Biological Invasions

, Volume 16, Issue 5, pp 1145–1163 | Cite as

Context- and density-dependent effects of introduced oysters on biodiversity

  • Dannielle S. Green
  • Tasman P. Crowe
Original Paper


Pacific oysters, Crassostrea gigas, have been introduced throughout much of the world, become invasive in many locations and can alter native assemblage structure, biodiversity and the distribution and abundance of other species. It is not known, however, to what extent their effects on biodiversity change as their cover increases, and how these effects may differ depending on the environmental context. Experimental plots with increasing cover of oysters were established within two estuaries in two different habitats commonly inhabited by C. gigas, (mussel-beds and mud-flats) and were sampled after 4 and 15 months. Within mud-flat habitats, macroscopic species living on or in the substratum increased in richness, Shannon–Wiener diversity and number of individuals with oyster cover. In mussel-bed habitats, however, these indices were unaffected by the cover of oysters except at one estuary after 15 months when species richness was significantly lower in plots with the greatest cover of oysters. Assemblage structure differed with oyster cover in mud-flats but not in mussel-beds, except at 100 % cover in one location and at one time. Within mud-flats at one location and time (of four total tests), assemblages became more homogenous with increasing cover of oysters leading to a significant decrease in β-diversity. These responses were primarily underpinned by the facilitation of several taxa including a grazing gastropod (Littorina littorea), an invasive barnacle (Austrominius modestus) and a primary producer (Fucus vesiculosus) with increasing cover of oysters. Although there were consistent positive effects of C. gigas on mud-flat biodiversity, effects were weak or negative at higher cover on mussel-beds. This highlights the need for the impacts of invasive species to be investigated at a range of invader abundances within different environmental contexts.


Invasive species Biodiversity Ecosystem engineer Environmental context Density-dependent Crassostrea gigas 



This research was funded by the project SIMBIOSYS (2007-B-CD-1-S1) as part of the Science, Technology, Research and Innovation for the Environment (STRIVE) Programme, financed by the Irish Government under the National Development Plan 2007–2013, administered on behalf of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government by the Irish Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). We would also like to thank Bas Boots, the editor Jennifer Ruesink and two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments that helped to improve this manuscript.


  1. Agrawal AA, Ackerly DD, Adler F, Arnold E, Cáceres C, Doak DF, Post E, Hudson PJ, Maron J, Mooney KA, Power M, Schemske D, Stachowicz J, Strauss S, Turner MG, Werner E (2007) Filling key gaps in population and community ecology. Front Ecol Environ 5:145–152 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aldridge DC, Elliott P, Moggridge GD (2004) The recent and rapid spread of the zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) in Great Britain. Biol Conserv 119:253–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allen BM, Power AM, O’Riordan RM, Myers AA, McGrath D (2006) Increases in the abundance of the invasive barnacle Austrominius modestus Darwin in Ireland. Biol Environ: Proc R Ir Acad 106:155–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Altieri AH, van Wesenbeeck BK, Bertness MD, Silliman BR (2010) Facilitation cascade drives positive relationship between native biodiversity and invasion success. Ecology 91:1269–1275PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Anderson MJ (2001) A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Austral Ecol 26:32–46Google Scholar
  6. Anderson MJ (2006) Distance-based tests for homogeneity of multivariate dispersions. Biometrics 62:245–253PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Anderson MJ, Ellingsen KE, McArdle BH (2006) Multivariate dispersion as a measure of beta diversity. Ecol Lett 9:683–693PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Anderson MJ, Crist TO, Chase JM, Vellend M, Inouye BD, Freestone AL, Sanders NJ, Cornell HV, Comita LS, Davies KF, Harrison SP, Kraft NJB, Stegen JC, Swenson NG (2011) Navigating the multiple meanings of beta diversity: a roadmap for the practicing ecologist. Ecol Lett 14:19–28PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barshaw DE, Lavalli KL (1988) Predation upon postlarval lobsters Homarus americanus by Cunners Tautogolabrus adspersus and mud crabs Neopanope sayi on 3 different substrates – eelgrass, mud and rocks. Mar Ecol-Prog Ser 48:119–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bray JR, Curtis JT (1957) An ordination of the upland forest communities of Southern Wisconsin. Ecol Monogr 27:326–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Buschbaum C (2000) Direct and indirect effects of Littorina littorea (L.) on barnacles growing on mussel-beds in the Wadden Sea. Hydrobiologia 440:119–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Callier MD, Richard M, McKindsey CW, Archambault P, Desrosiers G (2009) Responses of benthic macrofauna and biogeochemical fluxes to various levels of mussel biodeposition: an in situ “benthocosm” experiment. Mar Pollut Bull 58:1544–1553PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Castel J, Labourg PJ, Escaravage V, Auby I, Garcia ME (1989) Influence of seagrass beds and oyster parks on the abundance and biomass patterns of meiobenthos and macrobenthos in tidal flats. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 28:71–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Christensen PB, Glud RN, Dalsgaard T, Gillespie P (2003) Impacts of longline mussel farming on oxygen and nitrogen dynamics and biological communities of coastal sediments. Aquaculture 218:567–588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Clarke KR (1993) Non-parametric multivariate analyses of changes in community structure. Aust J Ecol 18:117–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Crooks JA (2002) Characterizing ecosystem-level consequences of biological invasions: the role of ecosystem engineers. Oikos 97:153–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Crooks JA, Khim HS (1999) Architectural vs. biological effects of a habitat-altering, exotic mussel, Musculista senhousia. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 240:53–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dame RF, Zingmark RG, Haskin E (1984) Oyster reefs as processors of estuarine materials. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 83:239–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dame RF, Wolaver TG, Libes SM (1985) The summer uptake and release of nitrogen by an intertidal oyster reef. Neth J Sea Res 19:265–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dayton PK (1975) Experimental evaluation of ecological dominance in a rocky intertidal algal community. Ecol Monogr 45:137–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Diederich S (2005) Differential recruitment of introduced Pacific oysters and native mussels at the North Sea coast: coexistence possible? J Sea Res 53:269–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dubois S, Commito JA, Olivier F, Retiere C (2006) Effects of epibionts on Sabellaria alveolata (L.) biogenic reefs and their associated fauna in the Bay of Mont Saint-Michel. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 68:635–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Escapa M, Isacch JP, Daleo P, Alberti J, Iribarne O, Borges M, Dos Santos EP, Gagliardini DA, Lasta M (2004) The distribution and ecological effects of the introduced Pacific oyster Crassostrea gigas (Thunberg, 1793) in northern Patagonia. J Shellfish Res 23:765–772Google Scholar
  24. Ferraro SP, Cole FA (2011) Ecological periodic tables for benthic macrofaunal usage of estuarine habitats in the US Pacific Northwest. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 94:36–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fey F, Dankers N, Steenbergen J, Goudswaard K (2010) Development and distribution of the non-indigenous Pacific oyster (Crassostrea gigas) in the Dutch Wadden Sea. Aquac Int 18:45–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gee JM, Warwick RM (1994) Metazoan community structure in relation to the fractal dimensions of marine macroalgae. Mar Ecol-Prog Ser 103:141–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Grabowski JH (2004) Habitat complexity disrupts predator-prey interactions but not the tropic cascade on oyster reefs. Ecology 85:995–1004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Grant WS (1977) High intertidal community organization on a rocky headland in Maine, USA. Mar Biol 44:15–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Green DS, Crowe TP (2013) Physical and biological effects of introduced oysters on biodiversity in an intertidal boulder field. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 482:119–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Green DS, Boots B, Crowe TP (2012) Effects of non-indigenous oysters on microbial diversity and ecosystem functioning. PLoS ONE 7(10):e48410. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048410 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Green DS, Rocha C, Crowe TP (2013) Effects of non-indigenous oysters on ecosystem processes vary with abundance and context. Ecosystems doi: 10.1007/s10021-013-9659-y
  32. Groffman P, Baron J, Blett T, Gold A, Goodman I, Gunderson L, Levinson B, Palmer M, Paerl H, Peterson G, Poff N, Rejeski D, Reynolds J, Turner M, Weathers K, Wiens J (2006) Ecological thresholds: the key to successful environmental management or an important concept with no practical application? Ecosystems 9:1–13Google Scholar
  33. Hayakawa Y, Kobayashi M, Izawa M (2001) Sedimentation flux from mariculture of oyster (Crassostrea gigas) in Ofunato estuary, Japan. ICES J Mar Sci 58:435–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hosack G (2003) Effects of Zostera marina and Crassostrea gigas culture on the intertidal communities of Willapa. Bay, Washington. M.Sc. Thesis, University of WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  35. Jones CG, Lawton JH, Shachak M (1994) Organisms as ecosystem engineers. Oikos 69:373–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kiirikki M (1996) Experimental evidence that Fucus vesiculosus (Phaeophyta) controls filamentous algae by means of the whiplash effect. Eur J Phycol 31:61–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kochmann J, Buschbaum C, Volkenborn N, Reise K (2008) Shift from native mussels to alien oysters: differential effects of ecosystem engineers. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 364:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Krassoi FR, Brown KR, Bishop MJ, Kelaher BP, Summerhayes S (2008) Condition-specific competition allows coexistence of competitively superior exotic oysters with native oysters. J Anim Ecol 77:5–15PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lejart M, Hily C (2011) Differential response of benthic macrofauna to the formation of novel oyster reefs (Crassostrea gigas, Thunberg) on soft and rocky substrate in the intertidal of the Bay of Brest, France. J Sea Res 65:84–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Levin SA (1992) The problem of pattern and scale in ecology. Ecology 73:1943–1967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Little C, Morritt D, Stirling P (1992) Changes in the shore fauna and flora of Lough Hyne. Ir Nat J 24:87–95Google Scholar
  42. Markert A, Wehrmann A, Kroncke I (2010) Recently established Crassostrea-reefs versus native Mytilus-beds: differences in ecosystem engineering affects the macrofaunal communities (Wadden Sea of Lower Saxony, southern German Bight). Biol Invasions 12:15–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mascaro M, Seed R (2001) Choice of prey size and species in Carcinus maenas (L.) feeding on four bivalves of contrasting shell morphology. Hydrobiologia 449:159–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McCoy ED, Bell SS (1991) Habitat structure: the evolution and diversification of a complex topic. In: Bell SS, McCoy ED, Mushinsky HR (eds) Habitat structure: the physical arrangement of objects in space. Chapman and Hall, New York, pp 3–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. McKinney ML, Lockwood JL (1999) Biotic homogenization: a few winners replacing many losers in the next mass extinction. Trends Ecol Evol 14:450–453PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Morrisey DJ, Howitt L, Underwood AJ, Stark JS (1992) Spatial variation in soft-sediment benthos. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 81:197–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Moulin FY, Guizien K, Thouzeau G, Chapalain G, Mulleners K, Bourg C (2007) Impact of an invasive species, Crepidula fornicata, on the hydrodynamics and transport properties of the benthic boundary layer. Aquat Living Resour 20:15–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Olden JD, Rooney TP (2006) On defining and quantifying biotic homogenization. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 15:113–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Olden JD, Kennard MJ, Pusey BJ (2008) Species invasions and the changing biogeography of Australian freshwater fishes. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 17:25–37Google Scholar
  50. Padilla DK (2010) Context-dependent impacts of a non-native ecosystem engineer, the Pacific oyster Crassostrea gigas. Integr Comp Biol 50:213–225PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Parker IM, Simberloff D, Lonsdale WM, Goodell K, Wonham M, Kareiva PM, Williamson MH, Von Holle B, Moyle PB, Byers JE, Goldwasser L (1999) Impact: toward a framework for understanding the ecological effects of invaders. Biol Invasions 1:3–19Google Scholar
  52. Pope KL, Garwood JM, Welsh HH, Lawler SP (2008) Evidence of indirect impacts of introduced trout on native amphibians via facilitation of a shared predator. Biol Conserv 141:1321–1331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Queirόs AD, Hiddink JG, Johnson G, Cabral HN, Kaiser MJ (2011) Context dependence of marine ecosystem engineer invasion impacts on benthic ecosystem functioning. Biol Invasions 13:1059–1075 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rahel FJ (2002) Homogenization of freshwater faunas. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 33:291–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rodriguez LF (2006) Can invasive species facilitate native species? Evidence of how, when, and why these impacts occur. Biol Invasions 8:927–939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ruesink JL, Lenihan HS, Trimble AC, Heiman KW, Micheli F, Byers JE, Kay MC (2005) Introduction of non-native oysters: ecosystem effects and restoration implications. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 36:643–689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Simberloff D, Von Holle B (1999) Positive interactions of nonindigenous species: invasional meltdown? Biol Invasions 1:21–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sousa R, Gutierrez JL, Aldridge DC (2009) Non-indigenous invasive bivalves as ecosystem engineers. Biol Invasions 11:2367–2385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Thomsen MS (2010) Experimental evidence for positive effects of invasive seaweed on native invertebrates via habitat-formation in a seagrass bed. Aquat Invasions 5:341–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Thomsen MS, Wernberg T, Olden JD, Griffin JN, Silliman BR (2011) A framework to study the context-dependent impacts of marine invasions. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 400:322–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Tolhurst TJ, Chapman MG (2007) Patterns in biogeochemical properties of sediments and benthic animals among different habitats in mangrove forests. Austral Ecol 32:775–788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Trimble AC, Ruesink JL, Dumbauld BR (2009) Factors preventing the recovery of a historically overexploited shellfish species, Ostrea lurida Carpenter 1864. J Shellfish Res 28:97–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Troost K (2010) Causes and effects of a highly successful marine invasion: case-study of the introduced Pacific oyster Crassostrea gigas in continental NW European estuaries. J Sea Res 64:145–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Underwood AJ, Chapman MG (1996) Scales of spatial patterns of distribution of intertidal invertebrates. Oecologia 107:212–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Underwood AJ (1997) Experiments in ecology: their logical design and interpretation using analysis of variance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UKGoogle Scholar
  66. Underwood AJ, Chapman MG (1998) Spatial analyses of intertidal assemblages on sheltered rocky shores. Aust J Ecol 23:138–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wagner EL, Ruesink JL, Dumbauld BR, Hacker SD, Wisehart LM (2012) Density-dependent effects of an introduced oyster, Crassostrea gigas, on native intertidal eelgrass, Zostera marina. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 468:149–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. White LF, Shurin JB (2011) Density dependent effects of an exotic marine macroalga on native community diversity. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 405:111–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. White EM, Wilson JC, Clarke AR (2006) Biotic indirect effects: a neglected concept in invasion biology. Divers Distrib 12:443–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Wrange AL, Valero J, Harkestad LS, Strand O, Lindegarth S, Christensen HT, Dolmer P, Kristensen PS, Mortensen S (2010) Massive settlements of the Pacific oyster, Crassostrea gigas, in Scandinavia. Biol Invasions 12:1145–1152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wright S (2011) Invasive species and the loss of beta diversity. Ethics Environ 16:75–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Yokomizo H, Possingham HP, Thomas MB, Buckley YM (2009) Managing the impact of invasive species: the value of knowing the density-impact curve. Ecol Appl 19:376–386PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Marine Biodiversity, Ecology and Evolution Group, Science Centre West, School of Biology and Environmental SciencesUniversity College DublinDublin 4Ireland
  2. 2.Urban Institute Ireland, Earth InstituteUniversity College DublinDublin 4Ireland

Personalised recommendations