共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 781 毫秒
1.
2.
Matthew S. Kendall John D. Christensen Christopher Caldow Michael Coyne Christopher Jeffrey Mark E. Monaco Wendy Morrison Zandy Hillis‐Starr 《水产资源保护:海洋与淡水生态系统》2004,14(2):113-132
- 1. A necessary component of implementing a successful marine reserve is the quantification of the biological resources that fall under its protection. Without such an initial assessment, the future effects of the reserve on the local habitat and biotic community cannot be quantified and will remain the subject of debate.
- 2. This study provides such a baseline assessment of fish diversity and habitat types within a recently enlarged marine reserve. Buck Island Reef National Monument, US Virgin Islands, was recently enlarged from approximately 4 km2 to over 76 km2. Areas of sand, seagrass, and hard‐bottom under protection were increased from 0.29 km2, 0.47 km2, and 1.96 km2 to 2.70 km2, 2.89 km2, and 18.30 km2 respectively when the Monument was expanded. A 53 km2 area of pelagic/deep‐water habitat with unknown bottom type is now also protected by the Monument.
- 3. Visual counts of fish within 25×4 m2 transects conducted during the day were used to assess fish community structure and habitat utilization patterns. Species richness, diversity, assemblage structure, and fish density were evaluated and compared among sand, seagrass, and hard‐bottom habitats. Hard‐bottom sites had over twice the mean species richness and diversity as sand and seagrass sites, and several times greater mean fish density.
- 4. Quantification of the fish community in pelagic and deep‐water habitats within the reserve is recommended to provide a more comprehensive assessment of the offshore areas of the reserve. Fish numbers, size, and diversity outside the reserve boundaries must also be evaluated to allow quantification of the effects of the marine reserve on the adjacent fish communities.
3.
4.
Peter J. Mitchell Stefan G. Bolam Hayden L. Close Clement Garcia Jacquomo Monk Khatija Alliji 《水产资源保护:海洋与淡水生态系统》2021,31(6):1354-1366
- Evidence-based decisions relating to effective marine protected areas as a means of conserving biodiversity require a detailed understanding of the species present. The Caribbean island nation of St Lucia is expanding its current marine protected area network by designating additional no-take marine reserves on the west coast. However, information on the distribution of fish species is currently limited.
- This study used baited remote underwater stereo-video to address this shortcoming by investigating the effects of depth and seabed habitat structure on demersal fish assemblages and comparing these assemblages between regions currently afforded different protection measures.
- From the 87 stations visited a total of 5,921 fish were observed comprising 120 fish taxa across 22 families. Species richness and total abundance were higher within the highly managed region, which included no-take reserves. Redundancy analysis explained 17% of the total variance in fish distribution, driven predominantly by the seabed habitats. The redundancy analysis identified four main groups of demersal fishes each associated with specific seabed habitats.
- The current no-take marine reserves protected two of these groups (i.e. fishes associated with the ‘soft corals, hard corals or gorgonians’ and ‘seagrass’ groups). Importantly, habitats dominated by sponges, bacterial mats, algal turfs or macroalgae, which also supported unique fish assemblages, are not currently afforded protection via the marine reserve network (based on the five reserves studied). These results imply that incorporation of the full breadth of benthic habitat types present would improve the efficacy of the marine reserve network by ensuring all fish assemblages are protected.
5.
6.
Lucas Martínez-Ramírez C. Robert Priester Inês Sousa Karim Erzini David Abecasis 《水产资源保护:海洋与淡水生态系统》2021,31(7):1584-1595
- The implementation of marine protected areas (MPAs) has been widely used as a tool to manage and conserve marine resources and services. Yet, to date, the reserve effect is still weakly evaluated, particularly for soft-sediment habitats.
- The Arrábida MPA, considered as a biodiversity hotspot, was fully established in 2009 on the west coast of Portugal and is characterized by large expanses of soft-sediment habitats. This MPA was established to protect biodiversity and to ensure the livelihood of the local small-scale fisheries community.
- Beyond before–after-control–impact (BACI) analyses were carried out on catch data (abundance and biomass) of 351 trammel net sets from experimental fishing campaigns (2007–2019) to study the reserve effect on demersal fish populations.
- The results show a declining trend in abundance inside and outside the protected area, with significant positive effects only found for undersize commercial species and Solea senegalensis, and a general increase in fish species total length. Despite the lack of any obvious reserve effect, the increase in fish length can be considered as a first sign.
- Anthropogenic pressures are generalized around the area, and transgressions of the restrictions are frequently observed inside the no-take zone. These can, among other aspects, delay or prevent the expected reserve effects. Therefore, enforcement and/or modification of the spatial plan must be incentivized to achieve the goals of the MPA.
7.
- 1. Growing concern associated with threats to the marine environment has resulted in an increased demand for marine reserves that conserve representative and adequate examples of biodiversity. Often, the decisions about where to locate reserves must be made in the absence of detailed information on the patterns of distribution of the biota. Alternative approaches are required that include defining habitats using surrogates for biodiversity. Surrogate measures of biodiversity enable decisions about where to locate marine reserves to be made more reliably in the absence of detailed data on the distribution of species.
- 2. Intertidal habitat types derived using physical properties of the shoreline were used as a surrogate for intertidal biodiversity to assist with the identification of sites for inclusion in a candidate system of intertidal marine reserves for 17 463 km of the mainland coast of Queensland, Australia. This represents the first systematic approach, on essentially one‐dimensional data, using fine‐scale (tens to hundreds of metres) intertidal habitats to identify a system of marine reserves for such a large length of coast. A range of solutions would provide for the protection of a representative example of intertidal habitats in Queensland.
- 3. The design and planning of marine and terrestrial protected areas systems should not be undertaken independently of each other because it is likely to lead to inadequate representation of intertidal habitats in either system. The development of reserve systems specially designed to protect intertidal habitats should be integrated into the design of terrestrial and marine protected area systems.
8.
9.
Simonetta Fraschetti Giuseppe Guarnieri Stanislao Bevilacqua Antonio Terlizzi Joachim Claudet Giovanni Fulvio Russo Ferdinando Boero 《水产资源保护:海洋与淡水生态系统》2011,21(3):299-306
- 1. The relentless increase in both human activities and exploitation of marine resources is a threat to marine habitats and species.
- 2. For marine systems, several protection initiatives have been outlined over the past decade to significantly reduce the current rate of biodiversity loss at global, regional, and national levels, and to establish representative networks of marine protected areas with the aim of protecting 10–30% of marine habitats.
- 3. Reliable estimates of the total area occupied by each habitat are crucial to set adequate protection initiatives. Habitat mapping requires a sound habitat classification. Many classification schemes have been developed in different areas of the world, sometimes based on questionable criteria.
- 4. A critical analysis of the most recent marine habitat classification list produced for the Mediterranean Sea from the Regional Activity Centre for Specially Protected Areas (RAC/SPA) showed that (i) 39% of habitats and associated species considered in the list are scarcely covered by scientific knowledge from Web‐based resources; (ii) 62% of the species/genera included in the list are primary producers; (iii) quantitative information about the geographical distribution of selected habitats and associated species is scant; and (iv) when available, information is largely unbalanced and biased towards the shallow western Mediterranean Sea.
- 5. Improved inventories of marine habitats are needed to support accurate and consistent mapping activities. The combination of large‐scale mapping and sound habitat classifications will allow better estimates of biodiversity distribution, to reverse regional/global habitat loss rates through the achievement of conservation targets and deadlines that, for the moment, are systematically not met. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
10.
11.
- 1. An abundance gradient from high inside to low outside a no‐take marine reserve may indicate net emigration of adult fish from the reserve (‘spillover’).
- 2. We examined spatial patterns of abundance of fish across two ～900 m long sections of coral reef slope at each of two small Philippine islands (Apo and Balicasag). One section sampled the entire length of a no‐take reserve and extended 200–400 m outside the two lateral reserve boundaries. The other section, without a reserve, was a control. The reserves had had 20 (Apo) and 15 (Balicasag) years of protection when sampled in 2002.
- 3. Significant spatial gradients of decreasing abundance of target fish occurred across only one (Apo Reserve northern boundary = ARNB) of four real reserve boundaries, and across none of the control ‘boundaries’. Abundance of non‐target fish did not decline significantly across reserve boundaries.
- 4. Abundance of target fish declined sharply 50 m outside the ARNB, but enhanced abundance extended 100–350 m beyond this boundary, depending on fish mobility.
- 5. Density of sedentary target fish declined 2–6 times faster than density of highly vagile and vagile target fish across the ARNB.
- 6. Habitat factors could not account for these ARNB results for target fish, but did influence abundance patterns of non‐target fish.
- 7. The lack of abundance gradients of target fish at Balicasag may reflect reduced fishing outside the reserve since it was established.
- 8. Apo Reserve had a gradient of abundance of target fish across at least one boundary, a result consistent with spillover.
12.
- 1. Diving surveys were undertaken to investigate the effects of marine reserve protection on spiny lobster (Jasus edwardsii) populations at Tonga Island Marine Reserve, northern South Island, New Zealand over a 2 year period from December 1998 to December 2000.
- 2. Spiny lobsters were 2.8 times more abundant overall, and mean size was 19 mm carapace length larger in shallow transects and 28 mm carapace length larger in deep transects, in the marine reserve than at adjacent fished sites. That pattern was evident despite very high variability within sites, and among sites within reserve and fished areas.
- 3. Large reproductive males were 10 times more abundant within the reserve compared to adjacent fished areas, suggesting that more eggs would be fertilized in the reserve than on the adjacent fished coast.
- 4. Estimates of size‐specific fecundity, combined with abundances of females, suggested that almost nine times more eggs would be produced in the reserve than in fished areas.
- 6. We estimate that the mean abundance of spiny lobster in the reserve has increased by 22%, 5 years after its establishment, indicating an annual population increase of 4.4%. Over the same period, abundance of spiny lobster outside the reserve has declined by 2.9% per annum.
- 7. Based on known spiny lobster movements, we suggest that marine reserves of more than 10 km length should be given priority over smaller reserves. Smaller reserves will, however, protect part of the population for at least a portion of their lifespan.
- 8. Previous studies of movement of J. edwardsii suggest that spillover from the reserve should occur, and as population density increases we predict that more spiny lobsters will move out from the reserve.
13.
- Marine protected area (MPA) planning often relies on scientific principles that help ensure that an area selected for conservation will effectively protect biodiversity. Capturing ecological processes in MPA network planning has received increased attention in recent years. High‐resolution seafloor maps, which show patterns in seafloor bio‐physical characteristics, can support our understanding of ecological processes.
- In part, owing to a global lack of high‐resolution seafloor maps, studies that aim to integrate seascape spatial pattern and conservation prioritization often focus on shallow biogenic habitats with less attention paid to deeper benthic seascapes (benthoscapes) mapped using acoustic techniques. Acoustic seafloor mapping strategies yield the spatial information required to extend conservation prioritization research into these environments, making incorporating seafloor ecological processes into conservation prioritization increasingly achievable.
- Here, a new method is proposed and tested that combines benthoscape mapping, landscape ecology metrics and a conservation decision support tool to prioritize areas with structural and potential connectivity value in MPA placement. Using a case study in eastern Canada, benthoscape composition and configuration were quantified using spatial pattern metrics and integrated into Marxan.
- Results illustrate how large patches of seafloor habitat in close proximity to neighbouring patches can be preferentially selected when benthoscape configuration is considered. The flexibility of the method for including relevant spatial pattern metrics or species‐specific movement data is discussed to illustrate how benthic habitat maps can improve existing conservation planning methods and complement existing and future work to support marine biodiversity conservation.
14.
- 1. If marine environments are to be systematically protected from the adverse effects of human activities, then identification of the types of marine habitats and the communities they contain, and delineation of their boundaries utilizing a consistent classification is required. Human impacts on defined communities can then be assessed, the ‘health’ of these communities can be monitored, and marine protected areas can be designated as appropriate.
- 2. Schemes to classify habitats at local and regional scales, according to their geophysical properties, may identify different factors as determinants, and/or use them in different sequences in a hierarchical classification. We examined the reasons for these differences in local and regional applications of a global concept, and argue that a common set of factors could be applied in a defined and defensible sequence to produce a common hierarchy of habitat types among geographic regions.
- 3. We show how simple mapping and GIS techniques, based on readily available data, can lead to the identification of representative habitat types over broad geographic regions. We applied a geophysical framework first to the entire Canadian coastline and second to the Scotian Shelf of Atlantic Canada to establish broad scale marine natural regions and ‘seascapes’, respectively. This ecosystem level approach — which defines representative habitat types — is a fundamental prerequisite for many purposes. It can form the basis for further analyses including: definition of community types from habitat — community relationships; evaluation of the potential roles of focal species in marine conservation; evaluation of candidate marine protected areas; definition of unaffected reference areas against which the effects of human activities can be gauged; guidance for water quality monitoring studies; management of marine resources.
15.
16.
Javier Lloret Arnaldo Marín Lzaro Marín‐Guirao M. Francisca Carreo 《水产资源保护:海洋与淡水生态系统》2006,16(6):579-591
- 1. As the interest of divers in exploring marine protected areas grows, so does their impact on sensitive marine organisms and communities. This situation has led managers to adopt a variety of measures to manage scuba diving in marine reserves. However, if marine areas need to be managed and protected from the adverse effects of human activities, then the characterization of marine habitats and the communities they contain, along with the potential effects of scuba diving, will need to be evaluated on scientific lines.
- 2. To this end, the use of benthic mapping, together with an evaluation of community vulnerability, constitutes a complementary tool for managing scuba diving, as is demonstrated in the present study.
- 3. The identification and evaluation of the different communities observed in Cabo de Palos‐Islas Hormigas Marine Reserve enables managers to propose different measures for controlling potential diver impact and also for evaluating the effects of these measures, thus reducing the degradation of the benthic organisms and communities, benefiting the local tourism industry and allowing a more sustainable use of the marine reserve resources.
17.
18.
- 1. Mapping of seabed habitats is increasingly being used to identify the distribution and structure of marine ecosystems and as surrogate measures of biodiversity for marine protected area (MPA) planning. In this study, the distribution of seabed habitats to the 3 nmi limit around the Kent Group of islands, south‐eastern Australia were mapped using video ground‐truthed single‐beam acoustics at the mesoscale level (10 m to 1 km) as part of an MPA planning process.
- 2. Six distinct seabed habitat types (continuous reef, patchy reef, sand, hard sand, sparse sponge, and seagrass) were identified based primarily on visual differences in the first and second echo and a further four (low, medium and high profile reef, and sand hills) on variations in seabed profile identified in the echogram. Extensive acoustic and video transects allowed an estimate of the broad‐scale spatial distribution of seabed habitats defined at several hierarchical levels and provided information on the cover of the dominant benthic species or assemblages.
- 3. The island group supports a range of consolidated habitats, including rocky reefs of varying profile dominated by the macroalgae Phyllospora comosa and Ecklonia radiata in depths down to around 45 m, adjacent to deeper sponge‐dominated reefs containing encrusting, erect and branching forms. Unconsolidated habitats occurred broadly through the island group, with the offshore region dominated by hard sand (sand with scallop shells and/or shell grit) and sparse sponge‐habitats (sand interspersed with low cover of sponge‐dominated assemblages). The sheltered coves were dominated by sand and seagrass habitats consisting of beds of the seagrasses Halophila australis, Zostera tasmanica and Posidonia australis, with variations in species composition, patchiness and percentage cover evident within and between coves.
- 4. In February 2004 the Kent Group MPA was announced, covering all waters out to the 3 nmi limit containing two areas defined as a Sanctuary Zone (‘no take’) and a Habitat Protection Zone (‘restricted take’). Overall, seabed habitat mapping generated a capability to define the boundary and size of potential MPA zones within the Kent Group of islands and was an essential component of the planning process to improve the likelihood that the MPA was comprehensive, adequate and representative (CAR).
- 5. The need to define habitats at multiple scales within a hierarchical classification scheme that are meaningful in terms of biodiversity and CAR principles and identifiable using mapping techniques is discussed.
19.
