Abstract
Context
The distribution of animals is influenced by a complex interplay of landscape, environmental, habitat, and anthropogenic factors. While the effects of each of these forces on fish assemblages have been studied in isolation, the implications of their combined influence within a seascape remain equivocal.
Objectives
We assessed the importance of local habitat composition, seascape configuration, and environmental conditions for determining the abundance, diversity, and functional composition of fish assemblages across a tropical seascape.
Methods
We quantified fish abundance in coral, macroalgal, mangrove, and sand habitats throughout the Dampier Archipelago, Western Australia. A full-subsets modelling approach was used that incorporated data from benthic habitat maps, a hydrodynamic model, in situ measures of habitat composition, and remotely sensed environmental data to evaluate the relative influence of biophysical drivers on fish assemblages.
Results
Measures of habitat complexity were the strongest predictors of fish abundance, diversity, and assemblage composition in coral and macroalgal habitats, with seascape effects playing a secondary role for some functional groups. Proximity to potential nursery habitats appeared to have minimal influence on coral reef fish assemblages. Consequently, coral, macroalgal, and mangrove habitats contained distinct fish assemblages that contributed to the overall diversity of fish within the seascape.
Conclusions
Our findings underscore the importance of structural complexity for supporting diverse and abundant fish populations and suggest that the value of structural connectivity between habitats depends on local environmental context. Our results support management approaches that prioritise the preservation of habitat complexity, and that incorporate the full range of habitats comprising tropical seascapes.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Understanding the factors governing the distribution of organisms is fundamental to developing ecologically sound and locally relevant conservation strategies (Pullin 2002; Marshall et al. 2014; Villero et al. 2017). Yet, climate change and human activities are altering the composition and connectivity of habitats upon which many animals rely (Haddad et al. 2015; Hughes et al. 2018; Gissi et al. 2021). In tropical seascapes, this modification can impair ecosystem functioning, impacting the delivery of ecosystem services upon which millions of people depend (Moberg and Folke 1999; Boyd and Banzhaf 2007; Woodhead et al. 2019). Ecosystem functioning within seascapes is regulated by the flow of energy and materials through various ecological processes, many of which are performed by specific functional groups of fish (e.g. grazers, piscivores, and excavators (Odum and Odum 1955; Olds et al. 2012b; Brandl et al. 2019). Variation in the diversity, abundance, and composition of fish assemblages may therefore affect the delivery of important ecological processes across seascapes (Bellwood and Fulton 2008; Olds et al. 2012b; Harborne et al. 2016).
Fish assemblages in coastal seascapes are frequently subject to a broad range of co-occurring physical and biological drivers that can interact in complex ways (Boström et al. 2011; Ceccarelli et al. 2023). The effects of habitat composition and complexity (e.g. Graham and Nash 2013; Darling et al. 2017), seascape configuration (e.g. Grober-Dunsmore et al. 2008; Nagelkerken et al. 2017), environmental conditions (e.g. Fulton et al. 2005; Moustaka et al. 2018), and fishing pressure (e.g. Dulvy et al. 2004; Graham et al. 2017) on fish assemblages are generally well understood in isolation (see ESM Table 1 for a detailed summary); however, few studies investigate the implications of multiple forces acting concurrently within an individual system (Wilson et al. 2008; Olds et al. 2012a; Gilby et al. 2016; Sievers et al. 2020). Determining the relative importance of these co-occurring biophysical drivers, and how this may differ between important functional groups, is important for conservation planning (Harborne et al. 2017; Pickens et al. 2021). Of the studies that have assessed multiple drivers, all noted the influence of seascape configuration on at least one component of the fish assemblage (Gilby et al. 2016; Henderson et al. 2017; van Lier et al. 2018; Berkström et al. 2020; Sievers et al. 2020). However, there was little consensus as to the relative importance of seascape effects compared to other factors. This ambiguity may stem, in part, from the different habitats and environmental settings in which these studies were conducted.
Tropical coastal seascapes often exist as patch mosaics of coral, seagrass, macroalgal, mangrove, sand, rubble, and pavement habitats that are biologically and hydrologically connected (Sheaves et al. 2015). These different habitats contain distinct assemblages and/or life history stages of fish and contribute uniquely to the total diversity and functioning of the seascape (Harborne et al. 2008; Sambrook et al. 2019; Harper et al. 2022; Dunne et al. 2023). Moreover, some fish species exploit multiple habitats within the seascape on a diel basis to forage or shelter, sustaining important ecological processes across habitat boundaries (Luo et al. 2009; Hyndes et al. 2014; Vaslet et al. 2015). Consequently, holistic seascape management necessitates expanding our understanding of the factors structuring fish assemblages to encompass the range of habitats that comprise coastal seascapes.
Habitats within coastal seascapes are subject to dissimilar physio-chemical conditions (e.g. salinity, turbidity, and wave exposure) due to factors such as topography, prevailing winds, and freshwater inputs (Young 1989; Serafy et al. 2003). Fish assemblages in disparate habitat types likely respond differently to prevailing environmental conditions due to the species-specific tolerances (e.g. osmoregulatory capacity) and characteristics (e.g. mobility) of the taxa present in each biotope (Denny 1994; Serafy et al. 1997; Sheaves 1998). Moreover, the disparate composition and complexity of benthic habitats represents a distinct range of resources and shelter, which can mediate the effects of environmental, anthropogenic, and biological influences (Brown et al. 2017). For example, intertidal mangroves are often physiochemically extreme and temporally variable environments (Igulu et al. 2014; Dubuc et al. 2019). As such, fish occupying these habitats may be most strongly influenced by seascape configuration because they must find alternative shelter at low tide (Pittman et al. 2007; Faunce and Layman 2009). In contrast, fish inhabiting fringing coral reef habitats may be subject to greater wave energy and predation pressure (Shulman 1985; Young 1989). In such environments, substrate complexity and the availability of suitable micro-habitat refugia may exert the strongest influence on the distribution of small-bodied species (Beukers and Jones 1998; Depczynski and Bellwood 2005). Uncertainty surrounding the relative importance of factors governing species distributions within and across tropical seascape habitats impedes our understanding of the functioning of these ecosystems.
Identifying the degree to which different biophysical factors influence the distribution of key functional groups of fish, and therefore likely the delivery of crucial ecological processes, and understanding how this varies among different habitats within a seascape, is important for effective management. To date, few studies have attempted to address this knowledge gap. As such, this study aimed to address the following questions: (a) what is the relative importance of local habitat composition, seascape configuration, environmental conditions, and human use in structuring the abundance, diversity, and functional composition of fish assemblages? And (b) how does the importance of these factors vary among different habitat types within a tropical seascape? The Dampier Archipelago in north-western Australia represents an ideal model system to investigate these questions as it contains numerous bays encompassing habitat mosaics with varying combinations and configurations of coral, macroalgal, mangrove, seagrass, and sand/rubble habitats (Morrison 2004). These bays are embedded within a complex oceanographic system that generates cross-shelf gradients in environmental conditions (e.g. turbidity) over a relatively small spatial scale (Pearce et al. 2003; Moustaka et al. 2019).
Methods
Study location
The Dampier Archipelago comprises 42 islands fringed by variable habitat mosaics (Fig. 1; Morrison 2004). The region is macrotidal and experiences semidiurnal tides with a maximum spring tidal range of 5 m, resulting in extensive subaerial exposure of intertidal areas (Pearce et al. 2003). Tidal water movement, combined with wind- and wave-driven sediment resuspension, generates a strong and highly variable cross-shelf turbidity gradient with anomalous spikes caused by natural and anthropogenic disturbances (Blakeway et al. 2013; Moustaka et al. 2018; Evans et al. 2020). The archipelago has been subject to significant modification, including the construction of Australia’s largest tonnage port, regular dredging of shipping channels, and ongoing vessel traffic (WAEPA 2007). The archipelago is also subject to moderate levels of recreational boat usage and fishing managed by bag and size limits at the regional level. While there are currently no spatial (e.g. marine protected areas) or temporal (e.g. seasonal closures) restrictions on recreational fishing, the Dampier Archipelago has historically been recognised as a site of conservation value and recommended as a potential marine protected area (CALM 1994). Commercial fishing effort within the Dampier Archipelago is minimal as the major demersal scalefish fisheries (trap and trawl) are restricted to offshore waters (Newman et al. 2023). Twelve shallow (< 7 m depth) bays of similar size were selected as study sites based on the presence of substantial structurally complex habitat (i.e. coral, macroalgae, mangrove) and spatial distribution.
Habitat mapping
Satellite imagery (Sentinel-2, 10 m resolution) paired with georeferenced ground-truthing habitat data collected from 2020 to 2022 were used to manually digitise marine benthic habitats using ArcMap 10.8.1 (ESRI 2020). Habitat classification was limited to depths of less than 7 m (relative to mean sea level) to ensure sufficient clarity to identify benthic features. A simplified four-category habitat classification scheme was used, which included sand/rubble/bare substrate (hereafter referred to as ‘sand’), coral, macroalgae, and mixed coral/macroalgae. Seagrass was not included as a benthic category because the meadows present in study bays are sparse, patchy and comprise small-bodied, ephemeral species (e.g. Halophila spp.; pers obs MM, RD) that are not visible on satellite imagery (Vanderklift et al. 2016). The four habitat categories, combined with mangroves, represent the dominant benthic habitat types present in the nearshore seascapes of the study region based on expert knowledge of the area and ground truthing. They are also ecologically relevant and commonly used classifications when studying ontogenetic and foraging migrations of fish (Grober-Dunsmore et al. 2008; Berkström et al. 2013; van Lier et al. 2018).
The area (m2) and seaward perimeter length (m) of fringing mangrove stands were extracted from shapefiles provided by the Western Australian Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions (ESRI 2020). Shapefiles of mangrove canopy extent were generated following Murray (2020; see ESM methods for details). Briefly, estimates of mangrove foliage cover from photo orthomosaics (collected using remotely piloted aircraft) were used to calibrate a Normalised Difference Vegetation Index (derived from Sentinel-2, 10 m resolution satellite imagery) resulting in a Vegetation Cover Index from which shapefiles were generated.
The intertidal area of each bay was quantified using the Sentinel-2 Normalized Difference Water Index (NDWI = (B03 − B08)/(B03 + B08); McFeeters 1996). The workflow involved first examining historical tide gauge data that span the Sentinel-2 satellite data archive in order to identify those dates that experienced lowest and highest spring tides that also coincided with day and time (~ 10:30 am local time) of a satellite pass. The NDWI raster image representing the two most extreme low and hightide events were then subtracted with the greatest difference in pixel intensity representing the intertidal zone.
Fish surveys
Diver-operated stereo-video (stereo-DOV)
Adult fish and benthos were surveyed in January 2021. In each of the study bays, divers completed three 5 m × 30 m transects in each of the major available habitat types (coral reef, macroalgal bed, mangrove fringe, and sand; hereafter referred to as a patch), although not all bays contained all habitat types (Fig. 1). The transects were laid out in succession within a single patch and separated by at least 5 m. Fish assemblages were surveyed using underwater diver-operated stereo-video (stereo-DOV; see ESM for details of stereo-DOV design and calibration). While video-based methods for quantifying fish may underestimate the abundance of cryptic species and juvenile fish, these methods reduce the in-water time required and provide a permanent record that can be reviewed (Holmes et al. 2013). The stereo-DOV transects were swum by an experienced scientific diver at a steady speed of ~ 0.3 m/s (20 m/min) at a height of ~ 0.5 m above the benthos and cameras tilted on a slight downward angle (Goetze et al. 2019).To minimise the potential effects of time of day and tide, all surveys were conducted during neep tides, at least two hours after sunrise and at least two hours prior to sunset, when coral and macroalgal sites were inundated to a depth of at least 2 m and mangrove sites to a depth of at least 0.5 m (Kruse et al. 2016).
As divers could not swim within mangroves, surveys were conducted along the perimeter of the mangrove stand. While this method may not capture fish deep within the mangrove forest, the majority of fishes only use the seaward fringe of mangrove habitat (Sheaves et al. 2016; Dunbar et al. 2017). Mangroves could not be sampled at a uniform level of inundation as the timing was constrained by conditions that maximised visibility (i.e. incoming or slack tide and low wind speed). This inconsistency is common in the scientific literature and is unlikely to bias the estimates of the abundance of small-bodied species, which have been shown to enter mangroves within the first 30 min of inundation (Olds et al. 2013; Dunbar et al. 2017). However, some larger taxa may enter intertidal mangrove habitats later in the tidal cycle (Meynecke et al. 2008; Dunbar et al. 2017). Estimates of their abundances may therefore have been influenced by tidal artefacts and should be interpreted cautiously.
Video analysis
Video footage was analysed using EventMeasure™ software with all fish identified to the lowest possible taxonomic level (SeaGIS Pty Ltd 2020a). Individuals further than 5 m in front or 2.5 m either side of the stereo-DOV were excluded to maintain a consistent sampling area among sites and habitats.
Estimates of habitat structural complexity were obtained from stereo-DOV footage by a single experienced analyst (Collins et al. 2017). Visual estimates are a commonly used method to quantify structural complexity and are comparable to photogrammetric techniques and in situ measures (Gratwicke and Speight 2005; Wilson et al. 2007; Bayley et al. 2019). Five still images (~ 6 m apart) were extracted from each video transect and the structural complexity of the substrate was classified on the 0 – 5 scale of Polunin and Roberts (1993), where 0 = no vertical relief, 1 = low and sparse relief, 2 = low but widespread, 3 = moderately complex, 4 = very complex with numerous caves and fissures, and 5 = exceptionally complex with high coral cover, numerous caves and overhangs.
Benthic surveys
To quantify the composition of the benthic communities, benthic images were collected on the return pass of the stereo-DOV transects (i.e. across the same three 30 m fish transects in each patch). Digital images were taken every 0.5 m along the transect, from a height of 0.5 m above the substrate (n = 60 per transect). Benthic images were analysed using the TransectMeasure™ software and a simplified version of the hierarchical CATAMI classification scheme (Althaus et al. 2015; SeaGIS Pty Ltd 2020b). Fifteen points (based on a preliminary precision analysis) were randomly overlaid on each image and the benthos under each point was classified to the highest resolution possible. The underlying substrate (unconsolidated or consolidated substrate) and the dominant biota (if present; hard coral, soft coral, seagrass, macroalgae, turf algae, mangrove, and sponge) were classified for each benthic point. Each category was then expressed as percent cover of the transect.
In addition to benthic photo transects, in situ measurements of macroalgal canopy parameters were collected in macroalgal patches, as the height and density of canopy-forming macroalgae can influence the abundance of fish (Wilson et al. 2017). Divers quantified holdfast density and height of canopy forming macroalgae (e.g. Sargassum spp.) in six 0.5 × 0.5 m quadrats located at 5 m intervals along the fish transects.
Seascape metrics
Locations of fish/benthic transects were overlaid onto the combined benthic habitat map, mangrove extent, and intertidal extent shapefiles to determine the spatial characteristics of the seascape surrounding each transect. Habitat categories included for spatial analysis were coral reef, macroalgae, sand, and mangrove. Mixed coral/macroalgae habitat was excluded from further analyses due to its relative rarity. Because different fish species may respond dissimilarly to their environment due to functional differences in mobility and size, a multi-scale exploratory approach was used to quantify seascape configuration (Wiens et al. 1993; Pittman and McAlpine 2003; Pittman et al. 2007). Initially, buffer zones surrounding each transect were defined at four different spatial scales (100, 200, 300, and 500 m radii) for the calculation of seascape metrics. The minimum buffer size of 100 m was dictated by the resolution of benthic habitat maps while the maximum buffer of 500 m was dictated by the small size of many of the study bays. However, seascape metrics calculated at the 100 m scale did not have a good spread of values due to typically large habitat patch sizes and therefore were excluded from further analyses. Seascape metrics calculated at the 300 m were highly correlated (R2 > 0.8; i.e. redundant variables) to both the 200 and 500 m scales in all instances and were also excluded from further analyses. The remaining 200 and 500 m buffers are at a spatial scale relevant to the reported daily home ranges of many taxa of interest and are commonly used in the seascape ecology literature (Kramer and Chapman 1999; Pittman et al. 2007; Kendall et al. 2011; Green et al. 2015). Buffers were clipped by the shoreline and the 7 m depth contour to ensure only shallow water habitat that could be confidently digitised from satellite imagery was represented.
The area (m2) of coral, macroalgae, and sand habitat, as well as intertidal habitat, within each buffer was calculated and expressed as a proportion of the total area of the clipped buffer (mangrove metrics were calculated separately, see below). Structural connectivity to alternative habitat types (e.g. sand and macroalgae for coral transects) was calculated using the function developed by Hanski (1998) and Moilanen and Nieminen (2002), as described in Berkström et al. (2013). Briefly, the connectivity of a transect to a given habitat type is a function of the sum of areas of the given habitat type within a buffer, weighted by their distance from the target transect (Calabrese and Fagan 2004).
Due to the shape of some bays, the 500 m buffer excluded most or all the mangrove habitat present. Increasing the maximum buffer size was not feasible as buffer size was constrained by the area of each bay within the 7 m contour. Therefore, the areal extent and connectivity to mangroves were calculated at the bay scale, rather than within each buffer (Berkström et al. 2013). A modified connectivity metric (connectivity and availability index; CAI) was used to capture both the structural connectivity to and the variation in temporal availability (i.e. the proportion of time the fringe of an intertidal mangrove stand was accessible to fish) of mangrove habitat for all transects. CAI was calculated as a function of the shortest navigable distance (i.e. not passing over land) from a transect to the edge of mangrove habitat (for mangrove transects this distance was set as 1 m), the length of the seaward perimeter of the mangrove stand, and the proportion of the tidal cycle during which the seaward fringe of the mangrove would be inundated. The length of the seaward perimeter was used in place of the areal extent as several studies have demonstrated that the majority of fish use only the fringe of intertidal mangrove habitat (Sheaves et al. 2016; Dunbar et al. 2017). The proportion of the tidal cycle during which a given mangrove stand was inundated was calculated by first extracting the elevation of the mangrove seaward perimeter at 25 m intervals from the National Intertidal Digital Elevation Model (Bishop-Taylor et al. 2019). A tidal harmonic analysis using UTIDE (Codiga 2011) was then conducted using data from in situ RBRsolo3 pressure sensors that had been deployed throughout the archipelago to generate a predicted tide from 2019 to 2021, relative to mean sea level. Finally, the amount of time that the tide was above each elevation point was calculated and summarised to an average value for each site.
Lastly, the Shannon-Wiener evenness index (SEI) of the seascape within the 200 and 500 m buffers was calculated for each transect. This index describes the relative abundance of different patch types in a seascape, incorporating the homogeneity among the seascape elements (Shannon 1948; Simpson 1949; Betzabeth and de los Ángeles 2017).
Environmental metrics
Environmental data were obtained for each patch using a combination of techniques. The depth of each transect was extracted from high-resolution bathymetry (see ESM for details). Turbidity within the macrotidal waters of the Dampier Archipelago is highly variable over short time periods (e.g. hours–days), therefore satellite-derived KD490 (diffuse attenuation coefficient at 490 nm [KD2 algorithm]) was used as a proxy measure, rather than a one-off in situ measures (Pearce et al. 2003). Daily KD490 data for the five years preceding sampling (January 2016–January 2021) was retrieved from the NOAA ERDDAP data server (dataset ID: erdMH1kd4901day). Average long-term KD490 values were calculated for each site, as the 4 km resolution of this product precluded patch- or transect-level measures. The catchment area of each bay was used as a proxy for potential freshwater and terrigenous sediment input. Catchment area was calculated using SAGA-GIS Module Library Documentation (v2.1.3) in QGIS (Moyroud and Portet 2018). The underlying terrain data was derived from a 1 m resolution airborne light detection and ranging (topoLiDAR) dataset (see McDonald et al. 2020 for more detailed methodology) and LiDAR data gaps were filled using lower resolution SRTM 1 s arc DEM (Wilson et al. 2011). To assess the spatial variability in wave energy, a high-resolution wave model was developed using SWAN (Simulating WAves Nearshore; Booj, 1999) and significant wave height was extracted for each embayment (see ESM for model validation and simulation details).
All spatial and environmental metrics were calculated using the R Language for Statistical Computing (hereafter referred to as R; version 4.2.0) and the sf (version 1.07), rerddap (version 1.0.2), spatialEco (version 1.3-7) packages (Pebesma 2018; Evans and Murphy 2021; R Core Team 2022; Chamberlain 2023).
Human use metric
In the absence of any available data on the spatial distribution of recreational fishing pressure in the Dampier Archipelago, potential recreational fishing pressure was quantified for each patch as the distance to the nearest boat ramp. The distance to boat ramp was manually measured as the shortest navigable distance between the nearest boat ramp and the patch using ArcMap 10.8.1 (ESRI 2020). While past work has demonstrated higher abundances of fished species at reefs further from boat ramps, it should be noted that the presence of privately-owned shacks on some of the islands of the Dampier Archipelago may influence the reliability of this metric as a proxy of fishing pressure (Stuart-Smith et al. 2008; Aston et al. 2022). Additionally, although the charter fishing effort in the Dampier Archipelago is relatively low and evenly spread (WA DOF 2015), it is important to note that this metric is unlikely to capture potential impacts of charter fishing operations.
Data analysis
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests were used to confirm whether different habitat types contained distinct fish assemblages. Due to non-normality of residuals, permutational analysis of variance (permutational ANOVA) tests were used to determine whether total abundance and species richness varied between habitats (fixed, four levels) and sites (random, 12 levels, nested within habitat). Data were log(x + 1) transformed prior to analysis and converted to a Euclidian distance matrix. Analyses were conducted in PRIMER v7 with PERMANONA+ (Anderson et al. 2008). Significant differences were further investigated using pairwise permutational ANOVAs. A permutational ANOVA test was also used to determine whether taxonomic distinctness of fish assemblages varied between habitats; however, sand transects were excluded as only two transects contained enough unique species. Average taxonomic distinctness is a measure of the average distance between all pairs of species in a taxonomic tree. This metric captures phenotypic differences and functional richness, is independent of sampling effort, and is insensitive to major habitat differences, allowing for comparisons across habitats (Clarke and Warwick 1998). Average taxonomic distinctness was calculated based on log(x + 1) transformed data (to downweight abundant species) using R and the vegan package (version 2.6-2; Oksanen et al. 2022; R Core Team 2022).
Fish community composition across habitats and sites was compared using multivariate analyses. Data were log(x + 1) transformed and converted into a Bray–Curtis similarity matrix for analysis. A permutational multivariate analysis of variance (PERMANOVA) was then used to test for differences between habitats and sites using the same design as the univariate ANOVA. Significant differences were further investigated using pairwise PERMANOVA. Non-metric multi-dimensional scaling (nMDS) was used to visualise differences in fish assemblages between habitats and sites. Vectors derived from the Bray-Curtis similarity matrix and corresponding to species with significant correlations (p < 0.05 and R2 ≥ 0.3) were overlaid onto the nMDS plot using R and the vegan package (Oksanen et al. 2022; R Core Team 2022).
Relationships between the suite of potential predictor variables (ESM Table 1) and fish assemblage response metrics (ESM Table 2) were investigated using a full-subsets approach (FSS) and generalised additive mixed models (GAMMs). GAMMs use a sum of smooth functions to model covariate effects, allowing for more flexible functional dependence of the response variable on the covariates, without the requirement for assumptions of the parametric form of the relationship (Wood 2011; Fisher et al. 2018). The FSS approach fits all possible combinations of variables, and calculates the AICc (Akaike information criterion corrected for small sample sizes) for each model (Akaike 1998; Fisher et al. 2018). Models were limited to two explanatory variables to avoid overfitting and difficulty interpreting results. Models containing variables with pairwise correlation coefficients exceeding 0.28 were excluded as even low levels of collinearity between variables can result in inaccurate model parametrisation, decreased power, and exclusion of significant predictor variables (Graham 2003; ESM Fig. 3). Site and Island were included as random effects to increase the inferential power of the model and to account for overdispersion and correlation (including potential spatial autocorrelation) in the data (Wood 2006; Harrison 2014). Variable importance was determined by summing the weight for all models containing each variable and was used to assess the relative importance of predictor variables (Burnham and Anderson 2002). Models were considered to have similar explanatory power if they were within two AICc units of the model with the lowest AICc, in which case the ‘best’ model(s) were selected based on variable importance and model weight (Akaike 1998). When there was no clear ‘best’ model, the model with the lowest AICc was presented in Table 1, with the remaining candidate models reported in ESM Table 5. All statistical analyses were conducted using R and the FSSgam (version 1.11), gamm4 (version 0.2-6) and mgcv (version 1.8-40) packages (Wood 2011; Fisher et al. 2018; R Core Team 2022).
Due to significant differences in fish assemblage composition between habitat types, and habitat-specificity of ecologically relevant potential predictor variables, FSS GAMMs were conducted separately for coral, macroalgae, and mangrove habitats. Response variables modelled included total abundance, species richness, average taxonomic distinctness, and the abundance of six common functional groups (present in > 20% of transects within a given habitat type; ESM Table 2). Fish species were initially assigned to nine functional groups based on diet and feeding behaviour as reported in the literature and on FishBase (see ESM Table 3 for full species list and functional group allocations; Wilson et al. 2008; Pratchett et al. 2011; Froese and Pauly 2022). FSS GAMM analyses were focused on six of the nine assigned functional groups, representing distinct pathways of primary and secondary consumption. Relatively rare functional groups and those dominated by small-bodied cryptic species were excluded (ESM Tables 2 and 3). Supplemental FSS GAMMs were also conducted on the abundances of common genera within each functional group and are presented in the supplementary material (ESM Table 2; ESM Table 6). Response data were not transformed as selecting an appropriate error distribution accounted for non-normal data distribution (see ESM Table 2 for details). A separate set of potential predictors were defined for each habitat type to ensure that only ecologically relevant predictors were included (ESM Table 1). Predictor variables were plotted, assessed for normal distributions and spread of values (as GAMMs are sensitive to the spread of predictors), and transformed or removed from the suite of predictors accordingly prior to analysis (see ESM Table 1 for details).
Results
Habitat-specific fish assemblages
The 117 stereo-DOV transects recorded 96 species spanning 61 genera and 35 families (ESM Table 3). The sand habitat contained very low abundances and diversity of fish, and no unique species, and as such was excluded from all further analyses (Fig. 2, ESM Table 3).
The total abundance and species richness of fish assemblages differed significantly among habitat types (Fig. 2, ESM Table 4). Fish abundance in mangrove and coral habitats were similar and both contained significantly more fish than macroalgal habitats (Fig. 2a, ESM Table 4). There was a significant effect of site (nested within habitat) on the total abundance of fish; however, the effect size of site was negligible compared to that of habitat (ESM Table 4). Mangroves exhibited the greatest variation in total abundance of fish, which was driven by the presence of large schools of bluestripe herring (Herklotsichthys quadrimaculatus) and Apogonidae in some transects (Fig. 2a; ESM Table 3). Species richness was significantly higher in coral than in macroalgae and mangrove habitats, with no significant effect of site detected (Fig. 2b, ESM Table 4). Taxonomic distinctness of fish assemblages was highest in mangrove habitats due to the presence of species of Mugilidae (Myxus elongatus) and Clupeidae (H. quadrimaculatus) which represent orders absent from coral and macroalgal habitats (Fig. 2c; ESM Tables 3 and 4).
The composition of fish assemblages differed significantly between all habitat types (ESM Table 4). There was a significant effect of site (nested within habitat); however, similarly to the univariate assemblage metrics the effect size of habitat was larger than that of site (ESM Table 4). An nMDS plot revealed strong clustering of fish assemblages within habitat types, with little overlap between habitats (Fig. 3). Indeed, habitats contained largely distinct groups of fish species, with 73.5% of observed species recorded in a single habitat type (44.9%, 16.3%, and 11.2% occurring solely in coral, macroalgae, and mangrove habitats, respectively; ESM Table 3). Coral habitats were characterised by higher abundance of Pomacentrids (in particular, Western Australian demoiselle [Neopomacentrus aktites] and golden butterflyfish [Chaetodon aureofasciatus]; Fig. 3). Fish assemblages in macroalgal habitats were more variable than those in coral; however, the brokenline wrasse (Stethojulis interrupta) was recorded in most transects. Mangrove assemblages were distinguished by schools of H. quadrimaculatus, and the presence of sand mullet (M. elongatus) and western yellowfin seabream (Acanthopagrus morrisoni; Fig. 3).
As the composition of fish assemblages (and therefore the species composition of several functional groups) differed greatly between habitat types, subsequent analyses investigating the drivers of functional group distribution were conducted separately for each habitat type to account for species-specific responses to structuring forces (Fig. 3; ESM Table 3).
Predictors of total abundance, species richness, taxonomic distinctness, and functional group abundance
The relative importance of local habitat composition and quality, seascape configuration, environmental conditions, and human use variables differed between various aspects of fish assemblage structure, and between habitats. In coral and macroalgal habitats, measures of overall diversity and abundance were most strongly influenced by local habitat complexity (Fig. 4). Habitat complexity was also an important predictor of abundance for most functional groups in these habitats, with measures of seascape configuration exerting secondary, functional group-specific effects (Fig. 4). The relative importance of environmental metrics was generally low across all models, except for micro-invertivores and planktivores in macroalgal habitats. Similarly, the human use metric was of limited importance except for models of Epinephelus spp. abundance (Fig. 4; ESM Fig. 5; ESM Table 6).
In mangrove habitats, local habitat and environmental metrics had lower average variable importance than seascape metrics (Fig. 4). However, despite their importance, measures of seascape configuration were poor predictors of assemblage- and functional group-level metrics (Figs. 5 and 6). This is likely a consequence of the high variability in abundance and composition of mangrove fish assemblages (Figs. 2 and 3).
Coral habitats
Structural complexity consistently appeared in the best models explaining spatial variation in the abundance and diversity of fish assemblages on coral reefs (Figs. 4 and 5; Table 1). Higher structural complexity positively influenced both the total abundance and species richness of fish in coral reef habitats, including abundance of four of the six functional groups modelled (carnivore, corallivore, herbivore, micro-invertivore, and planktivore; Figs. 5 and 6). In contrast, the taxonomic distinctness of fish assemblages in coral habitats was negatively influenced by structural complexity and the proportional area of sand habitat (200 m scale; Fig. 5). Taxonomic distinctness of coral fish assemblages also exhibited a positive relationship with percent cover of unconsolidated substrate, which was strongly negatively correlated with complexity (pairwise correlation coefficient = − 0.54) and thus does not appear in the same model (Figs. 4 and 5; Table 1; ESM Fig. 4). As local habitat composition becomes more heterogenous (i.e. contains not only reef and hard coral, but also rubble and sand), the phylogenetic diversity of species observed increases (Fig. 5). This pattern is predominantly driven by the increasing diversity of phylogenetically similar species of Pomacentridae, and to a lesser extent Labridae, present in more complex coral reefs (ESM Table 3). Connectivity to sand habitat at the 200 m scale was an important predictor for the total abundance of fish in coral habitats; however, no directional relationship was apparent (Fig. 5; Table 1). Several other predictor variables appeared in candidate coral species richness models, but none increased model weight (ESM Table 5).
Although seascape metrics were generally weak predictors of overall fish diversity and abundance on coral reefs, connectivity to non-reef habitats had varying and contrasting effects on the abundance of different functional groups. The abundance of herbivores (predominantly Acanthuridae) and planktivores (a range of Pomacentridae, Apogonidae, and Caesionidae) declined with connectivity to and proportional area of macroalgae (respectively) at the 500 m scale, but increased in locations with high structural complexity (Fig. 6). Conversely, micro-invertivores were more abundant on coral reefs with high connectivity to macroalgal habitat, a pattern which was predominantly driven by Halichoeres spp. and Thalassoma spp. (Fig. 6; ESM Fig. 5, ESM Table 6). Proportional area of focal habitat was only important for corallivores (Chaetodons), which exhibited a strong positive relationship with coral habitat availability (PA coral; Figs. 4 and 6; Table 1, ESM Table 3). While connectivity to mangroves was also an important predictor for corallivore abundance, no directional relationship was evident (Figs. 4 and 6). The abundance of scrapers (Scarine labrids) in coral habitats peaked with moderate levels of coral cover and with moderate connectivity to sand habitats (Fig. 6).
Several variables with low importance scores also appeared in candidate carnivore models (i.e. with ΔAICc values < 2; ESM Table 3). Candidate models of carnivore abundance included distance to boat ramp (positive correlation), percent cover of turf algae (positive correlation), connectivity to mangroves (no directional pattern), and connectivity to sand at the 500 m scale (no directional pattern; ESM Fig. 4, ESM Table 5). This broad range of candidate models reflects the taxonomic diversity of the carnivore functional group (38 species from 15 families; ESM Table 3). For example, Lutjanus spp. were most strongly influenced by structural complexity, while Epinepheulus spp. were positively correlated with distance from a boat ramp (ESM Fig. 5, ESM Table 6).
Macroalgal habitats
Both percent cover of macroalgae and structural complexity were important predictors of fish diversity and abundance in macroalgal habitats (Fig. 4). Macroalgal beds with higher complexity exhibited greater fish diversity and overall abundance, as well as greater abundance of carnivores and scrapers (Figs. 5 and 6; Table 1). Species richness was also weakly negatively related to seascape heterogeneity at the 200 m scale; however, the importance score of this variable was relatively low (Figs. 4 and 5). Total abundance of fish was positively correlated to percent cover of macroalgae (and consequently structural complexity; pairwise correlation coefficient = 0.74; Fig. 4, ESM Fig. 3, ESM Table 5). Overall fish abundance was also somewhat higher in shallower macroalgal beds (Fig. 5). Other variables present in the total abundance candidate models had low importance scores and did not increase the weight of the model (Fig. 4, ESM Table 5). Taxonomic distinctness of macroalgal fish assemblages declined at moderate levels of hard coral cover and with increasing connectivity to mangrove habitat (Fig. 5; Table 1).
Several measures of seascape configuration were included in the best models for the abundance of functional groups in macroalgal habitats; however, these metrics were generally weaker predictors than local habitat measures. In addition to a positive relationship with complexity, scraper abundance increased with the proportional area of sand in the seascape (200 m scale; Fig. 6; Table 1). Similarly, connectivity to mangrove habitat appeared in the best model of carnivore abundance, in addition to macroalgal cover; however, no directional relationship was evident (Fig. 6). Within the carnivore group, in addition to a positive relationship with macroalgal cover, the abundance of Lethrinus spp. and Lutjanus spp. were negatively correlated with proportion of sand in the seascape and seascape heterogeneity (both at the 200 m scale), respectively (ESM Fig. 5; ESM Table 6).
Micro-invertivores were the only functional group to respond to environmental metrics, with their abundance increasing at higher levels of turbidity (KD490) and decreasing in more heterogenous seascapes (200 m scale) in macroalgal habitats (Figs. 4 and 6; Table 1). The alternative candidate micro-invertivore model also showed a positive relationship with significant wave height (ESM Fig. 5, ESM Table 6).
Mangrove habitats
The total abundance of fish in mangrove habitats was highly variable and was not related to any of the predictor variables (i.e. the best model was the null; Fig. 2; Table 1). Similarly, while numerous predictor variables appeared in candidate models of mangrove species richness, none (including the ‘best’ model) had high variable importance scores or model weights (Fig. 4, ESM Table 5). Consequently, only a weak pattern of declining species richness at intermediate levels of connectivity to macroalgae habitats (500 m scale) was observed for mangrove fish assemblages (Fig. 5). In contrast to the patterns observed in coral habitats, the taxonomic distinctness of mangrove fish assemblages increased with structural complexity (Fig. 5; Table 1). Connectivity to coral habitats at the 200 m scale was also an important variable for the taxonomic distinctness of mangrove fish assemblages; however, this pattern was driven by a small number of transects (Figs. 4 and 5).
The abundance of fish within each functional group was also highly variable in mangrove habitats. Consequently, none of the predictor variables were strongly correlated to the abundance of any functional group (Table 1). Connectivity to macroalgae habitat at the 500 m scale was the most important predictor of carnivore abundance with abundance declining at intermediate levels of connectivity (Figs. 4 and 6). Within the carnivore group, the abundance of Acanthopagrus spp. and Choerodon spp. exhibited strong negative correlations with proportional area of macroalgae and sand habitat, respectively (500 m scale; ESM Fig. 5, ESM Table 6). The remaining genera-level models and the micro-invertivore model had low explanatory power (R2 = 0.14) and the best model for planktivores was the null (Table 1; ESM Table 5).
Discussion
In this study we investigated the importance of different structuring forces in determining the abundance, diversity, and functional composition of fish assemblages across multiple habitats within the dynamic seascape of the Dampier Archipelago, Western Australia. We found that local habitat composition and complexity were generally better predictors of overall fish abundance and diversity in both coral and macroalgal habitats than seascape configuration or environmental conditions. These findings contrast with previous studies that reported overriding effects of seascape configuration in structuring fish assemblages (Pittman et al. 2007; Olds et al. 2012a; Gilby et al. 2016; Sievers et al. 2020). Rather, our findings align with those of van Lier et al. (2018), who found that local habitat condition had the strongest influence on macroalgal fish assemblages, while seascape effects played a secondary role. We also identified distinct fish assemblages associated with specific habitats within the seascape (excepting sand habitats which harboured few fish) and found that the importance of biophysical drivers for fish varied between habitat types and functional groups. These findings contribute to a more nuanced understanding of the role of seascape configuration in structuring fish assemblages. Our results emphasise the importance of local structural complexity for fish and suggest that the value of structural connectivity between habitats depends on environmental context (Boström et al. 2011; Igulu et al. 2014; Bradley et al. 2021).
High structural complexity on coral reefs facilitates diverse and productive fish communities by creating numerous microhabitats and mediating ecological interactions (Hixon and Beets 1993; Graham and Nash 2013; Rogers et al. 2014). Our results demonstrate that structural complexity remains a crucial factor in shaping fish assemblages, even when the influence of seascape, environmental, and human use factors are taken into consideration. Structural complexity emerged as the strongest predictor of coral reef fish assemblages, with higher complexity resulting in increased total abundance, species richness, and representation of carnivores, herbivores, micro-invertivores, and planktivores. This is in contrast to previous studies that found that seascape configuration had a similar or greater effect on fish assemblages compared to structural complexity (Grober-Dunsmore et al. 2008; Olds et al. 2012a; Sievers et al. 2020). The dominance of structural complexity found in our study may be due to the small body sizes and limited home ranges of many of the abundant species recorded (Alvarez-Filip et al. 2011; Green et al. 2015; Nash et al. 2015). Some of these species likely recruit directly to coral reefs and occupy these habitats throughout their post-settlement life (Wilson et al. 2010; Coker et al. 2014), meaning that any influence of seascape configuration is likely to be overshadowed by variation in local habitat composition and complexity. Additionally, complex habitats may serve as hydrodynamic refuges for small-bodied species in macrotidal systems like the Dampier Archipelago (Johansen et al. 2008; Caldwell and Gergel 2013; Eggertsen et al. 2016). The importance of complexity in this system likely also explains the paucity of fish observed in sand habitats. However, our results also indicated that fish assemblages become taxonomically homogenous in uniformly complex coral reef habitats, highlighting the importance of local habitat heterogeneity to phylogenetic diversity. The relationship between complexity and the abundance of key functional groups underscores the crucial role of reef complexity in regulating benthic community structure, facilitating energy flow, and enhancing resilience (Hughes et al. 2007; Rogers et al. 2014; Graham et al. 2015).
Tropical macrophyte habitats (e.g. mangroves, seagrass, and macroalgae) have been shown to serve as nurseries for certain coral reef fish species (Dorenbosch et al. 2004; Mumby et al. 2004; Lefcheck et al. 2019). Accordingly, numerous studies have reported higher abundance of ‘nursery species’ (i.e. species that occupy macrophyte habitats as juveniles and coral reefs as adults) on coral reefs located near seagrass or mangrove habitats (Mumby et al. 2004; Grober-Dunsmore et al. 2007; Olds et al. 2012a; Harborne et al. 2016; Berkström et al. 2020). However, we found limited evidence that connectivity to mangrove or macroalgal habitat increased abundance or diversity of fishes on coral reefs (except for micro-invertivores). This result is unexpected as several studies in north-western Australia have previously identified macroalgae beds as nurseries for some Siganidae and Lethrinidae species (Wilson et al. 2010, 2018; Evans et al. 2014). The minimal influence of connectivity to potential nursery habitats on coral reef fish assemblages may be attributable to variations in environmental conditions, differences in the quantity/quality/arrangement of habitats, tidal amplitude, or assemblage composition among regions (Kendall et al. 2011; Hemingson and Bellwood 2020). For example, studies that reported benefits of connectivity to mangrove habitat were conducted in systems with extensive mangrove stands that are regularly inundated by tidal waters (Nagelkerken et al. 2008; Olds et al. 2012a; Berkström et al. 2020). In contrast, mangroves on the islands of the Dampier Archipelago tend to be relatively small, fringing stands, some of which are only inundated for short periods during the day (Semeniuk and Wurm 1987). As such, larger tidal ranges may reduce the value of intertidal mangrove habitat for fish (Barnes et al. 2012; Igulu et al. 2014; Sievers et al. 2020; Bradley et al. 2021), and/or strong tidal currents may facilitate fish migrations over greater spatial scales than in microtidal regions (Gibson 2003; Krumme 2009). Accordingly, inter-habitat migrations may occur over greater scales than those assessed in our study, as has been reported in the Caribbean (e.g. up to 4 km by Nagelkerken et al. 2017). Finally, the composition of fish assemblages may also influence the degree of ontogenetic multihabitat use. Hemingson and Bellwood (2020) reported lower ontogenetic connectivity on the Great Barrier Reef, Australia than in the Caribbean, attributing this difference to the larger adult body size of species comprising the Caribbean assemblages. Techniques such as tagging, telemetry and stable isotopes may be useful to determine the causes of this regional variation in the extent of seascape use by fish.
The complexity of macroalgal habitats is a function of both the rugosity of the underlying substrate and the soft macroalgal canopy structure (Wilson et al. 2014; van Lier et al. 2017). Our results showed that, similar to coral habitats, habitat complexity of the underlying reef was the best predictor of the overall abundance and diversity of fish in macroalgal habitats, whilst canopy height and density were relatively poor predictors. These results imply that when reef structure is moderately high, the benefits of structure associated with canopy become less important. Nonetheless, macroalgae cover was still an important predictor of fish abundance as complex macroalgae beds may offer food resources in the form of additional macroalgae biomass, epiphytic algae, juvenile fishes, and increased productivity of invertebrate epifauna (Tebbett et al. 2020; Fulton et al. 2020; Chen et al. 2021). Indeed, we observed an increased abundance of generalist carnivores (specifically Lethrinidae and Lutjanidae species) in more complex macroalgal beds. Interestingly, we did not see a similar positive correlation between micro-invertivore abundance and macroalgal cover. This may be a result of the feeding behaviour of the two dominant micro-invertivore genera observed, Stethojulis and Halichoeres, which tend to forage over the unvegetated components of macroalgal habitats and presumably use the macroalgal canopy primarily for shelter (Chen et al. 2022).
Given the dynamic nature of tropical macroalgae beds, it has been suggested that mobile, canopy-affiliated taxa may migrate to nearby alternative structured habitats during periods of low canopy biomass (Chen et al. 2022). However, we found connectivity to coral or mangrove habitats generally had little influence on the abundance or diversity of fish inhabiting macroalgal beds. This result has two plausible explanations: firstly, the strong currents in macrotidal environments may limit fish movement between habitats (Caldwell and Gergel 2013). Alternatively, these currents may instead facilitate fish movement, expanding fish home ranges beyond the scope of this study and allowing fish to access a wider variety of foraging sites (Krumme 2009). In contrast to previous studies conducted in macroalgae beds (van Lier et al. 2018) and seagrass meadows (Staveley et al. 2017), we observed lower abundance and diversity of micro-invertivores (and consequently overall species richness) in macroalgal beds within more heterogeneous seascapes. This inverse relationship between seascape heterogeneity and macroalgal micro-invertivore abundance may be explained by higher predation risk associated with an increased number of patch edges in more heterogeneous seascapes (Smith et al. 2010). This notion is supported by the positive relationship between micro-invertivore abundance and increased turbidity, as high turbidity may reduce prey detection by visual predators (Gregory and Levings 1998; Utne-Palm 2004). Alternatively, some micro-invertivores may be greater macroalgal specialists than previously thought and thus have limited ability to exploit more heterogenous seascapes (Fulton et al. 2020). As micro-invertivores are important conduits for the flow of benthic production to higher trophic levels, the mechanisms underlying their varying responses to seascape configuration warrant further investigation (Newcombe and Taylor 2010; Chen et al. 2022).
The mangrove fish assemblages surveyed in the present study contained unique species and, at times, notably high densities of fish. The species assemblages observed in mangrove habitat showed little overlap with those in coral or macroalgal habitats, and as such make a unique contribution to the overall diversity of the seascape. Similarly distinct fish assemblages have been reported elsewhere in Australia (Barnes et al. 2012; Hemingson and Bellwood 2020), the broader Indo-Pacific (Unsworth et al. 2009), and the Red Sea (Dunne et al. 2023). In contrast, fish assemblages in coral and mangrove habitats in the Caribbean frequently show considerable overlap (Chittaro et al. 2005; Verweij et al. 2006). The interaction between mangrove and coral habitats in the Indo-Pacific appears to be more variable (e.g. Unsworth et al. 2008, 2009), and often weaker, than in the Caribbean (Hemingson and Bellwood 2020), likely due to differences in geomorphology, tidal amplitude, environmental context, and evolutionary history (Barnes et al. 2012; Castellanos-Galindo et al. 2013; Igulu et al. 2014; Berkström et al. 2020; Bradley et al. 2020). Our findings suggest that the predation risk and/or energetic cost of tidal migrations from mangroves to subtidal biotic habitats is prohibitive for fish within the environmental and seascape context of The Dampier Archipelago (Dahlgren and Eggleston 2000; Sheaves 2005). Residual pools of water within the mangroves or rock habitats along the landward edges of bays may instead act as low tide refugia for fish occupying mangrove habitats (Espadero et al. 2021). Further research is required to determine the degree to which mangroves are connected to the broader seascape in macrotidal systems, and to understand the mechanisms dictating the degree of faunal inter-habitat connectivity (Sheaves 2005; Unsworth et al. 2008).
Recreational fishing can have considerable impacts on the biomass and composition of fish assemblages (McPhee et al. 2002; Zuercher et al. 2023). Indeed, previous studies have reported higher abundances of fished species at reefs located further from boat ramps (Stuart-Smith et al. 2008; Aston et al. 2022). While lower abundances of Ephinephelus spp. were recorded on coral reefs closer to boat ramps in this study, the same pattern was not evident for other commonly targeted genera (e.g. Lethrinus, Choerodon, and Lutjanus). The limited effects of human use in this study may be due to the dominance of biophysical drivers in shaping fish distributions within the challenging environmental context of the Dampier Archipelago (Fidler et al. 2021). However, it is also possible that distance to boat ramp does not accurately represent recreational fishing pressure in the region. High-resolution data quantifying the spatial distribution of fishing effort and catch rates would be beneficial in disentangling human impacts from habitat and seascape effects.
This study assessed the relative importance of a wide range of biophysical variables spanning several spatial scales for structuring fish assemblages across multiple habitat types in a tropical seascape. Using this novel framework, we demonstrated that the abundance, diversity, and composition of fish assemblages in the Dampier Archipelago were best predicted by local habitat composition and complexity, rather than measures of seascape configuration or environmental conditions. In contrast with previous work, proximity to potential macrophyte nursery habitats appeared to have little effect on coral reef fish abundance or diversity, except for micro-invertivores. This does not however discount the possibility that mangroves and macroalgae beds serve as nursey habitats in this region. Indeed, as video-based survey methods can underestimate the abundance of juvenile fish (Holmes et al. 2013), these findings may not fully reflect the relative importance of biophysical drivers for juvenile fish, which have limited mobility and are more vulnerable to predation than adults (Dahlgren and Eggleston 2000; Caldwell and Gergel 2013; Green et al. 2015). Future work could consider using complementary sampling methods, such as underwater visual census or eDNA, to further explore how the influence of structuring forces varies between life history stages. Our surveys also indicated that coral, macroalgal, and mangrove habitats contained unique fish assemblages and contributed to the overall diversity of fish within the seascape. Amid growing calls for the consideration of connectivity in marine reserve design, these findings underscore the importance of a deeper understanding of the mechanisms behind regional variation in the effects of seascape configuration on fish (Martin et al. 2015; Olds et al. 2016; Goetze et al. 2021). Our results provide support for management approaches that incorporate the full range of habitats present within tropical seascapes, and prioritise the preservation of structural complexity (Harborne et al. 2017; Sambrook et al. 2019; Wilson et al. 2022). Whilst comprehensive ecological and environmental datasets may not always be available, where such data do exist they can provide valuable insights for marine spatial planning. Given that conservation initiatives often require trade-offs between management objectives (McShane et al. 2011), approaches such as those used in this study can identify the combinations of local habitat and landscape characteristics that best support specific management goals (e.g. maintaining diversity or specific ecological processes). Furthermore, deepening our understanding of the mechanisms underpinning regional variation in the effects of key biophysical drivers will support the development of tailored strategies for preserving ecosystem function across tropical seascapes.
Data availability
The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
References
Akaike H (1998) Information Theory and an Extension of the Maximum Likelihood Principle. In: Second International Symposium on Information Theory. pp 199–213
Althaus F, Hill N, Ferrari R, Edwards L, Przeslawski R, Schönberg CHL, Stuart-Smith R, Barrett N, Edgar G, Colquhoun J, Tran M, Jordan A, Rees T, Gowlett-Holmes K (2015) A standardised vocabulary for identifying benthic biota and substrata from underwater imagery: the CATAMI classification scheme. PLoS ONE 10:1–18
Alvarez-Filip L, Gill JA, Dulvy NK (2011) Complex reef architecture supports more small-bodied fishes and longer food chains on Caribbean reefs. Ecosphere 2:art118
Anderson M, Clarke K, Gorley R (2008) PERMANOVA+ for Primer. Guide to Software and Statistical Methods
Aston C, Langlois T, Fisher R, Monk J, Gibbons B, Giraldo-Ospina A, Lawrence E, Keesing J, Lebrec U, Babcock RC (2022) Recreational fishing impacts in an offshore and deep-water marine park: examining patterns in fished species using hybrid frequentist model selection and bayesian inference. Front Mar Sci 9:1–17
Barnes L, Bellwood DR, Sheaves M, Tanner JK (2012) The use of clear-water non-estuarine mangroves by reef fishes on the great barrier reef. Mar Biol 159:211–220
Bayley DTI, Mogg AOM, Koldewey H, Purvis A (2019) Capturing complexity: field-testing the use of structure from motion derived virtual models to replicate standard measures of reef physical structure. PeerJ 2019:1–17
Bellwood DR, Fulton CJ (2008) Sediment-mediated suppression of herbivory on coral reefs: decreasing resilience to rising sea levels and climate change? Limnol Oceanogr 53:2695–2701
Berkström C, Lindborg R, Thyresson M, Gullström M (2013) Assessing connectivity in a tropical embayment: fish migrations and seascape ecology. Biol Conserv 166:43–53
Berkström C, Eggertsen L, Goodell W, Cordeiro CAMM, Lucena MB, Gustafsson R, Bandeira S, Jiddawi N, Ferreira CEL (2020) Thresholds in seascape connectivity: the spatial arrangement of nursery habitats structure fish communities on nearby reefs. Ecography (Cop) 43:882–896
Betzabeth PJE, de los Ángeles LCM (2017) Spatial diversity of a coastal seascape: characterization, analysis and application for conservation. Ocean Coast Manag 136:185–195
Beukers JS, Jones GP (1998) Habitat complexity modifies the impact of piscivores on a coral reef fish population. Oecologia 114:50–59
Bishop-Taylor R, Sagar S, Lymburner L, Beaman RJ (2019) Between the tides: modelling the elevation of Australia’s exposed intertidal zone at continental scale. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 223:115–128
Blakeway D, Byers M, Stoddart J, Rossendell J (2013) Coral colonisation of an Artificial reef in a Turbid Nearshore Environment, Dampier Harbour, Western Australia. PLoS ONE 8:1–13
Boström C, Pittman S, Simenstad C, Kneib R (2011) Seascape ecology of coastal biogenic habitats: advances, gaps, and challenges. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 427:191–217
Boyd J, Banzhaf S (2007) What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecol Econ 63:616–626
Bradley M, Nagelkerken I, Baker R, Sheaves M (2020) Context dependence: a conceptual approach for understanding the habitat relationships of Coastal Marine Fauna. Bioscience 70:986–1004
Bradley M, Nagelkerken I, Baker R, Travers M, Sheaves M (2021) Local environmental context structures animal-habitat associations across biogeographic regions. Ecosystems. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-021-00651-7
Brandl SJ, Rasher DB, Côté IM, Casey JM, Darling ES, Lefcheck JS, Duffy JE (2019) Coral reef ecosystem functioning: eight core processes and the role of biodiversity. Front Ecol Environ 17:445–454
Brown CJ, Jupiter SD, Lin HY, Albert S, Klein C, Maina JM, Tulloch VJD, Wenger AS, Mumby PJ (2017) Habitat change mediates the response of coral reef fish populations to terrestrial run-off. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 576:55–68
Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multi-model inference: a practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd edn. Springer, New York, USA
Calabrese JM, Fagan WF (2004) A comparison-shoppers’ guide to connectivity metrics. Front Ecol Environ 2:529–536
Caldwell IR, Gergel SE (2013) Thresholds in seascape connectivity: influence of mobility, habitat distribution, and current strength on fish movement. Landsc Ecol 28:1937–1948
Castellanos-Galindo GA, Krumme U, Rubio EA, Saint-Paul U (2013) Spatial variability of mangrove fish assemblage composition in the tropical eastern Pacific Ocean. Rev Fish Biol Fish 23:69–86
Ceccarelli DM, Evans RD, Logan M, Jones GP, Puotinen M, Petus C, Russ GR, Srinivasan M, Williamson DH (2023) Physical, biological and anthropogenic drivers of spatial patterns of coral reef fish assemblages at regional and local scales. Sci Total Environ 904:166695
Chamberlain S (2023) rerddap: General Purpose Client for ERDDAP Servers
Chen YY, Cooper P, Fulton CJ, Fox RJ (2021) Quantifying epifaunal secondary production within tropical macroalgal meadows: seasonality and sensitivity to canopy structure. Limnol Oceanogr 66:4267–4284
Chen YY, Jennions M, Fox RJ (2022) Foraging microhabitat preferences of invertivorous fishes within tropical macroalgal meadows: identification of canopy specialists. Coral Reefs 41:1511–1522
Chittaro PM, Usseglio P, Sale PF (2005) Variation in fish density, assemblage composition and relative rates of predation among mangrove, seagrass and coral reef habitats. Environ Biol Fishes 72:175–187
Clarke KR, Warwick RM (1998) A taxonomic distinctness index and its statistical properties. J Appl Ecol 35:523–531
Codiga DL (2011) Unified Tidal Analysis and Prediction Using the UTide Matlab Functions. Technical Report 2011-01. Narragansett, RI
Coker DJ, Wilson SK, Pratchett MS (2014) Importance of live coral habitat for reef fishes. Rev Fish Biol Fish 24:89–126
Collins DL, Langlois TJ, Bond T, Holmes TH, Harvey ES, Fisher R, McLean DL (2017) A novel stereo-video method to investigate fish–habitat relationships. Methods Ecol Evol 8:116–125
Dahlgren CP, Eggleston DB (2000) Ecological processes underlying ontogenetic habitat shifts in a coral reef fish. Ecology 81:2227–2240
Darling ES, Graham NAJ, Januchowski-Hartley FA, Nash KL, Pratchett MS, Wilson SK (2017) Relationships between structural complexity, coral traits, and reef fish assemblages. Coral Reefs 36:561–575
Denny MW (1994) Roles of hydrodynamics in the study of life on wave-swept shores. In: Wainwright PC, Reilly SM (eds) Ecological morphology. Integrative organismal biology. University of Chicago Press, pp 169–204
Depczynski M, Bellwood DR (2005) Wave energy and spatial variability in community structure of small cryptic coral reef fishes. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 303:283–293
Dorenbosch M, Van Riel MC, Nagelkerken I, Van Der Velde G (2004) The relationship of reef fish densities to the proximity of mangrove and seagrass nurseries. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 60:37–48
Dubuc A, Baker R, Marchand C, Waltham NJ, Sheaves M (2019) Hypoxia in mangroves: occurrence and impact on valuable tropical fish habitat. Biogeosciences 16:3959–3976
Dulvy NK, Freckleton RP, Polunin NVC (2004) Coral reef cascades and the indirect effects of predator removal by exploitation. Ecol Lett 7:410–416
Dunbar K, Baker R, Sheaves M (2017) Effects of forest width on fish use of fringing mangroves in a highly urbanised tropical estuary. Mar Freshw Res 68:1764–1770
Dunne A, Coker DJ, Kattan A, Tietbohl MD, Ellis JI, Jones B, Berumen M (2023) Importance of coastal vegetated habitats for tropical marine fishes in the Red Sea. Mar Biol 170:90
Eggertsen L, Hammar L, Gullström M (2016) Effects of tidal current-induced flow on reef fish behaviour and function on a subtropical rocky reef. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 559:175–192
Espadero ADA, Nakamura Y, Uy WH, Horinouchi M (2021) Tropical intertidal seagrass beds as fish habitat: similarities between fish assemblages of intertidal and subtidal seagrass beds in the Philippines. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 251:107245
ESRI (2020) ArcGIS Desktop
Evans J, Murphy M (2021) spatialEco
Evans RD, Wilson SK, Field SN, Moore JAY (2014) Importance of macroalgal fields as coral reef fish nursery habitat in north-west Australia. Mar Biol 161:599–607
Evans RD, Wilson SK, Fisher R, Ryan NM, Babcock R, Blakeway D, Bond T, Dorji P, Dufois F, Fearns P, Lowe RJ, Stoddart J, Thomson DP (2020) Early recovery dynamics of turbid coral reefs after recurring bleaching events. J Environ Manage 268:110666
Faunce CH, Layman CA (2009) Sources of variation that affect perceived nursery function of mangroves. Ecological connectivity among Tropical Coastal ecosystems. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, pp 401–421
Fidler RY, Andradi-Brown DA, Awaludinnoer, Pada D, Purwanto, Hidayat NI, Ahmadia GN, Harborne AR (2021) The importance of biophysical context in understanding marine protected area outcomes for coral reef fish populations. Coral Reefs 40:791–805
Fisher R, Wilson SK, Sin TM, Lee AC, Langlois TJ (2018) A simple function for full-subsets multiple regression in ecology with R. Ecol Evol 8:6104–6113
Froese R, Pauly D (2022) FishBase. https://www.fishbase.org. Accessed 1 Feb 2022
Fulton CJ, Bellwood DR, Wainwright PC (2005) Wave energy and swimming performance shape coral reef fish assemblages. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 272:827–832
Fulton CJ, Berkström C, Wilson SK, Abesamis RA, Bradley M, Åkerlund C, Barrett LT, Bucol AA, Chacin DH, Chong-Seng KM, Coker DJ, Depczynski M, Eggertsen L, Eggertsen M, Ellis D, Evans RD, Graham NAJ, Hoey AS, Holmes TH, Kulbicki M, Leung PTY, Lam PKS, Lier J, Matis PA, Noble MM, Pérez‐Matus A, Piggott C, Radford BT, Tano S, Tinkler P (2020) Macroalgal meadow habitats support fish and fisheries in diverse tropical seascapes. Fish Fish 21:700–717
Gibson RN (2003) Go with the flow: tidal migration in marine animals. Hydrobiologia 503:153–161
Gilby BL, Tibbetts IR, Olds AD, Maxwell PS, Stevens T (2016) Seascape context and predators override water quality effects on inshore coral reef fish communities. Coral Reefs 35:979–990
Gissi E, Manea E, Mazaris AD, Fraschetti S, Almpanidou V, Bevilacqua S, Coll M, Guarnieri G, Lloret-Lloret E, Pascual M, Petza D, Rilov G, Schonwald M, Stelzenmüller V, Katsanevakis S (2021) A review of the combined effects of climate change and other local human stressors on the marine environment. Sci Total Environ 755:142564
Goetze JS, Bond T, McLean DL, Saunders BJ, Langlois TJ, Lindfield S, Fullwood LAF, Driessen D, Shedrawi G, Harvey ES (2019) A field and video analysis guide for diver operated stereo-video. Methods Ecol Evol 10:1083–1090
Goetze JS, Wilson S, Radford B, Fisher R, Langlois TJ, Monk J, Knott NA, Malcolm H, Currey-Randall LM, Ierodiaconou D, Harasti D, Barrett N, Babcock RC, Bosch NE, Brock D, Claudet J, Clough J, Fairclough DV, Heupel MR, Holmes TH, Huveneers C, Jordan AR, McLean D, Meekan M, Miller D, Newman SJ, Rees MJ, Roberts KE, Saunders BJ, Speed CW, Travers MJ, Treml E, Whitmarsh SK, Wakefield CB, Harvey ES (2021) Increased connectivity and depth improve the effectiveness of marine reserves. Glob Chang Biol 27:3432–3447
Graham MH (2003) Confronting multicollinearity in ecological multiple regression. Ecology 84:2809–2815
Graham NAJ, Nash KL (2013) The importance of structural complexity in coral reef ecosystems. Coral Reefs 32:315–326
Graham NAJ, Jennings S, MacNeil MA, Mouillot D, Wilson SK (2015) Predicting climate-driven regime shifts versus rebound potential in coral reefs. Nature 518:94–97
Graham NAJ, McClanahan TR, MacNeil MA, Wilson SK, Cinner JE, Huchery C, Holmes TH (2017) Human disruption of coral reef Trophic structure. Curr Biol 27:231–236
Gratwicke B, Speight MRR (2005) The relationship between fish species richness, abundance and habitat complexity in a range of shallow tropical marine habitats. J Fish Biol 66:650–667
Green AL, Maypa AP, Almany GR, Rhodes KL, Weeks R, Abesamis RA, Gleason MG, Mumby PJ, White AT (2015) Larval dispersal and movement patterns of coral reef fishes, and implications for marine reserve network design. Biol Rev 90:1215–1247
Gregory RS, Levings CD (1998) Turbidity reduces predation on migrating Juvenile Pacific Salmon. Trans Am Fish Soc 127:275–285
Grober-Dunsmore R, Frazer TK, Lindberg WJ, Beets J (2007) Reef fish and habitat relationships in a Caribbean seascape: the importance of reef context. Coral Reefs 26:201–216
Grober-Dunsmore R, Frazer TK, Beets JP, Lindberg WJ, Zwick P, Funicelli NA (2008) Influence of landscape structure on reef fish assemblages. Landsc Ecol 23:37–53
Haddad NM, Brudvig LA, Clobert J, Davies KF, Gonzalez A, Holt RD, Lovejoy TE, Sexton JO, Austin MP, Collins CD, Cook WM, Damschen EI, Ewers RM, Foster BL, Jenkins CN, King AJ, Laurance WF, Levey DJ, Margules CR, Melbourne BA, Nicholls AO, Orrock JL, Song D, Townshend JR (2015) Habitat fragmentation and its lasting impact on Earth’s ecosystems. Sci Adv. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1500052
Hanski I (1998) Metapopulation dynamics. Nature 396:41–49
Harborne AR, Mumby PJ, Kappe CV, Dahlgren CP, Micheli F, Holmes KE, Brumbaugh DR (2008) Tropical coastal habitats as surrogates of fish community structure, grazing, and fisheries value. Ecol Appl 18:1689–1701
Harborne AR, Nagelkerken I, Wolff NH, Bozec YM, Dorenbosch M, Grol MGG, Mumby PJ (2016) Direct and indirect effects of nursery habitats on coral-reef fish assemblages, grazing pressure and benthic dynamics. Oikos 125:957–967
Harborne AR, Rogers A, Bozec YM, Mumby PJ (2017) Multiple stressors and the functioning of Coral Reefs. Ann Rev Mar Sci 9:445–468
Harper LM, Lefcheck JS, Whippo R, Jones MS, Foltz Z, Duffy JE (2022) Blinded by the bright: how species-poor habitats contribute to regional biodiversity across a tropical seascape. Divers Distrib. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.13632
Harrison XA (2014) Using observation-level random effects to model overdispersion in count data in ecology and evolution. PeerJ 2:e616
Hemingson CR, Bellwood DR (2020) Greater multihabitat use in Caribbean fishes when compared to their great barrier reef counterparts. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 239:106748
Henderson CJ, Gilby BL, Lee SY, Stevens T (2017) Contrasting effects of habitat complexity and connectivity on biodiversity in seagrass meadows. Mar Biol 164:1–9
Hixon MA, Beets JP (1993) Predation, Prey Refuges, and the structure of coral-reef fish assemblages. Ecol Monogr 63:77–101
Holmes TH, Wilson SK, Travers MJ, Langlois TJ, Evans RD, Moore GI, Douglas RA, Shedrawi G, Harvey ES, Hickey K (2013) A comparison of visual- and stereo-video based fish community assessment methods in tropical and temperate marine waters of Western Australia. Limnol Oceanogr Methods 11:337–350
Hughes TP, Rodrigues MJ, Bellwood DR, Ceccarelli D, Hoegh-Guldberg O, McCook L, Moltschaniwskyj N, Pratchett MS, Steneck RS, Willis B (2007) Phase shifts, herbivory, and the resilience of coral reefs to climate change. Curr Biol 17:360–365
Hughes TP, Kerry JT, Baird AH, Connolly SR, Dietzel A, Eakin CM, Heron SF, Hoey AS, Hoogenboom MO, Liu G, McWilliam MJ, Pears RJ, Pratchett MS, Skirving WJ, Stella JS, Torda G (2018) Global warming transforms coral reef assemblages. Nature 556:492–496
Hyndes GA, Nagelkerken I, Mcleod RJ, Connolly RM, Lavery PS, Vanderklift MA (2014) Mechanisms and ecological role of carbon transfer within coastal seascapes. Biol Rev 89:232–254
Igulu MM, Nagelkerken I, Dorenbosch M, Grol MGG, Harborne AR, Kimirei IA, Mumby PJ, Olds AD, Mgaya YD (2014) Mangrove habitat use by juvenile reef fish: Meta-analysis reveals that tidal regime matters more than biogeographic region. PLoS ONE 9:e114715
Johansen JL, Bellwood DR, Fulton CJ (2008) Coral reef fishes exploit flow refuges in high-flow habitats. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 360:219–226
Kendall MS, Miller TJ, Pittman SJ (2011) Patterns of scale-dependency and the influence of map resolution on the seascape ecology of reef fish. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 427:259–274
Kramer DL, Chapman MR (1999) Implications of fish home range size and relocation for marine reserve function. Environ Biol Fishes 55:65–79
Krumme U (2009) Diel and tidal movements by Fish and Decapods linking Tropical Coastal ecosystems. Ecological connectivity among Tropical Coastal ecosystems. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, pp 271–324
Kruse M, Taylor M, Muhando CA, Reuter H (2016) Lunar, Diel, and tidal changes in fish assemblages in an east African marine reserve. Reg Stud Mar Sci 3:49–57
Lefcheck JS, Hughes BB, Johnson AJ, Pfirrman BW, Rasher DB, Smyth AR, Williams BL, Beck MW, Orth RJ (2019) Are coastal habitats important nurseries? A meta-analysis. Conserv Lett. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12645
Luo J, Serafy JE, Sponaugle S, Teare PB, Kieckbusch D (2009) Movement of gray snapper Lutjanus griseus among subtropical seagrass, mangrove, and coral reef habitats. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 380:255–269
Marine Parks and Reserves Selection Working Group (1994) A representative marine reserve system for western Australia: report of the Marine Parks and reserves Selection Working Group. Perth, Western Australia
Marshall CE, Glegg GA, Howell KL (2014) Species distribution modelling to support marine conservation planning: the next steps. Mar Policy 45:330–332
Martin TSH, Olds AD, Pitt KA, Johnston AB, Butler IR, Maxwell PS, Connolly RM (2015) Effective protection of fish on inshore coral reefs depends on the scale of mangrove - reef connectivity. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 527:157–165
McDonald J, Beckett E, Hacker J, Morrison P, O’leary M (2020) Seeing the landscape: multiple scales of visualising terrestrial heritage on Rosemary Island (dampier archipelago). Open Quat 6:1–17
McFeeters SK (1996) The use of the normalized difference water index (NDWI) in the delineation of open water features. Int J Remote Sens 17:1425–1432
McPhee DP, Leadbitter D, Skilleter GA (2002) Swallowing the bait: is recreational fishing in Australia ecologically sustainable? Pac Conserv Biol 8:40–51
McShane TO, Hirsch PD, Trung TC, Songorwa AN, Kinzig A, Monteferri B, Mutekanga D, Thang H, Van, Dammert JL, Pulgar-Vidal M, Welch-Devine M, Peter Brosius J, Coppolillo P, O’Connor S (2011) Hard choices: making trade-offs between biodiversity conservation and human well-being. Biol Conserv 144:966–972
Meynecke JO, Poole GC, Werry J, Lee SY (2008) Use of PIT tag and underwater video recording in assessing estuarine fish movement in a high intertidal mangrove and salt marsh creek. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 79:168–178
Moberg F, Folke C (1999) Ecological goods and services of coral reef ecosystems. Ecol Econ 29:215–233
Moilanen A, Nieminen M (2002) Simple connectivity measures in spatial ecology. Ecology 83:1131–1145
Morrison PF (2004) A general description of the subtidal habitats of the Dampier Archipelago, Western Australia. Rec West Aust Museum Suppl. 66:51
Moustaka M, Langlois TJ, McLean D, Bond T, Fisher R, Fearns P, Dorji P, Evans RD (2018) The effects of suspended sediment on coral reef fish assemblages and feeding guilds of north-west Australia. Coral Reefs. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-018-1690-1
Moustaka M, Mohring M, Holmes T, Evans R, Thomson D, Nutt C, Stoddart J, Wilson S (2019) Cross-shelf heterogeneity of coral assemblages in Northwest Australia. Diversity. https://doi.org/10.3390/d11020015
Moyroud N, Portet F (2018) Introduction to QGIS. QGIS Generic Tools 1:1–17
Mumby PJ, Edwards AJ, Lez JEA-G, Lindeman KC, Blackwell PG, Gall A, Gorczynska MI, Harborne AR, Pescod CL, Renken H, Wabnitz CCC, Llewellyn G (2004) Mangroves enhance the biomass of coral reef fish communities in the Caribbean. Nature 427:533–536
Murray K (2020) Dampier / Montebello Islands Mangrove Monitoring Remote Sensing Technical Report 2020. Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions, Perth, Western Australia
Nagelkerken I, Blaber SJM, Bouillon S, Green P, Haywood M, Kirton LG, Meynecke JO, Pawlik J, Penrose HM, Sasekumar A, Somerfield PJ (2008) The habitat function of mangroves for terrestrial and marine fauna: a review. Aquat Bot 89:155–185
Nagelkerken I, Huebert KB, Serafy JE, Grol MGG, Dorenbosch M, Bradshaw CJA (2017) Highly localized replenishment of coral reef fish populations near nursery habitats. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 568:137–150
Nash KL, Welsh JQ, Graham NAJ, Bellwood DR (2015) Home-range allometry in coral reef fishes: comparison to other vertebrates, methodological issues and management implications. Oecologia 177:73–83
Newcombe EM, Taylor RB (2010) Trophic cascade in a seaweed-epifauna-fish food chain. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 408:161–167
Newman SJ, Wise BS, Santoro KG, J GD (eds) (2023) Status reports of the fisheries and aquatic resources of Western Australia 2021/22: the state of the fisheries. Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, Hillarys, Western Australia
Odum HT, Odum EP (1955) Trophic structure and Productivity of a Windward Coral Reef Community on Eniwetok Atoll. Ecol Monogr 25:291–320
Oksanen J, Simpson GL, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, Minchin PR, O’Hara RB, Solymos P, Stevens MHH, Szoecs E, Wagner H, Barbour M, Bedward M, Bolker B, Borcard D, Carvalho G, Chirico M, De Caceres M, Durand S, Evangelista HBA, FitzJohn R, Friendly M, Furneaux B, Hannigan G, Hill MO, Lahti L, McGlinn D, Ouellette M-H, Ribeiro Cunha E, Smith T, Stier A, Ter Braak CJF, Weedon J (2022) Vegan: Community Ecology Package
Olds AD, Connolly RM, Pitt KA, Maxwell PS (2012a) Primacy of seascape connectivity effects in structuring coral reef fish assemblages. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 462:191–203
Olds AD, Pitt KA, Maxwell PS, Connolly RM (2012b) Synergistic effects of reserves and connectivity on ecological resilience. J Appl Ecol 49:1195–1203
Olds AD, Albert S, Maxwell PS, Pitt KA, Connolly RM (2013) Mangrove-reef connectivity promotes the effectiveness of marine reserves across the western Pacific. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 22:1040–1049
Olds AD, Connolly RM, Pitt KA, Pittman SJ, Maxwell PS, Huijbers CM, Moore BR, Albert S, Rissik D, Babcock RC, Schlacher TA (2016) Quantifying the conservation value of seascape connectivity: a global synthesis. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 25:3–15
Pearce AF, Buchan S, Chiffings T, D’Adamo N, Fandry CB, Fearns PRCS, Mills DJ, Phillips RC, Simpson C (2003) A review of the oceanography of the Dampier Archipelago, Western Australia. In: The Marine flora and fauna of Dampier, Western Australia: proceedings of the Eleventh International Marine Biological Workshop. Western Australian Museum, Perth, Western Australia, pp 13–50
Pebesma E (2018) Simple features for R: standardized support for spatial Vector Data. R J 10:439–436
Pickens BA, Carroll R, Schirripa MJ, Forrestal F, Friedland KD, Taylor JC (2021) A systematic review of spatial habitat associations and modeling of marine fish distribution: a guide to predictors, methods, and knowledge gaps. PLoS ONE 16:1–21
Pittman SJ, McAlpine CA (2003) Movements of marine fish and decapod crustaceans: Process, theory and application
Pittman SJ, Caldow C, Hile SD, Monaco ME (2007) Using seascape types to explain the spatial patterns of fish in the mangroves of SW Puerto Rico. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 348:273–284
Polunin NVC, Roberts CM (1993) Greater biomass and value of target coral-reef fishes in two small Caribbean marine reserves. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 100:167–176
Pratchett MS, Hoey AS, Wilson SK, Messmer V, Graham NAJ (2011) Changes in biodiversity and functioning of reef fish assemblages following coral bleaching and coral loss. Diversity 3:424–452
Pullin AS (2002) Conservation Biology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
R Core Team (2022) R: a Language and. Environment for Statistical Computing
Rogers A, Blanchard JL, Mumby PJ (2014) Vulnerability of coral reef fisheries to a loss of structural complexity. Curr Biol 24:1000–1005
Sambrook K, Hoey AS, Andréfouët S, Cumming GS, Duce S, Bonin MC (2019) Beyond the reef: the widespread use of non-reef habitats by coral reef fishes. Fish Fish. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12383
SeaGIS Pty Ltd (2020a) EventMeasure
SeaGIS Pty Ltd (2020b) TransectMeasure
Semeniuk V, Wurm PAS (1987) Mangroves of the Dampier Archipelago, Western Australia. J - R Soc West Aust 69:29–87
Serafy JE, Linderman KC, Hopkins TE, Ault JS (1997) Effects of freshwater canal discharges on subtropical marine fish assemblages: field and laboratory observations. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 160:161–172
Serafy JE, Faunce CH, Lorenz JJ (2003) Mangrove shoreline fishes of Biscayne Bay, Florida. Bull Mar Sci 72:161–180
Shannon CE (1948) A Mathematical Theory of Communication. Bell Syst Tech J 27:379–423
Sheaves M (1998) Spatial patterns in estuarine fish faunas in tropical Queensland: a reflection of interaction between long-term physical and biological processes? Mar Freshw Res 49:31–40
Sheaves M (2005) Nature and consequences of biological connectivity in mangrove systems. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 302:293–305
Sheaves M, Baker R, Nagelkerken I, Connolly RM (2015) True value of Estuarine and Coastal nurseries for Fish: incorporating Complexity and Dynamics. Estuaries Coasts 38:401–414
Sheaves M, Johnston R, Baker R (2016) Use of mangroves by fish: new insights from in-forest videos. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 549:167–182
Shulman MJ (1985) Recruitment of coral reef fishes: effects of distribution of predators and shelter. Ecology 66:1056–1066
Sievers KT, McClure EC, Abesamis RA, Russ GR (2020) Non-reef habitats in a tropical seascape affect density and biomass of fishes on coral reefs. Ecol Evol 10:13673–13686
Simpson E (1949) Measurement of Diversity. Nature 163:688–688
Smith TM, Hindell JS, Jenkins GP, Connolly RM (2010) Seagrass patch size affects fish responses to edges. J Anim Ecol 79:275–281
Staveley TAB, Perry D, Lindborg R, Gullström M (2017) Seascape structure and complexity influence temperate seagrass fish assemblage composition. Ecography (Cop) 40:936–946
Stuart-Smith RD, Barrett NS, Crawford CM, Frusher SD, Stevenson DG, Edgar GJ (2008) Spatial patterns in impacts of fishing on temperate rocky reefs: are fish abundance and mean size related to proximity to fisher access points? J Exp Mar Bio Ecol 365:116–125
Tebbett SB, Streit RP, Bellwood DR (2020) A 3D perspective on sediment accumulation in algal turfs: implications of coral reef flattening. J Ecol 108:70–80
Unsworth RKF, De León PS, Garrard SL, Jompa J, Smith DJ, Bell JJ (2008) High connectivity of Indo-Pacific seagrass fish assemblages with mangrove and coral reef habitats. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 353:213–224
Unsworth RKF, Garrard SL, De León PS, Cullen LC, Smith DJ, Sloman KA, Bell JJ (2009) Structuring of Indo-Pacific fish assemblages along the mangrove-seagrass continuum. Aquat Biol 5:85–95
Utne-Palm AC (2004) Effects of larvae ontogeny, turbidity, and turbulence on prey attack rate and swimming activity of Atlantic herring larvae. J Exp Mar Bio Ecol 310:147–161
van Lier JR, Harasti D, Laird R, Noble MM, Fulton CJ (2017) Importance of soft canopy structure for labrid fish communities in estuarine mesohabitats. Mar Biol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-017-3068-2
van Lier JR, Wilson SK, Depczynski M, Wenger LN, Fulton CJ (2018) Habitat connectivity and complexity underpin fish community structure across a seascape of tropical macroalgae meadows. Landsc Ecol 33:1287–1300
Vanderklift M, Bearham D, Haywood M, Lozano-Montes H, McCallum R, McLaughlin J, McMahon K, Mortimer N, Lavery P (2016) Natural dynamics: understanding natural dynamics of seagrasses in north-western Australia. North-western Australia. Report of theme 5 – project 5.3 prepared for the Dredging Science Node. Western Australian Marine Science Institution, Perth, Western Australia
Vaslet A, Phillips DL, France CAM, Feller IC, Baldwin CC (2015) Trophic behaviour of juvenile reef fishes inhabiting interlinked mangrove-seagrass habitats in offshore mangrove islets. J Fish Biol 87:256–273
Verweij MC, Nagelkerken I, Graaff D, De, Peeters M, Bakker EJ, Van Der Velde G (2006) Structure, food and shade attract juvenile coral reef fish to mangrove and seagrass habitats: a field experiment. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 306:257–268
Villero D, Pla M, Camps D, Ruiz-Olmo J, Brotons L (2017) Integrating species distribution modelling into decision-making to inform conservation actions. Biodivers Conserv 26:251–271
Western Australia Department of Fisheries (2015) What the charter boats are catching. Hillarys, WA
Western Australia Environmental Protection Authority (2007) Environmental Protection Authority. Bulletin 1259: Pluto LNG Development, Burrup Peninsula, Woodside Energy Ltd. Environmental Protection Authority, Perth, Western Australia
Wiens JA, Stenseth NC, Horne B, Van, Ims RA (1993) Ecological mechanisms and Landscape Ecology. Oikos 66:369
Wilson SK, Graham NAJ, Polunin NVC (2007) Appraisal of visual assessments of habitat complexity and benthic composition on coral reefs. Mar Biol 151:1069–1076
Wilson SK, Fisher R, Pratchett MS, Graham NAJ, Dulvy NK, Turner RA, Cakacaka A, Polunin NVC, Rushton SP (2008) Exploitation and habitat degradation as agents of change within coral reef fish communities. Glob Chang Biol 14:2796–2809
Wilson SK, Depczynski M, Fisher R, Holmes TH, O’Leary RA, Tinkler P (2010) Habitat associations of Juvenile Fish at Ningaloo Reef, Western Australia: the importance of Coral and Algae. PLoS ONE 5:e15185
Wilson N, Tickle P, Gallant J, Dowling T, Read A (2011) 1 second SRTM Derived Hydrological Digital Elevation Model (DEM-H)
Wilson SK, Fulton CJ, Depczynski M, Holmes TH, Noble MM, Radford B, Tinkler P (2014) Seasonal changes in habitat structure underpin shifts in macroalgae-associated tropical fish communities. Mar Biol 161:2597–2607
Wilson SK, Depczynski M, Holmes TH, Noble MM, Radford BT, Tinkler P, Fulton CJ (2017) Climatic conditions and nursery habitat quality provide indicators of reef fish recruitment strength. Limnol Oceanogr 62:1868–1880
Wilson SK, Depcyznski M, Fisher R, Holmes TH, Noble MM, Radford BT, Rule M, Shedrawi G, Tinkler P, Fulton CJ (2018) Climatic forcing and larval dispersal capabilities shape the replenishment of fishes and their habitat-forming biota on a tropical coral reef. Ecol Evol 8:1918–1928
Wilson SK, Fulton CJ, Graham NAJ, Abesamis A, Berkström R, Coker C, Depczynski DJ, Evans M, Fisher RD, Goetze R, Hoey J, Holmes A, Kulbicki TH, Noble M, Robinson M, Bradley JPW, Åkerlund M, Barrett C, Bucol LT, Birt AA, Chacin MJ, Chong-Seng DH, Eggertsen KM, Eggertsen L, Ellis M, Leung D, Lam PTY, van Lier PKS, Matis J, Pérez‐Matus PA, Piggott A, Radford CVH, Tano BT, Tinkler S P (2022) The contribution of macroalgae‐associated fishes to small‐scale tropical reef fisheries. Fish Fish 23:847–861
Wood SN (2011) Fast stable restricted maximum likelihood and marginal likelihood estimation of semiparametric generalized linear models. J R Stat Soc Ser B Stat Methodol 73:3–36
Wood SN (2006) Generalized additive models: an introduction with R. Taylor & Francis, CRC Press, London
Woodhead AJ, Hicks CC, Norström AV, Williams GJ, Graham NAJ (2019) Coral reef ecosystem services in the Anthropocene. Funct Ecol 33:1023–1034
Young IR (1989) Wave transformation over coral reefs. J Geophys Res 94:9779
Zuercher R, Kochan DP, Brumbaugh RD, Freeman K, Layko R, Harborne AR (2023) Identifying correlates of coral-reef fish biomass on Florida’s coral reef to assess potential management actions. Aquat Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst 33:246–263
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Ms Caprice Hyde (DBCA) for analysing the stereo-DOV footage, Ms Adi Zweifler (Zvifler) (UWA) for her help analysing the benthic imagery, Dr Rebecca Fisher (AIMS) for her assistance with data analysis, Ms Kathy Murray (DBCA) and Mr Bart Huntley (DBCA) for their assistance with the GIS component of this work, and Dr Simone Strydom (DBCA) and Dr Chanelle Webster (ECU) for their efforts in the field. The authors would also like to thank the three anonymous reviewers for their considered feedback. Additional data for the hydrodynamic modelling was provided by Rio Tinto and Pilbara Ports Authority. We recognise and acknowledge the Murujuga People, the traditional custodians of the land and sea country on which this study was conducted.
Funding
Open Access funding enabled and organized by CAUL and its Member Institutions. This research was funded by the Kieran McNamara World Heritage PhD Top-Up Scholarship, the Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship, and the Woodside-operated Pluto Project’s State Environmental Offset Program “D” and administered by the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions. The hydrodynamic modelling work was supported by resources provided by the Pawsey Supercomputing Research Centre with funding from the Australian Government and the Government of Western Australia.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
MM, RE, SW, GK, and GH contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by MM, RE, SW, TB, MC, and MO. The first draft of the manuscript was written by MM and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests. The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.
Ethical approval
This research was conducted in accordance with the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions animal ethics permit 2020-16 A.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Moustaka, M., Evans, R.D., Kendrick, G.A. et al. Local habitat composition and complexity outweigh seascape effects on fish distributions across a tropical seascape. Landsc Ecol 39, 28 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-024-01814-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-024-01814-2