Material type and roughness influence structure of inter‐tidal communities on coastal defenses

Cacabelos, Eva; Martins, Gustavo M.; Thompson, Richard C.; Prestes, Afonso C. L.; Azevedo, José M. N.

doi:10.1111/maec.12354

Cited by 29 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 54 publications

(68 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In most cases the limpets reattached; but if not, these were replaced. The number of animals transplanted into each plot was within the range of densities observed on several natural shores of the island (mean values of 12.8 ± 5.0, 11.7 ± 3.4 and 4.1 ± 0.6 individuals per 625 cm 2 were observed for M. neritoides, T. striatus and P. candei respectively, during summer 2013 (n = 25; Cacabelos et al, 2016a). In January 2014, even higher densities were observed on local natural shores (103.6 ± 13.0 M. neritoides individuals per 625 cm 2 , 24.8 ± 5.4 T. striatus and 5.3 ± 0.9 P. candei, n = 30), and therefore intraspecies competition was not expected to occur.…”

Section: Dispersion Behaviour Across Microhabitat Patchinessmentioning

confidence: 59%

“…Generally, coastal defence structures are considered as poor surrogates for the natural shores they replace (Bulleri & Chapman, ; Chapman, ; Chapman & Bulleri, ; Coombes, La Marca, Naylor, & Thompson, ; Evans et al, ; Firth, Knights, et al, ; Moschella et al, ); when compared with natural habitats, coastal defence structures often support assemblages that are less diverse (Cacabelos et al, , ; Chapman, , ; Chapman & Bulleri, ; Connell & Glasby, ; Evans et al, ; Firth et al, ; Firth, Mieszkowska, Thompson, & Hawkins, ; Moschella et al, ; Pister, ; Vaselli, Bulleri, & Benedetti‐Cecchi, ). This effect has been attributed to the lack of topographic complexity that characterizes many of such structures (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Patchiness in habitat distribution can enhance biological diversity of coastal engineering structures

Cacabelos

Thompson

Prestes

et al. 2018

Aquatic Conservation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urbanization of coastal habitats is increasing worldwide. However, most man‐made structures are poor surrogates for the habitats they replace and can strongly impact the diversity and functioning of coastal habitats. The value of coastal engineering can be enhanced by the provision of microhabitats that facilitate colonization by marine life. One step forward is moved in this research by combining species coexistence theory, resource patchiness and applied ecology in order to find ways that maximize the biological diversity of coastal defence structures. Featureless areas of a seawall were modified by the addition of microhabitats (resource) that were distributed in different configurations of patchiness. Gastropod diversity peaked at intermediate levels of microhabitat patchiness. This appeared to be driven by different patterns of resource use among species. Gastropods dispersed longer distances on unmodified seawalls than on natural rocky shores, but when microhabitats were added the dispersal decreased. The ability to find microhabitats differed among species. Our results confirm that patchiness in microhabitat distribution affects biodiversity. The extent of microhabitat patchiness could potentially be tailored by coastal engineers to meet specific conservation priorities: increasing diversity versus increasing number of individuals.

show abstract

Section: Dispersion Behaviour Across Microhabitat Patchinessmentioning

confidence: 59%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patchiness in habitat distribution can enhance biological diversity of coastal engineering structures

Cacabelos

Thompson

Prestes

et al. 2018

Aquatic Conservation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At the global scale, and certainly along the Mediterranean coasts 18 , urbanization has resulted in substantial proportions of heavily modified coasts with embankments, marinas, breakwaters and seawalls. There is a broad consensus that coastal defence structures are poor surrogates for the natural habitats they replace 56 . Without a doubt, fish communities may respond to alterations to benthic substrates (see 13 and papers therein).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early evidence of a shift in juvenile fish communities in response to conditions in nursery areas

Matić‐Skoko

Vrdoljak

Uvanović

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A multivariate analysis of juvenile fish community data, sampled at two nursery sites at an interval of 17 years (2000—early, and 2017—late), was conducted to elucidate the trends of change in littoral juvenile fish communities along the eastern Adriatic coast. Fishing, trophic and taxonomic composition to the community data were analysed for possible causality. The ichthyofaunal composition differed significantly for Site, Period and all interactions. According to the mMDS ordination plot, four groups of communities were defined, with clear cyclicity. No patterns were found in species composition between sites in the early period, while the observed community changes were governed by the same pattern at both sites in the late period. The species that contributed most to the observed changes were non-commercial, small, benthic resident fishes, such as gobiids and blennids, or those associated with canopy alga for shelter and feeding. The analysis correctly allocated samples based on community information to Sites and Periods. The data obtained provided an invaluable opportunity to test for the generality of potential patterns of change in littoral fish communities, suggesting that significantly modified juvenile fish communities may be the result of constant human embankment and marine infrastructure construction along the coast in recent decades, rather than climate change or fishing pressure, as generally considered.

show abstract

“…Glasby & Connell, 2001;Firth et al, 2016b;Ushiama et al, 2016), herbivory (Forrest et al, 2013;Ferrario et al, 2016), roughness and nature of building materials (e.g. Coombes et al, 2015;Cacabelos et al, 2016;Sempere-Valverde et al, 2018). The sampling design considered in our study eliminated potential confounding effects due to some factors (e.g.…”

Section: Number Of Taxa (S) Shannon-wiener Diversity (H') Pielou's Evmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing sessile benthos on shallow artificial versus natural hard substrates in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea

Sedano

Florido²,

Rallis³

et al. 2019

Medit. Mar. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Artificial structures cover a considerable part of the Mediterranean coasts. In the Aegean Sea, most studies related to artificial structures have focused in vagile fauna on harbors and marinas but little attention has been given to the sessile biota on coastal defense structures. The aim of this work was to describe for the first time the shallow sublittoral sessile benthos on coastal defense structures in Crete (Eastern Mediterranean Sea) in order to identify potential differences in comparison to natural rocky substrates, adopting both a taxonomic and functional (i.e. macroalgal structural complexity) approach. Three shallow (1-3 m) localities were studied in the north coast and three in the south coast of the island (six localities in total). At each locality, two types of hard substrate were selected: an artificial coastal defense structure (rip-rap) and the nearest natural rocky substrates. The percent cover of sessile taxa was calculated using random points counts over photoquadrats (20 x 20 cm). The structure of the assemblage differed between artificial and natural habitats. Values of Shannon-Wiener’s diversity index and number of taxa were higher in natural substrates. In addition, cover of arborescent macroalgae was lower on artificial substrates. In conclusion, rip-raps do not function as surrogates of natural hard substrates in the study area since their shallow subtidal assemblages differ in terms of community structure, diversity and functionality. The deficient performance of such artificial structures could be attributed to the combined effects of abiotic factors and biotic processes, including substrate nature and roughness as well as differential grazing pressure.

show abstract

Material type and roughness influence structure of inter‐tidal communities on coastal defenses

Cited by 29 publications

References 54 publications

Patchiness in habitat distribution can enhance biological diversity of coastal engineering structures

Patchiness in habitat distribution can enhance biological diversity of coastal engineering structures

Early evidence of a shift in juvenile fish communities in response to conditions in nursery areas

Comparing sessile benthos on shallow artificial versus natural hard substrates in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About