Consequently, there has been significant effort to increase biodiversity and habitat availability via eco-engineering ( Firth et al., 2014 Strain et al., 2017 O’Shaughnessy et al., 2019), where habitat is integrated into ACSs ( Bergen et al., 2001 Mitsch and Jorgensen, 2003 Odum and Odum, 2003). It is known that ACSs are not analogous habitats to natural intertidal reefs in terms of habitat availability and topographical complexity ( Moschella et al., 2005 Chapman and Underwood, 2011 Aguilera et al., 2014) as well as community structure, species richness and biodiversity ( Connell and Glasby, 1999 Chapman, 2003 Moschella et al., 2005 McKinney, 2006 Glasby et al., 2007 Vaselli et al., 2008 Pister, 2009). ACSs can physically reduce soft-sediment habitat from their construction footprint ( Bugnot et al., 2021) and may also contribute to the alteration of natural dynamic soft-bottomed and hydrological processes ( Dugan et al., 2018) and the subsequent impacts on benthic species diversity and community structure ( Martin et al., 2005 Heery et al., 2017 Critchley and Bishop, 2019). Providing sediment-retentive features on ACSs has the potential to provide a novel eco-engineering option that may be appropriate for some heavily modified waterbodies on sheltered, depositional coasts.Ĭoastal squeeze threatens developed coasts with habitat loss as the intertidal area is reduced and steepened between a fixed high tide mark on artificial coastal structures (ACSs) and sea level rise ( Doody, 2004 Schleupner, 2008 Pontee, 2011), which is predicted to significantly decrease biodiversity within coastal regions ( Hawkins, 2012 Hawkins et al., 2016). This study demonstrates that retained sediment within eco-engineered features on hard ACSs can create habitat for benthic assemblages. Although the rockpools were placed at higher tidal levels than the lower shore mudflat, their assemblage structure and species richness were more similar to the lower shore mudflat at the base of the sheet piling than the upper shore mudflat. More benthic species were observed in the artificial rockpool than in the local mudflats. To explore how analogous the faunal assemblages and sediment profile of rockpool mud were to two local mudflats, core samples were taken and analysed for species richness, abundance, biomass, assemblage structure, median grain size, and organic matter content. As ecological enhancement of a flood defence scheme, nine concrete retrofit rockpools were installed at three different tidal elevations between mean high water neap tide and mean tide level on steel sheet piling on the Arun Estuary in Littlehampton Harbour, United Kingdom, which naturally filled with mud 1 year after installation. Yet, it is soft sediment habitat that is impacted the most through coastal construction. When sediment retention in these features has occurred, it has often been deemed detrimental to the overarching aim of the intervention. On seawalls and breakwaters, this has included the creation of habitats for benthic species found on natural rocky shores, including the provision of cracks, crevices and water retaining features, such as artificial rockpools. Consequently, there has been significant research effort to enhance these hard structures to increase biodiversity and habitat availability via eco-engineering. 3Artecology Ltd., Isle of Wight, United KingdomĪrtificial coastal structures (ACSs) are primarily designed to provide services for human use, such as flood defence or shipping, and are generally poor for marine biodiversity.2School of Biological and Marine Sciences, Faculty of Science and Engineering, University of Plymouth, Devon, United Kingdom.1Department of Life and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science and Technology, Bournemouth University, Poole, United Kingdom.
Hall 1,2, Ian Boyd 3, Nigel George 3 and Roger J.
0 kommentar(er)
