Scale-dependent topographic complexity underpins abundance and spatial distribution of ecosystem engineers on natural and artificial structures.

In response to ongoing coastal urbanization, it is critical to develop effective methods to improve the biodiversity and ecological sustainability of artificial shorelines. Enhancing the topographic complexity of coastal infrastructure through the mimicry of natural substrata may facilitate the establishment of ecosystem engineering species and associated biogenic habitat formation. However, interactions between ecosystem engineers and their substratum are likely determined by organismal size and resource needs, thus making responses to topography highly scale-dependent. Here, we assessed the topographic properties (rugosity, surface area, micro-surface orientations) that underpin the abundance and distribution of two ecosystem engineers (fucoids, limpets) across six spatial scales (1-500 mm). Furthermore, we assessed the 'biogenic' rugosity created by barnacle matrices across fine scales (1-20 mm). Field surveys and 3D scanning, conducted across natural and artificial substrata, showed major effects of rugosity and associated topographic variables on ecosystem engineer assemblages and spatial occupancy, while additional abiotic environmental factors (compass direction, wave exposure) and biotic associations only had weak influences. Natural substrata exhibited ≤67 % higher rugosity than artificial ones. Fucoid-covered patches were predominantly associated with high-rugosity substrata and horizontal micro-surfaces, while homescars of limpets (≥15 mm shell length) predominated on smoother substratum patches. Barnacle-driven rugosity homogenized substrata at scales ≤10 mm. Our findings suggest that scale-dependent rugosity is a key driver of fucoid habitat formation and limpet habitat use, with wider eco-engineering applications for mimicking ecologically impactful topography on coastal infrastructure.
Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
(Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)