Study

Conservation challenges in urban seascapes: promoting the growth of threatened species on coastal infrastructures

  • Published source details Perkol-Finkel S., Ferrario F., Nicotera V. & Airoldi L. (2012) Conservation challenges in urban seascapes: promoting the growth of threatened species on coastal infrastructures. Journal of Applied Ecology, 49, 1457-1466.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Create natural rocky reef topography on subtidal artificial structures

Action Link
Biodiversity of Marine Artificial Structures

Transplant or seed organisms onto subtidal artificial structures

Action Link
Biodiversity of Marine Artificial Structures

Use environmentally-sensitive material on subtidal artificial structures

Action Link
Biodiversity of Marine Artificial Structures

Transplant or seed organisms onto subtidal artificial structures

Action Link
Biodiversity of Marine Artificial Structures

Transplant or seed organisms onto subtidal artificial structures

Action Link
Biodiversity of Marine Artificial Structures

Transplant or seed organisms onto subtidal artificial structures

Action Link
Biodiversity of Marine Artificial Structures
  1. Create natural rocky reef topography on subtidal artificial structures

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2009 on a subtidal rocky reef on open coastline in the Adriatic Sea, Italy (Perkol-Finkel et al. 2012) found that creating natural rocky reef topography on settlement plates did not increase the abundance of juvenile canopy algae Cystoseira barbata that settled onto plates. After five months, there was no significant difference in the average abundance of juveniles on settlement plates with natural rocky reef topography (deep topography: 23/plate; shallow: 28/plate) and plates without (19/plate). Clay settlement plates (100 × 100 mm) were made with and without natural rocky reef topography imprinted on their surfaces using pieces of natural rock as the clay set. Six plates with each of deep (imprinted 5 mm deep) and shallow (1–2 mm) topography and six plates without were randomly arranged horizontally at 3 m depth on a rocky reef with existing adult canopy algae in March 2009. Juvenile canopy algae on plates were counted after five months.

    (Summarised by: Ally Evans)

  2. Transplant or seed organisms onto subtidal artificial structures

    A replicated study in 2008–2009 on four subtidal breakwaters on open coastline in the Adriatic Sea, Italy (Perkol-Finkel et al. 2012a) reported that 0–33% of canopy algae Cystoseira barbata transplanted onto the breakwaters survived, depending on the wave-exposure and surrounding habitat, and that survivors grew. Data were not statistically tested. After one week, no transplanted canopy algae survived on breakwaters on sandy shorelines. On rocky shorelines, after eight months, average survival was 33% on wave-sheltered sides of breakwaters and 9% on wave-exposed sides. Survival was 3–44% on horizontal surfaces and 9–27% on vertical surfaces. On average, wave-sheltered transplants grew to 120 mm and wave-exposed transplants to 90 mm. Average length was 130 mm on horizontal and 60 mm on vertical surfaces. Some transplants survived 12 months and appeared to reproduce (no data reported). Boulders with attached juvenile canopy algae (50 mm length) were collected from natural reefs, fragmented and transplanted onto boulder breakwaters using epoxy putty. Fragments were attached in 12 patches, with five individuals/patch, on both the wave-sheltered and wave-exposed sides of each of four breakwaters in June 2008 (depth not reported). Of the 12 patches in each setting, four were on each of: horizontal surfaces with adult canopy algae, horizontal surfaces without, and vertical surfaces without. Two of the breakwaters were on rocky shorelines and two were on sandy shorelines. Transplants were monitored over eight months.

    (Summarised by: Ally Evans)

  3. Use environmentally-sensitive material on subtidal artificial structures

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2009 on a subtidal rocky reef on open coastline in the Adriatic Sea, Italy (Perkol-Finkel et al. 2012) found that limestone, clay and concrete settlement plates supported similar numbers of juvenile canopy algae Cystoseira barbata. After three months, there was no significant difference in the average number of canopy algae recruits on limestone (25/plate), clay (29/plate) and concrete (12/plate) settlement plates. Six settlement plates (100 × 100 mm) of each of three materials (limestone, clay, concrete) were randomly arranged horizontally on a rocky reef at 3 m depth in March 2009. Recruits of juvenile canopy algae settled onto plates were counted after three months.

    (Summarised by: Ally Evans)

  4. Transplant or seed organisms onto subtidal artificial structures

    A replicated study in 2009 on two subtidal breakwaters on open coastline in the Adriatic Sea, Italy (Perkol-Finkel et al. 2012b) reported that juvenile canopy algae Cystoseira barbata transplanted onto breakwaters did not survive. After three days, no transplants remained on either breakwater. Boulders (100 mm diameter) with attached juvenile canopy algae were collected from a natural reef and transplanted onto boulder breakwaters using epoxy putty. Four boulders with canopy algae (numbers not reported) were attached on horizontal surfaces on the wave-sheltered side of each of two breakwaters on sandy shoreline in June 2009 (depth not reported). Transplants were monitored over three days.

    (Summarised by: Ally Evans)

  5. Transplant or seed organisms onto subtidal artificial structures

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2009 on two subtidal breakwaters on open coastline in the Adriatic Sea, Italy (Perkol-Finkel et al. 2012c) reported that juvenile canopy algae Cystoseira barbata transplanted onto breakwaters did not survive, regardless of whether they were transplanted under cages or left uncaged. After two days, no transplants remained on either breakwater. Boulders (100 mm diameter) with attached juvenile canopy algae were collected from a natural reef and transplanted onto boulder breakwaters using epoxy putty. Eight boulders with canopy algae were attached on horizontal surfaces on the wave-sheltered side of each of two breakwaters on sandy shoreline in June 2009 (depth not reported). Four randomly-selected boulders on each breakwater were protected from grazers by plastic cages (10 mm mesh size) and four were left uncaged. Transplants were monitored over two days.

    (Summarised by: Ally Evans)

  6. Transplant or seed organisms onto subtidal artificial structures

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2009 on two subtidal breakwaters on open coastline in the Adriatic Sea, Italy (Perkol-Finkel et al. 2012d) reported that 50–100% of juvenile canopy algae Cystoseira barbata transplanted onto the breakwaters survived, and found that survival and cover was higher when algae was transplanted under cages than when left uncaged. After eight days, average survival and remaining cover of transplanted canopy algae was higher under cages (100% survival, 88% of original cover) compared with uncaged transplants (50% survival, 24% cover). Limestone settlement plates (100 × 100 mm) were attached to rocky seabed at 3 m depth in March 2009 and were colonized by juvenile canopy algae. In June 2009, plates were removed and transplanted onto boulder breakwaters using epoxy putty. Eight plates were attached on horizontal surfaces on the wave-sheltered side of each of two breakwaters on sandy shoreline (depth not reported). Four randomly-selected plates on each breakwater were protected from grazers by plastic cages (1 mm mesh size) and four were left uncaged. Transplants were monitored over eight days.

    (Summarised by: Ally Evans)

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