Restore coastal lagoons

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    40%
  • Certainty
    28%
  • Harms
    20%

Source countries

Key messages

  • Three studies examined the effects restoring coastal lagoons on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. One study was in the Chilika lagoon (India), and two in East Harbor lagoon (USA).

 

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES)

  • Crustacean richness/diversity (1 study): One before-and-after study in Chilika lagoon found that following hydrological restoration total crustacean species richness decreased, but changes varied with species groups (decreases in prawn and crab species; increases in lobster species). The lagoon also hosted new species not found before.
  • Mollusc richness/diversity (2 studies): Two studies in East Harbor lagoon found that following hydrological restoration molluscs recolonised the lagoon and their species richness increased in the first three years but later decreased over the following six.

POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES)

  • Crustacean abundance (1 study): One before-and-after study in Chilika lagoon found that following hydrological restoration abundances of prawns and crabs increased.
  • Mollusc abundance (2 studies): Two studies in East Harbor lagoon found that following hydrological restoration molluscs recolonised the lagoon and their total abundance increased in the first three years, but later decreased over the following six.

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 1996–2004 in a degraded lagoon connected to the Bay of Bengal, east coast of India (Mohapatra et al. 2007) found that, four years after restoring its hydrology, crustacean species richness decreased, but abundance of commercially valued crustaceans increased. There were reductions in the number of prawn species (before: 24; after: 18 but four were new) and crab species (before: 28; after: 14 but seven were new), and an increase in lobster species (before: 0; after: 2). Abundance (as four-year averages of commercial landings) increased by 1,200% for prawns (before: 187; after: 2,430 t), and 1,135% for crabs (before: 10; after: 130 t). No commercial landings were reported for lobsters. Authors report that increases in landings were correlated with increases in salinity after restoration. The ecological status of the Chilika lagoon declined throughout the 20th century. In 2000, channels were dredged or extended to increase connections to the sea and rivers and improve the hydrology. Data were obtained from Orissa state Department of Fisheries for 1996–2000 (pre-restoration), and by the authors for 2000–2004 (post-restoration), following the same sampling methods. Thirty-four landings centres were visited monthly and prawn and crab catches, including the commercially valued species Penaeus monodon, Penaeus indicus, Metapenaeus monoceros, Metapenaeus dobsoni, Macrobrachium sp. and Scylla sp., were recorded (see study for details).

    Study and other actions tested
  2. A study in 2005 in a lagoon connected to Cape Cod Bay, Massachusetts, USA (Thelen & Thiet 2009 – same experimental set-up as Thiet et al. 2014) found that, three years after restoring its connection to the sea, molluscs had recolonised the lagoon, but molluscan abundance and species richness significantly varied within the lagoon, increasing with salinity and proximity to its connection to the sea. Sixteen molluscan species were recorded across the lagoon. Species richness in Moon Pond (13 species; highest salinity; closest to the sea) was significantly higher than in the central lagoon (9 species; intermediate salinity and distance to the sea) and the northwest cove (2 species, lowest salinity and furthest from the sea). Total mollusc abundance varied spatially within the lagoon, from 0.3 to 3,470 individuals/m2. Abundance of four selected species (softshell clam Mya arenaria; northern quahog Mercenaria mercenaria; blue mussel Mytilus edulis; periwinkle Littorina sp.) followed the same spatial pattern as species richness (see paper for details).  In 2002, tidal flow was partially restored to East Harbor lagoon (dominated by freshwater) by opening a culvert connecting to Cape Cod. Previously, no molluscan species were reported. In summer 2005, locations within three areas of the lagoon were surveyed twice (Moon Pond: 10 locations; central lagoon: 30 locations; northwest cove: 10 locations) using cores (0.79 m2) and quadrats (0.45 m2). Molluscs (>2 mm in cores; >0.64 cm in quadrats) were identified and counted. Salinity was measured at each location.

    Study and other actions tested
  3. A study in 2005–2011 in a lagoon connected to Cape Cod Bay, Massachusetts, USA (Thiet et al. 2014 – same experimental set-up as Thelen & Thiet 2009) found that, between three and nine years after restoring its connection to the sea, species richness and abundances of molluscs that had recolonised the lagoon following reconnection were decreasing over time, but effects varied geographically within the lagoon. Species richness decreased from 16 in 2005 to eight in 2011 across the lagoon, due to significant decreases in Moon Pond (from 14 to 5). Abundance of mollusc species also declined over time (total values not provided, see paper for details on each species abundance). Abundance of the softshell clam Mya arenaria (the dominant species in the lagoon and only one present in all areas each year), declined between 2005 and 2011, from 3,200/m2 to 8/m2 in Moon Pond and from 2,900/m2 to 7/m2 in the central lagoon, and remained low in northwest cove (0.2/m2 in 2005, 1/m2 in 2011). In 2002, tidal flow was partially restored to East Harbor lagoon (dominated by freshwater) by opening a culvert connecting to Cape Cod. Previously, no molluscan species were reported. In summer 2007, 2008 and 2011, locations within three areas of the lagoon were surveyed (Moon Pond: 20 locations; central lagoon: 24–30 locations; northwest cove: 4–15 locations) using cores (0.79 m2). Molluscs (>1 mm) were identified and counted. Data were compared to 2005 data from a previous study by Thelen & Thiel (2009) summarised above.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Lemasson, A.J., Pettit, L.R., Smith, R.K., and Sutherland, W.J. (2019) Subtidal Benthic Invertebrate Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions. Synopses of Conservation Evidence Series. University of Cambridge, 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 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, terrestrial 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 latest volume: Volume 17

Go to the CE Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

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