Outline
Figures
Tables

Volume: 03, Issue: 01, Page: 1-3

Invasive aquatic invertebrates as biological pollutants: Global challenges and future directions

Department of Animal Science and Fishery, Faculty of Agricultural and Forestry Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia Sarawak, 97008, Bintulu, Sarawak, Malaysia

*Corresponding authors

Email address: hadihamli@upm.edu.my (Hadi Hamli)

doi: https://doi.org/10.69517/aier.2026.03.01.0001

Share:

Received:
08 January 2026

Revised:
14 January 2026

Accepted:
22 January 2026

Published:
26 January 2026

Highlights

  • Invasive aquatic invertebrates function as persistent biological pollutants, causing long-term ecological degradation.
  • Human mediated pathways, especially ballast water and live trade, are the primary drivers of global invertebrate invasions.
  • These invasions significantly alter nutrient cycling, food webs, and habitat structure, leading to biodiversity loss.
  • Climate change intensifies invasion impacts by enhancing invader success and reducing native species resilience.
  • Effective management relies on prevention, early detection (eDNA), and coordinated biosecurity policies.

Abstract

Invasive aquatic invertebrates are increasingly recognised as a significant yet underappreciated form of biological pollution in freshwater and marine ecosystems worldwide. Unlike conventional chemical pollutants, these organisms are reproduced, persistent, and capable of causing cumulative and often irreversible ecological change. This editorial synthesises current understanding of the pathways, impacts, and management challenges associated with invasive aquatic invertebrates, framing them as biological pollutants that degrade ecosystem structure, function, and services. Major introduction pathways, including ballast water discharge, aquaculture, and ornamental trade have accelerated invasion rates under globalisation, while climate change is further amplifying invasion success by expanding suitable habitats and stressing native communities. Ecologically, invasive invertebrates disrupt food webs, alter nutrient cycling, and shift native species, with cascading consequences for biodiversity and ecosystem resilience. Socio-economic impacts include biofouling of infrastructure, reduced fisheries productivity, and increased public health risks through parasite transmission. Despite advances in invasion ecology, substantial knowledge gaps remain, particularly in early detection, impact prediction, and coordinated governance. The editorial highlights future directions that prioritise prevention, pathway management, early detection technologies such as environmental DNA, and interdisciplinary collaboration. Recognising invasive aquatic invertebrates as biological pollutants provides a unifying framework to strengthen science-based policy and protection aquatic ecosystems under accelerating global change.

Graphical abstract

Keywords

Aquatic ecosystems, Biological pollution, Ecological impacts, Invasive aquatic invertebrates, Invasive species pathways

Invasive aquatic invertebrates constitute an increasingly significant form of biological pollution in freshwater and marine ecosystems worldwide. Unlike conventional chemical pollutants, invasive organisms are living entities capable of reproduction, dispersal, and long-term persistence once introduced into nonnative environments (Simberloff et al., 2013). Their impacts often intensify over time, leading to cumulative and frequently irreversible ecological changes. Invasive invertebrates can disrupt food webs, modify nutrient cycling, and reduce native biodiversity, thereby degrading overall ecosystem health (Gallardo et al., 2016). Conceptualizing these organisms as biological pollutants emphasizes their role in altering environmental quality in a manner comparable to chemical contamination. This framing also strengthens the rationale for preventative management and policy driven responses at national and international scales.
The global spread of invasive aquatic invertebrates is largely facilitated by human-mediated transport pathways. Ballast water discharge from commercial shipping remains one of the most significant vectors, enabling organisms to cross-biogeographic barriers that would otherwise restrict natural dispersal (Soto-López et al., 2025). Additional pathways include aquaculture activities, aquarium and ornamental trades, recreational boating, and the live bait industry (Hulme, 2009). Increasing global trade and infrastructure development have intensified propagule pressure, raising the probability of establishment following introduction. Many invasive invertebrates possess biological traits such as rapid reproduction, early maturation, and broad environmental tolerance, which further enhance invasion success (Sakai et al., 2001). Addressing these pathways through regulation and biosecurity measures remains the most effective means of reducing future invasion risks.
The ecological impacts of invasive aquatic invertebrates are widespread and often intense. Invasive filter feeders, such as zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha), can dominate benthic habitats and significantly alter nutrient dynamics and water clarity (Lindim, 2015). These alterations may shift primary productivity patterns and restructure aquatic food webs. Invasive crustaceans and gastropods frequently outcompete native species for food and space, leading to declines in native populations and population loss (Gallardo et al., 2016). Some species act as ecosystem engineers, modifying sediments and habitat structure, which further affects community composition. Such tumbling ecological effects can ultimately reduce ecosystem resilience and functioning across spatial scales.
Invasive aquatic invertebrates impose substantial socio economic costs in addition to ecological damage. Biofouling by invasive species can obstruct water intake pipes, irrigation canals, and hydropower facilities, resulting in increased maintenance and operational expenses (Haubrock et al., 2022). In fisheries and aquaculture systems, invasive invertebrates may compete with cultured species, reduce recruitment success, or alter habitat quality. These impacts can undermine food security and threaten the livelihoods of fishing-dependent communities. Furthermore, some invasive invertebrates serve as intermediate hosts for parasites and pathogens, increasing risks to human and animal health (Xie et al., 2024). Together, these economic and health burdens reinforce the classification of invasive species as a form of biological pollution.
Climate change is increasingly recognized as a key driver that amplifies the impacts and spread of invasive aquatic invertebrates. Rising water temperatures can enhance metabolic rates, growth, and reproductive output of many invasive species, facilitating rapid population expansion (Raynal et al., 2025). Altered hydrological systems and extreme weather events may also increase dispersal opportunities by connecting previously isolated water bodies. Changes in salinity and water chemistry can create new ecological niches that favor tolerant non-native species. At the same time, climate induced stress may reduce the competitive ability of native taxa (Hillebrand et al., 2024). The interaction between climate change and biological invasions therefore represents a major challenge for future aquatic ecosystem management.
Despite increasing research attention, several knowledge gaps hinder effective management of invasive aquatic invertebrates. Accurate species identification is often complicated by cryptic taxa and limited taxonomic expertise, particularly in tropical regions (Kürzel et al., 2022). Impact assessments are frequently depend on situation, making it difficult to generalize invasion risks across ecosystems. Governance and management responsibilities are often fragmented across jurisdictions, reducing the effectiveness of coordinated responses (Burgos-Rodríguez and Burgiel, 2020). Emerging tools such as environmental DNA (eDNA) show strong potential for early detection, yet their application remains uneven and requires further standardization (Çevik and Çevik, 2025). Addressing these challenges requires integrated monitoring frameworks, improved capacity building, and stronger international collaboration.
Future efforts to address invasive aquatic invertebrates as biological pollutants should priorities prevention, early detection, and rapid response strategies. Strengthened regulation of high-risk pathways, particularly ballast water and live organism trade, is critical for reducing new introductions. Research should increasingly focus on functional impacts and ecosystem level consequences rather than only documenting species occurrences. Integrating ecological research with socio economic and policy analyses will improve management relevance and decision-making. Advances in molecular monitoring tools, including eDNA based surveillance, offer promising opportunities for enhancing detection efficiency. Public engagement and stakeholder participation will also play a vital role in reducing unintentional introductions and supporting long-term management success.
Invasive aquatic invertebrates are a widespread and growing type of biological pollution that affects ecosystems, the economy, and society. Their impacts are often persistent, cumulative, and difficult to reverse once populations become established. As global connectivity and climate change continue to intensify, the risks posed by biological invasions are expected to increase. Observing invasive species as harmful organisms shows the need for quick and organized action to prevent them. Effective responses will require the integration of science-based policy, advanced monitoring tools, and international cooperation. Conservation aquatic ecosystems from invasive invertebrates is essential for maintaining biodiversity, ecosystem services, and long-term environmental sustainability.

Acknowledgements

The author gratefully acknowledges the logistic support provided by the Department of Animal Science and Fishery, Faculty of Agricultural and Forestry Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia Sarawak, Malaysia.

Funding information

No funding was received to conduct this study.

Ethical approval statement

None to declare.

Data availability

Not applicable.

Informed consent statement

Not applicable.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Author contributions

Hadi Hamli: Conceptualization, writing first draft, review and revision. All of the enlisted authors have read and approved the final version of the published editorial.

References

Burgos-Rodríguez J and Burgiel SW, 2020. Federal legal authorities for the early detection of and rapid response to invasive species. Biological Invasions, 22: 129–146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-019-02148-w

Çevik T and Çevik N, 2025. Environmental DNA (eDNA): A review of ecosystem biodiversity detection and applications. Biodiversity and Conservation, 34(9): 2999–3035. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-025-03112-y

Gallardo B, Clavero M, Sánchez MI and Vilà M, 2016. Global ecological impacts of invasive species in aquatic ecosystems. Global Change Biology, 22: 151–163. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13004

Haubrock PJ, Cuthbert RN, Ricciardi A, Diagne C and Courchamp F, 2022. Economic costs of invasive bivalves in freshwater ecosystems. Diversity and Distributions, 28(5): 1010–1021. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.13501

Hillebrand V, Dobler AH, Schwalb AN and Geist J, 2024. Physiological effects of interacting native and invasive bivalves under thermal stress. Biological Invasions, 26(7): 2281–2293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-024-03315-4

Hulme PE, 2009. Trade, transport and trouble: Managing invasive species pathways in an era of globalization. Journal of Applied Ecology 46: 10–18.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01600.x

Kürzel K, Kaiser S, Lörz AN, Rossel S, Paulus E, Peters J, Schwentner M, Arbizu MP, Coleman CO, Svavarsson J and Brix S, 2022. Correct species identification and its implications for conservation using Haploniscidae (Crustacea, Isopoda) in Icelandic waters as a proxy. Frontiers in Marine Science,8: 795196. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.795196

Lindim C, 2015. Modeling the impact of Zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha) on phytoplankton and nutrients in a lowland river. Ecological Modelling, 301: 17–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2015.01.012

Raynal RS, Schwanz LE and Bonduriansky R, 2025. Differential effects of ambient temperature on juvenile versus adult life-stages of an invasive freshwater snail. Evolutionary Ecology, 39(3–4): 371–389. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10682-025-10348-1

Sakai AK, Allendorf FW, Holt JS, Lodge DM, Molofsky J, With KA, Baughman S, Cabin RJ, Cohen JE, Ellstrand NC, Mccauley DE, O’neil P, Parker IM, Thompson JN and Weller SG, 2001. The population biology of invasive species. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 32: 305–332. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.32.081501.114037

Simberloff D, Martin JL, Genovesi P, Maris V, Wardle DA, Aronson J, Courchamp F, Galil B, García-Berthou E, Pascal M, Pyšek P, Sousa R, Tabacchi E and Vilà M, 2013. Impacts of biological invasions: What’s what and the way forward. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 28: 58–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2012.07.013

Soto-López V, Menendez-Teleña D, Garcia-Vazquez E and Bartolomé M, 2025. Risk analysis of invasive species by ballast water: Case study in the Port of Gijón, Bay of Biscay. Journal of Marine Systems, 252: 104148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmarsys.2025.104148

Xie A, Zhang Y, Breed MF, An X, Yao H, Huang Q, Su J and Sun X, 2024. Terrestrial invertebrate hosts of human pathogens in urban ecosystems. Eco-Environment and Health, 3(3): 369–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eehl.2024.04.003

 

[stm-calc id="1576"]