Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41358516›Full record

ArticleEcological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America2025

Integrating molecular methods and biophysical modeling to assess functional connectivity between marine protected areas.

Kingsly C Beng, Anna Akimova, Silke Laakmann, Vera Sidorenko, Sara Rubinetti, Santiago E A Pineda-Metz, Bernadette Pogoda, Sarah C Brand, Kerstin Klemm, K Mathias Wegner and 10 more

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. Integrating molecular methods and biophysical modeling to assess functional connectivity between marine protected areas.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

20 authors.

Kingsly C BengThünen Institute of Sea Fisheries, Bremerhaven, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0745-7930
Anna AkimovaThünen Institute of Sea Fisheries, Bremerhaven, Germany.
Silke LaakmannHelmholtz Institute for Functional Marine Biodiversity at the University of Oldenburg (HIFMB), Oldenburg, Germany.
Vera SidorenkoAlfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research (AWI), Bremerhaven, Germany.
Sara RubinettiAlfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research (AWI), Wadden Sea Station Sylt, Germany.
Santiago E A Pineda-MetzAlfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research (AWI), Bremerhaven, Germany.
Bernadette PogodaAlfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research (AWI), Bremerhaven, Germany.
Sarah C BrandAlfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research (AWI), Wadden Sea Station Sylt, Germany.
Kerstin KlemmHelmholtz Institute for Functional Marine Biodiversity at the University of Oldenburg (HIFMB), Oldenburg, Germany.
K Mathias WegnerAlfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research (AWI), Wadden Sea Station Sylt, Germany.
Lisa N S ShamaAlfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research (AWI), Wadden Sea Station Sylt, Germany.
Lara SchmittmannGEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel, Kiel, Germany.
Luis GimenezSchool of Ocean Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, UK.
Katharina AlterDepartment of Coastal Systems, Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research (NIOZ), Den Burg, The Netherlands.
Brecht StecheleRoyal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Brussel, Belgium.
Amin RahdarianInstitute of Geosciences, Kiel University, Kiel, Germany.
Christian WinterInstitute of Geosciences, Kiel University, Kiel, Germany.
Alexey AndrosovAlfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research (AWI), Bremerhaven, Germany.
Inna SokolovaDepartment of Marine Biology, Institute for Biological Sciences, University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany.
Anne F SellThünen Institute of Sea Fisheries, Bremerhaven, Germany.

Funding

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung - BMBF 03F090BBundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung - BMBF 03F0910CBundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung - BMBF 03F0910MBundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung - BMBF 03F091ADeutsche Allianz Meeresforschung (DAM) 03F0847ADeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) 535573424German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation FKZ 3516892001German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation FKZ 3519892016German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation FKZ 3520892013
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Marine protected area (MPA) networks are important for supporting biodiversity, enhancing ecosystem resilience, and facilitating species recovery. For the effectiveness of conservation and restoration, functional connectivity plays a vital role. The dispersal, movement, and successful establishment of organisms between suitable habitats and MPAs ensure long-term sustainability of the populations. Despite its importance, functional connectivity is rarely integrated into restoration planning, which limits the effectiveness of species reintroductions, habitat connectivity, and adaptation to environmental changes. In this study, we applied an integrative approach combining molecular detections (environmental DNA [eDNA] and meroplankton metabarcoding) with biophysical modeling to explore the functional connectivity between two Natura 2000 MPAs in the North Sea: Borkum Reef Ground (BRG) and Sylt Outer Reef (SOR). We focused on the European flat oyster (Ostrea edulis), a reef-building species that once provided vast reef habitats but is now functionally extinct in the German Bight and is therefore the subject of recent restoration measures at BRG. Our results showed partial but informative correspondence between molecular detections of oyster genetic traces and the modeled larval pathways during the June-July 2022 sampling period. We further explored larval dispersal across entire spawning seasons in 2022 and 2023. Connectivity between BRG and SOR was highly dependent on larval drift depth. Surface-drifting larvae showed strong interannual variability, with 3% reaching SOR in 2022 when northwesterly winds dominated, increasing to 22% in 2023 under westerly and southwesterly winds. Larvae drifting at depth, however, exhibited near-zero connectivity, leading to high self-recruitment rates, with over 25% settling near the original restoration sites. Our results demonstrate that wind-driven currents are a key driver of interannual variability in larval retention and dispersal. Additionally, they highlight the role of biological traits, such as vertical positioning and pelagic larval duration, in shaping connectivity between MPAs and oyster restoration sites. These findings emphasize the need to integrate connectivity assessments into MPA management and the restoration planning of reef-building benthic species. The interdisciplinary approach presented here provides a quantitative framework for assessing connectivity under species- and site-specific conditions, offering a transferable tool to evaluate the restoration potential of other species and enhance the functional network between MPAs.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesEnvironmental MonitoringAnimalsCoral ReefsDNA Barcoding, TaxonomicDNA, EnvironmentalGermanyLarvaModels, BiologicalNorth SeaDNA, Environmentalecosystem restorationenvironmental DNALagrangian simulationNatura 2000 sitesoyster reefszooplankton

Identifiers

PMID41358516
PMCPMC12683707

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.