Strong site fidelity, residency and local behaviour of Atlantic cod () at two types of artificial reefs in an offshore wind farm.

B J P Berges, I van der Knaap, O A van Keeken, J Reubens, H V Winter
Author Information
  1. B J P Berges: Wageningen Marine Research, Yerseke, The Netherlands. ORCID
  2. I van der Knaap: van Hall-Larenstein University of Applied Sciences, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands.
  3. O A van Keeken: Wageningen Marine Research, Yerseke, The Netherlands.
  4. J Reubens: Flanders Marine Institute (VLIZ), Oostende, Belgium.
  5. H V Winter: Wageningen Marine Research, Yerseke, The Netherlands.

Abstract

Globally, biogenic temperate reefs are among the most threatened habitats. In the North Sea in particular, large shellfish reefs were lost owing to fishing activities in the 1900s. The impact of offshore wind farms (OWFs) on marine wildlife is extensive, and it offers the possibility to reintroduce new hard substrate habitats that are protected from fisheries at a large scale. In addition to the submerged structures of OWFs, marine hard substrate habitat can be further enhanced by providing extra artificial reefs. In an operational OWF along the Dutch coast, four artificial reefs (two with a scour bed and two without) were deployed in the vicinity of a wind turbine. Acoustic telemetry was used to monitor the fine-scale movement of 64 Atlantic cod (). The monitoring ran from July 2021 to January 2023. Detailed information on behaviour, area utilization and attraction to the structures was determined. Results showed strong attraction (high site fidelity and residency) to the artificial reef, with no significant difference between the two tested types of reefs, and only a few individuals staying over winter. Cod spent a large proportion of their time hiding in the artificial reefs, suggesting that adding pipes for shelter has a beneficiary effect.

Keywords

Associated Data

figshare | 10.6084/m9.figshare.c.7317216

References

  1. Ecology. 2006 May;87(5):1075-85 [PMID: 16761584]
  2. Mar Environ Res. 2017 May;126:26-36 [PMID: 28231443]
  3. Mar Pollut Bull. 2020 Nov;160:111680 [PMID: 33181953]
  4. PLoS One. 2013;8(2):e57386 [PMID: 23437380]
  5. Ecol Lett. 2020 Dec;23(12):1878-1903 [PMID: 33073921]
  6. Proc Biol Sci. 2007 Mar 22;274(1611):789-98 [PMID: 17251093]
  7. Mar Environ Res. 2013 Sep;90:128-35 [PMID: 23937893]
  8. Curr Biol. 2021 Apr 12;31(7):1555-1562.e4 [PMID: 33567289]
  9. Sci Total Environ. 2023 Jun 20;878:162902 [PMID: 36934919]