Re-establishment of epibiotic communities in reforested mangroves of Gazi Bay, Kenya

  • Published source details Crona B.I., Holmgren S. & Rönnbäck P. (2006) Re-establishment of epibiotic communities in reforested mangroves of Gazi Bay, Kenya. Wetlands Ecology and Management, 14, 527-538.


This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Directly plant trees/shrubs: brackish/saline wetlands

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation
  1. Directly plant trees/shrubs: brackish/saline wetlands

    A site comparison study in 2002 of three mangrove forests in southeast Kenya (Crona et al. 2006) reported that planting non-native mangrove apple Sonneratia alba into degraded forest generally restored habitat structure, algal richness and algal biomass to near natural levels, but replanting clear-cut forest did not. Unless specified, statistical significance was not assessed. After eight years, sites where mangrove apple had been planted into degraded forest did not clearly differ from natural forests in terms of canopy cover (planted: 50–75%; natural: 50–75%), the basal area of aerial roots (planted: 0.4–0.6 m2 roots/m2 forest; natural: 0.3–0.6 m2 roots/m2 forest) and algal richness (planted: 23 taxa/5 m2; natural: 18 taxa/5 m2), and did not significantly differ in terms of algal biomass (planted; 962–4,519 g/m2; natural: 681–2,963 g/m2). In contrast, sites where mangrove apple had been planted after clear-cutting had 100% canopy cover, only 0.2 m2 of aerial roots/m2 forest, only 10 algal species and only 5–167 g/m2 of algal biomass. Both types of planted mangroves contained more aerial roots (degraded: 322–424/m2; clear-cut: 380–400/m2) than natural mangroves (174–280/m2). For data on the biomass of individual algal species, see original paper. Methods: In early 2002, three mangrove forests were surveyed: two planted with mangrove apple trees in 1994 (amongst remnant forest, or in a site clear-cut in the 1970s) and one natural (mature). Twenty 0.25-m2 quadrats were surveyed in each mangrove. Aerial roots were counted and measured. Algae were identified, collected, dried and weighed.

    (Summarised by: Nigel Taylor)

Output references
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