Designate a Marine Protected Area and prohibit aquaculture activity

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    40%
  • Certainty
    10%
  • Harms
    20%

Study locations

Key messages

  • One study examined the effects of prohibiting aquaculture activity in a protected area on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. The study was in Tapong Bay lagoon (Taiwan).

 

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

  • Crustacean abundance (1 study): One before-and-after study in Tapong Bay lagoon found that two and a half years after removing oyster aquaculture in a marine protected area, the biomasses of amphipods and shrimps had decreased, and that the biomass of crabs had not changed.
  • Mollusc abundance (1 study): One before-and-after study in Tapong Bay lagoon found that two and a half years after removing oyster aquaculture in a marine protected area, the biomasses of gastropods and bivalves had decreased.
  • Worm abundance (1 study): One before-and-after study in Tapong Bay lagoon found that two and a half years after removing oyster aquaculture in a marine protected area, the biomass of polychaete worms had stayed the same.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

  1. A before-and-after study in 1999–2004 of 39 sampling stations in Tapong Bay lagoon, southwestern Taiwan (Lin et al. 2009) found that removing oyster aquaculture in a marine protected area led to decreases in the biomasses of four out of six invertebrate groups, after two and a half years. Biomass of sea snails (gastropod molluscs) declined by 98% (before: 4.40; after: 0.06 g/m2), bivalve molluscs by 97% (before: 274; after: 8.56 g/m2), amphipods (crustaceans) by 98% (before: 0.51; after: 0.01 g/m2), and shrimps by 50% (before: 0.12; after: 0.06 g/m2). There were no significant changes in the biomasses of polychaete worms (before: 0.32; after: 1.55 g/m2), and crabs (before: 1.59; after: 0.93 g/m2). In 1997, Tapong Bay became a National Scenic Area and oyster culture, which was intensive in the area, was prohibited. In June 2002, all oyster racks were removed. Invertebrates (>0.5 mm) in the sediment were surveyed using a core (10 cm diameter; 20 cm depth) at 30 stations (3 cores/station) in August 1999, October 2002, and January and November 2004. Crabs and shrimps were sampled in 2001–2004 (unspecified number of surveys) using a net at nine stations (4 nets/station). All invertebrates were identified and wet-weighed.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Lemasson, A.J., Pettit, L.R., Smith, R.K. & Sutherland, W.J. (2020) Subtidal Benthic Invertebrate Conservation. Pages 635-732 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2020. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Subtidal Benthic Invertebrate Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Subtidal Benthic Invertebrate Conservation
Subtidal Benthic Invertebrate Conservation

Subtidal Benthic Invertebrate Conservation - Published 2020

What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 18

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust