Fish assemblage structures in planted seagrass habitats, compared with natural seagrass habitats: a field experiment in an intertidal bay in Trang, southern Thailand

Abstract Fish assemblage structures in 1 × 1, 3 × 3 and 5 × 5 meter planted seagrass habitats, natural seagrass habitats and bare sand/mudflats in the intertidal bay at Trang Province, Thailand, were examined in detail by visual census, in order to clarify if the fish assemblage structures in the planted habitats had become similar to those in the natural seagrass habitats. Although the establishment of the smallest planted habitats required a relatively long time, their tidal inundation eventually resulted in harbored fish assemblages of similar structures to those in the intertidal natural seagrass habitats. Of 63 species recorded in the natural seagrass habitats, 47 occurred also in the planted habitats, with common dominant species (e.g., Siganus fuscescens , Halichoeres bicolor and Pelates quadrilineatus ), and density patterns of species assemblages in both habitat types becoming relatively similar over time. Total species numbers tended to be greater in both planted and natural seagrass habitats covering greater areas, probably a result of higher fish encounter rates and greater probability of discovery of the larger habitats. On the contrary, total fish and dominant species densities tended to be higher in seagrass habitats with smaller areas. Relatively greater densities of some prey items in smaller habitats, in addition to overcompensation of lower encounter rates and probability of habitat discovery by large groups of dominant-species’ juveniles within smaller areas may at least partly explain such phenomena. The present study suggested that intertidal planted seagrass habitats eventually play important roles for fish assemblages, much as natural seagrass habitats, and that seagrass-planting in intertidal zones should contribute to rehabilitation of damaged coastal ecosystems. However, intertidal bare sand/mudflats, when inundated, also support unique fish assemblages, including juveniles of fishery target species. Accordingly, seagrass-planting in such habitats without careful consideration could result in negative effects on overall coastal ecosystem biodiversity and the sustainability of local fisheries. Further study, considering a variety of factors which affect assemblage structures, is needed to develop appropriate seagrass-habitat restoration designs.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Ichthyological Research
Published
2025-03-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10228-025-01012-3
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Marine and coastal plant biology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.59

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Fish assemblage structures in planted seagrass habitats, compared with natural seagrass habitats: a field experiment in an intertidal bay in Trang, southern Thailand

Masahiro Horinouchi, Prasert Tongnunui, Atsuko Yamaguchi, Patcharee Kaeoprakan et al.
2 citations
Ichthyological Research
Marine and coastal plant biology
3.59
article

Fish assemblage structures in planted seagrass habitats, compared with natural seagrass habitats: a field experiment in an intertidal bay in Trang, southern Thailand

Masahiro Horinouchi, Prasert Tongnunui, Atsuko Yamaguchi, Patcharee Kaeoprakan, Kouki Kanou, Koetsu Kon, Keisuke Furumitsu, Parichat Hukiew, Y. Nakamura, Ken Okamoto, Mitsuhiko Sano
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Abstract Fish assemblage structures in 1 × 1, 3 × 3 and 5 × 5 meter planted seagrass habitats, natural seagrass habitats and bare sand/mudflats in the intertidal bay at Trang Province, Thailand, were examined in detail by visual census, in order to clarify if the fish assemblage structures in the planted habitats had become similar to those in the natural seagrass habitats. Although the establishment of the smallest planted habitats required a relatively long time, their tidal inundation eventually resulted in harbored fish assemblages of similar structures to those in the intertidal natural seagrass habitats. Of 63 species recorded in the natural seagrass habitats, 47 occurred also in the planted habitats, with common dominant species (e.g., Siganus fuscescens , Halichoeres bicolor and Pelates quadrilineatus ), and density patterns of species assemblages in both habitat types becoming relatively similar over time. Total species numbers tended to be greater in both planted and natural seagrass habitats covering greater areas, probably a result of higher fish encounter rates and greater probability of discovery of the larger habitats. On the contrary, total fish and dominant species densities tended to be higher in seagrass habitats with smaller areas. Relatively greater densities of some prey items in smaller habitats, in addition to overcompensation of lower encounter rates and probability of habitat discovery by large groups of dominant-species’ juveniles within smaller areas may at least partly explain such phenomena. The present study suggested that intertidal planted seagrass habitats eventually play important roles for fish assemblages, much as natural seagrass habitats, and that seagrass-planting in intertidal zones should contribute to rehabilitation of damaged coastal ecosystems. However, intertidal bare sand/mudflats, when inundated, also support unique fish assemblages, including juveniles of fishery target species. Accordingly, seagrass-planting in such habitats without careful consideration could result in negative effects on overall coastal ecosystem biodiversity and the sustainability of local fisheries. Further study, considering a variety of factors which affect assemblage structures, is needed to develop appropriate seagrass-habitat restoration designs.

Ichthyological ResearchVol. 72(4)
University of Nagasaki (JP), Shimane University (JP), Nagasaki University (JP), Tokyo University of Marine Science and Technology (JP), Ibaraki University (JP), Rajamangala University of Technology Srivijaya (TH), The University of Tokyo (JP), Kōchi University (JP)
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Shimane University
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Marine and coastal plant biology
3.59
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.