Designate a Marine Protected Area and prohibit aquaculture activity

Overall effectiveness category Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)
Number of studies: 1
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

40%
Certainty

10%
Harms

20%

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

Aquaculture systems can negatively impact subtidal benthic invertebrate communities through pollution and diminished water quality (Wu et al. 1994). Ceasing or prohibiting aquaculture activity in an area, for instance following relocation to a different area or following decommissioning, would remove the source of harm and potentially allow for subtidal benthic invertebrate communities to recover over time (Johannessen et al. 1994). Specific areas can be designated as protected, and specific management measures taken to prohibit aquaculture (Lin et al. 2009). Inside protected areas where this activity is prohibited, the threat to subtidal invertebrate communities is removed, and previously impacted populations are, in theory, able to recover over time.

When this intervention occurred outside of a marine protected area, evidence has been summarised under “Threat: Pollution – Cease or prohibit aquaculture activity”.

_{Johannessen P., Botnen H. & Tvedten Ø.F. (1994) Macrobenthos: before, during and after a fish farm. Aquaculture Research, 25, 55–66}

_{Lin H.J., Shao K.T., Hsieh H.L., Lo W.T. & Dai X.X. (2009) The effects of system-scale removal of oyster-culture racks from Tapong Bay, southwestern Taiwan: model exploration and comparison with field observations. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 66, 797–810.}

_{Wu R.S.S., Lam K.S., MacKay D.W., Lau T.C. & Yam V. (1994) Impact of marine fish farming on water quality and bottom sediment: A case study in the sub-tropical environment. Marine Environmental Research, 38, 115–145}.

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

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
Referenced paper
Lin H.-., Shao K.-., Hsieh H.-., Lo W.-. & Dai X.-. (2009) The effects of system-scale removal of oyster-culture racks from Tapong Bay, southwestern Taiwan: model exploration and comparison with field observations. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 66, 797-810.

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

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Subtidal Benthic Invertebrate Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Designate a Marine Protected Area and limit the density of traps Action Link	No evidence found (no assessment)	0	Synopsis Link
Engage with stakeholders when designing Marine Protected Areas Action Link	No evidence found (no assessment)	0	Synopsis Link
Designate a Marine Protected Area with a zonation system of activity restrictions Action Link	Likely to be beneficial	13	Synopsis Link