Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40536255›Full record

ArticleEcological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America2025

Combining co-introduction with patch-size optimization as a novel strategy to maximize seagrass restoration.

Rens J T Cronau, Leon P M Lamers, Jimmy de Fouw, Marieke M van Katwijk, Tjeerd J Bouma, Jannes H T Heusinkveld, Thijs Poortvliet, Tjisse van der Heide

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Combining co-introduction with patch-size optimization as a novel strategy to maximize seagrass restoration.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2025
    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

8 authors.

Rens J T CronauDepartment of Aquatic Ecology and Environmental Biology, Faculty of Science, Radboud Institute for Biological and Environmental Sciences, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Leon P M LamersDepartment of Aquatic Ecology and Environmental Biology, Faculty of Science, Radboud Institute for Biological and Environmental Sciences, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Jimmy de FouwDepartment of Aquatic Ecology and Environmental Biology, Faculty of Science, Radboud Institute for Biological and Environmental Sciences, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Marieke M van KatwijkDepartment of Environmental Science, Radboud Institute for Biological and Environmental Sciences, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Tjeerd J BoumaDepartment of Estuarine & Delta Systems, NIOZ Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research, Yerseke, The Netherlands.
Jannes H T HeusinkveldThe Fieldwork Company, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Thijs PoortvlietZeeland Department, Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment, Middelburg, The Netherlands.
Tjisse van der HeideDepartment of Coastal systems, NIOZ Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research, Den Burg, The Netherlands.

Funding

Rijkswaterstaat
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Coastal ecosystem engineers, such as mussels, oysters, salt marsh grasses, and seagrasses, typically shape their environment by ameliorating stressors when they grow beyond a critical population size. In doing so, they not only facilitate themselves but also provide habitat for diverse communities, which in turn, can engage in reciprocal interspecific facilitation. Over the last decades, anthropogenic disturbances have caused rapid degradation of coastal ecosystems, emphasizing the need for their restoration. Although the importance of both inter- and intraspecific positive interactions has been confirmed in small-scale experiments, their combined potential remains to be tested in restoration-scale experiments. Here, we examine whether restoration aimed at simultaneous recovery of both facilitation types can increase restoration yields of the seagrass Zostera marina. We conducted a full factorial experiment by manipulating patch size to test for intraspecific facilitation effects and co-introduced the epiphyte-grazing snails Littorina littorea to investigate interspecific facilitation. We found that the effect of including intraspecific facilitation on restoration yields was highly dependent on the hydrodynamic exposure conditions at the restoration site. Large patches in the most exposed sites showed a 40% increase in seagrass restoration yield compared to small patches, while at sheltered sites, large patches counted up to 60% less surviving plants compared to small ones. Interspecific facilitation, on the other hand, increased success yields by 73% on average. Moreover, in some plots where L. littorea survived through the winter, we counted 20 times more shoots than plots without co-introduction. Our study is the first to demonstrate that co-introduction can serve as a successful large-scale restoration strategy. Additionally, we highlight that integration of both inter- and intraspecific facilitation into restoration designs can be a powerful approach to increase coastal restoration success. However, we emphasize that these strategies should be applied specifically to counter environmental stressors as they may have adverse effects themselves in environments without such stressors.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesEcosystemEnvironmental Restoration and RemediationIntroduced SpeciesZosteraceaeAnimalscoastal ecosystemsfood webinterspecific facilitationintraspecific facilitationmutualismpatch size effectperiwinkleplant–animal interactionpositive feedbackrestoration

Identifiers

PMID40536255
PMCPMC12178098

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.