Recovery of deep Posidonia oceanica meadows degraded by trawling

Gónzalez-Correa, José Miguel; Bayle, Just T.; Sánchez-Lizaso, José Luis; Valle, Carlos; Sánchez-Jérez, Pablo; Ruiz, Juan Manuel García

doi:10.1016/j.jembe.2004.12.032

Cited by 115 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The experiment was concluded at this time so actual recovery times are not available for these longer duration dredging scenarios. This lack of recovery was comparable to other seagrass studies where recovery was shown or predicted to be slow (Gonzalez-Correa et al, 2005;Kendrick et al, 2000) or not detected (Kirkman, 1985;Walker et al, 2006). A. griffithii subjected to more severe stress had no or few surviving leaf clusters, thus recovery was mostly dependent on recruitment via production of new stems from existing rhizome or establishment of seedlings.…”

Section: Timescales Of Recoverysupporting

confidence: 89%

“…The recovery from three months of light reduction is faster than has previously been reported for larger seagrass species. Generally, recovery in these species takes years, decades or has been predicted to take centuries (Boese et al, 2009;Bryars and Neverauskas, 2004;Collier et al, 2009;Gonzalez-Correa et al, 2005;Hammerstrom et al, 2007;Neckles et al, 2005). Interestingly, this relatively fast recovery occurred despite up to 72% loss of leaf biomass, highlighting the fast leaf production rates of Amphibolis compared to other large seagrasses (Marba and Walker, 1999), and high recovery potential if actively growing clusters (up to 42%) remain on the stem from which new leaves can form.…”

Section: Timescales Of Recoverymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A key concern in assessing the impact of dredging on seagrass ecosystems is the length of time these ecosystem functions are compromised, that is, how long does it take for the ecosystem to recover. Recovery from dredging related stressors, defined as a return to predisturbance or undisturbed conditions (Elliott et al, 2007) has been demonstrated (Biber et al, 2009;Collier et al, 2009;Gonzalez-Correa et al, 2005;Hammerstrom et al, 2007), and the rate of recovery depends on a variety of factors (see Pickett and White, 1985) such as the size and severity of the impact (Fonseca et al, 2004) and the seagrass species. Recovery can take years and, in some instances, has been predicted to take centuries (Walker et al, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Recovery from the impact of light reduction on the seagrass Amphibolis griffithii, insights for dredging management

McMahon

Lavery

Mulligan³

2011

Marine Pollution Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A large-scale, manipulative experiment was conducted to examine the extent and rate of recovery of meadows of the temperate Australian seagrass, Amphibolis griffithii to different light-reduction scenarios typical of dredging operations, and to identify potential indicators of recovery from light reduction stress. Shade cloth was used to mimic different intensities, durations and start times of light reduction, and then was removed to assess the recovery. The meadow could recover from 3 months of light stress (5-18% ambient) following 10 months re-exposure to ambient light, even when up to 72% of leaf biomass was lost, much faster recovery rates than has previously been observed for large seagrasses. However, when the meadow had been shaded for 6-9 months and more than 82% of leaf biomass was lost, no recovery was detected up to 23 months after the light stress had ceased, consistent with other studies. Five potential indicators of recovery were recommended.Recovery of seagrass from light reduction 2

show abstract

Section: Timescales Of Recoverysupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Timescales Of Recoverymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Recovery from the impact of light reduction on the seagrass Amphibolis griffithii, insights for dredging management

McMahon

Lavery

Mulligan³

2011

Marine Pollution Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After benthic trawling, slower-growing sponges and corals took up to 8 years to recover compared with <1 years for polychaetes [21]. Yet, a deep seagrass meadow showed only a few signs of recovery 100 years after trawling [75], and a megabenthic seamount assemblage failed to recover 5-10 years after trawling [76]. Population or ecosystem recovery might take even longer if there has been a regime shift, as in the Benguela ecosystem [18].…”

Section: Magnitude Of Recoverymentioning

confidence: 99%

Recovery of marine animal populations and ecosystems

Lotze¹,

Coll²,

Magera³

et al. 2011

Trends in Ecology & Evolution

351

316

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many marine populations and ecosystems have experienced strong historical depletions, yet reports of recoveries are increasing. Here, we review the growing research on marine recoveries to reveal how common recovery is, its magnitude, timescale and major drivers. Overall, 10-50% of depleted populations and ecosystems show some recovery, but rarely to former levels of abundance. In addition, recovery can take many decades for long-lived species and complex ecosystems. Major drivers of recovery include the reduction of human impacts, especially exploitation, habitat loss and pollution, combined with favorable life-history and environmental conditions. Awareness, legal protection and enforcement of management plans are also crucial. Learning from historical recovery successes and failures is essential for implementing realistic conservation goals and promising management strategies.A new focus on recovery An increasing number of studies have reported strong declines in marine animal populations and the degradation of ocean ecosystems over past decades and centuries around the world [1][2][3][4][5][6][7], leading to a widespread perception of empty oceans and polluted waters. Yet, throughout history, humans have responded to declining resource abundance and ecosystem degradation by implementing management and conservation measures. Some of these have been successful and resulted in recovery, whereas others have failed [3,8,9].Therefore, an important question to science and management is: how common is recovery among depleted populations and degraded ecosystems in the ocean? Today, many marine mammal, bird, reptile and fish populations are at low abundance, and several species are endangered or extinct on regional or global scales [5,[10][11][12]. However, despite long periods of intense human impacts, most marine species persist and some populations do show signs of recovery [3,8,9]. Similarly, many coastal habitats, including wetlands, seagrass beds, mangrove and kelp forests, and oyster and coral reefs, have been severely reduced or degraded [2][3][4]6], yet partial recovery has been achieved in some regions in response to protection and pollution controls [3,13]. Restoration attempts at an ecosystem level have often been followed by the return and recovery of former species assemblages and ecosystem functions [13][14][15][16][17], but some ecosystems have remained in an altered state [18]. Such successes could serve as important guides for efforts to prevent further biodiversity loss and enhance future recoveries.Despite a growing number of case studies on the recovery of specific populations or ecosystems, an overview of the general patterns and drivers of marine recoveries over historical timescales is lacking. A recent review on the recovery of damaged ecosystems found that many terrestrial and marine ecosystems can recover on timescales of a few years to a few decades after major perturbations [19]. However, most case studies in the review, especially among marine and brackish examples, included small, short-...

show abstract

“…Throughout most of the Mediterranean sea, Posidonia oceanica is suffering constant pressure from both natural processes and human activities which are reducing the surface area covered by this key coastal ecosystem (boudouresque et al, 2006). The most important anthropogenic factors responsible for the decline of the seagrass are the decrease in water transparency (ruiz and romero, 2001), and the direct and indirect destruction of the meadows due to coastal development (Meinesz et al, 1991), boat anchoring (Francour et al, 1999;Milazzo et al, 2004), trawling (González-Correa et al, 2005), fish farming (delgado et al, 1997;), desalinisation plants (latorre, 2005Gacia et al, 2007) and climate change (Peirano et al, 2005). The beds under these pressures have a lower shoot density and a fragmented structure (boudouresque et al, 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Alterations of the structure of <em>Posidonia oceanica</em> beds due to the introduced alga <em>Caulerpa taxifolia</em>

Molenaar¹,

Meinesz²,

Thibaut³

2009

Sci. Mar.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ea 4228 eCoMers, laboratoire environnement Marin littoral, université de nice-sophia antipolis, Faculté des sciences, Parc Valrose, 06108 nice cedex 02, France. e-mail: thierry.thibaut@unice.fr suMMary: The impact of Caulerpa taxifolia on the structure of shallow Posidonia oceanica beds was studied in permanent quadrats from 1995 to 2005 at the invaded site of Cap Martin and the control site of Cap d'antibes (French riviera, France). The cover of C. taxifolia, shoot density, number of orthotropic and plagiotropic shoots and proportion of ramifications of P. oceanica were measured yearly. The cover of C. taxifolia in the invaded zone rapidly reached a maximum of infestation in 2000 with 93% of the quadrats covered by the alga. in 2001 an unexplained phenomenon led to a sharp decrease in the infestation and in the following years the colonisation remained low. Within the 10 years of the study, P. oceanica did not disappear from the permanent quadrats, but we observed a drastic change in the structure of the meadow invaded by C. taxifolia. between 1999 and 2000 a decrease in the shoot density observed at both sites was probably related to the warm temperature event recorded in 1999 (from 636 to 143 shoots m -2 at the invaded site and from 488 to 277 at the control site). at the invaded site, the seagrass never recovered its initial density even after a sharp decrease in C. taxifolia. The orthotropic/ plagiotropic shoot ratio was strongly modified at the invaded site, where plagiotropic shoots became dominant because of an increase in their ramification.Keywords: Caulerpa taxifolia, Posidonia oceanica, competition, ecological impact.resuMen: Alteraciones en la estructura de praderas de Posidonia oceanica debido al alga introducida caulerPa taxifolia. -el impacto de Caulerpa taxifolia sobre la estructura de la comunidad de Posidonia oceanica poco profunda se estudió entre 1995 y 2005 mediante parcelas permanentes en una zona invadida de Cap Martin y una zona control en Cap d'antibes (riviera Francesa, Francia). Para ello, se midieron anualmente la densidad de C. taxifolia, y la densidad de haces, el número de haces ortotrópicos y plagiotrópicos y la proporción de ramificaciones de P. oceanica. la densidad de C. taxifolia en la zona invadida alcanzó un máximo en 2000, con una cobertura del 93%, y a partir del año 2001 disminuyó drásticamente, dejando valores relativamente bajos en los años siguientes. durante los 10 años de estudio, la pradera de P. oceanica no desapareció en las zonas invadidas por C. taxifolia, aunque se observaron cambios drásticos en su estructura. en 2000, se observó una disminución en la densidad de haces de P. oceanica, coincidiendo con la máxima cobertura de C. taxifolia (de 636 a 143 haces m -2 en la zona invadida y de 488 a 277 en la zona control). entre 1999 y 2000 en los dos sitios se observó una disminución de la densidad probablemente relacionada con las altas temperaturas registradas en 1999. la densidad de haces de P. oceanica no recuperó los valores iniciales, incluso después de la di...

show abstract

Recovery of deep Posidonia oceanica meadows degraded by trawling

Cited by 115 publications

References 32 publications

Recovery from the impact of light reduction on the seagrass Amphibolis griffithii, insights for dredging management

Recovery from the impact of light reduction on the seagrass Amphibolis griffithii, insights for dredging management

Recovery of marine animal populations and ecosystems

Alterations of the structure of <em>Posidonia oceanica</em> beds due to the introduced alga <em>Caulerpa taxifolia</em>

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About