Data from: Patterns of oyster recruitment and habitat provision across tidal elevation gradients are dependent on predator mitigation methods
Data files
Dec 10, 2024 version files 45.96 KB
-
fish_mesopredators_sub.csv
2.25 KB
-
invert_com.csv
33.31 KB
-
oyster_data.csv
7.62 KB
-
README.md
2.78 KB
Abstract
For restoration projects conducted in environments with strong predation, effective predator mitigation can be key to the successful recruitment of habitat-forming species, and the development of associated ecological communities. Predator mitigation may involve exclusion through caging, or the provision of protective spaces through complex habitat mimics. The relative efficacy of the two approaches may vary across environmental gradients, according to predation and environmental stress.
To inform the most effective predator mitigation methods for oyster reef restoration, we compared oyster recruitment and associated community development between uncaged concrete blocks, caged concrete blocks and biodegradable complex habitat mimics (BESE), across 3 tidal elevations and 3 sites in eastern Australia.
After one year, oyster and associated invertebrate recruitment to uncaged concrete was low at all sites and tidal elevations. Whereas BESE supported greater invertebrate abundance and richness than caged concrete blocks at all elevations, the relative performance of the two predator mitigation methods in facilitating oyster recruitment was spatially variable. In the subtidal, BESE were less effective at excluding small-bodied mesopredatory fishes than caged concrete units and supported less oyster recruitment. In the intertidal, where exposure to mesopredatory fish is less due to emersion at low tide, there was greater recruitment to BESE than to caged concrete.
Synthesis and applications: The effectiveness of predator mitigation methods used in oyster reef restoration can vary across small-scale gradients. Understanding the strength of predator-prey interactions at local scales, and the identity of key predators, is crucial for designing restoration methods that allow colonisation of target species and exclude key predators.
README: Data from: Patterns of oyster recruitment and habitat provision across tidal elevation gradients are dependent on predator mitigation methods
https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.nk98sf838
Description of the data and file structure
This repository contains the data from the article:
Esquivel-Muelbert et al. (2024). Patterns of oyster recruitment and habitat provision across tidal elevation gradients are dependent on predator mitigation methods
Data description:
To inform the most effective predator mitigation methods for oyster reef restoration, we compared oyster recruitment and associated community development between uncaged concrete blocks, caged concrete blocks and biodegradable complex habitat mimics (BESE), across 3 tidal elevations (mid and low intertidal and subtidal) and 3 sites within 2 estuaries in eastern Australia. Additionally, to compare substrate use by cryptic fish, we quantified fish occupation of each subtidally placed experimental unit. Intertidal units were not censused, as their periodic emersion did not allow for persistence of fish.
Files and variables
1 - Oyster recruitment data (oyster_data.csv)
Variables:
estuary: Estuary name (Port Hacking or Bermagui)
site: Site name within each estuary
elevation: MID (mid intertidal), LOW (low intertidal) or SUB (subtidal)
treatment: Caged, Uncaged, Bese or Control (for caging artifacts - see methods in research article)
sample_code: Unique identifier for each experimental unit (estuary-site-elevation-treatment-replicate).
oyster_count: Number of oyster recruits per 176.7cm2 core
2 - Invertebrate community data (invert_com.csv)
Variables:
estuary: Estuary name (Port Hacking or Bermagui)
site: Site name within each estuary
elevation: MID (mid intertidal), LOW (low intertidal) or SUB (subtidal)
treatment: Caged, Uncaged, Bese or Control (for caging artifacts - see methods in research article)
sample_code: Unique identifier for each experimental unit (estuary-site-elevation-replicate).
columns E to CK: Abundance of invertebrate species per 176.7cm2 core sample.
3 - Fish occupation of subtidal units (fish_mesopredators_sub.csv)
Variables:
estuary: Estuary name (Port Hacking or Bermagui)
site: Site name within each estuary
elevation: Sub (subtidal)
treatment: Caged, Uncaged, Bese
sample_code: Unique identifier for each experimental unit (estuary-site-elevation-replicate).
count: Number of cryptic fish per experimental unit
count_m3: To account for differences in the volume of the uncaged substrate (0.006859 m3), caged substrate (0.015625 m3) and BESE (0.05 m3), the number of individuals of each fish species found in each experimental unit was standardized per cubic metre (m3)