Aim Topographic complexity is widely accepted as a key driver of biodiversity, but at the patch‐scale, complexity–biodiversity relationships may vary spatially and temporally according to the environmental stressors complexity mitigates, and the species richness and identity of potential colonists. Using a manipulative experiment, we assessed spatial variation in patch‐scale effects of complexity on intertidal biodiversity. Location 27 sites within 14 estuaries/bays distributed globally. Time period 2015–2017. Major taxa studied Functional groups of algae, sessile and mobile invertebrates. Methods Concrete tiles of differing complexity (flat; 2.5‐cm or 5‐cm complex) were affixed at low–high intertidal elevation on coastal defence structures, and the richness and abundance of the colonizing taxa were quantified after 12 months. Results The patch‐scale effects of complexity varied spatially and among functional groups. Complexity had neutral to positive effects on total, invertebrate and algal taxa richness, and invertebrate abundances. However, effects on the abundance of algae ranged from positive to negative, depending on location and functional group. The tidal elevation at which tiles were placed accounted for some variation. The total and invertebrate richness were greater at low or mid than at high intertidal elevations. Latitude was also an important source of spatial variation, with the effects of complexity on total richness and mobile mollusc abundance greatest at lower latitudes, whilst the cover of sessile invertebrates and sessile molluscs responded most strongly to complexity at higher latitudes. Conclusions After 12 months, patch‐scale relationships between biodiversity and habitat complexity were not universally positive. Instead, the relationship varied among functional groups and according to local abiotic and biotic conditions. This result challenges the assumption that effects of complexity on biodiversity are universally positive. The variable effect of complexity has ramifications for community and applied ecology, including eco‐engineering and restoration that seek to bolster biodiversity through the addition of complexity.

Climate change and coastal urbanization are driving the replacement of natural habitats with artificial structures and reclaimed land globally. These novel habitats are often poor surrogates for natural habitats. The application of integrated greening of grey infrastructure (IGGI) to artificial shorelines demonstrates how multifunctional structures can provide biodiversity benefits whilst simultaneously serving their primary engineering function. IGGI is being embraced globally, despite many knowledge gaps and limitations. It is a management tool to compensate anthropogenic impacts as part of the Mitigation Hierarchy. There is considerable scope for misuse and ‘greenwashing’ however, by making new developments appear more acceptable, thus facilitating the regulatory process. We encourage researchers to exercise caution when reporting on small‐scale experimental trials. We advocate that greater attention is paid to when experiments ‘fail’ or yield unintended outcomes. We advise revisiting, repeating and expanding on experiments to test responses over broader spatio‐temporal scales to improve the evidence base. Synthesis and applications. Where societal and economic demand makes development inevitable, particular attention should be paid to avoiding, minimizing and rehabilitating environmental impacts. Integrated greening of grey infrastructure (IGGI) should be implemented as partial compensation for environmental damage. Mutual benefits for both humans and nature can be achieved when IGGI is implemented retrospectively in previously developed or degraded environments. We caution, however, that any promise of net biodiversity gain from new developments should be scrutinized and any local ecological benefits set in the context of the wider environmental impacts. A ‘greened’ development will always impinge on natural systems, a reality that is much less recognized in the sea than on land.

Coastal urbanisation, energy extraction, food production, shipping and transportation have led to the global proliferation of artificial structures within the coastal and marine environments (sensu "ocean sprawl"), with subsequent loss of natural habitats and biodiversity. To mitigate and compensate impacts of ocean sprawl, the practice of ecoengineering of artificial structures has been developed over the past decade. Eco-engineering aims to create sustainable ecosystems that integrate human society with the natural environment for the benefit of both. The science of eco-engineering has grown markedly, yet synthesis of research into a user-friendly and practitioner-focused format is lacking. Feedback from stakeholders has repeatedly stated that a "photo user guide" or "manual" covering the range of eco-engineering options available for artificial structures would be beneficial. However, a detailed and structured "user guide" for eco-engineering in coastal and marine environments is not yet possible; therefore we present an accessible review and catalogue of trialled eco-engineering options and a summary of guidance for a range of different structures tailored for stakeholders and end-users as the first step towards a structured manual. This work can thus serve as a potential template for future eco-engineering guides. Here we provide suggestions for potential eco-engineering designs to enhance biodiversity and ecosystem functioning and services of coastal artificial structures with the following structures covered: (1) rock revetment, breakwaters and groynes composed of armour stones or concrete units; (2) vertical and sloping seawalls; (3) over-water structures (i.e., piers) and associated support structures; and (4) tidal river walls.

No abstract

The boring sponge Cliona celata is a nuisance species that can have deleterious effects on eastern oyster Crassostrea virginica growth, condition, and survival. Surprisingly, however, these effects have not been well documented and when examined, results have been equivocal. In this study, we provide a direct comparison of growth, condition, and survival of spongecolonized and uncolonized oysters in southeast North Carolina in 2 separate experiments. In the first experiment, sponge-colonized oysters exhibited significantly slower growth rates, reduced condition, and lower survival relative to uncolonized oysters, although results may have been confounded by oyster source. In the second experiment, using smaller oysters from the same source population, growth rate was again significantly reduced in colonized oysters relative to uncolonized oysters, however neither condition nor survival differed. In field surveys of the same population, colonized individuals across a range of sizes demonstrated significantly reduced condition. Further, condition index was negatively correlated with sponge biomass, which was positively correlated with oyster size, suggesting that the impact of the sponge changes with ontogeny. By investigating clearance rates, tissue isotopic and nutrient content, as well as caloric value, this study provides further evidence that sponge presence causes the oysters to divert energy into costly shell maintenance and repair at the expense of shell and somatic growth. Thus, although variable, our results demonstrate negative impacts of sponge infestation on oyster demographics, particularly as oysters grow larger.

No abstract

No abstract

Habitat modification coupled with the spread of non-native species (NNS) are among the top threats to marine biodiversity globally. Species are known to be transported to new locations via international shipping and secondarily spread via regional vessels and artificial structures. Rapid Assessment Surveys (RAS) combining quantitative and semi-quantitative methods compared NNS richness and assemblage composition on intertidal natural rocky shores and artificial structures in harbours in different regions along the south coast of England. Quantitative data showed that artificial habitats supported higher richness than natural habitats, while semiquantitative data found no difference in richness among habitat types. This result was attributed to additional species found in rock pools during searches of complex microhabitats in natural habitats. Assemblages on artificial structures differed among regions, with regions and harbours with greater numbers of vessels supporting greater richness. Results highlight the importance of shipping and artificial structures for NNS introduction and spread.