A multiple habitat restoration strategy in a semi-enclosed Florida embayment, combining hydrologic restoration, mangrove propagule plantings and oyster substrate additions

Milbrandt, Eric C.; Thompson, Mary-Frances; Coen, Loren D.; Grizzle, Raymond E.; Ward, Krystin M.

doi:10.1016/j.ecoleng.2015.06.043

Cited by 31 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Space competition may also reduce seagrass growth and spread (Wagner et al, 2012). In contrast the cross‐habitat effects of bivalve reefs, especially oysters (Ostreidae) are primarily positive, as oyster reefs promote subtidal seagrass growth by filtering water and increasing light availability (Wall et al, 2008), and also allow meadow expansion by reducing wave attenuation (Milbrandt, Thompson, Coen, Grizzle, & Ward, 2015; Sharma et al, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Mangroves can facilitate epifaunal bivalves by providing substrate (prop roots; Aquino‐Thomas & Proffitt, 2014), while infaunal sulphide‐metabolizing bivalves improve mangrove growth by reducing sulphide stress (Lebata, 2001). Milbrandt et al (2015) showed that the simultaneous restoration of mangroves and oysters led to an increase in oyster and mangrove abundance, as well as higher invertebrate density on the oyster reef. A local seagrass meadow also expanded in size, likely due to the combined effects of filtration by oysters and substrate stabilization by mangroves.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is evidence that co‐restoring foundation species can facilitate the recovery of associated communities and support higher biodiversity, by increasing the availability of habitats and substrates of differing complexity (Borst et al, 2018). For example, oyster reefs near salt marshes and mangroves support higher densities of invertebrates and piscivorous fish, respectively, than reefs near mud flats (Grabowski et al, 2005; Milbrandt et al, 2015). Oysters on mangrove roots also enhance species diversity by providing additional substrate (Hughes, Gribben, Kimbro, & Bishop, 2014).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Facilitating foundation species: The potential for plant–bivalve interactions to improve habitat restoration success

Gagnon

Rinde

Bengil³

et al. 2020

Journal of Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vegetated marine and freshwater habitats are being increasingly lost around the world. Habitat restoration is a critical step for conserving these valuable habitats, but new approaches are needed to increase restoration success and ensure their survival. We investigated interactions between plants and bivalves through a review and analysis of 491 studies, determined the effects, mechanisms and key environmental variables involved in and driving positive and negative interactions, and produced guidelines for integrating positive interactions into restoration efforts in different habitats. Fifty per cent of all interactions (both correlative and experimental studies) were positive. These were predominant between epifaunal bivalves and plants in all habitats, and between infaunal bivalves and plants in subtidal habitats. Plants primarily promoted bivalve survival and abundance by providing substrate and shelter, while bivalves promoted plant growth and survival by stabilizing and fertilizing the sediment, and reducing water turbidity. The prevalence of positive interactions increased with water temperature in subtidal habitats, but decreased with water temperature in intertidal habitats. The subset of studies conducted in a restoration context also showed mostly positive interactions. Twenty‐five per cent of all interactions were negative, and these were predominant between plants and infaunal bivalves in intertidal habitats, except sulphide‐metabolizing bivalves, which facilitated plant survival. Interactions involving non‐native species were also mostly negative. Synthesis and applications. Promoting facilitative interactions through plant–bivalve co‐restoration can increase restoration success. The prevalence of positive interactions depends on habitat and environmental conditions such as temperature, and was especially important in subtidal habitats (involving both infaunal and epifaunal bivalves) and in intertidal habitats (involving only epifaunal bivalves). Thus sites and species for co‐restoration must be carefully chosen to maximize the chances of success. If done properly, co‐restoration could increase initial survival, persistence and resilience of foundation species, and promote the recovery of associated biodiversity and ecosystem services.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Facilitating foundation species: The potential for plant–bivalve interactions to improve habitat restoration success

Gagnon

Rinde

Bengil³

et al. 2020

Journal of Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…m -2 and 690 ind. m -2 , respectively) than those found in GTM (Milbrandt et al 2015). Nevertheless, we are confident that if other community members were included, it would not be surprising to observe our reef-scale filtration estimates increase substantially.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 56%

Beyond residence time: quantifying factors that drive the spatially explicit filtration services of a “pristine” oyster population

Gray

Pinton

Canestrelli

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Guana-Tolomato-Matanzas (GTM) system is a relatively pristine and well-flushed estuary in Northeastern Florida, USA and characterized as having an extraordinarily high abundance of oysters. Historically, dense populations of oysters, such as those found in GTM, are believed to play an important role in water filtration; however, few biofiltration studies have had access to such pristine populations. To quantify the filtration service (FS) of Eastern oysters (Crassostrea virginica) in GTM at several spatial scales (i.e. reef, watershed, estuary), we implemented a model that solves for the hydrodynamics and depletion of particulate matter passing over model oyster populations, the latter of which were derived from detailed bay-wide surveys. The model results suggested that oyster reefs populating the GTM play an important role in water quality by filtering ~60% of the estuary's volume within its residence time. Our approach teases apart the role of reef size, residence time, particle concentration, and other physical factors on the generation of FS at different spatial scales. Downstream effects were found to be very important for estuary FS, which depend on the spatial distribution of the reefs in the GTM and local and estuarine-scale hydrodynamics. Therefore, the difference between realized FS and the potential FS of a given reef may be substantial when considering the complex hydrodynamic and connectivity among populations at several scales. Our model results provide clear and actionable information for management of these oyster populations and conservation of their ecosystem services.

show abstract

“…A number of studies have focused on the effect of oyster reef declines and restoration effort on filtration rates. For example, an 80% decline in filtering capacity was found when comparing past and present situations in Chesapeake bay (Zu Ermgassen et al, 2013b) and restoration of reefs can help regain lost services (Coen and Luckenbach, 2000;Grizzle et al, 2008;Baggett et al, 2015;Milbrandt et al, 2015). Filtration rates for invasive versus native species were compared, where invasive mussels were more efficient than native species that occupied similar niche space (Galimany et al, 2017a), thereby outcompeting them (Ruesink et al, 2006).…”

Section: Coastal Health and Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecological Mechanisms Underpinning Ecosystem Service Bundles in Marine Environments – A Case Study for Shellfish

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The supply of ecosystem services (ES) that benefit humanity are derived from multiple, interacting ecological functions and processes. Focusing on the ecological mechanisms that underpin ES delivery allows bundles of services to be identified, bridging a critical gap with management. Work in marine systems has not yet progressed to the identification of ES bundles, as a result of data scarcity and complications arising from system complexity and connectivity, as opposed to terrestrial systems where ES bundles have been more widely applied based on spatial clustering. To demonstrate the approach, identification of ES bundles provided by shellfish is used as a case-study. Shellfish provide a number of known ES that need to be strategically managed to ensure sustainable use. As a result of global degradations in shellfish beds ES have been lost, and restoration efforts emphasize the importance in regaining these services. A literature review, including 146 papers aimed specifically at linking shellfish to either ecosystem functions or ES, was conducted to establish key linkages between processes, functions and services. Based on co-occurrence of services and shared linkages, four bundles of services are identified, including Marine resources, Coastal health and quality, Habitat modification, and Biological structuring. Our study emphasizes the underpinning ecological mechanisms and the importance of interactions between services, expressed in the formation of bundles by mutual drivers and processes, as well as between services in different bundles, as either synergies or trade-offs. The approach enables the translation of ecological knowledge and creates generality to inform policy making and management, thereby providing a format useful for ecologists, managers and other stakeholders.

show abstract

A multiple habitat restoration strategy in a semi-enclosed Florida embayment, combining hydrologic restoration, mangrove propagule plantings and oyster substrate additions

Cited by 31 publications

References 36 publications

Facilitating foundation species: The potential for plant–bivalve interactions to improve habitat restoration success

Facilitating foundation species: The potential for plant–bivalve interactions to improve habitat restoration success

Beyond residence time: quantifying factors that drive the spatially explicit filtration services of a “pristine” oyster population

Ecological Mechanisms Underpinning Ecosystem Service Bundles in Marine Environments – A Case Study for Shellfish

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About