Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Limitations of habitats as biodiversity surrogates for conservation planning in estuaries

  • Published:
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Increasing pressures on global biodiversity and lack of data on the number and abundance of species have motivated conservation planners and researchers to use more readily available information as proxies or surrogates for biodiversity. “Habitat” is one of the most frequently used surrogates but its assumed value in marine conservation planning is not often tested. The present study developed and tested three alternative habitat classification schemes of increasing complexity for a large estuary in south-east Australia and tested their effectiveness in predicting spatial variation in macroinvertebrate biodiversity and selecting estuarine protected areas to represent species. The three habitat classification schemes were: (1) broad-scale habitats (e.g., mangroves and seagrass), (2) subdivision of each broad-scale habitat by a suite of environmental variables that varied significantly throughout the estuary, and (3) subdivision of each broad-scale habitat by the subset of environmental variables that best explained spatial variation in macroinvertebrate biodiversity. Macroinvertebrate assemblages differed significantly among the habitats in each classification scheme. For each classification scheme, habitat richness was significantly correlated with species richness, total density of macroinvertebrates, assemblage dissimilarity, and summed irreplaceability. However, in a reserve selection process designed to represent examples of each habitat, no habitat classification scheme represented species significantly better than a random selection of sites. Habitat classification schemes may represent variation in estuarine biodiversity; however, the results of this study suggest they are inefficient in designing representative networks of estuarine protected areas.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Al Bakri, D., & Kittaneh, W. (1998). Physicochemical characteristics and pollution indicators in the intertidal zone of Kuwait: implications for benthic ecology. Environmental Management, 22, 415–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al Bakri, D., Khuraibet, A., & Behbehani, M. (1997a). Quantitative assessment of the intertidal environment of Kuwait-I: integrated environmental classification. Journal of Environmental Management, 51, 321–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al Bakri, D., Khuraibet, A., & Behbehani, M. (1997b). Quantitative assessment of the intertidal environment of Kuwait II: controlling factors. Journal of Environmental Management, 51, 333–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Araújo, M. B., Humphries, C. J., Densham, P. J., Lampinen, R., Hagemeijer, W. J. M., Mitchell-Jones, A. J., & Gasc, J. P. (2001). Would environmental diversity be a good surrogate for species diversity? Ecography, 24, 103–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Archambault, P., & Bourget, E. (1996). Scales of coastal heterogeneity and benthic intertidal species richness, diversity and abundance. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 136, 111–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ardisson, P. L., & Bourget, E. (1997). A study of the relationship between freshwater runoff and benthos abundance: a scale-oriented approach. Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science, 45, 535–545.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Banks, S. A., Skilleter, G. A., & Possingham, H. P. (2005). Intertidal habitat conservation: identifying conservation targets in the absence of detailed biological information. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 15, 271–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beesley, P. L., Ross, G. J. B., & Wells, A. (1998). Mollusca: the southern synthesis. Fauna of Australia, vol 5. CD-ROM. Melbourne: CSIRO Publishing, part A xvi 563 pp. part B viii 565–1234.

  • Beesley, P.L., Ross, G. J. B., & Glasby, C. J. (2000). Polychaetes & allies: the southern synthesis. Fauna of Australia, vol 4A Polychaeta, Myzostomida, Pogonophora, Echiura, Sipuncula. CD-ROM. Melbourne: CSIRO Publishing, xii 465.

  • Beger, M., Jones, G. P., & Munday, P. L. (2003). Conservation of coral reef biodiversity: a comparison of reserve selection procedures for corals and fishes. Biological Conservation, 111, 53–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belbin, L. (1993). Environmental representativeness: regional partitioning and reserve selection. Biological Conservation, 66, 223–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benedetti-Cecchi, L., & Cinelli, F. (1996). Patterns of disturbance and recovery in littoral rock pools: nonhierarchical competition and spatial variability in secondary succession. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 135, 1616–1599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, T., da Fonseca, G. A. B., & Rodrigues, A. S. L. (2004). Species, data, and conservation planning. Conservation Biology, 18, 1682–1688.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, M. G. (2002). Patterns of spatial and temporal variation of macrofauna under boulders in a sheltered boulder field. Austral Ecology, 27, 211–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, M. G., & Underwood, A. J. (1996). Experiments on effects of sampling biota under intertidal and shallow subtidal boulders. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 207, 103–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, K. R. (1993). Non-parametric multivariate analyses of changes in community structure. Australian Journal of Ecology, 18, 117–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, K. R., & Ainsworth, M. (1993). A new method of linking multivariate community structure to environmental variables. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 92, 205–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, K. R., & Warwick, R. M. (1994). Changes in marine communities: an approach to statistical analysis and interpretation. UK: Plymouth Marine Laboratory.

  • Courtenay, G., Gladstone, W., & Schreider, M. (2005). Assessing the response of estuarine intertidal assemblages to urbanised catchment discharge. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 107, 375–398.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dauvin, J. C., Thiébaut, E., Gesteira, J. L. G., Ghertsos, K., Gentil, F., Ropert, M., & Sylvand, B. (2004). Spatial structure of a subtidal macrobenthic community in the Bay of Veys (western Bay of Seine, English Channel). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 307, 217–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeVantier, L. M., De'Ath, G., Done, T. J., & Turak, E. (1998). Ecological assessment of a complex natural system: a case study from the Great Barrier Reef. Ecological Applications, 8, 480–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edgar, G. J. (2000). Australian marine life: the plant and animals of temperate waters. Sydney, Reef New Holland.

  • Edgar, G. J., & Barrett, N. S. (2002). Benthic macrofauna in Tasmanian estuaries: scales of distribution and relationships with environmental variables. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 270, 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fairbanks, D. H. K., Reyers, B., & van Jaarsveld, A. S. (2001). Species and environment representation: selecting reserves for the retention of avian diversity in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Biological Conservation, 98, 356–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrier, S., & Watson, G. (1997). An evaluation of the effectiveness of environmental surrogates and modeling techniques in predicting the distribution of biological diversity. NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, Armidale.

  • Ferrier, S., Pressey, R. L., & Barrett, T. W. (2000). A new predictor of the irreplaceability of areas for achieving a conservation goal, its application to real-world planning, and a research agenda for further refinement. Biological Conservation, 93, 303–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gambi, M. C., & Dappiano, M. (2004). Mediterranean marine benthos: a manual of methods for its sampling and study. ICRAM, APAT, p. 604.

  • Gladstone, W. (2002). The potential value of indicator groups in the selection of marine reserves. Biological Conservation, 104, 211–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gladstone, W., & Alexander, T. (2005). A test of the higher-taxon approach in the identification of candidate sites for marine reserves. Biodiversity and Conservation, 14, 3151–3168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gladstone, W., & Owen, V. (2007). The potential value of surrogates for the selection and design of marine reserves for biodiversity and fisheries. In J. C. JC Day, J. Senior, S. Monk & W. Neal (Eds.), First International Marine Protected Areas Congress, IMPAC1 2005. Geelong, Victoria, Australia.

  • Gladstone, W., & Schreider, M. (2003). Effects of pruning a temperate mangrove forest on the associated assemblages of macroinvertebrates. Marine and Freshwater Research, 54, 683–690.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gosford City Council. (1995). Brisbane water plan of management. Gosford, NSW, Australia: Gosford City Council.

  • Heck, K. L., Able, K. W., Roman, C. T., & Fahay, M. P. (1995). Composition, abundance, biomass, and production of macrofauna in a New England estuary: comparisons among eelgrass meadows and other nursery habitats. Estuaries, 18, 379–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heip, C. H. R., Goosen, N. K., Herman, P. M. J., Kromkamp, J., Middelburg, J. J., & Soetaert, K. (1995). Production and consumption of biological particles in temperate tidal estuaries. Oceanography and Marine Biology Annual Review, 33, 1–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard, R. K., Edgar, G. J., & Hutchings, P. A. (1989). Faunal assemblages of seagrass beds. In A. W. D. Larkum, A. J. McComb, & S. A. Shepherd (Eds.), Biology of seagrasses: a treatise on the biology of seagrasses with special reference to the Australian region (pp. 536–564). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard, P. C., Viskanic, P., Davenport, T. R. B., Kigenyi, F. W., Baltzer, M., Dickinson, C. J., Lwanga, J. S., Matthews, R. A., & Balmford, A. (1998). Complementarity and the use of indicator groups for reserve selection in Uganda. Nature, 394, 472–475.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kirby, K. J. (1996). Conservation of habitats. In I. F. Spellerberg (Ed.), Conservation Biology. (pp. 242). Reading: Addison-Wesley.

  • Kirkpatrick, J. B., & Brown, M. J. (1994). A comparison of direct and environmental domain approaches to planning reservation of forest higher plant communities and species in Tasmania. Conservation Biology, 8, 217–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legendre, P., Thrush, S. F., Cummings, V. J., Dayton, P. K., Grant, J., Hewitt, J. E., Hines, A. H., McArdle, B. H., Pridmore, R. D., Schneider, D. C., Turner, S. J., Whitlatch, R. B., & Wilkinson, M. R. (1997). Spatial structure of bivalves in a sandflat: scale and generating processes. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 216, 99–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin, L. A., Gage, J. D., Martin, C., & Lamont, P. A. (2000). Macrobenthic community structure within and beneath the oxygen minimum zone, NW Arabian Sea. Deep Sea Research, 2, 189–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lombard, A. T., Cowling, R. M., Pressey, R. L., & Rebelod, A. G. (2003). Effectiveness of land classes as surrogates for species in conservation planning for the Cape Floristic Region. Biological Conservation, 112, 45–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magni, P., Como, S., Montani, S., & Tsutsumi, H. (2006). Interlinked temporal changes in environmental conditions, chemical characteristics of sediments and macrofaunal assemblages in an estuarine intertidal sandflat (Seto Inland Sea, Japan). Marine Biology, 149, 1185–1197.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Manly, B. F. J. (2002). Randomization, bootstrap and Monte Carlo methods in biology. London: Chapman and Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mannino, A., & Montagna, P. (1997). Small-scale spatial variation of macrobenthic community structure. Estuaries and Coasts, 20, 159–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrisey, D. J., Howitt, L., Underwood, A. J., & Stark, J. S. (1992). Spatial variation in soft-sediment benthos. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 81, 197–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noren, K., & Lindegarth, M. (2005). Spatial, temporal and interactive variability of infauna in Swedish coastal sediments. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 317, 53–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, I., Holmes, A., Dangerfield, M., Gillings, M., Pik, A. J., Britton, D. R., Holley, M., Montgomery, M. E., Raison, M., Logan, V., Pressey, R. L., & Beattiea, A. J. (2004). Land systems as surrogates for biodiversity in conservation planning. Ecological Applications, 14, 485–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ponder, W. F., Clark, S. A., & Dallwitz, M. J. (2000). Freshwater and estuarine molluscs: an interactive, illustrated key for New South Wales. CD-ROM. Melbourne: CSIRO Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poore, G. C. B. (2004). Marine decapod crustacea of southern Australia. A guide to identification. Melbourne: CSIRO Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, R. L. (1999). Applications of irreplaceability analysis to planning and management problems. Parks, 9, 42–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, R. L. (2004). Conservation planning and biodiversity: assembling the best data for the job. Conservation Biology, 18, 1677–1681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, R. L., & Nicholls, A. O. (1989). Efficiency in conservation evaluation; scoring versus iterative approaches. Biological Conservation, 50, 199–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, R. L., Humphries, C. J., Margules, C. R., Vane-Wright, R. I., & Williams, P. H. (1993). Beyond opportunism: key principles for systematic reserve selection. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 8, 121–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramey, P. A., & Snelgrove, P. V. R. (2003). Spatial patterns in sedimentary macrofaunal communities on the south coast of Newfoundland in relation to surface oceanography and sediment characteristics. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 262, 215–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reyers, B., Wessels, K. J., & van Jaarsaveld, A. S. (2002). An assessment of biodiversity surrogacy options in the Limpopo Province of South Africa. African Zoology, 37, 185–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roff, J. C., & Taylor, M. E. (2000). National frameworks for marine conservation—a hierarchical geophysical approach. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 10, 209–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sala, E., Aburto-Oropeza, O., Paredes, G., Parra, I., Barrera, J. C., & Dayton, P. K. (2002). A general model for designing networks of marine reserves. Science, 298, 1991–1993.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sarkar, S., Justus, J., Fuller, T., Kelley, C., Garson, J., & Mayfield, M. (2005). Effectiveness of environmental surrogates for the selection of conservation area networks. Conservation Biology, 19, 815–825.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlacher, T. A., Newell, P., Clavier, J., Schlacher-Hoenlinger, M. A., Chevillon, C., & Britton, J. (1998). Soft-sediment benthic community structure in a coral reef lagoon—the prominence of spatial heterogeneity and 'spot endemism'. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 174, 159–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sousa, R., Dias, S., & Antunes, J. C. (2006). Spatial subtidal macrobenthic distribution in relation to abiotic conditions in the Lima estuary, NW of Portugal. Hydrobiologia, 559, 135–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, T., & Connolly, R. M. (2004). Testing the utility of abiotic surrogates for marine habitat mapping at scales relevant to management. Biological Conservation, 119, 351–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valesini, F. J., Clarke, K. R., Eliot, I., & Potter, I. C. (2003). A user-friendly quantitative approach to classifying nearshore marine habitats along a heterogeneous coast. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 57, 163–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, T. J., Vanderklift, M. A., Nicholls, A. O., & Kenchington, R. A. (1999). Selecting marine reserves using habitats and species assemblages as surrogates for biological diversity. Ecological Applications, 9, 691–698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wessels, K. J., Freitag, S., & van Jaarsveld, A. S. (1999). The use of land facets as biodiversity surrogates during reserve selection at a local scale. Biological Conservation, 89, 21–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, R. S., Hutchings, P. A., & Glasby, C. J. (2003). Polychaetes: an interactive identification guide. CD-ROM. Melbourne: CSIRO Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ysebaert, T., & Herman, P. M. J. (2002). Spatial and temporal variation in benthic macrofauna and relationships with environmental variables in an estuarine, intertidal soft-sediment environment. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 244, 105–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by funding from the University of Newcastle and Gosford City Council. Thanks to Dr. P. Freewater at Gosford City Council. Thanks to K. O’Neill and G. Courtenay for their assistance in the field sampling and laboratory works. This project involved a large amount of species identification and this would not have been possible without the generous advice, teaching, and encouragement of Dr. P. Hutchings (Australian Museum). A large number of the species were checked for identification by Dr. Hutchings. The additional assistance at the Australian Museum provided by R. Springthorpe, I. Loch, W. Ponder, and A. Murray, was greatly appreciated. Thanks to two anonymous referees for critical review of an earlier version of this manuscript. The senior author was supported by an IPRS scholarship from the University of Newcastle. Macroinvertebrates were collected in compliance with permits issued by NSW Fisheries.

Author information

Author notes

  1. William Gladstone

    Present address: School of the Environment, University of Technology Sydney, Broadway, P.O. Box 123, Sydney, 2007, NSW, Australia

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle (Central Coast Campus), PO Box 127, Ourimbah, NSW, Australia, 2258

    Mohammad Reza Shokri & William Gladstone

  2. Faculty of Biological Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University, G.C., Evin, Tehran, 1983963113, Islamic Republic of Iran

    Mohammad Reza Shokri

Authors
  1. Mohammad Reza Shokri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. William Gladstone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohammad Reza Shokri.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shokri, M.R., Gladstone, W. Limitations of habitats as biodiversity surrogates for conservation planning in estuaries. Environ Monit Assess 185, 3477–3492 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-012-2804-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-012-2804-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation