Marine Pollution Bulletin 175 (2022) 113341

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Marine Pollution Bulletin

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/marpolbul

Abandoned, lost, or discarded fishing gear at urban coastlines

Anya Roopa Gajanur, Zeehan Jaafar *
Department of Biological Sciences, 14 Science Drive 4, National University of Singapore, 117543, Singapore

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Abandoned, lost, or discarded fishing gear (ALDFG) is considered a major threat to ocean biodiversity. Yet, little
Plastic pollution is known of the interactive impacts of ALDFGs and urban nearshore biodiversity and habitats, especially in
Singapore Southeast Asia where fisheries efforts are increasing. We identified ALDFG hotspots around Singapore–where
Ghost nets
80% of coastal areas are urbanized or anthropogenically modified. Fishing lines and nets were the most common
Ghost fishing
Marine debris
ALDFGs recovered; with strong correlations between ALDFG presence and beaches, intertidal, mangroves, as well
Urbanized shoreline as sites with significant coastal modifications. Plastic polymer nets trapped the highest organism diversity and
Southeast Asia abundance. A total of 1052 trapped individuals comprising 124 species were recovered, the majority in classes
Merostomata, Actinopterygii and Malacostraca. The most abundant trapped species was Carcinoscorpius rotun­
dicauda and the highest mortality presentation was in Class Actinopterygii. This study demonstrates that ALDFGs
remain a threat to marine biodiversity within urban coastal habitats and at heavily modified shorelines.

1. Introduction of mortality and morbidity for intertidal biodiversity. Derelict nets

continue to function due to their inherent design, with floats at the top
Anthropogenic marine debris is a global and pervasive threat to and weights at the bottom. The weighted ends often entangle onto corals
marine biodiversity (Jambeck et al., 2001). Abandoned, lost, or dis­ or mangrove roots, and severely affect the ability of intertidal organisms
carded fishing gear (ALDFG), in particular, is a class of debris identified to forage and escape predators (Donohue and Foley, 2007). Aerobic
as a major component of all marine debris that exact far-reaching intertidal organisms trapped in ALDFG asphyxiate at high tides, and are
negative ecological and socio-economic impacts (Breen, 1990). This ready prey at ebb tides. In open waters, these nets act like curtains in the
debris type makes up 10% of the 6.5 million tons of marine debris added water column, and remain viable trapping devices as they move with the
to the global seas annually (Löhr et al., 2017). In 1975, 135,400 tons of ocean currents (Barnette, 2001; Giordano et al., 2009). Organisms
plastic fishing gear was dumped into the ocean by global fishing fleets trapped in such nets eventually die of starvation, but not without first
(Derraik, 2002). Today, fishing nets alone account for 46% of all debris attracting conspecifics, predators, and scavengers that in turn become
surveyed within the Great Pacific Garbage Patch (Lebreton et al., 2018). entangled, thus continuing this detrimental cycle (Breen, 1990). Single
Plastic ALDFGs are especially prevalent because they are buoyant and derelict nets have been observed to, alone, entangle, kill and injure
can be transported long range by drainage systems and currents in open hundreds of marine vertebrates (Cortes, 2018; Embury-Dennis, 2018).
waters far from source points (Derraik, 2002; Vance and McGregor, Despite these wide-ranging impacts over broad areas, ALDFGs are
2019). The durability and ability of ALDFGs to travel long distances are typically under reported. Most ALDFGs occur within the water column,
important factors for the high occurrences of entanglement in marine and therefore, their presence and impacts are difficult to detect and
organisms within them (Gall and Thompson, 2015). Plastic ALDFGs record (Laist, 1997). There are indications however, that the impacts of
have also been reported to affect ecosystem processes, such as inter­ ALDFGs occur over comparatively shorter durations in shallower waters
fering in the production of marine snow and subsequent sequestration of (Ayaz et al., 2010; Erzini et al., 1997; Santos et al., 2003); an experi­
atmospheric carbon dioxide (Andrady, 2000; Moore, 2008). mental study reported that lost tangle nets ceased to capture any marine
Impacts of ALDFGs on global marine organisms have significantly organisms after 224 days (Santos et al., 2003). High rates of initial
increased in the past decades, in part due to advances in fishing gear, entanglement have been shown to precede a steep decline, and is fol­
escalation in fishing efforts, and expansion of fishing grounds (Gilman lowed by a long accentuated low catch rate phase (Sancho et al., 2003).
et al., 2016). When beached along shorelines, ALDFGs are major causes This is especially true if the nets are heavily bio-fouled, already

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (Z. Jaafar).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.113341
Received 16 July 2021; Received in revised form 8 January 2022; Accepted 8 January 2022
Available online 2 February 2022
0025-326X/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A.R. Gajanur and Z. Jaafar Marine Pollution Bulletin 175 (2022) 113341

damaged, or becomes damaged (Brown and Macfadyen, 2007). Exper­ 2. Methods

imental commercial gill nets in the Southern Baltic Sea for example, saw
catch rates stabilize at 5–6% of the initial levels (Tschernij and Larsson, An extensive literature review was first carried out to obtain infor­
2003). Further, nets in shallower areas are more susceptible to storms mation on ALDFGs occurrences for the years between 2000 and 2019
and tidal actions that cause them to roll up on themselves and become within territorial waters of Singapore. These occurrences included re­
ineffective (Brown and Macfadyen, 2007). In deeper waters, ALDFGs ports from concerted projects relating to marine debris or ALDFGs, such
were reported to be effective for over 3 years (Carr and Cooper, 1987; as Project AWARE (2020), International Coastal Clean-up Singapore
Davies et al., 2017; Furevik and Fosseidengen, 2000; Gilman et al., 2016; (ICCS) (2020), Project Driftnet (2020), and intertidal surveys docu­
Humborstad et al., 2003; Tschernij and Larsson, 2003). Similar to nets in mented online by citizen scientists. Further internet searches used
shallow waters, there was a rapid decline in the catch rate between the phrases ‘abandoned nets + Singapore’, ‘ghost nets + Singapore’ and
first few days after deployment of experimental nets and up to 45 days of ‘ghost fishing + Singapore’. Mapped ALDFG data obtained from the
soak time. Unlike ALDFGs in shallow waters however, the capture effi­ literature revealed hotspots within the territorial waters of Singapore;
ciency had stabilized at a higher rate of 20–30% of the commercial ef­ and these informed the selection of ten sites that were surveyed as many
ficiency 45 days after deployment (Humborstad et al., 2003). The extent times as the shores were accessible between September 2018 and March
of impact of ALDFGs in deeper marine ecosystems is limited (Brown and 2019 (see Table 1 for information on surveyed sites). Accessibility was
Macfadyen, 2007; Humborstad et al., 2003) as there are currently no dependent on shore exposure during spring ebb tides (ranged from − 0.2
substantial long-term studies on ghost-fishing at these areas. m to 0.5 m chart datum), visitation restrictions and permit regulations.
Of the countries identified as the most prolific marine polluters
(Ocean Conservancy, 2015), four are in Southeast Asia. Also considered 2.1. Characterisations of ALDFGs
a global biodiversity hotspot, Southeast Asia hosts ~34% of the world's
reefs (nearly 100,000 km2), and a third of its mangroves (~50,000 km2) ALDFGs encountered in both literature and surveys were combined
(Burke et al., 2002). The vast majority, estimated at about 95%, of and systematically characterised by identifying their type, condition,
Southeast Asia's coral reef areas are at risk due to stressors such as and material. Any abandoned, lost or discarded netting material from
coastal development, overfishing, and marine debris (including mariculture-cage enclosures encountered were also included in our data
ALDFGs) pollution (Burke et al., 2002). In Indonesia alone, up to 60,000 as an ALDFG that could potentially trap marine organisms when dis­
units of fishing gear are reported lost from small scale fishery industries lodged; these were differentiated from other nets by thick plastic and
annually (Wibowo et al., 2017). Despite the severity of the problem, nylon ropes with knots at points of intersection with adjacent mesh (see
significant knowledge gaps persist within Southeast Asia. The shift to­ Supplementary Fig. 1), and here termed ‘mariculture-cage nets’. During
wards large-scale extraction and technologically-advanced methods in surveys, any ALDFGs encountered were photographed, characterised
fisheries and associated industries are likely to escalate ALDFG pollution (gear type, opening sizes, mesh sizes, material types), and their GPS-
(Anticamara et al., 2011; Branch et al., 2011; FAO, 2020; Galbraith coordinate tacked. Organisms trapped or entangled within ALDFGs re­
et al., 2017). Also wanting are information on the behaviour of ALDFGs ported in the literature and found during surveys were categorised as
at urban coastlines, and in areas with altered coastal ecosystems. Over ‘live’ or ‘dead’, photographed, identified to lowest taxonomic order, and
the past 15 years, anthropogenic changes to coastlines within Southeast counted. All live organisms encountered during the surveys were
Asia have caused significant ecosystem changes and increased demand released, and dead ones were responsibly disposed.
for coastal resources (Song et al., 2020; Spalding, 2010; Veettil et al.,
2020; Zhang and Hou, 2020). Concurrently, changes to the climate have 2.2. Site description
resulted in coastal inundations and consequent biodiversity losses
(Mantyka-Pringle et al., 2015; Nitivattananon et al., 2012; Song et al., Ecosystems at sites where ALDFGs were found, both in the literature
2020; Zhang and Hou, 2020). From 2000 to 2015, natural mainland and surveys, were systematically characterised (see Table 1 for survey
coastlines of Southeast Asian countries decreased by 4%, while artificial site details). Four parameters (hereby termed ecotypes) were inves­
coastlines and novel structures (such as aquaculture dikes, wharfs, tigated—ecosystem types (mangroves; beaches and intertidal areas
breakwaters, jetties) increased at a rate of 29% (Song et al., 2020). (rubble-algae-seagrass matrices); seagrass meadows; coral reefs; river,
Similarly, Southeast Asian island coastlines saw a net increase of 532 reservoirs and marinas), presence or absence in protected areas, and
km, with artificial coastlines increasing by 3035 km as a result of coastal modifications (reclaimed (includes naturalized shores) shore­
aquaculture dikes and reclamation (Zhang and Hou, 2020). Among line; armoured shoreline). Naturalized shorelines refer to historically
islands within the Southeast Asian region, Singapore reported the reclaimed areas that retain natural characteristics such as beaches,
highest nett changes, up to 16% in the annual average coastline length in whereas armoured shores refer to shorelines with man-made structures
the fifteen years (Zhang and Hou, 2020). Between 1993 and 2011 for such as seawalls and breakwaters. We also included the presence of
example, Singapore's coastline increased from 408 km to 505 km as a mariculture facilities within 5 km of the sites, as they are a potential
result of coastal reclamation, 63% of the shorelines were armoured with source of ALDFGs, in our list of parameters. These data were used to
sea walls, and approximately 20% of the coastline comprises newly- calculate the strength of interaction of ALDFGs to different ecotypes
created or artificially augmented beaches (Lai et al., 2015). Coastal using the Z-score analysis. The similarities and dissimilarities between
areas of the other Southeast Asian countries are now changing at un­ the distribution of ALDFGs across ecotypes were further analysed using
precedented rates, and will soon arrive to similar levels as Singapore Euclidean distancing-hierarchical clustering.
(Song et al., 2020; Zhang and Hou, 2020). There is an urgent need to
understand how ALDFGs behave in these urbanized coastlines and novel 3. Results
habitats, especially when considering the gravity of ALDFG pollution in
the region. Our study focuses on understanding the impacts and A total of 25,532 ALDFGs, both whole and fragmented, were
behaviour of ALDFGs in tropical and urbanized coastal areas. Utilising recovered from reports and surveys from 2000 to 2019. ALDFG occur­
coastlines of Singapore as model sites, we systematically surveyed urban rences were most concentrated at the eastern, south-eastern, northern
coastal areas for ALDFGs, characterised the ALDFGs encountered, and shorelines of Singapore and the north-eastern shoreline of Pulau Ubin
investigated correlations between shorelines characteristics and these (Fig. 1). Monofilament fishing lines and nets (primarily gill, trammel,
ALDFGs. We were further able to identify taxa vulnerable to entangle­ trawl, or seine nets, but not including mariculture-cage nets) accounted
ment and passive-trapping. for 37% and 34% of all occurrences respectively, and made up the
majority of ALDFGs encountered. Only 0.03% of all ALDFG recorded

2
 A.R. Gajanur and Z. Jaafar
Table 1
Description of sites surveyed from September 2018 to March 2019.
Site Latitude Longitude Length of Region (as per Ecotype Number of
shoreline Fig. 1) times surveyed
Ecosystem types Mariculture facilities Coastal modifications Protected areas
(within a 5 km radius)

Changi Beach Park 1.392220 103.989974 1.21 Eastern Beaches and intertidal (rubble- Yes Reclaimed Yes 2
shorelines algae-seagrasss matrix) (naturalized) +
armoured
East Beach at NSRCC (National 1.31614 103.97531 1.33 South-eastern Beaches and intertidal (rubble- No Reclaimed No 1
Coast Service Resort and Country shorelines algae-seagrasss matrix)
Park Club)
Bedok Jetty 1.30521 103.9422 7.78 South-eastern Beaches and intertidal (rubble- No Reclaimed No 1
shorelines algae-seagrasss matrix) (naturalized)
Kallang and Singapore River, and, Marina 7.73 South-eastern Rivers and reservoirs No Reclaimed No 2
Bay shorelines
Pasir Ris Park 1.385 103.94555 2.56 Eastern Beaches and intertidal (rubble- Yes Reclaimed + Yes (mangroves 2
shorelines algae-seagrasss matrix) + armoured only)
mangroves
Pulau Semakau 1.20648 103.77091 3.84 Pulau Semakau Beaches and intertidal (rubble- Yes Reclaimed Yes 3
algae-seagrasss matrix) + (naturalized) +
mangroves armoured
3

Pulau Eastern Mangroves 1.407419 103.980842 1.56 Pulau Ubin Mangroves Yes Natural Yes 2
Ubin Jelutong Beach 1.40115 103.96755 0.91 Pulau Ubin Beaches and intertidal (rubble- Yes Natural Yes 4
algae-seagrasss matrix) +
mangroves
Main Jetty 1.40158 103.97024 0.61 Pulau Ubin Beaches and intertidal (rubble- Yes Natural Yes 3
algae-seagrasss matrix) +
mangroves
Ketam Beach 1.41029 103.94671 1.13 Pulau Ubin Beaches and intertidal (rubble- Yes Natural Yes 4
algae-seagrasss matrix) +
mangroves
Sungei Ubin 1.4043 103.97411 0.64 Pulau Ubin Mangroves Yes Natural Yes 4
Punggol Point Park 1.42178 103.91068 1.15 Eastern Beaches and intertidal (rubble- No Reclaimed No 2
shorelines algae-seagrasss matrix) (naturalized) +
armoured
Sembawang Park 1.46305 103.83891 1.30 Northern Beaches and intertidal (rubble- Yes Reclaimed + No 3
shorelines algae-seagrasss matrix) armoured

Marine Pollution Bulletin 175 (2022) 113341

Tanah Merah Beach 1.31684 103.98002 0.45 South-eastern Beaches and intertidal (rubble- No Reclaimed No 3
shorelines algae-seagrasss matrix) (naturalized) +
armoured
West Coast Park 1.29542 103.76228 0.67 South-western Beaches and intertidal (rubble- No Reclaimed + No 2
shorelines algae-seagrasss matrix) armoured
A.R. Gajanur and Z. Jaafar Marine Pollution Bulletin 175 (2022) 113341

Fig. 1. ALDFG hotspots based on type and abundance from 2003 to 2019, overlaid on an ecotone map showing two habitat types and year of coastal reclamation and
modification.
*Total ALDFG values for Southern Islands excluding Pulau Semakau.

were mariculture -cage nets; these were typically found at the eastern Interestingly, coral reefs had a different distribution of ALDFGs
and south-eastern coastal areas of Singapore as well as throughout compared to other ecotypes; in addition to fishing lines, lures, sinkers,
shorelines of Pulau Ubin. Lures, sinkers, hooks and rods, floats and hooks and rods were the most abundant at reefs (Figs. 1 and 2). Many
buoys, as well as traps and pots were also frequently found. ALDFGs (63.3%) were also recovered from sites within 5 km of mari­
The Z-score analyses and hierarchical clustering revealed the strong culture facilities.
correlation of fishing lines with the following sites: mariculture facil­
ities, protected areas, coral reefs, beaches and intertidal areas, and at 3.1. Organisms encountered in ALDFGs
sites with coastal modifications (Fig. 2). Nets also exhibited similar
trends in correlation to sites: mariculture facilities, protected areas, A total of 1052 individuals comprising 124 species from 74 families,
seagrass meadows, mangroves, beaches and intertidal areas, as well as 29 orders and 11 classes were trapped in the ALDFGs. Thirty-four per
modified coastlines (Fig. 2). Lures, sinkers, hooks, rods, floats, buoys and cent of all individuals trapped were found dead.
traps were clustered together, indicating similarity in ecotype Most common organisms trapped were from classes Merostomata,
interactions. Actinopterygii and Malacostraca, accounting for 63.4%, 15.4% and
The ALDFGs were mostly recovered from, and strongly correlated to, 14.4% of all trapped individuals, respectively (Fig. 3, Table 2). Thirty-
beaches and intertidal areas (74% of all ALDFG in the dataset), followed nine trapped individuals belonged to the class Chondrichthyes. The
by mangroves (Fig. 2). Ironically, even though fishing is prohibited in number of trapped individuals from other seven classes ranged from one
these protected areas, more than half of all ALDFGs in our data (63.8%) to twelve individuals (Table 2).
occurred in marine reserves and protected shorelines (Fig. 2). Majority Within the Merostomata, two horseshoe crab species were identi­
of these ALDFG were fishing lines (40.3% of all ALDFG recovered at fied—Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda and Tachypleus gigas. The former
protected areas), followed by nets (33.1% of all ALDFG recovered at species made up 94.6% of all horseshoe crabs, and 60% of all organisms,
protected areas). Notably, 56.7% of ALDFGs found in reserves and trapped. However, the rate of mortality in this species was low, as 76.9%
protected areas were also at mangrove areas. Further, ALDFGs were of the trapped individuals were found alive. A total of 162 individuals
strongly correlated with sites that had previously undergone coastal from 77 species of Actinopterygii fishes were found trapped, and
reclamation (79.5%) or coastal armouring (with seawalls; 77.2%) exhibited high mortality (74.7%). Within Actinopterygii, Perciformes
(Figs. 1 and 2). At sites with coastal modifications, fishing lines were the were the most abundant (84 individuals) and speciose (47 species) taxa.
most abundant, followed by nets (Figs. 1 and 2). The type and abun­ Mortality rate of members from Actinopterygii was high, with 71.4% of
dance of gear recovered at modified coastal sites were very similar to individuals found dead. Of the 151 individuals from twenty-one species
ALDFGs found at beaches and intertidal areas (Figs. 1 and 2). of Malacostraca found trapped, 64.9% were alive (Table 2).

4
A.R. Gajanur and Z. Jaafar Marine Pollution Bulletin 175 (2022) 113341

Fig. 2. Correlation of ALDFG to four parameters (i.e. associated ecosystems, coastal modifications, protection status and proximity to mariculture facilities) using Z-
score. MRF = mariculture facilities, NMRPS = nature and marine reserves and protected areas, CR = coral reefs, RR = rocky reefs, SG = seagrass meadows, MG =
mangroves, BI – beaches and intertidal areas (rubble-algae-seagrass matrices), RAR = rivers and reservoirs, RS – reclaimed shorelines, SW = seawalls. Number within
each cell shows raw count of ALDFGs. Dendrogram clusters show ALDFGs distributed similarly across site types.

Fig. 3. Organisms recovered from ALDFGs by

Class—total number of individuals (yellow); in­
dividuals recovered alive and subsequently
released (red); and individuals dead upon re­
covery (black). Values above each bar shows
percentage of individuals within that Status (e.g.
Merostomata accounts for 63.4% of all trapped
individuals, 74.9% of all individuals recovered
alive, and 41.2% of all individuals that were
dead upon recovery). (For interpretation of the
references to color in this figure legend, the
reader is referred to the web version of this
article.)

Nets, of which 92.3% were monofilament plastic gill nets, trapped originated from fishery and fishing activities within the Straits of Johor
the highest diversity of species and the most individuals—88.2% and and the Straits of Singapore (Fig. 1). Collectively, countries in Southeast
96% respectively. Traps (synthetic plastic material and metal), hooks, Asia contribute 21.6% to global fisheries production annually although
and fishing lines (all plastic) accounted for 5.8% of the species diversity within these, Singapore and Brunei factor lowest in fisheries productions
and 3.5% of all individuals recovered. (SEAFDEC, 2017). Commercial fishing vessels operating within the EEZ
of Singapore are trawlers, but these are few in numbers when compared
4. Discussion to neighboring countries. Further, only about 1.5 km2 of the sea space
(12% of the Singapore's EEZ) are used for farmed fish production and
Abandoned, lost, or discarded fishing gear persists within marine mariculture facilities (Lim et al., 2020). Conversely, smaller-scale fish­
ecosystems, but their impacts are not well understood in tropical urban ery activities such as artisanal and recreational fishing are common and
coastlines. The ALDFGs recovered in our study were likely to have extract significant biomass from wild fishery resources and are equally

5
A.R. Gajanur and Z. Jaafar Marine Pollution Bulletin 175 (2022) 113341

Table 2
Species list and abundance of trapped individuals recovered from ALDFGs.
Class Order Family Species Individuals recovered

Total Alive Dead

Anthozoa Actiniaria Stichodactylidae Stichodactyla sp. 6 6 0

Alcyonacea Plexauridae Echinogorgia sp. 1 1 0
Plexauridae Euplexaura sp. 1 1 0
Unknown Unknown 2 2 0
Scleractinia Acroporidae Montipora sp. 1 1 0
Merulinidae Pectinia sp. 1 1 0
Scyphozoa Semaeostomeae Pelagiidae Chrysaora sp. 1 1 0
Malacostraca Decapoda Calappidae Matuta planiceps 2 0 2
Eriphidae Eriphia ferox 1 1 0
Matutidae Ashtoret lunaris 6 5 1
Menippidae Myomenippe hardwickii 20 16 4
Oziidae Ozius guttatus 1 1 0
Palinuridae Panulirus ornatus 1 1 0
Penaeidae Penaeus sp. 1 1 0
Pilumnidae Pilumnus vespertilio 5 0 5
Portunidae Thalamita danae 1 1 0
Charybdis sp. 7 0 7
Portunus pelagicus 46 34 12
Scylla olivacea 1 1 0
Scylla sp. 5 5 0
Scyllaridae Unknown 1 1 0
Unknown Unknown 1 0 1
Xanthidae Actaeodes hirsutissimus 2 0 2
Etisus laevimanus 1 0 1
Atergatis floridus 6 1 5
Atergatis integerrimus 36 23 13
Leptodius sp. 2 2 0
Lophozozymus pictor 5 5 0
Merostomata Xiphosura Limulidae Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda 631 485 146
Limulidae 3 2 1
Tachypleus gigas 33 32 1
Gastropoda Neograstropoda Volutidae Cymbiola nobilis 2 2 0
Cephalopoda Sepiida Sepiidae Sepia latimanus 1 1 0
Sepiidae 1 1 0
Chondrichthyes Carcharhiniformes Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus melanopterus 17 0 17
Myliobatiformes Dasyatidae Taeniura lymma 15 7 8
Brevitrygon heterura 1 1 0
Brevitrygon walga 6 2 4
Actinopterygii Atherinoformes Atherinidae Atherinomorous duodecimalis 1 0 1
Beloniformes Belonidae Strongylura strongylura 2 0 2
Tylosaurus crocodilus 1 0 1
Hemiramphidae Hyporhamphus quoyi 1 0 1
Carangiformes Carangidae Scomberoides commersonnianus 2 0 2
Rachycentridae Rachycentron canadum 1 0 1
Elopiformes Elopidae Elops hawaiensis 1 0 1
Megalopidae Megalops cyprinoides 1 0 1
Gonorynchiformes Chanidae Chanos chanos 3 0 3
Mugiliformes Mugilidae Ellochelon vaigiensis 9 0 9
Planiliza sp. 1 0 1
Planiliza subviridis 1 0 1
Valamugil buchanani 9 0 9
Perciformes Apogonidae Apogonichthyoides melas 1 0 1
Carangidae Carangoides praeustus 1 0 1
Caranx sexfasciatus 1 0 1
Gnathanodon speciosus 1 0 1
Trachinotus blochii 1 0 1
Chaetodontidae Chaetodon octofasciatus 1 1 0
Chaetodon oligacanthus 2 1 1
Chelmon rostratus 3 3 0
Drepaneidae Drepane punctata 1 0 1
Echeneidae Echeneis naucrates 1 0 1
Gerreidae Gerres abbreviatus 3 0 3
Gerres oyena 1 0 1
Haemulidae Diagramma pictum 1 0 1
Pomadasys kaakan 1 0 1
Labridae Choerodon anchorago 5 1 4
Choerodon oligacanthus 1 0 1
Choerodon schoenleinii 1 0 1
Hemigymnus melapterus 1 0 1
Latidae Lates calcarifer 8 1 7
Psammoperca waigiensis 1 0 1
Lethrinidae Lethrinus lentjan 2 0 2
Lutjanidae Lutjanus madras 2 2 0
(continued on next page)

6
A.R. Gajanur and Z. Jaafar Marine Pollution Bulletin 175 (2022) 113341

Table 2 (continued )
Class Order Family Species Individuals recovered

Total Alive Dead

Lutjanus carponotatus 2 0 2
Mullidae Upeneus tragula 1 0 1
Nemipteridae Pentapodus sp. 1 0 1
Scolopsis cilatus 1 0 1
Scolopsis monogramma 2 1 1
Pempheridae Pempheris oualensis 1 0 1
Pomacanthidae Chaetodontoplus mesoleucus 3 3 0
Pomacentridae Abudefduf bengalensis 1 0 1
Dischistodus fasciatus 1 0 1
Dischistodus prosopotaenia 2 0 2
Hemiglyphidodon plagiometopon 1 0 1
Scaridae Scarus rivulatus 1 0 1
Scatophagidae Scatophagus argus 1 1 0
Serranidae Cromileptes altivelis 1 1 0
Epinephelinae 6 6 0
Epinephelus coioides 1 0 1
Epinephelus malabaricus 1 1 0
Siganidae Siganus canaliculatus 5 0 5
Siganus guttatus 5 1 4
Siganus javus 1 0 1
Sillaginidae Sillago aeolus 1 0 1
Sillago sihama 2 0 2
Terapontidae Pelates quadrilineatus 1 0 1
Toxotidae Toxotes jaculatrix 1 0 1
Uranoscopidae Icthyscopus lebeck 1 1 0
Pleuronectiformes Cynoglossidae Cynoglossus sp. 4 0 4
Soleidae Soleidae 2 0 2
Scorpaeniformes Platycephalidae Elates ransonnetii 4 0 4
Platycephalus sp. 2 0 2
Scorpaenidae Parascorpaena cf. picta 2 0 2
Parascorpaena picta 4 1 3
Siluriformes Ariidae Hexanematichthys sagor 2 2 0
Plicofolis nella 2 0 2
Plotosidae Plotosus canius 3 0 3
Plotosus lineatus 2 0 2
Syngnathiformes Syngnathidae Hippocampus sp. 1 1 0
Tetraodontiformes Diodontidae Diodon liturosus 1 1 0
Monacanthidae Acreichthys tomentosus 2 0 2
Chaetodermis penicilligerus 1 1 0
Monocanthus chinensis 10 10 0
Monocanthus sp. 1 0 1
Triacanthidae Triacanthus biculeatus 2 1 1
Reptilia Crocodilia Crocodylidae Crocodylus porosus 1 0 1
Squamata Acrochordidae Acrochordus granulatus 1 0 1
Squamata Varanidae Varanus salvator 2 2 0
Testudines Cheloniidae Chelonia mydas 2 0 2
Emydidae Trachemys scripta elegans 1 0 1
Aves Ciconiiformes Ardeidae Ardea cinerea 1 1 0
Pelecaniformes Ardeidae Nycticorax nycticorax 1 1 0
Mammalia Artiodactyla Delphinidae Sousa chinensis 1 1 0
Carnivora Mustelidae Lutrogale perspicillata 6 3 3

likely sources of ALDFGs. In addition, ALDFGs could also have travelled marine debris and plastic pollution in these ecosystems (Gilman et al.,
via currents, from adjacent maritime nations of Malaysia and Indonesia. 2016; Kershaw, 2016). The behaviour of plastic marine debris, including
In the absence of tracking capabilities of ALDFGs, we were unable to ALDFGs, differs when at different habitat types. They are retained in
state with certainty the origin or source of ALDFGs recovered in our mangrove areas longer than other coastal ecosystems (Ivar do Sul et al.,
study. 2014). High rates of retention of plastic marine debris translate to high
Fishing lines and nets (likely of plastic polymer material) were the in-situ degradation, and the consequent release of microplastics to the
most common type of ALDFGs found (Fig. 1), congruent with other immediate environment. The resultant elevated availability of micro­
findings from the region (Todd et al., 2010), and likely selected for their plastics increases likelihoods of ingestion or absorption by organisms in
non-degradable quality and low cost (Breen, 1990). Due to their relative the area with unknown consequences (Andrady, 2011; Wright et al.,
prevalence in Singapore's waters when compared to other ALDFGs, 2013). Also unknown are the contributions and effects of other com­
monofilament-plastic polymer nets trapped 96% of the organisms re­ ponents of disintegrated ALDFGs to the ecosystem and organisms
ported in this study. The efficacy of such nets, especially those made of therein.
plastic polymers, have been similarly demonstrated globally (Andrady, Despite mangrove areas covering only 1.2% of total land area of
2000; Derraik, 2002; Gall and Thompson, 2015; Gilman et al., 2016; Singapore (9.6 km2; Friess et al., 2016), ALDFGs occurred at dispro­
Moore, 2008). portionately higher frequencies (24% of all ALDFGs in this study) at this
Most ALDFGs were found on beaches as well as at intertidal and habitat type. The complex structures of mangrove plant roots and sap­
mangrove areas (Burke et al., 2002; Chou et al., 2018; Lai et al., 2015; lings, in addition to the soft sediment, are likely key factors in initial
Tan et al., 2016a, 2016b) (Fig. 2), and underpins the global problem of entanglement and subsequent retention of ALDFGs. Almost all the

7
A.R. Gajanur and Z. Jaafar Marine Pollution Bulletin 175 (2022) 113341

mangrove areas where ALDFGs were recovered are under protection, or in fishing gear for 10–16 days, compared to 1–4 days of confinement
gazetted as nature reserves; and therefore, are areas at which fishing (High, 1979). Similar uncertainties exist for entangled organisms that
activities are prohibited. The ALDFGs recovered at these mangrove areas subsequently escape ALDFGs —their survivability as a direct or indirect
likely originated from adjacent sites where fishing activities are not result of entanglement is unknown (Gilman et al., 2016).
restricted, or from undetected illegal fishing activities. Similarly, despite The efficacy of recovered ALDFGs in trapping marine organisms
the small areas of seagrass meadows (~0.2% of total shoreline) and varied significantly. Within our dataset, four ALDFGs contributed
coral reefs and rocky shorelines (~7% of total shoreline, with mean disproportionately to the abundance and diversity of trapped species.
coral cover ranging from 0.35% to 49% over several decades (Guest These four ALDFGs, all monofilament plastic gill nets, were efficient in
et al., 2016; Januchowski-Hartley et al., 2020)), an unproportionally trapping a broad diversity of marine organisms. The Mangrove horse­
large amount of ALDFGs were recovered from these habitats (6% of all shoe crabs we recovered were mostly from three different monofilament
ALDFG from each type of ecosystem) (Fig. 2). At coral reefs especially, plastic gill nets found between 2005 and 2008. The number of in­
angling-specific ALDFGs seem to be a cause for concern as lures, sinkers, dividuals trapped ranged from 100 to 300 per net. A mass of gill nets
hooks, and rods were the second-most abundant ALDFG recovered at found in 2015 contributed 29% of the diversity of all trapped organisms
this ecotype (Fig. 2). Derelict fishing gear is known to cause harm to observed in our data. We recovered 90 trapped individuals, including
seagrass beds and coral reefs, which provide many crucial marine thirteen out of the seventeen of Carcharhinus melanopterus in our dataset,
ecosystem services, through entanglement (Arthur et al., 2014; Consoli within this net; but only 24.4% of all individuals were alive. Such effi­
et al., 2019; Fortes et al., 2018; Heery et al., 2018; Valderrama Balles­ cacy in trapping abilities of ALDFGs is known. Reported examples
teros et al., 2018). The impact of ALDFGs on seagrass meadows is include the hundreds of sharks and fishes found in one derelict net off
especially of concern because less than 1% of global seagrass cover falls the coast of Cayman Islands (Embury-Dennis, 2018), and, 99 seabirds
under a marine protected area even though 50% of seagrass beds are and 200 dead salmon recovered in another derelict net in 1978 (Derraik,
located within Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas (as 2002). Several factors govern the probability of entanglement and
determined by the Convention of Biological Diversity) (Fortes et al., accumulation of trapped individuals in derelict nets. The re-baiting
2018; Sudo et al., 2021). Fundamental understanding of the behaviour phenomenon is one whereby initial trapped organisms attract preda­
and impact of ALDFG on seagrass meadows and coral reefs will benefit tors and scavengers who in turn entangle in the net, rather than a
greatly to cogent management and conservation strategies of these function of direct trapping (Breen, 1990) or due to breeding seasons
imperiled habitats. (C. rotundicauda showed no seasonal breeding pattern (Cartwright-
Coastal alterations impact the initial entanglement and subsequent Taylor et al., 2009)). The decomposing remains of horseshoe crabs for
retention of ALDFGs. In Singapore, much of the coastal landscape was example, attract scavengers, which in turn attract more horseshoe crabs
altered through reclamation of nearshore habitats to increase land area as predators to the scavengers; the cycle repeats until hundreds of
(Lai et al., 2015). Further, to stem the consequences of erosion, 60% of horseshoe crabs and other crustaceans are entangled in the nets (Breen,
the shoreline is protected by seawalls (Lai et al., 2015). Over 70% of 1990; Cartwright-Taylor et al., 2011). It may be that more cases such as
ALDFGs were found at sites that had undergone significant coastal these exist but are not observed or reported as after their demise,
reclamation and 62% at sites with seawalls, suggesting that reclaimed entangled organisms sink rapidly to the seafloor thus evading detection
land, seawalls, as well as breakwaters, jetties and many other anthro­ (Laist, 1997). ALDFGs may also occur further away from coastlines or in
pogenic coastal structures, are sites at which ALDFG may easily entangle areas with low human populations, and are thus unnoticed (Todd et al.,
and remain. 2010). Trapping rates, specifically, could also decline with the loss of
Sixty-three percent of the ALDFGs were recovered at sites in close overall structural integrity, as demonstrated of gill and trammel nets in
proximity to fish mariculture facilities. In Singapore, there are a total of temperate European waters at depths 15-18 m (Erzini et al., 1997), with
110 sea-based farms, 108 of which are located in the Johor Strait and the the impact of ALDFGs on the environment possibly decreasing as it
remaining 2 in the southern islands (Pulau Semakau and St. John's Is­ disintegrates (Ayaz et al., 2010; Brown and Macfadyen, 2007; Erzini
land). We encountered seven mariculture-cage nets that ran ashore, with et al., 1997; Santos et al., 2003). Alternatively, the decrease in impact of
mesh sizes ranging between 2.3 cm and 14 cm, all of which were found ALDFGs may also be a consequence of organism adaptability, by using
at Pulau Ubin within the Johor Strait, a site with many artisanal fish ALDFGs for shelter, refuge or dispersal, rather than being solely due to
farms. As they are structurally similar to fishing nets, mariculture-cage the structural integrity of ALDFGs (Kiessling et al., 2015; Angiolillo and
nets could potentially ghost fish once they break away from the facil­ Fortibuoni, 2020). This underpins the urgent need for systematic studies
ity. However, as only a negligible number (relative to other ALDFG) of over larger areas to accurately evaluate the efficacy of ALDFGs as active
mariculture-cage nets were found, more systematic studies are needed to trapping devices. Other factors such as reproductive seasons and
determine their ghost fishing capabilities. Future studies can also focus breeding areas could increase the rate of entanglement. Several studies
on sea-based mariculture facilities and quantify their contribution to the have focused on the high entanglement rates of Hawaiian monk seals
ALDFG pollution. (Neomonachus schauinslandi) in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands, a
Our data of 19 years revealed different degrees of vulnerability of location considered as key breeding sites for this species (Donohue et al.,
marine organisms to ALDFGs. The majority of individuals (93%) found 2001; Henderson, 2001). Similarly, the shallow Arafura and Timor Seas
trapped in ALDFGs belonged to one of these three class­ region is a hotspot of turtle-ghost net interactions because it is a critical
es—Merostomata, Actinopterygii or Malacostraca (Fig. 3). The breeding and foraging area for several populations of turtles (Hardesty
Mangrove horseshoe crab, Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda, was the most et al., 2015). Age of the individuals was also found to affect entangle­
commonly-trapped species, accounting for 94.6% of all individuals in ment rates in Hawaiian monk seals—pups and juveniles were more
Merostomata (Table 2), but many of these were recovered alive and likely to be trapped in nets than adults, suggesting that nets are more
released. Conversely, a significantly higher proportion of individuals hazardous in nearshore reefs since weaned pups remain close to shore
from the class Actinopterygii, were recovered dead (Fig. 3, Table 2). The (Henderson, 2001). Bullimore et al. (2001) also linked the rise and fall in
higher survivability observed in C. rotundicauda, as well as other species the catch rate of spider and ghost crabs (Superfamily Majoidea and
from classes Merostomata and Malacostraca, may be attributed to their Family Ocypodidae, respectively) by ALDFGs to the seasonal increase in
ability to withstand brief periods of emersion (U.S. Fish & Wildlife water temperatures. Seasonality can also affect the rate of gear loss. For
Services, 2006), and the protection accorded by their exoskeleton. example, the late-monsoon season in Rayong, Thailand saw an increase
However, the rate of survivability of individuals after their release is in lost squid traps when compared to the pre-monsoon season, likely due
unknown. A study on the Alaskan king crabs for example, showed to stronger waves and currents during late-monsoon (Sukhsangchan
reduced recovery after escape when the crabs were trapped or confined et al., 2020).

8
A.R. Gajanur and Z. Jaafar Marine Pollution Bulletin 175 (2022) 113341

Measures to effectively reduce the ubiquity of ALDFGs have Declaration of competing interest
remained elusive. The open and interconnected marine system facili­
tates the transport of ALDFGs over long distances. Efforts to identify the The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
origin of ALDFGs have met with limited success (Derraik, 2002; Vance interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
and McGregor, 2019). The tagging of fishing gear has been proposed as a the work reported in this paper.
measure to identify origin of ALDFGs. This solution is only partially
viable since there are few examples of successful national gear-tagging Acknowledgments
initiatives—it is mostly still up to individual operators to tag their
gear. Fishing nets especially, remain a challenge to effectively tag We thank Muhammad Irsyad Khalis Daud, Frances Loke Wei and
because of high rates of breakage and disintegration. Moreover, cost- Afreen Chawla for help during field surveys. We are grateful to Sirius Ng
effective tagging devices focused on relocating and retrieval of lost facilitating data analyses, and to Joseph Cham for sharing the base
gear have yet to be developed (Gilman et al., 2016; He and Suuronen, ecotone map. This project would not have been possible without the
2018). assistance of Ria Tan from Wild Singapore who graciously provided field
Trapped organisms and ALDFGs are often encountered by coastal support and made diligent records on ALDFGs at intertidal areas around
communities and stakeholders. Authorities and interest groups over­ Singapore. We also thank Project Driftnet and Waterways Watch
seeing coastal areas can avail protocol for the safe disposal of ALDFGs to Singapore for sharing their dataset. We acknowledge funds from the
ensure that impact to the habitat is not sustained. Similarly, providing a Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore to
protocol for the disentanglement of trapped live organisms will increase Zeehan Jaafar; and from the Student Research Award, Singapore Insti­
the likelihood of survival after release. Dive cleanups (e.g., Project tute of Biology to Anya R. Gajanur.
AWARE) and coastal cleanups (e.g., International Coastal Cleanup) ef­
forts are gaining popularity as stakeholders take on active roles to References
conserve marine areas (Ocean Conservancy, 2019, 2015). Data from
these efforts provide crucial information and can contribute signifi­ Andrady, A.L., 2011. Microplastics in the marine environment. Mar. Pollut. Bull. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2011.05.030.
cantly to our understanding of ALDFGs and ALDFG behaviour (Consoli Andrady, A.L., 2000. Plastics and their impacts in the marine environment, in. In:
et al., 2020; Walther et al., 2018). Information from localized sites Proceedings of the International Marine Debris Conference on Derelict Fishing Gear
identifies pertinent ALDFG issues locally, such as the impact assessment and the Ocean Environment.
Angiolillo, M., Fortibuoni, T., 2020. Impacts of marine litter on Mediterranean reef
of debris to marine fauna within Chesapeake Bay, USA (Bilkovic et al., systems: from shallow to deep waters. Front. Mar. Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/
2014). When combined, data from varied sites can elucidate regional fmars.2020.581966.
and global trends of ALDFGs (Awaluddin, 2011; Ocean Conservancy, Anticamara, J.A., Watson, R., Gelchu, A., Pauly, D., 2011. Global fishing effort
(1950–2010): trends, gaps, and implications. Fish. Res. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
2019, 2018, 2017, 2016, 2015) necessary for larger-scale management fishres.2010.10.016.
plans and implementation. Arthur, C., Sutton-Grier, A.E., Murphy, P., Bamford, H., 2014. Out of sight but not out of
Increasing the awareness of the stakeholders within the fishery in­ mind: harmful effects of derelict traps in selected U.S. Coastal waters. Mar. Pollut.
Bull. 86, 19–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MARPOLBUL.2014.06.050.
dustries and recreational fishers towards the need for the proper disposal
Awaluddin, M.Y., 2011. International coastal cleanup application at local marine area as
of fishing gear is a major component in the bid to curb ALDFGs. an environmental solution. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Seminar on
Incentivising these stakeholders by providing safe and convenient gear Chemistry 2011, pp. 309–310.
disposal system at low or no cost is one solution (Gilman et al., 2016; Ayaz, A., Ünal, V., Acarli, D., Altinagac, U., 2010. Fishing gear losses in the Gökova
special environmental protection area (SEPA), eastern Mediterranean, Turkey.
Macfadyen et al., 2009). Disposal services by port facilities for example, J. Appl. Ichthyol. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0426.2009.01386.x.
was evaluated to be an efficient management of ALDFG, and ultimately Barnette, M.C., 2001. A review of the fishing gear utilized within the Southeast Region
economical, when environmental costs of ALDFGs are considered and their potential impacts on essential fish habitat. In: NOAA Technical
Memorandum NMFS-SEFC.
(Brown and Macfadyen, 2007; Gilman et al., 2016). Fines for improper Bilkovic, D.M., Havens, K., Stanhope, D., Angstadt, K., 2014. Derelict fishing gear in
disposal of ALDFGs, and other punitive measures can be effective, but Chesapeake Bay, Virginia: spatial patterns and implications for marine fauna. Marine
should only be imposed if these measures can be enforced. Proactive Pollution Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.01.034.
Branch, T.A., Jensen, O.P., Ricard, D., Ye, Y., Hilborn, R., 2011. Contrasting global trends
measures to stem ALDFGs are therefore key because implementation of in marine fishery status obtained from catches and from stock assessments. Conserv.
mitigative measures is challenging while sustaining high environment Biol. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01687.x.
cost. Breen, P.A., 1990. A review of ghost fishing by traps and gillnets. In: Proceedings of the
Second International Conference on Marine Debris, 2-7 April 1989. Honolulu,
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi. Hawaii. U.S. Dep. Comer.. NOM Tech Memo. NHFS. NOAA-TM-NMFS-SUFSC-154.
org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.113341. 1990.
Brown, J., Macfadyen, G., 2007. Ghost fishing in european waters: impacts and
management responses. Mar. Policy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Funding
marpol.2006.10.007.
Bullimore, B.A., Newman, P.B., Kaiser, M.J., Gilbert, S.E., Lock, K.M., 2001. A study of
This work was supported by funds from the Department of Biological catches in a fleet of “ghost-fishing” pots. Fish. Bull. 99 (2), 247-247.
Sciences, National University of Singapore to Zeehan Jaafar; and by the Burke, L., Selig, E., Spalding, M., 2002. Reefs at Risk in Southeast Asia. World Resources
Institute.
Student Research Award 2018, Singapore Institute of Biology to Anya Carr, H.A., Cooper, R.A., 1987. Manned submersible and ROV assessment of ghost
Roopa Gajanur. gillnets in the Gulf of Maine. In: Oceans Conference Record (IEEE). https://doi.org/
10.1109/oceans.1987.1160764.
Cartwright-Taylor, L., Lee, J., Hsu, C.C., 2009. Population structure and breeding pattern
CrediT authorship contribution statement of the mangrove horseshoe crab Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda in Singapore. Aquat.
Biol. https://doi.org/10.3354/ab00206.
Conceptualisation: Zeehan Jaafar Cartwright-Taylor, L., von Bing, Y., Chi, H.C., Tee, L.S., 2011. Distribution and
abundance of horseshoe crabs Tachypleus gigas and Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda
Study design: Zeehan Jaafar and Anya Gajanur around the main island of Singapore. Aquat. Biol. https://doi.org/10.3354/
Investigation: Anya Gajanur and Zeehan Jaafar ab00346.
Data curation: Anya Gajanur Chou, L.M., Huang, D., Tan, K.S., Toh, T.C., Goh, B.P.L., Tun, K., 2018. Singapore. In:
Sheppard, C. (Ed.), World Seas: An Environmental Evaluation, Second edition.
Writing & reviewing: Anya Gajanur and Zeehan Jaafar Academic Press, pp. 539–558. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100853-
Visualisation: Anya Gajanur 9.00031-2.
Funding acquisition: Anya Gajanur and Zeehan Jaafar Consoli, P., Romeo, T., Angiolillo, M., Canese, S., Esposito, V., Salvati, E., Scotti, G.,
Andaloro, F., Tunesi, L., 2019. Marine litter from fishery activities in the Western
Supervision: Zeehan Jaafar.

9
A.R. Gajanur and Z. Jaafar Marine Pollution Bulletin 175 (2022) 113341

Mediterranean Sea: the impact of entanglement on marine animal forests. Environ. Jambeck, J., Townsend, T.G., Barr, C.G., 2001. A survey of marine debris management
Pollut. 249, 472–481. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVPOL.2019.03.072. and research. In: Air and Waste Management Association (AWMA) National
Consoli, P., Scotti, G., Romeo, T., Fossi, M.C., Esposito, V., D’Alessandro, M., Conference.
Battaglia, P., Galgani, F., Figurella, F., Pragnell-Raasch, H., Andaloro, F., 2020. Januchowski-Hartley, F.A., Bauman, A.G., Morgan, K.M., Seah, J.C.L., Huang, D.,
Characterization of seafloor litter on Mediterranean shallow coastal waters: evidence Todd, P.A., 2020. Accreting coral reefs in a highly urbanized environment. Coral
from dive against Debris®, a citizen science monitoring approach. Mar. Pollut. Bull. Reefs 39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-020-01953-3.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.110763. Kershaw, P.J., 2016. Marine Plastic Debris and Microplastics Global Lessons and
Cortes, J., 2018. About 300 endangered sea turtles found dead off Mexican coast. Research to Inspire Action and Guide Policy Change. UNEP.
Reuters. Kiessling, T., Gutow, L., Thiel, M., 2015. Marine litter as habitat and dispersal vector. In:
Davies, T., Curnick, D., Barde, J., Chassot, E., 2017. Potential environmental impacts Marine Anthropogenic Litter. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16510-3_6.
caused by beaching of drifting fish aggregating devices and identification of Lai, S., Loke, L.H.L., Hilton, M.J., Bouma, T.J., Todd, P.A., 2015. The effects of
management solutions and uncertainties. In: A Paper Submitted to the 1st Ad-Hoc urbanisation on coastal habitats and the potential for ecological engineering: a
IOTC Working Group on FADs. Singapore case study. Ocean Coast. Manag. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Derraik, J.G.B., 2002. The pollution of the marine environment by plastic debris: a ocecoaman.2014.11.006.
review. Mar. Pollut. Bull. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-326X(02)00220-5. Laist, D.W., 1997. Impacts of Marine Debris: Entanglement of Marine Life in Marine
Donohue, M.J., Boland, R.C., Sramek, C.M., Antonelis, G.A., 2001. Derelict fishing gear Debris Including a Comprehensive List of Species With Entanglement and Ingestion
in the northwestern Hawaiian islands: diving surveys and debris removal in 1999 Records. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-8486-1_10.
confirm threat to coral reef ecosystems. Mar. Pollut. Bull. https://doi.org/10.1016/ Lebreton, L., Slat, B., Ferrari, F., Sainte-Rose, B., Aitken, J., Marthouse, R., Hajbane, S.,
S0025-326X(01)00139-4. Cunsolo, S., Schwarz, A., Levivier, A., Noble, K., Debeljak, P., Maral, H., Schoeneich-
Donohue, M.J., Foley, D.G., 2007. Remote sensing reveals links among the endangered Argent, R., Brambini, R., Reisser, J., 2018. Evidence that the great Pacific garbage
hawaiian monk seal, marine debris, and El Niño. Mar. Mamm. Sci. https://doi.org/ patch is rapidly accumulating plastic. Sci. Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-
10.1111/j.1748-7692.2007.00114.x. 018-22939-w.
Embury-Dennis, T., 2018. Hundreds of sharks and other fish discovered tangled in “ghost Lim, H.S., Jiang, J., Tan, Y.W., 2020. The Singapore Aquaculture Industry - Contributing
net” drifting through Caribbean Sea. In: Independent. to Singapore's Food Security. World Aquaculture Society.
Erzini, K., Monteiro, C.C., Ribeiro, J., Santos, M.N., Gaspar, M., Monteiro, P., Borges, T. Löhr, A., Savelli, H., Beunen, R., Kalz, M., Ragas, A., van Belleghem, F., 2017. Solutions
C., 1997. An experimental study of gill net and trammel net “ghost fishing” off the for global marine litter pollution. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. https://doi.org/
Algarve (southern Portugal). Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. https://doi.org/10.3354/ 10.1016/j.cosust.2017.08.009.
meps158257. Macfadyen, G., Huntington, T., Cappell, R., 2009. Abandoned, lost or otherwise
FAO, 2020. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture (SOFIA), 2020th-SOF ed. FAO, discarded fishing gear. In: UNEP Regional Seas Reports and Studies 185, United
Rome. https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9229en. Nations Environment Programme, FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper
Fortes, M.D., Ooi, J.L.S., Tan, Y.M., Prathep, A., Bujang, J.S., Yaakub, S.M., 2018. 523.
Seagrass in Southeast Asia: a review of status and knowledge gaps, and a road map Mantyka-Pringle, C.S., Visconti, P., di Marco, M., Martin, T.G., Rondinini, C., Rhodes, J.
for conservation. Bot. Mar. 61, 269–288. https://doi.org/10.1515/BOT-2018-0008/ R., 2015. Climate change modifies risk of global biodiversity loss due to land-cover
PDF. change. Biol. Conserv. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2015.04.016.
Friess, D.A., Richards, D.R., Phang, V.X.H., 2016. Mangrove forests store high densities of Moore, C.J., 2008. Synthetic polymers in the marine environment: a rapidly increasing,
carbon across the tropical urban landscape of Singapore. Urban Ecosystems. https:// long-term threat. Environ. Res. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2008.07.025.
doi.org/10.1007/s11252-015-0511-3. Nitivattananon, V., Tu, T.T., Rattanapan, A., Asavanant, J., 2012. Vulnerability and
Furevik, D.M., Fosseidengen, J.E., 2000. Investigation on naturally and deliberately lost resilience of urban communities under coastal hazard conditions in Southeast Asia.
gillnets in Norwegian waters. In: Working Document to the Fisheries Technology In: Cities and Climate Change: Responding to an Urgent Agenda.
Fish Behaviour Group. Harlem, Netherlands. Conservancy, Ocean, 2019. The Beach and Beyond, Ocean Conservancy and
Galbraith, E.D., Carozza, D.A., Bianchi, D., 2017. A coupled human-earth model International Coastal Cleanup. https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822391265-013.
perspective on long-term trends in the global marine fishery. Nat. Commun. https:// Conservancy, Ocean, 2018. Building a Clean Swell - International Coastal Cleanup
doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14884. Report.
Gall, S.C., Thompson, R.C., 2015. The impact of debris on marine life. Mar. Pollut. Bull. Conservancy, Ocean, 2017. Together for our ocean. In: International Coastal Cleanup
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.12.041. Report.
Gilman, E., et al., 2016. Abandoned, lost and discarded gillnets and trammel nets. Conservancy, Ocean, 2016. 30th anniversary. In: International Coastal Cleanup Report.
Methods to estimate ghost fishing mortality, and the status of regional monitoring Conservancy, Ocean, 2015. Stemming the Tide. Land-based strategies for a plastic - free
and management. In: FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. ocean. In: International Coastal Cleanup Report.
Giordano, S., Lazar, J., Bruce, D., Little, C., Levin, D., Slacum Jr., H.W., Dew- AWARE, Project, 2020. Dive Against Debris® Map [WWW Document]. https://www.
Baxter Jr., J., Methratta Jr., L., Wong Jr., D., Corbin Jr., R., 2009. Quantifying the projectaware.org/diveagainstdebrismap. (Accessed 30 September 2020).
Effects of Derelict Fishing Gear in the Maryland Portion of Chesapeake Bay. NOAA Driftnet, Project, 2020. Project Driftnet [WWW Document]. https://projectdriftnet.blog
Marine Debris Program. spot.com/. (Accessed 30 September 2020).
Guest, J.R., Tun, K., Low, J., Vergés, A., Marzinelli, E.M., Campbell, A.H., Bauman, A.G., Sancho, G., Puente, E., Bilbao, A., Gomez, E., Arregi, L., 2003. Catch rates of monkfish
Feary, D.A., Chou, L.M., Steinberg, P.D., 2016. 27 years of benthic and coral (Lophius spp.) by lost tangle nets in the Cantabrian Sea (northern Spain). Fish. Res.
community dynamics on turbid, highly urbanised reefs off Singapore. Sci. Rep. 6 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-7836(03)00212-1.
https://doi.org/10.1038/srep36260. Santos, M.N., Saldanha, H.J., Gaspar, M.B., Monteiro, C.C., 2003. Hake (Merluccius
Hardesty, B.D., Good, T.P., Wilcox, C., 2015. Novel methods, new results and science- merluccius L., 1758) ghost fishing by gill nets off the Algarve (southern Portugal).
based solutions to tackle marine debris impacts on wildlife. Ocean Coast. Manag. Fisheries Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-7836(03)00211-X.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2015.04.004. SEAFDEC, 2017. Southeast Asian State of Fisheries and Aquaculture 2017. Southeast
He, P., Suuronen, P., 2018. Technologies for the marking of fishing gear to identify gear Asian Fisheries Development Center.
components entangled on marine animals and to reduce abandoned, lost or Song, Y., Li, D., Hou, X., 2020. Characteristics of mainland coastline changes in Southeast
otherwise discarded fishing gear. Mar. Pollut. Bull. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Asia during the 21st century. J. Coast. Res. https://doi.org/10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-
marpolbul.2018.02.033. 19-00018.1.
Heery, E.C., Hoeksema, B.W., Browne, N.K., Reimer, J.D., Ang, P.O., Huang, D., Friess, D. Spalding, M., 2010. World Atlas of Mangroves. https://doi.org/10.4324/
A., Chou, L.M., Loke, L.H.L., Saksena-Taylor, P., Alsagoff, N., Yeemin, T., 9781849776608.
Sutthacheep, M., Vo, S.T., Bos, A.R., Gumanao, G.S., Syed Hussein, M.A., Waheed, Z., Sudo, K., Quiros, T.E.A.L., Prathep, A., van Luong, C., Lin, H.J., Bujang, J.S., Ooi, J.L.S.,
Lane, D.J.W., Johan, O., Kunzmann, A., Jompa, J., Suharsono, Taira, D., Bauman, A. Fortes, M.D., Zakaria, M.H., Yaakub, S.M., Tan, Y.M., Huang, X., Nakaoka, M., 2021.
G., Todd, P.A., 2018. Urban coral reefs: Degradation and resilience of hard coral Distribution, temporal change, and conservation status of tropical seagrass beds in
assemblages in coastal cities of East and Southeast Asia. Marine Pollution Bulletin Southeast Asia: 2000–2020. Front. Mar. Sci. 8, 779. https://doi.org/10.3389/
135, 654–681. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MARPOLBUL.2018.07.041. FMARS.2021.637722/BIBTEX.
Henderson, J.R., 2001. A pre- and post-MARPOL annex V summary of hawaiian monk Sukhsangchan, C., Phuynoi, S., Monthum, Y., Whanpetch, N., Kulanujaree, N., 2020.
seal entanglements and marine debris accumulation in the northwestern hawaiian Catch composition and estimated economic impacts of ghost-fishing squid traps near
islands, 1982–1998. Mar. Pollut. Bull. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-326X(00) Suan Son Beach, Rayong province, Thailand. ScienceAsia. https://doi.org/10.2306/
00204-6. scienceasia1513-1874.2020.014.
High, W., 1979. Escape of King Crab, Paralithodes camtschatica, From Derelict Pots, Vol. Tan, K.S., Acerbi, E., Lauro, F.M., 2016a. Marine habitats and biodiversity of Singapore’s
734. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric coastal waters: a review. Reg. Stud. Mar. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service. rsma.2016.01.008.
Humborstad, O.B., Løkkeborg, S., Hareide, N.R., Furevik, D.M., 2003. Catches of Tan, K.S., Koh, K.S., Ng, J.Y., Goh, L., 2016. The comprehensive marine biodiversity
Greenland halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides) in Deepwater ghost-fishing survey Singapore strait international workshop 2013. Raffles Bulletin of Zoology
gillnets on the norwegian continental slope. Fish. Res. https://doi.org/10.1016/ Supplement 34.
S0165-7836(03)00215-7. Todd, P.A., Ong, X., Chou, L.M., 2010. Impacts of pollution on marine life in Southeast
International Coastal Cleanup, 2020. Singapore. http://coastalcleanup.nus.edu.sg/. Asia. Biodivers. Conserv. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-010-9778-0.
(Accessed 30 September 2020). Tschernij, V., Larsson, P.O., 2003. Ghost fishing by lost cod gill nets in the Baltic Sea.
Ivar do Sul, J.A., Costa, M.F., Silva-Cavalcanti, J.S., Araújo, M.C.B., 2014. Plastic debris Fish. Res. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-7836(03)00214-5.
retention and exportation by a mangrove forest patch. Marine Pollution Bulletin. Fish, U.S., Services, Wildlife, 2006. The Horseshoe Crab, Limulus polyphemus, A Living
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2013.11.011. Fossil.

10
A.R. Gajanur and Z. Jaafar Marine Pollution Bulletin 175 (2022) 113341

Valderrama Ballesteros, L., Matthews, J.L., Hoeksema, B.W., 2018. Pollution and coral Walther, B.A., Kunz, A., Hu, C.S., 2018. Type and quantity of coastal debris pollution in
damage caused by derelict fishing gear on coral reefs around Koh tao, gulf of Taiwan: a 12-year nationwide assessment using citizen science data. Mar. Pollut.
Thailand. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 135, 1107–1116. https://doi.org/10.1016/J. Bull. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.08.025.
MARPOLBUL.2018.08.033. Wibowo, S., Utomo, B.S.B., Ward, A.R., Diei-Ouadi, Y., Susana, S., Suuronen, P., 2017.
Vance, A., McGregor, I., 2019. Desert Island Dump: The Shameful State of Henderson Case studies on fish loss assessment of small-scale fisheries in Indonesia. In: FAO
Island. [WWW Document]. Stuff. https://interactives.stuff.co.nz/2019/07/hende Fisheries and Aquaculture Circular No. 1129. Rome, Italy.
rson-island-rubbish-plastic-ocean-waste/chapter1/. (Accessed 29 July 2019). Wright, S.L., Thompson, R.C., Galloway, T.S., 2013. The physical impacts of
Veettil, B.K., Costi, J., Marques, W.C., Tran, X.L., Quang, N.X., Van, D.D., Hoai, P.N., microplastics on marine organisms: a review. Environ. Pollution (Barking, Essex :
2020. Coastal environmental changes in southeast Asia: a study from Quang Nam 1987). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2013.02.031.
Province, Central Vietnam. Regional Studies in Marine Science. https://doi.org/ Zhang, Y., Hou, X., 2020. Characteristics of coastline changes on Southeast Asia Islands
10.1016/j.rsma.2020.101420. from 2000 to 2015. Remote Sens. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12030519.

11