Residency and movement patterns of yellowfin bream (Acanthopagrus australis) released at natural and artificial reef sites

Abstract

The present study investigated the long-term (>2 years) site fidelity, residency and movement patterns of Acanthopagrus australis (Sparidae) at artificial (AR) and natural reef (NR) sites. Acoustic telemetry was used to assess movement patterns of 39 fish released at NR and AR locations and other habitat types within the study area. Detection periods ranged from 1 day to a maximum of 912 days, with 36% of fish detected by the array for >1 year and a further 7% detected for >2 years. Results indicate that tagged fish tended to remain associated with the release site; however, AR fish were detected for considerably longer periods with greater numbers of fish identified as resident within the AR system. AR-released fish were also identified more frequently across the entire array, with the majority (90%) of detections between receiver stations located within the AR system. Results were affected by short detection periods (<6 days) of a relatively high proportion of fish released at the NR, possibly indicating differential rates of fishing mortality between locations. Longer range movements of >200km were also detected, but there was no obvious trend with release location. The results of the present study indicate interactions between existing and introduced artificial habitat are more complex than a ‘draw-down’ effect and provide further evidence that AR systems provide suitable habitat for a variety of species, as well as further support for the use of AR systems in fisheries enhancement initiatives. The results also have important implications for understanding the effect of AR systems and indicate that the size of the reef system may be an important factor in controlling for levels of fishing-related mortality.

Where technology meets ecology: acoustic telemetry in contemporary Australian aquatic research and management

“…In a multispecies study, Keller et al (2017) show that artificial reefs with these design features may have a positive effect on fidelity to the structure, with tagged animals showing a greater affinity to the artificial reef than adjacent natural reefs that lacked vertical relief. Similar patterns were observed for an estuarine artificial reef by Lowry et al (2017), and both these studies show clear patterns that reflect the importance of these reefs in mediating connectivity and dispersal. Much remains to be learned about the importance of individual behaviours in relation to isolated structures, whether they be artificial or natural, as seen in the fidelity of herbivorous grey drummer (Kyphosus bigibbus, Pillans et al 2017) to adjacent patch reefs and the differences in foraging patterns exhibited by fish from these reefs.…”

“…For example, tags deployed to study the movement patterns of fish associated with both estuarine (e.g. yellowfin bream, Acanthopagrus australis; Lowry et al 2017) and offshore (e.g. Port Jackson shark, Heterodontus portusjacksoni; Keller et al 2017) artificial reefs were detected on separate arrays owned by other projects deployed hundreds of kilometres away in far south-eastern Australia.…”

Climate change does not affect the seafood quality of a commonly targeted fish

“…Although the increase in temperature simulated here was above that usually experienced by yellowfin bream in the open ocean in the region where the experiment was completed (and where these fish were collected), it is well within the thermal range of the species (Curley et al, ) and within the range that can be experienced within individual estuaries. Moreover, acoustically tagged yellowfin bream from nearby areas have been known to migrate up to 250 km, including between estuarine and inshore open coastal habitats (Lowry, Becker, Folpp, Mcleod, & Taylor, ). Thus, a 3°C temperature increase is likely well within the range yellowfin bream can tolerate more broadly and suggests that near‐future climate change may have negligible direct impacts on this widely distributed species, except perhaps near its low latitude limit.…”

“…Although the increase in temperature simulated here was above that usually experienced by yellowfin bream in the open ocean in the region where the experiment was completed (and where these fish were collected), it is well within the thermal range of the species (Curley et al, 2013) and within the range that can be experienced within individual estuaries. Moreover, acoustically tagged yellowfin bream from nearby areas have been known to migrate up to 250 km, including between estuarine and inshore open coastal habitats (Lowry, Becker, Folpp, Mcleod, & Taylor, 2017).…”

Managing the development of artificial reef systems: The need for quantitative goals

“…Beets & Hixon, ; Hackradt, Felix‐Hackradt, & Garcia‐Charton, ; Reed, Schroeter, Huang, Anderson, & Ambrose, ), deployment locations (Fernandez, D'Anna, Badalamenti, & Perez‐Ruzafa, ) and reef arrangement (dos Santos, Brotto, & Zalmon, ). Artificial reef science has contributed to improvements in how reefs are used in natural systems over decadal timescales (Relini, Relini, Torchia, & Palandri, ; dos Santos & Zalmon, ) and also led to concomitant improvements to our knowledge of fundamental ecological processes, including production and trophic interactions (Cresson, Ruitton, & Harmelin‐Vivien, ), movement and migration (Abecasis, Bentes, Lino, Santos, & Erzini, ; Lowry, Becker, Folpp, McLeod, & Taylor, ) and predation and mortality (e.g. Grati, Scarcella, Bolognini, & Fabi, ; Leitão, Santos, Erzini, & Monteiro, ).…”