I studied what happens to reef fish after coral bleaching. What I saw still makes me nauseous



Victor Huertas, Author provided

Jodie L. Rummer, James Cook University

The Great Barrier Reef is suffering its third mass bleaching event in five years. It follows the record-breaking mass bleaching event in 2016 that killed a third of Great Barrier Reef corals, immediately followed by another in 2017.

While we don’t know if fish populations declined from the 2016 bleaching disaster, one 2018 study did show the types of fish species on some coral reefs changed. Our study dug deeper into fish DNA.

I was part of an international team of scientists that, for the first time, tracked wild populations of five species of coral reef fish before, during, and after the 2016 marine heatwave.

From a scientific perspective, the results are fascinating and world-first.

Marine heatwaves are now becoming more frequent and more severe with climate change. Corals are bleaching, as pictured here.
Jodie Rummer, Author provided

We used gene expression as a tool to survey how well fish can handle hotter waters. Gene expression is the process where a gene is read by cell machinery and creates a product such as a protein, resulting in a physical trait.

We know many tropical coral reef fish are already living at temperatures close to their upper limits. Our findings can help predict which of these species will be most at risk from repeated heatwaves.




Read more:
‘This situation brings me to despair’: two reef scientists share their climate grief


But from a personal perspective, I still feel nauseous thinking about what the reef looked like during this project. I’ll probably feel this way for a long time.

Rewind to November 2015

We were prepared. Back then we didn’t know the reef was about to bleach and lead to widespread ecological devastation. But we did anticipate that 2016 would be an El Niño year. This is a natural climate cycle that would mean warm summer waters in early 2016 would stick around longer than usual.

But we can’t blame El Niño – the ocean has already warmed by 1°C above pre-industrial levels from continued greenhouse gas emissions. What’s more, marine heatwaves are becoming more frequent and severe with climate change.

Given this foresight, we took some quick liver biopsies from several coral reef fish species at our field site in December 2015, just in case.

Coral bleaching at Magnetic Island, March 2020.
Victor Huertas, Author provided

A couple months later, we were literally in hot water

In February 2016, my colleague and I were based on Lizard Island in the northern part of the Great Barrier Reef working on another project.

The low tides had shifted to the afternoon hours. We were collecting fish in the shallow lagoon off the research station, and our dive computers read that the water temperature was 33°C.




Read more:
The Great Barrier Reef is in trouble. There are a whopping 45 reasons why


We looked at each other. These are the temperatures we use to simulate climate change in our laboratory studies for the year 2050 or 2100, but they’re happening now.

Over the following week, we watched corals turn fluorescent and then bone-white.

The water was murky with slime from the corals’ immune responses and because they were slowly exuding their symbiotic zooxanthellae – the algae that provides corals with food and the vibrant colours we know and love when we think about a coral reef. The reef was literally dying before our eyes.

A third of the corals on the Great Barrier Reef perished after the 2016 heatwave.
Jodie Rummer, Author provided

Traits for dealing with heatwaves

We sampled fish during four time periods around this devastating event: before, at the start, during, and after.

Some genes are always “switched on”, regardless of environmental conditions. Other genes switch on or off as needed, depending on the environment.

If we found these fish couldn’t regulate their gene expression in response to temperature stress, then the functions – such as metabolism, respiration, and immune function – also cannot change as needed. Over time, this could compromise survival.




Read more:
‘Bright white skeletons’: some Western Australian reefs have the lowest coral cover on record


The plasticity (a bit like flexibility) of these functions, or phenotypes, is what buffers an organism from environmental change. And right now, this may be the only hope for maintaining the health of coral reef ecosystems in the face of repeated heatwave events.

So, what were the fish doing?

We looked at expression patterns of thousands of genes. We found the same genes responded differently between species. In other words, some fish struggled more than others to cope with marine heatwaves.

Ostorhinchus doederleini, a species of cardinalfish, is bad at coping with marine heatwaves.
Göran Nilsson, Author provided

The species that coped the least was a nocturnal cardinalfish species (Cheilodipterus quinquelineatus). We found it had the lowest number of differentially expressed genes (genes that can switch on or off to handle different stressors), even when facing the substantial change in conditions from the hottest to the coolest months.

In contrast, the spiny damselfish (Acanthochromis polyacanthus) responded to the warmer conditions with changes in the expression of thousands of genes, suggesting it was making the most changes to cope with the heatwave conditions.

What can these data tell us?

Our findings not only have implications for specific fish species, but for the whole ecosystem. So policymakers and the fishing industry should screen more species to predict which will be sensitive and which will tolerate warming waters and heatwaves. This is not a “one size fits all” situation.

One of the species that showed the least amount of change under warming was Cheilodipterus quinquelineatus.
Moises Antonio Bernal de Leon, Author provided

Fish have been on the planet for more than 400 million years. Over time , they may adapt to rising temperatures or migrate to cooler waters.

But, the three recent mass bleaching events is unprecedented in human history, and fish won’t have time to adapt.




Read more:
Attention United Nations: don’t be fooled by Australia’s latest report on the Great Barrier Reef


My drive to protect the oceans began when I was a child. Now it’s my career. Despite the progress my colleagues and I have made, my nauseous feelings remain, knowing our science alone may not be enough to save the reef.

The future of the planet, the oceans, and the Great Barrier Reef lies in our collective actions to reduce global warming. What we do today will determine what the Great Barrier Reef looks like tomorrow.The Conversation

Jodie L. Rummer, Associate Professor & Principal Research Fellow, James Cook University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

For decades, scientists puzzled over the plastic ‘missing’ from our oceans – but now it’s been found


Britta Denise Hardesty, CSIRO and Chris Wilcox, CSIRO

You’ve probably heard that our oceans have become a plastic soup. But in fact, of all the plastic that enters Earth’s oceans each year, just 1% has been observed floating on the surface. So where is the rest of it?

This “missing” plastic has been a longstanding scientific question. To date, the search has focused on oceanic gyres such as the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, the water column (the part of the ocean between the surface and the sea bed), the bottom of the ocean, and the stomachs of marine wildlife.

But our new research suggests ocean plastic is being transported back onshore and pushed permanently onto land away from the water’s edge, where it often becomes trapped in vegetation.

Of course, plastic has been reported on beaches around the world for decades. But there has been little focus on why and how coastal environments are a sink for marine debris. Our findings have big implications for how we tackle ocean plastic.

New research shows a significant amount of plastic pollution from our oceans ends up back on land, where it gets trapped.

The hunt for marine pollution

Our separate, yet-to-be-published research has found around 90% of marine debris that enters the ocean remains in the “littoral zone” (the area of ocean within 8km of the coast). This new study set out to discover what happens to it.

We collected data on the amount and location of plastic pollution every 100 kilometres around the entire coast of Australia between 2011 and 2016. Debris was recorded at 188 locations along the Australian coastline. Of this, 56% was plastic, followed by glass (17%) and foam (10%).

Data was recorded approximately every 100 kilometres along the coast of Australia. Of the marine debris recorded, more than half was plastic.

The debris was a mix of litter from people and deposition from the ocean. The highest concentrations of plastic pollution were found along coastal backshores – areas towards the inland edge of the beach, where the vegetation begins. The further back from the water’s edge we went, the more debris we found.

The amount of marine debris, and where it ends up, is influenced by onshore wave activity and, to a lesser extent, wind activity. Densely populated areas and those where the coast was easily accessible were hotspots for trapped plastics.




Read more:
Stop shaming and start empowering: advertisers must rethink their plastic waste message


Think about what you see on your beach. Smaller debris is often found near the water’s edge, while larger items such as drink bottles, plastic bags and crisp packets are often found further back from the water, often trapped in vegetation.

We also found more debris near urban areas where rivers and creeks enter the ocean. It could be that our trash is being trapped by waterways before it gets to the sea. We’re finding similar patterns in other countries we’re surveying around the Asia Pacific and beyond.

This pollution kills and maims wildlife when they mistake it for food or get tangled in it. It can damage fragile marine ecosystems by smothering sensitive reefs and transporting invasive species and is potentially a threat to human health if toxins in plastics make their way through the food chain to humans.

It can also become an eyesore, damaging the economy of an area through reduced tourism revenue.

Onshore waves, wind and areas with denser human populations influences where and how much marine debris there is along our coastlines.
CSIRO

Talking rubbish

Our findings highlight the importance of studying the entire width of coastal areas to better understand how much, and where, debris gets trapped, to inform targeted approaches to managing all this waste.

Plastic pollution can be reduced through local changes such as water refill stations, rubbish bins, incentives and awareness campaigns. It can also be reduced through targeted waste management policies to reduce, reuse and recycle plastics. We found container deposit schemes to be a particularly effective incentive in reducing marine pollution.




Read more:
We organised a conference for 570 people without using plastic. Here’s how it went


This discussion is particularly timely. The National Plastics Summit in Canberra last week brought together governments, industry and non-government organisations to identify new solutions to the plastic waste challenge, and discuss how to meet targets under the National Waste Policy Action Plan. Understanding that so much of our debris remains local, and trapped on land, provides real opportunities for successful management of our waste close to the source. This is particularly critical given the waste export ban starting July 1 at the latest.

Plastic in our oceans is increasing. It’s clear from our research that waste management strategies on land must accommodate much larger volumes of pollution than previously estimated. But the best way to keep plastic from our ocean and land is to stop putting it in.

Arianna Olivelli contributed to this article, and the research upon which it was based.




Read more:
Here is a global solution to the plastic waste crisis – and A$443 million to get it started


The Conversation


Britta Denise Hardesty, Principal Research Scientist, Oceans and Atmosphere Flagship, CSIRO and Chris Wilcox, Senior Research Scientist, CSIRO

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The story of a wave: from wind-blown ripples to breaking on the beach



By the time a wave reaches shore, it may have travelled tens of thousands of kilometres.
Ian Mitchinson / Shutterstock

Shane Keating, UNSW

It’s a cliché, but Aussies love the beach. And little wonder: with 36,000 kilometres of coastline, Australia is blessed with some of the best beaches in the world.

Around 20 million Australians live within 50 kilometres of the coast. As summer temperatures soar, we flock to the ocean to splash, swim, surf, paddle, and plunge in the waves.

But where do those waves come from? How do they form, and why do they break? As it turns out, what we see at the shore is just the last few moments of an epic journey.




Read more:
Hidden women of history: Isabel Letham, daring Australian surfing pioneer


Great waves from tiny ripples grow

The waves we see crashing on the beach can begin their lives tens of thousands of kilometres away. Surface waves, as they are known, are born when the wind blows over the ocean, amplifying small ripples and transferring momentum from the atmosphere to the water.

The height of the wave depends on how long the wind is blowing and the distance – or fetch – over which it blows. The largest waves are created by distant storms, which churn up the surface of the ocean and radiate waves outwards like ripples in a pond.

Surface waves don’t move the water itself very far – each water molecule travels forward and back in a circle a few meters across and ends up back at its starting point.

As the wave crest rises, water molecules gather gravitational potential energy that is released as kinetic energy when the water descends into the trough of the wave. This energy is then passed onto the next crest in a see-saw of kinetic and potential energy that can propagate across an entire ocean basin.

The mounting wave

Once a wave leaves the open ocean and approaches land, the sea floor begins to exert its influence. Surface waves transmit their energy more slowly in shallow water than in deep water. This causes energy to pile up near the shore. Waves start to shoal, becoming taller, steeper, and more closely spaced.

Once a wave grows too steep to hold together, it breaks. Breaking waves come in different varieties.

Spilling breakers, which crumble gently into white water, occur when the sea floor rises relatively slowly.

By contrast, plunging breakers – the classic rolling waves favoured by surfers – form when the sea floor rises sharply, particularly near reefs and rocky headlands.

Finally, surging waves occur when the shore is almost vertical. These waves don’t produce breakers but rather a rhythmic rise and fall of the sea surface.

Bend it like bathymetry

The shape or topography of the sea floor – called bathymetry – can have remarkable effects on breaking waves. If the depth of the sea floor changes parallel to the coast, incoming waves will refract or bend so their crests line up with the shoreline.

The effect can be clearly seen near headlands: waves close to the headland move slowly because the water is shallow, while waves further out move more quickly. This causes waves to curl around the headland like a marching band rounding a corner.

Bathymetry is also responsible for some of the biggest waves on Earth. Famous big wave surf spots like Mavericks in Northern California and Nazaré in Portugal benefit from undersea canyons that refract incoming waves and focus them into monsters. The Nazaré wave originates from an undersea canyon almost 5 kilometres deep to produce waves as tall as an eight-storey building.




Read more:
Don’t get sucked in by the rip this summer


Don’t risk the rip

The story of a wave doesn’t end when it breaks, however. Breaking waves push water towards the shore, raising the water level. This water will try to flow back offshore via the lowest point along the beach. The result is a rip current: a swift, narrow current that flows out to sea.

Rip currents are Australia’s number one coastal hazard, responsible for more fatalities per year than shark attacks, bush fires, floods, and cyclones combined. Inexperienced swimmers caught in a rip can panic and try to swim against the current, which is a dangerous recipe for exhaustion. Yet most Australians are unable to identify a rip current, and two-thirds of those who think they can get it wrong.

Purple dye traces the path of a rip current.
Rob Brander

To spot a rip, look for a gap in the waves, a dark channel, or ripples surrounded by smoother water. The safest thing to do is to stick to patrolled beaches and swim between the flags. If you do find yourself caught in a rip, Surf Lifesaving Australia advises you to stay calm and conserve your energy.

Rip currents are usually quite narrow, so swim at right angles to the current until you are outside the rip. If you are too tired to swim, tread water and let yourself go with the flow until the rip weakens and you can signal for help.

Above all, if you are unsure, don’t risk the rip. Sit back and enjoy the waves from a safe distance instead.The Conversation

Shane Keating, Senior Lecturer in Mathematics and Oceanography, UNSW

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Acidic oceans are corroding the tooth-like scales of shark skin



CT scan of a catshark hatchling head. Note the ridged scales.
Rory Cooper, Kyle Martin & Amin Garbout/Natural History Museum London, Author provided

Rory Cooper, University of Sheffield

Shark skin might look perfectly smooth, but inspect it under a microscope and you’ll notice something strange. The entire outer surface of a shark’s body is actually covered in sharp, little scales known as denticles. More remarkable still, these denticles are incredibly similar to human teeth, as they’re also comprised of dentine and enamel-like materials.

Your dentist will no doubt have warned you that acidic drinks like fizzy cola damage your teeth. This is because acid can dissolve the calcium and phosphate in the enamel tooth covering. For the first time, scientists have discovered a similar process acting on the tooth-like scales of sharks in the ocean.




Read more:
How we uncovered the feeding habits of sharks, thanks to plankton ‘post codes’


The carbon dioxide (CO₂) that humans release into the atmosphere doesn’t just heat the planet. As more of it dissolves in the ocean, it’s gradually increasing the acidity of seawater. In the past 200 years, the ocean has absorbed 525 billion tonnes of CO₂ and become 30% more acidic as a result. Now scientists worry that the lower pH is affecting one of the ocean’s top predators.

Denticles have sharp ridges and are arranged in an overlapping pattern, similar to chainmail.
Rory Cooper, Author provided

An unwelcome sea change

Over hundreds of millions of years, the denticles that make up shark skin have evolved to allow sharks to thrive in different environments. Different species have distinct denticle shapes and patterns that enable a range of remarkable functions. I’ve spent the last four years attempting to understand how the development of these scales is genetically controlled in shark embryos, and how their intricate details give each species an edge.

Denticles have highly specialised ridges which help reduce drag by up to 10%, allowing sharks to swim further and faster while using less energy. This works in a similar fashion to the ridges in the hulls of speed boats, which help the vessel move more efficiently through the water. In fact, these scales are so effective at reducing drag that scientists and engineers have long tried to create shark skin-inspired materials for boats and aircraft that can help them travel further on less fuel.

A catshark embryo about 80 days after fertilisation.
Rory Cooper, Kyle Martin & Amin Garbout/Natural History Museum London, Author provided

The patterning of denticles also works as a defensive armour, which protects sharks from their environment and from other predators. Some female sharks – such as the small-spotted catshark – have even developed a region of enlarged denticles which provide protection from a male shark’s bites during mating.

The changing chemistry of the ocean has been linked to coral bleaching, but its effect on other marine animals is less clear. To address this, researchers exposed puffadder shysharks – a species found off the coast of South Africa – to different levels of acidity in aquariums, and used a high-resolution imaging technique to examine the effect of acid exposure on their skin. After just nine weeks, they found that increased water acidity had weakened the surfaces of their denticles.

The puffadder shyshark (Haploblepharus edwardsii) is a slow moving species that lives on the sea floor.
Derekkeats/Wikipedia, CC BY-SA

Corrosion and weakening of the denticle surface could degrade the highly specialised drag-reducing ridges, affecting the ability of these sharks to swim and hunt. Many shark species are top-level predators, so if they’re not able to hunt as effectively, this might have an unpredictable impact on the population size of their prey and other animals in the complex marine environment. Some species of shark need to swim constantly to keep oxygen-rich water flowing over their gills and to expel CO₂ – another process which might be hindered by increased drag.




Read more:
Sharks: one in four habitats in remote open ocean threatened by longline fishing


Sharks belong to an ancient group of vertebrates known as the cartilaginous fishes, which split from the bony fishes – a lineage that later gave rise to humans – roughly 450 million years ago. Sharks, and other cartilaginous fish like rays, arose long before the dinosaurs, and have outlived multiple mass extinction events. But the rate of change in the marine environment over the last few centuries is an unprecedented challenge. These ancient predators may struggle to adapt to the fastest known change in ocean chemistry in the last 50 million years.The Conversation

Rory Cooper, PhD Researcher in Evolutionary Developmental Biology, University of Sheffield

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Fish larvae float across national borders, binding the world’s oceans in a single network


Larval black sea bass, an important commercial species along the US Atlantic coast.
NOAA Fisheries/Ehren Habeck

Nandini Ramesh, University of California, Berkeley; James Rising, London School of Economics and Political Science, and Kimberly Oremus, University of Delaware

Fish populations are declining around the world, and many countries are trying to conserve them by regulating their fishing industries. However, controlling fishing locally may not do enough to strengthen fish populations. Often one nation’s fish stocks depend on the spawning grounds of a neighboring country, where fish release eggs and sperm into the water and larvae hatch from fertilized eggs.

We do research on oceans, climate and fisheries. In a recent study, we showed that global fisheries are even more tightly connected than previously understood. The world’s coastal marine fisheries form a single network, thanks to the drift of larvae along ocean currents.

This suggests that country-by-country fishery management may be fundamentally insufficient. If a fish species that provides food to one country should decline, the amount of fish spawn, or eggs and larvae, riding the ocean currents from there to other countries would also decline dramatically, resulting in further loss of fish elsewhere.

Many countries live with this risk, although they may not realize it. To manage fisheries effectively, nations must understand where the fish in their territories originate.

Ocean currents affect the speed at which fish eggs and larvae drift and vary through the year. This map shows surface current speeds for January: yellow = fastest, dark blue = slowest. Each country’s territory is highlighted with red dots during the month of maximum spawning activity in that country. In each territory, a different number of species spawn in each month of the year. The red dots appear in the month during which the largest number of species spawn in that territory.

Crossing national borders

Fish don’t recognize political boundaries, and regularly travel internationally. Scientists have tracked adult fish movements using electronic tags, and have shown that a few species migrate over long distances.

Countries and territories have negotiated agreements to ensure sustainable sharing of migratory fish. One such agreement joins several nations in the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission to ensure that the territories fish cross share them sustainably.

But fish eggs and larvae are much harder to follow. Many species lay eggs in large numbers that float near the ocean surface. When they hatch, larvae measure a few millimeters long and continue to drift as plankton until they grow large enough to swim. During these stages of the life cycle, ocean currents sweep fish spawn across international boundaries.

Simulating the journeys of eggs and larvae

Like weather on land, the pattern of ocean currents varies with the seasons and can be predicted. These currents are typically sluggish, traveling about an inch per second, or less than 0.1 miles per hour.

There are a few exceptions: Currents along the eastern coasts of continents, like the Gulf Stream in North America or the Kuroshio in Asia, and along the equator can be significantly faster, reaching speeds of 2 miles per hour. Even a gentle current of 0.1 miles per hour can carry spawn 40 miles over a month, and some species can float for several months.

Government and academic scientists use a vast network of satellites, moored instruments and floating buoys to monitor these surface flows. Using this information, we performed a computer simulation of where drifting particles would be carried over time. Scientists have used this type of simulation to study the spread of marine plastic pollution and predict where debris from plane crashes at sea could have washed ashore.

Different fish species spawn in different seasons, and a single species may spawn in several months at different locations. We matched the seasons and locations of spawning for over 700 species with ocean current data, and simulated where their spawn would drift. Then, using records of where those species have been fished, and information about how suitable conditions are for each species in different regions, we deduced what fraction of the fish caught in each country arrived from other countries because of ocean currents.

A small-world network

Scientists and policymakers can learn a lot by studying these international connections. Each species that floats across international boundaries during its plankton stage represents a linkage between countries. These linkages span the world in a dense, interconnected network.

Each color represents a region in the network of fish larvae connections. This map shows the strongest 467 connections among a total of 2,059 that the authors modeled.
Nandini Ramesh, James Rising and Kimberly Oremus, CC BY-ND

At a global level, this network of connections has an important property: It is a small-world network. Small-world networks connect regions that are far apart to each other by just a few steps along the network. The concept is rooted in social scientist Stanley Milgram’s 1960s experiments with social networks, which found that it was possible for a letter to reach almost any total stranger by passing through six or fewer hands. Milgram’s work was popularized in the 1990 play “Six Degrees of Separation.”

Among fisheries, the world seems even smaller: We found that the average number of degrees of separation among fisheries is five. This means that local problems can become global risks.

For example, imagine that a fishery collapses in the middle of the Mediterranean. If the population in one spawning region collapses, it could quickly put pressure on neighboring fisheries dependent upon it. If fishers in those neighboring countries overfish the remaining population or shift to other species, the disturbance can grow. Within just a few years, a fisheries disturbance could travel around the world.

We assessed how countries would be affected in terms of food security, employment and gross domestic product if they were to lose access to fish spawn from other territories. The most affected countries cluster in the Caribbean, the western Pacific, Northern Europe and West Africa. These hotspots correspond to the network’s most clustered areas, because the effects of these flows of fish spawn are most pronounced where many coastal countries lie in close proximity.

International flows of fish eggs and larvae affect countries’ total catch, food security, jobs and economies.
Nandini Ramesh, James Rising and Kimberly Oremus, CC BY-ND

Thinking globally about fisheries

Because the world’s fisheries are so interconnected, only international cooperation that takes flows of fish spawn into account can effectively manage them. Aside from egg and larvae connections, fisheries are linked by movements of adult fish and through agreements among countries allowing them to fish in each other’s waters.

All of this suggests that fishery management is best conducted at a large, international scale. Proposals for doing this include defining Large Marine Ecosystems to be jointly managed and creating networks of Marine Protected Areas that safeguard a variety of critical habitats. Ideas like these, and careful study of interdependence between national fisheries, are crucial to sustainable use of the oceans’ living resources.

[ Expertise in your inbox. Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter and get a digest of academic takes on today’s news, every day. ]The Conversation

Nandini Ramesh, Postdoctoral Researcher in Earth and Planetary Science, University of California, Berkeley; James Rising, Assistant Professorial Research Fellow, London School of Economics and Political Science, and Kimberly Oremus, Assistant Professor of Marine Policy, University of Delaware

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Whales and dolphins found in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch for the first time



Adult and infant sperm whales have been spotted in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch.
Inf-Lite Teacher/Flickr, CC BY-SA

Chandra Salgado Kent, Edith Cowan University

Scientific research doesn’t usually mean being strapped in a harness by the open paratroop doors of a Vietnam-war-era Hercules plane. But that’s the situation I found myself in several years ago, the result of which has just been published in the journal Marine Biodiversity.

As part of the Ocean Cleanup’s Aerial Expedition, I was coordinating a visual survey team assessing the largest accumulation of ocean plastic in the world: the Great Pacific Garbage Patch.




Read more:
The ocean’s plastic problem is closer to home than scientists first thought


When the aircraft’s doors opened in front of me over the Pacific Ocean for the first time, my heart jumped into my throat. Not because I was looking 400m straight down to the wild sea below as it passed at 260km per hour, but because of what I saw.

This was one of the most remote regions of the Pacific Ocean, and the amount of floating plastic nets, ropes, containers and who-knows-what below was mind-boggling.

However, it wasn’t just debris down there. For the first time, we found proof of whales and dolphins in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, which means it’s highly likely they are eating or getting tangled in the huge amount of plastic in the area.

The Great Pacific Garbage Patch

The Great Pacific Garbage Patch is said to be the largest accumulation of ocean plastic in the world. It is located between Hawaii and California, where huge ocean currents meet to form the North Pacific subtropical gyre. An estimated 80,000 tonnes of plastic are floating in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch.




Read more:
The major source of ocean plastic pollution you’ve probably never heard of


Our overall project was overseen and led by The Ocean Cleanup’s founder Boyan Slat and then-chief scientist Julia Reisser. We conducted two visual survey flights, each taking an entire day to travel from San Francisco’s Moffett Airfield, survey for around two hours, and travel home. Along with our visual observations, the aircraft was fitted with a range of sensors, including a short-wave infrared imager, a Lidar system (which uses the pulse from lasers to map objects on land or at sea), and a high-resolution camera.

Both visual and technical surveys found whales and dolphins, including sperm and beaked whales and their young calves. This is the first direct evidence of whales and dolphins in the heart of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch.

Mating green turtles in a sea of plastics.
photo by Chandra P. Salgado Kent, Author provided

Plastics in the ocean are a growing problem for marine life. Many species can mistake plastics for food, consume them accidentally along with their prey or simply eat fish that have themselves eaten plastic.

Both beaked and sperm whales have been recently found with heavy plastic loads in their stomachs. In the Philippines, a dying beaked whale was found with 40kg of plastic in its stomach, and in Indonesia, a dead sperm whale washed ashore with 115 drinking cups, 25 plastic bags, plastic bottles, two flip-flops, and more than 1,000 pieces of string in its stomach.

The danger of ghost nets

The most common debris we were able to identify by eye was discarded or lost fishing nets, often called “ghost nets”. Ghost nets can drift in the ocean for years, trapping animals and causing injuries, starvation and death.

Crew sorts plastic debris collected from the Great Pacific Garbage Patch on a voyage in July 2019.
EPA/THE OCEAN CLEANUP

Whales and dolphins are often found snared in debris. Earlier this year, a young sperm whale almost died after spending three years tangled in a rope from a fishing net.

During our observation we saw young calves with their mothers. Calves are especially vulnerable to becoming trapped. With the wide range of ocean plastics in the garbage patch, it is highly likely animals in the area ingest and become tangled in it.

It’s believed the amount of plastics in the ocean could triple over the next decade. It is clear the problem of plastic pollution has no political or geographic boundaries.




Read more:
There are some single-use plastics we truly need. The rest we can live without


While plastics enter the sea from populated areas, global currents transport them across oceans. Plastics can kill animals, promote disease, and harm the environment, our food sources and people.

The most devastating effects fall on communities in poverty. New research shows the Great Pacific Garbage Patch is rapidly growing, posing a greater threat to wildlife. It reinforces the global movement to reduce, recycle and remove plastics from the environment.

But to really tackle this problem we need creative solutions at every level of society, from communities to industries to governments and international organisations.

To take one possibility, what if we invested in fast-growing, sustainably cultivated bamboo to replace millions of single-use plastics? It could be produced by the very countries most affected by this crisis: poorer and developing nations.




Read more:
Designing new ways to make use of ocean plastic


It is only one of many opportunities to dramatically reduce plastic waste, improve the health of our environments and people, and to help communities most susceptible to plastic pollution.The Conversation

Chandra Salgado Kent, Associate Professor, School of Science, Edith Cowan University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.