Biological Invasions

, Volume 14, Issue 8, pp 1651–1663 | Cite as

Adapted for invasion? Comparing attachment, drag and dislodgment of native and nonindigenous hull fouling species

  • Cathryn Clarke MurrayEmail author
  • Thomas W. Therriault
  • Patrick T. Martone
Original Paper


Invasive species possess unique traits that allow them to navigate the invasion process in order to establish and spread in new habitats. Successful hull fouling invaders must resist both physical and physiological stressors associated with their voyage. We characterised attachment strength and drag coefficient of common fouling species in order to estimate the velocity required to dislodge them from boat hulls. We hypothesized nonindigenous fouling species would possess biomechanical properties that enable them to remain attached to hulls more successfully than similar native species. Indeed, the well-known invasive ascidian Styela clava had both high attachment strength and low drag coefficient and its dislodgment velocity was well above that of fast moving vessels. In contrast, the native congener Styela gibbsii had low attachment strength and higher drag coefficient. Colonial invasive species employed a different hitchhiking strategy; despite their low attachment strengths, Botrylloides violaceus and Didemnum vexillum had low drag coefficients allowing them to be transported on slower-moving vessels, such as sailboats and barges. The biomechanical adaptations of invasive species show promise in predicting future invaders and informing vector management strategies at the first node in the invasion process: transport by the vector.


Hull fouling Biomechanics Dislodgment velocity Attachment strength Drag coefficient 



The authors wish to thank N. Backe, B. Claman, T. Goodman, M. Herborg, J. Nelson and C. Simkanin for field and laboratory assistance. We are grateful to Megan Mach for creating the illustrations in the manuscript. Detailed comments by L. Brown, K. Demes and two anonymous reviewers improved earlier versions of this manuscript. Conference travel support was provided by the Canadian Aquatic Invasive Species Network (CAISN). Research funding was provided by the Aquatic Invasive Species program of Fisheries & Oceans Canada as well as a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) Postgraduate Scholarship and a University of British Columbia (UBC) Affiliated Fellowship to CCM.


  1. Abbott DP, Johnson JV (1972) The ascidians Styela barnharti, S. plicata, S. clava, and S. montereyensis in Californian waters. Bull South Calif Acad Sci 71:95–105Google Scholar
  2. Altman S, Whitlatch RB (2007) Effects of small-scale disturbance on invasion success in marine communities. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 342:15–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson K, Close L, DeWreede RE, Lynch BJ, Ormond C, Walker M (2006) Biomechanical properties and holdfast morphology of coenocytic algae (Halimedales, Chlorophyta) in Bocas del Toro, Panama. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 328:155–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bell EC (1999) Applying flow tank measurements to the surf zone: predicting dislodgment of the Gigartinaceae. Phycol Res 47:159–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bell CM, Gosline JM (1996) Mechanical design of mussel byssus: material yield enhances attachment strength. J Exp Biol 199:1005–1017PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bell EC, Gosline JM (1997) Strategies for life in flow: tenacity, morphometry, and probability of dislodgment of two Mytilus species. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 159:197–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boller ML, Carrington E (2006) The hydrodynamic effects of shape and size change during reconfiguration of a flexible macroalga. J Exp Biol 209:1894–1903PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bossenbroek JM, Johnson LE, Peters B, Lodge DM (2007) Forecasting the expansion of zebra mussels in the United States. Cons Bio 21:800–810CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Byers JEB (2002) Impact of non-indigenous species on natives enhanced by anthropogenic alteration of selection regimes. Oikos 97:449–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carlton JT (1996) Pattern, process, and prediction in marine invasion ecology. Biol Conserv 78:97–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carrington E (1990) Drag and dislodgement of an intertidal macroalga: consequences of morphological variation in Mastocarpus papillatus Kutzing. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 139:185–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carrington E (2002) Seasonal variation in the attachment strength of blue mussels: causes and consequences. Limnol Oceanog 47:1723–1733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Clarke Murray C, Pakhomov EA, Therriault TW (2011) Recreational boating: a large unregulated vector transporting marine invasive species. Divers Distrib 17:1161–1172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Clarke CL, Therriault TW (2007) Biological synopsis of the invasive tunicate Styela clava (Herdman 1881). Can Man Rep Fish Aquat Sci 2807:23Google Scholar
  15. Coutts ADM, Taylor MD, Hewitt CL (2007) Novel method for assessing the en route survivorship of biofouling organisms on various vessel types. Mar Pollut Bull 54:97–116PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dafforn KA, Glasby TM, Johnston EL (2008) Differential effects of tributyltin and copper antifoulants on recruitment of non-indigenous species. Biofouling 24:23–33PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dafforn KA, Johnston EL, Glasby TM (2009) Shallow moving structures promote marine invader dominance. Biofouling 25:277–287PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Darbyson EA, Hanson JM, Locke A, Willison JHM (2009) Settlement and potential for transport of clubbed tunicate (Styela clava) on boat hulls. Aquat Invasion 4:95–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dark SJ (2004) The biogeography of invasive alien plants in California: an application of GIS and spatial regression analysis. Divers Distrib 10:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Davidson IC, Zabin CJ, Chang AL, Brown CW, Sytsma MD, Ruiz GM (2010) Recreational boats as potential vectors of marine organisms at an invasion hotspot. Aquat Biol 11:179–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Denny MW (1994) Extreme drag forces and the survival of wind- and water-swept organisms. J Exp Biol 194:97–115PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Denny M (1995) Predicting physical disturbance: mechanistic approaches to the study of survivorship on wave-swept shores. Ecol Monogr 65:371–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Denny MW, Gaylord B (2002) The mechanics of wave-swept algae. J Exp Biol 205:1355–1362PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Edlund AF, Koehl MA (1998) Adhesion and reattachment of compound ascidians to various substrata: weak glue can prevent tissue damage. J Exp Biol 201:2397–2402PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Epelbaum A, Herborg LM, Therriault TW, Pearce CM (2009) Temperature and salinity effects on growth, survival, reproduction, and potential distribution of two non-indigenous botryllid ascidians in British Columbia. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 369:43–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Evans SM, Birchenough AC, Brancato MS (2000) The TBT Ban: out of the frying pan into the fire? Mar Pollut Bull 40:204–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Field D (1999) Disaster averted? Black striped mussel outbreak in northern Australia. Fish Farming Int 26:30–31Google Scholar
  28. Flagella MM, Verlaque M, Soria A, Buia MC (2007) Macroalgal survival in ballast water tanks. Mar Pollut Bull 54:1395–1401PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Floerl O, Inglis GJ (2005) Starting the invasion pathway: the interaction between source populations and human transport vectors. Biol Invasions 7:589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Floerl O, Pool TK, Inglis GJ (2004) Positive interactions between nonindigenous species facilitate transport by human vectors. Ecol Appl 14:1724–1736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Frey MA, Gartner HN, Clarke Murray C, Therriault TW (2009) First confirmed records of the non-native amphipod Caprella mutica (Schurin 1935) along the coast of British Columbia, Canada, and the potential for secondary spread via hull fouling. Aquat Invasion 4:495–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gaylord B (2000) Biological implications of surf-zone flow complexity. Limnol Oceanogr 45:174–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gaylord B, Blanchette CA, Denny MW (1994) Mechanical consequences of size in wave-swept algae. Ecol Monogr 64:287–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gollasch S, Lenz J, Dammer M, Andres H (2000) Survival of tropical ballast water organisms during a cruise from the Indian Ocean to the North Sea. J Plankton Res 22:923–937CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Gosling EM, Wilkins NP (1981) Ecological genetics of the mussels Mytilus edulis and Mytilus galloprovincialis on Irish coasts. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 4:221–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Herborg LM, O’Hara P, Therriault TW (2008) Forecasting the potential distribution of the invasive tunicate Didemnum vexillum. J Appl Ecol 46:64–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Highsmith RC (1982) Reproduction by fragmentation by corals. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 7:207–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hilbish TJ, Carson EW, Plante JR, Weaver LA, Gilg MR (2002) Distribution of Mytilus edulis, M. galloprovincialis, and their hybrids in open-coast populations of mussels in southwestern England. Mar Biol 140:137–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hobbs RJ (1992) Disturbance, diversity, and invasion: implications for conservation. Conserv Biol 6:324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hoppe KN (2002) Teredo navalis: the cryptogenic shipworm. In: Leppakoski E, Gollasch S, Olenin S (eds) Invasive aquatic species of Europe: distribution, impacts, and management. Springer, New York, pp 116–119Google Scholar
  41. Hunt HL, Scheibling RE (2001) Predicting wave dislodgment of mussels: variation in attachment strength with body size, habitat, and season. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 213:157–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Johnson AS (2001) Drag, drafting, and mechanical interactions in canopies of the red alga Chondrus crispus. Biol Bull 201:126–135PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Johnson AS, Koehl MAR (1994) Maintenance of dynamic strain similarity and environmental stress factor in different flow habitats: Thallus allometry and material properties of a giant kelp. J Exp Biol 195:381–410PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Johnson LE, Ricciardi A, Carlton JT (2001) Overland dispersal of aquatic invasive species: a risk assessment of transient recreational boats. Ecol Appl 11:1789–1799CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kado R (2003) Invasion of Japanese shores by the NE Pacific barnacle Balanus glandula and its ecological and biogeographical impact. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 249:199–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kitzes JA, Denny MW (2005) Red algae respond to waves: morphological and mechanical variation in Mastocarpus papillatus along a gradient of force. Biol Bull 208:114–119PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Koehl MAR (1984) How do benthic organisms withstand moving water? Am Zool 24:57–70Google Scholar
  48. Koehl MA (1999) Ecological biomechanics of benthic organisms: life history, mechanical design and temporal patterns of mechanical stress. J Exp Biol 202:3469–3476PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Koehl MA (2000) Mechanical design and hydrodynamics of blade-like algae: Chondracanthus exasperatus. In: Spatz HC, Speck T (eds) Third international plant biomechanics conference. Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart, pp 295–308Google Scholar
  50. Koehl MA (2007) Mini review: hydrodynamics of larval settlement into fouling communities. Biofouling 23:359–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Kolar CS, Lodge DM (2001) Progress in invasion biology: predicting invaders. Trends Ecol Evol 16:199–204PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Laird MC, Griffiths CL (2008) Present distribution and abundance of the introduced barnacle Balanus glandula Darwin in South Africa. Afr J Mar Sci 30:93–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lambert CC, Lambert G (1998) Non-indigenous ascidians in southern California harbors and marinas. Mar Biol 130:675–688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lawson J, Davenport J, Whitaker A (2004) Barnacle distribution in Lough Hyne Marine Nature Reserve: a new baseline and an account of invasion by the introduced Australasian species Elminius modestus Darwin. Estuarine Coastal Shelf Sci 60:729–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Levine JM, D’Antonio CM (2003) Forecasting biological invasions with increasing international trade. Conserv Biol 17:322–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Locke A, Hanson JM, Ellis KM, Thompson J, Rochette J (2007) Invasion of the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence by the clubbed tunicate (Styela clava Herdman): potential mechanisms for invasions of Prince Edward Island estuaries. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 342:69–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Lockwood JL, Cassey P, Blackburn T (2005) The role of propagule pressure in explaining species invasions. Trends Ecol Evol 20:223–228PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Lodge DM (1993) Biological invasions: lessons for ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 8:133–137PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Mach KJ, Nelson DV, Denny MW (2007) Techniques for predicting the lifetimes of wave-swept macroalgae: a primer on fracture mechanics and crack growth. J Exp Biol 210:2213–2230PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Mach KJ, Tepler SK, Staaf AV, Bohnhoff JC, Denny MW (2011) Failure by fatigue in the field: a model of fatigue breakage for the macroalga Mazzaella, with validation. J Exp Biol 214:1571–1585PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Marchetti MP, Moyle PB, Levine R (2004) Alien fishes in California watersheds: characteristics of successful and failed invaders. Ecol Appl 14:587–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Martone PT, Denny MW (2008a) To bend a coralline: effect of joint morphology on flexibility and stress amplification in an articulated calcified seaweed. J Exp Biol 211:3421–3432PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Martone PT, Denny MW (2008b) To break a coralline: mechanical constraints on the size and survival of a wave-swept seaweed. J Exp Biol 211:3433–3441PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. McMahon RF (1996) The physiological ecology of the zebra mussel, Dreissena polymorpha, in North America and Europe. Am Zool 36:339–363Google Scholar
  65. McMahon RF (2002) Evolutionary and physiological adaptations of aquatic invasive animals: r selection versus resistance. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 59:1235–1244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Padilla DK, Chotkowski MA, Buchan LA (1996) Predicting the spread of zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha) to inland waters using boater movement patterns. Glob Ecol Biogeogr Lett 5:353–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Pawlik JR (1992) Chemical ecology of the settlement of benthic marine invertebrates. Oceanogr Mar Biol Annu Rev 30:273–335Google Scholar
  68. Phillips BL, Brown GP, Webb JK, Shine R (2006) Invasion and the evolution of speed in toads. Nature 439:803PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Pilsbry HA (1916) The sessile barnacles (Cirripedia) contained in the collections of the U.S. National Museum; including a monograph of the American species. Bull US Nat Mus 93:1–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Piola RF, Johnston EL (2009) Comparing differential tolerance of native and non-indigenous marine species to metal pollution using novel assay techniques. Environ Pollut 157:2853–2864PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Piola RF, Dafforn KA, Johnston EL (2009) The influence of antifouling practices on marine invasions. Biofouling 25:633–644PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Schneider KR, Wethey DS, Helmuth BST, Hilbish TJ (2005) Implications of movement behavior on mussel dislodgment: exogenous selection in a Mytilus spp. hybrid zone. Mar Biol 146:333–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Schultz MP, Kavanagh CJ, Swain GW (1999) Hydrodynamic forces on barnacles: implications on detachment from fouling-release surfaces. Biofouling 13:323–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Schwindt E (2007) The invasion of the acorn barnacle Balanus glandula in the south-western Atlantic 40 years later. J Mar Bio Ass UK 87:1219–1225Google Scholar
  75. Skibinski DOF, Roderick EE (1991) Evidence of selective mortality in favor of the Mytilus galloprovincialis Lmk phenotype in British mussels. Biol J Linn Soc 42:351–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Southward AJ, Burton RS, Coles SL, Dando PR, DeFelice R, Hoover J, Parnell PE, Tamaguchi T, Newman WA (1998) Invasion of Hawaiian shores by an Atlantic barnacle. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 165:119–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Tyrell MC, Byers JEB (2007) Do artificial substrates favor nonindigenous fouling species over native species? J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 342:54–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Utter BD, Denny MW (1996) Wave-induced forces on the giant kelp Macrocystis pyrifera (Agardh): field test of a computational model. J Exp Biol 199:2645–2654PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. Vogel S (1984) Drag and flexibility in sessile organisms. Am Zool 24:28–34Google Scholar
  80. Vogel S (2003) Comparative biomechanics: life’s physical world. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  81. Witman JD, Suchanek TH (1984) Mussels in flow: drag and dislodgment by epizoans. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 16:259–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Worcester SE (1994) Adult rafting versus larval swimming: dispersal and recruitment of a botryllid ascidian on eelgrass. Mar Biol 121:309–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cathryn Clarke Murray
    • 1
    Email author
  • Thomas W. Therriault
    • 2
  • Patrick T. Martone
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Earth and Ocean SciencesUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  2. 2.Pacific Biological StationFisheries and Oceans CanadaNanaimoCanada
  3. 3.Botany Department and Biodiversity Research CentreUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations