Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2022 Oct:183:114042.
doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.114042. Epub 2022 Aug 20.

Assessing cumulative impacts of human-induced pressures on reef and sandbank habitats and associated biotopes in the northeastern Baltic Sea

Annaleena Vaher  1 , Jonne Kotta  2 , Robert Szava-Kovats  2 , Ants Kaasik  2 , Mihhail Fetissov  2 , Robert Aps  2 , Anneliis Kõivupuu  2
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Assessing cumulative impacts of human-induced pressures on reef and sandbank habitats and associated biotopes in the northeastern Baltic Sea

Annaleena Vaher et al. Mar Pollut Bull. 2022 Oct.

Abstract

Marine ecosystems are impacted by multiple individual and combined anthropogenic pressures. We used meta-analysis and data-driven PlanWise4Blue decision support tool to predict individual and combined impacts of wind park development, nutrient loading, and invasive species on vulnerable reef and sandbank habitats and associated species-specific biotopes in the northeastern Baltic Sea. Many impacts were not statistically significant due to large between-study variance in effect sizes. Wind park development is predicted to have less impact than nutrient loading and invasive species. Predicted impacts varied greatly among larger-scale habitats versus smaller-scale biotopes with impacts being generally stronger at small scale. Excessive nutrient loading damages algae-based biotopes, the presence of nonnative species has substantial negative impacts on larger-scale reef and sandbank habitats. The results showed that a 25 % reduction of nutrient loading improves all examined benthic habitats, whereas nonnative species, which cannot be removed from ecosystems, pose a significant threat to these habitats.

Keywords: Baltic Sea; Benthic habitats; Cumulative impact analysis; Maritime spatial planning; Sustainable development.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Study area. The red outline marks the Western Estonian waters where this study takes place. Green areas mark the location of reef habitat type and orange the sandbanks. Red dashed areas mark the planned wind park locations. Depth isobaths are shown with blue lines. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
We divided benthic ecosystems into reef and sandbank habitat types according to bottom substrate and species composition. Furthermore, the habitat types were divided into species-specific biotopes: Furcellaria, Fucus, and suspension feeders are associated with reef habitats and Zostera, Charophytes, and higher plants are associated with sandbank habitats.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Results of the ANOVA analysis of the effect size (x-axis) of studied human pressures (y-axis) on the reef habitat. Effect size values < 1 indicate a habitat loss of reefs; values > 1 indicate an increase of reef habitat. Red indicates a significant change, blue shows a non-significant change. Primary data and the list of references are found in Supplementary material 1. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Results of the ANOVA analysis of the effect size (x-axis) of studied human-induced pressures (y-axis) on the Fucus, Furcellaria, and Mytilus biotopes. Effect size values < 1 indicate an areal loss; values > 1 indicate the increased area. Red indicates a significant change, blue shows a non-significant change, and black marks factors with only one data source available. Primary data and the list of references are found in Supplementary material 1. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Results of the ANOVA analysis of the effect size (x-axis) of studied human pressures (y-axis) on the sandbank habitat. Effect size values < 1 indicate an areal loss of the habitat; values > 1 indicate an increase in sandbank area. Red indicates a significant change, blue shows a non-significant change, and black marks factors with only one data source available. Primary data and the list of references are found in Supplementary material 1. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Habitat change comparing the combinations of current nutrient load + nonnative species + wind park development versus 25 % nutrient reduction + nonnative species + wind park development scenarios. Maps (a, b) show the difference in larger-scale reef habitat. Differences in habitat change in associated biotopes are (c, d) in Fucus, (e, f) in Furcellaria, and (g, h) in suspension feeders (percentage change in km2 in a 1 km2 cell).
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Habitat change comparing the combinations of current nutrient load + nonnative species + wind park development versus 25 % nutrient reduction + nonnative species + wind park development scenarios. Maps (a, b) show the difference in a larger-scale sandbank habitat. Differences in habitat change in associated biotopes are (c, d) in Charophytes, (e, f) in Zostera, and (g, h) in higher plants (percentage change in km2 in a 1 km2 cell).
Fig. 8
Fig. 8
The predicted maximum, mean, and minimum areal cover of Reef habitat (a–c), Fucus biotope (d–f), Furcellaria biotope (g–i), Suspension feeders biotope (j–l) in result of the impact of the Current nutrient load scenario (Scenario 1). Unit 100 denotes 100 % coverage (i.e. 1 km2 cover of habitat/biotope) in a 1 km2 grid cell.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Aps R., Herkül K., Kotta J., Cormier R., Kostamo K., Laamanen L., Lappalainen J., Lokko K., Peterson A., Varjopuro R. Marine environmental vulnerability and cumulative risk profiles to support ecosystem-based adaptive maritime spatial planning. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 2018;75:2488–2500.
    1. Bax N., Williamson A., Aguero M., Gonzalez E., Geeves W. Marine invasive alien species: a threat to global biodiversity. Mar. Policy. 2003;27:313–323.
    1. Burrows M.T., Schoeman D.S., Buckley L.B., Moore P., Poloczanska E.S., Brander K.M., Brown C., Bruno J., Duarte C., Halpern B., Holding J., Kappel C., Kiessling W., O’Connor M., Pandolfi J., Parmesan C., Schwing F., Sydeman W., Richardson A. The pace of shifting climate in marine and terrestrial ecosystems. Science. 2011;334:652–655. - PubMed
    1. Carstensen J., Conley D., Bonsdorff E., Gustafsson B., Hietanen S., Janas U., Jilbert T., Maximov A., Norkko A., Norkko J., Reed D., Slomp C.P., Timmermann K., Voss M. Hypoxia in the Baltic Sea: biogeochemical cycles, benthic fauna, and management. Ambio. 2014;43:26–36. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Degraer S., Carey D.A., Coolen J.W.P., Hutchison Z.L., Kerckhof F., Rumes B., Vanaverbeke J. Offshore wind farm artificial reefs affect ecosystem structure and functioning: a synthesis. Oceanography. 2020;33:48–57.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources