Testing the resilience of dead maerl infaunal assemblages to the experimental removal and re-lay of habitat

  • Published source details Sheehan E., Bridger D., Cousens S. & Attrill M. (2015) Testing the resilience of dead maerl infaunal assemblages to the experimental removal and re-lay of habitat. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 535, 117-128.


This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Remove and relocate habitat-forming (biogenic) species before onset of impactful activities

Action Link
Subtidal Benthic Invertebrate Conservation
  1. Remove and relocate habitat-forming (biogenic) species before onset of impactful activities

    A replicated, paired, controlled study in 2012–2013 of 24 plots in six sites of maërl bed in the Fal Estuary, southwest England, UK (Sheehan et al. 2015) found that plots where maërl bed habitat had been temporarily removed then relayed had fewer invertebrate species, reduced abundance, and a different community composition, compared to plots of undisturbed maërl, after five weeks but not after 44 weeks. After five weeks, the removed-relayed plots had fewer species (54 species/core) and lower abundance (155 individuals/core) compared to undisturbed maërl plots (species: 94; abundance: 282), and a different community composition (community data presented at statistical model results and graphical analyses). After 44 weeks, species richness and abundance were similar in the removed-relayed plots (species: 93; abundance: 263) and the undisturbed maërl plots (species: 91; abundance: 178), and community compositions were similar. Dredging of shipping lanes was planned in Falmouth Harbour. This trial study aimed to assess the feasibility of removing and relaying maërl as a mitigation action prior to dredging. Four 5 m2 plots were selected at each of six sites.  One of two treatments was attributed to each plot: maërl removed then relayed, undisturbed maërl (representing natural maërl where no dredging for shipping lane occurred). In September 2012, the top 0.3 m of maërl was dredged from the removed-relayed plots and relayed to its original position 12 h later (to mimic the duration of shipping lane dredging). Five maërl samples were collected using a hand corer (25 cm length, 10 cm diameter) from one plot/treatment/site after five and 44 weeks. Invertebrates associated with maërl habitat (>0.5 mm) were counted.

    (Summarised by: Anaëlle Lemasson)

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 19

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 Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust