Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://repositorio.ufc.br/handle/riufc/74735
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorVillavicencio, Carolina Bracho-
dc.contributor.authorMatthews-Cascon, Helena-
dc.contributor.authorRossi, Sergio-
dc.date.accessioned2023-10-23T13:25:08Z-
dc.date.available2023-10-23T13:25:08Z-
dc.date.issued2023-
dc.identifier.citationVILLAVICENCIO, Carolina Bracho; MATTHEWS-CASCON, Helena; ROSSI, Sergio. 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. Enviroments, Switzerland, v. 10, n. 7, p. 121, 2023. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.3390/environments10070121. Acesso em: 23 out. 2023.pt_BR
dc.identifier.issn2076-3298-
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorio.ufc.br/handle/riufc/74735-
dc.description.abstractOver 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.pt_BR
dc.language.isopt_BRpt_BR
dc.publisherEnviromentspt_BR
dc.rightsAcesso Abertopt_BR
dc.titleArtificial reefs around the world: a review of the state of the art and a meta-analysis of its effectiveness for the restoration of marine ecosystemspt_BR
dc.typeArtigo de Periódicopt_BR
dc.subject.ptbrCorais artificiaispt_BR
dc.subject.ptbrEcossistema marinhopt_BR
dc.subject.ptbrCosta - Manejopt_BR
dc.subject.enArtificial reefspt_BR
dc.subject.enMarine ecosystemspt_BR
dc.subject.enCoastal managementpt_BR
local.author.latteshttp://lattes.cnpq.br/0900817180710886pt_BR
Appears in Collections:LABOMAR - Artigos publicados em revistas científicas

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
2023_art_carolina.pdf2,76 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.