| |

Received: 3 June 2019    Revised: 9 August 2019    Accepted: 11 August 2019

DOI: 10.1111/gcb.14808

RESEARCH REVIEW

Prevention is better than cure: Persian Gulf biodiversity

vulnerability to the impacts of desalination plants

Moslem Sharifinia1  | Zahra Afshari Bahmanbeigloo2 | Walker O. Smith Jr3,4 |

Chee Kong Yap5 | Mehrzad Keshavarzifard1

1
Shrimp Research Center, Iranian Fisheries
Science Research Institute, Agricultural Abstract
Research, Education and Extension Due to extremely high rates of evaporation and low precipitation in the Persian Gulf,
Organization (AREEO), Bushehr, Iran
2 discharges from desalination plants (DPs) can lead to ecological stresses by increasing
Faculty of Sciences, Hamedan Branch,
Islamic Azad University, Hamedan, Iran water temperatures, salinities, and heavy metal concentrations, as well as decreas‐
3
School of Oceanography, Shanghai Jiao ing dissolved oxygen levels. We discuss the potential ecological impacts of DPs on
Tong University, Shanghai, People's Republic
of China
marine organisms and propose mitigating measures to reduce the problems induced
4
Virginia Institute of Marine Science, College by DPs discharges. The daily capacity of DPs in the Persian Gulf exceeds 11 million
of William & Mary, Gloucester Point, VA, m3 per day, which is approximately half of global daily freshwater production; multi‐
USA
5 stage flash distillation (MSF) is the dominant desalination process. Results from field
Department of Biology, Faculty of
Science, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, and laboratory studies indicate that there are potentially serious and chronic threats
Selangor, Malaysia
to marine communities following exposure to DP discharges, especially within the
Correspondence zoobenthos, echinodermata, seagrasses, and coral reefs. DP discharges can lead to
Moslem Sharifinia, Shrimp Research Center,
decreases in sensitive species, plankton abundance, hard substrate epifauna, and
Iranian Fisheries Science Research Institute,
Agricultural Research, Education and growth rates of seagrasses. However, the broad applicability of any one of these
Extension Organization (AREEO), Bushehr,
impacts is currently hard to scale because of the limited number of studies that have
Iran.
Email: moslem.sharifinia@yahoo.com been conducted to assess the ecological impacts of DP discharge on Persian Gulf
organisms. Even so, available data suggest that appropriately sited, designed, and
Funding information
Iran National Science Foundation, Grant/ operated DPs combined with current developments in impingement and entrainment
Award Number: 97015984
reduction technology can mitigate many of the negative environmental impacts of
DPs.

KEYWORDS
brine discharge, corals, desalination plants, macrofauna, plankton, seagrasses

1 |  I NTRO D U C TI O N
Desalination of seawater is one of the most promising ways (and
often the only way) to provide drinking water in arid and semiarid
regions. The industrial, global production of fresh water is rapidly
increasing (Lattemann & Höpner, 2008a), and although seawater de‐
salination provides a range of economic, social, and health benefits,
numerous potential negative effects associated with the chemical
and condensed compounds released into the environment can occur
(Roberts, Johnston, & Knott, 2010). Given that most desalination
plants (DPs) extract water from local sources, environmental degra‐
dation near the plants can occur. In general, impingement (IPM) and
entrainment (ETM) processes include the removal of marine organ‐
isms during the intake system operation of DPs. Impingable organ‐
isms include larger organisms with active swimming ability (such as
juveniles and adult organisms) and retained by a mesh with a max
opening of 14.2 mm. Entrainable organisms are defined as small or‐
ganisms with limited to no swimming ability, and lacking the ability
to avoid intake flow, and which also can pass through the 14.2 mm
mesh (Missimer & Maliva, 2018). The effects of IPM (mortality of

Glob Change Biol. 2019;00:1–12. © 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd |  1
wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/gcb  
 |
2       SHARIFINIA et al.

marine organisms on the intake screens) and ETM (mortality of mi‐ (MED), and multi‐stage flash (MSF) are the three most globally
croscopic organisms, fish eggs and larvae, and small crustaceans applied desalination systems (Miller, Shemer, & Semiat, 2015).
during salt water processing) caused by DPs have been assessed for Figure 2a,b shows the classification of the main desalination
mostly freshwater intake systems, while mortality in seawater intake techniques and contribution of each desalination technology
systems is not well documented (Gille, 2003; Miri & Chouikhi, 2005). to water production around the world. According to Alkaisi,
Impingement and ETM of marine species are influenced by intake Mossad, and Sharifian‐Barforoush (2017), 62% of the installed
design and operation, intake location, water quality parameters such global desalination capacity is based on RO, while MED and MSF
as temperature and dissolved oxygen, as those impact the mobility account for 14% and 10%, respectively. The widespread use of
of organisms and ambient hydraulics (Hogan, 2015). Death of plank‐ the RO system is due to its lower costs and energy demands and
ton can have serious food web consequences, as these organisms improved membrane durability. In the RO system, dynamic pres‐
are the base of the marine food web; without these microorganisms sure was used to overcome the osmotic pressure of salt solution
much of the local aquatic life will be at risk. and leads to water‐selective permeation from the saline water‐
One of the most important emerging issues in the Persian Gulf side of a membrane to the freshwater side (Semiat, 2000). In
is that DPs will alter biodiversity and jeopardize ecosystem ser‐ MSF distillation, evaporation of seawater takes place by reduc‐
vices. Given that marine invertebrates and fishes are ectotherms tion in the pressure of the heated water. The energy efficiency
(Sunday, Bates, & Dulvy, 2011), the impacts of DP discharges on is obtained by regenerative heating and also preheating of the
aquatic fauna may be serious. Water temperature and salinity are incoming seawater using the condensing water vapor. In MED,
critical to the growth and survival of all aquatic species, especially the process takes place in a series of evaporators and operates
larval forms, and sudden changes in these may endanger numerous on the reducing principle of the ambient pressure in each com‐
species. Increases in temperatures and salinities can push marine ponent. Generation of a secondary steam at a lower pressure
fauna close to their upper tolerances; consequently, these changes
can be expected to affect species distributions and cause changes
in recruitment success, fecundity, and growth rate (Lattemann &
Höpner, 2008a; Pörtner & Farrell, 2008). Biodiversity in semien‐
closed bodies of water such as Persian Gulf is vulnerable to an‐
thropogenic activities such as discharges from DPs. That is not
to say that other environmental features do not threaten marine
life. Indeed, impacts from shipping ports and hydrocarbon loading
facilities can be substantial, given the sensitive nature of Persian
Gulf fauna. The Persian Gulf is facing with many threats resulting
from natural changes and anthropogenic pressures. Marine species
diversity, ecosystem health, and fisheries are currently threatened
by multiple stressors such as industrial effluents, reclamation and
dredging, oil pollution, overfishing, and other natural and anthro‐
pogenic factors (Figure 1; Daliri, Kamrani, Jentoft, & Paighambari,
2016; Kamrani, Sharifinia, & Hashemi, 2016; Sharifinia, Daliri, &
Kamrani, 2019; Sharifinia, Taherizadeh, Namin, & Kamrani, 2018).
Despite the potential effects of DPs on marine ecosystems and
their services, there is a lack of research on the impact of brine
discharges from DPs on Persian Gulf biodiversity. We summarize
the literature to assess the knowledge of DP discharges and their
impacts on marine organisms from fish to microbes, discuss the po‐
tential effects of DPs on the Persian Gulf biodiversity, and describe
an achievable and practical management plan to mitigate the im‐
pacts of DPs.

2 |  S E AWATE R D E SA LI N ATI O N

TEC H N I Q U E S

Desalination plant systems depend on energy sources, and these

F I G U R E 1   The main threats to biodiversity in the Persian Gulf
can be classified as thermal, mechanical, electrical, and chemical (Daliri et al., 2016; Kamrani et al., 2016; Sharifinia et al., 2015,
energy sources. Reverse osmosis (RO), multi‐effect distillation 2018, 2019)
SHARIFINIA et al. |
      3

F I G U R E 2   Classification of (a) the main desalination techniques and (b) contribution of each desalination technology to the world water
production

TA B L E 1   Advantages and disadvantages of desalination technologies (Negewo, 2012)

Desalination
processes Advantages Disadvantages

RO • Easily adapts to local conditions. • Needs comprehensive pretreatments to be applied

• Plant size can be adjusted to meet short‐term increases in demand for high saline water.
and expanded incrementally as needed. • Membrane fouling.
• Can remove silica. • Complex configuration.
• Capital cost approximately 25% less than thermal options. • Needs experienced personnel for operation and
maintenance.
MED • Capability to operation between 0% and 100% capacity while MED • Antiscalants necessary to stop scale buildup on
unit is kept under vacuum and cold circulation. evaporating surfaces.
• Appropriate to mix with renewable energy sources that supply
intermittent energy.
MSF • Easy management and operation. • Cannot operate below 60% capacity.
• Capability to treat saline water up to 70,000 mg/L. • Not appropriate to mix with renewable energies
that have intermittent energy supplies.
• High energy use.
ED • Up to 94% recovery rate. • Capital intensive and costly compared to RO.
• Durable membranes (up to 15 years).
• Ability to combine with RO for higher water recovery (up to 98%).

Abbreviations: ED, Electrodialysis; MED, multi‐effect distillation; MSF, multi‐stage flash; RO, reverse osmosis.

conducted by the primary steam is fed to the next component
where the process is repeated (Miller et al., 2015; Semiat, 2000).
The advantages and disadvantages of some desalination pro‐
cesses are shown in Table 1.
3 | D I S TR I B U TI O N O F D P S I N TH E WO R LD
A N D PE R S I A N G U LF CO U NTR I E S
Water from DPs has been used to supply freshwater in arid and semi‐
arid areas of the world for decades. The highest numbers of DPs have
been constructed in the Middle East, North America, Asia, Europe, and
Africa (Figure 3a; Gorjian & Ghobadian, 2015; Lattemann & Höpner,
2008a; Shatat, Worall, & Riffat, 2013). Given the arid nature of the
region, threat to the Persian Gulf environment from DPs (and also by
other human activities) will be greater in the future, and there is an
urgent need for more research on reducing the effects of DPs on this
system. Thermal evaporation and membrane‐based separation are
the two main techniques used in seawater desalination in the Persian
Gulf (Elimelech & Phillip, 2011). Additionally, the Iranian government
envisages massive investments in DPs to bring water from the south‐
ern Iranian coastal waters to the interior of the country. Currently,
213 active seawater DPs are operating in the Persian Gulf, with 51
plants planned, under construction, or being installed. Saudi Arabia
and Kuwait have the highest and lowest numbers of DPs among the
Persian Gulf countries (Figure 3b). The daily capacity of these plants
for all of the Persian Gulf countries is about 11 million m3 per day,
which is approximately equal to half the global production (Gorjian
 |
4       SHARIFINIA et al.
& Ghobadian, 2015; Sharifinia et al., 2019). Lattemann and Höpner
(2008a) reported that 81% of the desalinated water in the Persian Gulf
countries is produced by MSF and 13% by MED, but only 6% by re‐
verse osmosis. In contrast, the most applied technique in Iranian DPs
are RO and MED, respectively (Figure 3c; Gorjian & Ghobadian, 2015).
4 |  B I O D I V E R S IT Y V U LN E R A B I LIT Y
TO E N V I RO N M E NTA L I M PAC T S O F D P
D I S C H A RG E S
Given the increasing rates of development of urban areas and coastal
construction in the Persian Gulf region, anthropogenic activities and
climate change will be important threats to the future of biodiversity
in marine ecosystems (Griffith, Strutton, & Semmens, 2018; Henson
et al., 2017; Kamrani et al., 2016; Segan, Murray, & Watson, 2016;
Sharifinia et al., 2018, 2019; Sharifinia, Penchah, Mahmoudifard,
F I G U R E 3   The global distribution of
the existing desalination plants (DPs; a)
worldwide, (b) in the Persian Gulf, and
(c) relative frequency of desalination
techniques used in Iran, and the entire
Persian Gulf
Gheibi, & Zare, 2015; Taherizadeh & Sharifinia, 2015). The impacts
of DPs on marine biodiversity include decreases in sensitive species,
reductions in plankton abundance, decreases in hard substrate epi‐
fauna, and growth rate decreases of seagrasses (Roberts et al., 2010).
Although there already is a variety of environmental impacts, DPs
will continue to have an increased negative impact on biodiversity in
marine ecosystems in the future. There are several means that a rapid
change in anthropogenic pressures may intensify or limit the ability
of a species to respond to DP impacts. For example, brine discharges
from DPs induce morphological and physiological changes in a variety
of species, which in turn may limit the ability of a species to resist
additional environmental stresses (Roberts et al., 2010). Owing to ex‐
treme evaporation (1.54 m/year; Brewer & Dyrssen, 1985) and low
precipitation rates (0.03–0.11 m/year), the Persian Gulf is highly sa‐
line (average salinity for the entire region is more than 37; Moaddab,
Khabazi, & Roosta, 2017). The rapid increase in the number of DPs
will lead to ecological stresses by increasing water temperatures and
SHARIFINIA et al.
salinities throughout the region, decreasing dissolved oxygen con‐
centrations, and increasing heavy metal concentrations (Sharifinia
et al., 2019). Despite the documented impacts of DP discharges on
marine species, the Persian Gulf region suffers from a lack of research
on the regional impacts, with limited research that addresses environ‐
mental issues of DPs in general (de la Ossa‐Carretero et al., 2016a;
Lattemann & Höpner, 2008a; Roberts et al., 2010).
Semienclosed and shallow ecosystems such as Persian Gulf (with
a mean and maximum depth of 50 and 89 m) with a high diversity
of marine species, are generally more sensitive to brine discharges
than open‐ocean systems (Lattemann & Höpner, 2008a). The im‐
pacts of desalination processes and applied pretreatments on the
physicochemical properties of DP discharges were discussed by
Lattemann and Höpner (2008a). Discharges from DPs on salin‐
ity and temperature (having been defined by Tettelbach & Rhodes
1981 and O'Connor & Lawler 2004 as ‘master factors’ for several
marine organisms) and other contaminants around outfalls can be
considerable (Table 2). Autecological studies have indicated that de‐
velopment, growth, and survival of marine organisms are affected
by salinity and temperature (Kinne, 1964; O'Connor & Lawler, 2004;
Tettelbach & Rhodes, 1981).
Increases in seawater salinity and temperature due to anthro‐
pogenic activities and climate change will continue to occur in the
coming century (Pires, Figueira, Moreira, Soares, & Freitas, 2015),
particularly in coastal areas (Cardoso, Raffaelli, & Pardal, 2008; Pires
et al., 2015; Reid, Soudant, Lambert, Paillard, & Birkbeck, 2003).
Studies that assess the impacts of salinity and temperature changes
on marine organisms are increasing, because these changes can have
harmful and lasting effects. For example, Pires et al. (2015) reported
that salinity increases have a significant negative impact on the regen‐
erative capacity of polychaete Diopatra neapolitana, and found that
under higher salinities complete regeneration was significantly de‐
layed. The toxicological effects of DP discharges on seagrasses, fish,
macrofauna, meiofauna, zooplankton, and phytoplankton exposed to
effluents in areas surrounding the outlets are summarized in Table 3.
TA B L E 2   Physicochemical properties of discharges from DPs
Physicochemical
properties Effect
Salinity Increases of up to 50,000 mg/L in both RO and
thermal plants
Temperature In RO plants equal to ambient seawater while in
MSF plants increases from 5 to 15°C
Dissolved Below ambient seawater DO
oxygen (DO)
Heavy metals Elevated levels of iron, chromium, nickel, and
molybdenum in RO, and copper and nickel in
thermal plants (MSF)
Coagulants In RO may be present, while in MSF not present
Antiscalants Low content below toxic levels
Abbreviations: DO, dissolved oxygen; MSF, multi‐stage flash; RO,
reverse osmosis.
|
      5
Given that brine discharges from DPs are more dense than ambient
seawater, outfall water tends to remain at the bottom rather than getting
mixed within the water column (Gacia, Invers, Manzanera, Ballesteros,
& Romero, 2007; Purnama, Al‐Barwani, & Smith, 2005; Roberts et al.,
2010). Therefore, benthic species are more likely to be initially affected
by brine discharges rather than planktonic and pelagic species, and most
studies have examined the impact of DPs on benthic organisms. Gacia
et al. (2007) investigated the effects of DP brine discharges on the seagrass
Posidonia oceanica. They suggested that discharges result in increasing
nitrogen content in tissues and decreasing carbohydrates. Seagrass
meadows in the Persian Gulf include Halodule uninervis, Halophila stipula‐
cea, and Halophila ovalis and are responsible for high primary production,
high biodiversity of associated flora and fauna, and serve as nursery and
feeding grounds for many marine organisms. Persian Gulf seagrasses
are subject to very large changes in salinity (from 38 to 70) and tem‐
peratures (from 10 to 39°C; Price, Sheppard, & Roberts, 1993). Halophila
stipulacea and H. ovalis are more sensitive to increases in salinity, so the
distribution of these species is more limited spatially than that of the
H. uninervis (Erftemeijer & Shuail, 2012; Green, Short, & Frederick, 2003).
The available evidence indicates that H. uninervis in the Persian Gulf can
tolerate hypersaline conditions (Erftemeijer & Shuail, 2012; Green et al.,
2003), but further research into the impacts of the DP brine discharges
on seagrass species distribution and growth in the region is needed.
Salinity and temperature are the main factors controlling
growth, photosynthesis, and survival of corals (Baird & Hughes,
2000; Ferrier‐Pages, Gattuso, & Jaubert, 1999; Kuanui, Chavanich,
Viyakarn, Omori, & Lin, 2015). Most marine organisms adapt to mod‐
est changes from optimal salinity and temperature conditions, but are
unable to tolerate these changes for long time periods (Lattemann &
Höpner, 2008a). Research on the relationship between environmen‐
tal variables and coral distributions suggests that coral reefs only
grow within narrow ranges of salinity and temperature. Despite the
importance of salinity and temperature to coral reefs physiological
processes, the effects of changes in theses parameters due to DP
discharges remains incompletely studied.
Salinity is a critical factor regulating the distribution of coral spe‐
cies and reef‐building potential (Riegl & Purkis, 2012). Corals appear
to have lower thresholds, as a 5% salinity increase causes reduced
growth and/or death (Birkeland, 2015; Hughes et al., 2017; van der
Merwe et al., 2014). Generally, most scleractinian corals can survive
only within a small range of salinity, and death occurs when salinity
increases above 40 (Muthiga & Szmant, 1987). Other studies found
that sudden changes in salinity had a negative effect on coral repro‐
duction, photosynthesis of algal symbionts, and respiration (Porter,
Lewis, & Porter, 1999; Richmond, 1993). Disruption in the symbiotic
relationship between coral and alga due to salinity stress will have a
severe effect on coral metabolism (Muthiga & Szmant, 1987). It has
also been shown that salinity variations disrupt optimal cellular elec‐
trochemical processes, enzyme kinetics and nerve conduction, and
cause metabolic drain (Vernberg & Vernberg, 2012). Ferrier‐Pages
et al. (1999) reported that the growth rates of Stylophora pistillata
decreased if salinity changed by 2–4 from optimal levels, and the
coral is particularly sensitive to hypersaline conditions. Furthermore,
 |
6       SHARIFINIA et al.

TA B L E 3   The ecological and toxicological impacts of DP brine discharges on marine organisms

Reference Species/community Summary of findings

de la Ossa‐Carretero Echinoderms, Polychaetes and • BOPA (Benthic Opportunistic Polychaetes and Amphipods) index suc‐
et al. (2016a); Amphipods cessfully indicates the impacts of DPs brine discharges on macrofaunal
Fernández‐Torquemada, communities.
González‐Correa, and • Echinoderms disappeared, sensitive amphipods decreased, and tolerant
Sánchez‐Lizaso (2013) polychaete families increased at the station closest to the discharge.
• The combination of a sensitive group like amphipods and a tolerant group
such as some polychaeta families, allowed an evaluation of the impact of
brine discharge.
Raventós, Macpherson, and Macrofauna • Monitoring found no significant changes in macrofaunal related to DP
García‐Rubies (2006) brine discharges.
Ruso, Ossa Carretero, Macrofauna • Found changes in abundance, number of taxonomic groups, and diversity
Casalduero, and Lizaso in macrofaunal assemblages impacted by DP discharges.
(2007) • In the vicinity of DP outfall, diversity and the number of taxonomic
groups reduced, while the abundance of nematode, increased.
• Macrofaunal assemblages in stations with salinity values >39 (close to a
DP outfall) dominated by nematodes (up to 98%).
Riera, Tuya, Ramos, Macrofauna • Macrofaunal assemblages surrounding DPs directly impacted by brine
Rodríguez, and discharges.
Monterroso (2012) • Monitoring found significant differences in abundance, community struc‐
ture, and diversity of macrobenthic fauna.
• The amphipod Ampelisca brevicornis dominated, in stations located at 15
and 30 m away from brine discharge was abundant.
Riera et al. (2011) Meiofauna • Abundances and community structure of meiofauna clearly impacted by
brine discharges.
• Found decreased abundance of meiofauna, particularly, nematodes in
impacted stations by brine discharge.
• Recommended meiofauna as useful indicators for ecological monitoring
programs of DP impacts.
de la Ossa‐Carretero et al. Amphipods • Amphipods indicated high sensitivity to DP brine discharges.
(2016b) • Found reduced abundance and diversity of amphipods in station sur‐
rounding and closest to discharge, where salinity values are up to 53.
Yoon and Park (2011) Phytoplankton (Skeletonema • Reported different tolerance ranges of phytoplankton species to brine
costatum, Chlorella vulgaris, discharge.
Tetraselmis suecica, and Isochrysis • Found significant correlation between brine concentration and phyto‐
galbana) plankton growth inhibition of the four species tested.
Macroalgae (Ulva pertusa) • Growth rate of S. costatum, T. suecica, and I. galbana decreased over 45
Zooplankton (Brachinonus plicatilis, • Galbana was the most sensitive species to DP brine discharges.
Tigriopus japonicas) • Sporulation rate of green algae U. pertusa sharply reduced with the
Demersal fish (Olive flounder, increase in brine concentration.
Paralichthys olivaceus) • Brine concentrations lower than 60.0 induced <50% mortality and over
65.0 resulted in >50% mortality.
• Mortality rate of fish increased with increasing salinity.
• Difference of brine effect on Paralichthys olivaceus related to ecophysi‐
ological characteristics such as adaptation capacity, exposure time, and
origin of species.
• Survival rate reduced with the increase in brine concentration.
Portillo et al. (2014) Fish • Total mortality of Liza fish (Synodus synodus) occurred at sodium metabi‐
sulfite concentrations equal to or greater than 50 ppm.
• Dead individuals of Lizardfish and other soft‐bottom species (Bothus
podas, Microchirus azevia, and Trachinus draco) occurred over more than
2 ha.
Gacia et al. (2007); Seagrass • Shallow Posidonia oceanica meadows exposed to RO brine discharge;
Sanchez‐Lizaso et al. found P. oceanica very sensitive to high salinities.
(2008); Latorre (2005); • High epiphyte load and nitrogen content in the leaves, high frequen‐
Walker and McComb cies of necrosis marks, low total nonstructural carbohydrates, and low
(1990) glutamine synthetase activity in affected meadows observed.

(Continues)
SHARIFINIA et al.
TA B L E 3   (Continued)
Reference
Cambridge, Zavala‐Perez,
Cawthray, Mondon, and
Kendrick (2017)
Iso, Suizu, and Maejima
(1994)
Iso et al. (1994)
del Pilar‐Ruso, Ossa‐
Carretero, Giménez‐
Casalduero, and
Sánchez‐Lizaso (2008)
Dupavillon and Gillanders
(2009)
Mandelli (1975)
Petersen et al. (2018)
Frank, Rahav, and Bar‐Zeev
(2017)
Portillo et al. (2014)
other studies indicated that rapid changes in salinity can effect zo‐
oxanthellae photosynthesis and may induce coral death by reduc‐
ing the amount of energy transferred to corals (Manzello & Lirman,
2003; Muthiga & Szmant, 1987). Petersen et al. (2018) investigated
the potential impacts of brine discharge on reef‐building corals S.
pistillata, Acropora tenuis, and Pocillopora verrucosa. They found that
Species/community
Seagrass Posidonia australis
Fish (Pagrus major, Pleuronectes
yokohamae)
Bivalve (Tapes philippinarum)
Polychaeta
Cuttlefish (Sepia apama)
Oyster (Crassostrea virginica)
Corals (Stylophora pistillata,
Acropora tenuis, and Pocillopora
verrucosa)
Microbial communities
Seagrass (Cymodocea nodosa)
|
      7
Summary of findings
• Salinity decreased maximum quantum yield of chlorophyll‐a fluorescence
emissions.
• Elevated salinity negatively affected the leaf water potential and osmotic
potential, while turgor pressure unaffected.
• K+ and Ca2+ concentrations is reduced in meadow leaves, while sugars
mainly sucrose and amino acids increased.
• Leaf osmolarity, ion, sugar, and amino acids recommended as potential
bioindicators to assess impacts of DP brine discharge.
• The impacts of DP brine discharge on fertilized eggs, larvae, juveniles,
and adults.
• Incipient lethal high salinity and sensitivity in each organism were differ‐
ent in different species according to their ecological and morphological
characteristics.
• Pagrus major juveniles exposed to salinities of 70 died within 1 hr, with
some mortality at 50.
• Pleuronectes yokohamae larvae died at salinities of 55 after approximately
6 days of exposure.
• Hatchability of eggs was delayed at S = 60 and completely inhibited at 70.
• In salinities <50, Tapes philippinarum extended their siphons after 30 min.
• In salinities >50, T. philippinarum kept their shells closed. After 24 hr, they
opened the shell at S = 60 and 70.
• The first lethal effect observed at 48 hr in S = 60 and at 24 hr at 70.
• Found different sensitivity of polychaete families to brine discharges;
Ampharetidae were the most sensitive, followed by Nephtyidae and
Spionidae.
• Syllidae and Capitellidae exhibited some resistance, while Paraonidae
was shown to be a tolerant family.
• Cuttlefish embryo survival rates reduced with increasing salinity, with no
embryos surviving in salinities >50.
• Mean weight and mantle length reduced with an increase in salinity.
• DP brine discharge introduced as a potential threat to the spawning ag‐
gregation of the Sepia apama.
• The effects of DP brine discharge on juvenile and adult Crassostrea virgi‐
nica were evaluated; they found that high copper concentrations in brines
was the most critical factor affecting survival and reproduction.
• DP brine discharge adversely impacted scleractinian corals and associ‐
ated Symbiodinium and microbial communities.
• Increased salinity (10% above ambient) changed Stylophora pistillata,
Acropora tenuis, and Pocillopora verrucosa physiology.
• Found that the effects of DP brine discharge on hard corals is
species‐specific.
• Microbial abundance decreased (up to 60%) at salinity levels >5% above
the surrounding environment.
• Elevated salinity increased the activity of bacterial metabolism.
• Monitoring shows high sensitivity to short‐term exposure to low sodium
metabisulphite (SMBS).
• Cymodocea nodosa were completely absent within the influence of the
salinity field connected with the brine discharge.
• Vitality and survival of the Cymodocea nodosa seedling exposure to
100 ppm SMBS concentrations decreased.
there was an overall reduction in coral performance and variations
in physiology of corals and suggested that the DP brine discharge
can lead to coral tissue loss due to decreases in Symbiodinium abun‐
dance and reduction in protein synthesis.
The best development and growth of corals occur in offshore
areas of the Persian Gulf, and is limited due to the extremes in
 |
8       SHARIFINIA et al.
TA B L E 4   Tolerance range of different corals species to the
salinity in the Persian Gulf
Salinity
Coral species 46 48 50
Cyphastrea serailia X     coastal protection to nearby Persian Gulf villages, towns, and cities,
Porites harrisoni X     an increasingly important service owing to sea level rise (Sale et al.,
Platygyra daedalea X X  
Favia pallida X X  
Favites chinensis X X  
Leptastrea purpurea X X  
Porites nodifera X X X
Cyphastrea microphthalma X X X
Siderastrea savignyana X X X
temperature, salinity, and other physical parameters (Sheppard
et al., 2010). Despite these difficult environmental conditions,
coral species show remarkable resilience and vitality in the region.
Tolerance ranges of different corals to the salinity in the Persian
Gulf are shown in Table 4. Sheppard, Price, and Roberts (1992)
found Cyphastrea serailia and Porites harrisoni growing in salinities
>42 in the Persian Gulf with large heads of Porites spp. flourishing
at 48. However, most corals die or suffer damage at salinities above
48. Although Persian Gulf corals are adapted to high salinities, cor‐
als may be vulnerable to exposure to DP discharges, and there is a
need for systematic studies on the effects of brine discharges on
coral reefs and their abilities to acclimate to increased salinities.
5 |  W H AT W I LL H A PPE N TO
B I O D I V E R S IT Y I F W E E X PA N D
D E SA LI N ATI O N PL A NT S I N TH E PE R S I A N
G U LF ?
The direct impacts of DP discharges on the Persian Gulf biodiver‐
sity presently remain unknown, and little is known about how these
releases impact present and future ecosystem functioning and ser‐
vices. Beaumont et al. (2007) and Hein, Koppen, Groot, and Ierland
(2006) classified goods and services provided by marine ecosystems
into four categories: Provisioning services (fisheries, bioprospect‐
ing, building materials), supporting services (life cycle maintenance
for both fauna and flora, primary and secondary production, nutri‐
ent cycling), regulating services (carbon sequestration and storage,
erosion prevention, wastewater treatment, moderation of extreme
events), and cultural services (touristic, recreational, esthetic, and
spiritual benefits). It is difficult to evaluate Persian Gulf services
and goods, because the same ecosystem can have a local, regional,
and global impact (Pendleton, Thébaud, Mongruel, & Levrel, 2016).
Despite the great loss of biodiversity (e.g., coral reef deterioration),
ecosystem goods and services are more greatly valued today than
20 years ago. In the Persian Gulf, several systems such as man‐
groves forests, seagrasses, and marshes are potentially important
for carbon sequestration (Sharifinia et al., 2019). Furthermore, the
Persian Gulf ecosystem sustains the livelihoods of millions of people
through fisheries and tourism (Daliri et al., 2016; Madani, Ahmadian,
KhaliliAraghi, & Rahbar, 2012; Nouri, Danehkar, & Sharifipour, 2008;
Sharifinia et al., 2019). Coral reefs and mangrove forests provide
2011; Sharifinia et al., 2019). It is possible that the adverse impacts
of DPs will modify or impair the provided goods and services by
Persian Gulf in the future. As such, there is a pressing‐need for fur‐
ther research into the impacts of discharges on marine biodiversity.
The potential impacts of DPs on all species in the system result
from their exposure, adaptive capacity, and sensitivity. However,
there is a growing evidence that DPs have begun to affect survival,
reproduction, diversity, and distribution of marine organisms (Chang,
2015; Petersen et al., 2018; Roberts et al., 2010). Brine discharges
(and other associated environmental disturbances) by DPs into the
Persian Gulf will impact physicochemical parameters. Therefore, due
to accumulation of brine discharges in and around the DPs, the bot‐
tom dwelling species will be strongly impacted (Feary et al., 2013).
With such a high number of existing DPs and a scarcity of research
on the effects of DPs on biodiversity, we used the results from other
parts of the world to predict and suggest the future potential im‐
pacts of DP discharges on the Persian Gulf fauna and flora (Figure 4).
We conclude that increasing the input of brine discharges from
DPs will cause a reduction in plankton biomass, species diversity,
and richness in the Persian Gulf. High levels of brine discharges into
the Persian Gulf may have the following impacts: alter phytoplank‐
ton photosynthesis due to increases in water turbidity that reduce
light penetration; increase benthic mortality due to cell dehydration
and subsequent turgor reduction, and over long time periods, alter
the nature of the benthic habitat; change chloroplast ultrastructure,
decrease in chlorophyll content, enzyme activity, and electron flow
inhibition in photosynthetic organisms; alter larval development and
individual growth, larval survival rate and generation time, species
reproduction and reproductive traits in a variety of organisms; and
result in a loss of fishery resources and economic activity due to
biomass and reproductive reductions in marine species.
6 | M ITI G ATI O N PL A N S FO R D P
ECO LO G I C A L I M PAC T S
Mitigation plans for DP facilities are necessary to maintain the
aquatic vitality and productivity (‘prevention is better than the cure’)
and should be evaluated prior to and during the construction of new
DPs in the Persian Gulf. The effects of DPs on the environment de‐
pend on factors such as plant size, type of desalinizing process, use
of chemicals during desalination, and the specific ecological and hy‐
drographical characteristics of the site (Lattemann & Höpner, 2008b).
To mitigate the negative impacts of DP discharges on Persian Gulf
biodiversity, we propose measures to achieve a balance between ma‐
rine ecological conservation and generation of needed freshwater.
SHARIFINIA et al.
F I G U R E 4   Potential impacts of
desalination plant (DP) discharges on the
Persian Gulf ecosystem. DO, dissolved
oxygen
To mitigate the impingement and entrainment of larger plankton in
intakes, a low through‐screen velocity (lower than 0.15 m/s), small
screen openings (less than 22 cm), and suitable fine screen mesh size
(less than 9 mm) should be used to reduce the impact on plankton, fish
eggs and larvae. One common mitigation strategy to reduce impacts
is to use modern surface water intake designs or a subsurface intake.
In particular, subsurface intakes can virtually eliminate IPM and ETM,
as seawater is taken from beneath the sea floor. Three additional
mitigation plans that can be useful and effective in reducing impacts
include creation of marine wetland areas or other marine habitats al‐
lowing greater areas for spawning of fish and invertebrates, paying a
fee based on calculating the IPM and ETM losses, and restocking the
marine impacted habitat with fish and invertebrates’ eggs, larvae, ju‐
venile, and small adult forms (Missimer & Maliva, 2018). Furthermore,
the intake inlet should be placed outside the littoral zone in deeper
waters and away from sensitive productive areas. Locating intake in‐
lets at least 300 m from shoreline and installing them in water at least
20 m, where organism abundances are lower, could minimize effects
associated with intake operations (WateReuse‐Association, 2011).
The adverse effects of chemicals can be reduced by treatment before
discharge such as replacing hazardous substances, as well as through
the use of alternative treatment options. Biocides such as chlorine
that can acutely affect organisms at the discharge site, should be re‐
placed or treated before discharge. Chlorine can be removed from
the effluent by using efficient chemical substances such as sodium bi‐
sulfite (NaHSO3), as practiced in RO plants, while sulfur dioxide (SO2)
and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) have been suggested to treat thermal
plant stream effluents (Lattemann & Höpner, 2008a). Cleaning solu‐
tions should be treated on‐site in special treatment facilities, while
waters from filter backwash should be treated by sedimentation,
|
      9
land deposition, and dewatering. In summary, environmental impacts
of DPs could be mitigated by preventing and replacing damaging
chemicals such as heavy metals and chlorine used during treatment,
diluting and dispersing the salt, heat, and any contaminants using
hydrological conditions and shoreline morphology (sandy and rocky
shorelines exposed to strong currents are suggested), eliminating
plant construction in areas of high biological importance (near coral
reefs, mangroves, and nesting habitats for sea turtles), and avoiding
plant construction in areas that are important to biodiversity and pro‐
ductivity, (nursery, feeding, and harvesting grounds). Appropriately
sited, designed, operated, and well‐planned DPs can minimize eco‐
logical impacts on the marine life. By using current developments in
impingement and entrainment reduction technology, both nationally
and internationally, marine biodiversity and local ecosystems will be
preserved with minimal environmental impacts.
7 | CO N C LU D I N G R E M A R K S
Desalination plants are a potentially serious threat to biodiversity
in marine environments. A better understanding of the impacts will
increase the breadth of mitigation plans to deal with their negative
effects on marine systems. Information on the impacts of DP brine
discharge on marine biota is available, but there is a pressing need
for further research to explore footprints of DPs in the Persian Gulf
and on regional impacts. We propose that new efforts in six cat‐
egories are necessary: (a) Understanding the vulnerability of species
to DPs releases for designing effective mitigation strategies; (b) Use
of both field monitoring and laboratory experiments to assess DP
impacts on the biodiversity in the Persian Gulf; (c) Provide data on
 |
10       SHARIFINIA et al.
positive or negative responses of each species to brine discharges
for use in future plan construction efforts; (d) Conduct a compre‐
hensive Environmental Impact Assessment before and after each
desalination project to understand all ecological impacts of DP con‐
struction; (e) Develop collaborative research projects to prevent the
negative impacts of DPs and other activities on the Persian Gulf bio‐
diversity; and (f) Creation of a joint task force on how to protect the
regional environment, or establishing a forum for Persian Gulf coun‐
tries to reach a consensus. Such a system will allow the development
of reasonable scenarios of future environmental impacts of DPs and
marine biodiversity.
AC K N OW L E D G E M E N T S
This research was supported by a grant from the Iran National
Science Foundation (INSF; 97015984) to Dr. Moslem Sharifinia. The
author is very grateful to the INSF for financial support. We would
also like to thank all colleagues at Iran Shrimp Research Center
(ISRC) and Chabahar Oceanographic Research Station for their kind
assistance and cooperation. Finally, the authors are grateful to the
reviewers and the editor for the time and effort they put into their
detailed comments that helped improve this paper.
C O N FL I C T O F I N T E R E S T
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
E T H I C A L A P P R OVA L
No animals are involved in the study.
ORCID
Moslem Sharifinia  https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2969-0036
REFERENCES
Alkaisi, A., Mossad, R., & Sharifian‐Barforoush, A. (2017). A review of
the water desalination systems integrated with renewable en‐
ergy. Energy Procedia, 110, 268–274. https​://doi.org/10.1016/
j.egypro.2017.03.138
Baird, A., & Hughes, T. (2000). Competitive dominance by tabular corals:
An experimental analysis of recruitment and survival of understorey
assemblages. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 251,
117–132. https​://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-0981(00)00209-4
Beaumont, N. J., Austen, M. C., Atkins, J. P., Burdon, D., Degraer, S.,
Dentinho, T. P., … Zarzycki, T. (2007). Identification, definition and
quantification of goods and services provided by marine biodiversity:
Implications for the ecosystem approach. Marine Pollution Bulletin,
54, 253–265. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpo​lbul.2006.12.003
Birkeland, C. (Ed.). (2015). Coral reefs in the Anthropocene. Dordrecht,
the Netherlands: Springer. https​://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-
7249-5_1
Brewer, P. G., & Dyrssen, D. (1985). Chemical oceanography of the
Persian Gulf. Progress in Oceanography, 14, 41–55. https​ ://doi.
org/10.1016/0079-6611(85)90004-7
Cambridge, M., Zavala‐Perez, A., Cawthray, G., Mondon, J., & Kendrick,
G. (2017). Effects of high salinity from desalination brine on growth,
photosynthesis, water relations and osmolyte concentrations of
seagrass Posidonia australis. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 115, 252–260.
https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpo​lbul.2016.11.066
Cardoso, P. G., Raffaelli, D., & Pardal, M. A. (2008). The impact of extreme
weather events on the seagrass Zostera noltii and related Hydrobia
ulvae population. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 56, 483–492. https​://doi.
org/10.1016/j.marpo​lbul.2007.11.006
Chang, J. S. (2015). Understanding the role of ecological indicator use in
assessing the effects of desalination plants. Desalination, 365, 416–
433. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2015.03.013
Daliri, M., Kamrani, E., Jentoft, S., & Paighambari, S. Y. (2016). Why is
illegal fishing occurring in the Persian Gulf? A case study from the
Hormozgan province of Iran. Ocean & Coastal Management, 120, 127–
134. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceco​aman.2015.11.020
de la Ossa‐Carretero, J. A., del Pilar‐Ruso, Y., Loya‐Fernández, A.,
Ferrero‐Vicente, L. M., Marco‐Méndez, C., Martinez‐Garcia, E.,
… Sánchez‐Lizaso, J. L. (2016a). Bioindicators as metrics for en‐
vironmental monitoring of desalination plant discharges. Marine
Pollution Bulletin, 103, 313–318. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpo​
lbul.2015.12.023
de la Ossa‐Carretero, J. A., del Pilar‐Ruso, Y., Loya‐Fernández, A.,
Ferrero‐Vicente, L. M., Marco‐Méndez, C., Martinez‐Garcia, E., …
Sánchez‐Lizaso, J. L. (2016b). Response of amphipod assemblages
to desalination brine discharge: Impact and recovery. Estuarine,
Coastal and Shelf Science, 172, 13–23. https​ ://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ecss.2016.01.035
del Pilar‐Ruso, Y., de la Ossa‐Carretero, J. A., Giménez‐Casalduero, F.,
& Sánchez‐Lizaso, J. L. (2008). Effects of a brine discharge over soft
bottom Polychaeta assemblage. Environmental Pollution, 156, 240–
250. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2007.12.041
Dupavillon, J. L., & Gillanders, B. M. (2009). Impacts of seawater desali‐
nation on the giant Australian cuttlefish Sepia apama in the upper
Spencer Gulf, South Australia. Marine Environmental Research, 67,
207–218. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.maren​vres.2009.02.002
Elimelech, M., & Phillip, W. A. (2011). The future of seawater desalina‐
tion: Energy, technology, and the environment. Science, 333, 712–
717. https​://doi.org/10.1126/scien​ce.1200488
Erftemeijer, P. L., & Shuail, D. A. (2012). Seagrass habitats in the
Arabian Gulf: Distribution, tolerance thresholds and threats.
Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management, 15, 73–83. https​://doi.
org/10.1080/14634​988.2012.668479
Feary, D. A., Burt, J. A., Bauman, A. G., Al Hazeem, S., Abdel‐Moati, M. A.,
Al‐Khalifa, K. A., … Wiedenmann, J. (2013). Critical research needs for
identifying future changes in Gulf coral reef ecosystems. Marine Pollution
Bulletin, 72, 406–416. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpo​lbul.2013.02.038
Fernández‐Torquemada, Y., González‐Correa, J. M., & Sánchez‐Lizaso,
J. L. (2013). Echinoderms as indicators of brine discharge im‐
pacts. Desalination and Water Treatment, 51, 567–573. https​://doi.
org/10.1080/19443​994.2012.716609
Ferrier‐Pages, C., Gattuso, J.‐P., & Jaubert, J. (1999). Effect of small vari‐
ations in salinity on the rates of photosynthesis and respiration of
the zooxanthellate coral Stylophora pistillata. Marine Ecology Progress
Series, 181, 309–314. https​://doi.org/10.3354/meps1​81309​
Frank, H., Rahav, E., & Bar‐Zeev, E. (2017). Short‐term effects of
SWRO desalination brine on benthic heterotrophic microbial
communities. Desalination, 417, 52–59. https​ ://doi.org/10.1016/
j.desal.2017.04.031
Gacia, E., Invers, O., Manzanera, M., Ballesteros, E., & Romero, J. (2007).
Impact of the brine from a desalination plant on a shallow seagrass
(Posidonia oceanica) meadow. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 72,
579–590. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2006.11.021
Gille, D. (2003). Seawater intakes for desalination plants. Desalination,
156, 249–256. https​://doi.org/10.1016/S0011-9164(03)00347-3
SHARIFINIA et al.
Gorjian, S., & Ghobadian, B. (2015). Solar desalination: A sustainable
solution to water crisis in Iran. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, 48, 571–584. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.009
Green, E. P., Short, F. T., & Frederick, T. (2003). World atlas of seagrasses.
Prepared by the UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre.
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Griffith, G. P., Strutton, P. G., & Semmens, J. M. (2018). Climate change
alters stability and species potential interactions in a large ma‐
rine ecosystem. Global Change Biology, 24, e90–e100. https​://doi.
org/10.1111/gcb.13891​
Hein, L., van Koppen, K., de Groot, R. S., & van Ierland, E. C. (2006).
Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services.
Ecological Economics, 57, 209–228. https​ ://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecole​
con.2005.04.005
Henson, S. A., Beaulieu, C., Ilyina, T., John, J. G., Long, M., Séférian, R., …
Sarmiento, J. L. (2017). Rapid emergence of climate change in envi‐
ronmental drivers of marine ecosystems. Nature Communications, 8,
14682. https​://doi.org/10.1038/ncomm​s14682
Hogan, T. W. (2015). Impingement and entrainment at SWRO desali‐
nation facility intakes. In T. Missimer, B. Jones, & R. Maliva (Eds.),
Intakes and outfalls for seawater reverse‐osmosis desalination facili‐
ties. Environmental Science and Engineering. Cham, Switzerland:
Springer.
Hughes, T. P., Barnes, M. L., Bellwood, D. R., Cinner, J. E., Cumming,
G. S., Jackson, J. B. C., … Scheffer, M. (2017). Coral reefs in the
Anthropocene. Nature, 546, 82. https​ ://doi.org/10.1038/natur​
e22901
Iso, S., Suizu, S., & Maejima, A. (1994). The lethal effect of hypertonic
solutions and avoidance of marine organisms in relation to dis‐
charged brine from a desalination plant. Desalination, 97, 389–399.
https​://doi.org/10.1016/0011-9164(94)00102-2
Kamrani, E., Sharifinia, M., & Hashemi, S. H. (2016). Analyses of fish com‐
munity structure changes in three subtropical estuaries from the
Iranian coastal waters. Marine Biodiversity, 46, 561–577. https​://doi.
org/10.1007/s12526-015-0398-5
Kinne, O. (1964). The effects of temperature and salinity on marine and
brackish water animals: 2. Salinity and temperature‐salinity combi‐
nations. Oceanography and Marine Biology: Annual Review, 2, 281–339.
Kuanui, P., Chavanich, S., Viyakarn, V., Omori, M., & Lin, C. (2015).
Effects of temperature and salinity on survival rate of cultured
corals and photosynthetic efficiency of zooxanthellae in coral tis‐
sues. Ocean Science Journal, 50, 263–268. https​://doi.org/10.1007/
s12601-015-0023-3
Latorre, M. (2005). Environmental impact of brine disposal on Posidonia
seagrasses. Desalination, 182, 517–524. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.
desal.2005.02.039
Lattemann, S., & Höpner, T. (2008a). Environmental impact and impact
assessment of seawater desalination. Desalination, 220, 1–15. https​
://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2007.03.009
Lattemann, S., & Höpner, T. (2008b). Impacts of seawater desalination
plants on the marine environment of the Gulf. In Protecting the Gulf's
marine ecosystems from pollution (pp. 191–205). Basel, Switzerland:
Birkhäuser.
Madani, S., Ahmadian, M., KhaliliAraghi, M., & Rahbar, F. (2012).
Estimating total economic value of coral reefs of Kish Island (Persian
Gulf). International Journal of Environmental Research, 6, 51–60.
Mandelli, E. F. (1975). The effects of desalination brines on Crassostrea
virginica (Gmelin). Water Research, 9, 287–295. https​://doi.
org/10.1016/0043-1354(75)90050-0
Manzello, D., & Lirman, D. (2003). The photosynthetic resilience of
Porites furcata to salinity disturbance. Coral Reefs, 22, 537–540. https​
://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-003-0327-0
Miller, S., Shemer, H., & Semiat, R. (2015). Energy and environmental is‐
sues in desalination. Desalination, 366, 2–8. https​://doi.org/10.1016/
j.desal.2014.11.034
|
      11
Miri, R., & Chouikhi, A. (2005). Ecotoxicological marine impacts from
seawater desalination plants. Desalination, 182, 403–410. https​://
doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2005.02.034
Missimer, T. M., & Maliva, R. G. (2018). Environmental issues in seawater
reverse osmosis desalination: Intakes and outfalls. Desalination, 434,
198–215. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2017.07.012
Moaddab, A. R., Khabazi, M., & Roosta, H. (2017). Determining the rate
of salinity of Persian Gulf waters with the aid of satellite images and
least squares method. Open Journal of Marine Science, 7(1), 155–168.
Muthiga, N. A., & Szmant, A. M. (1987). The effects of salinity stress on
the rates of aerobic respiration and photosynthesis in the hermatypic
coral Siderastrea siderea. Biological Bulletin, 173, 539–551.
Negewo, B. D. (2012). Renewable energy desalination: An emerging solution
to close the water gap in the Middle East and North Africa. Washington,
D.C.: World Bank Publications.
Nouri, J., Danehkar, A., & Sharifipour, R. (2008). Evaluation of ecotourism
potential in the northern coastline of the Persian Gulf. Environmental
Geology, 55, 681–686. https​://doi.org/10.1007/s00254-007-1018-x
O'Connor, W. A., & Lawler, N. F. (2004). Salinity and temperature tol‐
erance of embryos and juveniles of the pearl oyster, Pinctada imbri‐
cata Röding. Aquaculture, 229, 493–506. https​ ://doi.org/10.1016/
S0044-8486(03)00400-9
Pendleton, L. H., Thébaud, O., Mongruel, R. C., & Levrel, H. (2016).
Has the value of global marine and coastal ecosystem services
changed? Marine Policy, 64, 156–158. https​ ://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpol.2015.11.018
Petersen, K. L., Paytan, A., Rahav, E., Levy, O., Silverman, J., Barzel, O.,
… Bar‐Zeev, E. (2018). Impact of brine and antiscalants on reef‐build‐
ing corals in the Gulf of Aqaba – Potential effects from desalination
plants. Water Research, 144, 183–191. https​ ://doi.org/10.1016/
j.watres.2018.07.009
Pires, A., Figueira, E., Moreira, A., Soares, A. M., & Freitas, R. (2015).
The effects of water acidification, temperature and salinity on the
regenerative capacity of the polychaete Diopatra neapolitana. Marine
Environmental Research, 106, 30–41. https​ ://doi.org/10.1016/j.
maren​vres.2015.03.002
Porter, J. W., Lewis, S. K., & Porter, K. G. (1999). The effect of multiple
stressors on the Florida Keys coral reef ecosystem: A landscape hy‐
pothesis and a physiological test. Limnology and Oceanography, 44,
941–949. https​://doi.org/10.4319/lo.1999.44.3_part_2.0941
Portillo, E., de la Rosa, M. R., Louzara, G., Ruiz, J., Marín‐Guirao, L.,
Quesada, J., … Mendoza, H. (2014). Assessment of the abiotic and
biotic effects of sodium metabisulphite pulses discharged from de‐
salination plant chemical treatments on seagrass (Cymodocea nodosa)
habitats in the Canary Islands. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 80, 222–233.
https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpo​lbul.2013.12.048
Pörtner, H. O., & Farrell, A. P. (2008). Physiology and climate change.
Science, 322, 690–692.
Price, A., Sheppard, C., & Roberts, C. (1993). The Gulf: Its bio‐
logical setting. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 27, 9–15. https​ ://doi.
org/10.1016/0025-326X(93)90004-4
Purnama, A., Al‐Barwani, H. H., & Smith, R. (2005). Calculating the envi‐
ronmental cost of seawater desalination in the Arabian marginal seas.
Desalination, 185, 79–86. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2005.03.072
Raventós, N., Macpherson, E., & García‐Rubies, A. (2006). Effect of brine
discharge from a desalination plant on macrobenthic communities
in the NW Mediterranean. Marine Environmental Research, 62, 1–14.
https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.maren​vres.2006.02.002
Reid, H., Soudant, P., Lambert, C., Paillard, C., & Birkbeck, T. (2003).
Salinity effects on immune parameters of Ruditapes philippinarum
challenged with Vibrio tapetis. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms, 56,
249–258. https​://doi.org/10.3354/dao05​6249
Richmond, R. H. (1993). Coral reefs: Present problems and future con‐
cerns resulting from anthropogenic disturbance. American Zoologist,
33, 524–536. https​://doi.org/10.1093/icb/33.6.524
 |
12       SHARIFINIA et al.
Riegl, B. M., & Purkis, S. J. (2012). Coral reefs of the Gulf: Adaptation to
climatic extremes in the world’s hottest sea. In Coral reefs of the Gulf
(pp. 1–4). Dordrecht, the Netehrlands: Springer.
Riera, R., Tuya, F., Ramos, E., Rodríguez, M., & Monterroso, Ó. (2012).
Variability of macrofaunal assemblages on the surroundings of a
brine disposal. Desalination, 291, 94–100. https​://doi.org/10.1016/
j.desal.2012.02.003
Riera, R., Tuya, F., Sacramento, A., Ramos, E., Rodríguez, M., &
Monterroso, Ó. (2011). The effects of brine disposal on a subtidal
meiofauna community. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 93, 359–
365. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2011.05.001
Roberts, D. A., Johnston, E. L., & Knott, N. A. (2010). Impacts of desali‐
nation plant discharges on the marine environment: A critical review
of published studies. Water Research, 44(18), 5117–5128. https​://doi.
org/10.1016/j.watres.2010.04.036
Ruso, Y. D. P., de la Ossa Carretero, J. A., Casalduero, F. G., & Lizaso,
J. S. (2007). Spatial and temporal changes in infaunal communi‐
ties inhabiting soft‐bottoms affected by brine discharge. Marine
Environmental Research, 64, 492–503. https​ ://doi.org/10.1016/
j.maren​vres.2007.04.003
Sale, P. F., Feary, D. A., Burt, J. A., Bauman, A. G., Cavalcante, G. H.,
Drouillard, K. G., … Van Lavieren, H. (2011). The growing need for sus‐
tainable ecological management of marine communities of the Persian
Gulf. Ambio, 40, 4–17. https​://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-010-0092-6
Sanchez‐Lizaso, J. L., Romero, J., Ruiz, J., Gacia, E., Buceta, J. L., Invers,
O., … Manzanera, M. (2008). Salinity tolerance of the Mediterranean
seagrass Posidonia oceanica: Recommendations to minimize the im‐
pact of brine discharges from desalination plants. Desalination, 221,
602–607. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2007.01.119
Segan, D. B., Murray, K. A., & Watson, J. E. (2016). A global assessment of
current and future biodiversity vulnerability to habitat loss–climate
change interactions. Global Ecology and Conservation, 5, 12–21. https​
://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2015.11.002
Semiat, R. (2000). Desalination: Present and future. Water International,
25, 54–65. https​://doi.org/10.1080/02508​06000​8686797
Sharifinia, M., Daliri, M., & Kamrani, E. (2019). Estuaries and coastal
zones in the Northern Persian Gulf (Iran). In E. Wolanski, J. W. Day,
M. Elliott, & R. Ramachandran (Eds.), Coasts and estuaries (pp. 57–68).
Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Elsevier.
Sharifinia, M., Penchah, M. M., Mahmoudifard, A., Gheibi, A., & Zare, R.
(2015). Monthly variability of chlorophyll‐α concentration in Persian
Gulf using remote sensing techniques. Sains Malaysiana, 44, 387–397.
https​://doi.org/10.17576/​jsm-2015-4403-10
Sharifinia, M., Taherizadeh, M., Namin, J. I., & Kamrani, E. (2018).
Ecological risk assessment of trace metals in the surface sediments
of the Persian Gulf and Gulf of Oman: Evidence from subtropical es‐
tuaries of the Iranian coastal waters. Chemosphere, 191, 485–493.
https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemo​sphere.2017.10.077
Shatat, M., Worall, M., & Riffat, S. (2013). Opportunities for solar water
desalination worldwide. Sustainable Cities and Society, 9, 67–80. https​
://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2013.03.004
Sheppard, C., Al‐Husiani, M., Al‐Jamali, F., Al‐Yamani, F., Baldwin, R.,
Bishop, J., … Zainal, K. (2010). The Gulf: A young sea in decline.
Marine Pollution Bulletin, 60, 13–38. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpo​
lbul.2009.10.017
Sheppard, C., Price, A., & Roberts, C. (1992). Marine ecology of the Arabian
region: Patterns and processes in extreme tropical environments.
London: Academic Press.
Sunday, J. M., Bates, A. E., & Dulvy, N. K. (2011) Global analysis of ther‐
mal tolerance and latitude in ectotherms. Proceedings of the Royal
Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 278, 1823–1830.
Taherizadeh, M., & Sharifinia, M. (2015). Applicability of ecological benthic
health evaluation tools to three subtropical estuaries (Azini, Jask and
Khalasi) from the Iranian coastal waters. Environmental Earth Sciences,
74, 3485–3499. https​://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-015-4385-8
Tettelbach, S., & Rhodes, E. (1981). Combined effects of temperature
and salinity on embryos and larvae of the northern bay scallop
Argopecten irradians. Marine Biology, 63, 249–256.
Van der Merwe, R., Röthig, T., Voolstra, C. R., Ochsenkühn, M. A.,
Lattemann, S., & Amy, G. L. (2014). High salinity tolerance of the
Red Sea coral Fungia granulosa under desalination concentrate dis‐
charge conditions: An in situ photophysiology experiment. Frontiers
in Marine Science, 1, 1–8. https​://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2014.00058​
Vernberg, W. B., & Vernberg, F. J. (2012). Environmental physiology of ma‐
rine animals. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
Walker, D., & McComb, A. (1990). Salinity response of the seagrass
Amphibolis antarctica (Labill.) Sonder et Aschers.: An experimental
validation of field results. Aquatic Botany, 36, 359–366. https​://doi.
org/10.1016/0304-3770(90)90052-M
WateReuse‐Association. (2011). Desalination plant intakes: Impingement
and entrainment impacts and solutions. WateReuse Association
White Paper.
Yoon, S. J., & Park, G. S. (2011). Ecotoxicological effects of brine dis‐
charge on marine community by seawater desalination. Desalination
and Water Treatment, 33, 240–247. https​://doi.org/10.5004/
dwt.2011.2644
How to cite this article: Sharifinia M, Afshari Bahmanbeigloo
Z, Smith WO Jr, Yap CK, Keshavarzifard M. Prevention is
better than cure: Persian Gulf biodiversity vulnerability to
the impacts of desalination plants. Glob Change Biol.
2019;00:1–12. https​://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14808​