Seagrasses provide multiple ecosystem services including nursery habitat, improved water quality, coastal protection, and carbon sequestration. However, seagrasses are in crisis as global coverage is declining at an accelerating rate. With increased focus on ecological restoration as a conservation strategy, methods that enhance restoration success need to be explored. Decades of work in coastal plant ecosystems, including seagrasses, has shown that positive species relationships and feedbacks are critical for ecosystem stability, expansion, and recovery from disturbance. We reviewed the restoration literature on seagrasses and found few studies have tested for the beneficial effects of including positive species interactions in seagrass restoration designs. Here we review the full suite of positive species interactions that have been documented in seagrass ecosystems, where they occur, and how they might be integrated into seagrass restoration. The few studies in marine plant communities that have explicitly incorporated positive species interactions and feedbacks have found an increase in plant growth with little additional resource investment. As oceans continue to change and stressors become more prevalent, harnessing positive interactions between species through innovative approaches will likely become key to successful seagrass restoration.

The effect of climate change on natural oyster recruitment has the potential to disrupt many of the ecosystem services oysters provide. Due to the temperature‐sensitivity of reproduction, oyster recruitment may shift as water temperatures rise. A biological imprint of climate change was revealed in a multi‐decadal time series of recruitment of non‐native Pacific oysters (Crassostrea gigas) in the main stem of Hood Canal, Washington, USA, extracted from historic fishery documents. Water in July and August warmed significantly from 1945 to 1995 (0.028 ± 0.004°C per year [±SE]) and accounted for an increase in Pacific oyster recruitment (7% per year, 0.028 ± 0.006 spat per year on log scale [±SE]); recruitment also strongly tracked inter‐annual variability in summer water temperature. Methods used to collect historical data were repeated in 2013–2015 when recruitment of both Pacific oysters and native Olympia oysters (Ostrea lurida) were recorded in main stem and lower Hood Canal. Both historic and modern data show large variation within and between years for temperature as well as recruitment. The modern data add information regarding spatial variation, in that recruitment patterns in the two regions of Hood Canal were decoupled. As temperatures continue to increase, non‐native Pacific oysters are likely to be favored over Olympia oysters, which recruit earlier at lower temperatures and presently contribute less than half of total oyster recruits. Future recruitment, however, may be limited by environmental factors other than temperature, a point indicated particularly in Hood Canal where many subtidal species already respond strongly to gradients in dissolved oxygen.

As efforts to restore coastal habitats accelerate, it is critical that investments are targeted to most effectively mitigate and reverse habitat loss and its impacts on biodiversity. One likely but largely overlooked impediment to effective restoration of habitat-forming organisms is failing to explicitly consider non-habitat-forming animals in restoration planning, implementation, and monitoring. These animals can greatly enhance or degrade ecosystem function, persistence, and resilience. Bivalves, for instance, can reduce sulfide stress in seagrass habitats and increase drought tolerance of saltmarsh vegetation, whereas megaherbivores can detrimentally overgraze seagrass or improve seagrass seed germination, depending on the context. Therefore, understanding when, why, and how to directly manipulate or support animals can enhance coastal restoration outcomes. In support of this expanded restoration approach, we provide a conceptual framework, incorporating lessons from structured decision-making, and describe potential actions that could lead to better restoration outcomes using case studies to illustrate practical approaches.

1. Both seagrasses and oysters are foundation species valued for their wide range of ecosystem services, but their space competition sets a constraint on joint benefits. A reserve for native Olympia oysters (Ostrea lurida) was established in lower Hood Canal (Washington State, USA) more than a century ago but is now devoid of that species and dominated by native eelgrass (Zostera marina). This situation sets up a conservation conflict because management activities for one species are at odds with the protection of another.2. In experimental enhancement plots, Olympia oysters were outplanted at low density, which successfully maintained eelgrass density and production. One method was used in 2013 (seeded cultch, 8% cover) and two additional methods in 2015 (anchored cultch and single oysters, the latter at 4% cover).3. For all outplant methods, oysters experienced 99% annual mortality, associated with the attraction of non-native and native predators. Shell cover remained steady for a year and then declined rapidly, as shell accumulation did not exceed sedimentation rates.4. Eelgrass per se does not preclude Olympia oysters, given that the two species were observed to co-occur at a coastal estuarine site (Willapa Bay, Washington). However, even when sociopolitical constraints on restoration activities were overcome, ecological constraints remained from predation. Competition between these two protected species was avoided, but it may be the case that top-down control on oysters was particularly acute owing to low oyster density and/or the environmental conditions of eelgrass beds.