No‐take marine protected areas enhance the benefits of kelp‐forest restoration for fish but not fisheries

Hopf, Jess K.; Caselle, Jennifer E.; White, J. Wilson

doi:10.1111/ele.14023

Cited by 11 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results highlight the idea that MPAs have great potential for concurrent restoration of both predatory and foundation species. Results from recent modeling studies show promising results for kelp restoration within previously designated MPAs (Hopf et al, 2022). We suggest that that future implementation of MPAs should incorporate a larger ecosystem‐wide approach and explicitly consider the benefits for foundation species as well as the target species, which are typically of fisheries interest.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Harnessing trophic cascades to improve foundation species restoration: A meta‐analysis

Heineke,

Kimbro,

Zabin

et al. 2023

Ecosphere

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Global declines in foundation species and associated losses of biodiversity and ecosystem services have made restoration of foundation species and the habitats they create a top priority. Because restoration success has been highly variable, the field is increasingly using both experimentation and ecological theory to augment success. We conducted a meta‐analysis of studies (18) in estuarine and marine systems, which increased the abundance of top predators as a restoration approach, thus improving biogenic habitat‐forming foundation species recovery by reducing consumers. Beyond testing the general idea of whether top predator addition enhances foundation species restoration, we examined whether the degree of restoration success could be explained by classic predictors of top‐down strength, such as taxonomic identity of the foundation species and top predators, direct and indirect effects of top predators, and the latitude and duration of the study. Top predators successfully elicited a trophic cascade by decreasing consumer abundances (direct effect) and increasing foundation species recovery (indirect effect) when compared with control restoration projects without top predators. Direct effects are expected to be stronger than indirect effects, in accordance with classic ecological theory. We found no evidence of magnitude differences between direct and indirect effects of top predator addition. Increasing invertebrate top predators produced a 3.5× greater increase in the basal trophic level than adding vertebrate top predators. Despite the strong effect of predator type, the log response ratio of all foundation species types (algae, animal, and plant) increased 10‐fold in top predator addition treatments. We found diminishing effects of top predator addition as study duration increased, which supports recent developments that the positive effects of marine protected area designation decline over time. Our results highlight the promise of harnessing top‐down control via top predator addition as a mechanism to aid foundation species recovery.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Harnessing trophic cascades to improve foundation species restoration: A meta‐analysis

Heineke,

Kimbro,

Zabin

et al. 2023

Ecosphere

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Choosing MPAs as restoration sites could improve survival and kelp recruitment by affording increased protection from other local stressors (Cebrian et al., 2021). Additionally, restoration initiatives can yield more co‐benefits (e.g., enhanced fish stocks) in kelp forests within MPAs compared to those in unprotected areas (Hopf et al., 2022). Despite these benefits, the local‐based targets and inflexibility in adjusting boundaries that are embedded in many MPAs management plans can hamper the implementation of novel management strategies.…”

Section: Rethinking Kelp Protectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Marine protected areas can be useful but are not a silver bullet for kelp conservation

Filbee‐Dexter,

Starko,

Pessarrodona

et al. 2024

Journal of Phycology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Kelp forests are among the most valuable ecosystems on Earth, but they are increasingly being degraded and lost due to a range of human‐related stressors, leading to recent calls for their improved management and conservation. One of the primary tools to conserve marine species and biodiversity is the establishment of marine protected areas (MPAs). International commitments to protect 30% of the world's ecosystems are gaining momentum, offering a promising avenue to secure kelp forests into the Anthropocene. However, a clear understanding of the efficacy of MPAs for conserving kelp forests in a changing ocean is lacking. In this perspective, we question whether strengthened global protection will create meaningful conservation outcomes for kelp forests. We explore the benefits of MPAs for kelp conservation under a suite of different stressors, focusing on empirical evidence from protected kelp forests. We show that MPAs can be effective against some drivers of kelp loss (e.g., overgrazing, kelp harvesting), particularly when they are maintained in the long‐term and enforced as no‐take areas. There is also some evidence that MPAs can reduce impacts of climate change through building resilience in multi‐stressor situations. However, MPAs also often fail to provide protection against ocean warming, marine heatwaves, coastal darkening, and pollution, which have emerged as dominant drivers of kelp forest loss globally. Although well‐enforced MPAs should remain an important tool to protect kelp forests, successful kelp conservation will require implementing an additional suite of management solutions that target these accelerating threats.

show abstract

“…For example, network analysis methods and meta-population modelling tools developed for marine protected areas [18,20] are now being applied to identifying sites for restoration of specific coastal habitat types [6,8]. Protected area models are now also informing restoration guidelines for specific coastal habitats [21]. This parallel between fields suggest we should look to lessons from marine protected area modelling to address the issue of predicting recovery times in restoration ecology.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Speeding up the recovery of coastal habitats through management interventions that address constraints on dispersal and recruitment

Brown,

Campbell,

Collier

et al. 2024

Proc. R. Soc. B.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Plans for habitat restoration will benefit from predictions of timescales for recovery. Theoretical models have been a powerful tool for informing practical guidelines in planning marine protected areas, suggesting restoration planning could also benefit from a theoretical framework. We developed a model that can predict recovery times following restoration action, under dispersal, recruitment and connectivity constraints. We apply the model to a case study of seagrass restoration and find recovery times following restoration action can vary greatly, from <1 to >20 years. The model also shows how recovery can be accelerated when restoration actions are matched to the constraints on recovery. For example, spreading of propagules can be used when connectivity is the critical restriction. The recovery constraints we articulated mathematically also apply to the restoration of coral reefs, mangroves, saltmarsh, shellfish reefs and macroalgal forests, so our model provides a general framework for choosing restoration actions that accelerate coastal habitat recovery.

show abstract

No‐take marine protected areas enhance the benefits of kelp‐forest restoration for fish but not fisheries

Cited by 11 publications

References 55 publications

Harnessing trophic cascades to improve foundation species restoration: A meta‐analysis

Harnessing trophic cascades to improve foundation species restoration: A meta‐analysis

Marine protected areas can be useful but are not a silver bullet for kelp conservation

Speeding up the recovery of coastal habitats through management interventions that address constraints on dispersal and recruitment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About