How to select networks of marine protected areas for multiple species with different dispersal strategies

Aim To develop and test theory based on connectivity to identify optimal networks of marine protected areas (MPAs) that protect multiple species with a range of dispersal strategies. Location The eastern North Sea in the Atlantic Ocean. Methods Theory of finding optimal MPA network is based on eigenvalue perturbation theory applied to population connectivity. Previous theory is here extended to the persistence of multiple species by solving a maximization problem with constraints, which identifies an optimal consensus network of MPAs. The theory is applied to two test cases within a 120,000 km2 area in the North Sea where connectivity was estimated with a biophysical model. In a realistic case, the theory is applied to the protection of rocky-reef habitats, where the biophysical model is parameterized with realistic dispersal traits for key species. Theoretical predictions of optimal networks were validated with a simple metapopulation model. Persistence of optimal consensus MPA networks is compared to randomly selected networks as well as to the existing MPA network. Results Despite few overlapping MPA sites for the optimal networks based on single dispersal strategies, the consensus network for multiple dispersal strategies performed well for 3 of 4 contrasting strategies even without user-defined constraints. In the test with five realistic dispersal strategies, representing a community on threatened rocky reefs, the consensus network performed equally well compared to solutions for single species. Different dispersal strategies were also protected jointly across the MPA network (93% of sites), in contrast to simulations of the existing MPA network (2% of sites). Consensus networks based on connectivity were significantly more efficient compared to existing MPAs. Main conclusions Our findings suggest that the new theoretic framework can identify a consensus MPA network that protects a whole community containing species with multiple dispersal strategies.

[1]  P. Sale,et al.  Determining the extent and spatial scale of population connectivity: decapods and coral reef fishes compared , 2003 .

[2]  J. Kool,et al.  Population connectivity: recent advances and new perspectives , 2012, Landscape Ecology.

[3]  R. Cowen,et al.  Larval dispersal and marine population connectivity. , 2009, Annual review of marine science.

[4]  K. Döös,et al.  Calculating Lagrangian Trajectories Using Time-Dependent Velocity Fields , 2001 .

[5]  Hugh P. Possingham,et al.  Dispersal connectivity and reserve selection for marine conservation , 2011 .

[6]  P. Moksnes,et al.  Depth distribution of larvae critically affects their dispersal and the efficiency of marine protected areas , 2012 .

[7]  G. Thorson.  REPRODUCTIVE and LARVAL ECOLOGY OF MARINE BOTTOM INVERTEBRATES , 1950, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[8]  Ameer Abdulla,et al.  Status of marine protected areas in the Mediterranean sea , 2008 .

[9]  G. Luikart,et al.  Genomics and the future of conservation genetics , 2010, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[10]  P. Moksnes,et al.  Larval connectivity and ecological coherence of marine protected areas (MPAs) in the Kattegat-Skagerrak region , 2014 .

[11]  Atte Moilanen,et al.  Methods and workflow for spatial conservation prioritization using Zonation , 2013, Environ. Model. Softw..

[12]  Moa Berglund,et al.  Optimal selection of marine protected areas based on connectivity and habitat quality , 2012 .

[13]  B. Halpern,et al.  Biological Effects Within No-Take Marine Reserves: A global Synthesis , 2009 .

[14]  H. Meier,et al.  Freshwater outflow of the Baltic Sea and transport in the Norwegian current: A statistical correlation analysis based on a numerical experiment , 2013 .

[15]  Alan Hastings,et al.  Disentangling trophic interactions inside a Caribbean marine reserve. , 2010, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[16]  Jason J. Roberts,et al.  Reproductive output and duration of the pelagic larval stage determine seascape-wide connectivity of marine populations. , 2012, Integrative and comparative biology.

[17]  John E. Parks,et al.  Dangerous targets? Unresolved issues and ideological clashes around marine protected areas , 2003 .

[18]  S. Gaines,et al.  Designing marine reserve networks for both conservation and fisheries management , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[19]  Mark H. Carr,et al.  PROPAGULE DISPERSAL DISTANCE AND THE SIZE AND SPACING OF MARINE RESERVES , 2003 .

[20]  S. Levin,et al.  Toward a Dynamic Metacommunity Approach to Marine Reserve Theory , 2004 .

[21]  T. Shank,et al.  Going where traditional markers have not gone before: utility of and promise for RAD sequencing in marine invertebrate phylogeography and population genomics , 2013, Molecular ecology.

[22]  K. Myrberg,et al.  Physical Oceanography of the Baltic Sea , 2009 .

[23]  Martin Nilsson Jacobi,et al.  Optimal networks of nature reserves can be found through eigenvalue perturbation theory of the connectivity matrix. , 2011, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[24]  L. A. Barnett,et al.  Beyond connectivity: how empirical methods can quantify population persistence to improve marine protected-area design. , 2014, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[25]  E. K. Pikitch,et al.  Ecosystem-Based Fishery Management , 2004, Science.

[26]  B. Halpern,et al.  Low functional redundancy in coastal marine assemblages , 2005 .

[27]  Carrie V. Kappel,et al.  Evaluating and Ranking the Vulnerability of Global Marine Ecosystems to Anthropogenic Threats , 2007, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[28]  Hugh P. Possingham,et al.  Conservation planning for connectivity across marine, freshwater, and terrestrial realms , 2010 .

[29]  W. Figueira.  Connectivity or demography: Defining sources and sinks in coral reef fish metapopulations , 2009 .

[30]  M. Laamanen,et al.  Biodiversity in the Baltic Sea – An integrated thematic assessment on biodiversity and nature conservation in the Baltic Sea. , 2009 .

[31]  Alan Hastings,et al.  Population persistence in marine reserve networks: incorporating spatial heterogeneities in larval dispersal , 2010 .

[32]  A. Hastings,et al.  Persistence of spatial populations depends on returning home. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[33]  M. Sköld,et al.  Using Vessel Monitoring System Data to Improve Systematic Conservation Planning of a Multiple-Use Marine Protected Area, the Kosterhavet National Park (Sweden) , 2014, AMBIO.

[34]  F. Guichard,et al.  Designing effective reserve networks for nonequilibrium metacommunities. , 2013, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[35]  Simon A. Levin,et al.  Designing marine reserves for interacting species: Insights from theory , 2007 .

[36]  M. Gatto,et al.  Understanding the effectiveness of marine protected areas using genetic connectivity patterns and Lagrangian simulations , 2013 .

[37]  Peter J S Jones,et al.  The science of European marine reserves: Status, efficacy, and future needs , 2012 .

[38]  M. Hellberg.  Gene Flow and Isolation among Populations of Marine Animals , 2009 .

[39]  J. Castilla,et al.  ECOLOGICAL CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING CANDIDATE SITES FOR MARINE RESERVES , 2003 .

[40]  Otso Ovaskainen,et al.  How much does an individual habitat fragment contribute to metapopulation dynamics and persistence? , 2003, Theoretical population biology.

[41]  V. Blondel,et al.  Numerical modelling and graph theory tools to study ecological connectivity in the Great Barrier Reef , 2014 .

[42]  David M Kaplan,et al.  Dispersal per recruit: an efficient method for assessing sustainability in marine reserve networks. , 2006, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[43]  John L. Largier,et al.  AVOIDING CURRENT OVERSIGHTS IN MARINE RESERVE DESIGN , 2003 .

[44]  Elizabeth A. Moffitt,et al.  The utility and limitations of size and spacing guidelines for designing marine protected area (MPA) networks , 2011 .