP must be capable of detecting a range of species within these high-risk groups (e.g., eDNA metabarcoding). We conclude that the most beneficial Antarctic eDNA biosecurity applications include surveillance of marine species in nearshore environments, terrestrial invertebrates, and biofouling species on vessels visiting Antarctica. An urgent need exists to identify suitable genetic markers for detecting priority species groups, establish baseline terrestrial and marine biodiversity for Antarctic stations, and develop eDNA sampling methods for detecting biofouling organisms.This work was supported as a Science Innovation Project by the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment’s Science Innovation Program funding 2021–22 (project team: A.J.M., L.J.C., D.M.B., C.K.K., J.S.S. and L.S.). Support was also provided (to J.D.S, E.L.J., S.A.R., J.S.S., M.I.S., J.M.S., N.G.W.) from Australian Research Council SRIEAS grant SR200100005. P.C. and K.A.H. are supported by NERC core funding to the BAS Biodiversity, Evolution and Adaptation Team and Environment Office, respectively. L.R.P. and M.G. are supported by Biodiversa ASICS funding

A horizon scan of priorities for coastal marine microbiome research

Research into the microbiomes of natural environments is changing the way ecologists and evolutionary biologists view the importance of microbes in ecosystem function. This is particularly relevant in ocean environments, where microbes constitute the majority of biomass and control most of the major biogeochemical cycles, including those that regulate the Earth's climate. Coastal marine environments provide goods and services that are imperative to human survival and well-being (e.g. fisheries, water purification), and emerging evidence indicates that these ecosystem services often depend on complex relationships between communities of microorganisms (the ‘microbiome’) and their hosts or environment – termed the ‘holobiont’. Understanding of coastal ecosystem function must therefore be framed under the holobiont concept, whereby macroorganisms and their associated microbiomes are considered as a synergistic ecological unit. Here we evaluated the current state of knowledge on coastal marine microbiome research and identified key questions within this growing research area. Although the list of questions is broad and ambitious, progress in the field is increasing exponentially, and the emergence of large, international collaborative networks and well-executed manipulative experiments are rapidly advancing the field of coastal marine microbiome research

An expert-driven framework for applying eDNA tools to improve biosecurity in the Antarctic

SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL : FIGURE S1. Map of Antarctica and the Southern Ocean including year-round Australian stations. Sourced from the Australian Antarctic Data Centre (https://data.aad.gov.au/map-catalogue/map/14159) under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported License. TABLE S1. Ranked list of marine species that represent the greatest perceived risk of arrival, establishment, and impact via the Australian Antarctic Program. TABLE S2. Ranked list of terrestrial invertebrate species that represent the greatest perceived risk of arrival, establishment, and impact via the Australian Antarctic Program. TABLE S3. Ranked list of terrestrial plant species that represent the greatest perceived risk of arrival, establishment, and impact via the Australian Antarctic Program. TABLE S4. Genetic resources currently available for priority species, including species-specific real-time PCR assays, and reference sequences for DNA barcoding genes or mitochondrial/chloroplast genomes.Signatories to the Antarctic Treaty System’s Environmental Protocol are committed to preventing incursions of non-native species into Antarctica, but systematic surveillance is rare. Environmental DNA (eDNA) methods provide new opportunities for enhancing detection of non-native species and biosecurity monitoring. To be effective for Antarctic biosecurity, eDNA tests must have appropriate sensitivity and specificity to distinguish non-native from native Antarctic species, and be fit-for-purpose. This requires knowledge of the priority risk species or taxonomic groups for which eDNA surveillance will be informative, validated eDNA assays for those species or groups, and reference DNA sequences for both target non-native and related native Antarctic species. Here, we used an expert elicitation process and decision-by- consensus approach to identify and assess priority biosecurity risks for the Australian Antarctic Program (AAP) in East Antarctica, including identifying high priority non-native species and their potential transport pathways. We determined that the priority targets for biosecurity monitoring were not individual species, but rather broader taxonomic groups such as mussels (Mytilus species), tunicates (Ascidiacea), springtails (Collembola), and grasses (Poaceae). These groups each include multiple species with high risks of introduction to and/or establishment in Antarctica. The most appropriate eDNA methods for the AAP must be capable of detecting a range of species within these high-risk groups (e.g., eDNA metabarcoding). We conclude that the most beneficial Antarctic eDNA biosecurity applications include surveillance of marine species in nearshore environments, terrestrial invertebrates, and biofouling species on vessels visiting Antarctica. An urgent need exists to identify suitable genetic markers for detecting priority species groups, establish baseline terrestrial and marine biodiversity for Antarctic stations, and develop eDNA sampling methods for detecting biofouling organisms.A Science Innovation Project by the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment’s Science Innovation Program; Australian Research Council; NERC core funding to the BAS Biodiversity, Evolution and Adaptation Team and Environment Office; and Biodiversa ASICS funding.http://www.reabic.net/journals/mbi/Default.aspxhj2024Plant Production and Soil ScienceSDG-14:Life below wate

Consistent male–male paternity differences across female genotypes

In a recent paper, we demonstrated that male-female genetic relatedness determines male probability of paternity in experimental sperm competition in the Peron\u27s tree frog (Litoria peronii), with a more closely related male out-competing his rival. Here, we test the hypothesis that a male-male difference in siring success with one female significantly predicts the corresponding difference in siring success with another female. With male sperm concentration held constant, and the proportion of viable sperm controlled statistically, the male-male difference in siring success with one female strongly predicted the corresponding difference in siring success with another female, and alone explained more than 62 per cent of the variance in male-male siring differences. This study demonstrates that male siring success is primarily dictated by among-male differences in innate siring success with less influence of male-female relatedness.<br /