Quantitative assessment of different artificial reef designs in mitigating losses to kelp forest fishes

Bulletin of Marine Science

Volumn 78, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 133-150

  Reed, Daniel C ^a   Schroeter, Stephen C ^a   Huang, David ^a   Anderson, Todd W ^b   Ambrose, Richard F ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL REEF; COMMUNITY STRUCTURE; DESIGN; ICHTHYOFAUNA; KELP FOREST; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS;

CALIFORNIA; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

PISCES;

EID: 32044460131     PISSN: 00074977     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (38)

1. Abelson, A. and Y. Shlesinge. 2002. Comparison of the development of coral and fish communities on rock-aggregated artificial reefs in Eilat, Red Sea. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 59: S122-S126.
2. Ambrose, R. F. 1994. Mitigating the effects of a coastal power plant on a kelp forest community: Rationale and requirements for an artificial reef. Bull. Mar. Sci. 55: 694-708.
3. _ and S. L. Swarbrick. 1989. Comparison of fish assemblages on artificial and natural reefs off the coast of southern California. Bull. Mar. Sci. 44: 718-733.
4. _, R. J. Schmitt, and C. W. Osenberg. 1996. Predicted and observed environmental impacts: Can we foretell ecological change? Pages 345-369 in R. J. Schmitt and C. W. Osenberg, eds. Detecting ecological impacts: concepts and applications in coastal habitats. Academic Press, San Diego.
5. Anderson, T. W., E. E. DeMartini, and D. A. Roberts. 1989. The relationship between habitat structure, body size and distribution of fishes at a temperate artificial reef. Bull. Mar. Sci. 44: 681-697.
6. Andrews, K. S. and T. W. Anderson. 2004. Habitat-dependent recruitment of two temperate reef fishes at multiple spatial scales. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 277: 231-244.
7. Bence, J. R., A. Stewart-oaten, and S. C. Schroeter. 1996. Estimating the size of an effect from a before-after-control-impact paired series design: the predictive approach applied to a power plant study. Pages 133-150 in R. J. Schmitt and C. W. Osenberg, eds. Detecting ecological impacts: concepts and applications in coastal habitats. Academic Press, San Diego.
8. Bohnsack, J. A. and J. L. Sutherland. 1985. Artificial reef research: a review with recommendations for future priorities. Bull. Mar. Sci. 37: 11-39.
9. Burton, W. H., J. S. Farrar, F. Steimle, and B. Conlin. 2002. Assessment of out-of-kind mitigation success of an artificial reef deployed in Delaware Bay, USA. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 59: S106-S110.
10. Carlise, J. G., Jr., C. H. Turner, and E. E. Ebert. 1964. Artificial habitats in the marine environment. Calif. Dept. Fish Game, Fish Bull. 124: 1-93.
11. Carr, M. H. and M. A. Hixon. 1997. Artificial reefs: the importance of comparisons with natural reefs. Fisheries 22: 28-33.
12. Carter, J. W., W. N. Jessee, M. S. Foster, and A. L. Carpenter. 1985. Management of artificial reefs designed to support natural communities. Bull. Mar. Sci. 37: 114-128.
13. Davis, G. E. 1985. Artificial structures to mitigate marine construction impacts on spiny lobster, Panulirus argus. Bull. Mar. Sci. 37: 151-156.
14. DeMartini, E. E., D. A. Roberts, and T. W. Anderson. 1989. Contrasting patterns of fish density and abundance at an artificial rock reef and a cobble-bottom kelp forest. Bull. Mar. Sci. 44: 881-892.
15. _, A. M. Barnett, T. D. Johnson, and R. F. Ambrose. 1994. Growth and production estimates for biomass-dominant fishes on a Southern California artificial reef. Bull. Mar. Sci. 55: 484-500.
16. Deysher, L. E., T. A. Dean, R. S. Grove, and A. Jahn. 2002. Design considerations for an artificial reef to grow giant kelp (Macrocystis pyrifera) in southern California. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 59: S201-S207.
17. Gnose, C. E. 1967. Ecology of the striped sea perch, Embiotoca lateralis, in Yaquina Bay, Oregon. M.S. Thesis, Oregon State University, Corvallis. 53 p.
18. Grant, J. L., K. C. Wilson, A. Grover, and H. A. Togstad. 1982. Early development of Pendleton Artificial Reef. Mar. Fish. Rev. 44: 53-60.
19. Jessee, W. N., A. L. Carpenter, and J. W. Carter. 1985. Distribution patterns and density estimates of fishes on a southern California artificial reef with comparisons to natural kelp-reef habitats. Bull. Mar. Sci. 37: 214-226.
20. Johnson, T. D., A. M. Barnett, E. E. DeMartini, L. L. Craft, R. F. Ambrose, and L. J. Purcell. 1994. Fish production and habitat utilization on a southern California artificial reef. Bull. Mar. Sci. 55: 711-725.
21. Mahan, W. T. 1985. Initial growth rate and life expectancy of the bay pipefish Syngnathus leptorynchus from Humbolt Bay, California. Report No. TML-11. Humbolt State University, Arcata. 11 p.
22. Murdoch, W. W., R. C. Fay, and B. J. Mechalas. 1989. Final report of the Marine Review Committee to the California Coastal Commission. MRC Document No. 89-02. MRC, San Francisco. 346 p.
23. Osenberg, C. W., C. M. St. Mary, J. A. Wilson, and W. J. Lindberg. 2002. A quantitative framework to evaluate the attraction-production controversy. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 59: S214-S221.
24. Patton, M. L., R. S. Grove, and L. O. Honma. 1996. Substrate disturbance, competition from sea fans (Muricea sp.) and the design of an artificial reef for giant kelp (Macrocystis sp.). Pages 272-276 in Proc. Int. Conf. Ecological System Enhancement Technology for Aquatic Environments. Japan International Marine Science and Technology Federation, Tokyo.
25. _, C. F. Valle, and R. S. Grove. 1994. Effects of bottom relief and fish grazing on the density of the giant kelp Macrocystis. Bull. Mar. Sci. 55: 631-644.
26. Pielou, E. C. 1984. The interpretation of ecological data: A primer on classification and ordination. John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York. 263 p.
27. Quast, J. C. 1968a. Estimates of the population and the standing crop of fishes. California Dept. Fish Game, Fish Bull. 139: 57-79.
28. _. 1968b. Fish fauna of the rocky inshore zone. Calif. Dept. Fish Game, Fish Bull. 139: 35-55.
29. Reed, D. C., S. C. Schroeter, and D. Huang. In press. An experimental experimentation of the use of artificial reefs to mitigate the loss of giant kelp forest habitat: a case study of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Artificial Reef Project. California Sea Grant College Program, University of California, San Diego.
30. _, _, and P. T. Raimondi. 2004. Spore supply and habitat availability as sources of recruitment limitation in giant kelp. J. Phycol. 40: 275-284.
31. Sánchez-Jerez, P., B. M. Gillanders, S. Rodríguez-Ruiz, and A. A. Ramos-Esplá. 2002. Effect of an artificial reef in Posidonia meadows on fish assemblage and diet of Diplodus annularis. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 59: S59-S68.
32. Schroeter, S. C., J. D. Dixon, J. Kastendiek, R. O. Smith, and J. R. Bence. 1993. Detecting the ecological effects of environmental impacts: a case study of kelp forest invertebrates. Ecol. Appl. 3: 331-350.
33. Stephens, J. S., Jr., P. A. Morris, K. Zebra, and M. Love. 1984. Factors affecting fish diversity on a temperate reef: the fish assemblage at Palos Verdes Point, 1974-1981. Envir. Biol. Fish. 11: 259-275.
34. Stepien, C. A. 1986. Regulation of color morphic patterns in the giant kelpfish, Heterostichus rostratus Girard: genetic versus environmental factors. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. and Ecol. 100: 181-208.
35. Thorhaug, A. 1989. Fish aggregation and fisheries nursery restoration by seagrass rehabilitation. Bull. Mar. Sci. 44: 1070-1071.
36. Turner, C. H., E. E. Ebert, and R. R. Given. 1969. Man-made reef ecology. Calif. Dept. Fish Game, Fish Bull. 146: 1-221.
37. Wildermuth, D. A. 1983. Length-weight regression analysis for thirty-eight species of sport caught marine fishes. Progress report 198. Washington State Department of Fisheries, Olympia. 7 p.
38. Wilson, K. C., R. D. Lewis, and H. A. Togstad. 1990. Artificial reef plan for sport fish enhancement. Administrative report No. 90-15. California Department of Fish and Game Nearshore Sport Fish Habitat Enhancement Program, Olympia. 76 p.