0
Meta Analysis ? AI-assigned paper type based on the abstract. Classification may not be perfect — flag errors using the feedback button. Tier 1 ? Systematic review or meta-analysis. Synthesizes findings across many studies. Strongest evidence. Marine & Wildlife Policy & Risk Sign in to save

Artificial Reefs around the World: A Review of the State of the Art and a Meta-Analysis of Its Effectiveness for the Restoration of Marine Ecosystems

Environments 2023 30 citations ? Citation count from OpenAlex, updated daily. May differ slightly from the publisher's own count. Score: 60 ? 0–100 AI score estimating relevance to the microplastics field. Papers below 30 are filtered from public browse.
Carolina Bracho-Villavicencio, Sérgio Rossi Carolina Bracho-Villavicencio, Helena Matthews-Cascón, Sérgio Rossi Sérgio Rossi Sérgio Rossi Sérgio Rossi Helena Matthews-Cascón, Helena Matthews-Cascón, Sérgio Rossi Sérgio Rossi Sérgio Rossi Sérgio Rossi Sérgio Rossi Sérgio Rossi Sérgio Rossi

Summary

This meta-analysis of artificial reef studies from 1990 to 2020 found that while artificial reefs can develop species assemblages similar to natural reefs, their effectiveness varies significantly by design, material, location, and deployment time. The research reveals important gaps in understanding the socioeconomic impacts and long-term ecological outcomes of reef restoration, which is relevant because artificial reefs can be sources of microplastic pollution when made from degrading plastic or concrete with plastic components.

Study Type Review

Over the past decade, there has been increasing interest in marine restoration, requiring a consideration of various approaches for optimal success. Artificial reefs (ARs) have been employed for marine restoration and fisheries management, but their effectiveness in restoring ecosystems lacks well-defined ecological criteria and empirical evidence. A systematic review of the literature on ARs articles between 1990–2020, a meta-analysis of their effectiveness based on the similarity of species composition with reference natural reefs (NRs), as well as bias risk analyses were carried out. Research on ARs primarily focused production of marine communities (n = 168). There are important information gaps regarding socioeconomic aspects; design, materials, and disposal in the selected habitats; legal, management, and planning aspects considering long-term monitoring. Regarding effectiveness, few articles (n = 13) allowed comparisons between ARs and NRs, highlighting the need to apply proper reference sites in AR implementations. Meta-analysis showed that ARs are not similar to reference NRs (p = 0.03, common effect and p = 0.05 random effect models). However, a high index of heterogeneity (88%) suggests that this relation may be influenced by factors other than the reef type. Thus, further analysis can disguise variables conditioning this AR–NR similarity as a measure of restoration for degraded marine ecosystems.

Sign in to start a discussion.

Share this paper