Purpose of Review We use the 'seascape' concept to explore how interactions between mangrove forests, tidal marshes and seagrass influence the storage of carbon in these ecosystems. Mangrove forests, with the other two 'blue carbon' habitats, are exceptionally powerful carbon sinks. Maintaining and enhancing these sinks is an emerging priority in climate change mitigation. However, managing any one ecosystem on its own risks is ignoring important contextual drivers of carbon storage emerging from its place in the seascape. We consider how interactions between these coastal habitats directly or indirectly affect the amounts of carbon they can store. Recent Findings The export of carbon from seagrasses may occur over hundreds or thousands of kilometres, much further than reported for mangroves or tidal marshes. Seagrasses may buffer mangroves from wave impacts, assisting forest regeneration. Trophic cascades supported by contiguous blue carbon habitat may limit excessive herbivory and bioturbation in them but evidence is limited. Summary Direct transfers of carbon between blue carbon habitats are common and are likely to enhance total carbon storage, but our understanding of their contribution to carbon stocks at the seascape level is elementary. There is evidence for indirect enhancement of carbon storage at the seascape by close association of habitats, mostly through the creation and maintenance of propitious conditions by one ecosystem for another. Protection from waves of mangroves by seagrass and protection from excess nutrients and sediment of seagrass by mangroves and tidal marsh are key mechanisms. There is little evidence or theory suggesting negative effects on carbon storage of one blue carbon habitat on another. Keywords Mangrove. Seagrass. Tidal marsh. Carbon. Seascape. Sequestration 'When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe' (John Muir) My first summer in the Sierra,

There is a growing need for collaborative and interdisciplinary research in addressing global ecological challenges, and early career researchers (ECRs) often play a vital role in such ventures. But despite the desire for such approaches, forming new and interdisciplinary collaborations is risky, and disproportionately so for ECRs, whose perspectives on this topic are rarely heard. Here, we present common perceptions among ECRs regarding opportunities for intra‐ and interdisciplinary collaboration, and barriers preventing such collaboration from taking place. We also discuss possible solutions, and the ecological outcomes of fostering more collaboration. The perceptions discussed have been distilled from a two‐day workshop in New Zealand, aiming to investigate the potential for collaboration between 34 ECRs in distinct ecological disciplines across ten research institutes. Commonality in methodology or research aims was vital for potential collaborations to be considered worthwhile, but differences in spatial or temporal scales were a key disconnect that hindered numerous potential crossovers. Individual connectivity and institutional structures were commonly perceived as barriers to acting collaboratively in general. Specifically, barriers included having a small peer network, lack of access to funding, and concerns over the risk/reward ratio of forming new collaborations. Overcoming barriers will require active, practical support from institutions, funding bodies and mentors, and participants commonly called for specific funding support and the creation of ECR‐focused spaces to better foster collaborative behavior. Fostering interdisciplinary ECR collaborations in ecology was perceived to be useful in creating larger and more useful datasets and tools, and more scalable and transferable models and outcomes. Adopting practices that facilitate more ECR‐led interdisciplinary collaboration will help generate a more integrative understanding of ecological systems globally.

No abstract

Mangrove cover is increasing in estuaries and harbours in many areas on North Island, New Zealand. The expansion of mangroves has been attributed to anthropogenic land-use change, including urbanisation and conversion of land to agriculture. Rapid expansion of mangroves in the coastal landscape has created discord in local communities over their importance in terms of the services they deliver to both wildlife and people. Some community groups have been advocates for the large-scale removal of mangrove habitat, whilst other local residents oppose this removal. This review paper investigated and discussed pertinent biodiversity and ecosystem services studies based in New Zealand mangroves from 1950 to 2017. Results showed that the majority of biodiversity studies have targeted particular species or groups of organisms, with a focus on benthic invertebrate communities. Deficits remain in our knowledge of this expanding forest and shrub ecosystem, notably the terrestrial component of biodiversity, species community-shifts with landscape fragmentation, and associated cultural values. It is recommended that broader species assessments and a longer-term approach be applied to biodiversity monitoring in mangroves, coupled with Mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge) and western science for holistic management of this coastal ecosystem.

Blue Carbon Ecosystems (BCEs) help mitigate and adapt to climate change but their integration into policy, such as Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), remains underdeveloped. Most BCE conservation requires community engagement, hence community-scale projects must be nested within the implementation of NDCs without compromising livelihoods or social justice. Thirty-three experts, drawn from academia, project development and policy, each developed ten key questions for consideration on how to achieve this. These questions were distilled into ten themes, ranked in order of importance, giving three broad categories of people, policy & finance, and science & technology. Critical considerations for success include the need for genuine participation by communities, inclusive project governance, integration of local work into national policies and practices, sustaining livelihoods and income (for example through the voluntary carbon market and/or national Payment for Ecosystem Services and other types of financial compensation schemes) and simplification of carbon accounting and verification methodologies to lower barriers to entry.

Seaward expansion of New Zealand’s mangrove Avicennia marina (subsp.) australasica in estuaries has led to disparity in opinion over their social-ecological value. This study investigated existing stakeholders and interested parties’ perceptions and attitudes towards mangroves, focusing on four sites in Auckland. A mixed methods design was used consisting of semi-structured interviews, ratings of importance of mangrove ecosystem services and issues and Q-sorts on mangrove social-ecological statements. 29 participants were interviewed in person. Results revealed a disparity in perceptions and attitudes towards mangroves. Community Groups displayed strongly negative opinions towards mangrove preservation and Conservation Organisations expressed a strongly positive stance. The occupation of participants was a significant factor in the ratings. Overall, sediment and nutrient retention were rated as the most important ecosystem services. The desire for reversion of estuaries to a “pre-mangrove” state is the greatest issue affecting mangroves. Q-analysis revealed loading of participants onto two factors representing (1) a pro-preservation attitude towards mangrove and (2) a neutral view. Managing sediment loads and nutrient run-off in the wider catchment were highlighted as ways to reduce mangrove expansion. Improving water quality and the health of the harbour was of utmost priority to kaitiaki (Māori guardians of the environment). This study provides critical insights into the management of mangroves as social-ecological systems.

No abstract

No abstract