Version classiqueVersion mobile

What Works in Conservation 2021

 | 
William Junior Sutherland
, 
Lynn V. Dicks
, 
Silviu O. Petrovan
, 
et al.

13. Subtidal benthic invertebrate conservation

13.9 Habitat restoration and creation

Texte intégral

13.9.1 Natural habitat restoration

Likely to be beneficial

●Restore biogenic habitats (other methods) - Restore oyster reefs

1Eight studies examined the effects of restoring oyster reefs (not by transplanting or translocating oysters) on oysters and oyster reef-associated subtidal benthic invertebrates. Two were in the Gulf of Mexico (USA), one was a global review, four were in the North Pacific Ocean (USA), and one was in the Mission-Aransas estuary (USA).

2COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES)

3Overall community composition (2 studies): One of two replicated, controlled studies in the Gulf of Mexico and the Mission-Aransas estuary found that after restoring eastern oyster reefs, the community composition of combined mobile decapod invertebrates and fish was similar on all types of restoration material used, but the other found that composition varied with the material used.

4Overall species richness/diversity (3 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in the Gulf of Mexico found that diversity of reef-associated invertebrates was similar in reefs restored by laying rocks regardless of age, in young reefs restored by laying oyster shells, and in natural reefs, but lower in old shell-restored reefs. One replicated, controlled study in the Gulf of Mexico found that diversity of reef-associated invertebrates was higher in all restored reefs than on unrestored sediment, but that diversity varied between the restoration materials used. One replicated, controlled study in the Mission-Aransas estuary found that diversity of fish, crabs and shrimps varied with the restoration material used.

5POPULATION RESPONSE (7 STUDIES)

6Overall abundance (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in the Gulf of Mexico found that the effect of restoring eastern oyster reefs on the abundance of reef-associated invertebrates depended on the material used for restoration and the age of the reef. One replicated, controlled study in the Gulf of Mexico found that abundance of combined reef-associated mobile decapod invertebrate and fish was similar on all restored reefs regardless of the restoration material used, and higher than on unrestored sediment. Crustacean abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the Mission-Aransas estuary found that after restoring eastern oyster reefs, crab abundance, but not biomass, and shrimp biomass, but not abundance, varied with the restoration material used.

7Oyster abundance (6 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in the Gulf of Mexico found that oyster reefs restored by laying rocks had similar oyster abundance to natural reefs, and higher than reefs restored by laying oyster shells. One replicated, controlled study in the Mission-Aransas estuary found that oyster cover and abundance varied with the restoration material used. One replicated, controlled study in the Gulf of Mexico found that oyster spat abundance was similar on all types of restoration material used, and higher than on unrestored sediment. Three replicated, controlled studies in the North Pacific Ocean found that restoring oyster reefs by placing lines of clam shells below Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) led to higher cover of clam shells by oysters than when placing the lines above MLLW, that for those placed below MLLW, keeping them there led to similar cover compared to moving them above MLLW halfway through the study, and that placing the lines on cobbly seabed led to similar cover compared to placing them on muddy seabed.

8Oyster reproductive success (3 studies): Three replicated, controlled studies in the North Pacific Ocean found that restoring oyster reefs by placing lines of clam shells below Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) led to higher recruitment of oyster spat on clam shells than by lacing lines above MLLW, that recruitment was higher on lines placed on cobbly seabed than on muddy seabed, and that recruitment was similar on lines placed near or far from the nearest adult oyster populations.

9Oyster survival (5 studies): One global systematic review found that two of nine restoration techniques (restoring oyster reef by transplanting juveniles, and by creating no-harvest sanctuaries) assessed resulted in over 85 % survival of restored oysters. Four replicated, controlled studies in the North Pacific Ocean found that restoring oyster reefs by placing lines of clam shells below Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) led to similar survival of oysters than when placing the lines above MLLW, but that for those placed below MLLW, moving them above MLLW halfway through the study led to higher survival than keeping then below, that survival was similar on lines placed on cobbly seabed or muddy seabed, and that survival was similar on lines placed near or far from the nearest adult oyster populations.

10Oyster condition (5 studies): One replicated, controlled study in the Gulf of Mexico found that the effect of restoring eastern oyster reefs on average spat size varied with the restoration material used. One replicated, controlled study in the North Pacific Ocean found that restoring oyster reefs by placing lines of clam shells below Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) led to similar growth of oysters on the shells than placing lines above MLLW. Four replicated, controlled studies in the North Pacific Ocean found that restoring oyster reefs by placing lines of clam shells below Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) led to higher cover of clam shells by non-native species than placing lines above MLLW, but that for those placed below MLLW, moving them above MLLW halfway through the study led to lower cover than keeping then below, that cover was similar on lines placed on cobbly seabed or muddy seabed, and that cover of clam shells by non-native species was higher on lines placed near compared to far from the nearest adult oyster populations.

11Assessment: likely to be beneficial (effectiveness 60 %; certainty 50 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​2248

●Translocate habitat-forming (biogenic) species - Translocate reef-forming corals

12Two studies examined the effects of translocating habitat-forming corals on associated subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. One was in Tayabas Bay (Philippines) and one in the South China Sea (Philippines).

13COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES)

14Overall community composition (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the South China Sea found that following coral translocation associated invertebrate communities did not change and remained similar to plots without translocated corals.

15Overall richness/diversity (2 studies): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the South China Sea found that following coral translocation richness of associated invertebrates increased but also increased in plots without corals, likely due to spill-over. One replicated, controlled study in Tayabas Bay found that richness of associated invertebrates was higher in plots with translocated corals than in plots without.

16POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

17Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the South China Sea found that following coral translocation abundance of associated invertebrates increased and became higher than in plots without translocated corals.

18Assessment: likely to be beneficial (effectiveness 65 %; certainty 43 %; harms 0 %).

http://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​2246

Unknown effectiveness

●Install a pump on or above the seabed in docks, ports, harbour, or other coastal areas to increase oxygen concentration

19One study examined the effects of installing a pump on or above the seabed in docks, ports, harbour, or other coastal areas to increase oxygen concentration on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. The study was in Osaka Bay (Japan).

20COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

21Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One before-and-after study in Osaka Bay found that installing a pump on the seabed of a port to mix seawater and increase oxygen concentration led to an increase in combined invertebrate and fish species richness.

22POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

23Overall abundance (1 study): One before-and-after study in Osaka Bay found that installing a pump on the seabed of a port to mix seawater and increase oxygen concentration led to an increase in combined invertebrates and fish abundance.

24Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 75 %; certainty 20 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​2252

●Refill disused borrow pits

25One study examined the effects of refilling disused borrow pits on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. The study was in Barnegat Bay estuary (USA).

26COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

27Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in Barnegat Bay estuary found that overall invertebrate species richness and diversity increased at a disused borrow pit after being refilled with sediments but remained lower than at a natural non-dredged site.

28POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

29Overall abundance (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in Barnegat Bay estuary found that overall invertebrate abundance increased at a disused borrow pit after being refilled with sediments but remained lower than at a natural non-dredged site.

30Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 60 %; certainty 32 %; harms 0 %).

http://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​2251

●Restore biogenic habitats (other methods) - Restore mussel beds

31Two studies examined the effects of restoring mussel beds (not by transplanting or translocating mussels) on mussels and mussel bed-associated subtidal benthic invertebrates. Both were in Strangford Lough (UK).

32COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES)

33Overall community composition (2 studies): One replicated, controlled study in Strangford Lough found that after restoring beds of horse mussels by adding scallop shells to the seabed, overall invertebrate community composition in restored plots was different to that of unrestored plots. One replicated, controlled study in the same area found that after restoring beds of horse mussels by adding scallop shells to the seabed and translocating horse mussels, overall invertebrate community composition in plots restored with shells and mussels was different to plots restored without mussels (shells only), and both were different to unrestored plots and to nearby natural horse mussel beds.

34Overall species richness/diversity (2 studies): One replicated, controlled study in Strangford Lough found that after restoring beds of horse mussels by adding scallop shells to the seabed, overall invertebrate species diversity was lower in restored plots compared to unrestored plots, but species richness was similar. One replicated, controlled study in the same area found that after restoring beds of horse mussels by adding scallop shells to the seabed and translocating horse mussels, species richness and diversity were higher in restored plots with mussels and shells compared to plots with shells only, and similar to nearby natural horse mussel beds.

35POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

36Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Strangford Lough found that after restoring beds of horse mussels by adding scallop shells to the seabed, overall invertebrate abundance was higher in restored plots compared to unrestored plots.

37Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 55 %; certainty 30 %; harms 5 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​2247

●Restore biogenic habitats (other methods) - Restore seagrass beds/meadows

38Three studies examined the effects of restoring seagrass beds (not by transplanting or translocating seagrass) on seagrass bed-associated subtidal benthic invertebrates. One was in the North Atlantic Ocean (USA), one in the Indian Ocean (Kenya), and one in the Florida Keys (USA).

39COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES)

40Overall community composition (1 study): One randomized, replicated, controlled study in the Florida Keys found that restoring seagrass beds by fertilizing the seabed had no effect on overall invertebrate community composition, but adding sand led to communities different from both unrestored and natural sites.

41Overall species richness/diversity (2 studies): One randomized, replicated, controlled study in the Florida Keys found that after restoring seagrass beds by fertilizing the seabed and adding sand, overall invertebrate species richness was similar at restored, unrestored, and natural sites. One replicated, controlled study in the Indian Ocean found that transplanting plastic seagrass mimics into bare sites, previously-restored seagrass sites, and natural seagrass sites, resulted in similar invertebrate diversity on mimic leaves and in the surrounding sediment, and similar species richness on mimic leaves at all restored sites as on natural seagrass leaves.

42POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES)

43Overall abundance (3 studies): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in the North Atlantic Ocean found that after restoring seagrass beds, the abundance of mobile invertebrates had increased and was higher in restored than unrestored plots, but the abundance of sessile invertebrates had not increased. One replicated, controlled study in the Indian Ocean found that transplanting plastic seagrass mimics into bare sites, previously-restored seagrass sites, and natural seagrass sites, resulted in similar abundance of invertebrate in the surrounding sediment across sites, and resulted in different abundance of invertebrates on mimic leaves between sites although all had lower abundances than on natural seagrass leaves. One randomized, replicated, controlled study in the Florida Keys found that after restoring seagrass beds by fertilizing the seabed or adding sand, overall invertebrate abundance was not different at restored sites compared to both unrestored and natural sites.

44Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 40 %; certainty 30 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​2249

●Restore coastal lagoons

45Three studies examined the effects restoring coastal lagoons on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. One study was in the Chilika lagoon (India), and two in East Harbor lagoon (USA).

46COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES)

47Crustacean richness/diversity (1 study): One before-and-after study in Chilika lagoon found that following hydrological restoration total crustacean species richness decreased, but changes varied with species groups (decreases in prawn and crab species; increases in lobster species). The lagoon also hosted new species not found before.

48Mollusc richness/diversity (2 studies): Two studies in East Harbor lagoon found that following hydrological restoration molluscs recolonised the lagoon and their species richness increased in the first three years but later decreased over the following six.

49POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES)

50Crustacean abundance (1 study): One before-and-after study in Chilika lagoon found that following hydrological restoration abundances of prawns and crabs increased.

51Mollusc abundance (2 studies): Two studies in East Harbor lagoon found that following hydrological restoration molluscs recolonised the lagoon and their total abundance increased in the first three years, but later decreased over the following six.

52Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 40 %; certainty 28 %; harms 20 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​2250

●Translocate habitat-forming (biogenic) species - Translocate reef- or bed-forming molluscs

53Two studies examined the effects of translocating habitat-forming molluscs on associated subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. Both were in Strangford Lough (UK).

54COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES)

55Overall community composition (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in Strangford Lough found that plots with translocated mussels had different associated invertebrate communities to plots without mussels, but also to natural mussel beds. One replicated, controlled study in Strangford Lough found that translocating mussels onto scallop shells or directly onto the seabed led to similar associated invertebrate communities.

56Overall richness/diversity (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in Strangford Lough found that plots with translocated mussels had higher richness and diversity of associated invertebrates to plots without mussels, and similar to natural mussel beds. One replicated, controlled study in Strangford Lough found that translocating mussels onto scallop shells or directly onto the seabed led to similar richness and diversity of associated invertebrates.

57POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES)

58Overall abundance (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in Strangford Lough presented unclear abundance results. One replicated, controlled study in Strangford Lough found that translocating mussels onto scallop shells or directly onto the seabed led to higher abundance of associated invertebrates in one of two comparisons.

59Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 65 %; certainty 35 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​2245

No evidence found (no assessment)

60We have captured no evidence for the following interventions:

  • Transplant captive-bred or hatchery-reared habitat-forming (biogenic) species.

13.9.2 Habitat enhancement

Beneficial

●Provide artificial shelters

61Five studies examined the effects of providing artificial shelters on subtidal benthic invertebrates. Three studies were in the Caribbean Sea (Mexico); one in Florida Bay and one in the Florida Keys (USA).

62COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

63POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES)

64Lobster abundance (2 studies): Two replicated, controlled, before-and-after studies in the Caribbean Sea found that abundance of lobsters either increased in plots with artificial shelters but not in plots without, or increased in all plots but more so in plots with artificial shelters than those without.

65Lobster condition (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the Caribbean Sea found that lobsters in plots with artificial shelters were bigger than in plots without.

66BEHAVIOUR (3 STUDIES)

67Use (3 studies): Three replicated studies (two controlled) in Florida Bay, the Florida Keys, and the Caribbean Sea, found that artificial shelters were occupied by lobsters and molluscs, that occupancy by lobsters varied with artificial shelter designs, that lobsters occupied artificial shelters more than natural ones (crevices), and that lobsters occupying artificial shelters were larger, had greater nutritional condition, and had similar sex ratio and survival rate, compared to lobsters occupying natural shelters.

68Assessment: beneficial (effectiveness 70 %; certainty 63 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​2257

Unknown effectiveness

●Landscape or artificially enhance the seabed (natural habitats)

69Three studies examined the effects of landscaping or artificially enhancing the seabed on subtidal benthic invertebrates. One study was in the North Sea (UK), one in the Westerschelde estuary (Netherlands), and one in the Persian Gulf (Kuwait).

70COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES)

71Overall community composition (2 studies): One controlled, before-and after study in the North Sea found that following addition of gravels, invertebrate community composition became more similar to natural seabed communities. One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Westerschelde estuary found no change in invertebrate community composition following addition of sedimentary dredge material.

72Overall richness/diversity (3 studies): One controlled, before-and after study in the North Sea and one site comparison study in the Persian Gulf found that invertebrate species richness increased following addition of gravels or coral and limestone rubbles, and one also found that richness became similar to natural seabed. One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Westerschelde estuary found no change in species richness following addition of sedimentary dredged material.

73POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES)

74Overall abundance (3 studies): One controlled, before-and after study in the North Sea and one site comparison study in the Persian Gulf found that invertebrate abundance and biomass increased following addition of gravels or coral and limestone rubbles, and one also found that abundance became similar to natural seabed. One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Westerschelde estuary found no change in invertebrate abundance and biomass following addition of sedimentary dredge material.

75Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 50 %; certainty 35 %; harms 5 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​2253

No evidence found (no assessment)

76We have captured no evidence for the following interventions:

  • Use green engineering techniques on artificial structures - Cover subsea cables with artificial reefs
  • Use green engineering techniques on artificial structures - Cover subsea cables with materials that encourage the accumulation of natural sediments
  • Use green engineering techniques on artificial structures - Modify rock dump to make it more similar to natural substrate.

13.9.3 Artificial habitat creation

Likely to be beneficial

●Create artificial reefs

77Twelve studies examined the effects of creating artificial reefs on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. Three studies were in the Mediterranean Sea (Italy); three were in the North Atlantic Ocean (USA, Portugal, France); one in the Firth of Lorn (UK); two in the North Pacific Ocean (USA); one in the English Channel (UK), one in the Gulf of Mexico (USA); and one in the Yellow Sea (China).

78COMMUNITY RESPONSE (8 STUDIES)

79Overall community composition (3 studies): Two site comparison studies (one replicated) in the English Channel and North Atlantic Ocean found that invertebrate communities growing on artificial reefs were different to that of natural reefs. One replicated study the North Pacific Ocean found that invertebrate community composition changed over time on an artificial reef. Overall richness/diversity (6 studies): Two site comparison studies (one replicated) in the Mediterranean Sea and North Atlantic Ocean found that invertebrate species richness and/or diversity on the artificial reef or in the sediments inside and adjacent to the reef area were lower compared to on natural reefs or in nearby natural sediments. One replicated, site comparison study in the Gulf of Mexico found that artificial breakwaters had more species of nekton compared to adjacent mudflats. One site comparison study in English Channel recorded 263 taxa on the artificial reef, including at least nine not recorded on nearby natural reefs but excluding at least 39 recorded on natural reefs. One replicated study in the North Pacific Ocean found a 49 % increase in species richness over five years on an artificial reef. One study in the North Atlantic Ocean found that artificial reefs hosted at least five species of large mobile invertebrates.

80Mollusc richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the Mediterranean Sea found that mollusc species richness and diversity were lower on artificial reefs compared to natural reefs.

81Worm community composition (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the North Pacific Ocean found that polychaete worm community composition was similar at one of two artificial reefs compared to a natural reef. Worm richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the North Pacific Ocean found that polychaete worm species richness and diversity were similar at one of two artificial reefs compared to a natural reef, but lower at the second artificial reef.

82POPULATION RESPONSE (12 STUDIES)

83Overall abundance (10 studies): One of two site comparison studies (one replicated) in the Mediterranean Sea found that abundance of invertebrates in the sediment was lower at the reef sites than in nearby natural sediments, but increased in the sediments directly adjacent to the reefs, while the other study found that abundance was similar in the sediments inside and directly adjacent to the artificial reef area, but lower than in nearby natural sediments. Of five site comparison studies (four replicated) in the North Pacific Ocean, the North Atlantic Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico and the Yellow Sea, one found that invertebrate biomass was higher on the artificial reef than in adjacent natural sediments, two that invertebrate abundance and biomass and nekton abundance were similar on artificial reefs and natural habitats (reef; mudflat), and two found mixed effects on abundances of invertebrates. One site comparison study in the English Channel reported that the abundances of some species were lower on the artificial reef compared to natural reefs. One replicated study in the North Pacific Ocean reported an 86 % increase in invertebrate abundance growing on an artificial reef over five years. One study in the North Atlantic Ocean found that two of five species at one artificial reef, and three of seven at another, were recorded during & gt; 50 % of dives. Overall condition (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the Yellow Sea found mixed effects of creating an artificial reef on the sizes of mobile invertebrates.

84Mollusc abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the Mediterranean Sea found that mollusc abundance was lower on artificial reefs compared to natural reefs.

85Crustacean abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison in the Firth of Lorn found that abundances of edible crabs and velvet swimming crabs were typically higher on artificial than natural reefs.

86OTHER (1 STUDY)

87Biological production (1 study): One site comparison study in North Atlantic Ocean found that secondary production was higher from invertebrates growing on an artificial reef than from invertebrates in adjacent natural sediments. Assessment: likely to be beneficial (effectiveness 55 %; certainty 60 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​2258

●Create artificial reefs of different 3-D structure and material used

88Eight studies examined the effects of creating artificial reefs of different typology on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. One study was in the English Channel (UK), three in the Mediterranean Sea (Israel, Italy), one in the North Atlantic Ocean (USA), one in the Firth of Lorn (UK), one in the North Pacific Ocean (USA), and one in the Gulf of Mexico (USA).

89COMMUNITY RESPONSE (6 STUDIES)

90Overall community composition (3 studies): One controlled study in the English Channel found that artificial reef modules made of scrap tyres developed a similar sessile invertebrate community composition as traditional artificial concrete modules. Two controlled studies (one replicated) in the Mediterranean Sea found that pyramids reefs made of “sea-friendly” concrete developed different invertebrate community compositions compared to reefs of either traditional concrete plinth-pole structures or bundles of traditional concrete tubes.

91Overall richness/diversity (5 studies): Four controlled studies (three replicated) in the Mediterranean Sea, the North Pacific Ocean, and the Gulf of Mexico found no differences in overall invertebrate richness/diversity or combined mobile invertebrate and fish richness between reef structure and/or material. One controlled study in the Mediterranean Sea found that invertebrate species richness was lower on “sea-friendly” pyramid reefs compared to bundle reefs of traditional concrete.

92POPULATION RESPONSE (7 STUDIES)

93Overall abundance (5 studies): Four controlled studies (three replicated) in the English Channel, the Mediterranean Sea, the North Pacific Ocean, and the Gulf of Mexico found no differences in overall invertebrate abundances or combined mobile invertebrate and fish abundance between reef structure and/or material. One controlled study in the Mediterranean Sea found that “sea-friendly” concrete pyramids had lower abundance compared to plinth-pole structures after two years, but higher after three.

94Crustacean abundance (2 studies): One replicated, controlled study in the North Atlantic Ocean found that artificial reefs made of limestone boulders, gravel concrete aggregate, or tyre-concrete aggregate had similar abundance of spiny lobsters. One replicated, controlled study in the Firth of Lorn found that the complexity of artificial reef modules had mixed effects on the abundance of edible crab and velvet swimming crab.

95Mollusc abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the Gulf of Mexico found that breakwaters made of bags of oyster shells recruited more oysters and ribbed mussels compared to “ReefBall” breakwaters.

96Assessment: likely to be beneficial (effectiveness 43 %; certainty 40 %; harms 10 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​2259

Unknown effectiveness

●Locate artificial reefs near aquaculture systems to benefit from nutrient run-offs

97Two studies examined the effects of locating artificial reefs near aquaculture systems to benefit from nutrient run-offs on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. One study was in the Gulf of Aqaba (Israel and Jordan), and one in the Mediterranean Sea (Spain).

98COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

99Overall community composition (1 study): One controlled study in the Mediterranean Sea found that an artificial reef located under aquaculture cages had similar invertebrate community composition to artificial reefs located at sites without aquaculture cages.

100POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

101Overall abundance (1 study): One controlled study in the Gulf of Aqaba found that an artificial reef located at an aquaculture site had similar invertebrate biomass growing on it compared to an artificial reef located at a site without aquaculture cages.

102Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 35 %; certainty 24 %; harms 0 %).

http://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​2260

●Repurpose obsolete offshore structures to act as artificial reefs

103One study examined the effects of repurposing obsolete offshore structures on subtidal benthic invertebrates. The study was of a sunken oil rig in the Mediterranean Sea (Italy).

104COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

105Overall species richness/diversity (1 study): One study in the Mediterranean Sea recorded at least 53 invertebrate species having colonised a sunken oil rig after 30 years. Species included 14 species of molluscs, 14 species of worms, and 11 species of crustaceans.

106POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

107Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 65 %; certainty 26 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​2262

No evidence found (no assessment)

108We have captured no evidence for the following interventions:

109• Place anthropogenic installations (e.g. windfarms) in an area such that they create artificial habitat and reduce the level of fishing activity.

13.9.4 Other habitat restoration and creation interventions

Unknown effectiveness

●Offset habitat loss from human activity by restoring or creating habitats elsewhere

110Two studies examined the effects of offsetting habitat loss from human activity by restoring or creating habitats elsewhere on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. One study was in the Delaware Bay (USA), the other in the Persian Gulf (Kuwait).

111COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

112Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One study in the Persian Gulf found that an area of low ecological value restored to offset habitat lost to land reclamation was colonized by over 198 invertebrate species.

113POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

114OTHER (1 STUDY)

115Biological production (1 study): One study in Delaware Bay found that an artificial reef built to offset lost soft-sediment habitat had higher annual secondary production/unit area from sessile invertebrates, but lower total annual secondary production, compared to habitat similar to that lost.

116Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 45 %; certainty 20 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​2265

●Remove and relocate habitat-forming (biogenic) species before onset of impactful activities

117One study examined the effects of removing and relocating habitat-forming species before onset of impactful activities on subtidal benthic invertebrates. The study was in the Fal Estuary (UK).

118COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

119Overall community composition (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in the Fal Estuary found that invertebrate community composition was different in plots where maërl bed habitat had been removed and relayed compared to undisturbed maërl after five weeks, but similar after 44 weeks. Overall species richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in the Fal Estuary found that invertebrate species richness was lower in plots where maërl bed habitat had been removed and relayed compared to undisturbed maërl after five weeks, but similar after 44 weeks.

120POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

121Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in the Fal Estuary found that invertebrate abundance was different in plots where maërl bed habitat had been removed and relayed compared to undisturbed maërl after five weeks, but similar after 44 weeks.

122Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 55 %; certainty 20 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​2264

No evidence found (no assessment)

123We have captured no evidence for the following interventions:

  • Pay monetary compensation for habitat damage remediation.

Acheter

Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search