Edited by Jennifer Sills
A better way forward for Brazil’s fisheries IN DECEMBER 2014, the Brazilian Minister
of the Environment released the new national red lists enumerating 2113 plants and 1173 animals threatened with extinction (1). Of the 475 aquatic species on the list, 83 are commercially exploited by fisheries, mainly as by-catch. The industrial fisheries sector is now using its political influence to persuade the government to change the contents of the list of aquatic animals or revoke it entirely. This would be an enormous setback for the conservation of Brazil’s aquatic fauna. The situation is reminiscent of that of the agribusiness lobby weakening the new Forest Code, and other recent political maneuvers that could lead to the opening of mining concessions in strictly protected areas (2, 3). The effect of the new lists on industrial fisheries is actually less disruptive than what is being purported. The ordinance that deals specifically with threatened aquatic animals provides for continued capture and trade of fishes classified as Vulnerable—the category in which most species of commercial interest fall—if they are subject to specific management plans and their fishery is regulated by federal agencies. Annual updates to the list based on new or revised information are also foreseen in the ordinance. Therefore, instead of putting Brazil’s
aquatic fauna at increased risk, the industrial fisheries sector should work with government agencies and the ministries of the Environment and Fisheries and Aquaculture to implement management strategies that have been historically lacking in Brazil (4). A permanent system to evaluate and manage stock status would eventually result in the downgrading of the extinction risk of legally protected species. Ideally, it would also prevent the overexploitation of fishing stocks that now seem to be at sustainable levels. Fabio Di Dario,1* Carlos B. M. Alves,2 Harry Boos,3 Flávia L. Frédou,4 Rosangela P. T. Lessa,4 Michael M. Mincarone,1 Marcelo A. A. Pinheiro,5 Carla N. M. Polaz,6 Roberto E. Reis,7 Luiz A. Rocha,8 Francisco M. Santana,9 Roberta A. Santos,3 Sonia B. Santos,10 Marcelo Vianna,11 Fábio Vieira12 1 Núcleo em Ecologia e Desenvolvimento Socioambiental de Macaé, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, 27910-970, Macaé, RJ, Brazil. 2Projeto Manuelzão, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, 31270-901, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil. 3Centro de Pesquisa e Conservação da Biodiversidade Marinha do Sudeste e Sul, Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade, 88301-700, Itajaí, SC, Brazil. 4Departamento de Pesca e Aquicultura, Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco, 52171-900, Recife, PE, Brazil. 5UNESP, Campus Experimental do Litoral Paulista (CLP), Group of Studies on Crustacean Biology (CRUSTA), 11330-900 São Vicente, SP, Brazil. 6Centro Nacional de Pesquisa e Conservação de Peixes Continentais, Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade, 13630-000, Pirassununga, SP, Brazil. 7PUCRS, Faculdade de Biociências, Laboratory of Vertebrate Systematics, 90619-900, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil. 8 Institute of Biodiversity Science and Sustainability, California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, CA 94118, USA. 9Unidade Acadêmica de Serra Talhada, Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco, 56903970, Serra Talhada, PE, Brazil. 10Departamento de Zoologia, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, 20550-900, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil. 11Instituto de Biologia, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, CCS, bl. A. 21941-617, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil. 12Centro
In January 2015, fshing boats blocked the passage of a transatlantic cruise ship at the port of Itajaí, Santa Catarina, to protest the publication of the new red lists.
de Transposição de Peixes/Coleção de Peixes, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, 31270-901, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil. *Corresponding author. E-mail: didario@ macae.ufrj.br REFERENCES
1. Brazil, Ministério do Meio Ambiente. Portarias Nos. 443, 444, 445, de 17 de Dezembro de 2014, Diário Oficial da União–Seção 1, 245, 110 (18 December 2014); http://pesquisa.in.gov.br/imprensa/jsp/visualiza/index. jsp?data=18/12/2014&jornal=1&pagina= 110&totalArquivos=144. 2. B. Soares-Filho et al., Science 344, 363 (2014). 3. J. Ferreira et al., Science 346, 706 (2014). 4. C. T. Elfes et al., PLOS ONE 9, e92589 (2014).
Complex ecology of China’s seawall IN THE POLICY Forum “Rethinking China’s
new great wall” (21 November 2014, p. 912), Z. Ma et al. demonstrated that coastal land reclamation and infrastructure construction are destroying coastal wetlands and threatening biodiversity. However, the ecological impacts of the “new Great Wall” are complex and unpredictable. With the construction of seawalls, these hard-substrate structures become “stepping stones” for rocky shore organisms (1, 2) and promote gene flow between populations in northern and southern China. Some species can rapidly occupy the “new Great Wall” and thereby extend their biogeographic ranges. Substrate availability is one of the major factors affecting distribution of rocky intertidal species along the Chinese coastline, and there is a phylogeographic barrier to movement of rocky intertidal species at the Yangtze River estuary (3). The distribution and diversity of rocky intertidal macrobenthos (invertebrates that live on the ocean floor) have been investigated since July 2013 on the artificial seawalls along the Jangsu coastline, where a phylogeographic barrier for these species occurred before construction of large-scale artificial seawalls (4). Our preliminary observations suggest that biodiversity on the new Great Wall is showing a tendency to increase.
PHOTO: MARCOS PORTO/AGÊNCIA RBS
Xiong-Wei Huang, Wei Wang, Yun-Wei Dong* State Key Laboratory of Marine Environmental Science, Xiamen University, Xiamen, China. *Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected] REFERENCES
1. 2. 3. 4.
SCIENCE sciencemag.org
L. Airoldi et al., Coast. Eng. 52, 10 (2005). L. B. Firth et al., Divers. Distrib. 19, 10 (2013). Y. Dong et al., PLOS One, e36178 (2012). Y. Dong et al., World Conference on Marine Biodiversity, Qingdao, China (2014). 6 MARCH 2015 • VOL 347 ISSUE 6226
Published by AAAS
1079
Downloaded from www.sciencemag.org on March 5, 2015
LET TERS
INSIGHTS
Response
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
X.-W. HUANG ET AL. indicate that the
REFERENCES
seawalls constructed along the coast can help rocky shore organisms spread to and settle down in a region out of their original biogeographic range, leading to an increase in biodiversity of certain aquatic taxa in the regions where seawalls were built. However, habitat alteration caused by human activities has profound consequences to global biodiversity (1). One of the consequences is promoting invasion of non-native species (2). In the muddy or sandy coasts, hard-substrate seawalls may create suitable habitats for organisms living in rocky shores, some of which may come from other biogeographic areas. The long-term effects of those non-native organisms on native biodiversity and local environments are unpredictable. The issue raised by Huang et al. highlights another potential ecological risk of seawall construction that should be monitored. Zhijun Ma* and Bo Li Ministry of Education Key Laboratory for Biodiversity Science and Ecological Engineering, Institute of Biodiversity Science, Fudan University, Shanghai 200438, China.
1. C. Cremene et al., Conserv. Biol. 19, 1606 (2005). 2. T. Light, Freshwater Biol. 48, 1886 (2003).
TECHNICAL COMMENT ABSTRACTS Comment on “Stellar activity masquerading as planets in the habitable zone of the M dwarf Gliese 581” Guillem Anglada-Escudé and Mikko Tuomi
Robertson et al. (Reports, 25 July 2014, p. 440) claimed that activity-induced variability is responsible for the Doppler signal of the proposed planet candidate GJ 581d. We point out that their analysis using periodograms of residual data is inappropriate and promotes inadequate tools. Because the claim challenges the viability of the method to detect exoEarths, we encourage reanalysis and a deliberation on what the field-standard methods should be. Full text at http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/ science.1260796
Response to Comment on “Stellar activity masquerading as planets in the habitable zone of the M dwarf Gliese 581” Paul Robertson, Suvrath Mahadevan, Michael Endl, Arpita Roy
Anglada-Escudé and Tuomi question the statistical rigor of our analysis while ignoring the stellar activity aspects that we present. Although we agree that improvements in multiparametric radial velocity (RV) modeling are necessary for the detection of Earth-mass planets, the key physical points we raised were not challenged. We maintain that activity on Gliese 581 induces RV shifts that were interpreted as exoplanets. Full text at http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/ science.1260974
ERRATA Erratum for the Report: “Multiple nutrient stresses at intersecting Pacifc Ocean biomes detected by protein biomarkers” by M. A. Saito et al., Science 347, aaa7328 (2015). Published online 30 January 2015; 10.1126/science.aaa7328
“ M O ST O F T H E P EO P L E T H I N K T H E Y ’ V E R E AC H E D T H E E N D O F E A RT H W H E N T H E Y G E T T O T H E R E I N D E E R C A M P. B U T W E G O B E YO N D T H AT.”
Lichenologist and Mongolian cultural conservationist Paula DePriest, AAAS Member
Every scientist has a
story
Read her story at membercentral.aaas.org, the website that opens up new worlds. Connect with others who share your passion.
Published by AAAS
A better way forward for Brazil’s fisheries IN DECEMBER 2014, the Brazilian Minister
of the Environment released the new national red lists enumerating 2113 plants and 1173 animals threatened with extinction (1). Of the 475 aquatic species on the list, 83 are commercially exploited by fisheries, mainly as by-catch. The industrial fisheries sector is now using its political influence to persuade the government to change the contents of the list of aquatic animals or revoke it entirely. This would be an enormous setback for the conservation of Brazil’s aquatic fauna. The situation is reminiscent of that of the agribusiness lobby weakening the new Forest Code, and other recent political maneuvers that could lead to the opening of mining concessions in strictly protected areas (2, 3). The effect of the new lists on industrial fisheries is actually less disruptive than what is being purported. The ordinance that deals specifically with threatened aquatic animals provides for continued capture and trade of fishes classified as Vulnerable—the category in which most species of commercial interest fall—if they are subject to specific management plans and their fishery is regulated by federal agencies. Annual updates to the list based on new or revised information are also foreseen in the ordinance. Therefore, instead of putting Brazil’s
aquatic fauna at increased risk, the industrial fisheries sector should work with government agencies and the ministries of the Environment and Fisheries and Aquaculture to implement management strategies that have been historically lacking in Brazil (4). A permanent system to evaluate and manage stock status would eventually result in the downgrading of the extinction risk of legally protected species. Ideally, it would also prevent the overexploitation of fishing stocks that now seem to be at sustainable levels. Fabio Di Dario,1* Carlos B. M. Alves,2 Harry Boos,3 Flávia L. Frédou,4 Rosangela P. T. Lessa,4 Michael M. Mincarone,1 Marcelo A. A. Pinheiro,5 Carla N. M. Polaz,6 Roberto E. Reis,7 Luiz A. Rocha,8 Francisco M. Santana,9 Roberta A. Santos,3 Sonia B. Santos,10 Marcelo Vianna,11 Fábio Vieira12 1 Núcleo em Ecologia e Desenvolvimento Socioambiental de Macaé, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, 27910-970, Macaé, RJ, Brazil. 2Projeto Manuelzão, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, 31270-901, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil. 3Centro de Pesquisa e Conservação da Biodiversidade Marinha do Sudeste e Sul, Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade, 88301-700, Itajaí, SC, Brazil. 4Departamento de Pesca e Aquicultura, Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco, 52171-900, Recife, PE, Brazil. 5UNESP, Campus Experimental do Litoral Paulista (CLP), Group of Studies on Crustacean Biology (CRUSTA), 11330-900 São Vicente, SP, Brazil. 6Centro Nacional de Pesquisa e Conservação de Peixes Continentais, Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade, 13630-000, Pirassununga, SP, Brazil. 7PUCRS, Faculdade de Biociências, Laboratory of Vertebrate Systematics, 90619-900, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil. 8 Institute of Biodiversity Science and Sustainability, California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, CA 94118, USA. 9Unidade Acadêmica de Serra Talhada, Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco, 56903970, Serra Talhada, PE, Brazil. 10Departamento de Zoologia, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, 20550-900, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil. 11Instituto de Biologia, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, CCS, bl. A. 21941-617, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil. 12Centro
In January 2015, fshing boats blocked the passage of a transatlantic cruise ship at the port of Itajaí, Santa Catarina, to protest the publication of the new red lists.
de Transposição de Peixes/Coleção de Peixes, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, 31270-901, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil. *Corresponding author. E-mail: didario@ macae.ufrj.br REFERENCES
1. Brazil, Ministério do Meio Ambiente. Portarias Nos. 443, 444, 445, de 17 de Dezembro de 2014, Diário Oficial da União–Seção 1, 245, 110 (18 December 2014); http://pesquisa.in.gov.br/imprensa/jsp/visualiza/index. jsp?data=18/12/2014&jornal=1&pagina= 110&totalArquivos=144. 2. B. Soares-Filho et al., Science 344, 363 (2014). 3. J. Ferreira et al., Science 346, 706 (2014). 4. C. T. Elfes et al., PLOS ONE 9, e92589 (2014).
Complex ecology of China’s seawall IN THE POLICY Forum “Rethinking China’s
new great wall” (21 November 2014, p. 912), Z. Ma et al. demonstrated that coastal land reclamation and infrastructure construction are destroying coastal wetlands and threatening biodiversity. However, the ecological impacts of the “new Great Wall” are complex and unpredictable. With the construction of seawalls, these hard-substrate structures become “stepping stones” for rocky shore organisms (1, 2) and promote gene flow between populations in northern and southern China. Some species can rapidly occupy the “new Great Wall” and thereby extend their biogeographic ranges. Substrate availability is one of the major factors affecting distribution of rocky intertidal species along the Chinese coastline, and there is a phylogeographic barrier to movement of rocky intertidal species at the Yangtze River estuary (3). The distribution and diversity of rocky intertidal macrobenthos (invertebrates that live on the ocean floor) have been investigated since July 2013 on the artificial seawalls along the Jangsu coastline, where a phylogeographic barrier for these species occurred before construction of large-scale artificial seawalls (4). Our preliminary observations suggest that biodiversity on the new Great Wall is showing a tendency to increase.
PHOTO: MARCOS PORTO/AGÊNCIA RBS
Xiong-Wei Huang, Wei Wang, Yun-Wei Dong* State Key Laboratory of Marine Environmental Science, Xiamen University, Xiamen, China. *Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected] REFERENCES
1. 2. 3. 4.
SCIENCE sciencemag.org
L. Airoldi et al., Coast. Eng. 52, 10 (2005). L. B. Firth et al., Divers. Distrib. 19, 10 (2013). Y. Dong et al., PLOS One, e36178 (2012). Y. Dong et al., World Conference on Marine Biodiversity, Qingdao, China (2014). 6 MARCH 2015 • VOL 347 ISSUE 6226
Published by AAAS
1079
Downloaded from www.sciencemag.org on March 5, 2015
LET TERS
INSIGHTS
Response
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
X.-W. HUANG ET AL. indicate that the
REFERENCES
seawalls constructed along the coast can help rocky shore organisms spread to and settle down in a region out of their original biogeographic range, leading to an increase in biodiversity of certain aquatic taxa in the regions where seawalls were built. However, habitat alteration caused by human activities has profound consequences to global biodiversity (1). One of the consequences is promoting invasion of non-native species (2). In the muddy or sandy coasts, hard-substrate seawalls may create suitable habitats for organisms living in rocky shores, some of which may come from other biogeographic areas. The long-term effects of those non-native organisms on native biodiversity and local environments are unpredictable. The issue raised by Huang et al. highlights another potential ecological risk of seawall construction that should be monitored. Zhijun Ma* and Bo Li Ministry of Education Key Laboratory for Biodiversity Science and Ecological Engineering, Institute of Biodiversity Science, Fudan University, Shanghai 200438, China.
1. C. Cremene et al., Conserv. Biol. 19, 1606 (2005). 2. T. Light, Freshwater Biol. 48, 1886 (2003).
TECHNICAL COMMENT ABSTRACTS Comment on “Stellar activity masquerading as planets in the habitable zone of the M dwarf Gliese 581” Guillem Anglada-Escudé and Mikko Tuomi
Robertson et al. (Reports, 25 July 2014, p. 440) claimed that activity-induced variability is responsible for the Doppler signal of the proposed planet candidate GJ 581d. We point out that their analysis using periodograms of residual data is inappropriate and promotes inadequate tools. Because the claim challenges the viability of the method to detect exoEarths, we encourage reanalysis and a deliberation on what the field-standard methods should be. Full text at http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/ science.1260796
Response to Comment on “Stellar activity masquerading as planets in the habitable zone of the M dwarf Gliese 581” Paul Robertson, Suvrath Mahadevan, Michael Endl, Arpita Roy
Anglada-Escudé and Tuomi question the statistical rigor of our analysis while ignoring the stellar activity aspects that we present. Although we agree that improvements in multiparametric radial velocity (RV) modeling are necessary for the detection of Earth-mass planets, the key physical points we raised were not challenged. We maintain that activity on Gliese 581 induces RV shifts that were interpreted as exoplanets. Full text at http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/ science.1260974
ERRATA Erratum for the Report: “Multiple nutrient stresses at intersecting Pacifc Ocean biomes detected by protein biomarkers” by M. A. Saito et al., Science 347, aaa7328 (2015). Published online 30 January 2015; 10.1126/science.aaa7328
“ M O ST O F T H E P EO P L E T H I N K T H E Y ’ V E R E AC H E D T H E E N D O F E A RT H W H E N T H E Y G E T T O T H E R E I N D E E R C A M P. B U T W E G O B E YO N D T H AT.”
Lichenologist and Mongolian cultural conservationist Paula DePriest, AAAS Member
Every scientist has a
story
Read her story at membercentral.aaas.org, the website that opens up new worlds. Connect with others who share your passion.
Published by AAAS
