Fish assemblages of three common artificial reef designs during early colonization
In this study, we compared the early fish colonization of three types of artificial reefs deployed in the coastal waters of Saba and St Eustatius in the Caribbean: reef balls®, layered cakes and piles of locally obtained basaltic rock. As an indicator of performance, three fish assemblage parameters...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Ecological engineering 2020-10, Vol.157, p.105994, Article 105994 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 105994 |
container_title | Ecological engineering |
container_volume | 157 |
creator | Hylkema, Alwin Debrot, Adolphe O. Osinga, Ronald Bron, Patrick S. Heesink, Daniel B. Izioka, Ayumi Kuramae Reid, Callum B. Rippen, Jorien C. Treibitz, Tali Yuval, Matan Murk, Albertinka J. |
description | In this study, we compared the early fish colonization of three types of artificial reefs deployed in the coastal waters of Saba and St Eustatius in the Caribbean: reef balls®, layered cakes and piles of locally obtained basaltic rock. As an indicator of performance, three fish assemblage parameters (abundance, biomass, species richness) were measured using underwater visual censuses at 11 months post-deployment and 4 months after restoration from hurricane damage. All artificial reef plots showed higher values for fish abundance, biomass and species richness than control plots covered by bare sand, which shows that artificial reefs can locally enhance the fish assemblage. However, the effect differed among artificial reef plots. Fish abundance was 3.8 times higher on the layered cake plots compared to the reef ball plots, while fish biomass was 4.6 times higher. Rock pile plots had intermediate values. Species richness did not differ significantly among different artificial reef plots. Three-dimensional modelling revealed that layered cakes had a smaller gross volume, shelter volume and total surface area than reef balls. The availability of multiple small shelters in the layered cake design appeared to be more relevant than other physical parameters, as the layered cake plots had higher fish abundance than the reef balls plots. We concluded that on Saba and St. Eustatius, layered cake plots performed better than reef ball plots after one year of colonization. Rock pile plots, made of local volcanic rock, showed an intermediate performance, and were 4–10 times cheaper to construct. If observed differences are consistent with other locations and persist during further colonization, current efforts to deploy reef balls could better be allocated to deploy artificial reef structures with a higher shelter density.
•Fish abundance and biomass differed per artificial reef type.•This difference is driven by the availability of small shelters.•Artificial reef deployment can be more efficient by choosing better performing or cheaper designs. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2020.105994 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2461618282</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0925857420302822</els_id><sourcerecordid>2461618282</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-9e8222da4f3ffdaa40b4ce07b8f15de50b7fc4c11d462f6c0b6397aca2274a153</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkF1LwzAUhoMoOKc_QQh43ZmkSdtciQy_YCCIXoc0PelS2mQmnTB_vR3dvVcHXt4PzoPQLSUrSmhx363AhB58u2KEHTUhJT9DC1qVLCukZOdoQSQTWSVKfomuUuoIISUTcoE-nl3aYp0SDHWvW0g4WDxuIwA2YRiCxzqOzjrjdI8n1eIGkmt9ws0-Ot9i0LE_TN4-ePerRxf8Nbqwuk9wc7pL9PX89Ll-zTbvL2_rx01m8oqPmYSKMdZobnNrG605qbkBUtaVpaIBQerSGm4obXjBbGFIXeSy1EYzVnJNRb5Ed3PvLobvPaRRdWEf_TSpGC9oQStWscklZpeJIaUIVu2iG3Q8KErUEZ_q1AmfOuJTM74p9zDnYHrhx0FUyTjwBhoXwYyqCe6fhj__PHyA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2461618282</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Fish assemblages of three common artificial reef designs during early colonization</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Hylkema, Alwin ; Debrot, Adolphe O. ; Osinga, Ronald ; Bron, Patrick S. ; Heesink, Daniel B. ; Izioka, Ayumi Kuramae ; Reid, Callum B. ; Rippen, Jorien C. ; Treibitz, Tali ; Yuval, Matan ; Murk, Albertinka J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Hylkema, Alwin ; Debrot, Adolphe O. ; Osinga, Ronald ; Bron, Patrick S. ; Heesink, Daniel B. ; Izioka, Ayumi Kuramae ; Reid, Callum B. ; Rippen, Jorien C. ; Treibitz, Tali ; Yuval, Matan ; Murk, Albertinka J.</creatorcontrib><description>In this study, we compared the early fish colonization of three types of artificial reefs deployed in the coastal waters of Saba and St Eustatius in the Caribbean: reef balls®, layered cakes and piles of locally obtained basaltic rock. As an indicator of performance, three fish assemblage parameters (abundance, biomass, species richness) were measured using underwater visual censuses at 11 months post-deployment and 4 months after restoration from hurricane damage. All artificial reef plots showed higher values for fish abundance, biomass and species richness than control plots covered by bare sand, which shows that artificial reefs can locally enhance the fish assemblage. However, the effect differed among artificial reef plots. Fish abundance was 3.8 times higher on the layered cake plots compared to the reef ball plots, while fish biomass was 4.6 times higher. Rock pile plots had intermediate values. Species richness did not differ significantly among different artificial reef plots. Three-dimensional modelling revealed that layered cakes had a smaller gross volume, shelter volume and total surface area than reef balls. The availability of multiple small shelters in the layered cake design appeared to be more relevant than other physical parameters, as the layered cake plots had higher fish abundance than the reef balls plots. We concluded that on Saba and St. Eustatius, layered cake plots performed better than reef ball plots after one year of colonization. Rock pile plots, made of local volcanic rock, showed an intermediate performance, and were 4–10 times cheaper to construct. If observed differences are consistent with other locations and persist during further colonization, current efforts to deploy reef balls could better be allocated to deploy artificial reef structures with a higher shelter density.
•Fish abundance and biomass differed per artificial reef type.•This difference is driven by the availability of small shelters.•Artificial reef deployment can be more efficient by choosing better performing or cheaper designs.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0925-8574</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1872-6992</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2020.105994</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Abundance ; Artificial reef ; Artificial reefs ; Biomass ; Coastal waters ; Colonization ; Deployment ; Fish ; Fish abundance ; Habitat restoration ; Hurricanes ; Layered cake ; Parameters ; Physical properties ; Piles ; Reef ball ; Restoration ; Shelter availability ; Shelters ; Species richness ; Storm damage ; Three dimensional models ; Underwater ; Volcanic rocks</subject><ispartof>Ecological engineering, 2020-10, Vol.157, p.105994, Article 105994</ispartof><rights>2020 Elsevier B.V.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier BV Oct 1, 2020</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-9e8222da4f3ffdaa40b4ce07b8f15de50b7fc4c11d462f6c0b6397aca2274a153</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-9e8222da4f3ffdaa40b4ce07b8f15de50b7fc4c11d462f6c0b6397aca2274a153</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925857420302822$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27903,27904,65309</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hylkema, Alwin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Debrot, Adolphe O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Osinga, Ronald</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bron, Patrick S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heesink, Daniel B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Izioka, Ayumi Kuramae</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reid, Callum B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rippen, Jorien C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Treibitz, Tali</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yuval, Matan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Murk, Albertinka J.</creatorcontrib><title>Fish assemblages of three common artificial reef designs during early colonization</title><title>Ecological engineering</title><description>In this study, we compared the early fish colonization of three types of artificial reefs deployed in the coastal waters of Saba and St Eustatius in the Caribbean: reef balls®, layered cakes and piles of locally obtained basaltic rock. As an indicator of performance, three fish assemblage parameters (abundance, biomass, species richness) were measured using underwater visual censuses at 11 months post-deployment and 4 months after restoration from hurricane damage. All artificial reef plots showed higher values for fish abundance, biomass and species richness than control plots covered by bare sand, which shows that artificial reefs can locally enhance the fish assemblage. However, the effect differed among artificial reef plots. Fish abundance was 3.8 times higher on the layered cake plots compared to the reef ball plots, while fish biomass was 4.6 times higher. Rock pile plots had intermediate values. Species richness did not differ significantly among different artificial reef plots. Three-dimensional modelling revealed that layered cakes had a smaller gross volume, shelter volume and total surface area than reef balls. The availability of multiple small shelters in the layered cake design appeared to be more relevant than other physical parameters, as the layered cake plots had higher fish abundance than the reef balls plots. We concluded that on Saba and St. Eustatius, layered cake plots performed better than reef ball plots after one year of colonization. Rock pile plots, made of local volcanic rock, showed an intermediate performance, and were 4–10 times cheaper to construct. If observed differences are consistent with other locations and persist during further colonization, current efforts to deploy reef balls could better be allocated to deploy artificial reef structures with a higher shelter density.
•Fish abundance and biomass differed per artificial reef type.•This difference is driven by the availability of small shelters.•Artificial reef deployment can be more efficient by choosing better performing or cheaper designs.</description><subject>Abundance</subject><subject>Artificial reef</subject><subject>Artificial reefs</subject><subject>Biomass</subject><subject>Coastal waters</subject><subject>Colonization</subject><subject>Deployment</subject><subject>Fish</subject><subject>Fish abundance</subject><subject>Habitat restoration</subject><subject>Hurricanes</subject><subject>Layered cake</subject><subject>Parameters</subject><subject>Physical properties</subject><subject>Piles</subject><subject>Reef ball</subject><subject>Restoration</subject><subject>Shelter availability</subject><subject>Shelters</subject><subject>Species richness</subject><subject>Storm damage</subject><subject>Three dimensional models</subject><subject>Underwater</subject><subject>Volcanic rocks</subject><issn>0925-8574</issn><issn>1872-6992</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkF1LwzAUhoMoOKc_QQh43ZmkSdtciQy_YCCIXoc0PelS2mQmnTB_vR3dvVcHXt4PzoPQLSUrSmhx363AhB58u2KEHTUhJT9DC1qVLCukZOdoQSQTWSVKfomuUuoIISUTcoE-nl3aYp0SDHWvW0g4WDxuIwA2YRiCxzqOzjrjdI8n1eIGkmt9ws0-Ot9i0LE_TN4-ePerRxf8Nbqwuk9wc7pL9PX89Ll-zTbvL2_rx01m8oqPmYSKMdZobnNrG605qbkBUtaVpaIBQerSGm4obXjBbGFIXeSy1EYzVnJNRb5Ed3PvLobvPaRRdWEf_TSpGC9oQStWscklZpeJIaUIVu2iG3Q8KErUEZ_q1AmfOuJTM74p9zDnYHrhx0FUyTjwBhoXwYyqCe6fhj__PHyA</recordid><startdate>20201001</startdate><enddate>20201001</enddate><creator>Hylkema, Alwin</creator><creator>Debrot, Adolphe O.</creator><creator>Osinga, Ronald</creator><creator>Bron, Patrick S.</creator><creator>Heesink, Daniel B.</creator><creator>Izioka, Ayumi Kuramae</creator><creator>Reid, Callum B.</creator><creator>Rippen, Jorien C.</creator><creator>Treibitz, Tali</creator><creator>Yuval, Matan</creator><creator>Murk, Albertinka J.</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier BV</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H97</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>P64</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20201001</creationdate><title>Fish assemblages of three common artificial reef designs during early colonization</title><author>Hylkema, Alwin ; Debrot, Adolphe O. ; Osinga, Ronald ; Bron, Patrick S. ; Heesink, Daniel B. ; Izioka, Ayumi Kuramae ; Reid, Callum B. ; Rippen, Jorien C. ; Treibitz, Tali ; Yuval, Matan ; Murk, Albertinka J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-9e8222da4f3ffdaa40b4ce07b8f15de50b7fc4c11d462f6c0b6397aca2274a153</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Abundance</topic><topic>Artificial reef</topic><topic>Artificial reefs</topic><topic>Biomass</topic><topic>Coastal waters</topic><topic>Colonization</topic><topic>Deployment</topic><topic>Fish</topic><topic>Fish abundance</topic><topic>Habitat restoration</topic><topic>Hurricanes</topic><topic>Layered cake</topic><topic>Parameters</topic><topic>Physical properties</topic><topic>Piles</topic><topic>Reef ball</topic><topic>Restoration</topic><topic>Shelter availability</topic><topic>Shelters</topic><topic>Species richness</topic><topic>Storm damage</topic><topic>Three dimensional models</topic><topic>Underwater</topic><topic>Volcanic rocks</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hylkema, Alwin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Debrot, Adolphe O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Osinga, Ronald</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bron, Patrick S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heesink, Daniel B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Izioka, Ayumi Kuramae</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reid, Callum B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rippen, Jorien C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Treibitz, Tali</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yuval, Matan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Murk, Albertinka J.</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution & Environmental Quality</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Ecological engineering</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hylkema, Alwin</au><au>Debrot, Adolphe O.</au><au>Osinga, Ronald</au><au>Bron, Patrick S.</au><au>Heesink, Daniel B.</au><au>Izioka, Ayumi Kuramae</au><au>Reid, Callum B.</au><au>Rippen, Jorien C.</au><au>Treibitz, Tali</au><au>Yuval, Matan</au><au>Murk, Albertinka J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Fish assemblages of three common artificial reef designs during early colonization</atitle><jtitle>Ecological engineering</jtitle><date>2020-10-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>157</volume><spage>105994</spage><pages>105994-</pages><artnum>105994</artnum><issn>0925-8574</issn><eissn>1872-6992</eissn><abstract>In this study, we compared the early fish colonization of three types of artificial reefs deployed in the coastal waters of Saba and St Eustatius in the Caribbean: reef balls®, layered cakes and piles of locally obtained basaltic rock. As an indicator of performance, three fish assemblage parameters (abundance, biomass, species richness) were measured using underwater visual censuses at 11 months post-deployment and 4 months after restoration from hurricane damage. All artificial reef plots showed higher values for fish abundance, biomass and species richness than control plots covered by bare sand, which shows that artificial reefs can locally enhance the fish assemblage. However, the effect differed among artificial reef plots. Fish abundance was 3.8 times higher on the layered cake plots compared to the reef ball plots, while fish biomass was 4.6 times higher. Rock pile plots had intermediate values. Species richness did not differ significantly among different artificial reef plots. Three-dimensional modelling revealed that layered cakes had a smaller gross volume, shelter volume and total surface area than reef balls. The availability of multiple small shelters in the layered cake design appeared to be more relevant than other physical parameters, as the layered cake plots had higher fish abundance than the reef balls plots. We concluded that on Saba and St. Eustatius, layered cake plots performed better than reef ball plots after one year of colonization. Rock pile plots, made of local volcanic rock, showed an intermediate performance, and were 4–10 times cheaper to construct. If observed differences are consistent with other locations and persist during further colonization, current efforts to deploy reef balls could better be allocated to deploy artificial reef structures with a higher shelter density.
•Fish abundance and biomass differed per artificial reef type.•This difference is driven by the availability of small shelters.•Artificial reef deployment can be more efficient by choosing better performing or cheaper designs.</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><doi>10.1016/j.ecoleng.2020.105994</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0925-8574 |
ispartof | Ecological engineering, 2020-10, Vol.157, p.105994, Article 105994 |
issn | 0925-8574 1872-6992 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2461618282 |
source | Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
subjects | Abundance Artificial reef Artificial reefs Biomass Coastal waters Colonization Deployment Fish Fish abundance Habitat restoration Hurricanes Layered cake Parameters Physical properties Piles Reef ball Restoration Shelter availability Shelters Species richness Storm damage Three dimensional models Underwater Volcanic rocks |
title | Fish assemblages of three common artificial reef designs during early colonization |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-28T01%3A45%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Fish%20assemblages%20of%20three%20common%20artificial%20reef%20designs%20during%20early%20colonization&rft.jtitle=Ecological%20engineering&rft.au=Hylkema,%20Alwin&rft.date=2020-10-01&rft.volume=157&rft.spage=105994&rft.pages=105994-&rft.artnum=105994&rft.issn=0925-8574&rft.eissn=1872-6992&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2020.105994&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2461618282%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2461618282&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0925857420302822&rfr_iscdi=true |