Loading…

The effects of marine reserve protection on the trophic relationships of reef fishes on the Great Barrier Reef

What are the effects of no-take marine reserves on trophic relationships of coral reef fish? Previous studies often have lacked detailed dietary information on major predators, and have often been confounded by differences in habitat complexity between reserve and fished sites. This study investigat...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Environmental conservation 2003-06, Vol.30 (2), p.200-208
Main Authors: Graham, N.A.J., Evans, R.D., Russ, G.R.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c595t-9bd7c6a8e243024175cf4d89da958c6a2597c607b37041a2c641b069429c5c133
cites
container_end_page 208
container_issue 2
container_start_page 200
container_title Environmental conservation
container_volume 30
creator Graham, N.A.J.
Evans, R.D.
Russ, G.R.
description What are the effects of no-take marine reserves on trophic relationships of coral reef fish? Previous studies often have lacked detailed dietary information on major predators, and have often been confounded by differences in habitat complexity between reserve and fished sites. This study investigates the effects of marine reserve protection on predator-prey interactions of coral reef fish on the inshore islands of the Great Barrier Reef (GBR). The abundance of species of prey fish of Plectropomus leopardus (Serranidae), a piscivore and the major target of the hook and line fisheries on the GBR, were estimated in protected and fished zones. These prey species were identified from previous detailed studies of the diet of P. leopardus. Fish populations and habitat characteristics were surveyed by underwater visual census. Previous studies had determined that the biomass of P. leopardus was 3–4 times higher in protected than fished zones in the Whitsunday and Palm Islands, central GBR, after 14 years of protection. Eight of the nine prey species had a higher density within fished zones than protected zones, six significantly so. The density of all prey fish was twice that in the fished than the protected zone (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in availability of different sized refuge holes, structural complexity or live coral cover between zones. Thus, important attributes of habitat complexity did not confound the comparisons between reserve and fished zones. Finally, a significant negative correlation (r = 0.46) between coral trout biomass and summed prey fish biomass suggested that predation may be an important structuring process in this system. The results have implications for the conservation of fishery targets and their prey. The study highlights the potential ecosystem implications of the use of no-take marine reserves as conservation and fisheries management tools.
doi_str_mv 10.1017/S0376892903000195
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_743514205</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S0376892903000195</cupid><jstor_id>44520674</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>44520674</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c595t-9bd7c6a8e243024175cf4d89da958c6a2597c607b37041a2c641b069429c5c133</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqF0V2LEzEUBuAgCtbqD_BCCIJ6NZrvTC51dauyIK4reBfS9IxNnc7UJBX9956xdRcUXQgE8j4n5OQQcp-zp5xx--wDk9a0TjgmGWPc6RtkxpVxjZKtvUlmU9xM-W1yp5QNGqNtOyPDxRoodB3EWujY0W3IaQCaoUD-BnSXx4pRGgeKq6KtedytU0TRh-m8rNPuV2UG6GiXyhrKb7vIECp9EXJOkOk5grvkVhf6AveO-5x8PH11cfK6OXu3eHPy_KyJ2unauOXKRhNaEEoyobjVsVOr1q2C0y0GQjvMmV1KyxQPIhrFl8w4JVzUkUs5J08O92IDX_dQqt-mEqHvwwDjvnirpOZKMI3y8X-l4Io7Z66HqIRombkeKmMQcoQP_4CbcZ8H_BcvmOTWcdzmhB9QzGMpGTq_ywmn9MNz5qfR-79GjzWPjheHEkPf5TDEVK4KlbMO20f34OA2pY75MldKC2bslDeHPJUK3y_zkL94Y6XV3ize-5etPn177j75BXp5fGvYLnNafYarjv792p8pStO3</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>203179120</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The effects of marine reserve protection on the trophic relationships of reef fishes on the Great Barrier Reef</title><source>Cambridge Journals Online</source><source>JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection</source><creator>Graham, N.A.J. ; Evans, R.D. ; Russ, G.R.</creator><creatorcontrib>Graham, N.A.J. ; Evans, R.D. ; Russ, G.R.</creatorcontrib><description>What are the effects of no-take marine reserves on trophic relationships of coral reef fish? Previous studies often have lacked detailed dietary information on major predators, and have often been confounded by differences in habitat complexity between reserve and fished sites. This study investigates the effects of marine reserve protection on predator-prey interactions of coral reef fish on the inshore islands of the Great Barrier Reef (GBR). The abundance of species of prey fish of Plectropomus leopardus (Serranidae), a piscivore and the major target of the hook and line fisheries on the GBR, were estimated in protected and fished zones. These prey species were identified from previous detailed studies of the diet of P. leopardus. Fish populations and habitat characteristics were surveyed by underwater visual census. Previous studies had determined that the biomass of P. leopardus was 3–4 times higher in protected than fished zones in the Whitsunday and Palm Islands, central GBR, after 14 years of protection. Eight of the nine prey species had a higher density within fished zones than protected zones, six significantly so. The density of all prey fish was twice that in the fished than the protected zone (p &lt; 0.001). There were no significant differences in availability of different sized refuge holes, structural complexity or live coral cover between zones. Thus, important attributes of habitat complexity did not confound the comparisons between reserve and fished zones. Finally, a significant negative correlation (r = 0.46) between coral trout biomass and summed prey fish biomass suggested that predation may be an important structuring process in this system. The results have implications for the conservation of fishery targets and their prey. The study highlights the potential ecosystem implications of the use of no-take marine reserves as conservation and fisheries management tools.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0376-8929</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1469-4387</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S0376892903000195</identifier><identifier>CODEN: EVCNA4</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology ; Applied ecology ; Archipelagos ; Biological and medical sciences ; Biomass ; Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife ; coral reef fishes ; Coral reefs ; Corals ; Fish populations ; Fisheries ; Fisheries management ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; General aspects ; Great Barrier Reef ; habitat structure ; Habitats ; Islands ; Management tools ; Marine ; Marine ecosystems ; Marine fishes ; no-take marine reserves ; Ocean fisheries ; Pisces ; Plectropomus leopardus ; Predation ; Predator-prey interactions ; predator-prey relationships ; Predators ; Prey ; Reefs ; Serranidae ; Trophic relationships ; Trout</subject><ispartof>Environmental conservation, 2003-06, Vol.30 (2), p.200-208</ispartof><rights>2003 Foundation for Environmental Conservation</rights><rights>Foundation for Environmental Conservation 2003</rights><rights>2003 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c595t-9bd7c6a8e243024175cf4d89da958c6a2597c607b37041a2c641b069429c5c133</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/44520674$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0376892903000195/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,58238,58471,72832</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=14979514$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Graham, N.A.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Evans, R.D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Russ, G.R.</creatorcontrib><title>The effects of marine reserve protection on the trophic relationships of reef fishes on the Great Barrier Reef</title><title>Environmental conservation</title><addtitle>Envir. Conserv</addtitle><description>What are the effects of no-take marine reserves on trophic relationships of coral reef fish? Previous studies often have lacked detailed dietary information on major predators, and have often been confounded by differences in habitat complexity between reserve and fished sites. This study investigates the effects of marine reserve protection on predator-prey interactions of coral reef fish on the inshore islands of the Great Barrier Reef (GBR). The abundance of species of prey fish of Plectropomus leopardus (Serranidae), a piscivore and the major target of the hook and line fisheries on the GBR, were estimated in protected and fished zones. These prey species were identified from previous detailed studies of the diet of P. leopardus. Fish populations and habitat characteristics were surveyed by underwater visual census. Previous studies had determined that the biomass of P. leopardus was 3–4 times higher in protected than fished zones in the Whitsunday and Palm Islands, central GBR, after 14 years of protection. Eight of the nine prey species had a higher density within fished zones than protected zones, six significantly so. The density of all prey fish was twice that in the fished than the protected zone (p &lt; 0.001). There were no significant differences in availability of different sized refuge holes, structural complexity or live coral cover between zones. Thus, important attributes of habitat complexity did not confound the comparisons between reserve and fished zones. Finally, a significant negative correlation (r = 0.46) between coral trout biomass and summed prey fish biomass suggested that predation may be an important structuring process in this system. The results have implications for the conservation of fishery targets and their prey. The study highlights the potential ecosystem implications of the use of no-take marine reserves as conservation and fisheries management tools.</description><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</subject><subject>Applied ecology</subject><subject>Archipelagos</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Biomass</subject><subject>Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife</subject><subject>coral reef fishes</subject><subject>Coral reefs</subject><subject>Corals</subject><subject>Fish populations</subject><subject>Fisheries</subject><subject>Fisheries management</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>General aspects</subject><subject>Great Barrier Reef</subject><subject>habitat structure</subject><subject>Habitats</subject><subject>Islands</subject><subject>Management tools</subject><subject>Marine</subject><subject>Marine ecosystems</subject><subject>Marine fishes</subject><subject>no-take marine reserves</subject><subject>Ocean fisheries</subject><subject>Pisces</subject><subject>Plectropomus leopardus</subject><subject>Predation</subject><subject>Predator-prey interactions</subject><subject>predator-prey relationships</subject><subject>Predators</subject><subject>Prey</subject><subject>Reefs</subject><subject>Serranidae</subject><subject>Trophic relationships</subject><subject>Trout</subject><issn>0376-8929</issn><issn>1469-4387</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2003</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqF0V2LEzEUBuAgCtbqD_BCCIJ6NZrvTC51dauyIK4reBfS9IxNnc7UJBX9956xdRcUXQgE8j4n5OQQcp-zp5xx--wDk9a0TjgmGWPc6RtkxpVxjZKtvUlmU9xM-W1yp5QNGqNtOyPDxRoodB3EWujY0W3IaQCaoUD-BnSXx4pRGgeKq6KtedytU0TRh-m8rNPuV2UG6GiXyhrKb7vIECp9EXJOkOk5grvkVhf6AveO-5x8PH11cfK6OXu3eHPy_KyJ2unauOXKRhNaEEoyobjVsVOr1q2C0y0GQjvMmV1KyxQPIhrFl8w4JVzUkUs5J08O92IDX_dQqt-mEqHvwwDjvnirpOZKMI3y8X-l4Io7Z66HqIRombkeKmMQcoQP_4CbcZ8H_BcvmOTWcdzmhB9QzGMpGTq_ywmn9MNz5qfR-79GjzWPjheHEkPf5TDEVK4KlbMO20f34OA2pY75MldKC2bslDeHPJUK3y_zkL94Y6XV3ize-5etPn177j75BXp5fGvYLnNafYarjv792p8pStO3</recordid><startdate>20030601</startdate><enddate>20030601</enddate><creator>Graham, N.A.J.</creator><creator>Evans, R.D.</creator><creator>Russ, G.R.</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><general>CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>7TV</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H95</scope><scope>H97</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>KR7</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20030601</creationdate><title>The effects of marine reserve protection on the trophic relationships of reef fishes on the Great Barrier Reef</title><author>Graham, N.A.J. ; Evans, R.D. ; Russ, G.R.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c595t-9bd7c6a8e243024175cf4d89da958c6a2597c607b37041a2c641b069429c5c133</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2003</creationdate><topic>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</topic><topic>Applied ecology</topic><topic>Archipelagos</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Biomass</topic><topic>Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife</topic><topic>coral reef fishes</topic><topic>Coral reefs</topic><topic>Corals</topic><topic>Fish populations</topic><topic>Fisheries</topic><topic>Fisheries management</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>General aspects</topic><topic>Great Barrier Reef</topic><topic>habitat structure</topic><topic>Habitats</topic><topic>Islands</topic><topic>Management tools</topic><topic>Marine</topic><topic>Marine ecosystems</topic><topic>Marine fishes</topic><topic>no-take marine reserves</topic><topic>Ocean fisheries</topic><topic>Pisces</topic><topic>Plectropomus leopardus</topic><topic>Predation</topic><topic>Predator-prey interactions</topic><topic>predator-prey relationships</topic><topic>Predators</topic><topic>Prey</topic><topic>Reefs</topic><topic>Serranidae</topic><topic>Trophic relationships</topic><topic>Trout</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Graham, N.A.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Evans, R.D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Russ, G.R.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>Pollution Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 1: Biological Sciences &amp; Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution &amp; Environmental Quality</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Environmental conservation</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Graham, N.A.J.</au><au>Evans, R.D.</au><au>Russ, G.R.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The effects of marine reserve protection on the trophic relationships of reef fishes on the Great Barrier Reef</atitle><jtitle>Environmental conservation</jtitle><addtitle>Envir. Conserv</addtitle><date>2003-06-01</date><risdate>2003</risdate><volume>30</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>200</spage><epage>208</epage><pages>200-208</pages><issn>0376-8929</issn><eissn>1469-4387</eissn><coden>EVCNA4</coden><abstract>What are the effects of no-take marine reserves on trophic relationships of coral reef fish? Previous studies often have lacked detailed dietary information on major predators, and have often been confounded by differences in habitat complexity between reserve and fished sites. This study investigates the effects of marine reserve protection on predator-prey interactions of coral reef fish on the inshore islands of the Great Barrier Reef (GBR). The abundance of species of prey fish of Plectropomus leopardus (Serranidae), a piscivore and the major target of the hook and line fisheries on the GBR, were estimated in protected and fished zones. These prey species were identified from previous detailed studies of the diet of P. leopardus. Fish populations and habitat characteristics were surveyed by underwater visual census. Previous studies had determined that the biomass of P. leopardus was 3–4 times higher in protected than fished zones in the Whitsunday and Palm Islands, central GBR, after 14 years of protection. Eight of the nine prey species had a higher density within fished zones than protected zones, six significantly so. The density of all prey fish was twice that in the fished than the protected zone (p &lt; 0.001). There were no significant differences in availability of different sized refuge holes, structural complexity or live coral cover between zones. Thus, important attributes of habitat complexity did not confound the comparisons between reserve and fished zones. Finally, a significant negative correlation (r = 0.46) between coral trout biomass and summed prey fish biomass suggested that predation may be an important structuring process in this system. The results have implications for the conservation of fishery targets and their prey. The study highlights the potential ecosystem implications of the use of no-take marine reserves as conservation and fisheries management tools.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/S0376892903000195</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0376-8929
ispartof Environmental conservation, 2003-06, Vol.30 (2), p.200-208
issn 0376-8929
1469-4387
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_743514205
source Cambridge Journals Online; JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection
subjects Animal, plant and microbial ecology
Applied ecology
Archipelagos
Biological and medical sciences
Biomass
Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife
coral reef fishes
Coral reefs
Corals
Fish populations
Fisheries
Fisheries management
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
General aspects
Great Barrier Reef
habitat structure
Habitats
Islands
Management tools
Marine
Marine ecosystems
Marine fishes
no-take marine reserves
Ocean fisheries
Pisces
Plectropomus leopardus
Predation
Predator-prey interactions
predator-prey relationships
Predators
Prey
Reefs
Serranidae
Trophic relationships
Trout
title The effects of marine reserve protection on the trophic relationships of reef fishes on the Great Barrier Reef
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T01%3A14%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20effects%20of%20marine%20reserve%20protection%20on%20the%20trophic%20relationships%20of%20reef%20fishes%20on%20the%20Great%20Barrier%20Reef&rft.jtitle=Environmental%20conservation&rft.au=Graham,%20N.A.J.&rft.date=2003-06-01&rft.volume=30&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=200&rft.epage=208&rft.pages=200-208&rft.issn=0376-8929&rft.eissn=1469-4387&rft.coden=EVCNA4&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S0376892903000195&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E44520674%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c595t-9bd7c6a8e243024175cf4d89da958c6a2597c607b37041a2c641b069429c5c133%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=203179120&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_S0376892903000195&rft_jstor_id=44520674&rfr_iscdi=true