Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33108387›Full record

ReviewPloS one2020

Substrate stabilisation and small structures in coral restoration: State of knowledge, and considerations for management and implementation.

Daniela M Ceccarelli, Ian M McLeod, Lisa Boström-Einarsson, Scott E Bryan, Kathryn M Chartrand, Michael J Emslie, Mark T Gibbs, Manuel Gonzalez Rivero, Margaux Y Hein, Andrew Heyward and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
8.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 111 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.

Daniela M CeccarelliMarine Ecology Consultant, Nelly Bay, QLD, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8067-8716
Ian M McLeodTropWATER (Centre for Tropical Water and Aquatic Ecosystem Research), James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.
Lisa Boström-EinarssonTropWATER (Centre for Tropical Water and Aquatic Ecosystem Research), James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.
Scott E BryanSchool of Earth & Atmospheric Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Kathryn M ChartrandTropWATER (Centre for Tropical Water and Aquatic Ecosystem Research), James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.
Michael J EmslieAustralian Institute of Marine Science, PMB 3 Townsville MC, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.
Mark T GibbsAustralian Institute of Marine Science, PMB 3 Townsville MC, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.
Manuel Gonzalez RiveroAustralian Institute of Marine Science, PMB 3 Townsville MC, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.
Margaux Y HeinTropWATER (Centre for Tropical Water and Aquatic Ecosystem Research), James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.
Andrew HeywardAustralian Institute of Marine Science, Indian Ocean Marine Research Centre, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia.
Tania M KenyonMarine Spatial Ecology Lab, The University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Queensland, Australia.
Brett M LewisSchool of Earth & Atmospheric Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Neil MattocksReef Joint Field Management Program, Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.
Maxine NewlandsTropWATER (Centre for Tropical Water and Aquatic Ecosystem Research), James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1947-5802
Marie-Lise SchläppyAustralian Institute of Marine Science, PMB 3 Townsville MC, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.
David J SuggettClimate Change Cluster, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Line K BayAustralian Institute of Marine Science, PMB 3 Townsville MC, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.
Australian Institute of Marine Science · AUJames Cook University · AUQueensland University of Technology · AUGreat Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority · AULancaster University · GBReef Ecologic · AUThe University of Queensland · AUUniversity of Technology Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Coral reef ecosystems are under increasing pressure from local and regional stressors and a changing climate. Current management focuses on reducing stressors to allow for natural recovery, but in many areas where coral reefs are damaged, natural recovery can be restricted, delayed or interrupted because of unstable, unconsolidated coral fragments, or rubble. Rubble fields are a natural component of coral reefs, but repeated or high-magnitude disturbances can prevent natural cementation and consolidation processes, so that coral recruits fail to survive. A suite of interventions have been used to target this issue globally, such as using mesh to stabilise rubble, removing the rubble to reveal hard substrate and deploying rocks or other hard substrates over the rubble to facilitate recruit survival. Small, modular structures can be used at multiple scales, with or without attached coral fragments, to create structural complexity and settlement surfaces. However, these can introduce foreign materials to the reef, and a limited understanding of natural recovery processes exists for the potential of this type of active intervention to successfully restore local coral reef structure. This review synthesises available knowledge about the ecological role of coral rubble, natural coral recolonisation and recovery rates and the potential benefits and risks associated with active interventions in this rapidly evolving field. Fundamental knowledge gaps include baseline levels of rubble, the structural complexity of reef habitats in space and time, natural rubble consolidation processes and the risks associated with each intervention method. Any restoration intervention needs to be underpinned by risk assessment, and the decision to repair rubble fields must arise from an understanding of when and where unconsolidated substrate and lack of structure impair natural reef recovery and ecological function. Monitoring is necessary to ascertain the success or failure of the intervention and impacts of potential risks, but there is a strong need to specify desired outcomes, the spatial and temporal context and indicators to be measured. With a focus on the Great Barrier Reef, we synthesise the techniques, successes and failures associated with rubble stabilisation and the use of small structures, review monitoring methods and indicators, and provide recommendations to ensure that we learn from past projects.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesCoral ReefsAnimalsAnthozoaBiodiversityEcological Parameter MonitoringEcosystemEnvironmental Restoration and RemediationGeologic Sediments

Identifiers

PMID33108387
PMCPMC7591095
OpenAlexW3096824582

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.