Study

Ecologically-active concrete for coastal and marine infrastructure: innovative matrices and designs

  • Published source details Perkol-Finkel S. & Sella I. (2014) Ecologically-active concrete for coastal and marine infrastructure: innovative matrices and designs. Pages 1139-1149 in: W. Allsop & K. Burgess (eds.) From Sea to Shore – Meeting the Challenges of the Sea: (Coasts, Marine Structures and Breakwaters 2013). ICE Publishing, London.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Create textured surfaces (≤1 mm) on 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
  1. Create textured surfaces (≤1 mm) on subtidal artificial structures

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study (year not reported) on open coastlines in the Mediterranean Sea and the Gulf of Aqaba, Israel (Perkol-Finkel & Sella 2014) found that upward-facing settlement plates with textured surfaces supported similar macroalgae and non-mobile invertebrate abundance but different community composition to downward-facing surfaces without texture. After 12 months, macroalgae and non-mobile invertebrate live cover was similar on upward-facing settlement plate surfaces with texture (81–100%) and downward-facing surfaces without (80–100%), but the community composition differed (data reported as statistical model results). Concrete settlement plates (150 × 150 mm) were moulded with textured surfaces on one side and flat on the other, using a formliner. Plates were either standard-concrete or one of five patented ECOncreteTM materials. Ten of each material were randomly arranged horizontally with textured surfaces facing upwards on frames at 6 m depth in the Mediterranean Sea and at 10 m in the Gulf of Aqaba (month/year not reported). Macroalgae and non-mobile invertebrates on plates were counted and biomass (dry weight) was recorded in the laboratory over 12 months.

    (Summarised by: Ally Evans)

  2. Use environmentally-sensitive material on subtidal artificial structures

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study (year not reported) on open coastlines in the Mediterranean Sea and the Gulf of Aqaba, Israel (Perkol-Finkel et al. 2014) found that settlement plates made from different concrete mixes (including five ECOncreteTM and one standard-concrete mix) supported different macroalgae and non-mobile invertebrate community composition, coral (Scleractinia, Alcyonacea) abundance and inorganic biomass, but similar organic biomass. Over 12 months, macroalgae and non-mobile invertebrate community composition differed on different concrete mixes (including five ECOncreteTM and one standard-concrete mix), but it was not clear which materials differed in which locations (data reported as statistical model results). The same was true for their abundance (ECOncreteTM: 81–100% cover; standard-concrete: 80–92%), inorganic biomass (ECOncreteTM: 153–659 g/m2; standard-concrete: 168–332 g/m2) and coral abundance (2–16 vs 3–5 recruits in total). Organic biomass was similar on ECOncreteTM (16–73 g/m2) and standard-concrete (30–79 g/m2). Settlement plates (150 × 150 mm) were moulded from six concrete mixes. Five were patented ECOncreteTM mixes with reduced pH (pH 9–11), reduced Portland-cement and alternative cements and additives (details not reported) while one was standard-concrete (pH 13–14, Portland cement). Plates had textured surfaces on one side and were flat on the other. Ten of each material were randomly arranged horizontally with textured surfaces facing upwards on frames at 6 m depth in the Mediterranean Sea and at 10 m in the Gulf of Aqaba (month/year not reported). Macroalgae and invertebrates on plates were counted and biomass (dry weight) was recorded in the laboratory over 12 months.

    (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