MEPS 366:147-158 (2008)  -  DOI: https://doi.org/10.3354/meps07494

ABSTRACT: Size and abundance data were compiled and collated for blue cod Parapercis colias and rock lobster Jasus edwardsii from New Zealand marine reserve (MR) studies for a meta-analysis to test the null hypotheses that reserve status does not affect the size or abundance of either species. Calculation of meta-analysis effect sizes revealed that significant differences in effect size existed among studies, meaning that the biological response to MR status of both species in terms of their changes in size and/or abundance differed significantly among the MRs. Analysis revealed that blue cod were bigger inside compared with outside MRs in 9 of 10 studies and were more abundant inside MRs in 8 of 11 studies, and that rock lobster were bigger inside the MRs in 12 of 13 studies and more abundant inside the MRs in 11 of 14 studies. These findings indicate that MR protection can result in more and bigger individuals soon after the establishment of the MR (mean of 6.5 yr for blue cod, 8.5 yr for rock lobster) despite small sample sizes of studies (≤10 for blue cod, ≤14 for rock lobster). Focused comparison tests did not reveal any relationship between rock lobster or blue cod size or abundance and either age or area of MRs. Our results demonstrate that no-take MRs are valuable conservation tools for species such as blue cod and rock lobster (and probably also for other exploited species with similar life history characteristics and habitat requirements) and that statistically detectable conservation benefits are apparent after only a few years of protection.

KEY WORDS: Meta-analysis · Focused comparison tests · Marine reserves · Marine conservation · Blue cod · Rock lobster · Mean size and mean abundance · New Zealand