Principles and science of stocking

marine areas with sea cucumbers

Steven W. Purcell1*
Abstract
Clearly stating the goals of stocking builds an essential platform for success. The scales, methodologies, management and time frames of the interventions can then be matched to the original goals. Stock enhancement,
restocking and sea ranching will involve different stocking strategies. The genetic risks to wild stocks must
be minimised by preventing translocation of juvenile sea cucumbers to different locations than those where
broodstock were collected, unless studies show broad genetic homogeneity of the stock. Cultured juveniles
are easily marked by immersion in a fluorochrome solution (e.g. tetracycline or calcein), which provides a
long-term, unequivocal means of distinguishing hatchery-produced animals from wild conspecifics. Use of
open sea pens is an experimental tool that provides better estimates of early stocking success. Juvenile density
can be assessed by searching through sand and mud in quadrats by hand, whereas sub-adults and adults can
be surveyed visually in transects with a stratified arrangement. Proponents of sea cucumber stocking in the
wild should be conservative and realistic about the expected returns; 1 in 510 (1020%) of released juvenile
sea cucumbers surviving to market size is a benchmark. Clear goals, use of existing technology, and realistic
expectations in sea ranching and restocking of sea cucumbers will provide the foundation for success.

Background

the technology was developed to know how they

should be released. This is unfortunate because stocking was thus criticised as a questionable management
intervention even before the technology for many species was given the chance to be developed and proven
(Hilborn 1998; Molony et al. 2003).
In recent times, criticism about stocking success has
fostered a new era for programs to both develop release
strategies through research before large-scale releases
and conduct stocking in a responsible way (Blankenship
and Leber 1995; Lorenzen et al. 2010). Key elements
to responsible stocking are: (1) a requirement to demonstrate stocking success using marking of juveniles,
(2) precautions to avoid disease transfer from hatchery
stocks to the wild and (3) making efforts in the hatchery
to produce juvenile cohorts with a wide genetic pool
that closely matches the genetic make-up of the wild
stocks among which the juveniles are released. As a
consequence, greater scientific rigour in stocking
programs is now giving back confidence in restocking,
sea ranching and stock enhancement as potentially costeffective management tools (Bell et al. 2006, 2008).

Stocking of marine invertebrates

While fish have been stocked into the sea since
long ago, stocking of cultured marine invertebrates is
mostly fairly recent (Bell et al. 2005). Notable invertebrates used in marine stocking include scallops and
other bivalves, sea urchins, abalone, lobsters, Queen
conch, giant clams and trochus. In the past, most
stocking programs were unsuccessful in biological and
economical terms (Leber et al. 2005; Bell et al. 2006).
Poor survival of the released juveniles can be attributed, to a large extent, to inept knowledge about how,
when and where to release the animals so that they
may survive in high numbers (Liao et al. 2003; Purcell
2004; Lorenzen et al. 2010). Consequently, stocking
programs started releasing cultured juveniles before
1
*

National Marine Science Centre, Southern Cross

University, Coffs Harbour New South Wales, Australia
Corresponding author: <[email protected]>

92

to achieve success. The path to failure in stocking

programs is therefore often paved with uncertainty
about the ultimate goals.
Stocking is a general term used here to mean
the release of sea cucumbers into the sea with the
expectation that they will then grow to larger sizes.
Bell et al. (2005, 2008) and Bartley and Bell (2008)
defined different types of stocking interventions,
which are paraphrased, respectively, below.
Sea ranching: the release of cultured juveniles
into open (non-bounded) habitats in the sea for
harvesting once they reach market size. This is a
put, grow, and take strategy relying on sole access
rights (e.g. via lease of an area) to the proponents,
without a main objective of increasing the yield of
the overall fishery.
Restocking: the release of cultured juveniles into
natural habitats to build nucleus breeding populations that will subsequently breed and replenish
recruitment to repopulate the broader fishery.
This modality is predicated on protection of the
released animals from fishing, ideally for their
life span.
Stock enhancement: the release of cultured juveniles into the broader fishery to grow and later
improve yields to fishers granted access to fishing
grounds. This modality does not have a main
objective of rebuilding egg supply for generational
stock rebuilding, and does not rely on sole access
to stocked areas within the fishery.
Sea farming is another type of stocking, which is
done into impoundments and artificial habitats (e.g.
earthen ponds) supplied with sea water, but it is not
examined in this paper.
The pathways to impact in restocking interventions are rather long compared with sea ranching
(Figure 1). The main reason is because restocking
relies not only on the survival of released animals to
maturity, but also that they breed in the wild and that
their offspring repopulate fishing grounds and survive to maturity (also see Molony et al. (2003)). The
success of this latter, vital step of restocking is most
difficult to demonstrate scientifically (Battaglene and
Bell 2004; Purcell 2004). In contrast, sea ranching
requires only that the stocked animals survive in
high numbers to a market size.
Proponents should be explicit about whether the
aim is to release animals that will be harvested by
a particular group of people, or to rebuild depleted
wild populations, or to enhance fishery yields for
all fishers.

Stocking of sea cucumbers

Stocking marine areas with sea cucumbers is a
relatively nascent intervention (Battaglene and Bell
2004; Bell et al. 2005). Small-scale trials of stocking cultured sandfish (Holothuria scabra) in the sea
appear to have commenced in the early 1990s in India
(James 2004) and the late 1990s in Solomon Islands
(Dance et al. 2003).
The Australian Centre for Inter national
Agricultural Research (ACIAR) embarked on
a long-term program to assess the best tropical
candidate species for restocking, develop hatchery
technology for producing juveniles en masse,
develop optimal release strategies, and apply the
technology on a larger scale to test whether tropical
sea cucumbers could be restocked or grown economically for village-based sea ranching. The first
component, in Solomon Islands, determined that
sandfish (Holothuria scabra) was the best species
for tropical stocking, developed enough hatchery
technology to produce them reliably for smallscale releases (Battaglene 1999; Battaglene et al.
1999) and studied the juvenile ecology (Mercier
et al. 1999, 2000). The second component, in New
Caledonia, adapted the larval culture and grow-out
methods (Agudo 2006), developed methods to
transport the juveniles (Purcell et al. 2006a) and
technology for markrecapture research (Purcell et
al. 2006b; Purcell and Blockmans 2009), assessed
release density and size-at-release in long-term
release experiments (Purcell and Simutoga 2008),
and evaluated restocking design (Purcell and Kirby
2006). The third component, being conducted
in the Philippines and the Northern Territory,
Australia, aims to determine whether the benefits
of stocking sandfish for village-based sea ranching
outweigh the costs of stocking (Juinio-Meez 2012;
Fleming 2012).

Purposes of stocking
The goals of stocking interventions will govern
the management regulations needed and the spatial
context of the releases. It is easy for agencies to
develop a keen interest in culturing and stocking
sea cucumbers in the wild without a clear description of the ultimate goals of the intervention. Such
ambiguity can lead to false expectations of the
likely outcomes, ownership or access issues, and the
scale of releases and companion measures needed

93

Steps in sea ranching

Correct the fishery

management problem

Gain access rights over an area

of optimal habitat for ranching

Nominate existing reserves or

create no-take zones for restocking

Collect broodstock and

breed them in a hatchery

Collect broodstock and

breed them in a hatchery

Release juveniles in ways to

maximise survival to maturity

Release juveniles in ways to

maximise survival to maturity

Protect the released animals in

the ranching area until they
reach an optimum market size

Protect the released animals in

the reserve for their lifespan

Improved recruitment to
neighbouring fishing
grounds is a secondary
effect

Larval supply from the

restocked breeding population
rejuvenates recruitment in
neighbouring fishing grounds

Communication and participation with stakeholders

Communication and participation with stakeholders

Steps in restocking

Harvest all animals

The offspring from restocked

animals survive in fishing
grounds and grow to adulthood

The offspring from

restocked animals
can be fished

Breeding populations in
local fishery are rebuilt

Figure 1. Important steps in restocking and sea ranching. Restocking relies on survival of
the restocked animals to maturity and survival of their offspring to maturity. Also
important through the steps of both interventions is frequent communication and
participation of stakeholders.

causing certain populations to be relatively isolated

from others, even within a country, and leading to
unique genetic differences between populations at
scales of less than 100km (Uthicke and Benzie 2001;
Uthicke and Purcell 2004). Native stocks may have
particular genes that predispose them to cope much
better with local environmental stresses that may occur
periodically (Templeton 1986; Waples 1995).
Stock translocation may lead to reduced fitness of
resident populations through outbreeding depression
and introgression (Utter 1998; Uthicke and Purcell
2004). That is, introduced stock can outcompete with
local stock (both ecologically and reproductively) or
can interbreed with local stocks, leading to a loss
in the genetic differentiation between populations.
It is possible that introgression of foreign stocks
could reduce the fitness of the population to deal

Preserving the integrity of

wild stocks
Risks of translocation
The ability to produce juveniles in the hatchery
often spurs the desire to release them at various sites
for various purposes. However, the genetic identity
of local stocks, even those suppressed to low levels
by fishing, should be maintained (Hindar et al. 1991;
Utter and Epifanio 2002; Lorenzen et al. 2010). Some
sea cucumbers such as black teatfish (Holothuria
whitmaei) have high gene flow among populations,
suggesting that larvae travel long distances and maintain genetic mixing among populations (Uthicke and
Benzie 2000, 2003). In contrast, species such as the
sandfish (Holothuria scabra) have restricted gene flow,

94

with occasional environmental stresses (Figure 2).

Such effects are not just theoretical; studies show that
translocation of fish can negatively affect local populations, and the introduction of foreign genes can lead
to long-lasting effects that are usually irreversible
(Hindar et al. 1991; Waples 1995; Utter 1998).
Are there some instances when translocation of
foreign stock could be responsible? In some cases,
populations have been depleted to extinction such
that teams of divers could not find even a small
number to serve as hatchery broodstock for restocking, and years have passed without successful natural
recruitment (Bell et al. 2005). If proponents can produce rigorous data to convincingly show this to be the
case, foreign translocation of new stock may be the
only practical solution to restoring populations, but
such interventions should not be swayed by private
economic interests. Additionally, responsible restocking in such cases would use broodstock of the closest
populations from which broodstock can be collected.
Population viability relies on genetic variability
among individuals (Waples 1995). Using a large
number of spawning animals in each spawning event
in the hatchery, and taking care with using different sperm from different males to fertilise different
groups of eggs (to avoid sperm dominance), will help
to produce genetically diverse juveniles for stocking
in the wild (see Utter 1998).

Technology for stocking

Use of markers
In a responsible approach to stocking
(Blankenship and Leber 1995; Lorenzen et al. 2010),
cultured animals stocked in the wild are first tagged
or marked. Marking the juveniles allows them to be
distinguished from wild conspecifics, and provides a
means to evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention (Figure 3). The ability of sea cucumbers to shed
tags inserted in their body wall or coelomic cavity
prevents the retention of most tags used in fisheries
biology, including streamer tags, T-bar tags, codedwire tags, visible implant elastomer tags and passive
induced transponders (Conand 1990; Kirshenbaum
et al. 2006; Purcell et al. 2006b, 2008).
Genetic fingerprinting of individual sea cucumbers provides an accurate marking method (Uthicke
and Benzie 2002; Uthicke et al. 2004), but the
method is relatively costly. This method has not been
applied yet to cultured sea cucumbers. Alternatively,
sea cucumbers can be marked with fluorochromes,
which fluorescently marks the ossicles (spicules)
in the outer body wall of the animals. This procedure can be as cheap as 2 cents (US) to mark a 5-g
juvenile (Purcell et al. 2006b). Fluorochromes such
as tetracycline and calcein have been shown to be

A: Native population stocked with native juveniles

Stress event

Stocking
(native stock)
B: Native population stocked with foreign juveniles
Translocation

Interbreeding

Stress event

(foreign stock)

Figure 2. Illustration of one risk of translocation of foreign stock. A: Hatchery-produced juveniles from local
(native) broodstock are stocked into the local population, the genetic identity of the stock is preserved,
and the population is able to cope well with a stress event. B: Hatchery-produced juveniles from foreign
broodstock (from a genetically different population) are translocated into the local population, the
genetic identity of the stock is greatly reduced through introgression, and the interbred population no
longer has the previous tolerance to cope with certain stress events.

95

A: Sea ranching or restocking with unmarked juveniles

Unmarked juveniles
stocked

Wild recruits

Survival rate of released

animals is uncertain

??
12 years
B: Sea ranching or restocking with marked juveniles
Marked juveniles
stocked
Wild recruits

Survival rate of released

animals can be proven
unequivocally

12 years

Figure 3. Diagrammatic illustration of pitfalls in releasing unmarked sea cucumbers in the wild. A: Unmarked
cultured juveniles are released into an area that receives some natural recruitment of wild juvenilesit
is impossible to validate how many, or what percentage, of the cultured animals survived over time.
B: Marked cultured juveniles are released into an area that receives some natural recruitment of wild
juvenilesthe markers allow the cultured animals to be later distinguished from wild conspecifics mixed
in the population to validate how many, or what percentage, survived over time.

suitable for up to about 2years (Purcell and Simutoga

2008) (Figure 4), and 2-month trials with calcein blue
and xylenol orange have shown long-term promise
(Purcell and Blockmans 2009).
Cultured juveniles can be immersed in a marker
solution in mass numbers in the hatchery within
completely shaded flat-bottom tanks (Figure 5). The
animals must be in a growth phase for the ossicles in

their body wall to take up the fluorochromes (Purcell

and Blockmans 2009). Fluorochromes are combined
into the carbonate structure of ossicles during the
process of calcification, and only that portion (e.g.
1050%) of their ossicles being developed will be
marked (Purcell et al. 2006b; Purcell and Blockmans
2009). Some juveniles may be slightly yellowish for
a short time after immersion, but afterwards they are

Same ossicles
under fluorescent
light only

Ossicles under
normal light

Figure 4. Ossicles (spicules) of Holothuria scabra individuals that had previously been marked sequentially
by tetracycline then calcein (2weeks later). Left: a field of view of ossicles under the microscope
with normal light; right: the same field of view of the same ossicles under fluorescent light in an
epifluorescence microscope. Note that about half of the ossicles have been markedsome that were
fully formed were not marked during the immersion treatment.

96

Figure 5.

Pascal 2009, 2012). However, sea pens can be costly

(materials and set-up), require regular maintenance
and do not allow sufficient space for large numbers of
animals unless the pens are very large. Sea ranching
of large numbers of sea cucumbers would involve an
area (e.g. a sheltered bay) of good habitat in which
the ranching proponents have exclusive access to the
animals, and where the animals could be released into
that area without sea pens. So long as the habitat is
optimal or good for the species, the sea cucumbers
will not be likely to move far in the years before they
are harvested (Mercier et al. 2000; Purcell and Kirby
2006). Sea pens are, therefore, mostly advantageous
as experimental tools to help the researcher better estimate survival and growth of released sea cucumbers.
Up to a size of about 50100g, juvenile sandfish
can crawl up the walls of sea pens made of plastic
mesh. Escape then causes an underestimation in survival rates. We conducted short trials in a hatchery tank
with sand to test different designs of small (0.1 m2)
prototype sea pens in an attempt to find a design that
would prevent 210-g juveniles from escaping. Copper
wire sewn to the upper edge of the mesh deterred
animals from moving over it and escaping, but was
toxic. In a weakly replicated (n = 2) test over 24hours,
fewer juveniles escaped (climbed over) pens with mesh
skirting (mean = 25% escape) compared with pens
with the upper edges folded inwards (mean = 60%
escape) or pens with simple straight edges (mean =
70% escape). Juveniles were observed to crawl up the
mesh wall, but fell back into pens when they crawled
to the edge of the net skirts. We therefore used small
sea pens of 1m2 with mesh skirts for small experiments on release strategies (Figure 7). Later, we tested
escape rates of similar sized juveniles from prototype
pens in the hatchery that had a strip of antifouling
painted on the upper edge, and found that escape rates
over 24hours were comparable with those using the
mesh skirts. As mesh skirts were difficult to make, we
used an antifouling strip on the upper 10-cm surface
of the pen walls for large pens (e.g. 500 m2). Note
that the risk of escape is much higher with smaller
pens because the animals are in close proximity to the
pen walls; hence, escape rates from small pens are not
indicative of those from large pens.

Fluorochrome stock solution is added to a

large tank with aerated sea water and a heater
to maintain water conditions. The animals are
left for 1224hours in the solution to enable
effective marking of the ossicles within their
outer body wall.

indistinguishable in outer appearance from unmarked

animals. If ossicles are unmarked, or weakly marked,
after an immersion treatment, it may be that (1) the animals were not growing well before the treatment (i.e.
they were stunted), so their ossicles were not being
developed; (2) the conditions, such as the temperature
of the immersion solution, were not well maintained;
or (3) the fluorochrome chemicals were inactivee.g.
tetracycline can be damaged by light and heat.
The materials needed for verification of fluorochrome markers are surprisingly basic, and the
methods are cheap and simple (Figure 6). Small tissue
samples can be taken from the ventral surface of the
sea cucumbers in the field. Most ossicles are about
50100m long and there are thousands of ossicles
in each cubic millimetre sample of outer body wall of
sandfish (Purcell et al. 2006b). Once in the laboratory,
the samples are simply soaked for 30minutes in household bleach to digest the soft tissue, which leaves the
ossicles in the sample container. The ossicles are rinsed
with fresh water to remove the bleach, then dried and
observed under an epifluorescence microscope.

Use of sea pens

Surveys

In some situations, sea pens may be used for

farming sea cucumbers to market size. For instance,
it may be important to separate sea cucumbers from
other animals or to keep them from moving into other
areas where they can be fished (e.g. Robinson and

Surveys for juvenile sandfish <100 g need to be

done by hand because the animals often bury in the
sediment during part of the day at this small size.
This makes large transects impractical for surveying

97

Figure 6. Steps in collecting and processing tissue samples of sea cucumbers to distinguish
marked animals from unmarked (wild) ones. A: A tiny sample (a few mm2) of the
outer body wall is taken from the ventral surface of the animal, which is returned
to the sea. B: The tissue sample is placed into a cell of a tray and buffered alcohol
is added to preserve it. C: The alcohol is removed, bleach is added for 30minutes
to digest the soft tissue, then the bleach is removed and the ossicles are rinsed five
times with freshwater. D: Once dry, the tray is placed under an epifluorescence
microscope to look for fluorescently marked ossicles.

juvenile sandfish. The solution is to assess densities

of juveniles within randomly placed quadrats of
12m2 by laying the quadrat and manually searching
through the upper 5cm of sediment by hand.
It is useful to estimate the survival rate in the initial
months after release, when the animals are still juveniles. Within sea pens, quadrat surveys for sandfish
should be stratifiedsome should be placed against
the inner wall of the sea pen and some in the centre
area of the pen (Figure 8). This is necessary because
sea cucumbers will tend to gather near the edge of
the sea pen through random movements (Jeanson et
al. 2003), so this zone should be surveyed separately
(Purcell and Simutoga 2008).
Once the animals in a sea pen are large enough to
count reliably using visual census, the sea pen may be
removed to allow the animals to displace over a larger
area and avoid crowding. Conversely, the sea-ranching program may have simply released animals into
the open and waited 612months before doing visual
surveys. In most sea-ranching situations, the animals

Figure 7. A small sea pen of 1m2 set into a seagrass

bed. A mesh skirt on the upper edge of the
pen mesh helps to prevent juveniles from
escaping by climbing over the sea pen wall.

98

Quadrats
(1 m2)

Pen fence wall

Border area within

pen (imaginary)

Quadrats (2 m2)

Inner area within

pen
Figure 8.

Potential placement of random quadrats within experimental sea pens. The number of animals within the
border area50cm inside the inner wall of the pen meshcan be sampled with rectangular 1-m2 quadrats
(2 0.5m). Animals within the inner area can be sampled with square 2-m2 quadrats (1.41 1.41m).

would be released near the middle of the managed

area at moderate density (e.g. 1/m2). Through random
displacement over long time intervals (see Purcell
and Kirby 2006), some of the animals will move
relatively large distances from the release area (e.g.
100 m), many would move short distances from the
release area (e.g. up to 50m) and many would stay
in the release area. The uneven density of released
animals calls for a stratified survey design (Figure 9).
Zones can be marked outfor example, using buoys
at the cornersto delineate the release zone (central
zone), a middle zone and the outer zone. Transects
can then be laid randomly in each zone, increasing
replication in zones successively further from the
release area to account for greater variability in
counts within the replicate transects from increasing
patchiness and sparseness of sea cucumbers.

of sea cucumber but could serve as good stocking

sites; however, this will generally be rare. Avoid sites
with widely varying environmental conditions; for
example, areas periodically subject to freshwater
deluges. Likewise, avoid areas that may be vulnerable
to pollutants (see Purcell and Simutoga 2008).
In an experiment in New Caledonia, we set up 30
replicate 1-m2 experimental sea pens with net skirts
15 cm into sediments within various locations in a
bay such that each pen had a different undisturbed
habitat composition (S.W. Purcell, unpublished data).
A group of 25 juveniles (210 g) was weighed and
released into each sea pen. After 1week, the juveniles surviving in each enclosure were collected by
hand and an air-uplift suction device, and re-weighed.
Preliminary analyses suggest that microhabitats for
optimal growth and survival of the juveniles would
have the following traits to ensure their protection
from predators and allow them to bury easily:
shallow0.2m to about 23m depth
a low proportion of coral or coral rubble in the
sediments
moderate penetrability of sediments; muddy-sand
appeared best and should allow a hand to be forced
easily to a few centimetres depth
moderately high seagrass coverage, preferably in the genera Cymodocea, Thalassia and
Syringodium.

Where to release?
Nature should be a useful guide to choosing good
sites for stocking sea cucumbers. For example,
sandfish (Holothuria scabra) larvae appear to settle on seagrass blades, and juveniles are known to
inhabit shallow seagrass beds (Mercier et al. 2000).
Sites with a current or previous history of hosting
the species should be a sensible start. It may be that
some sites never really were home to the species

99

Central zone
(release)
Middle zone
Outer zone

Random transects
for visual surveys
Figure 9. Potential design for transect surveys within a coastal seagrass
bed in which cultured sea cucumbers (small oval figures) have
been previously released for sea ranching, and have moved out
of the central release zone. Bars are belt transects (e.g. 2 50m)
laid randomly within three zones (red dashed lines), which are
defined at the site by buoys or other permanent markers at the
corners of each zone. Stratified sampling is used; that is, the
number of transects increases from the central zone to the outer
zone because the sea cucumbers are expected to become sparser.

Expected returns

cucumbers. These observations correspond closely

with reports of crab predation in Madagascar (Lavitra
et al. 2009; Robinson and Pascal 2012).
Modelling of survival rates of 5-g released juveniles showed that 720% of sandfish released in New
Caledonia could be expected to survive to a good
market size of 700g 2.6years after being released for
sea ranching (Purcell and Simutoga 2008). Therefore,
a conservative estimate of survival to this size would
be about 1 in 10 (Figure 10). A survival rate of
around 20% to this size over roughly 3years could
be achieved if conditions were favourable over the
ranching period. This notion corresponds closely with
shorter durations of some other recent studies. In Fiji,
Hair (2011) determined survival rates of 2341% for
sandfish in sea pens over just 6months, and the animals had not reached a market size. Similarly, in the
Philippines, a survival rate of 39% was reported by
Juinio-Menez et al. (2012) for sandfish in a sea ranch;

Unfortunately, but quite predictably, most of the

small juvenile sea cucumbers released in the wild
will not survive. Predation is the biggest hurdle in
stocking a wide variety of invertebrates, and most of
the released juveniles die or are eaten by predators
shortly after being released (Bell et al. 2005). Many
different animals eat sea cucumbers, particularly
when they are young. Known predators of tropical
sea cucumbers include a wide variety of crabs,
predatory gastropods, sea stars, sea birds, and fishes
including pufferfishes (Tetraodontidae), emperor
fishes (Lethrinidae), triggerfishes (Balistidae) and
wrasses (Labridae) (Dance et al. 2003; Francour
1997). Personal experience with various release
experiments in New Caledonia suggests that invertebrate predators, especially crabs and sea stars,
are especially voracious predators of juvenile sea

100

Released juveniles

Sub-adults

Adults

23 years
Figure 10. Stylised diagram of changes in size and numbers of sea cucumbers, due to death and predation, from
the time of release in the wild to the time at which they reach a good marketable size

however, these comprised juveniles from batches

released at various occasions over a 19-month period,
and many had been recently released.
Overly optimistic predictions of economic returns
from sea ranching will give expectations to villagers
that will be difficult to meet, and proponents may benefit more from conservative expectations and praise at
exceeding them. Estimates of economic viability of
sea ranching can then be made by back-calculating
revenue from the harvested animals to the maximum
cost of producing juveniles in hatcheries to make a
profit (see Leber et al. 2005; Purcell and Simutoga
2008). Two additional points should be considered:
1. As with other mariculture programs, some
patience and investment is needed early on
because it often takes years to reduce the costs
of producing juveniles and to perfect release
methods.
2. Benefits to communities extend beyond the economic (Lorenzen et al. 2010); sea ranching and
restocking can build technical capacity and foster
awareness for better stewardship of the resource
by communities, which should be considered a
valuable outcome for fishery managers.

contribution of the National Marine Science Centre and

Marine Ecology Research Centre of Southern Cross
University.

References
Agudo N.S. 2006. Sandfish hatchery techniques. Australian
Centre for International Agricultural Research,
Secretariat of the Pacific Community and WorldFish
Center: Noumea, New Caledonia.
Bartley D. and Bell J.D. 2008. Restocking, stock enhancement and sea ranching: arenas of progress. Reviews in
Fisheries Science 16, 357364.
Battaglene S.C. 1999. Culture of tropical sea cucumbers for
stock restoration and enhancement. Naga the ICLARM
Quarterly 22, 411.
Battaglene S.C. and Bell J.D. 2004. The restocking of sea
cucumbers in the Pacific Islands. In Marine ranching,
ed. by D.M. Bartley and K.M. Leber. FAO Fisheries
Technical Paper No 429, 109132. Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations: Rome.
Battaglene S.C., Seymour J.E. and Ramofafia C. 1999.
Survival and growth of cultured juvenile sea cucumbers
Holothuria scabra. Aquaculture 178, 293322.
Bell J.D., Bartley D.M., Lorenzen K. and Loneragan N.R.
2006. Restocking and stock enhancement of coastal
fisheries: potential, problems and progress. Fisheries
Research 80, 18.
Bell J.D., Leber K.M., Blankenship L.H., Loneragan
N.R. and Masuda R. 2008. A new era for restocking,
stock enhancement and sea ranching marine fisheries
resources. Reviews in Fisheries Science 16, 19.
Bell J.D., Rothlisberg P.C., Munro J.L., Loneragan N.R.,
Nash W.J., Ward R.D. et al. 2005. Restocking and stock
enhancement of marine invertebrate fisheries. Advances
in Marine Biology 49, 1370.
Blankenship H.L. and Leber K.M. 1995. A responsible
approach to marine stock enhancement. American
Fisheries Society Symposium 15, 167175.

Acknowledgments
For assistance in field and hatchery experiments
presented in this paper, the author thanks N. Agudo,
P. Blazer, B. Blockmans, E. Danty, E. Vigne, A. le
Turc and C. Sanchez. The research components were
conducted through the WorldFish Center, and received
financial support from the Australian Centre for
International Agricultural Research (ACIAR), the three
provinces of New Caledonia, and the Government of
France via the Dlgation Franaise, Noumea. This is a

101

Conand C. 1990. The fishery resources of Pacific island

countries, Part 2: holothurians. FAO Fisheries Technical
Paper No. 272.2. Food and Agriculture Organization of
the United Nations: Rome.
Dance S.K., Lane I. and Bell J.D. 2003. Variation in shortterm survival of cultured sandfish (Holothuria scabra)
released in mangrove-seagrass and coral reef flat habitats
in Solomon Islands. Aquaculture 220, 495505.
Fleming A. 2012. Sea ranching of sandf ish in an
Indigenous community within a well-regulated fishery
(Northern Territory, Australia). In AsiaPacific tropical sea cucumber aquaculture, ed. by C.A. Hair, T.D.
Pickering and D.J. Mills. ACIAR Proceedings No. 136,
156160. Australian Centre for International Agricultural
Research: Canberra. [These proceedings]
Francour P. 1997. Predation on holothurians: a literature
review. Invertebrate Biology 116, 5260.
Hair C., Pickering T., Meo S., Vereivalu T., Hunter J. and
Cavakigali L. 2011. Sandfish culture in Fiji Islands. SPC
Beche-de-mer Information Bulletin 31, 311.
Hilborn R. 1998. The economic performance of marine
stock enhancement programs. Bulletin of Marine Science
62, 661674.
Hindar K., Ryman, N. and Utter F. 1991. Genetic effects
of cultured fish on natural fish populations. Canadian
Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 48, 945957.
James B.D. 2004. Captive breeding of the sea cucumber,
Holothuria scabra, from India. In Advances in sea
cucumber aquaculture and management, ed. by A.
Lovatelli, C. Conand, S. Purcell, S. Uthicke, J.-F. Hamel
and A. Mercier. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No. 463,
386395. Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations: Rome.
Jeanson R., Blanco S., Fournier R., Deneubourg J.-L.,
Fourcassi V. and Theraulaz G. 2003. A model of animal
movements in a bounded space. Journal of Theoretical
Biology 225, 443451.
Juinio-Meez M.A., Paa M.A., de Peralta G., Olavides R.,
Catbagan T., Edullantes C.M. et al. 2012. Establishment
and management of communal sandfish (Holothuria
scabra) sea ranching in the Philippines. In AsiaPacific
tropical sea cucumber aquaculture, ed. by C.A. Hair,
T.D. Pickering and D.J. Mills. ACIAR Proceedings
No. 136, 121127. Australian Centre for International
Agricultural Research: Canberra. [These proceedings]
Kirshenbaum S., Feindel S. and Chen Y. 2006. A study
of tagging methods for the sea cucumber Cucumaria
frondosa in the waters off Maine. Fishery Bulletin 104,
299302.
Lavitra T., Rasolofonirina R., Jangoux M. and Eeckhaut
I. 2009. Problems related to the farming of Holothuria
scabra (Jaeger, 1833). SPC Beche-de-mer Information
Bulletin 29, 2030.
Leber K.M., Cantrell R.N. and Leung P.S. 2005. Optimizing
cost-effectiveness of size at release in stock enhancement

programs. North American Journal of Fishery

Management 25, 15961608.
Liao I.C., Su M.S. and Leao E.M. 2003. Status of research
in stock enhancement and sea ranching. Reviews in Fish
Biology and Fisheries 13, 151163.
Lorenzen K., Leber K.M. and Blankenship H.L. 2010
Responsible approach to marine stock enhancement: an
update. Reviews in Fisheries Science 18(2), 189210.
Mercier A., Battaglene S.C. and Hamel J.-F. 1999. Daily
burrowing cycle and feeding activity of juvenile sea
cucumbers Holothuria scabra in response to environmental factors. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology
and Ecology 239, 125156.
Mercier A., Battaglene S.C. and Hamel J.-F. 2000. Periodic
movement, recruitment and size-related distribution of
the sea cucumber Holothuria scabra in Solomon Islands.
Hydrobiologia 440, 81100.
Molony B.W., Lenanton R., Jackson G. and Norriss J.
2003. Stock enhancement as a fisheries management
tool. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 13, 409432.
Purcell S.W. 2004. Criteria for release strategies and evaluating the restocking of sea cucumbers. In Advances in
sea cucumber aquaculture and management, ed. by A.
Lovatelli, C. Conand, S. Purcell, S. Uthicke, J.-F. Hamel
and A. Mercier. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No. 463,
181191. Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations: Rome.
Purcell S.W., Agudo N.S. and Gossuin H. 2008. Poor
retention of passive induced transponder (PIT) tags for
mark-recapture studies on tropical sea cucumbers. SPC
Beche-de-mer Information Bulletin 28, 5355.
Purcell S.W. and Blockmans B.F. 2009. Effective fluorochrome marking of juvenile sea cucumbers for sea
ranching and restocking. Aquaculture 296, 263270.
Purcell S.W., Blockmans B.F. and Agudo N.S. 2006a.
Transportation methods for restocking of juvenile
sea cucumber, Holothuria scabra. Aquaculture 251,
238244.
Purcell S.W., Blockmans B.F. and Nash W.J. 2006b.
Efficacy of chemical markers and physical tags for
large-scale release of an exploited holothurian. Journal
of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 334,
283293.
Purcell S.W. and Kirby D.S. 2006. Restocking the sea
cucumber Holothuria scabra: sizing no-take zones
through individual-based movement modelling. Fisheries
Research 80, 5361.
Purcell S.W. and Simutoga M. 2008. Spatio-temporal and
size-dependent variation in the success of releasing
cultured sea cucumbers in the wild. Reviews in Fisheries
Science, 16, 204214.
Robinson G. and Pascal B. 2009. From hatchery to community: Madagascars first village-based holothurian
mariculture programme. SPC Beche-de-mer Information
Bulletin 29, 3843.

102

Robinson G. and Pascal B. 2012. Sea cucumber farming

experiences in south-western Madagascar. In Asia
Pacific tropical sea cucumber aquaculture, ed. by C.A.
Hair, T.D. Pickering and D.J. Mills. ACIAR Proceedings
No. 136 142155. Australian Centre for International
Agricultural Research: Canberra. [These proceedings]
Templeton A.R. 1986. Coadaptation and outbreeding
depression. Pp. 105116 in Conservation biology: the
science of scarcity and diversity, ed. by M.E. Soule.
Sinauer Associates: Sunderland, Massachusetts.
Uthicke, S. and Benzie J.A.H. 2000. Allozyme electrophoresis indicates high gene flow between populations of
Holothuria nobilis (Holothuroidea: Aspidochirotida) on
the Great Barrier Reef. Marine Biology 137, 819825.
Uthicke S. and Benzie J.A.H. 2001. Restricted gene
flow between Holothuria scabra (Echinodermata:
Holothuroidea) populations along the north-east coast
of Australia and the Solomon Islands. Marine Ecology
Progress Series 216, 109117.
Uthicke S. and Benzie J.A.H. 2002. A genetic fingerprint
recapture technique for measuring growth in unmarkable invertebrates: negative growth in commercially
fished holothurians (Holothuria nobilis). Marine Ecology
Progress Series 241, 221226.
Uthicke S. and Benzie J.A.H. 2003. Gene flow and
population history in high dispersal marine invertebrates:
mitochondrial DNA analysis of Holothuria nobilis
(Echinodermata: Holothuroidea) populations from the
Indo-Pacific. Molecular Ecology 12, 26353648.

Uthicke S. and Purcell S. 2004. Preservation of genetic

diversity in restocking of the sea cucumber Holothuria
scabra planned through allozyme electrophoresis.
Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 61,
519528.
Uthicke S., Welch D. and Benzie J.A.H. 2004. Slow growth
and lack of recovery in overfished holothurians on the
Great Barrier Reef: evidence from DNA fingerprints and
repeated large-scale surveys. Conservation Biology 18,
13951404.
Utter F. 1998. Genetic problems of hatchery-reared progeny released into the wild, and how to deal with them.
Bulletin of Marine Science 65, 623640.
Utter F. and Epifanio J. 2002. Marine aquaculture: genetic
potentials and pitfalls. Reviews in Fish Biology and
Fisheries 12, 5977.
Waples R.S. 1995. Genetic effects of stock transfers of
fish. Pp. 5169 in Protection of aquatic biodiversity:
proceedings of the World Fisheries Congress, Theme 3,
ed. by D.P. Philipp. Science Publishers: Lebanon, New
Hampshire.

103

AsiaPacific tropical
sea cucumber
aquaculture

ACIAR PROCEEDINGS

136

AsiaPacific tropical
sea cucumber aquaculture
Proceedings of an international symposium held in
Noumea, New Caledonia, 1517 February 2011
Editors: Cathy A. Hair, Timothy D. Pickering and David J. Mills

2012

The Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR) was established in
June 1982 by an Act of the Australian Parliament. ACIAR operates as part of Australias
international development cooperation program, with a mission to achieve more productive
and sustainable agricultural systems, for the benefit of developing countries and Australia.
It commissions collaborative research between Australian and developing-country
researchers in areas where Australia has special research competence. It also administers
Australias contribution to the International Agricultural Research Centres.
Where trade names are used this constitutes neither endorsement of nor discrimination
against any product by ACIAR.

ACIAR PROCEEDINGS SERIES

This series of publications includes the full proceedings of research
workshops or symposia organised or supported by ACIAR. Numbers
in this series are distributed internationally to selected individuals
and scientific institutions, and are also available from ACIARs
website at <www.aciar.gov.au>. The papers in ACIAR Proceedings
are peer reviewed.

Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR) 2012

This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act
1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission
from ACIAR, GPO Box 1571, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia, [email protected]
Hair C.A., Pickering T.D. and Mills D.J. (eds) 2012. AsiaPacific tropical sea cucumber
aquaculture. Proceedings of an international symposium held in Noumea, New
Caledonia, 1517 February 2011. ACIAR Proceedings No. 136. Australian Centre for
International Agricultural Research: Canberra. 209pp.
ACIAR Proceedings - ISSN 1038-6920 (print), ISSN 1447-0837 (online)
ISBN 978 1 921962 34 9 (print)
ISBN 978 1 921962 35 6 (online)
Technical editing by Mason Edit, Adelaide, Australia
Design by Clarus Design Pty Ltd, Canberra, Australia
Printing by Canprint Communications Pty Ltd, Canberra, Australia
Cover: Adult sandfish, Goulburn Island, Northern Territory, Australia.
(Photo: Wayne Tupper)