Study

Differences in benthic cover inside and outside marine protected areas on the Great Barrier Reef: Influence of protection or disturbance history?

  • Published source details Myers M.R. & Ambrose R.F. (2009) Differences in benthic cover inside and outside marine protected areas on the Great Barrier Reef: Influence of protection or disturbance history?. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 19, 736-747.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Designate a Marine Protected Area and prohibit some fishing and collection (including where restrictions are unspecified)

Action Link
Coral Conservation
  1. Designate a Marine Protected Area and prohibit some fishing and collection (including where restrictions are unspecified)

    A replicated, paired, site comparison study in 1992–2002 of 15 pairs of coral reef sites in the Great Barrier Reef, Australia (Myers & Ambrose 2009) found that in protected areas that prohibited some fishing and collection (a range of different restrictions), hard coral cover was similar but soft coral cover lower than in unprotected areas. When pooling data across all reefs, hard coral cover was similar in protected (39%) and unprotected reefs (31%), but soft coral cover was lower (protected: 12%, unprotected: 19%). For undisturbed reefs, hard coral cover was higher in protected reefs (46%) than in unprotected (25%), and soft coral cover was lower (protected: 18%, unprotected: 36%), but there were no overall differences for disturbed reefs (hard: 34–36%, soft: 8–10%). Annual increases in hard coral cover were higher in protected than in unprotected areas in two of five comparisons at undisturbed reefs, but at disturbed reefs neither protected or unprotected areas consistently had higher increases in cover. For soft corals, there was very little change in cover in protected and unprotected areas over time on both undisturbed and disturbed reefs (see paper for details). Fifteen pairs of sites, one protected and one unprotected, were selected across 23 reefs. The protected sites included three levels of protection: no fishing, collecting or diving; no fishing or collecting, but diving permitted; or no trawling or collection, limited line fishing, other fishing and diving permitted. Disturbances included cyclones, storms and crown-of-thorns Acanthaster planci invasions. Annual surveys in 1992–2002 were conducted at each site, with three survey locations selected per site, and five transects (50 m) surveyed/location.

    (Summarised by: William Morgan)

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 22

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the Evidence Champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust