Deep-sea mining risks for sharks, rays, and chimaeras

Deep-sea mining is expected to cause disturbances of sufficient scale and intensity to pose a risk to biodiversity and ecosystem function.<sup>1</sup><sup>,</sup><sup>2</sup><sup>,</sup><sup>3</sup> We assess the potential impact of deep-sea mining on sharks, rays, and chimaeras in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (ABNJ) and identify 30 species (of the total 1,223 marine chondrichthyan species) that overlap spatially with the anticipated mining footprint, specifically through 2 pathways: benthic impacts from physical disturbance and the collector vehicle plume<sup>2</sup> and midwater impacts from the discharge plume.<sup>4</sup> Most species' depth ranges (83%, 25/30, range: 3%-80%) overlapped vertically with the benthic mining footprint, while all species overlapped with discharge plume scenarios. Further, 17 of these species had >50% depth overlap with benthic impacts of at least one of the mineral types. Seven species were egg-laying, benthic, or benthopelagic, which increases their susceptibility to seabed impacts. Filter-feeding species also had high depth overlap with potential midwater discharge plumes. Nearly two-thirds (60%, 18/30) are already threatened with an elevated risk of extinction, and 64.3% are predicted to be threatened. Our analysis raises concerns that deep-sea mining would compound and worsen their extinction risk. We recommend updated risk assessments of significant adverse impacts to chondrichthyans; robust baseline monitoring prior to, during, and after mining; spatial protections near crust and sulfide mining; and that the discharge plume be set at a minimum depth below 2,000 m or at the seabed to minimize overlap with midwater species.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Current Biology
Published
2025-10-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2025.09.019
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Ichthyology and Marine Biology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
6.94

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Deep-sea mining risks for sharks, rays, and chimaeras

Nicholas K. Dulvy, Christopher G. Mull, Aaron B. Judah, Jeffrey C. Drazen et al.
3 citations
Current Biology
Ichthyology and Marine Biology
6.94
article

Deep-sea mining risks for sharks, rays, and chimaeras

Nicholas K. Dulvy, Christopher G. Mull, Aaron B. Judah, Jeffrey C. Drazen, Brittany Finucci, Victoria E. Assad
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Deep-sea mining is expected to cause disturbances of sufficient scale and intensity to pose a risk to biodiversity and ecosystem function.<sup>1</sup><sup>,</sup><sup>2</sup><sup>,</sup><sup>3</sup> We assess the potential impact of deep-sea mining on sharks, rays, and chimaeras in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (ABNJ) and identify 30 species (of the total 1,223 marine chondrichthyan species) that overlap spatially with the anticipated mining footprint, specifically through 2 pathways: benthic impacts from physical disturbance and the collector vehicle plume<sup>2</sup> and midwater impacts from the discharge plume.<sup>4</sup> Most species' depth ranges (83%, 25/30, range: 3%-80%) overlapped vertically with the benthic mining footprint, while all species overlapped with discharge plume scenarios. Further, 17 of these species had >50% depth overlap with benthic impacts of at least one of the mineral types. Seven species were egg-laying, benthic, or benthopelagic, which increases their susceptibility to seabed impacts. Filter-feeding species also had high depth overlap with potential midwater discharge plumes. Nearly two-thirds (60%, 18/30) are already threatened with an elevated risk of extinction, and 64.3% are predicted to be threatened. Our analysis raises concerns that deep-sea mining would compound and worsen their extinction risk. We recommend updated risk assessments of significant adverse impacts to chondrichthyans; robust baseline monitoring prior to, during, and after mining; spatial protections near crust and sulfide mining; and that the discharge plume be set at a minimum depth below 2,000 m or at the seabed to minimize overlap with midwater species.

Current BiologyVol. 35(21)
University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa (US), University of Tasmania (AU), Simon Fraser University (CA), National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NZ)
University of Hawai'i
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Ichthyology and Marine Biology
6.94
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.