Harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) are the most abundant cetacean in UK waters, and are likely to be affected by a variety of marine industries and activities. This research uses data collected by acoustic recorders (C-PODs) and aerial video surveys to investigate patterns in porpoise detection. The findings can be split into five key themes, and are used to support the development of spatial management and survey recommendations. 1. Porpoise detection changes based on time of day in different habitats, indicating possible differences in diel habitat use and highlighting potential issues with visual or video data collection methods for assessing distribution. 2. Porpoise exhibit seasonal shifts in detection, yet year-round data are often lacking, therefore seasonal changes in distribution are often unknown. 3. The highest proportions of buzzes (associated with foraging) are not detected in areas with the highest relative density of porpoise. I propose that porpoise use different foraging strategies in different habitats which are not equally detectable by acoustic recorders. 4. Porpoise distribution may be influenced by the distribution of perceived risk from predator / competitor species (dolphins). Temporal partitioning of sites may arise either from porpoise actively avoiding times when bottlenose dolphins are expected to be present, or from porpoise and bottlenose preferences for different environmental conditions. 5. The choice of spatial modelling method can influence the fine-scale predictions of areas with the highest density. Improving our understanding of top and mesopredator ecology is informative for management strategies. Each of the points raised above should be considered when determining management strategies to minimise the impact from fisheries, offshore developments and other industrial activities on harbour porpoise.

[Truncated abstract] Spatially explicit marine habitat data is required for effective resource planning and management across large areas, although mapped boundaries typically lack rigour in explaining what factors influence habitat distributions. Accurate, quantitative methods are needed. In this thesis I aimed to assess the utility of ecological models to determine what factors limit the spatial extent of marine habitats. I assessed what types of modeling methods were able to produce the most accurate predictions and what influenced model results. To achieve this, initially a broad scale marine habitat survey was undertaken in the Recherche Archipelago, on the south coast of Western Australia using video and sidescan sonar. Broad and more detailed functional habitats types were mapped for 1054km2 of the Archipelago. Broad habitats included high and low profile reefs, sand, seagrass and extensive rhodolith beds, although considerable variation could be identified from video within these broad types. Different densities of seagrass were identified and reefs were dominated by macroalgae, filter feeder communities, or a combination of both. Geophysical characteristics (depth, substrate, relief) and dominant benthic biota were recorded and then modelled using decision trees and a combination of generalised additive models (GAMs) and generalised linear models (GLMs) to determine the factors influencing broad and functional habitat variation. Models were developed for the entire Archipelago (n=2769) and a subset of data in Esperance Bay (n=797), which included exposure to wave conditions (mean maximum wave height and mean maximum shear stress) calculated from oceanographic models. Additional distance variables from the mainland and islands were also derived and used as model inputs for both datasets. Model performance varied across habitats, with no one method better than the other in terms of overall model accuracy for each habitat type, although prevalent classes (>20%) such as high profile reefs with macroalgae and dense seagrass were the most reliable (Area Under the Curve >0.7). ... This highlighted not only issues of data prevalence, but also how ecological models can be used to test the reliability of classification schemes. Care should be taken when mapping predicted habitat occurrence with broad habitat models. It should not be assumed that all habitats within the type will be defined spatially, as this may result in the distribution of distinctive and unique habitats such as filterfeeders being underestimated or not identified at all. More data is needed to improve prediction of these habitats. Despite the limitations identified, the results provide direction for future field sampling to ensure appropriate variables are sampled and classification schemes are carefully designed to improve descriptions of habitat distributions. Reliable habitat models that make ecological sense will assist future assessments of biodiversity within habitats as well as provide improved data on the probability of habitat occurrence. This data and the methods developed will be a valuable resource for reserve selection models that prioritise sites for management and planning of marine protected areas.

Virtually all marine conservation planning and management models in place or proposed have in common the need for improved scientific rigour in identifying and characterising the marine habitats encompassed. An emerging central theme in the last few years has been the concept of representativeness, or representative systems of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs). The habitat classification and mapping needed to incorporate considerations of representativeness into MPA planning must logically be carried out at the same scale at which management occurs. Management of highly protected areas occurs almost exclusively at local scales or finer, independent of the reservation model or philosophy employed. Moreton Bay, on Australia’s east coast, was selected for studies at the local scale to map and classify macrobenthic habitats. In a site scale (1 km) trial for the major habitat classification study, remote underwater videography was used to map and characterise an unusual assemblage of epibenthic invertebrates on soft sediments. The assemblage included congregations of the comatulid crinoid Zygometra cf. Z. microdiscus (Bell) at densities up to 0.88 individuals.m-2, comparable to those found in coral reef habitats. There was no correlation between the distribution of this species and commonly used abiotic surrogates depth (6 – 18 m), sediment composition and residual current. This site scale trial is the first quantitative assessment of crinoid density and distribution in shallow water soft-sediment environments. The high densities found are significant in terms of the generally accepted picture of shallow-water crinoids as essentially reefal fauna. The findings highlight the conservation benefits of an inclusive approach to marine habitat survey and mapping. Assemblages such as the one described, although they may be of scientific and ecological significance, would have been overlooked by common approaches to marine conservation planning which emphasise highly productive or aesthetically appealing habitats. Most habitat mapping studies rely solely or in part on abiotic surrogates for patterns of biodiversity. The utility of abiotic variables in predicting biological distributions at the local scale (10 km) was tested. Habitat classifications of the same set of 41 sites based on 6 abiotic variables and abundances of 89 taxa and bioturbation indicators were compared using correlation, regression and ordination analyses. The concepts of false homogeneity and false heterogeneity were defined to describe types of errors associated with using abiotic surrogates to construct habitat maps. The best prediction by abiotic surrogates explained less than 30% of the pattern of biological similarity. Errors of false homogeneity were between 20 and 62%, depending on the methods of estimation. Predictive capability of abiotic surrogates at the taxon level was poor, with only 6% of taxon / surrogate correlations significant. These results have implications for the widespread use of abiotic surrogates in marine habitat mapping to plan for, or assess, representation in Marine Protected Areas. Abiotic factors did not discriminate sufficiently between different soft bottom communities to be a reliable basis for mapping. Habitat mapping for the design of Marine Protected Areas is critically affected by the scale of the source information. The relationship between biological similarity of macrobenthos and the distance between sites was investigated at both site and local scales, and for separate biotic groups. There was a significant negative correlation between similarity and distance, in that sites further apart were less similar than sites close together. The relationship, although significant, was quite weak at the site scale. Rank correlograms showed that similarity was high at scales of 10 km or less, and declined markedly with increasing distance. There was evidence of patchiness in the distributions of some biotic groups, especially seagrass and anthozoans, at scales less than 16 km. In other biotic groups there was an essentially monotonic decline in similarity with distance. The spatial agglomeration approach to habitat mapping was valid in the study area. Site spacing of less than 10 km was necessary to capture important components of biological similarity. Site spacing of less than 2.5 km did not appear to be warranted. Macrobenthic habitat types were classified and mapped at 78 sites spaced 5 km apart. The area mapped was about 2,400 km2 and extended from estuarine shallow subtidal waters to offshore areas to the 50 m isobath. Nine habitat types were recognised, with only one on hard substrate. The habitat mapping characterised several habitat types not previously described in the area and located deepwater algal and soft coral reefs not previously reported. Seagrass beds were encountered in several locations where their occurrence was either unknown or had not previously been quantified. The representation of the derived habitat types within an existing marine protected area was assessed. Only two habitat types were represented in highly protected zones, with less than 3% of each included The study represents the most spatially comprehensive survey of epibenthos undertaken in Moreton Bay, with over 40,000 m2 surveyed. Derived habitat maps provide a robust basis for inclusion of representative examples of all habitat types in marine protected area planning in and adjacent to Moreton Bay. The utility of video data to conduct a low-cost habitat survey over a comparatively large area was also demonstrated. The method used has potentially wide application for the survey and design of marine protected areas.

Marine bioeroders, borers, and burrowers can have drastic effects to marine habitats and facilities. By physically altering the structure of marine habitats, these organisms may elicit ecosystem-level effects that cascade through the community. While borer damage is typically restricted to a few substratum types, burrowing isopods in the genus Sphaeroma attack a diversity of substrata in tropical and temperate systems. My dissertation examined how boring sphaeromatid isopods affect coastal habitats (saltmarshes, mangroves) and other estuarine substrata as well as marine structures. I used a combination of lab and mensurative field experiments to quantify the effects of boring by isopods and examine how select factors affect the colonization, hence burrowing damage by isopods. I explored these questions primarily using the temperate boring sphaeromatid, Sphaeroma quoianum, as a model organism. My initial lab experiments quantified the per capita erosion rates of S. quoianum in four commonly attacked estuarine substrata. I found marsh banks and Styrofoam substrata were the most affected per capita. I supplemented this lab experiment with a year-long mensurative field experiment examining how erosion rates differ between marshes infested and uninfested by boring isopods. Marshes infested with isopods eroded 300% faster than uninfested marshes. I further examined the boring effects on Styrofoam floats. I compiled surveys and observations and conducted a short experiment to describe how isopods affect Styrofoam floats used in floating docks. I observed dense colonies of isopods attacking floats and expelling millions of plastic particles in the ocean. The boring effects to simulated Styrofoam floats were also affected by seawater temperature. Burrowing effects in Styrofoam floats exhibited a curvilinear relationship with temperature and peaked around 18°C. These results suggest a 1-2°C increase in water temperature could increase boring effects 5-17% of populations of isopods in Oregon and California bays. To examine the small-scale factors that mediate colonization and boring, I conducted a series of binary choice experiments. I found the presence of conspecifics, biofilm, and shade were important factors influencing colonization. These small scale factors likely explain why isopod attack is focused in some substrata. Finally, to examine the boring effects of tropical isopods in mangroves, I examined the associations between burrowing by S. terebrans and mangrove performance and fecundity. I found negative relationships between boring effects and performance and fecundity in two mangrove species in a restored mangrove stand in Taiwan. Together, these studies elucidate the effects of bioerosive isopods on saltmarshes, mangroves, and marine structures. However, the similar mechanisms involved in bioerosion in other boring species suggest that these results can be used to infer similar effects of other borers. In addition, since many species of sphaeromatid isopods have been introduced, this research shows how the effects of a non-native bioeroder can damage marine facilities and degrade and alter marine habitats. Through biological erosion and thus changing the physical structure of a marine habitat these non-native species can have ecosystem-level effects that cascade throughout the local community.