Ecological restoration of mussel beds onto soft‐sediment using transplanted adults

Wilcox, Mark; Kelly, Shane; Jeffs, Andrew G.

doi:10.1111/rec.12607

Cited by 23 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This site historically contained subtidal mussel beds (Greenway ; Reid ) and was corroborated by the abundance of large mussel shells within the sediment (greater than 10 cm depth). As part of a larger restoration study, seven experimental green‐lipped mussel beds were deployed in November 2013 within this field site (Wilcox et al ). Each mussel bed consisted of approximately 1 t of mussels (70–100 mm SL) placed on the seabed in shallow water between 3.9 and 5.1 m below chart datum.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…±0.1 m). Mussel density was derived from quadrat samples of the restored mussel beds, conducted on each of the sampling dates (see Wilcox et al ). For each bed, divers spread four square quadrats (0.0625 m 2 ) across the length of the bed (>1 m from adjacent quadrats) by haphazardly dropping them from a height greater than 1 m above the mussel bed and maintaining a minimum of 0.5 m from the bed margin.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Estimated predatory impact was calculated using the modified equation from Dempster () and is as follows:

N = \sum_{i = 1}^{n} C ((), \frac{P_{i} + P_{i + 1}}{2}) t_{i, i + 1}

where N is the total number of mussels consumed summed over all sampling intervals, C is the consumption rate of mussels per sea star derived from the consumption rate experiment, P i is the initial number of sea stars within the mussel bed for the sampling date, P i + 1 is the number of sea stars within the mussel bed for the following sampling date, and t i,i + 1 is the amount of time between sampling dates or the sampling interval. Estimated predatory impact was calculated for each bed at each sampling interval and compared to estimated mortality of mussels within the experimental mussel beds (Wilcox et al ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recent initiatives to restore depleted populations of green‐lipped mussels, Perna canaliculus , on the soft‐sediment seabed of the Hauraki Gulf, New Zealand (Greenway ; Reid ; McLeod ) quickly resulted in a high abundance of the sea star, Coscinasterias muricata , on restored mussel beds (Wilcox et al ). Coscinasterias muricata is commonly found throughout the Hauraki Gulf and high densities of these sea stars appear to be associated with concentrations of live adult mussels, aggregating within natural beds and beneath mussel aquaculture site (Inglis & Gust ; Paul‐Burke ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, there is limited information on the feeding ecology of C. muricata on P. canaliculus with which to begin to determine their potential impact via predation upon the transplanted adult mussels. Previous studies have also suggested that restored mussel beds in the Hauraki Gulf system are likely to be recruitment limited as evidenced by a near lack of observed mussels on settlement collectors over an 18‐month period (McLeod ) and the near lack of settling mussels recruiting to restored green‐lipped mussel beds (Wilcox et al ). It is therefore critical to determine whether predation by sea stars will preferentially target the potentially small number of recruiting mussels.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Impacts of sea star predation on mussel bed restoration

Wilcox

Jeffs

2018

Restoration Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Predation by sea stars has the potential to cause elevated levels of mortality in reestablished populations of bivalves relative to levels of recruitment. Recent efforts to restore beds of the nearly extirpated green‐lipped mussel within the Hauraki Gulf, New Zealand, resulted in high abundances of sea stars occupying those beds and it is unknown whether predation poses a potential limitation to the success of restoration in this bivalve species. The contribution of predation by sea stars to the mortality of mussels across four experimental mussel beds over a 2‐year period was estimated using data from regular assessments of sea star abundance and an experimentally determined consumption rate of sea stars upon mussels. In addition, the potential size selection of mussels by sea stars was assessed to determine if large sea stars selected for recent settlers. Sea stars' abundance within the mussel beds grew to an average of 0.57 sea stars/m2 within 9 months, remaining at similar levels throughout the study. These predominantly large sea stars were estimated to have consumed 30.1% of the mussels over a 25‐month period, representing a contribution of 40.4% of the mussel mortality. Sea stars predominantly selected for larger mussels, and their predation likely contributes little to any lack in mussel recruitment. Sea star predation is clearly a limiting factor on the survival of transplanted adult mussels and the present study highlights the need to continually assess predation risk to determine if remediation is necessary for the persistence of the restored beds.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Estimated predatory impact was calculated using the modified equation from Dempster () and is as follows:

N = \sum_{i = 1}^{n} C ((), \frac{P_{i} + P_{i + 1}}{2}) t_{i, i + 1}

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Impacts of sea star predation on mussel bed restoration

Wilcox

Jeffs

2018

Restoration Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The benefits of bivalve reef restoration: A global synthesis of underrepresented species

Ermgassen

Thurstan

Corrales

et al. 2020

Aquatic Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bivalve habitat restoration is growing in geographic extent and scale globally. While addressing the wide‐scale loss of these biogenic habitats is still a key motivation behind restoration efforts, stakeholders and funders are increasingly drawn to shellfish restoration for the many ecosystem services these habitats provide. There is clear evidence for the provision of ecosystem services from species targeted for restoration in the USA, in particular Crassostrea virginica. Ecosystem services, however, remain largely unquantified or even undescribed for the majority of other species targeted for restoration. A structured review of the literature was undertaken and supplemented by expert knowledge to identify which ecosystem services are documented in the following other bivalve species targeted for restoration: Ostrea edulis, Ostrea angasi, Crassostrea rhizophorae, Perna canaliculus, Modiolus modiolus, Mytilus edulis, Mytilus platensis, Crassostrea gigas, Ostrea denselamellosa, Crassostrea ariakensis, and Crassostrea sikamea. Key knowledge gaps in quantifying ecosystem services and the ecosystem engineering properties of habitat‐building bivalves contributing to the provision of ecosystem services were identified. Ecosystem services with the potential to be widely applicable across bivalve habitat‐building species were identified. Though there is evidence that many of the ecosystem engineering properties that underpin the provision of ecosystem services are universal, the degree to which services are provided will vary between locations and species. Species‐specific, in situ, studies are needed in order to avoid the inappropriate transfer of the ecosystem service delivery between locations, and to further build support and understanding for these emerging targets of restoration.

show abstract

Bottlenecks and barriers: Patterns of abundance in early mussel life stages reveal a potential obstacle to reef recovery

Toone

Hillman

South

et al. 2023

Aquatic Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conservation and restoration projects have emerged globally to address extensive declines in mussel reefs and the ecosystem services they provide. The success of these efforts relies on the re‐establishment of self‐sustaining populations, which requires mussels to effectively undergo every stage in their complex development cycle from larvae to adult mussels. In particular, the settlement of early life stages presents a potential bottleneck for recruitment in species like the green‐lipped mussel (Perna canaliculus) that rely on juvenile settlement onto macroalgae before they transition to a reef. However, it is largely unknown whether mussels can undergo settlement in areas after overharvesting where only remnant populations remain and natural recovery is vital. In this study, wild and transplanted macroalgae were sampled in an area with historically near‐extirpated mussel reefs (Kenepuru Sound, New Zealand) to examine the patterns of abundance of plantigrades, an early mussel life stage, in a degraded environment. The results suggest that plantigrades can settle to and survive on natural substrates following the removal of mussel reefs, but not into ecologically relevant areas. Specifically, almost no plantigrades were recorded on substrates near the sea bed, the area where almost all settlement to macroalgae would naturally occur. Instead, plantigrades were primarily recorded on macroalgae on docks suspended above the sea bed. A transplantation experiment verified this trend, demonstrating that substrates transferred to surface waters recorded a 36‐fold increase in plantigrade abundance compared with substrates near the sea bed. Turbidity was significantly higher near the sea bed than near the water surface, suggesting that high turbidity following the loss of wild mussels may be hindering natural plantigrade settlement or survival. This study identifies a potential bottleneck to natural mussel recovery and demonstrates the importance of a life cycle‐informed approach to restoration that prioritizes the removal of bottlenecks at multiple life stages.

show abstract

Ecological restoration of mussel beds onto soft‐sediment using transplanted adults

Cited by 23 publications

References 61 publications

Impacts of sea star predation on mussel bed restoration

Impacts of sea star predation on mussel bed restoration

The benefits of bivalve reef restoration: A global synthesis of underrepresented species

Bottlenecks and barriers: Patterns of abundance in early mussel life stages reveal a potential obstacle to reef recovery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About