2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.aquaculture.2018.08.046
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bivalve aquaculture and eelgrass: A global meta-analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
18
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 41 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 57 publications
1
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…3). This difference between aquaculture types is consistent with previous research that showed less impact of LL aquaculture on shoot density than OB culture, though both resulted in lower densities, and this difference was largely associated with mechanical harvest methods used in some OB culture areas (reviewed in Ferriss et al 2019). Although we did not survey the growers to determine the most recent harvest event or method, all 3 OB culture beds we studied were previously classed as mechanical harvest (B. R. Dumbauld pers.…”
Section: Habitat Structuresupporting
confidence: 90%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…3). This difference between aquaculture types is consistent with previous research that showed less impact of LL aquaculture on shoot density than OB culture, though both resulted in lower densities, and this difference was largely associated with mechanical harvest methods used in some OB culture areas (reviewed in Ferriss et al 2019). Although we did not survey the growers to determine the most recent harvest event or method, all 3 OB culture beds we studied were previously classed as mechanical harvest (B. R. Dumbauld pers.…”
Section: Habitat Structuresupporting
confidence: 90%
“…However, off-bottom culture is becoming increasingly popular due to regulatory constraints and market trends. This method can result in a higher-quality product for the half-shell market (Walton et al 2012) and has also been shown to reduce some impacts to eelgrass, as disturbance due to mechanical harvesting is reduced (Tallis et al 2009, Ferriss et al 2019. The ecological impacts of such practices, where cages, floats, rafts, lines, and supporting structures are also placed in the estuary, are less well-understood.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Bivalves may not be consistently facilitated because many live infaunally or create their own structure and are less dependent on aboveground structure than mobile species in the water column. Another prior metaanalysis found that density and demography of seagrasses were generally negatively affected by bivalve shellfish aquaculture (Ferriss et al 2019). Of 28 publications reviewed by Ferriss et al (2019), five included field experiments without aquaculture gear and in small planted plots, and these experiments also appear in the present review addressing bivalve effects on seagrass.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…Negatively affects seagrass meadows through scaring and smothering [20] Polygons of dredge fishing locations converted into raster [68] Dredging (anthropogenic) Negatively affects seagrass meadows through scaring and smothering [69] Polygons of European dredging activities converted into raster [70] Dumped Mat (anthropogenic) Negatively affects seagrass meadows through smothering [69] Polygons of dumping of dredge spoil material at sea converted into raster [71] Eco Status (anthropogenic) Negatively effects seagrass through increased nutrients [73] Point data of European shellfish aquaculture locations converted into raster [74] To evaluate the SDMs performance, we split each iteration of the 10-fold cross-validation into 80% training and 20% testing data as is common practice when independent test data are lacking [24]. We then averaged the resulting habitat suitability values and accuracy metrics across the 10 iterations.…”
Section: Layermentioning
confidence: 99%