Marine reserves: size and age do matter.

By J. Claudet, Craig W. Osenberg, L. Benedetti‐Cecchi, Paolo Domenici, J. García-Charton, Á. Pérez-Ruzafa, Fabio Badalamenti, J. Bayle-Sempere, A. Brito, F. Bulleri and 11 more. Ecology Letters, 2008

674 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Global and Planetary Change, Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c55101bb717d779fd9a70a81ee3325129a666792

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

1. G. Hays
2. G. Schofield
3. R. Scott
4. K. A. Katselidis
5. John Pantis
6. Sabrina Fossette
7. M. Lilley
8. Michel J. Kaiser

In Global and Planetary Change

1. G. Hays
2. G. Schofield
3. R. Scott
4. K. A. Katselidis
5. M. Lilley
6. S. Jenkins
7. Sabrina Fossette
8. John Pantis

In Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

1. Michel J. Kaiser
2. S. Hawkins

Citations in the corpus

• Passive acoustic telemetry reveals highly variable home range and movement patterns among unicornfish within a marine reserve (2011, background): “While the synergistic effects of home range size and mobility, fishing pressure and marine reserve characteristics have the greatest influence on how a species responds to protection (Palumbi 2004), fish mobility is rarely reported in the marine reserve literature (Claudet et al. 2008).”
• Evaluating the biological effectiveness of fully and partially protected marine areas (2013, background): “There have been numerous reviews on the effectiveness of no-take marine reserves for fish populations [29-39], however few attempts have been made to generalize the ecological effects of partially protected areas to date (but see [40]).”
• Habitat connectivity improves reserve performance (2012, background): “Marine reserves are used throughout the world to conserve biodiversity and prevent overfishing, but uncertainty remains over strategies to optimize their design, productivity, and assessment (Claudet et al. 2008).”
• Migratory marine species: their status, threats and conservation management needs (2014, background): “Where required, effective no-take marine reserves need to be large (Claudet et al., 2008) and encompass not only diverse habitats (e.g. ocean reefs, seagrass flats, lagoons) but also the areas that connect them.”
• A global assessment of the direct and indirect benefits of marine protected areas for coral reef conservation (2018, background): “This result is consistent with other broadscale studies which have demonstrated that old (~30 years), highly compliant and unfished MPA sites had marginally higher total coral cover than unprotected sites (Claudet et al., 2008; Selig & Bruno, 2010).”
• Evidence-based marine protected area planning for a highly mobile endangered marine vertebrate (2013, background): “Some studies state that uniform year-round zoning is the most ideal framework for MPA design (Al-Abdulrazzak and Trombulak, 2012); yet other studies have shown that enlarging MPAs, particularly buffer zones, does not necessarily enhance their effectiveness (Claudet et al., 2008).”
• Models and indicators for assessing conservation and fisheries-related effects of marine protected areas (2008, positive): “Significant differences are more likely observed when the reserve has already been in place for several years (Alcala 1988; Paddack and Estes 2000) and when fishing pressure is high before MPA establishment and outside the MPA (Côté et al. 2001; Micheli et al. 2004b).”