Projet RECIF Réutilisation de coproduits coquilliers marins en récifs artificiels RECIF project Reuse of marine shell byproducts in concrete artificial reefs
Proceedings of the RECIF Conference on artificial reefs: from materials to ecosystem Caen, France 27-29 January 2015 Organised by ESITC Caen
Edited By Dr. Mohamed Boutouil, Research Director, ESITC Caen Ing. Stéphanie Le Boulanger, R&D Engineer, ESITC Caen
Congrès RECIF sur les récifs artificiels : des matériaux à l’écosystème / RECIF Conference on artificial reefs: from materials to ecosystem – ESITC Caen – 27-28-29 Janvier/January 2015
RECIF Conference Organizing Committee Dr Mohamed Boutouil (Chair) Jérôme Lebrun Ing. Stéphanie Le Boulanger Dr Nassim Sebaibi Marie-Caroline Coubé Vincent Boissel Héctor Cuadrado David Lescarmontier
ESITC Caen (FR) ESITC Caen (FR) ESITC Caen (FR) ESITC Caen (FR) ESITC Caen (FR) ESITC Caen (FR) ESITC Caen (FR) ESITC Caen (FR)
RECIF Conference Scientific Committee Dr. Jens Andersen Dr. Denise Bellan Santini Prof. Bertrand Boudart Dr Mohamed Boutouil (Chair) Prof. Caijun Shi Ing. Emmanuel Chollet Prof. Pascal Claquin Dr. Ken J. Collins Prof. Martin Cyr Prof. Jean-Claude Dauvin Prof. Abdeljebbar Diouri Prof. Eric Feunteun Dr. Gianna Fabi Dr. Antony C. Jensen Dr. Philippe Lenfant Dr. William J. Lindberg Prof. Altan Lök Ing. Emilia Medioni Dr. Thierry Perez Dr. Nassim Sebaibi Prof. Arezki Tagnit Hamou Dr. Eleanor van Veen Dr. Steve Widdicombe
University of Exeter (GB) IMBE (FR) UNICAEN (FR) ESITC Caen (FR) Hunan University (CN) EMCC (FR) UNICAEN (FR) University of Southampton (GB) Université de Toulouse (FR) UNICAEN (FR) Faculté des Sciences de Rabat (MA) MNHN (FR) Institute of Marine Science (IT) University of Southampton (GB) Cefrem, Université de Perpignan (FR) University of California (USA) Ege University (TR) Ville de Marseille (FR) CNRS, IMBE (FR) ESITC Caen (FR) Sherbrooke University (CA) University of Exeter (GB) Plymouth Marine Laboratory (GB)
vii
Congrès RECIF sur les récifs artificiels : des matériaux à l’écosystème / RECIF Conference on artificial reefs: from materials to ecosystem – ESITC Caen – 27-28-29 Janvier/January 2015
Contents RECIF PROJECT: REUSE OF MARINE BYPRODUCT IN ARTIFICIAL REEFS / REUTILISATION DE COPRODUITS MARINS EN RECIF ARTIFICIEL Mohamed Boutouil, Héctor Cuadrado, Stéphanie Le Boulanger
DESIGN AND ENGINEERING OF ARTIFICIAL REEFS INGÉNIERIE DES MATÉRIAUX ET CONCEPTION DES RÉCIFS ARTIFICIELS PROPERTIES OF CONCRETES INCORPORATING CRUSHED QUEEN SCALLOPS FOR ARTIFICIAL REEFS Héctor Cuadrado, Nassim Sebaibi, Mohamed Boutouil, Bertrand Boudart
1
7
9
MINERALOGICAL PROPERTIES OF MARINE SHELL PRO DUCTS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF CONCRETE ARTIFICIAL REEFS (RECIF) Terrie T. Sawyer, Eleanor M. van Veen, Gavyn K. Rollinson, Jens C. Andersen, John S. Coggan, Bernd G. Lottermoser
19
THE USE OF ULTRASONIC TELEMETRY TO ESTIMATE RESIDENCY AND MOVEMENT PATTERNS SOME OF FISH SPECIES AT ARTIFICIAL REEFS IN THE NORTHERN AEGEAN SEA Aytaç Özgül, Altan Lök
28
INFLUENCE OF THE ARTIFICIAL REEF SIZE CONFIGURATION ON THE TRANSIENT ICHTHYOFAUNA, SOUTHEASTERN BRAZIL Ilana R. Zalmon, Pedro V. Gatts, Marcos A. L. Franco, Luciano N. Santos, Diogo F. Rocha
36
TESTING OF DIFFERENT MATERIALS FOR ARTIFICIAL REEFS (WESTERN ADRIATIC SEA) Elisa Punzo, Alessandra Spagnolo, Gianna Fabi
44
xi
Congrès RECIF sur les récifs artificiels : des matériaux à l’écosystème / RECIF Conference on artificial reefs: from materials to ecosystem – ESITC Caen – 27-28-29 Janvier/January 2015
THE USE OF ULTRASONIC TELEMETRY TO ESTIMATE RESIDENCY AND MOVEMENT PATTERNS SOME OF FISH SPECIES AT ARTIFICIAL REEFS IN THE NORTHERN AEGEAN SEA Aytaç Özgül (1) and Altan Lök (1) (1) Ege University, Faculty of Fisheries, 35100 İzmir, Turkey Corresponding author:
[email protected] Abstract The interaction between fish and artificial habitats and determination of diel variations on the fish assemblages around artificial reefs and movement patterns are extremely important for the management of small-scale fisheries. That knowledge will affect the success of reef projects. Sciaena umbra, Scorpaena porcus and Scorpaena scrofa and members of Sparidae family are frequently observed in artificial reef studies in the Mediterranean Sea. These fish species are closely associated with hard substrate and also targeted by small-scale fisheries in this region. However, residency and use of artificial reefs by these species over diel periods is unclear. This study intends to contribute to the management of fisheries in artificial reef areas and aims at testing the employability of acoustic telemetry method on these species and determining the short-term movement patterns in artificial reef areas. Passive acoustic telemetry system (Vemco, VR2W) was used to monitor home range, movement patterns and residence time of fish species on artificial reef site. Five S. umbra, fourteen individual S. porcus, seven individual S. scrofa and S. aurata were surgically fitted with small acoustic transmitters (Vemco, V9-2H and V8-4H) and tracked with Vemco Positioning System (VPS), for 24-h periods, between August 2013 and June 2014 within the Altınoluk Artificial Reef Area. The result of study will contribute to measure the reef performance, manage small-scale fisheries at artificial reef site, and understand the interaction between fish, reef and also fisheries. In conclusion, acoustic telemetry method and VPS system can be successfully used in the examination of these fish species’ behavior in artificial reef areas. Acoustic data show that fish prefer coastal reef sites due to ecological reasons. This information will offer insight to decision makers in the field of management of fisheries in artificial reef areas. Keywords: Artificial reef; acoustic telemetry; VPS; Aegean Sea; movement patterns 1.
INTRODUCTION
An artificial reef (AR) is defined as “one or more objects of natural or human origin deployed purposefully on the sea floor to influence physical, biological, or socioeconomic processes related to living marine resources” [1]. Artificial reefs are used for coastal management purposes in many countries and regions across the world. Today, artificial reefs
28
Congrès RECIF sur les récifs artificiels : des matériaux à l’écosystème / RECIF Conference on artificial reefs: from materials to ecosystem – ESITC Caen – 27-28-29 Janvier/January 2015
are used on all seas around the world for several purposes such as protecting marine biodiversity, preventing coastal erosion, mariculture, protecting sensitive ecosystems, preventing illegal fishing, supporting small scale fisheries, and developing diving tourism [2, 3, 4, 5]. Management of the artificial reef sites is the most fundamental factor for the success of projects. In addition to the variables like the properties of the fishing fleet in the region (number of boats, fishing effort, fishing methods etc.), other stakeholders in the region (diving tourism, aquaculture etc.) and socio-economic conditions; the effect range of the artificial reef area, behavior of the fish in the area and movement models are the primary parameters to be used in the design of the management model [6, 7]. In determining the behavior of the fish in the artificial reef area, different methods are used such as visual census, experimental fishing methods, underwater video techniques and tagmonitoring [8, 9]. Among these methods, acoustic telemetry has recently been preferred frequently [10, 11]. In addition to improving the understanding of the value of artificial reefs, analyses of fine-scale movements may also provide insight into the use of open habitats surrounding the reefs. While telemetry can be defined as the science of conveying information from one location to another, acoustic telemetry is described as the sound waves that are utilized to transfer that information. Acoustic telemetry is the use of an acoustic transmitter attached to or implanted in an aquatic animal to locate and gather information about its presence, movements, and behavior in the underwater environment [12]. The system consists of two main components: transmitters (tags) and receivers. A tag or transmitter is an electronic device usually implanted or externally attached to a fish that transmits ultrasonic signals. Receivers are small, data-logging computers anchored near the bottom of a lake or stream or the ocean that “listen” for tagged fish. When a signal is identified, the tag’s unique ID code is saved with the date and time. The data from any single receiver provide a record of each visit to that location by a tagged fish [13]. This study intends to contribute to the management of fisheries in artificial reef areas and aims at testing the employability of acoustic telemetry method on these species and determining the short-term movement patterns in artificial reef areas. 2.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The study was carried out between August 2013 and June 2014 within the Altınoluk Artificial Reef Area in the Gulf of Edremit in the Northern Aegean Sea. The artificial reef area was created by The Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock between 2009 and 2012. There are 215 reef sites each consisting of 30 concrete blocks in seven different fields (number of artificial unit is 7000 and total volume is 25000 m3)in the artificial reef area, which aims to improve marine biodiversity and develop small-scale fisheries in the region (Fig. 1). Acoustic Monitoring System: Movements of tagged reef fish within artificial reef site was tracked of using the Vemco VR2W Positioning System (VPS). The VPS system consists of acoustic transmitters (synchronization and reference tags), receivers and data processing. The VPS system uses an array of VR2W receivers and synchronization tags to calculate the position of the tags. The positioning is based on the time-difference-of arrival of an acoustic signal to at least three receivers. VPS positions are not determined in real time, but are calculated by software after downloading data from receivers [14, 15]. Receivers should be placed in a grid of triangles and squares. The objective is to guarantee that every tag
29
Congrès RECIF sur les récifs artificiels : des matériaux à l’écosystème / RECIF Conference on artificial reefs: from materials to ecosystem – ESITC Caen – 27-28-29 Janvier/January 2015
transmission is detected by at least 3 receivers. Synchronization tags, “Synctags”, are placed along with each receiver to correct for clock drift between submerged receivers. Additional reference tags are placed within the receiver grid in the known measured locations to measure system performance [16]. Geographic positions (latitude and longitude), tag number, date, time and some metric of horizontal positions can be calculated by VPS system for tagged fish.
Figure1: Study area and study VPS design for artificial reefs In our study, six omni-directional acoustic receivers (Vemco VR2W) with overlapping detection ranges were placed around artificial reefs. Receivers were located in a pentagonal array design. One receiver was placed in the center of the pentagon and the other 5 receivers were put 300 m apart in a circle receiver. Receivers were positioned in mid-water with subsurface buoy to keep the receiver vertical and the hydrophone pointing upward. Additionally, five fixed synchronization transmitters (Vemco V13-1x; 69 kHz; transmission delay: 500–700 sec) were attached to the mooring lines one meter above from all receivers except for the center to synchronize the receiver clocks. Reference tag (Vemco, V13T-1X, 69 kHz) was attached to the center mooring line 1 m above the receiver to monitor water temperature at 1 h intervals. Fish Tagging: Seven S. scrofa, 14 S. porcus, 5 S. umbra, and 2 S. aurata were tagged with acoustic tags. While multifilament trammel nets were used to catch S. scrofa and S. porcus, other fish species were caught by divers with scoop net. Capture fish was anesthetized in a 25 l tank using 0.5 ml l-1 of 2-phenoxyethanol (Sigma, USA) and total length and weight were measured. For the surgical implantation of acoustic tags fish were placed in a V-shaped support and a 1 cm incision was made in the ventral region between the pelvic fins insertion and the anus. Before insertion, the acoustic transmitters (Vemco V8-4H, 20.8 x 8 mm and V92H, 29 x 9 mm) were smeared with a povidone-iodine antiseptic solution to prevent
30
Congrès RECIF sur les récifs artificiels : des matériaux à l’écosystème / RECIF Conference on artificial reefs: from materials to ecosystem – ESITC Caen – 27-28-29 Janvier/January 2015
infections. Each acoustic tag was surgically implanted into the peritoneal cavity through a dorso-ventral incision and sutured using non-absorbable sutures (Surgisorb 3/0, UK) maximizing sterile conditions. The entire surgical process took less than 5 min. The tagged individual was then released into the artificial reef area surrounded with VPS system by divers. The position (longitude and latitude), depth (m), day (dd/mm/yy) and hour (hh:mm:ss) were recorded for each tagged fish prior to its release. Data analysis: First, a prior temporal patterns analysis was conducted by visually examining the temporal chronograms describing the detections per hour for each individual. The total period between the release date and the last detection (total period of detection: TP) was calculated, as well as the number of days detected (DD). Both types of data were used to calculate a residence index (RI), defined as the quotient between the DD and the TP. 3.
RESULTS
Five S. umbra (13.1-32.2 cm, TL), 14 individual S. porcus (18.2-27.7 cm, TL), 7 individual S. scrofa (25.2-44.5 cm, TL) and 2 individual S. aurata (23.1-26.0 cm, TL) were tagged in this study. Tagged fish released in the artificial reef area with the VPS system (average 24 m depth) were observed to swim towards the inner parts of the reef blocks. A total of 1 003 672 detections were taken from the tagged fish and a total of 85 840 positions were determined by the VPS system. Among the tagged fish, the highest number of detections (261 581) was obtained from the fish T01 whereas only 32 signals were taken from T27. The highest number of positions (45 859) was calculated by the VPS system for fish coded T01 while no positions were calculated for T11 and T23. The tagged fish, the rates of detection and calculated positions are summarized in Table.1. The average residency index values, defined in relation to the position of the acoustic array, were 0.64 for S. umbra, 0.87 for S. porcus, and 0.91 for S. scrofa. Residency index was not calculated for S. aurata, because it detected only a day. These values indicate that S. porcus and S. scrofa indicated high individual detection rated during the study. Tagged S. umbra individuals stayed in the artificial reef area for an average 4.2 days and then moving away from the artificial reef area towards the coastal region, they left the VPS coverage range. No detection was received from the tagged S. aurata fish 5.1 hours after their release into the artificial reef area. The fish are considered to have left the artificial reef area or died. The tagged S. porcus and S. scrofa were found to have stayed in the artificial reef area for average 19.4 days and 47.1 days respectively. S. porcus individuals were detected for an average of 34 282.3 times in the artificial reef area and average 2 176.6 positions were calculated. S. scrofa individuals, for which average 7 852.9 positions were determined, were detected in the artificial reef area for average 74 071.4 times. Unlike S. umbra and S. aurata individuals, behaviors of S. porcus and S. scrofa types vary in the day. Average 1 295.9 positions were determined for the individuals of S. porcus in the day while it was 902.2 positions at night. For S. scrofa individual’s 4 249.3 positions were determined during the day and 3 604.4 positions at night.
31
Congrès RECIF sur les récifs artificiels : des matériaux à l’écosystème / RECIF Conference on artificial reefs: from materials to ecosystem – ESITC Caen – 27-28-29 Janvier/January 2015
Table 1: Summary of VPS data for tagged fish Fish_ID Species
TL (mm)
Weight (g)
Detections Positions
First Detected Date
Last Detected Date
TP (d) DD (d)
RI
T01
S.scrofa
44.5
1347,6
261581
45859
07.08.2013
13.09.2013
38
38
1.00
T02
S.porcus
27.1
359,4
158396
21098
07.08.2013
13.09.2013
38
38
1.00
T03
S.scrofa
36.4
852,2
35954
5788
07.08.2013
13.09.2013
38
32
0.84
T04
S.porcus
21.1
162,8
16071
408
07.08.2013
09.09.2013
34
34
1.00
T05
S.porcus
19.5
121,4
7197
145
07.08.2013
30.08.2013
24
21
0.88
T06
S.umbra
31.7
385,4
836
116
07.08.2013
10.08.2013
4
2
0.50
T07
S.umbra
32.2
362,4
2922
186
07.08.2013
25.08.2013
19
10
0.53
T08
S.umbra
13.1
142,6
132
6
07.08.2013
07.08.2013
1
1
1.00
T09
S.umbra
29.3
243,5
731
81
07.08.2013
07.08.2013
1
1
1.00
T10
S.porcus
18.2
109,41
32117
1874
14.12.2013
06.01.2014
24
24
1.00
T11
S.porcus
19.6
123.5
101
0
16.12.2013
16.12.2013
1
1
1.00
T12
S.porcus
23.8
275.3
2421
16
14.12.2013
20.12.2013
7
6
0.86
T13
S.porcus
20.6
170.5
1256
16
14.12.2013
28.12.2013
15
7
0.47
T14
S.scrofa
27.5
341.3
10160
65
28.02.2014
09.04.2014
58
57
0.98
T15
S.scrofa
27.5
224.3
140270
776
28.02.2014
29.05.2014
92
92
1.00
T16
S.porcus
27.7
395.0
13104
527
28.02.2014
22.03.2014
23
21
0.91
T17
S.porcus
25.3
288.0
180500
3021
28.02.2014
27.04.2014
59
59
1.00
T18
S.umbra
31.5
405.7
480
6
28.02.2014
05.04.2014
37
7
0.19
T19
S.porcus
24.0
287.3
55061
3278
28.02.2014
14.03.2014
15
15
1.00
T20
S.porcus
24.5
238.5
309
2
28.02.2014
24.03.2014
25
8
0.32
T21
S.porcus
22.3
181.9
7948
13
28.02.2014
29.03.2014
30
25
0.83
T22
S.porcus
26.9
370.0
5099
43
30.05.2014
11.06.2014
13
11
0.85
T23
S.scrofa
25.9
271.2
4225
0
30.05.2014
21.06.2014
23
22
0.96
T24
S.scrofa
37.6
1008.1
32559
1892
30.05.2014
23.07.2014
55
37
0.67
T25
S.scrofa
25.2
236.1
33751
590
30.05.2014
23.07.2014
55
52
0.95
T26
S.aurata
23.1
186.8
87
2
30.05.2014
30.05.2014
1
1
1.00
T27
S.aurata
26.0
220.2
32
1
30.05.2014
30.05.2014
1
1
1.00
T28
S.porcus
25.9
305.1
372
31
30.05.2014
30.05.2014
1
1
1.00
TL = Total length; TP = Total period of detection; DD = Number of days detected; and R I = Residence index
Considering the movement of these fish in the reef area seasonally, average 14 659.6 positions were determined in summer; average 476.5 in autumn and 1097.4 positions were found in winter. In spring, the average number of the positions determined was 511.2. In the positional data of the S. porcus and S. scrofa, it is seen that they stayed in the artificial reef area they were released into and in the deeper region in summer while they moved from the reef area towards the coastal region in autumn and winter when the water gets colder. When the water gets warmer in spring, the fish are observed to prefer the reef area and the reef groups in deeper water (Fig.2).
32
Congrès RECIF sur les récifs artificiels : des matériaux à l’écosystème / RECIF Conference on artificial reefs: from materials to ecosystem – ESITC Caen – 27-28-29 Janvier/January 2015
Figure 2: Seasonal distribution of S. porcus and S. scrofa individuals in the artificial reef area 4.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
Acoustic telemetry can be an extremely useful tool to understand the behavior and movement models of the fish type in artificial reef areas. In comparison with other research methods for determining the efficiency of artificial reefs, (visual census, underwater video technics, experimental fishing methods and standard tag-recapture studies, etc.), acoustic telemetry may help obtain correct results causing minimum damage on marine ecosystem. In the artificial reef area where the study was conducted, members of Sparidae family, S. porcus, S. scrofa and S. umbra species have a wide distribution and can be seen frequently. These fish species are among the most common fish types in the other reef studies in the Mediterranean. Therefore, understanding the behavior and movement models of these species is expected to contribute to fisheries in artificial reef areas. This study is the first to examine S. scrofa, S. porcus and S. umbra behaviors in an artificial reef using VPS method. The VPS method employed by the study worked efficiently in the artificial reef area. The use of the VPS system in an artificial reef has been a favorite method over the last years. Although studies have been carried out on fish species such as Diplodus sargus [17], Lutjanus campechanus [18] and Gadus morhua [19] in artificial reef using this method, no study has been found on examining these reef fish species with VPS. Using the data obtained from the VPS system may contribute to the management of fisheries in artificial reef areas. If the aim is to increase fisheries in artificial reef areas, fishing can be carried out within the scope of the behavior and movement patterns of the targeted fish species. In this respect, answers can be found for the questions which method to use, when and where to fish in artificial reef areas. These data in particular can help prevent possible ghost fishing problems in the artificial reef area. The data to be obtained through acoustic
33
Congrès RECIF sur les récifs artificiels : des matériaux à l’écosystème / RECIF Conference on artificial reefs: from materials to ecosystem – ESITC Caen – 27-28-29 Janvier/January 2015
telemetry in the projects that aim at protecting artificial reef areas will provide valuable information for decision makers on the limitations and scope of the fishing ban to be implemented in the area. After their release into the artificial reef area, S. porcus and S. scrofa individuals either stay in the artificial reef groups or move towards other reef groups. This behavior is thought to result from search for food or competition. The fish are generally distributed in the 300m area around the reef group after they are released. This movement is different in the day and during the night. The fish is predicted to locate on the reef groups in the day. Calculations of higher numbers of positions in the day by the VPS system also support this idea. Position data were calculated by the VPS system for the tagged S. umbra individuals. However, since the tagged fish left the VPS coverage range, not many data could be reached. It is expected to obtain more data for this species by moving the VPS system towards the area where the fish are caught or expanding the VPS range with the use of more receivers. This is also true for the S. aurata. The number of fish to be tagged should be increased in order to reach more data with the VPS system concerning the S. aurata, which can be frequently seen in the underwater observations made in the artificial reef area. In conclusion, acoustic telemetry method and VPS system can be successfully used in the examination of behavior of reef species in artificial reef areas. Acoustic data shows that fish prefer coastal reef sites due to ecological reasons. By increasing the number of tagged fish and using more receivers in future studies, it could be possible to obtain more detailed information on variables such as home range, site fidelity and diel pattern in artificial reef areas for other species. This information will offer insight to decision makers in the field of management of fisheries in artificial reef areas. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would like to thank Vemco, Ltd. for providing the technical support and software to render the positions from the VPS system. We would like to thank Stephanie Smedbol and Ainsley Miller for their valuable comments and helping for data analysis. This study was part of the project (TOVAG-1120383), funded by TÜBİTAK. REFERENCES [1] Seaman Jr, W., ‘Artificial reef evaluation with application to natural marine habitats’ CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, (2000). [2] Fabi, G., Fiorentini, L. and Giannini, S., ‘Experimental shellfish culture on artificial reefs in the Adriatic Sea’, BulL Mar Sci 44 (2) (1989) 923-933. [3] Clark, S. and Edwards, A.J. ‘An evaluation of artificial reef structures as tools for marine rehabilitation in the Maldives’, Aquatic Con Mar Freshwater Ecosystems, 9 (1999) 5-21. [4] Lök, A., Düzbastılar, F.O., Gül, B., Özgül, A. and Ulaş, A., ‘The Role of Artificial Reefs in Fisheries Management in Turkey’. In S. A. Bortone, F.P. Brandini, G. Fabi and S. Otake (Eds.), Artificial Reefs in Fisheries Management (Chap. 10), (2011), CRC Press, USA, 155-166. [5] Jak i , S., Stamenkovi , I. and or evi , J., ‘Impacts of Artificial Reefs and Diving Tourism’, Turizam, (17) (4) (2013), 155-165. [6] Kramer, D.L. and Chapman, M.R. ‘Implications of fish home range size and relocation for marine reserve function’, Env. Biol. Fish. 55, (1999) 65-79. [7] Addis D.T, Patterson W.F.III. and Dance, M.A., ‘Implications of reef fish movement from unreported artificial reef sites in the northern Gulf of Mexico’, Fish Res. 147, (2013) 349-358.
34
Congrès RECIF sur les récifs artificiels : des matériaux à l’écosystème / RECIF Conference on artificial reefs: from materials to ecosystem – ESITC Caen – 27-28-29 Janvier/January 2015
[8] Bortone, S.A. and Bohnsack, J.A., ‘Sampling and studying fish on artificial reefs’, In: Halusky, J.G. (Ed.), Artificial Reef Research Diver’s Handbook, Technical Paper 63, Florida Sea Grant College, University of Florida, Gainesville, (1991). [9] Addis, D.T., Patterson, W.F.III. and Dance, M.A., ‘Site fidelity and movement of reef fishes tagged at unreported artificial reef sites off NW Florida’ In: Proceedings of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, (2008) 297-304. [10] Jadot, C., Donnay, A., Acolas, M.L., Cornet, Y. and Anras, M.L.B., ‘Activity patterns, homerange size, and habitat utilization of Sarpa salpa (Teleostei: Sparidae) in the Mediterranean Sea’, ICES J. Mar. Sci. 63, (2006) 128-139. [11] Abecasis, D. and Erzini, K., ‘Site fidelity and movements of gilthead sea bream (Sparus aurata) in a coastal lagoon (Ria Formosa, Portugal)’, Est. Coast. Shelf Sci. 79, (2008) 758-763. [12] Pincock, D.G. and Johnston, S.V., ‘Acoustic telemetry overview’. In Adams, N.S., Beeman, J.W. and Eiler, J.H. (eds.). Telemetry techniques: A users guide for fisheries research. Am. Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland, (2012). [13] Heupel, M.R., Semmens, J.M. and Hobday, A.J., ‘Automated acoustic tracking of aquatic animals: Scales, design and deployment of listening station arrays’, Mar and Freshwater Res, 57 (2006) 1-13. [14] Espinoza, M., Farrugia, T.J., Webber, D.M., Smith, F. and Lowe, C.G., ‘Testing a new acoustic telemetry technique to quantify long-term, fine-scale movements of aquatic animals’, Fish. Res. 108, (2011) 364-371 [15] Piraino, M. and Szedlmayer, S.T., ‘Fine-Scale Movements and Home Ranges of Red Snapper around Artificial Reefs in the Northern Gulf of Mexico’, T American Fisheries Society, 143 (4) (2014), 988-998. [16] Espinoza, M., ‘Site fidelity, movements and habitat use of gray smooth-hound sharks, Mustelus californicus (Gill 1863), in a newly restored estuarine habitat’, Master’s Thesis, California State University, Long Beach, (2010) 91 p. [17] D'Anna, G., Giacalone, V. M., Pipitone, C. and Badalamenti, F., ‘Movement pattern of white seabream, Diplodus sargus (L., 1758) (Osteichthyes, Sparidae) acoustically tracked in an artificial reef area’, Ital. J. Zool. 78 (2) (2011) 255-263. [18] Topping, D.T. and Szedlmayer, S.T., ‘Home range and movement patterns of red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) on artificial reefs’ Fish. Res. 112, (2011) 77-84. [19] Reubens, J., De Rijcke, M., Degraer, S. and Vincx, M., ‘Diel variation in feeding and movement patterns of juvenile Atlantic cod at offshore wind farms’, J. Sea Res. 85, (2014) 214-221.
35
