Variation in reef fish and invertebrate communities with level of protection from fishing across the Eastern Tropical Pacific seascape

  1. Graham J. Edgar1,2,3,*,
  2. Stuart A. Banks2,
  3. Sandra Bessudo4,
  4. Jorge Cortés5,
  5. Hector M. Guzmán6,
  6. Scott Henderson1,
  7. Camilo Martinez7,
  8. Fernando Rivera8,
  9. German Soler4,
  10. Diego Ruiz2,
  11. Fernando A. Zapata9

Article first published online: 17 FEB 2011

DOI: 10.1111/j.1466-8238.2010.00642.x

Issue

Global Ecology and Biogeography

Global Ecology and Biogeography

Volume 20, Issue 5, pages 730–743, September 2011

Additional Information

How to Cite

Edgar, G. J., Banks, S. A., Bessudo, S., Cortés, J., Guzmán, H. M., Henderson, S., Martinez, C., Rivera, F., Soler, G., Ruiz, D. and Zapata, F. A. (2011), Variation in reef fish and invertebrate communities with level of protection from fishing across the Eastern Tropical Pacific seascape. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 20: 730–743. doi: 10.1111/j.1466-8238.2010.00642.x

Author Information

  1. 1

    Conservation International, Puerto Ayora, Galapagos, Ecuador

  2. 2

    Charles Darwin Foundation, Puerto Ayora, Galapagos, Ecuador

  3. 3

    Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute, University of Tasmania, GPO Box 252-49, Hobart, Tasmania 7001, Australia

  4. 4

    Fundación Malpelo, Bogotá, Colombia

  5. 5

    Centro de Investigación en Ciencias del Mar y Limnología (CIMAR), Universidad de Costa Rica, San Pedro, 11501-2060 San José, Costa Rica

  6. 6

    Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, PO Box 0843-03092, Balboa, Republic of Panama

  7. 7

    ECOLAP, Universidad de San Francisco de Quito, Ecuador

  8. 8

    Instituto NAZCA de Investigaciones Marinas, Yuguoeslavia N33-96 Rumipamba, Quito, Ecuador

  9. 9

    Departamento de Biología, Universidad del Valle, Apartado Aéreo 25360, Cali, Colombia

* Graham J. Edgar, Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute, University of Tasmania, GPO Box 252-49, Hobart, Tas 7001, Australia. E-mail: g.edgar@utas.edu.au

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 9 AUG 2011
  2. Article first published online: 17 FEB 2011

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (569K)

Keywords:

  • Colombia;
  • coral reef;
  • Costa Rica;
  • Ecuador;
  • effects of fishing;
  • Galapagos;
  • marine reserve;
  • Panama;
  • UNESCO World Heritage

ABSTRACT

Aim  To quantify general differences in reef community structure between well-enforced and poorly enforced marine protected areas (MPAs) and fished sites across the Eastern Tropical Pacific (ETP) regional seascape

Location  The Pacific continental margin and oceanic islands of Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia and Ecuador, including World Heritage sites at Galapagos, Coiba, Cocos and Malpelo

Methods  Densities of reef fishes, mobile and sessile invertebrates, and macroalgae were quantified using underwater visual surveys at 136 ‘no-take’ and 54 openly fished sites associated with seven large MPAs that encompassed a range of management strategies. Spatial variation in multivariate and univariate community metrics was related to three levels of fishing pressure (high-protection MPAs, limited-protection MPAs, fishing zones) for both continental and oceanic reefs.

Results  High-protection MPAs possessed a much greater biomass of higher carnivorous fishes, lower densities of asteroids and Eucidaris spp. urchins, and higher coral cover than limited-protection MPAs and fished zones. These results were generally consistent with the hypothesis that overfishing of predatory fishes within the ETP has led to increased densities of habitat-modifying macroinvertebrates, which has contributed to regional declines in coral cover. Major differences in ecological patterns were also evident between continental and oceanic biogeographic provinces.

Main conclusions  Fishing down the food web, with associated trophic cascades, has occurred to a greater extent along the continental coast than off oceanic islands. Poorly enforced MPAs generate food webs more similar to those present in fished areas than in well-protected MPAs.

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (569K)