Research and Management Priorities to Address Sea

Star Wasting Syndrome:

A Collaborative Strategic Action Plan

Issue 1

By the Sea Star Wasting Syndrome Task Force

Updated Nov 2018

Multiple mottled sea stars (Evasterias troscheli) losing arms and their grip as they succumb to sea star wasting syndrome in 2014 at Coupeville Wharf, Whidbey Island, Washington.

Photo by Jan Kocian

The Sea Star Wasting Syndrome Task Force http://www.piscoweb.org/sea-star-wasting-syndrome-task-force

*Oversight Committee Members

Working Group Leaders *Sarah Gravem, Oregon State University

*Jennifer Burnaford, California State University Fullerton Amy Henry, University of California, Irvine

Laurel Field, Oregon State University Elliot Jackson, Cornell University

Noah Jaffe, San Francisco State University Malina Loeher, California Department of Fish and Wildlife

*Bruce Menge, Oregon State University *Melissa Miner, University of California, Santa Cruz

Contributors

Emil Aalto, Stanford University Sean Bignami, Concordia University Jenn Burt, Simon Fraser University

Cynthia Catton, California Department of Fish and Wildlife Tim Carpenter, Seattle Aquarium

*Benjamin Dalziel, Oregon State University *Mike Dawson, University of California, Merced

Christopher Derito, Cornell University Corey Garza, California State University Monterey Bay

Maurice Goodman, California State University San Luis Obispo Cassandra Glaspie, Oregon State University

*Drew Harvell, Cornell University Lenaïg Hemery, Oregon State University

*Ian Hewson, Cornell University Brenda Konar, University of Alaska Fairbanks

Diego Montecino-Latorre, University of California, Davis Monica Moritsch, University of California, Santa Cruz

*Priya Nanjappa, American Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies Melissa Pespeni, University of Vermont

Jonathan Robinson, Oregon State University Laura Rogers-Bennett, California Department of Fish and Wildlife

*Steven Rumrill, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Cascade Sorte, University of California, Irvine

Lauren Schiebelhut, University of California, Merced Jenna Sullivan, Oregon State University

Dannise Ruiz-Ramos, University of California, Merced Allison Tracy, Cornell University

Piper Wallingford, University of California, Irvine

Special thanks to these stakeholders for their contributions Rylee Ann Alexander, University of California Davis

Silke Bachhuber, Oregon State University Michael Behrens, Pacific Lutheran University

Evonne Collura, Oregon Coast Aquarium Dalin D'Alessandro, Portland State University

Chris Eardley, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Steven Fradkin, National Park Service, Olympic National Park

Katie Gavenus, Center for Alaskan Coastal Studies Alyssa Gehman, University of British Columbia, Hakai Institute

Maya Groner, Prince William Sound Science Center, USGS Western Fisheries Research Center

Caitlin Hadfield, Seattle Aquarium Joel Hollander, Seattle Aquarium

Camille Hopkins, US Geological Survey Cori Kane, Oregon State University

Amy Olsen, Seattle Aquarium Michelle Segal, Strawberry Isle Marine Research Society

Stephanie Tsui, University of California Davis Dick Van Der Schaaf, The Nature Conservancy

Table of Contents Executive summary ................................................................................................................................................................ 1

Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................... 2

Background ................................................................................................................................................................................ 3

The Outbreak ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 3

The Cause ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3

Environmental Influences ...................................................................................................................................................................... 4

Recovery Potential .................................................................................................................................................................................... 5

Ecological Significance............................................................................................................................................................................. 6

The Unique Challenges of SSWS and Other Marine Diseases ................................................................................ 8

The water medium .................................................................................................................................................................................... 8

Pelagic Larval Phases ............................................................................................................................................................................... 8

Climate Change in the Sea ...................................................................................................................................................................... 8

Observation Capacity ............................................................................................................................................................................... 9

Agency Structure ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 9

The Strategic Action Plan ................................................................................................................................................... 10

Why a Strategic Action Plan? .............................................................................................................................................................. 10

Origin and Intent of the Plan ............................................................................................................................................................... 11

Working Group Summaries ............................................................................................................................................... 14

Diagnostics and Epidemiology ......................................................................................................................................... 15

Overview ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 15

Goals and Action Items .......................................................................................................................................................................... 16

Surveillance and Ecology .................................................................................................................................................... 19

Overview ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 19

Goals and Action Items .......................................................................................................................................................................... 20

Management, Conservation, and Recovery ................................................................................................................. 25

Overview ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 25

Goals and Action Items .......................................................................................................................................................................... 25

Communication, Outreach, and Citizen Science ........................................................................................................ 28

Overview ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 28

Goals and Action Items .......................................................................................................................................................................... 29

References ................................................................................................................................................................ ................ 32

Appendices ............................................................................................................................................................................... 35

1

Executive summary The outbreak of sea star wasting syndrome that began in 2013 devastated many

species of sea stars along the North American West Coast. While the outbreak has abated, the disease persists. While there are signs of recovery for some species or local populations, there are entire species and regions that have not recovered. This is especially important because many sea stars species are major predators, and ecosystem-level changes have already been observed.

This strategic action plan was crafted by expert scientists in the fields of marine disease, marine ecology, aquaculture, and disease dynamics. We have formed the four working groups below, each of which has outlined research goals and accompanying action items to advance our knowledge of SSWS and promote recovery, where possible. Next steps include mobilizing scientists to execute the action items herein. 1) Diagnostics and Epidemiology focuses on the pathogenesis and etiology of SSWS, which remains largely unknown 2) Surveillance and Ecology aims to maintain a monitoring network for future outbreaks of SSWS and to track population recovery, They also will investigate potential causes and study the consequences for marine communities. 3) Management, Conservation, and Recovery will identify populations and species at highest risk, create appropriate recovery plans, and craft a socioeconomic impact report. 4) Communication, Outreach, and Citizen Science will create a communication network among scientists, stakeholders, the public and policymakers. They also coordinate citizen science efforts.

Healthy ochre sea stars (Pisaster ochraceus) near Bodega Bay, California in 2010. Photo by Sarah Gravem.

2

Lesions on an infected giant pink sea star (Pisaster brevispinus) in 2014, Langley, Whidbey Island, Washington.

Photo by Jan Kocian

Introduction

Sea star wasting syndrome (SSWS) is one of the most extensive marine epizootics on record (Hewson et al. 2014). The scope of this outbreak is global, with the most devastating impacts occurring along the west coast of North America, from Baja California to Alaska (www.seastarwasting.org). At least 20 species have been affected, with many species experiencing extremely high mortality (Hewson et al. 2014, Montecino-Latorre et al. 2016). The disease remains active at moderate levels (Miner et al. 2018), recovery has not occurred for most species nor most places, and it is unknown if further outbreaks will occur.

SSWS poses a considerable threat to some of the most ecologically important predatory species in the intertidal and subtidal zones along the west coast of North

America, and large-scale changes in prey species are already being observed in these ecosystems (Schultz et al. 2016, Gravem & Menge unpublished data). Given the severity of the disease, the lack of knowledge about its etiology, and the potentially profound ecosystem consequences, we have assembled a SSWS Task Force to identify gaps in knowledge, research goals and action items, and potential conservation strategies at a national scale. The task force is populated by academics, state and federal agencies, and private partners to respond effectively to the disease. The

following plan details the elements that are critical to understanding and managing SSWS. For each element, we detail the research goals and action items for scientists and managers involved in this effort. Please see http://www.piscoweb.org/sea-star-wasting-syndrome-task-force for more detail.

3

An infected and dying ochre sea star (Pisaster ochraceus) losing grip from

the rocks at Cape Blanco, Oregon in 2014. Photo by Angela Johnson

Background

The Outbreak

The SSWS outbreak was first observed in April 2013, in the intertidal ochre star Pisaster ochraceus, on the outer coast of Washington State and Fraser Sound near Vancouver, British Columbia (seastarwasting.org). The disease rapidly became an epizootic and spread to many other species, with increasing reports made in Washington, British Columbia, and central and southern California. Oddly, the outbreak lagged by one year in coastal Oregon. Ultimately, SSWS devastated populations of sea stars ranging from Baja California to Alaska between 2013 and 2015 (Hewson et al. 2014, Eisenlord et al. 2016, Menge et al. 2016, Montecino-Latorre et al. 2016, Miner et al. 2018). There are records of similar wasting disease outbreaks on the US East Coast, but it is not clear whether the same disease agent is responsible (DelSesto 2015, Bucci et al. 2017).

When animals are infected, lesions develop that can progress into arm detachment, grip loss, “melting” and death (Hewson et al. 2014, Menge et al. 2016). This process is rapid; sea stars can go from visually asymptomatic to dead within days, and few recover once symptoms are observed. The ochre sea star P. ochraceus experienced severe declines (58-100%) throughout its range (Eisenlord et al. 2016, Menge et al. 2016, Miner et al. 2018). The large sunflower star, Pycnopodia helianthoides, was among the most severely affected species, and populations are still only a small fraction of their pre-SSWS levels (Montecino-Latorre et al. 2016, Schultz et al. 2016, Burt et al. in review, seastarwasting.org, Scott Marion personal communication, B. Konar, unpublished data). Several sea star species were also severely affected but demographic data are limited (Eisenlord et al. 2016, Montecino-Latorre et al. 2016).

The Cause

The cause is not well understood; there is evidence for P. helianthoides that sea star associated densovirus (SSaDV) or wasting asteroid-associated densoviruses (WAaDs) cause the syndrome (Hewson et al. 2014, 2018). However, challenge experiments with these viral particles did not elicit disease symptoms in other species (P. ochraceus, Pisaster brevispinus and

4

Now a rare sight, a young sunflower sea star (Pycnopodia helianthoides) is held by co-author Lenaïg Hemery during a dive at Alki Beach, West

Seattle, in July 2015

Evasterias troschelii), so it is possible there are two or more diseases involved or that the syndrome has a multifactorial cause (Hewson et al. 2018). There is evidence that the syndrome can be readily transmitted through seawater (e.g., it caused outbreaks in flow-through aquaria) and the rapid and expansive geography of the outbreak suggests it may be transported long distances by ocean currents (Hewson et al. 2014). But candidate viruses appear to decay quickly in seawater, and are not currently detectable in the phytoplankton or sediment, so the mode of transmission is unknown and potentially requires direct contact among nearby individuals (Hewson et al. 2018). Further, links between the sea star microbiome and the emergence of SSWS symptoms are evident (Lloyd and Pespeni 2018)

Symptoms of uncharacterized wasting syndromes have been intermittently observed in sea star species in the past (Dungan et al. 1982, Eckert et al. 1998, Bates et al. 2009, Staehli et al. 2009). A viral DNA was detected in one museum specimen from 1972 (Hewson et al. 2014), but a more complete analyses of museum samples, sea stars around the globe, and multiple species of stars in California from 2012 (pre-wasting) revealed almost no detection of candidate viruses, so it is now thought that the virus associated with the most recent outbreak is novel, if the cause is indeed a virus (Hewson et al. 2018). The agent of the most recent outbreak is not likely an RNA virus, a bacterium, a protozoan, nor transmitted by a pelagic vector species (Hewson et al. 2018). We are just beginning to understand the infectious agent, its transmission, and the susceptibility, immune responses, and recovery potential of the sea stars (Hewson et al. 2014, 2018, Fuess et al. 2015, Gudenkauf and Hewson 2015, Wares and Schiebelhut 2015, Chandler and Wares 2017). Building this knowledge base is a major priority of this Strategic Action Plan.

Environmental Influences

Prior outbreaks of putative “wasting syndrome” were often preceded by increases in water temperature (Dungan et al. 1982, Eckert et al. 1998, Bates et al. 2009, Staehli et al. 2009), but there is mixed evidence that elevated temperatures triggered the most recent 2013/2014 outbreak. For the recent outbreak, diseased sea stars were more common in

5

warmer late spring, summer, and early fall than in cooler winter months in coastal Oregon and the Salish Sea (Eisenlord et al. 2016, Kohl et al. 2016, Menge et al. 2016). In laboratory experiments before and after the recent outbreak, sea stars suffered higher disease frequencies or accelerated symptom and death rates under warmer conditions (Bates et al. 2009, Eisenlord et al. 2016, Kohl et al. 2016). Field surveys immediately before, during, and after the recent outbreak also suggest that warm temperature anomalies coincided with increased disease severity in the Salish Sea (Eisenlord et al. 2016), and population declines were more severe in warmer southern regions (Miner et al. 2018). On the central coast of British Columbia, Canada, observations of diseased sea stars in subtidal surveys corresponded with the arrival of an anomalous marine heat wave (Burt et al. in review). On the other hand, symptoms were most severe during winter in Southern California and the timing of P. ochraceus population declines showed no clear patterns with water temperature anomalies when comparing multiple regions (Miner et al. 2018). Similarly, Hewson et al. (2018) did not find convincing evidence for a correlation between water temperature and patterns of disease symptoms across sites from southern California to Washington State. The disease frequency was actually negatively related to average water temperature in 2014 in Oregon, though anomalously warm May temperatures did coincide with the start of the outbreak (Menge et al. 2016). Regardless of whether warming temperatures triggered the outbreak, it is clear that warming hastens disease progression and may have contributed to disease severity in at least some regions (Miner et al. 2018).

Recovery Potential

The potential for natural recovery varies widely among species. Observations of the formerly common Pycnopodia helianthoides have been sparse or non-existent throughout much of the US West Coast since the outbreak, which is of serious concern (Montecino-LaTorre 2016, Schultz et al. 2016, Burt et al. in review, S. Rumrill personal observation, Mark Carr and Scott Marion personal communications). Recent modest recovery has been observed at a few locations within the Salish Sea (seastarwasting.org) and central coast of British Columbia (J. Burt, personal observation), but this represents a very small portion of its geographic range. In some regions around the Gulf of Alaska, juvenile P. helianthoides began appearing in the summer of 2017; however, the survivorship of these juveniles is still unknown (B. Konar, personal observation). Though observations are limited, P. brevispinus recovery has not been observed in bays and estuaries of Oregon (Steve Rumrill personal observation). Conversely, a large number of juvenile P. ochraceus have been observed at many sites in Washington, Oregon and northern and central California starting in 2014 (Menge et al. 2016, Miner et al. 2018, Moritsch and Raimondi 2018). However, almost no recruitment has been observed in the bays and estuaries of Oregon (Steve Rumrill personal observation) or in southern California (Miner et al. 2018, Moritsch and Raimondi 2018). Though juvenile mortality is high (Sewell and Watson 1993, Miner et al. 2018), survivors should reach reproductive size in the coming years and could serve as source populations for other areas (Moritsch and Raimondi 2018). It is not clear whether the surge of juveniles is related to the disease itself (i.e., causing spawning), to increased survival of juveniles after release from competition with adults, or was a lucky happenstance. Despite potential for recovery of P. ochraceus, we do not know if another

6

A very young ochre sea star (Pisaster ochraceus) that was part of a large recruitment pulse in 2016, after the outbreak. Cape Perpetua Marine Reserve, Oregon. Photo by Jonathan Robinson.

outbreak will occur, or if these sea stars will become more vulnerable as they reach adulthood as some studies suggest (Eisenlord et al. 2016). One goal of this task force is to compile existing or obtain demographic data to determine the recovery potential of all affected species. Another priority of the SSWS task force is to consider rehabilitation and management options if populations do not recover.

Ecological Significance

SSWS has had fundamental ecological consequences for sea star populations, and has apparently elicited extremely rapid shifts in allele frequency for P. ochraceus, indicating a selective event that may increase resilience to future outbreaks (Schiebelhut et al. 2018). Beyond consequences for sea star populations themselves, many affected sea stars are important members of their ecological communities. P. ochraceus is a keystone predator that consumes the competitively dominant mussel Mytilus californianus, thereby opening space for other species (e.g., algae, barnacles, sea anemones), which can result in increased biodiversity of primary space occupiers in the intertidal ecosystem (Paine 1966, 1969, 1980). Since the outbreak, major increases in prey abundance and consequent crowding-out of other intertidal species have been observed in several locales (Schultz et al. 2016, Gravem & Menge unpublished data). The sunflower star Pycnopodia helianthoides is also a strongly interacting predator. In the Gulf of Alaska it competes with sea otters and perhaps humans for clams (Traiger et al. 2016). It is also a major predator of sea urchins that, when left unchecked, can overgraze kelp and other seaweeds, decreasing habitat and food for many species (Duggins 1983). Increases in sea urchins Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis and Mesocentrotus franciscanus were evident in Howe Sound, British Columbia and the San Juan Islands shortly after the outbreak, and accompanying decreases in kelp were observed (Montecino-Latorre et al. 2016, Schultz et al. 2016). On the central coast of British Columbia, the decline of P. helianthoides was linked to in a 311% increase in the density of M. franciscanus and a corresponding 30% decline in kelp densities (Burt et al. in review). It is likely that increases in sea urchins and decreases in kelp will occur in many locales, with negative consequences for the many species that rely on kelp for food. Potential economic impacts also include decreased fish stocks

7

because many larval fish rely on kelp for refuge (Holbrook et al. 1990). Other possible economic impacts include a potential negative effect on kelp and algal harvesting and potential positive effects on the modest recreational take of the sea urchin M. franciscanus, the mussel M. californianus, and the gooseneck barnacle Pollicipes polymerus. An economic impacts assessment of SSWS is one of the goals of this Strategic Action Plan.

8

The Unique Challenges of SSWS and Other Marine Diseases

The water medium

The water medium introduces a unique set of challenges for researchers and managers of marine and aquatic diseases compared to those studying better-known terrestrial diseases. Firstly, compared to air, water often transmits pathogens more readily because pathogens can survive longer and move with less-contained ocean currents. This can make containment of a waterborne disease by managers less feasible as well. Further, marine diseases tend to have a wider host range (each disease affects many species), which can make them more widespread or deadly (Lafferty and Gerber 2002, Harvell et al. 2004). The large volumes of water can also literally dilute the risk of acquiring infection (Bidegain et al. 2016). There are also apparently fewer vector-borne disease in marine systems, though this may be because they are relatively less-studied (Harvell et al. 2004). Because pathogen transmission in the ocean may be governed by different processes than on land, marine infectious diseases may not conform to standard models of transmission that have been primarily developed in terrestrial contexts and focus on host contact rates or population susceptibility (McCallum et al. 2003, Harvell et al. 2004). Thus, one priority of this strategic action plan is to develop an ecosystems-based disease transmission model for SSWS, and test its performance with data (Surveillance and Ecology, Goal 3, Action Item 1).

Pelagic Larval Phases

The life history strategies of many marine organisms present unique benefits and challenges for managing disease. Most marine invertebrates and fish have external fertilization followed by a larval phase before the young return to shore weeks or months later (R. Strathmann 1978, M.F. Strathmann 1987). Thus, most marine organisms have relatively open populations, and parents and offspring do not typically cohabitate (Cowen and Sponaugle 2009). The benefits include 1) that parents may not easily infect their offspring, 2) traveling larvae can replenish depauperate areas and 3) large numbers of offspring may allow adaptation to disease. On the other hand, 1) typical remediation strategies like vaccination, antibiotic therapy, quarantine, culling, and the development of resistant transgenics are unfeasible, except perhaps for some fish and marine mammals (Harvell et al. 2004) and 2) captive breeding is very challenging and often expensive. One goal of this strategic action plan is to assess the practicality of various remediation strategies, should they be necessary (Management, Conservation, and Recovery, Goal 2, Action Item 2).

Climate Change in the Sea

In general, disease is on the rise for many marine taxa, and this is likely caused by increasing temperatures among other climate change stressors (Lafferty et al. 2004, Ward and Lafferty 2004, Burge et al. 2014). Warming water can increase pathogen growth and reproduction and weaken host resistance (Chubb 1979, 1980, Harvell et al. 1999, 2002,

9

Mydlarz et al. 2006). Beyond temperature rise, marine organisms face unique challenges associated with global change that terrestrial organisms do not, and all may have consequences for disease dynamics (reviewed by Burge et al. 2014). Firstly, ocean acidification interferes with multiple physiological processes and may affect immune function (Doney et al. 2009, Kroeker et al. 2013, Brothers et al. 2016, Figueiredo et al. 2016). Further, increased storm water runoff could also increase “pollutogens”, which are infectious agents that travel with pollution (Lafferty et al. 2004). Finally, increases in destructive storms can cause physical injury and increase host susceptibility (Mydlarz et al. 2006) and hurricanes can transport pathogens in warm water (Scheibling and Lauzon-Guay 2010). Overall, climate change may exacerbate the frequency or severity of marine diseases.

Observation Capacity

Our observational capacities in the sea are significantly limited relative to on land. It is possible to miss outbreaks entirely and scientists, managers or fisheries are usually slow to notice or respond (Harvell et al. 2004). Even in commercial species there is considerable room for improvement (Carnegie et al. 2016). To surveil populations and disease outbreaks, engaging engage members of the public who regularly venture into marine environments is crucial. Coordinating this effort for SSWS is part of our action plan below (Communication, Outreach, and Citizen Science, Goal 4).

Agency Structure

Finally, the governmental management units are somewhat different in the sea than on land. This determines how management tactics are pursued. It is common for many agencies to have jurisdiction over the same geographic area, but have different levels of or shared authority depending on the taxon. Many species’ ranges overlap local, county, city, state, tribal, and federal jurisdictions all at once. Multi-agency cooperation may be required to enact protective legislation or management action. Further, many diseases, including SSWS, cross international boundaries and require international cooperation. We are assembling an interdisciplinary team to address SSWS and inform strategies for other marine diseases.

10

The Strategic Action Plan

Why a Strategic Action Plan?

The severity and potential ecological consequences of SSWS make it important that a coordinated national and international effort be undertaken to understand its etiology, the consequences, and to take management action if needed. It is quite possible that some affected species will not recover naturally, or that the disease will re-emerge. State, Federal, and Tribal wildlife and land management agencies have authority to manage wildlife species and their habitats through applicable law and legislation. For example, Federal agencies must comply with the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act, among other laws. At the state level, California’s Marine Life Protection Act is also relevant. Some of these laws provide alternative procedures to address emergency situations. The implementation of a strategic action plan (SAP) will assist State, Federal, and Tribal agencies, as well as local governments, in exercising their authorities for managing sea star populations and marine ecosystems. The implementation of this SAP will also help to standardize surveillance and reporting methods to ensure consistency in data collection and provide meaningful results.

Organizational structure of the Sea Star Wasting Syndrome Task Force. Working groups are in purple circles, with the backgrounds of participating members in orange circles. The Task

Force oversight committee members, working group leaders, and contributors are detailed in the list of authors. The oversight committee is populated by leading SSWS scientists. Many

task force members serve on more than one working group.

11

Origin and Intent of the Plan

In August 2016 authors Harvell and Menge were invited to participate in a “Strategic Wildlife Health Initiative” in concert with academic and agency scientists and lawyers working on wildlife disease in bats (white-nose syndrome) and salamanders (Batrachochytrium salamandrivorans or BSal). It became apparent through discussions that there exist significant knowledge gaps in SSWS as well as unique challenges for understanding and managing marine diseases in general, especially when compared to more familiar vertebrate diseases.

Funding from the BAND Foundation (bandfdn.org) enabled the coordination of a Sea Star Wasting Syndrome Workshop held in Pasadena, CA on November 16, 2017, which was attended primarily by academic scientists studying various aspects of SSWS, along with agency scientists and aquarists. At the workshop, we identified and sorted into four working groups (Fig. 1): 1) Diagnostics and Epidemiology, 2) Surveillance and Ecology, 3) Management, Conservation and Recovery, and 4) Communication, Outreach, and Citizen Science (Fig. 1). In each group, 1-2 individuals volunteered to lead the working group and draft the SAP. More senior participants agreed to serve on the Oversight Committee for the emerging SSWS Task Force. The priorities of the workshop included identifying knowledge gaps, research goals, and associated action items for each goal. The content of this SAP is a product of the workshop.

To diversify perspectives, we recruited a diverse group of stakeholders including non-governmental organizations, government agencies, aquarists, museums, veterinarians, and naturalists among others. Stakeholders met at a second workshop October 20, 2018 in Portland Oregon, also funded by the BAND foundation. At this meeting we solicited input on this SAP and strengthened out network of experts. This strong collaborative effort will facilitate efficient and effective research and management advancements. The implementation of this and future iterations of this SAP will be an adaptive process, requiring continual modification and expansion as new information becomes available and new stakeholders and research provide input.

The SSWS SAP builds upon goals identified by attendees of two prior workshops. The first was a collaborative effort in June 2014 between Oregon Sea Grant and Oregon State University’s Hatfield Marine Science Center to bring together scientists, resource managers, aquarists, and members of the public to share preliminary findings from research and observations from field, laboratory, and aquarium environments. Invited speakers described the progression of SSWS, pathology of the syndrome, potential ecological impacts, and efforts to control the spread of SSWS in aquaria and science centers. The collective knowledge shared at the workshop was then used to identify gaps in research and monitoring, make recommendations for management of SSWS (particularly for captive stars), and develop consistent and effective educational messaging. The information shared, and related discussion and goals identified were summarized in a white paper (Appendix 1: Rumrill et al. 2014). From this workshop, a coordinated surveillance network, a citizen science program, and public outreach began (seastarwasting.org).

A second workshop, the “Sea Star Wasting Summit”, was hosted by the Seattle Aquarium in January 2016. The primary focus of this workshop was to bring together

12

researchers studying various aspects of SSWS (e.g. pathology, histology, physiology, possible contributing environmental factors) to provide a comprehensive summary of what was known/not known about the syndrome. This summary (Appendix 2: Lahner and Work 2016) could then be used by scientists to better focus their research, and hopefully, lead to the discovery of the cause(s) of SSWS. SSWS researchers have made progress on many of the priority areas identified by these earlier workshops, including improved coordination and collaboration among researchers studying various aspects of SSWS, and better communication among researchers, resource managers, and members of the general public. This SAP extends and modifies these previously identified goals and recommendations.

A long term goal of the SSWS task force, our collaborators, and our funders is to use SSWS as a case study outlining best practices for studying and managing marine wildlife disease outbreaks. We plan to use this to inform a reintroduction of The Marine Disease Emergency Act (US House of Representatives H.R. 5546), which was introduced by Rep. Dennis Heck (D-Wash.) in 2014. The purpose of the act is to provide emergency resources to mount a rapid response when marine infectious diseases are first detected. Its goals include (i) a basic research program to increase diagnostic tools, understand pathogenesis, and quantify epidemiological processes; (ii) a surveillance program to identify marine disease outbreaks; (iii) a marine disease forecasting program; and (iv) directed mitigation programs to reduce the intensity of disease outbreaks and their downstream impacts (Groner et al. 2015). The lack of timely resources available to enable scientists to study SSWS disease as it emerged made it quite apparent that this type of legislation is sorely needed. This is especially necessary as marine and terrestrial diseases are already increasing with climate change and other human activities (Harvell et al. 2002, 2004, Lafferty et al. 2004).

13

Attendees of the Sea Star Wasting Workshop, November 16, 2017 in Pasadena, CA.

Front row (left to right): Diego Montecino-Latorre, Elliot Jackson, Jenna Sullivan, Chris Derito, Piper Wallingford, Maurice Goodman, Laurel Field, Sarah Gravem, Bruce Menge, Lauren

Schiebelhut, Jonathan Robinson Middle row (left to right): Monica Moritsch, Amy Henry, Emil Aalto, Lenaïg Hemery, Malina

Loeher Back row (left to right): Sean Bignami, Tim Carpenter, Cascade Sorte, Michael Dawson,

Benjamin Dalziel, Cassie Glaspie, Cynthia Catton, Jennifer Burnaford, Noah Jaffe, Dannise Ruiz-Ramos, Corey Garza

14

Working Group Summaries Diagnostics and Epidemiology: The major goal of this working group is to improve our understanding of the pathogenesis and etiology of SSWS because very little is known about the cause. Another goal is to develop laboratory protocols and field sampling standards to enable a coordinated sampling approach for sea stars. Surveillance and Ecology: The goals of this group include establishing a coordinated, ongoing, and reproducible set of protocols that will facilitate the detection and monitoring of SSWS events in natural populations throughout the range of this epizootic, and to maintain a database for this information. Additionally, tracking the potential recovery of sea star populations. Further, to gain a mechanistic understanding of the potential causes of SSWS outbreaks including environmental, genetic, larval, pathogenic, and human impacts. Finally, studying the consequences of the disease for marine communities. Management, Conservation, and Recovery: This working group primarily focuses on assessing present and future impacts of SSWS to identify populations most at risk. This information will help us create a multi-level recovery plan for species or populations depending on the risk level. Further, a socioeconomic impact report will be compiled. Communication, Outreach, and Citizen Science: Goals of this working group include creating an organizational structure among scientists studying various aspects of SSWS to improve communication with the public and policymakers. We outline an approach for identifying target audiences and developing appropriate outreach mechanisms for various audiences and interest levels. We will also identify pressing research questions and data gaps that might be addressed through citizen science efforts. We plan to build upon the infrastructure and methods that have been developed by groups like the Multi-Agency Rocky Intertidal Network to expand outreach and involvement, both geographically and scientifically, to areas that are currently underrepresented.

A young ochre sea star (Pisaster ochraceus) among coralline algae, tunicates and sea

anemones in 2016 in Cape Perpetua Marine Reserve, Oregon. Photo by Jonathan Robinson.

15

Diagnostics and Epidemiology Elliot Jackson*, Lauren Schiebelhut, Dannise Ruiz-Ramos, Diego Montecino-Latorre, Ben

Dalziel, Christopher DeRito, and Ian Hewson *Working group leaders

Overview

The purpose of the diagnostics and epidemiology working group is to coordinate standardized sampling efforts for activities in diagnostic laboratories to study microbial, host and environmental aspects of SSWS. Because the etiology of SSWS is not fully understood, a coordinated effort among field researchers and diagnostic laboratories is needed to effectively utilize samples collected to investigate microbial (e.g., bacterial, microeukaryote, viral) or environmental (e.g., toxins) causes of SSWS and populations or areas at greatest risk. Researchers in this working group are experts in these fields, and will lead development of protocols for sample analyses. The primary goals include establishing case definition(s) for SSWS, identifying the pathogen(s) that causes SSWS, identifying taxa or geographic regions most at risk, and monitoring environmental parameters associated with SSWS.

Co-author Laurel Field sampling ochre sea star (Pisaster ochraceus) tissue for DNA analyses

and pathogen detection in 2016. Photo by Sarah Gravem.

16

Goals and Action Items

Goal 1: Case definition: Establish the case definition of SSWS

Action item 1: Establish a case definition for SSWS for each affected species. The clinical signs may be non-specific, which has impeded establishing a case definition. Through wild observations and disease challenge experiments with each species, species-specific case definitions should be generated based on a combination of species, gross observations, progression over time, diagnostics, geographic location, and/or concomitant factors. Suggested categories are: ‘probable’, ‘suspect’ and ‘not consistent with SSWS’. Case definitions allow researchers and citizen scientists to differentiate potential cases from sea stars that may have other disease issues. Case definitions may change over time as more information becomes available.

Goal 2: Identify the causal agent: Establish etiology of SSWS

Action Item 1: Determine if SSWS appears to be transmissible for all species affected. Disease challenge experiments with Pycnopodia helianthoides indicate that the disease is transmissible through direct contact (Hewson et al. 2014). Infection of multiple species housed in aquaria connected to the coastal ocean suggest waterborne transmission, though identifying the agent in the water has been challenging (Hewson et al. 2018).

Action item 2: Build upon existing inquiries determining which single or combined factors can induce symptoms of SSWS experimentally for all species affected, e.g., temperature or pH fluctuations, toxin exposure, microbiome changes, prey changes.

Action item 3: Continue to try to identify possible microbial pathogen(s) associated with wasting in all species affected. While a densovirus (SSaDV) has been implicated in SSWS in Pycnopodia helianthoides, the virus has been found in unaffected individuals and the evidence is other asteroid species is poor. It is important to assess the antigenic variation and geographic and host range of SSaDV and encourage isolation (culture) of densovirus and other suspected pathogens.

Action item 4: Encourage one or more research or diagnostic laboratories to establish immortal cell cultures of asteroids against which potential intracellular pathogens can be tested.

Action item 5: If pathogens are identified, investigate the possibility of developing pathogen free sea stars under human care.

17

Goal 3: Sampling protocols and infrastructure: Develop standardized sampling protocols for SSWS and establish laboratories and personnel for sample testing Action Item 1: Create standardized sampling protocols for field researchers. We will

develop specific sampling instructions to enable molecular testing, genetic testing, cytology, histology, and cultures. This should include materials, costs, collection criteria, sample site(s) and sizes, sampling methods, and storage and shipping requirements. Non-lethal sample collection options should be used wherever possible. Ideally, materials and training for sample collection should be provided.

Action item 2: Encourage coordinated collection of environmental data at time and site of tissue sampling (e.g., water quality, toxicology, environmental conditions, prey distribution).

Action Item 3: Establish centralized laboratories to which field samples can be shipped for analyses.

Goal 4: Communicate findings: Assist with timely reporting and communication of

results to associated agencies and participating groups Action Item 1: Working with the Communication, Outreach, and Citizen Science

group, make monitoring and sampling protocols and associated results available through peer-reviewed publications, workshops, conferences, online websites, and/or collaborative working groups.

Action Item 2: Make a centralized online database for all sample collections, including any scientific results. This should provide researchers and collaborators with a digital library to encourage collaboration.

Action Item 3: Make a centralized library of published SSWS-associated research (depending on permissions) with links to the principal working groups.

18

An infected and dying Stimpson’s sun star (Solaster stimpsoni) in 2014 at Deception Pass,

Whidbey Island, Washington. Photo by Jan Kocian

19

Surveillance and Ecology Jennifer Burnaford*, Noah Jaffe*, Bruce Menge*, Sean Bignami, Cynthia Catton, Ben Dalziel, Corey Garza, Lenaïg G. Hemery, C. Melissa Miner, Diego Montecino-Latorre, Cascade Sorte,

and Piper Wallingford *Working group leaders

Overview

The goals of the ecological research and surveillance working group are to establish a coordinated, ongoing, and reproducible set of protocols that will facilitate the detection and monitoring of SSWS events in natural populations, identify any mechanistic causes of SSWS, and document the consequences of SSWS for marine communities. The vast geographic extent of the 2013-2014 SSWS outbreak suggests that effective surveillance and monitoring necessitates participation from a large number of researchers across multiple regions. Thus, development of standardized protocols for field surveys and data management, along with the establishment of a centralized data repository, were identified as key factors by the working group.

Co-author Sean Bignami measuring a surviving ochre star (Pisaster ochraceus) in 2017 at

Shaw’s Cove, Orange County, California. Photo by Sean Bignami.

20

Goals and Action Items

Goal 1: Field surveys: Develop standardized protocols for field surveys of natural populations of asteroids across a wide geographic range.

Action Item 1: In conjunction with the Outreach and Citizen Science working group, build a communication network of those performing ongoing field studies on natural populations of asteroids. This communication network will be used assess the geographic extent of SSWS, quantify remaining populations, and track recovery. Existing networks include MARINe (Multi-Agency Rocky Intertidal Network: www.pacificrockyintertidal.org), PISCO (Partnership for Interdisciplinary Studies of Coastal Oceans www.piscoweb.org), National Parks Service, and Gulf Watch Alaska. The MARINe website www.seastarwasting.org may be used to as the communication interface.

Action Item 2: Work with the Diagnostics and Epidemiology working group to develop standardized protocols for surveying natural populations of asteroids and their prey species. This includes tracking disease presence and symptoms, which will be guided by the establishment of clear case definitions (Diagnostics and Epidemiology Goal 1 Action Item 1). We will assess disease symptoms across species, life stages, and habitats (subtidal and intertidal). We will target surveys to obtain adequate temporal frequency and spatial extent. We will also pursue non-lethal estimates of fecundity of individuals and populations to assess potential for population recovery.

Action Item 3: Work with the Diagnostics and Epidemiology working group to establish standardized protocols (preferably non-lethal) for collection of asteroid tissue samples for histological and genetic analyses of host and pathogens (Diagnostics and Epidemiology Goal 3).

Action Item 4. Develop statistical models to estimate the detection probability of the surveillance system to detect SSWS and consequently adjust inferences of disease presence at the geographic level and species level.

Action Item 5: Strengthen and expand collaborative monitoring efforts on the US East Coast and beyond US borders to track wasting syndrome across the entire geographic range of the affected species.

Action Item 6: Quantify recruitment of young sea stars for species of interest. We will develop a standard recruitment monitoring protocol, which will help quantify population recovery.

Action Item 7: Expand monitoring efforts for evidence of disease in other groups of echinoderms.

21

Goal 2: Historical context: Develop improved historical context of sea star population dynamics and SSWS events.

Action Item 1: Compile data and conduct focused comparisons of past outbreaks of wasting syndrome. Previous outbreaks of uncharacterized disease symptoms have been noted in sea star populations along the North American Pacific Coast (e.g., Word et al. 1978, Dungan 1982, Eckert et al. 1999, Becker 2006, Bates et al. 2009). Data will be compiled from publications and personal observations, and preserved tissue samples from affected populations will be sought to provide important historical context for advancing our understanding of the most recent outbreak.

Action Item 2: Improve our understanding of natural or ‘baseline’ fluctuations in populations of asteroids throughout their geographic range. Compilation of monitoring records from multiple sources including academic institutions, government agencies (e.g., Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, National Parks Service, California Fish and Wildlife, NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service) into a single library or database. This will provide a more thorough picture of natural population dynamics across as much of the species’ ranges as possible, giving important insight into spatial and temporal fluctuations in abundance. Multi-agency Rocky Intertidal Network (MARINe) sitemaps could be used as a starting point to develop a comprehensive geographic assessment of historical data that can be used to identify gaps. Others data sources include the Partnership for Interdisciplinary Studies of Coastal Oceans (PISCO) at Oregon State University and University of California Santa Cruz, National Parks Service (for subtidal data), State Fish and Wildlife Agencies, and individual authors of manuscripts on sea star populations.

Goal 3: Modelling disease dynamics: Develop data-driven models to forecast and hindcast SSWS outbreak dynamics and shifts in population abundance.

Action Item 1: Develop an ecosystems-based disease transmission model for SSWS, test its performance with data via hindcasting, and use ecoforecasting to generate testable predictions about where and when future outbreaks will occur. Recently-developed models for host-pathogen dynamics in structured populations (e.g., integral projection models; IPMs) can use diverse data on state-specific survival and reproduction to explain observed variation in disease prevalence (Ellner et al. 2016). By linking contextualized data on survival, reproduction, and prevalence to disease dynamics, the SSWS transmission model will allow inference of the drivers of transmission and pathogenesis from ecological data, and provide a platform translating scientific results into disease forecasts and quantitative risk assessments.

22

Action Item 2: Develop population connectivity models (e.g. Regional Oceanographic Modeling System; ROMS) to predict impacts and recovery times via recruitment of new cohorts. This will also increase our general understanding of the degree of connectivity among sea star populations.

Action Item 3: Develop predictive models of trajectories for populations, communities, and ecosystems following SSWS infection in natural populations. Candidate data sets will be identified (e.g., MARINe, PISCO), and requirements for data processing and metadata will be established. Models will be tested through hindcasting.

Goal 4: Drivers of the outbreak: Progress toward a mechanistic understanding of SSWS outbreaks, including environmental, genetic, larval, pathogenic, and human impact drivers of outbreak events.

Action Item 1: Develop a better understanding of any link between SSWS and population reproductive output. Make quantitative comparisons within and across sites.

Action Item 2: Identify factors underlying successful recruitment of sea stars in populations (or periods) with and without SSWS. Investigate whether declines in adult populations enhance recruit survival.

Action Item 3: Use observational and experimental data to determine the role of environmental and anthropogenic factors (abiotic conditions) in SSWS outbreaks.. Parameters for consideration include: the effects of air temperature and water temperature (surface and bottom), ocean acidification, harmful algal blooms, freshwater runoff, environmental pollutants, and metals. These may affect susceptibility, disease impact (mortality rate), duration of symptoms in the population, and rate and degree of population recovery.

Action Item 4: Integrate ecological and evolutionary analysis of SSWS in natural populations through population genetic studies throughout the whole range of distribution of each species, which will allow for comparison of populations pre and post-SSWS outbreak in any future events.

Goal 5: Subtidal surveillance: Increase the focus on subtidal monitoring to determine the extent of SSWS in subtidal species and populations.

Action Item 1: Compile monitoring records from multiple sources including academic institutions and government agencies to identify gaps in our knowledge of subtidal sea star population dynamics. For example, query data from the NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service, which conducts annual benthic trawls. Multi-agency Rocky Intertidal Network (MARINe) sitemaps

23

could be used as a starting point to develop a comprehensive geographic assessment of historical data.

Action Item 2: Develop standardized protocols and schedules for monitoring subtidal sea stars. Identify geographic and temporal gaps, and target surveillance for those populations.

Action Item 3: In coordination with the Communication, Outreach and Citizen Science Group, improve communication among intertidal and subtidal research groups and among researchers from academic, governmental, and non-governmental groups.

Goal 6: SSWS database: Establish and maintain a single complete, updated, quality-controlled database of SSWS observations.

Action Item 1: Identify existing candidate databases for expansion, such as the one maintained by MARINe. Discuss protocols for quality control and data organization. Determine costs associated with expanding or developing the database and feasibility for long-term maintenance.

Action Item 2: Determine data categories for inclusion in database. Candidate information includes species, location, search effort, density, individual sizes and disease category data.

Action Item 3: Determine database parameters that ensure easy access to data over the long term. Considerations include: presenting data in machine readable form, updates to website application programming interface (API), and metadata framework.

Action Item 4: Establish quality control protocols for database. Web data entry forms could include built in quality control as well as post-data entry quality assurance procedures. Data sharing guidelines will be developed such that they are compatible with various partners’ requirements.

Action 5: Pursue funding and identify personnel or organizations to be responsible for data quality control and database maintenance.

24

Scientists from Oregon State University and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife surveying the intertidal community responses to sea star wasting syndrome in 2017 at Cascade Head State Marine Reserve, Oregon.

25

Management, Conservation, and Recovery Malina Loeher*, Cynthia Catton*, Sean Bignami, Tim Carpenter, Jonathan Robinson, and

Laura Rogers-Bennett *Working group leaders

Overview

Managing waterborne marine diseases presents unique challenges to epidemiology research and conservation. The goals of the Management, Conservation, & Recovery group are to assess the impacts of Sea Star Wasting Syndrome (SSWS) on prevailing populations, develop a management plan tailored to SSWS, and establish a conservation network for future collaboration. Establishing a monitoring system and closely associated support network of research institutions, wet laboratory facilities, husbandry, education and funding resources will be essential for tracking the presence and severity of SSWS. Monitoring data will inform research questions and focus conservation efforts to restore affected species’ populations if needed. Long-term goals of this action plan include facilitating legislation for the purpose of continued environmental stewardship and marine conservation.

The goals of this group are wide-ranging due to the many knowledge gaps in current SSWS epidemiology, and affected asteroid life histories. Recovery actions depend on integrating existing sea star population dynamics with SSWS epizootic intensity data.

The ocean is a dynamic biome that provides ecosystem services for humans’ physical, economic, and recreational benefit. Management of its non-commercial, non-threatened, native animal populations generally falls outside existing legislature, but proactive management of future epizootics requires resources and funding from state and federal agencies.

Goals and Action Items

Goal 1: Risk assessment: Develop an environmental risk-analysis based on affected species’ life histories, resistance, disease patterns.

Action Item 1: To prioritize research questions, we will identify knowledge gaps in life histories by conducting a literature search and connecting existing monitoring groups’ datasets. For example, new information is needed to more fully characterize and describe reproductive seasonality and output, larval duration, population connectivity, and survival and growth rates of recruits.

Action Item 2: In concert with other working groups, maintain a list of affected sea star and other echinoderm species. Conduct species-specific sea star population status review using compiled data. Review this list periodically.

Action Item 3: Identify gaps in regions and sampling locations for monitoring, and add monitoring locations where needed. Monitoring of affected or related

26

species status will continue into the future and be led by the Surveillance and Ecology working group.

Action Item 4: Conduct risk-analyses for vulnerability to future outbreaks local extirpation, and extinction from status reviews, monitoring data, and field and laboratory observations.

Goal 2: Recovery plan: Develop a multi-level recovery action plan for affected species and ecosystems.

Action Item 1: Use baseline data of previous abundances and densities to define and establish practical, quantitative recovery goals where needed.

Action Item 2: Assess feasibility of restoration options for affected asteroid species in host aquaria or research-affiliated wet lab space, including larval culture, veterinary care, and captive breeding. Explore options for breeding for genetic resistance or adaptive capacity. Test small-scale treatment options for captive asteroid populations (including use of antibiotic treatments developed by the Oregon Coast Aquarium). Adoption of existing methods used for captive rearing of affected echinoderms (e.g. Strathmann and white abalone (Haliotis sorenseni, IUCN federally endangered species) could be adapted for captive-rearing of sea stars.

Action Item 3: Establish gene banks with both living specimens and preserved tissues.

Action Item 4: Consider the potential risks and benefits of augmenting critically low populations by translocating with individuals from elsewhere.

Action Item 5: Identify and protect potential enhancement and restoration sites based on healthy existing populations, suitable habitat, environmental conditions and researcher access for each species.

Action Item 6: Consider pursuing legislative action for recovery. Action Item 7: Establish timepoints in the action plan at which to reassess viability

of action items and renew goals. Goal 3: Socioeconomics analysis: Conduct an economic impact report at species and ecosystem levels to inform continuing conservation efforts. Action Item 1: Recruit resource economists to partner with researchers. Action Item 2: Determine economies that may benefit from sea star population

health directly and indirectly, including non-market evaluation and ecosystem services.

Action Item 3: Distribute findings among education, outreach, management partners, and stakeholders in coastal communities.

27

Multiple sea star species at varying stages of infection held in sea water tanks at the Seattle Aquarium. Photo by Tim Carpenter.

28

Citizen scientists measuring and counting ochre sea stars (Pisaster ochraceus) at Point Whitehorn, near Bellingham, Washington. Photo by Melissa Miner

Communication, Outreach, and Citizen Science

C. Melissa Miner*, Laurel Field*, Piper Wallingford, Cassandra Glaspie, Monica Moritsch *Working group leaders

Overview

Public interest in sea star wasting syndrome has been phenomenal. Beachgoers, along with artists, playwrights, authors and politicians have reached out to scientists to better understand the disease that has affected so many of these emblematic members of the sea shore. Many people want to know how they can help, and several organizations have been able to channel this desire into citizen science efforts ranging from simple reporting of sick stars to collection of quantitative data. However, SSWS emerged so rapidly, and with such force, that there was little opportunity for scientists to come together as a group to identify the most pressing needs that might be addressed through citizen science efforts. An overarching goal of this working group is to increase outreach and communication between scientists studying SSWS and the general public. To that end, this working group has outlined steps to facilitate communication and collaboration among researchers and identify gaps in SSWS data that could be answered with directed citizen science efforts.

Citizen science has contributed substantially to our understanding of the emergence, spread, and impact of SSWS. Members of the public are able to submit any observations to MARINe’s online portal (http://gordon.science.oregonstate.edu/sea_star_wasting/observation_log/new). So far, they have contributed thousands of observations to the SSWS tracking map (http://data.piscoweb.org/marine1/seastardisease.html), which has enabled researchers to follow the spread of the syndrome throughout the west coast of North America and identify potential contributing factors. Citizen science groups and individuals have also collected long-term (since 2014) abundance and population size structure data from over

29

50 sites, which have improved our understanding of the impact of SSWS on sea star populations and their potential for recovery. The goals and actions outlined below aim to build upon these existing efforts and further increase public awareness and understanding of SSWS.

Goals of this working group include creating an organizational structure among scientists studying various aspects of SSWS to improve communication and identify pressing questions and data gaps that might be addressed through citizen science efforts. This group outlined an approach for identifying target audiences and developing appropriate outreach mechanisms for various audiences and interest levels. We plan to build upon the infrastructure and methods that have been developed by groups like the Multi-Agency Rocky Intertidal Network (MARINe) to expand outreach and involvement, both geographically and scientifically, to areas that are currently underrepresented.

Goals and Action Items

Goal 1: Researcher network: Create an organizational structure for coordination of SSWS research and management effort among all the SSWS Task Force working groups.

Action Item 1: Maintain our current network of stakeholders. Encourage their continued participation in the Task Force and in future iterations of the Strategic Action Plan. These stakeholders include academic scientists, state and federal agencies, non-governmental organizations, indigenous groups, affected industries, public aquariums, SCUBA divers, environmental groups, educational institutions. Solicit involvement from US east coast and international stakeholders.

Action Item 2: Determine points of contact within the existing Sea Star Wasting Task Force for various specialties.

Action Item 3: Identify relevant expertise and data of collaborators, including current citizen science sea star monitoring efforts. Identify current and planned efforts at local, national, international levels.

Goal 2: Tools for communication: Establish organized methods of communication between collaborators

Action Item 1: Maintain our current online workspace for Task Force Members. Action Item 3: The oversight committee will regularly distribute information about

SSWS research advances, status of the SAP and wildlife disease policy, and other important information to collaborators.

Action Item 4: Maintain our database of literature and resources to share with collaborators.

Goal 3: Public presence: Define target audiences and audience-specific goals to improve SSWS public outreach efforts

Action Item 1: Craft a cohesive mission statement for the Task Force aimed at increasing public awareness and investment in seeking solutions to SSWS.

30

Action Item 2: Maintain the SSWS Task Force website http://www.piscoweb.org/sea-star-wasting-syndrome-task-force

Action Item 3. Develop social media presence (profiles on twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and Instagram) to communicate effectively with the public.

Action Item 4: Once completed by the Management Conservation and Recovery working group, publish the population status reviews and economic impact reports for SSWS to the public. Contact National Ocean Economics Program to gauge interest in collaboration.

Action Item 5: Solicit, refine and distribute educational materials focused on SSWS. Review training and protocol materials as well as species and disease ID guides developed by MARINe and make improvements. Communicate with educators (including Elaine Klein at University of Washington) about curricula that incorporate SSWS as an anchoring phenomenon.

Action Item 6: Establish a photo repository that provides fair use photos for educators, the press, and researchers.

Action Item 7: Create a communication toolbox to streamline public outreach and train Task Force members in its use. Identify existing resources and, as necessary, Design materials to distribute to educational and community organizing centers in proximity to the coast such as research centers, aquariums, and museums.

Goal 4: Identify how citizen science can better contribute to understanding of SSWS spread and impacts

Action Item 1: Inventory, establish, and strengthen partnerships with citizen science organizations. Contact existing monitoring platforms to develop partnerships including iNaturalist, Reefcheck, Reef Environmental Education Foundation (REEF), Long-term Monitoring Program and Experiential Training for Students (LiMPETS).

Action Item 2: Identify how citizen science program(s) can help to address goals identified. Determine the capability of citizen science to address data needs.

Action Item 3: Refine protocols for citizen science data collection and develop new protocols where appropriate to capture additional regions or species. Review established, vetted protocols developed by MARINe for both intertidal and subtidal surveys to maintain backwards compatibility.

Action Item 4: Modify seastarwasting.org (or create new platform if necessary) to clearly communicate the data needs of researchers and desired level of citizen science engagement.

Action Item 5: Incorporate SSWS citizen science monitoring efforts into existing “project finder” websites such as SciStarter.

Goal 5: Strengthen existing and establish new relationships between researchers, managers and policy makers

Action Item 1: Connect with organizations that practice both policy and science such as MARINe, the Ocean Conservancy, the Nature Conservancy, the Center for Ocean Solutions, and state and federal agencies

31

Action Item 2: Encourage or enable training of Task Force members in effective communication techniques through organizations like COMPASS science communication.

Action Item 3: Engage and educate legislators about SSWS. Contact and request engagement with policy-makers at multiple levels, including local, state and federal congressional office visits. Inform and update legislators at regular intervals with regard to SSWS advances.

Young explorer Finley Bracken-Sorte tide pooling near Sitka, Alaska

32

References Bates, A. E., B. J. Hilton, and C. D. G. Harley. 2009. Effects of temperature, season and locality

on wasting disease in the keystone predatory sea star Pisaster ochraceus. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 86:245–251.

Bidegain, G., E. N. Powell, J. M. Klinck, T. Ben-Horin, and E. E. Hofmann. 2016. Marine infectious disease dynamics and outbreak thresholds: Contact transmission, pandemic infection, and the potential role of filter feeders. Ecosphere 7.

Brothers, C. J., J. Harianto, J. B. Mcclintock, and M. Byrne. 2016. Sea urchins in a high-CO2 world : the influence of acclimation on the immune response to ocean warming and acidification. Proceedings of Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 283:20161501.

Bucci, C., M. Francoeur, J. McGreal, R. Smolowitz, V. Zazueta-Novoa, G. M. Wessel, and M. Gomez-Chiarri. 2017. Sea star wasting disease in Asterias forbesi along the Atlantic coast of North America. PLoS ONE 12:1–20.

Burge, C. A., C. M. Eakin, C. S. Friedman, B. Froelich, P. K. Hershberger, E. E. Hofmann, L. E. Petes, K. C. Prager, E. Weil, B. L. Willis, S. E. Ford, and C. D. Harvell. 2014. Climate change influences on marine infectious diseases : implications for management and society. Annual Review of Marine Science 6:249–279.

Burt, J., T. Tinker, D. Okamoto, K. Demes, K. Holmes, and A. Salomon. (n.d.). Sudden collapse of a mesopredator reveals its complementary role in mediating rocky reef regime shifts. In reveiw.

Carnegie, R. B., I. Arzul, and D. Bushek. 2016. Managing marine mollusc diseases in the context of regional and international commerce: policy issues and emerging concerns. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 371:20150215.

Chandler, V. K., and J. P. Wares. 2017. RNA expression and disease tolerance are associated with a “keystone mutation” in the ochre sea star Pisaster ochraceus. PeerJ 5:e3696.

Chubb, J. C. 1979. Seasonal occurrence of helminths in freshwater fishes Part II. Trematoda. Advances in Parasitology 17:141–313.

Chubb, J. C. 1980. Seasonal occurrence of helminths in freshwater fishes: Part III. Larval cestoda and nematoda. Advances in Parasitology 18:1–120.

Cowen, R. K., and S. Sponaugle. 2009. Larval dispersal and marine population connectivity. Annual Review of Marine Science 1.

DelSesto, C. J. 2015. Assessing the pathogenic cause of sea star wasting disease in Asterias forbesi along the East Coast of the United States.

Doney, S. C., V. J. Fabry, R. A. Feely, and J. A. Kleypas. 2009. Ocean acidification : The other CO2 problem. Annual Review of Marine Science 1:169–194.

Duggins, D. 1983. Starfish predation and the creation of mosaic patterns in a kelp-dominated community. Ecology 64:1610–1619.

Dungan, M., T. Miller, and D. Thomson. 1982. Catastrophic decline of a top carnivore in the gulf of California rocky intertidal zone. Science 216:989–991.

Eckert, G. L., J. M. Engle, and D. J. Kushner. 1998. Sea star disease and population declines at the Channel Islands. Proceedings of the 5th California Island Symposium 5:390–393.

Eisenlord, M. E., M. L. Groner, R. M. Yoshioka, J. Elliott, J. Maynard, S. Fradkin, M. Turner, K. Pyne, N. Rivlin, R. van Hooidonk, and C. D. Harvell. 2016. Ochre star mortality during the 2014 wasting disease epizootic: role of population size structure and temperature. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 371.

33

Ellner, S. P., D. Z. Childs, and M. Rees. 2016. Data-driven Modelling of Structured Populations. Springer International Publishing, Cham.

Figueiredo, D. A. L., P. Cristina, D. Amaral, A. Krupinski, R. Stecca, J. Carlos, S. Borges, J. Roberto, and M. Cunha. 2016. Ocean acidification affects parameters of immune response and extracellular pH in tropical sea urchins Lytechinus variegatus and Echinometra luccunter. Aquatic Toxicology 180:84–94.

Fuess, L. E., M. E. Eisenlord, C. J. Closek, A. M. Tracy, R. Mauntz, S. Gignoux-Wolfsohn, M. M. Moritsch, R. Yoshioka, C. A. Burge, C. D. Harvell, C. S. Friedman, I. Hewson, P. K. Hershberger, and S. B. Roberts. 2015. Up in arms: Immune and nervous system response to sea star wasting disease. PLoS ONE 10:1–16.

Groner, M., R. Breyta, A. Dobson, C. S. Friedman, B. Froelich, M. Garren, F. Gulland, J. Maynard, E. Weil, S. Wyllie-Echeverria, and D. Harvell. 2015. Emergency response for marine diseases. Science Letters 347:2–3.

Gudenkauf, B. M., and I. Hewson. 2015. Metatranscriptomic analysis of Pycnopodia helianthoides (Asteroidea) affected by sea star wasting disease. PloS one 10:e0128150.

Harvell, C. D., K. Kim, J. M. Burkholder, R. R. Colwell, P. R. Epstein, D. J. Grimes, E. E. Hofmann, E. K. Lipp, A. D. M. E. Osterhaus, R. M. Overstreet, J. W. Porter, G. W. Smith, and G. R. Vasta. 1999. Emerging marine disease: Climate links and anthropogenic factors. Science 285:1505–1510.

Harvell, C. D., C. E. Mitchell, J. R. Ward, S. Altizer, A. P. Dobson, R. S. Ostfeld, and M. D. Samuel. 2002. Climate warming and disease risks for terrestrial and marine biota. Science 296:2158–2162.

Harvell, D., R. Aronsen, N. Baron, J. Connell, A. Dobson, S. Ellner, L. Gerber, K. Kim, A. Kuris, H. McCallum, K. Lafferty, B. McKay, J. Porter, M. Pascual, G. Smith, K. Sutherland, and J. Ward. 2004. The rising tide of ocean diseases: unsolved problems and research priorities. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2:375–382.

Hewson, I., K. S. I. Bistolas, E. M. Quijano Cardé, J. B. Button, P. J. Foster, J. M. Flanzenbaum, J. Kocian, and C. K. Lewis. 2018. Investigating the complex association between viral ecology, environment, and northeast pacific sea star wasting. Frontiers in Marine Science 5:77.

Hewson, I., J. B. Button, B. M. Gudenkauf, B. Miner, A. L. Newton, J. K. Gaydos, J. Wynne, C. L. Groves, G. Hendler, M. Murray, S. Fradkin, M. Breitbart, E. Fahsbender, K. D. Lafferty, A. M. Kilpatrick, C. M. Miner, P. Raimondi, L. Lahner, C. S. Friedman, S. Daniels, M. Haulena, J. Marliave, C. A. Burge, M. E. Eisenlord, and C. D. Harvell. 2014. Densovirus associated with sea-star wasting disease and mass mortality. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 111:17278–83.

Holbrook, S. J., M. H. Carr, R. J. Schmitt, and J. A. Coyer. 1990. Effect of giant kelp on local abundance of reef fishes : the importance of ontogenetic resource requirements. Bulletin of Marine Science 47:104–114.

Kohl, W. T., T. I. McClure, and B. G. Miner. 2016. Decreased temperature facilitates short-term sea star wasting disease survival in the keystone intertidal sea star Pisaster ochraceus. PLoS ONE 11:1–9.

Kroeker, K. J., R. L. Kordas, R. Crim, I. E. Hendriks, L. Ramajo, G. S. Singh, C. M. Duarte, and J. P. Gattuso. 2013. Impacts of ocean acidification on marine organisms: Quantifying sensitivities and interaction with warming. Global Change Biology 19:1884–1896.

Lafferty, K. D., and L. R. Gerber. 2002. Good medicine for conservation biology: the

34

intersection of epidemiology and conservation theory. Conservation Biology 16:593–604.

Lafferty, K. D., J. W. Porter, and S. E. Ford. 2004. Are Diseases Increasing in the Ocean? Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 35:31–54.

Lahner, L., and T. M. Work. 2016. Sea Star Wasting Summit. Seattle, Washington. Lloyd, M. M. and M. H. Pespeni. 2018. Microbiome shifts with onset and progression of Sea

Star Wasting Disease revealed through time course sampling. Scientific Reports, 8(1), 16476.

McCallum, H., D. Harvell, and A. Dobson. 2003. Rates of spread of marine pathogens. Ecology Letters 6:1062–1067.

Menge, B. A., E. B. Cerny-Chipman, A. Johnson, J. Sullivan, S. Gravem, and F. Chan. 2016. Sea star wasting disease in the keystone predator Pisaster ochraceus in Oregon: insights into differential population impacts, recovery, predation rate, and temperature effects from long-term research. PloS one 11:e0153994.

Miner, C. M., J. L. Burnaford, R. F. Ambrose, L. Antrim, H. Bohlmann, C. A. Blanchette, J. M. Engle, S. C. Fradkin, R. Gaddam, C. D. G. Harley, B. G. Miner, S. N. Murray, J. R. Smith, S. G. Whitaker, and P. T. Raimondi. 2018. Large-scale impacts of sea star wasting disease (SSWD) on intertidal sea stars and implications for recovery. PLoS ONE 13:1–21.

Montecino-Latorre, D., M. E. Eisenlord, M. Turner, R. Yoshioka, C. Drew Harvell, C. V. Pattengill-Semmens, J. D. Nichols, and J. K. Gaydos. 2016. Devastating transboundary impacts of sea starwasting disease on subtidal asteroids. PLoS ONE 11:1–14.

Moritsch, M., and P. Raimondi. 2018. Reduction and recovery of keystone predation pressure after disease-related mass mortality. Ecology and evolution:0–34.

Mydlarz, L. D., L. E. Jones, and C. D. Harvell. 2006. Innate immunity, environmental drivers, and disease ecology of marine and freshwater invertebrates. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 37:251–288.

Paine, R. T. 1966. Food web complexity and species diversity. American Naturalist:65–75. Paine, R. T. 1969. A note on trophic complexity and community stability. American

Naturalist 103:91–93. Paine, R. T. 1980. Food webs: linkage, interaction strength and community infrastructure-

the 3rd Tansley lecture. Journal of Animal Ecology 49:667–685. Rumrill, S. S., K. Milligan, M. Miner, C. Don, S. Marion, and D. Fox. 2014. Observations and

monitoring the progression of seastar wasting syndrome along the West Coast. Page White Paper.

Scheibling, R. E., and J. S. Lauzon-Guay. 2010. Killer storms: North atlantic hurricanes and disease outbreaks in sea urchins. Limnology and Oceanography 55:2331–2338.

Schiebelhut, L. M., J. B. Puritz, and M. N. Dawson. 2018. Decimation by sea star wasting disease and rapid genetic change in a keystone species, Pisaster ochraceus. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(27), 7069–7074.

Schultz, J. A., R. N. Cloutier, and I. M. Côté. 2016. Evidence for a trophic cascade on rocky reefs following sea star mass mortality in British Columbia. PeerJ 4:e1980.

Sewell, M. A., and J. C. Watson. 1993. A “source” for asteroid larvae?: recruitment of Pisaster ochraceus, Pycnopodia helianthoides and Dermasterias imbricata in Nootka Sound, British Columbia. Marine Biology 117:387–398.

Staehli, A., R. Schaerer, K. Hoelzle, and G. Ribi. 2009. Temperature induced disease in the starfish Astropecten jonstoni. Marine Biodiversity Records 2:e78.

35

Strathmann, M. F. 1987. Reproduction and Development of Marine Invertebrates of the Northern Pacific Coast: Data and Methods for the Study of Eggs, Embryos, and Larvae. University of Washington Press, Seattle.

Strathmann, R. 1978. Length of pelagic period in echinoderms with feeding larvae from the Northeast Pacific. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 34:23–27.

Traiger, S., B. Konar, A. Doroff, and L. McCaslin. 2016. Sea otters versus sea stars as major clam predators: evidence from foraging pits and shell litter. Marine Ecology Progress Series 560:73–86.

Ward, J. R., and K. D. Lafferty. 2004. The elusive baseline of marine disease: Are diseases in ocean ecosystems increasing? PLoS Biology 2:542–547.

Wares, J., and L. Schiebelhut. 2015. Is there an association between elongation factor 1- α overdominance in the seastar Pisaster ochraceus and “ seastar wasting disease ”? PeerJ:1–9.

Appendices Appendix 1_Rumrill et al. 2014_Observations and Monitoring the Progression of Seastar

Wasting Syndrome along the West Coast.pdf Appendix 2_Lahner and Work 2016_Sea Star Wasting Summit.pdf