2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2008.05.024
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Interrupting a multi-species bioinvasion vector: The efficacy of in-water cleaning for removing biofouling on obsolete vessels

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
18
0
2

Year Published

2010
2010
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
(28 reference statements)
2
18
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The findings of the present study agree with the recent work of Davidson et al (2008), who assessed the efficacy of a submersible cleaning and maintenance platform (SCAMP) on obsolete vessels that had developed extensive fouling (up to 30 cm thick). Their study found that while the SCAMP was capable of significantly reducing fouling cover and diversity, posttreatment investigations undertaken 3 days after defouling revealed a 'substantial and diverse' fouling community across the entire vessel.…”
Section: Removal Of Fouling Materials By Brush Systemssupporting
confidence: 91%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The findings of the present study agree with the recent work of Davidson et al (2008), who assessed the efficacy of a submersible cleaning and maintenance platform (SCAMP) on obsolete vessels that had developed extensive fouling (up to 30 cm thick). Their study found that while the SCAMP was capable of significantly reducing fouling cover and diversity, posttreatment investigations undertaken 3 days after defouling revealed a 'substantial and diverse' fouling community across the entire vessel.…”
Section: Removal Of Fouling Materials By Brush Systemssupporting
confidence: 91%
“…It is worthwhile highlighting that the fouling extent (cover, richness and biomass) that accumulated on experimental plates deployed for 3 months represents the upper range of that expected on commercial vessels in frequent use (eg Coutts and Taylor 2004;Davidson et al 2009). Plates deployed for 6-12 months had fouling assemblages comparable to that described for vessels that had been idle for an extensive period (eg Davidson et al 2008). As such, the efficacy of the brush systems tested, in terms of biofouling removal, is likely to be an underestimate of their performance on a 'typical' vessel.…”
Section: Removal Of Fouling Materials By Brush Systemsmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…These include in-water cleaning, in-water treatment (e.g. heat treatment to neutralize biofouling organisms), encapsulation (with possible chemical treatment), temporary repositioning to freshwater sites, haul-out for power washing and air drying, and biological surveys for unwanted NIS or pest species (Wotton et al 2004;Coutts and Forrest 2007;Davidson et al 2008b;Atalah et al 2016). Few jurisdictions have policy frameworks to manage invasion risks from this vector, although New Zealand imposes biofouling thresholds or requires documentation of best-practice husbandry and maintenance for all vessels and SMS entering coastal waters (New Zealand Government 2014).…”
Section: Future Trends and Managementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In a study of non-chemical control methods, Davidson et al (2008) monitored the efficacy of in-water scrubbing by hand and by a mechanized machine on the fouling organisms on a ship's hull, including dark falsemussels and hooked mussels. Scrubbing reduced organism cover significantly but not completely.…”
Section: Control Measuresmentioning
confidence: 99%