Conservation status of New Zealand marine invertebrates, 2009

Abstract

A re-evaluation of the threat status of New Zealand's marine invertebrates was undertaken in 2009, following earlier review of New Zealand's Threat Classification System and subsequent refinement of the national criteria for classifying threat of extinction to New Zealand's flora and fauna. Sufficient information was available to enable 295 marine invertebrate taxa to be fully evaluated and assigned to a national threat category. The 10 taxa at most risk of extinction (‘nationally critical’) were the giant seep clam Calyptogena sp., the primitive acorn barnacle Chionelasmus crosnieri, O'Shea's vent barnacle Volcanolepas osheai, the stalked barnacle Ibla idiotica, the four-blotched umbrella octopus Cirroctopus hochbergi, the roughy umbrella octopus Opisthoteuthis chathamensis, the giant squid Idioteuthis cordiformis, the large-egged polychaete Boccardiella magniovata and two gravel maggots, Smeagol climoi and Smeagol manneringi. The key threatening processes identified for marine invertebrates were fishing and land-use associated impacts such as sedimentation. We identified no taxa that had improved in threat status as a result of past or ongoing conservation management action, nor any taxa that had worsened in threat status because of known changes in their distribution, abundance or rate of population decline. We evaluated a small fraction of New Zealand's marine invertebrate fauna for their threat status. Many taxa remain ‘data deficient’ or unlisted. In addition to the most threatened taxa, we recommend these taxa and their habitats as priorities for further survey and monitoring.

Full text

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tnzm20
Download by: [192.30.84.70] Date: 05 December 2016, At: 03:08
New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research
ISSN: 0028-8330 (Print) 1175-8805 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tnzm20
Conservation status of New Zealand marine
invertebrates, 2009
DJ Freeman , BA Marshall , ST Ahyong , SR Wing & RA Hitchmough
To cite this article: DJ Freeman , BA Marshall , ST Ahyong , SR Wing & RA Hitchmough (2010)
Conservation status of New Zealand marine invertebrates, 2009, New Zealand Journal of
Marine and Freshwater Research, 44:3, 129-148, DOI: 10.1080/00288330.2010.495373
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00288330.2010.495373
Published online: 06 Sep 2010.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 464
View related articles
Citing articles: 6 View citing articles

Conservation status of New Zealand marine invertebrates, 2009
DJ Freeman
a
*, BA Marshall
b
, ST Ahyong
c
, SR Wing
d
and RA Hitchmough
a
a
Research and Development Group, Department of Conservation, Wellington, New Zealand;
b
Museum of New
Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa, Wellington, New Zealand;
c
Australian Museum, Sydney, Australia;
d
Department
of Marine Science, Otago University, Dunedin, New Zealand
(Received 27 August 2009; final version received 13 May 2010)
A re-evaluation of the threat status of New Zealand’s marine invertebrates was undertaken in
2009, following earlier review of New Zealand’s Threat Classification System and subsequent
refinement of the national criteria for classifying threat of extinction to New Zealand’s flora and
fauna. Sufficient information was available to enable 295 marine invertebrate taxa to be fully
evaluated and assigned to a national threat category. The 10 taxa at most risk of extinction
(‘nationally critical’) were the giant seep clam Calyptogena sp., the primitive acorn barnacle
Chionelasmus crosnieri, O’Shea’s vent barnacle Volcanolepas osheai, the stalked barnacle Ibla
idiotica, the four-blotched umbrella octopus Cirroctopus hochbergi, the roughy umbrella octopus
Opisthoteuthis chathamensis, the giant squid Idioteuthis cordiformis, the large-egged polychaete
Boccardiella magniovata and two gravel maggots, Smeagol climoi and Smeagol manneringi.
The key threatening processes identified for marine invertebrates were fishing and land-use
associated impacts such as sedimentation. We identified no taxa that had improved in threat
status as a result of past or ongoing conservation management action, nor any taxa that had
worsened in threat status because of known changes in their distribution, abundance or rate of
population decline. We evaluated a small fraction of New Zealand’s marine invertebrate fauna
for their threat status. Many taxa remain ‘data deficient’ or unlisted. In addition to the most
threatened taxa, we recommend these taxa and their habitats as priorities for further survey
and monitoring.
Keywords: New Zealand; threatened marine invertebrates; conservation status; threat
classification
Introduction
Most marine species are thought to be more
resilient to extinction than terrestrial species
because of their large effective population sizes,
often over broad ranges (Carlton et al. 1991,
McKinney 1998). However, marine species with
particular characteristics, such as slow growth
rate, low adult mobility and small geographic
range, are vulnerable to extirpation and extinc-
tion, with several examples of recent extinctions
and near-extinctions (Roberts & Hawkins
1999). The first documented extinction of a
marine invertebrate was of the eelgrass limpet,
Lottia alveus, which became extinct following
a disease outbreak that wiped out its eelgrass
habitat (Carlton et al. 1991). A number of
other marine invertebrates are thought to have
become extinct in recent history (Carlton 1993;
Carlton et al. 1999).
A species’ risk of extinction can be a
critical consideration in its management, not
only at a species level, but at a habitat and
ecosystem level. Listing a species by its level of
threat of extinction can help highlight where
management action and associated resources
need to be focussed (Nielsen & Kenchington
*Corresponding author. Email: dfreeman@doc.govt.nz
New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research
Vol. 44, No. 3, September 2010, 129148
ISSN 0028-8330 print/ISSN 1175-8805 online
#2010 The Royal Society of New Zealand
DOI: 10.1080/00288330.2010.495373
http://www.informaworld.com

2001; Joseph et al. 2008) and inform consid-
eration of decisions such as habitat protection
and resource utilisation (Roberts et al. 2003a,
2003b). Ongoing assessments of changes in
species’ threatened status can also provide a
way of measuring the effectiveness of conser-
vation management. However, as any conserva-
tion management action may have substantial
impacts on economic activities (particularly in
the marine environment), accurate identifica-
tion of species at risk of extinction is an
important issue (Powles et al. 2000).
The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species
(IUCN 2010) identifies and documents those
species most in need of conservation attention
if global extinction rates are to be reduced,
and provides a global index of the state of
change of biodiversity. In 2002, to complement
the world view provided by the Red List,
New Zealand developed a Threat Classification
System focussed at the national level (Molloy
et al. 2002). This system provided a process and
criteria for assessing the threat status of New
Zealand’s flora and fauna and provided a more
sensitive classification for taxa with naturally
restricted distributions and small numbers as a
result of insular rarity. Hitchmough (2002)
presented the results of applying that system
to a range of taxa. An update of the list was
undertaken in 2005 (Hitchmough et al. 2007),
which documented changes in the threat status
of species and added new species to the list.
Internationally, marine species have received
less attention than their terrestrial counterparts,
both in terms of assessments of their threat
status and associated management responses.
Just 5% of the species listed on the IUCN Red
List are marine species and of these, few
are invertebrate taxa (IUCN 2010). There have
been few attempts to collate information
on the conservation of marine invertebrates
for particular regions (but see Ponder et al.
2002). However, their importance for fisheries,
tourism, ecosystem services and as the major
component of biodiversity in the marine
environment highlights the need for appropriate
conservation management.
Although all marine mammals, most sea-
birds and two marine fish are fully protected in
New Zealand waters, the only protected mar-
ine invertebrates are black corals (all anti-
patharian species) and all species of ‘red coral’
(Stylasteridae), which are protected under the
Wildlife Act 1953. Despite their legal protec-
tion, bycatch of these species does occur across
some regions, primarily as a result of bottom
trawling and dredging (Probert et al. 1997;
Clark & O’Driscoll 2003; Consalvey et al. 2006).
Further, some localised coral populations are
vulnerable to other damage associated with
human activities, such as scuba diving (Miller
et al. 2004). There is also some confusion over
what species comprise the legally-protected ‘red
corals’ (Consalvey et al. 2006). Many other
marine invertebrates are at risk from human
activities including pollution, habitat loss or
modification, collection, disturbance and fish-
eries bycatch. Marine invertebrates also sup-
port important recreational, commercial and
customary fisheries in New Zealand and
in 2007, four of the 10 marine species
with the highest export dollar value were
invertebrates*arrow squid, paua (abalone),
green-lipped mussel and rock lobster (Ministry
of Fisheries 2009). Some areas that support
particularly sensitive, at risk or ecologically
important marine invertebrate communities
have received protection from fishing and
other threats in New Zealand (Anon 2001;
Grange et al. 2003).
For some taxa, it is possible confidently to
list and assess the risk of extinction of all species
known to exist in New Zealand (e.g. marine
mammals, terrestrial birds), but the task is large
for many groups, including the marine inverte-
brates. For example, over 3000 marine mollusc
species and subspecies are known from New
Zealand waters, of which more than a third
remain undescribed (Spencer et al. 2009) and
the threat list for marine invertebrates com-
pleted in 2005 was known to be incomplete
130 DJ Freeman et al.

(Hitchmough et al. 2007). In 2007, a review of
New Zealand’s Threat Classification System
(Molloy et al. 2002) was undertaken, which
resulted in a new manual for classifying New
Zealand’s flora and fauna according to their
threat of extinction (Townsend et al. 2008). As
part of the implementation of this revised
system, we re-evaluated the threat status of
New Zealand marine invertebrates in 2009. This
paper reports the results of these assessments.
Methods
Our starting list for re-evaluation of the
conservation status of New Zealand marine
invertebrates was the result of the previous
listing process (Hitchmough et al. 2007), which
included 285 taxa from a range of phyla. A call
for submissions on the list was made via the
Department of Conservation website (http://
www.doc.govt.nz/) in December 2008 and via
contact with the New Zealand Marine Sciences
Society. Submissions closed on 22 March 2009.
In May 2009, a range of experts on New
Zealand marine invertebrates was contacted
by the Department of Conservation and invited
to be part of an expert panel to be convened to
undertake the re-evaluation process. The role of
the expert panel members was to provide
knowledge on their particular field of expertise
at the threat classification list meeting, to
answer queries on listing decisions reached,
and to consult with peers to bring as much
information as possible to the meetings
(Townsend et al. 2008).
A one-day workshop was held in June 2009,
and taxa were placed into risk categories based
on the criteria provided by Townsend et al.
(2008), submissions received, advice from
invited panel members that were unable to
attend the meeting, panel knowledge and
referral to recent publications relating to taxo-
nomic and population status information
(e.g. Tracey et al. 2005; Consalvey et al. 2006;
Gordon 2009). Where there was doubt, we
referred our provisional assessments to the
relevant experts subsequent to the workshop.
The categories used in our evaluation
(Fig. 1) are as defined in Townsend et al. (2008)
and are specific to the New Zealand region:
1. Extinct;
2. Threatened [including Nationally Critical
(NC), Nationally Endangered (NE) and
Nationally Vulnerable (NV)];
3. At Risk [including Declining (Dec), Re-
covering (Rec), Relict (Rel) and Natu-
rally Uncommon (NU)];
4. Not Threatened (NT);
5. Non-resident Native [including Coloniser
(Col), Migrant, and Vagrant)];
6. Introduced and Naturalised (self-sustain-
ing populations exist in the wild);
7. Data Deficient.
Taxa were also classified using one or more
of the following criteria (depending on the
category): total number of mature individuals;
ongoing or predicted population trend (because
of existing threats); total number of popula-
tions; number of mature individuals in the
largest population; area of occupancy of the
total population. A series of ‘qualifiers’ was
also available (e.g. data poor, one location,
secure overseas) to enable additional informa-
tion on each taxon to be captured and
considered (Townsend et al. 2008). The list
includes both endemic and non-endemic taxa,
but where a non-endemic taxon is listed, our
assessment of its threatened status is based on
the New Zealand population(s) only. Scientific
names for all taxa are given in Appendix 1,
and follow the New Zealand Inventory of
Biodiversity (Gordon 2009) or subsequent
taxonomic revisions as noted by the expert
panel. The list includes both taxonomically
determinate and taxonomically indeterminate
taxa. Taxonomically determinate taxa are those
that are legitimately and effectively published
and generally accepted by relevant experts as
distinct; taxonomically indeterminate taxa are
Conservation status of New Zealand marine invertebrates, 2009 131

legitimately and effectively published but not
generally accepted as distinct, or are entities yet
to be furnished with a formal name (Townsend
et al. 2008).
Results
A total of 311 (2.7%) of the 11544 known
New Zealand marine invertebrate species
(Gordon 2009) were considered during the
threat classification process, including four
annelids, 21 arthropods, one brachiopod, seven
bryozoans, 39 cnidarians, four echinoderms,
one sponge and 234 molluscs (Tables 1 and 2;
complete list in Appendix 1). Of these, 12
taxa were considered ‘data deficient’ and
were not evaluated for their threat status.
Four species [three limpets: Micropilina sp. C
(NMNZ M.171275), Actinoleuca campbelli
bountyensis Powell, 1956, and Notoacmea scapha
(Suter, 1907); and one shrimp Chorocaris sp.
(NIWA specimen, coll. 2001)] were removed
from the revised list because of recent taxo-
nomic revisions. The remaining 295 taxa
were evaluated and assigned to the relevant
threat category. The vast majority of taxa
evaluated were endemic to New Zealand waters
and included a number of endemic genera.
In accordance with recent taxonomic revisions,
18 taxa (two crabs, two barnacles and 14
molluscs) were renamed in the list. Of the 295
taxa we evaluated, plus the 12 ‘data deficient’
taxa, 91 remained taxonomically indeterminate.
Some 26 taxa were added to the previous
list, including 12 isidids (bamboo corals),
nine paragorgiids (bubblegum corals), one
Fig. 1 The structure of the New Zealand Threat Classification System (Townsend et al. 2008), reproduced
with permission of the Department of Conservation.
132 DJ Freeman et al.

coralliid (precious coral), three vent shrimps
(Alvinocaris alexander,Lebbeus wera and
Nautilocaris saintlaurentae) and the king crab,
Paralomis hirtella. For several cnidarian taxa,
listings were made at the genus level (and
therefore may include more than one species)
to reflect difficulties in identification and the
large number of undescribed but apparently
endemic and in some cases, threatened species.
For example, red coral, Errina novazealandica
was changed to Errina spp. to reflect difficulties
in identification of these species. Several deep-
water corals were also listed at the genus level,
including the precious corals, Corallium, and
many of the bamboo corals.
Threatened taxa
We placed 33 taxa in the ‘threatened’ category
(Table 1). In 2004, there were 11 ‘nationally
critical’ marine invertebrates, based on the
previous classification system. Under the new
criteria, 10 taxa were listed as being at most risk
of extinction. This list included seven species
previously listed as ‘nationally critical’, plus
three additional taxa: the squid Idioteuthis
cordiformis, and two gravel maggots, Smeagol
climoi and Smeagol manneringi. The status of
four taxa previously listed in 2004 as
‘nationally critical’ was changed (the octopus
Opisthoteuthis mero was relisted as ‘nationally
vulnerable’; the echinoid Porterpygus kieri was
relisted as ‘data deficient’; the polychaete Spio
aequalis was relisted as ‘nationally endangered’;
and the seadaisy Xyloplax medusiformis was
relisted as ‘data deficient’).
Two taxa were listed as ‘nationally endan-
gered’*the polychaete Spio aequalis (previously
listed as ‘nationally critical’) and the brachio-
pod Pumilus antiquatus. A total of 21 taxa were
listed as ‘nationally vulnerable’ and all were as-
signed to this category because of their patterns
of decline as a result of existing threats. Most of
the taxa in this category were deepwater corals.
The following 10 taxa have been listed as
‘nationally critical’ and are the marine inverte-
brates known to be at most risk of extinction in
New Zealand waters:
Giant seep clam, Calyptogena spp.
The genus Calyptogena comprises highly
specialised bivalves that live in symbiosis with
sulphur-oxidising bacteria in habitats such as
hydrothermal vents (Krylova & Sahling 2006).
Calyptogena spp. have been found in methane
seeps from Cape Palliser to Castlepoint off-
shore of the southeast North Island coast. The
small spatial area of these species’ highly
Table 1 Number of taxa evaluated and assigned to threat categories defined by Townsend et al. (2008).
Threatened At risk
Phylum Total NC NE NV Dec Rec Rel NU NT
Porifera 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
Cnidaria 37 0 0 14 0 0 0 23 0
Mollusca 226 6 0 2 7 0 0 203 8
Brachiopoda 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Bryozoa 7 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 3
Annelida 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Echinodermata 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
Arthropoda 19 3 0 2 0 0 0 14 0
Total 295 10 2 21 8 0 0 243 11
An additional 12 taxa were considered ‘data deficient’ and were therefore not evaluated. Abbreviations: NC, Nationally
critical; NE, Nationally endangered; NV, Nationally vulnerable; Dec, Declining; Rec, Recovering; Rel, Relict; NU,
Naturally uncommon; NT, Not threatened.
Conservation status of New Zealand marine invertebrates, 2009 133

specialised habitat placed them in the ‘nation-
ally critical’ category.
Primitive acorn barnacle, Chionelasmus
crosnieri (Buckeridge, 1998)
Chionelasmus crosnieri was formerly listed as
C. darwini, but has been relisted as C. crosnieri,
in accordance with Buckeridge’s (1998) revi-
sion. In New Zealand, this species is known
only from an area at around 500 m depth, on
the Kermadec Ridge (Foster 1981), and is one
of the most primitive living acorn barnacles.
The small area of its known habitat placed it in
the ‘nationally critical’ category.
Four-blotched umbrella octopus, Cirroctopus
hochbergi O’Shea, 2000
Recorded only from New Zealand, C. hochbergi
has been captured from several locations
at depths between 700 and 1350 m and in
Table 2 Number of marine invertebrate taxa evaluated and assigned to threat categories, or listed as data
deficient, as a percentage of the total known New Zealand species diversity in the coastal and marine
environment (from Gordon 2009).
Taxon
Species
diversity
% of taxa
evaluated
% of taxa data
deficient
% of taxa yet to be
considered
Porifera 724 0.1 0 99.9
Ctenophora 19 100
Cnidaria* 1112 3.3 0.2 96.5
Platyhelminthes 324 100
Dicyemida 6 100
Gastrotricha 4 100
Gnathifera 44 100
Mollusca 3593 6.3 0.1 93.6
Brachiopoda 38 2.6 0 97.4
Phoronida 3 100
Bryozoa 953 100
Kamptozoa 12 100
Sipuncula 26 100
Echiura 7 100
Annelida 792 0.3 0.3 99.5
Orthonectida 1 100
Nemertea 29 100
Echinodermata 623 0.3 0.3 99.4
Hemichordata 7 100
Tunicata 192 100
Chaetognatha 15 100
Tardigrada 5 100
Arthropoda 2820 0.7 0.0 99.3
Kinorhyncha 17 100
Loricifera 1 100
Priapulida 3 100
Nematoda 173 100
Nematomorpha 1 100
Total 11544 2.6 0.1 97.3
Groups with no known marine species are excluded. Blank entries indicate ‘zero’ values. *Percentages are underestimates,
because of listing of several taxa at the genus level.
134 DJ Freeman et al.

association with seamounts, cold seep and vent
habitats (O’Shea 1999). Its probable small
population size and ongoing pattern of decline
because of fishing impacts placed this species in
the ‘nationally critical’ category.
Stalked barnacle, Ibla idiotica Batham, 1945
Although historically found at several sites on
the Otago Peninsula, the small*the female is
2.03.5 mm and the male 0.4 mm in maximum
dimension (Batham 1945)*stalked barnacle
I. idiotica appears to have vanished from the
intertidal and may now be restricted to a few
subtidal pockets. This pattern of decline placed
this species in the ‘nationally critical’ category.
Giant squid, Idioteuthis cordiformis
(Chun, 1908)
The giant, or whip-lash squid, I. cordiformis,
is known from several seamounts in the
New Zealand region, including on the Chatham
Rise and in the Bay of Plenty. Its ongoing or
predicted decline because of fishing impacts
placed this species in the ‘nationally critical’
category.
Roughy umbrella octopus, Opisthoteuthis
chathamensis O’Shea, 2000
Recorded only from New Zealand, this octopus
species has been captured from soft sediment
habitat at depths between 900 and 1438 m off
East Cape and the Chatham Rise (O’Shea
1999). Taken as bycatch in the deepwater trawl
fishery, this species has not been recorded since
1999. The apparent pattern of decline in this
species placed it in the ‘nationally critical’
category.
Gravel maggot, Smeagol climoi Tillier &
Ponder, 1993
Previously listed as ‘range restricted’ under the
2002 criteria (Molloy et al. 2002), the pulmo-
nate gastropod S. climoi has been recorded only
on the gravel beaches of Wellington’s South
Coast (Tillier & Ponder 1992). All five species
of Smeagol are restricted to the upper littoral
of very small areas of gravel or cobble beaches
in New Zealand and southeastern Australia,
with each species having a very small geo-
graphic distribution (Ponder et al. 2002).
S. climoi’s highly restricted range placed it in
the ‘nationally critical’ category.
Gravel maggot, Smeagol manneringi
Climo, 1981
As with S. climoi,S. manneringi was also listed
as ‘range restricted’ under the 2002 criteria.
This species is found only on Kaikoura gravel
beaches, and this highly restricted range placed
it in the ‘nationally critical’ category.
O’Shea’s vent barnacle, Volcanolepas osheai
(Buckeridge, 2000)
Known only from the Brothers Caldera, north-
east of the North Island, at depths between
1200 and 1700 m, this stalked barnacle species is
the only hydrothermal vent-associated barnacle
known from New Zealand waters (Buckeridge
2000). It is one of two species in the genus
Volcanolepas (Southward & Jones 2003). Its
apparent highly restricted distribution and
single population placed this species in the
‘nationally critical’ category.
Large-egged polychaete, Boccardiella
magniovata (Read, 1975)
An intertidal estuarine species, B. magniovata
has been recorded from several locations but is
nowhere abundant. Sites where this species has
been found previously are being increasingly
modified through urbanisation and a search in
2002 of its type locality revealed no individuals
of this species (G. Read, personal communica-
tion). The few populations, apparent small
population sizes and pattern of decline because
of anthropogenic threats placed this endemic
species in the ‘nationally critical’ category.
Conservation status of New Zealand marine invertebrates, 2009 135

At risk taxa
A total of 251 taxa were placed in the ‘at risk’
category, with most (243) being listed as
‘naturally uncommon’ (Table 1). These are
taxa whose distributions are naturally confined
to specific substrates, habitats or geographic
areas, or taxa that occur within naturally small
and widely scattered populations. This includes
a large number of species with distributions
restricted to particular islands (e.g. Calliostoma
spp.), and species associated with particular
habitats, such as seamounts. The remaining
eight taxa were classified as ‘declining’, within
the ‘at risk’ category.
Other categories
Some 12 taxa were listed as being ‘data
deficient’, where information relating to them
was so poor that an assessment of threat status
could not be made (Townsend et al. 2008). This
included two annelids, one arthropod, two
cnidarians, two echinoderms and five molluscs.
A further 11 taxa (three bryozoans and
eight molluscs) were evaluated but did not fit
any of the other categories and were listed as
‘not threatened’.
Discussion
Some 33 ‘threatened’ and 251 ‘at risk’ marine
invertebrates were identified through our
threat classification process, which involved the
assessment of 295 taxa. It is known that marine
taxa generally have much smaller percentages
of threatened species, but also many more
undescribed and unrecorded species than do
terrestrial or freshwater plants or vertebrates
(McKinney 1999; Regnier et al. 2009). This is
certainly the case for New Zealand marine
invertebrates, where just a small fraction of
the fauna has been surveyed and described to
date (Gordon 2009). Unlike New Zealand birds
and terrestrial plants, where all taxa can be
evaluated for their threat status (Miskelly et al.
2008; de Lange et al. 2009), this is currently an
unachievable task for marine invertebrates,
where many of the taxa remain unknown and
undescribed.
There are, therefore, several sources of bias
in relation to the list of threatened marine
invertebrates presented here. While some phyla
and geographic areas are relatively well studied
in New Zealand waters, there are substantial
gaps in our knowledge, which prevent us from
not only knowing more about species’ distribu-
tion and abundance, but about their existence
and identity. A huge number of marine species
in New Zealand remain undiscovered and
undescribed, and many habitats, such as those
in depths beyond the continental shelf, remain
largely unsurveyed. In addition, available taxo-
nomic and ecological expertise is inconsistent
among marine phyla and habitats, resulting in
some taxa receiving more attention than others.
Nearly a third of the marine invertebrate taxa
we evaluated remain taxonomically indetermi-
nate. Taxonomic resolution is seen as vital for
furthering conservation management of these
species (de Lange et al. 2009).
Much of the data available on marine
species distribution and abundance has been
derived from fisheries surveys and museum
collections. Although such data can be very
useful for assessing biodiversity (e.g. Ponder
et al. 2000; Beaumont et al. 2008), the geo-
graphic distribution of sampling effort and
the sampling methodology employed often
prevents reliable description or even estimation
of a species’ actual distribution and abundance.
Our evaluations have been based on the best
available information, which is incomplete for
many taxa.
Edgar et al. (2005) suggested that popula-
tion declines for marine species at risk of
extinction will go largely unnoticed, because
of the ‘hidden’ nature of their environment
and the lack of quantitative data on species
distribution and abundance. Priorities for the
collection of demographic data should there-
fore be not only on the species at most risk
of extinction, but also on the ‘data deficient’
taxa (McKinney 1999; Townsend et al. 2008).
It is likely that the vast majority of marine
136 DJ Freeman et al.

invertebrate species not evaluated here (which
can be a large percentage of the known
diversity; Table 2) would be listed as ‘data
deficient’, but this would highlight parti-
cular taxa and geographical areas where survey
effort should be directed. We also consider that
there is a strong likelihood that many marine
invertebrates listed as ‘data deficient’ would be
relisted as ‘threatened’ or ‘at risk’ if sufficient
data were available to allow their evaluation.
A range of marine habitats are under
ongoing risk of loss or degradation, through
human activities such as reclamation, destruc-
tive fishing methods and sedimentation. It may
therefore also be important to survey and
monitor species associated with habitats known
to be particularly vulnerable, as the loss of
some habitats may result in the loss of asso-
ciated fauna, including marine invertebrates.
Seagrasses and seamounts are examples of
vulnerable habitats that may support threa-
tened dependent marine invertebrate species
(O’Hara 2002; Hughes et al. 2009).
The threat status of several species appeared
to have improved since the last listing process.
These apparent improvements were related to
changes in the evaluation criteria or to changes
in knowledge of a taxon. For example, two
species, the octopus Opisthoteuthis mero and
polychaete Spio aequalis, ‘improved’ since the
2004 listing process (Hitchmough et al. 2007).
Previously listed as ‘nationally critical’ under the
old criteria (Molloy et al. 2002), O. mero was
relisted as ‘nationally vulnerable’ and S. aequalis
was relisted as ‘nationally endangered’. The
change in classification of the former was related
to the change in the classification criteria, and
the change of the latter was related to the
discovery of several new populations of that
species.
Although management action such as the
implementation of marine protected areas and
benthic protected areas has been undertaken
since the last marine invertebrate threat listing
process (e.g. Ministry of Fisheries 2007), we
know of no instance where any recovery or
slowing in the rate of decline of a taxon as a
whole has been documented in response to
management. However, a lack of monitoring
may explain this lack of documentation in some
areas (deepwater habitats for example), and it is
also likely that individual populations of some
taxa have responded to management through
the removal of threatening processes such as
fishing (Clark & O’Driscoll 2003).
We could identify no taxon that was
‘recovering’ following a decline in population
abundance, or that could be considered a
‘relict’ (Townsend et al. 2008). The particular
characteristics of marine invertebrate species
(e.g. dispersal mechanisms, body size) and lack
of completeness of the list, also excluded the
‘migrant’, ‘vagrant’, ‘coloniser’ and ‘introduced
and naturalised’ categories.
Two species formerly listed as ‘nationally
critical’ (each with the qualifier ‘data poor’)
were relisted as ‘data deficient’ under our
evaluation process. We considered that there
were too little data available (e.g. on popula-
tion size or distribution) for the echinoid
Porterpygus kieri and the seadaisy Xyloplax
medusiformis to enable an adequate assess-
ment of their threat status. As ‘data deficient’
species, these species remain priorities for
future collection of population information.
A range of known threatening processes
continue to act upon many of the marine
invertebrates listed during our evaluation
process, and are consistent with the threats
that continue to be identified worldwide. The
activities we noted as being key threatening
processes for the majority of taxa thought to be
in decline were the impacts of fishing (including
bycatch or habitat loss), and land use/coastal
development-associated impacts such as sedi-
mentation. Some species were also noted to
be at risk from shell collectors and traders,
but such threats are usually considered much
less significant than either fishing or coastal
development, which can affect the survival
of even some relatively common taxa (Ponder
& Grayson 1998; Morrison et al. 2009). Man-
agement of these effects may result in the
improvement in the threat status of some
Conservation status of New Zealand marine invertebrates, 2009 137

species we have listed, but ongoing monitoring
would be required to assess fully the magnitude
of any such improvement.
Marine invertebrates have been suggested
to be vulnerable to the effects of climate change
and associated effects such as sea level rise,
climate warming and acidification (Harvell
et al. 2002; Orr et al. 2005; Przeslawski et al.
2008). A number of taxa we have listed as being
threatened or at risk, such as the deepwater
corals and other calcified taxa, have been
suggested to be particularly vulnerable to
the effects of ocean acidification (Turley et al.
2007; Smith 2009). Evaluation of these species’
population status provides a baseline for the
long-term assessment of the potential impacts
of such environmental change.
Encouragingly, no taxa listed in 2004
(Hitchmough et al. 2007) were relisted here in
a more threatened category as a result of an
actual change in the distribution and abun-
dance of the taxon, or an increase in the rate of
decline in abundance. The vast majority of taxa
that appeared to worsen in their threat status
were actually relisted in a more threatened
category as a result of the change in criteria
between 2002 (Molloy et al. 2002) and 2008
(Townsend et al. 2008), or an increase in
knowledge of the taxa. The marine slugs, or
gravel maggots S. climoi and S. manneringi are
two examples of ‘nationally critical’ species,
with highly restricted distributions. Smeagol
hilaris has recently been listed as a critically
endangered species in New South Wales,
Australia, for the same reasons as the two
conspecifics listed here (Fisheries Scientific
Committee 2009). The list of threatened
New Zealand marine invertebrates includes a
large number of narrow-range endemics, which
are known to be at particular risk of extinction
as a result of their vulnerability to small-scale
threatening processes such as stormwater
discharges, pollution or urbanisation (Ponder
et al. 2002). Often, legal protection of their
geographic range through the establishment of
a marine protected area, or other such manage-
ment action, may do little to protect such
species. Smeagol climoi and S. manneringi
were previously listed as ‘range restricted’
(Hitchmough et al. 2007) but revision of the
classification criteria (Townsend et al. 2008)
has ensured that such narrow-range endemic
species with no predicted pattern of decline or
history of human influence are highlighted as
being at the highest risk of extinction.
The results of this threat listing process
provide guidance for marine conservation man-
agement in New Zealand and also highlight key
areas where further monitoring and research is
required. As found in several international
threat listing processes, a general lack of
knowledge of population distribution and
abundance, as well as life history characteris-
tics, is an important issue to address to allow
the threat classification of marine invertebrates
(Gardenfors 2001; Miller et al. 2007). Addi-
tionally, the management of key threatening
processes and the responses of marine inverte-
brate populations to such management are
important areas of future research. As noted
by Ponder et al. (2002) for Australia, our lack
of knowledge in these areas may have serious
consequences for marine ecosystems. Although
international studies have reported difficulty in
applying some threat classification criteria to
marine species (Miller et al. 2007), we have
shown that the New Zealand criteria can be
successfully applied to marine species, and
may be suited to other countries with similar
requirements, geography and ecological char-
acteristics (Townsend et al. 2008).
Acknowledgements
We thank the following for their valuable input into
the relisting process: Geoff Read, Di Tracey and
Michelle Kelly. We also thank our two reviewers
for their constructive comments on the manuscript.
Figure 1 was reproduced with permission of the
Department of Conservation.
References
Anon 2001. Seamount closures. Seafood New
Zealand. June 2001: 21.
138 DJ Freeman et al.

Batham EJ 1945. Description of female, male and
larval forms of a tiny stalked barnacle, Ibla
idiotica n. sp. Transactions of the Royal Society
of New Zealand 75: 347356.
Beaumont, J, Oliver, M, MacDiarmid, A 2008.
Mapping the values of New Zealand’s coastal
waters 1. Environmental values. Biosecurity
New Zealand. Biosecurity New Zealand techni-
cal paper no. 2008/16 Wellington.
Buckeridge JS 1998. A new coral inhabiting barna-
cle, Chionelasmus crosnieri sp. nov. (Cirripedia:
Balanomorpha) from New Caledonia, South-
west Pacific. Zoosystema 20: 167176.
Buckeridge JS 2000. Neolepas osheai sp. nov., a
new deep-sea vent barnacle (Cirripedia: Pedun-
culata) from the Brothers Caldera, south-west
Pacific Ocean. New Zealand Journal of Marine
and Freshwater Research 34: 409418.
Carlton JT 1993. Neoextinctions of marine inverte-
brates. American Zoologist 33: 499509.
Carlton JT, Geller JB, Reaka-Kudla ML, Norse EA
1999. Historical extinctions in the sea. Annual
Review of Ecology and Systematics 30:
515538.
Carlton JT, Vermeij GJ, Lindberg DR, Carlton DA,
Dudley EC 1991. The first historical extinction
of a marine invertebrate in an ocean basin: The
demise of the eelgrass limpet Lottia alveus.
Biological Bulletin 180: 7280.
Clark M, O’Driscoll R 2003. Deepwater fisheries and
aspects of their impact on seamount habitat in
New Zealand. Journal of Northwest Atlantic
Fishery Science 31: 441458.
Consalvey M, Mackay K, Tracey D 2006. Informa-
tion review for protected deep-sea coral species
in the New Zealand region. NIWA Client
Report WLG200685, prepared for the Depart-
ment of Conservation. Wellington, National
Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research.
de Lange PJ, Norton DA, Courtney SP, Heenan PB,
Barkla JW, Cameron EK 2009. Threatened
and uncommon plants of New Zealand (2008
revision). New Zealand Journal of Botany 47:
6196.
Edgar GJ, Samson CR, Barrett NS 2005. Species
extinction in the marine environment: Tasmania
as a regional example of overlooked losses
in biodiversity. Conservation Biology 19:
12941300.
Fisheries Scientific Committee 2009. Proposed
determination: Smeagol hilaris, a marine slug,
as a critically endangered species. Port Stephens,
NSW, Port Stephens Fisheries Centre.
Foster BA 1981. Cirripedes from ocean ridges north
of New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of
Zoology 8: 349367.
Gardenfors U 2001. Classifying threatened species at
national versus global levels. Trends in Ecology
& Evolution 16: 511516.
Gordon DP ed. 2009. New Zealand Inventory of
Biodiversity. Volume One: Kingdom Animalia,
Radiata, Lophotrochozoa, Deuterostomia.
Christchurch, Canterbury University Press.
Grange KR, Tovey A, Hill AF 2003. The spatial
extent and nature of the bryozoan commu-
nities at Separation Point, Tasman Bay.
Marine Biodiversity Biosecurity Report No. 4.
Wellington, Ministry of Fisheries.
Harvell CD, Mitchell CE, Ward JR, Altizer S,
Dobson AP, Ostfeld RS, Samuel MD 2002.
Climate warming and disease risks for terrestrial
and marine biota. Science 296: 21582162.
Hitchmough R 2002. New Zealand threat classifica-
tion system lists. Wellington, Department of
Conservation.
Hitchmough R, Bull L, Cromarty P 2007. New
Zealand threat classification system lists 2005.
Wellington, Department of Conservation.
Hughes AR, Williams SL, Duarte CM, Heck KL,
Waycott M 2009. Associations of concern:
declining seagrasses and threatened dependent
species. Frontiers in Ecology 7: 242246.
IUCN (2010) IUCN Red List of Threatened
Species, version 2010.1. http://www.iucnred
list.org (accessed 28 April 2010).
Joseph LN, Maloney RF, Possingham HP 2008.
Optimal allocation of resources among threa-
tened species: a project prioritisation protocol.
Conservation Biology 23: 328338.
Krylova EM, Sahling H 2006. Recent bivalve
molluscs of the genus Calyptogena (Vesicomyi-
dae). Journal of Molluscan Studies 72: 359395.
McKinney ML 1998. Is marine biodiversity at less
risk? Evidence and implications. Diversity and
Distributions 4: 38.
McKinney ML 1999. High rates of extinction and
threat in poorly studied taxa. Conservation
Biology 13: 12731281.
Miller KJ, Mundy CN, Chadderton WL 2004.
Ecological and genetic evidence of the vulner-
ability of shallow-water populations of the
stylasterid hydrocoral Errina novaezelandiae in
New Zealand’s fiords. Aquatic Conservation:
Freshwater and Marine Ecosystems 14: 7594.
Miller RM, Rodriguez JP, Aniskowicz-Fowler T,
Bambaradeniya C, Boles R, Eaton MA, Gar-
denfors U, Keller V, Molur S, Walker S,
Pollock C 2007. National threatened species
listing based on IUCN criteria and regional
guidelines: current status and future perspec-
tives. Conservation Biology 21: 684696.
Conservation status of New Zealand marine invertebrates, 2009 139

Ministry of Fisheries 2007. Habitat protection
and research. http://www.fish.govt.nz/en-nz/
Environmental/SeabedProtection and
Research/default.htm.
Ministry of Fisheries 2009. Commercial quota
value. http://www.fish.govt.nz/en-nz/SOF/Val
ueIndicator.htm.
Miskelly CM, Dowding JE, Elliot GP, Hitchmough
RA, Powlesland RG, Robertson HA, Sagar
PM, Scofield RP, Taylor GA 2008. Conserva-
tion status of New Zealand birds, 2008.
Notornis 55: 117135.
Molloy J, Bell B, Clout M, de Lange P, Gibbs G,
Given D, Norton DA, Smith N, Stephens T
2002. Classifying species according to threat
of extinction. A system for New Zealand.
Threatened Species Occasional Publication 22
Wellington, Department of Conservation.
Morrison MA, Lowe ML, Parsons DM, Usmar NR,
McLeod IM 2009. A review of land-based
effects on coastal fisheries and supporting
biodiversity in New Zealand. New Zealand
Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report
No. 37 Wellington, Ministry of Fisheries.
Nielsen EE, Kenchington E 2001. A new approach
to prioritising marine fish and shellfish popula-
tions for conservation. Fish and Fisheries 2:
328343.
O’Hara T 2002. Endemism, rarity and vulnerability
of marine species along a temperate coastline.
Invertebrate Systematics 16: 671684.
O’Shea S 1999. The marine fauna of New Zealand:
Octopoda (Mollusca: Cephalopoda). NIWA
Biodiversity Memoir 112. Wellington, National
Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research.
Orr JC, Fabry VJ, Aumont O, Bopp L, Doney SC,
Feely RA, Gnanadesikan A, Gruber N, Ishida
A, Joos F, Key RM, Lindsay K, Maier-Reimer
E, Matear R, Monfray P, Mouchet A, Najjar
RG, Plattner G, Rodgers KB, Sabine CL,
Sarmiento JL, Schlitzer R, Slater RD, Totterdell
IJ, Weirig M, Yamanaka Y, Yool A 2005.
Anthropogenic ocean acidification over the
twenty-first century and its impact on calcifying
organisms. Nature 437: 681686.
Ponder WF, Carter GA, Flemons P, Chapman RR
2000. Evaluation of museum collection data for
use in biodiversity assessment. Conservation
Biology 15: 648657.
Ponder WF, Grayson JE 1998. The Australian
marine molluscs considered to be potentially
vulnerable to the shell trade. Report for Envir-
onment Australia. Sydney, Australian Museum.
Ponder WF, Hutchings P, Chapman R 2002.
Overview of the conservation of Australian
marine invertebrates. Report for Environment
Australia. Sydney, Australian Museum.
Powles H, Bradford MJ, Bradford RG, Doubleday
WG, Innes S, Levings CD 2000. Assessing and
protecting endangered marine species. ICES
Journal of Marine Science 57: 669676.
Probert PK, McKnight DG, Grove SL 1997. Benthic
invertebrate bycatch from a deep-water trawl
fishery. Chatham Rise, New Zealand. Aquatic
Conservation: Freshwater and Marine Ecosys-
tems 7: 2740.
Przeslawski R, Ahyong ST, Byrne M, Wo
¨rheide G,
Hutchings P 2008. Beyond corals and fish: the
effects of climate change on noncoral benthic
invertebrates of tropical reefs. Global Change
Biology 14: 27732795.
Regnier C, Fontane B, Bouchet P 2009. Not
knowing, not recording, not listing: numerous
unnoticed mollusk extinctions. Conservation
Biology 23 (5): 12141221.
Roberts CM, Andelman S, Branch G, Bustamante
RH, Castilla JC, Dugan J, Halpern BS, Lafferty
KD, Leslie H, Lubchenco J, McArdle D,
Possingham HP, Ruckelshaus M, Warner
RR 2003a. Ecological criteria for evaluating
candidate sites for marine reserves. Ecological
Applications 13: S199S214.
Roberts CM, Branch G, Bustamante RH, Castilla
JC, Dugan J, Halpern BS, Lafferty KD, Leslie
H, Lubchenco J, McArdle D, Ruckelshaus M,
Warner RR 2003b. Application of ecological
criteria in selecting marine reserves and devel-
oping reserve networks. Ecological Applications
13: S215S228.
Roberts CM, Hawkins JP 1999. Extinction risk in
the sea. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 14:
241246.
Smith AM 2009. Bryozoans as southern sentinels of
ocean acidification: a major role for a minor
phylum. Marine and Freshwater Research 60:
475482.
Southward AJ, Jones DS 2003. A revision of stalked
barnacles (Cirripedia: Thoracica: Scalpellomor-
pha: Eolepadidae: Neolepadinae) associated
with hydrothermalism, including a description
of a new genus and species from a volcanic
seamount off Papua New Guinea. Marine
Biodiversity 32: 7793.
Spencer HG, Marshall BA, Willan RC 2009. Check-
list of New Zealand living mollusca. In: Gordon
DP ed. New Zealand Inventory of Biodiversity
1. Kingdom Animalia, Radiata, Lophotrocho-
zoa, Deuterostomia. Christchurch, Canterbury
University Press.
Tillier S, Ponder WF 1992. New species of Smeagol
from Australia and New Zealand, with a
140 DJ Freeman et al.

discussion of the affinities of the genus (Gastro-
poda: Pulmonata). Journal of Molluscan
Studies 58: 135155.
Townsend AJ, de Lange PJ, Duffy CAJ, Miskelly
CM, Molloy J, Norton DA 2008. New Zealand
threat classification system manual, Wellington,
Department of Conservation.
Tracey DM, Anderson OF, Clark MR, Oliver MD
2005. A guide to common deepsea invertebrates
in New Zealand waters. New Zealand Aquatic
Environment and Biodiversity Report No. 1,
Wellington, Ministry of Fisheries.
Turley CM, Roberts JM, Guinotte JM 2007. Corals
in deep-water: will the unseen hand of ocean
acidification destroy cold-water ecosystems.
Coral Reefs 26: 445448.
Appendix 1: Threat rankings for marine invertebrates.
The following is a list of all marine invertebrate taxa we assessed according to Townsend et al. (2008). Taxa
are grouped by threat category, then alphabetically by scientific name. * denotes an addition to this list (c.f.
Hitchmough et al. 2007). Townsend et al. (2008) provided further detail regarding the qualifiers, which are
abbreviated as: CD, Conservation Dependent; DP, Data Poor; De, Designated; EF, Extreme Fluctuations;
EW, Extinct in the Wild; Inc, Increasing; IE, Island Endemic; OL, One Location; PD, Partial Decline; RF,
Recruitment Failure; RR, Range Restricted; SO, Secure Overseas; Sp, Sparse; St, Stable; TO, Threatened
Overseas.
Threatened
Nationally critical
Criteria for nationally critical: A, very small population (natural or unnatural); B, small population (natural
or unnatural) with a high ongoing or predicted decline; C, population (irrespective or size or number of sub-
populations) with a very high ongoing or predicted decline (70%).
Scientific name Phylum Criteria Qualifier(s)
Calyptogena spp. (NZOI) Mollusca A(3) DP, OL
Chionelasmus crosnieri (Buckeridge, 1998) Arthropoda A(3) RR, SO
Cirroctopus hochbergi O’Shea, 2000 Mollusca B (1/1) DP
Ibla idiotica Batham, 1945 Arthropoda C
Idioteuthis cordiformis (Chun, 1908) Mollusca C SO
Opisthoteuthis chathamensis O’Shea, 2000 Mollusca C
Smeagol climoi Tillier & Ponder, 1993 Mollusca A(3) DP, OL
Smeagol manneringi Climo 1981 Mollusca A(3) DP, OL
Volcanolepas osheai (Buckeridge, 2000) Arthropoda A(3) OL
Boccardiella magniovata (Read, 1975) Annelida B (2/1)
Nationally endangered
Criteria for nationally endangered: A, small population (natural or unnatural) that has a low to high ongoing
or predicted decline; B, small stable population (unnatural); C, moderate population and high ongoing or
predicted decline.
Scientific name Phylum Criteria Qualifer(s)
Pumilus antiquatus Atkins, 1958 Brachiopoda A (3/1)
Spio aequalis Ehlers, 1904 Annelida A (1/1) Dp, RR, Sp
Conservation status of New Zealand marine invertebrates, 2009 141

Nationally vulnerable
Criteria for nationally vulnerable: A, small, increasing population (unnatural); B, moderate, stable
population (unnatural); C, moderate population, with population trend that is declining; D, moderate to
large population and moderate to high ongoing or predicted decline; E, large population and high ongoing or
predicted decline.
Scientific name Phylum Criteria Qualifier(s)
Calvetia osheai Taylor & Gordon, 2003 Bryozoa C (3/1) RR
Cancellus laticoxa Forest & McLaughlan, 2000 Arthropoda C (3/1) OL
*Chathamisis bayeri Grant, 1976 Cnidaria D (3/1) DP, RR
Chitinolepas spiritsensis Buckeridge & Newman, 2006 Arthropoda C (3/1) DP
*Circinisis circinata Grant, 1976 Cnidaria D (3/1) DP, OL
*Echinisis spp. Cnidaria D (3/1) DP, OL, SO
Enallopsammia cf. maranzelleri Zibrowius, 1973 Cnidaria D (3/1) PD, SO, Sp
Iridogorgia spp. Cnidaria D (3/1)
Madrepora oculata Linnaeus, 1758 Cnidaria D (1/1) SO
Metallogorgia cf. melanotrichos Cnidaria D (3/1) SO
*Mopsea elongata Roule, 1908 Cnidaria D (3/1) DP, SO, Sp
Octopus kaharoa O’Shea, 2000 Mollusca E (2/1)
Opisthoteuthis mero O’Shea, 2000 Mollusca E (2/1)
*Paragorgia alisonae Sanchez, 2005 Cnidaria D (3/1) DP, Sp
*Paragorgia aotearoa Sanchez, 2005 Cnidaria D (3/1) DP, OL
*Paragorgia wahine Sanchez, 2005 Cnidaria D (3/1) DP, OL
*Peltastisis spp. Cnidaria D (3/1) OL
*Primnoisis spp. Cnidaria D (3/1) RR, SO
*Sibogagorgia dennisgordoni Sanchez, 2005 Cnidaria D (3/1) DP, OL
Spiritopora perplexa Taylor & Gordon, 2003 Bryozoa C (3/1) RR
Steginoporella perplexa Livingstone, 1929 Bryozoa C (3/1) RR
At risk
Declining
Criteria for declining: A, moderate to large population and low ongoing or predicted decline; B, large
population and low to moderate ongoing or predicted decline; C, very large population and low to high
ongoing or predicted decline.
Scientific name Phylum Criteria Qualifier(s)
Alcithoe benthicola (Dell, 1963) Mollusca B (2/1)
Alcithoe davegibbsi Hart, 2000 Mollusca C (2/1) OL
Alcithoe fissurata (Dell, 1963) Mollusca C (2/1)
Alcithoe larochei Marwick, 1926 Mollusca C (2/1)
Bathymodiolus tangaroa Cosel & Marshall, 2003 Mollusca A (2/1) RR
Calliostoma turnerarum (Powell, 1964) Mollusca C (2/1)
Cellana flava (Hutton, 1873) Mollusca A (2/1) RR
Gorgonocephalus dolichodactylus Do
¨derlein, 1911 Echinodermata C (2/1) SO
Recovering
Criteria for recovering: A, moderate population; B, moderate to large population.
No taxa listed in this category.
142 DJ Freeman et al.

Relict
No taxa listed in this category.
Naturally uncommon
Scientific name Phylum Qualifier(s)
Abra sp. (NMNZ M.225609) Mollusca DP, RR
*Acanella spp. Cnidaria DP, SO, Sp
Alcyonidium n. sp. 1 Leigh Reserve Bryozoa DP, OL
Alvania kermadecensis (Oliver, 1915) Mollusca RR
*Alvinocaris alexander Ahyong, 2009 Arthropoda RR
Alvinocaris longirostris Kikuchi & Ohta, 1995 Arthropoda RR
Alvinocaris niwa Webber, 2004 Arthropoda RR
Amaea sp. (NZOI TAN107/233) Mollusca DP, RR, SO?
Amygdalum sp. (NMNZ M.147338) Mollusca DP, SO?, Sp
Anabathron sp. aff. ovatus (Powell, 1927) (NMNZ M.227089) Mollusca RR
Ancistrobasis sp. (NZOI TAN107/232) Mollusca DP, RR
Annulobalcis marshalli Ware
´n, 1981 Mollusca RR
Antipathella fiordensis (Grange, 1990) Cnidaria RR
Antipathes n. sp. Cnidaria RR
Archiminolia dawsoni (B.A. Marshall, 1979) Mollusca DP, RR
Archiminolia hurleyi (B.A. Marshall, 1979) Mollusca DP, RR
Archiminolia tenuiseptum B.A. Marshall, 2000 Mollusca DP, RR
Argalista sp. A (NMNZ M.148551) Mollusca RR
Argalista sp. B (NMNZ M.148552) Mollusca RR
Asterophila sp. Ware
´n & Lewis, 1994 Mollusca DP, RR
Balanophyllia chnous Squires, 1962 Cnidaria RR
Bathyfautor rapuhia B.A. Marshall, 1996 Mollusca RR
Bathymophila valentia B.A. Marshall, 2000 Mollusca RR
Bellomitra sp. (NZOI TAN107/127) Mollusca DP, RR
Benthocardiella obliquata bountyensis Powell, 1934 Mollusca DP, RR
Benthocardiella sp. A (NMNZ M.148673) Mollusca RR
Benthocardiella sp. B (NMNZ M.148674) Mollusca RR
Benthocardiella sp. C (NMNZ M.148675) Mollusca RR
Benthocardiella sp. D (NMNZ M.148676) Mollusca RR
Brookula stibarochila (Iredale, 1912) Mollusca RR
Caecum maori Pizzini & Raines, 2006 Mollusca RR
Calliostoma antipodense B.A. Marshall, 1996 Mollusca RR
Calliostoma benthicola (Dell, 1950) Mollusca RR
Calliostoma consobrinum (Powell, 1958) Mollusca RR
Calliostoma eminens B.A. Marshall, 1996 Mollusca RR
Calliostoma gendalli B.A. Marshall, 1980 Mollusca RR
Calliostoma gibbsorum B.A. Marshall, 1996 Mollusca RR
Calliostoma jamiesoni B.A. Marshall, 1996 Mollusca RR
Calliostoma peregrinum B.A. Marshall, 1996 Mollusca RR
Calliostoma sp. (NZOI TAN107/233) Mollusca RR
Calliostoma xanthos B.A. Marshall, 1996 Mollusca RR
Calliotropis crystalophorus B.A. Marshall, 1980 Mollusca DP, RR
Calliotropis sp. A (NMNZ M.152747) Mollusca DP, RR
Calliotropis sp. B (NMNZ M.152735) Mollusca DP, RR
Cantharidus burchorum B.A. Marshall, 1999 Mollusca RR
Cantrainea sp. A (NZOI TAN107/323) Mollusca DP, RR
Cantrainea sp. B (NZOI TAN107/323) Mollusca DP, RR
Cantrainea sp. C (NZOI TAN107/235) Mollusca DP, RR
Conservation status of New Zealand marine invertebrates, 2009 143

Carditella sp. (NMNZ M.20766) Mollusca RR
Carinastele coronata B.A. Marshall, 1989 Mollusca DP, RR
Carinastele jugosa B.A. Marshall, 1989 Mollusca DP, RR
Carinastele kristelleae B.A. Marshall, 1989 Mollusca RR
Cellana craticulata (Suter, 1905) Mollusca RR
Cellana strigilis bollonsi Powell, 1955 E Mollusca RR
Cellana strigilis flemingi Powell, 1955 E Mollusca RR
Cellana strigilis oliveri Powell, 1955 E Mollusca RR
Chiton themeropis (Iredale, 1914) Mollusca RR
Cirsonella laxa Powell, 1938 Mollusca RR
Cirsonella maoria (Powell, 1937) Mollusca RR
Cirsonella paradoxa Powell, 1938 Mollusca RR
Clanculus atypicus Iredale, 1913 Mollusca RR
Clathrosepta sp. (NZOI U608) Mollusca DP, RR
Coenocyathus brooki Cairns, 1995 Cnidaria RR
Cominella quoyana griseicalx Willan, 1979 Mollusca RR
Cominella regalis Willan, 1979 Mollusca RR
Conchocele sp. (NMNZ M.28418) Mollusca RR
Condylocuna sp. A (NMNZ M.144652) Mollusca RR
Condylocuna sp. B (NMNZ M.144656) Mollusca RR
Condylocuna sp. C (NMNZ M.144657) Mollusca RR
Condylocuna sp. D (NMNZ M.144658) Mollusca RR
Hirtomurex tangaroa B.A. Marshall & Oliverio, 2009 Mollusca RR
*Corallium spp. Cnidaria Sp
Dilemma inexpectatum (Crozier, 1967) Mollusca RR
Cornisepta festiva (Crozier, 1966) Mollusca RR
Cranopsis sp. (NZOI TAN107.323) Mollusca RR
Crateritheca novaezelandiae (Thompson, 1879) Cnidaria RR
Crosseola favosa Powell, 1938 Mollusca RR
Crosseola intertexta Powell, 1938 Mollusca RR
Cyamiomactra sp. A (NMNZ M.60854) Mollusca RR
Cyamiomactra sp. B (NMNZ M.33947) Mollusca RR
Cyclochlamys pileolus Dijkstra & B.A. Marshall, 2008 Mollusca DP, RR
Cyclopecten fluctuosus Dijkstra & B.A. Marshall, 2008 Mollusca DP, RR
Cyclopecten horridus Dijkstra, 1995 Mollusca DP, RR
Danilia sp. (NZOI U599) Mollusca DP, RR
Ciclopecten fluctuatus (Bavay, 1905) Mollusca DP, RR
Diodora bollonsi (Oliver, 1915) Mollusca RR
Discotectonica acutissima (G.B. Sowerby III, 1914) (NZOI TAN107/122) Mollusca DP, RR, SO
Eatoniella (E.) iredalei (Oliver, 1915) Mollusca RR
Elamena momona Melrose, 1975 Arthropoda Sp
Eosipho sp. (NMNZ M.150056) Mollusca DP, RR
Errina spp. Cnidaria Sp
Etrema hedleyi (Oliver, 1915) Mollusca RR
Eurygonias hyalacanthus Farquhar, 1913 Echinodermata Sp RR
Falcatoflabellum raoulensis Cairns, 1995 Cnidaria RR
Fautrix candida B.A. Marshall, 1996 Mollusca RR
Fictonoba oliveri (Powell, 1927) Mollusca RR
Fissurellidae sp. (NMNZ M.118002) Mollusca RR
Fissurisepta manawatawhia Powell, 1938 Mollusca RR
Fissurisepta sp. (NMNZ M.138467) Mollusca RR
Fuscapex ophioacanthicola Ware
´n, 1981 Mollusca OL, DP, RR
Fusceulima goodingi Ware
´n, 1981 Mollusca OL, DP, RR
Gandalfus puia McLay 2007 Arthropoda RR
Gigantidas gladius Cosel & B.A. Marshall, 2003 Mollusca RR
Gonaxia sp. (NZOI) Cnidaria OL, RR
144 DJ Freeman et al.

Granata sp. (NMNZ M.148566) Mollusca RR
Graphis sculpturata (Oliver, 1915) Mollusca RR
Grippina acherontis B.A. Marshall, 2002 Mollusca OL, RR
Halimena aotearoa Melrose, 1975 Arthropoda Sp,
Haloceras sp. 1 (NZOI U573) Mollusca OL, DP, RR
Haloceras sp. 2 (M.147782) Mollusca OL, DP, RR
Haloceras sp. 3 (NZOI P941) Mollusca OL, DP, RR
Hamacuna sp. A (NMNZ M.143347) Mollusca RR
Hamacuna sp. B (NMNZ M.149015) Mollusca RR
Herpetopoma pruinosa B.A. Marshall, 1980 Mollusca RR
Herpetopoma sp. (NZOI TAN107/233) Mollusca RR
Hexaplex puniceus Oliver, 1916 Mollusca RR
Hunkydora rakiura B.A. Marshall, 2002 Mollusca RR
Iredalea subtropicalis Oliver, 1916 Mollusca RR
Kaiparapelta sp. (NMNZ M.137534) Mollusca DP, RR
Kapala sp. (NZOI TAN107/136) Mollusca DP, RR
*Keratoisis spp. Cnidaria DP, Sp
Kermia benhami Oliver, 1916 Mollusca RR
Kidderia sp. (NMNZ M.134975) Mollusca RR
Laevilitorina antipodum (Filhol, 1880) Mollusca RR
Laevilitorina bifasciata Suter, 1914 Mollusca RR
Laevilitorina delli (Powell, 1955) Mollusca RR
*Lebbeus wera Ahyong, 2009 Arthropoda OL
Lepetopsidae sp. (NMNZ M.158228) Mollusca RR
*Lepidisis spp. Cnidaria DP, Sp
Leptochiton norfolcensis subtropicalis (Iredale, 1914) Mollusca RR
Leptomithrax tuberculatus mortenseni Bennett, 1964 Arthropoda RR
Leptothyra benthicola B.A. Marshall, 1980 Mollusca RR
Leptothyra kermadecensis B.A. Marshall, 1980 Mollusca RR
Lienardia roseocincta (Oliver, 1915) Mollusca RR
Lillipathes lillei (Totton, 1923) Cnidaria S?O, RR
Lissodendoryx sp. (yellow slimy) Porifera RR
Lissotesta conoidea Powell, 1938 Mollusca RR
Lutraria bruuni Powell, 1967 Mollusca OL, DP, RR
Margarella antipoda hinemoa Powell, 1956 Mollusca RR
Margarella sp. A (NMNZ M.59506) Mollusca RR
Margarella sp. B (NMNZ M.131607) Mollusca RR
Meiocardia sp. (NZOI T256) Mollusca DP, SO? RR
Melanella kermadecensis Oliver, 1916 Mollusca RR
Melanella luminosa B.A. Marshall, 1997 Mollusca RR
Melanella perplexa Oliver, 1916 Mollusca RR
Melanella spinosa Oliver, 1916 Mollusca RR
Merelina sp. A (NMNZ M.148669) Mollusca RR
Merelina sp. B (NMNZ M.148670) Mollusca RR
Merelina sp. C (NMNZ M.148671) Mollusca RR
Merelina sp. D (NMNZ M.148668) Mollusca RR
Metaxia kermadecensis B.A. Marshall, 1978 Mollusca RR
Micrelenchus festivus B.A. Marshall, 1999 Mollusca RR
Micropilina rakiura B.A. Marshall, 1999 Mollusca RR
Micropilina tangaroa B.A. Marshall, 1991 Mollusca DP, RR
*Minuisis spp. Cnidaria DP, Sp
Mitrella sp. A (NZOI TAN107/233) Mollusca DP, RR
Mitrella sp. B (NZOI TAN107/323) Mollusca DP, RR
Mitromorpha expeditionis Oliver, 1916 Mollusca RR
Monilea incerta Iredale, 1913 Mollusca RR
Munditia anomala Powell, 1941 Mollusca RR
Conservation status of New Zealand marine invertebrates, 2009 145

Munditia aupouria Powell, 1938 Mollusca RR
Munditia delicatula Powell, 1941 Mollusca RR
Munditia echinata Powell, 1938 Mollusca RR
Munditia manawatawhia Powell, 1938 Mollusca RR
Munditia suteri (Mestayer, 1919) Mollusca RR
Mursia microspina Davie & Short, 1989 Arthropoda RR, SO
Mysella sp. (NMNZ M.51502) Mollusca RR
Mysella tellinula (Odhner, 1924) Mollusca RR
Nassarius sp. (NZOI TAN107/218) Mollusca RR
*Nautilocaris saintlaurentae Komai & Segonzac, 2006 Arthropoda SO
Nemertesia elongata Totton, 1930 Cnidaria RR
Niso sp. (NZOI TAN107/225) Mollusca DP, RR
Notopoides latus Henderson, 1888 Arthropoda OL
Oculina virgosa Squires, 1958 Cnidaria RR
Olgasolaris sp.(NZOI TAN107/228) Mollusca DP, RR
Onithochiton oliveri (Iredale, 1914) Mollusca RR
Ophieulima fuscoapicata Ware
´n, 1981 Mollusca OL, DP
Oxyperas belliana (Oliver, 1915) Mollusca RR
*Paragorgia arborea (Linnaeus, 1758) Cnidaria DP, SO, Sp
*Paragorgia kaupeka Sanchez, 2005 Cnidaria DP, RR
*Paragorgia maunga Sanchez, 2005 Cnidaria DP, RR
*Paragorgia whero Sanchez, 2005 Cnidaria DP, Sp
*Paralomis hirtella Macpherson & Saint Laurent, 1997 Arthropoda SO
Patella kermadecensis (Pilsbry, 1894) Mollusca RR
Patinigera terroris (Filhol, 1880) Mollusca RR
Pectunculina sp. (NMNZ M.225313) Mollusca DP, RR
Peltospiridae sp. A (NZOI Z9504) Mollusca DP, RR
Peltospiridae sp. B (NZOI Z9504) Mollusca DP, RR
Peltospiridae sp. C (NZOI Z9504) Mollusca DP, RR
Perrierina sp. (NMNZ M.96189) Mollusca RR
Philanisus fasciatus Riek, 1976 Arthropoda OL
Philorene texturata Oliver, 1916 Mollusca RR
Phymorhynchus sp. (NZOI KAH11/21) Mollusca DP
Pleuromeris sp. (NMNZ M.148741) Mollusca RR
Profundisepta sp. A (NMNZ M.148575) Mollusca RR
Profundisepta sp. B (NMNZ M.138462) Mollusca RR
Pronucula kermadecensis Oliver, 1916 Mollusca RR
Pteria avicula (Holten, 1802) Mollusca DP, SO, RR
Pteria sp. (NMNZ M.158247) Mollusca RR
Punctifera ophiomoerae Ware
´n, 1981 Mollusca OL, DP
Puncturella sp. (NZOI U601) Mollusca DP, RR
Purpurocardia reinga (Powell, 1933) Mollusca RR
Pusillina wallacei (Oliver, 1915) Mollusca RR
Pyramidelloides suteri (Oliver, 1915) Mollusca RR
Rastodens electra (Oliver, 1915) Mollusca RR
Rhyssoplax exasperata Iredale, 1915 Mollusca RR
Rimulanax sp. (NMNZ M.225598) Mollusca DP, RR
Rokopella capulus B.A. Marshall, 2006 Mollusca DP
Ruapukea carolus Dell, 1953 Mollusca DP, RR
Scissurella fairchildi Powell, 1934 Mollusca RR
*Sclerisis spp. Cnidaria DP, OL
Selastele kopua (B.A. Marshall, 1995) Mollusca RR
Selastele limatulum (B.A. Marshall, 1995) Mollusca RR
Selastele onustum (Odhner, 1924) Mollusca RR
Serrata raoulica B.A. Marshall, 2004 Mollusca RR
Serrata sp. A (NMNZ M.227078) Mollusca RR
146 DJ Freeman et al.

*Sibogagorgia tautahi Sanchez, 2005 Cnidaria DP, OL
Sinezona pacifica (Oliver, 1915) Mollusca RR
Skeneoides sp. (NMNZ M.148557) Mollusca OL
Solariella sp. A (NZOI TAN107/233) Mollusca DP, RR
Solariella sp. B (NZOI TAN107/225) Mollusca DP, RR
Solariella sp. C (NZOI W672) Mollusca DP, RR
Solatisonax aff. alleryi (Seguenza, 1876) (NZOI TAN107/053) Mollusca DP, RR
Solecurtus sp. (NMNZ M.225439) Mollusca DP, RR
Sphenotrochus squiresi Cairns, 1995 Cnidaria RR
Spondylus raoulensis Oliver, 1916 Mollusca RR
Stilapex sp. (NMNZ M.232084) Mollusca OL
Stilifer sp. (NMNZ M.150057) Mollusca OL, DP
Stomatella oliveri (Iredale, 1912) Mollusca RR
Sundaya exquisita Oliver, 1916 Mollusca RR
Suterilla imperforata Fukuda, Ponder & B.A. Marshall, 2006 Mollusca RR
Talabrica sp. (NMNZ M.137651) Mollusca RR
Tectus royanus (Iredale, 1912) Mollusca RR
Tegulaplax sp. (NZOI TAN107/235) Mollusca DP, RR
Thoristella polychroma B.A. Marshall, 1999 Mollusca RR
Thysanodonta sp. (NMNZ M.152736) Mollusca DP, RR
Trophon subtropicalis Iredale, 1913 Mollusca RR
Tugali sp. (NMNZ M.36012) Mollusca RR
Turbinellid sp. (NZOI TAN107/134) Mollusca DP, RR
Xenograpsus ngatama McLay, 2007 Arthropoda RR, SO
Zafra fuscolineata Oliver, 1915 Mollusca RR
Zafra kermadecensis Oliver, 1915 Mollusca RR
Zygoceras tropidophora Ware
´n & Bouchet, 1991 Mollusca OL, DP, SO
Other categories
Introduced and naturalised
No taxa listed in this category.
Migrant
No taxa listed in this category.
Vagrant
No taxa listed in this category.
Coloniser
No taxa listed in this category.
Data deficient
Scientific name Phylum Qualifier(s)
Antipathes fruticosa Gray, 1857 Cnidaria
Bathysquilla microps (Manning, 1961) Arthropoda SO
Cyclopecten kermadecensis (E.A. Smith, 1885) Mollusca OL
Hartmanonuphis pectinata (Knox & Hicks, 1973) Annelida
*Isidella spp. Cnidaria OL
Micropilina reinga B.A. Marshall, 2006 Mollusca RR, OL
Micropilina wareni B.A. Marshall, 2006 Mollusca RR, OL
Porterpygus kieri Baker, 1984 Echinodermata
Conservation status of New Zealand marine invertebrates, 2009 147

Scoletoma lynnei (Knox, 1951) Annelida
Spondylus ostreoides E.A. Smith, 1886 Mollusca OL
Vema occidua B.A. Marshall, 2006 Mollusca OL
Xyloplax medusiformis Baker, Rowe & Clark, 1987 Echinodermata
Extinct
No taxa listed in this category.
Not threatened
Scientific Name Phylum Qualifier(s)
Alcithoe flemingi Dell, 1978 Mollusca
Alcithoe lutea (Watson, 1882) Mollusca
Astraea heliotropium (Martyn, 1784) Mollusca
Celleporaria agglutinans (Hutton, 1873) Bryozoa
Cinctipora elegans Hutton, 1873 Bryozoa
Cyclochlamys transenna (Suter, 1913) Mollusca
Hippomenella vellicata (Hutton, 1873) Bryozoa
Notoacmea badia Oliver, 1927 Mollusca
Notoacmea helmsi (E.A. Smith, 1894) Mollusca
Provocator mirabilis (Finlay, 1926) Mollusca
Sinepecten segonzaci Schein, 2006 Mollusca SO
148 DJ Freeman et al.