You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
MDPIMDPI
Search all articles
Forests
Download PDF
  • Review
  • Open Access

18 February 2023

Mapping the Link between Climate Change and Mangrove Forest: A Global Overview of the Literature

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
and
1
Institute of Marine Biotechnology (IMB), Universiti Malaysia Terengganu (UMT), Kuala Nerus 21030, Terengganu, Malaysia
2
Research Center for Marine and Land Bioindustry, Earth Sciences and Maritime Organization, National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN), Pemenang 83352, Indonesia
3
East Coast Environmental Research Institute, Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin, Gong Badak Campus, Kuala Nerus 21300, Terengganu, Malaysia
4
Mineral and Energy Economy Research, Institute of the Polish Academy of Sciences, 31-261 Krakow, Poland
Forests2023, 14(2), 421;https://doi.org/10.3390/f14020421
This article belongs to the Special Issue Biodiversity, Health, and Ecosystem Services of Mangroves
Version Notes
Order Reprints
Review Reports

Abstract

Mangroves play a crucial role in maintaining the stability of coastal regions, particularly in the face of climate change. To gain insight into associations between climate change and mangroves, we conducted bibliometric research on the global indexed database of the Web of Knowledge, Core Collection. A total of 4458 literature were analyzed based on bibliometric information and article metadata through a scientometric analysis of citation analysis as well as a cluster analysis. Results suggest that coastal countries such as the USA, Australia, China, India, and Brazil are showing the recent influential mangrove-related keywords such as blue carbon and carbon stock. Interestingly, the “carbon stock”, “Saudi Arabia”, “range expansion” and “nature-based flood risk mitigation” is among the top cluster networks in the field of climate change and mangrove forest. The present research is expected to attract potential leaders in research, government, civil society, and business to advance progress towards mangrove sustainability in the changing climate meaningfully.

1. Introduction

Mangroves are referred to as plants or trees as well as being defined in the context of the mixture of various plant types or called a “tidal forest” or a “mangrove forest” [1]. Mangroves are valuable economic and ecological resources, being a breeding ground for fish, shellfish, and birds, as well as being a renewable source of wood and offering protection against climate change, especially coastal erosion [2,3,4,5,6,7,8]. Most of the mangroves are also physiologically adapted to various anthropogenic problems, such as anoxia, high salinity, and frequent tidal flooding. The scientific community has conducted extensive research on mangroves covering a variety of topics. This includes the origin, biology, and growth history of mangroves [9], biogeographic distribution and biodiversity of mangroves [10,11], physical characteristics and hydrodynamics [12,13], rehabilitation, restoration and conservation strategies of mangrove ecosystem [14,15], mangrove mapping using remote sensing [16,17,18], chemical characteristics and carbon sequestration [19,20,21], a mangrove ecosystem and its associated biodiversity [22,23], secondary metabolites and valuable bioactive compounds derived from a mangrove forest [24,25], deforestation and exploitation of a mangrove forest [26], economic analysis and management strategies [27], the impact of climate change, and nutrient and soil pollution on the mangrove ecosystem [28,29]. There have also been several highly cited review articles on mangroves, such as the review on mangrove ecosystems and rehabilitation [14], mangrove carbon dynamics [30], socio-economics, ethnobiology and management of mangroves [31], carbon cycling and storage [32], and the impact of rising sea levels on mangroves [33].
Currently, bibliometric information with article metadata has been widely used as a tool for research-on-research performance and perspective [34,35,36,37,38]. Scientometric analysis is one of the methods to monitor emerging trends and research progress in selected areas. CiteSpace is one of the most widely used softwares associated with scientometric techniques. Few metrics in CiteSpace can be considered important for any document or citation analysis in the field. Centrality and burstiness detection is a metric to identify and measure the importance of a document in a field within the networks [39]. Any detected publication with high centrality and burst detection can be considered the most influential literature in the field. The research topics in the discussion section will be selected based on these criteria. Prominent groupings generated by the CiteSpace through the extraction of noun phrases from the titles, keyword lists, or abstracts in all selected articles are also one of the simple and useful indicators to identify the cluster available in the area.
There have also been several publications using bibliometrics and scientometric analysis on mangroves and their associated ecosystem, such as the publication trends in mangrove forests [40], tropical mangrove forest land-use [41], analysis on mangrove related publications [42], mangroves as blue carbon sinks [43], mangrove-derived bioactive compounds to combat neurodegenerative diseases [44], and many more. This demonstrates the breadth of issues surrounding mangrove research, as well as the need to employ bibliometrics, especially scientometric analysis, to obtain a holistic perspective of the field as a whole. Thus, this review aims to address the key question: “How have mangrove forests been affected by climate change and its interactions”? Specific objectives were to assess the mangrove-related literature towards changing climate in terms of (i) annual number of articles published, (ii) countries/regions involved in the field, (iii) research topics, (iv) co-cited networks (i.e., frequency of two different documents are cited together in other documents) (v) cluster networks, (vi) research topic (i.e., keywords) burstiness, (vii) dual map overlay, and (viii) the future trends of the knowledge domain (i.e., mangrove and climate change).

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Bibliometric Analysis

Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science (WOS) platform was used to generate the metadata for the present study, and Core Collection (WOSCC) database was the only main dataset used for the purpose. There are two different keywords used to perform the search activities: “mangrove” and “climate change”. For the mangrove, the appropriate synonym is (“mangrove*”) OR (“mangrove* forest”) OR (“tidal forest”), which is based on the previous studies by Ho and Mukul [40], Mohd Razali et al. [41], and Saravanan and Dominic [42]. For the climate change related elements, the keywords were based on the modifications by Azra et al. [45], which are (“climat*”) OR (“climat* chang*”) OR (“global warm*”) OR (“seasonal* variat*”) OR (“extrem* event*”) OR (“environment* variab*”) OR (“anthropogenic effect*”) OR (“greenhouse effect*”) OR (“sea level ris*”) OR (erosio*) OR (“agricult* runoff”) OR (“weather* variab*”) OR (“weather* extrem*”) OR (“extreme* climat*”) OR (“environment* impact*”) OR (“environment* chang*”) OR (“anthropogenic stres*”) OR (“temperature ris*”) OR (“temperature effect*”) OR (“warm* ocean”) OR (“sea surface* temperat*”) OR (heatwav*) OR (acidific*) OR (hurrican*) OR (“el nino”) OR (“el-nino”) OR (“la nina”) OR (la-nina) OR (drought*) OR (flood*) OR (“high precipit*”) OR (“heavy rainfall*”) OR (“CO2 concentrat*”) OR (“melt* of the glacier*”) OR (“melt* ice*”) OR (“therm* stress*”) OR (“drought”) OR (“hypoxia”). Full bibliometrics records and cited references from WOSCC were downloaded in the Plain Text File (.txt) format, in which each download was limited to only 500 data entries.

2.2. Data Visualization

Figure 1 indicates the framework for the scientometric review based on the general bibliometric methods. The scientometric software of CiteSpace generated the visualized graph. CiteSpace version 6.1.R6 (64-bit) for Advance users was used on 26 December 2022. In Citespace, a few features were usually revealed through the visualization of charts created automatically by the algorithm of the software. These features allow for a clear and effective presentation of the downloaded data from WOSCC. In CiteSpace, time was set automatically based on the generated database (1977–2021), with a 1-year time slice as well as Top N (50 levels) as a selection criterion of most cited or occurred items from each slice (i.e., year).
Figure 1. The framework of the present study of climate change and mangrove forests.

3. Results

3.1. Annual Publication Trends and Productive Journals

The search identified 4458 papers related to the impact of climate change on mangroves between 1977 and 2021 (Figure 2). The earliest article relating the climatic impact on mangroves was the study titled “Reconstructing Triassic vegetation of eastern Australasia”, which was published in 1977 by Retallack [46], and which stood for the pioneering approach in dating and mapping fossil plant associations, which included Pachydermophylletum (a mangrove scrub) and Linguifolietum (coastal swamp woodland) from the Pacific margin of Gondwanaland during Middle Triassic time. There has been a strong upsurge in publications relating to topics of interest during the past decade, suggesting that academia is paying increasing attention to this subject. We found that 77.2% of the datasets, or 3517 papers, are from the past decade (2011–2021), with 2283 of those papers alone appearing in the last five years (2017–2021). All the articles recorded on mangrove forest-related studies in this review were distributed in 911 journals. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science ranked first in the number of publications (221), followed by The Journal of Coastal Research (113), Science of the Total Environment (85), Ocean & Coastal Management (79) and Estuaries and Coasts (78), (Table 1).
Figure 2. The number of original research articles on the impact of climate change on mangrove forest-related studies published between 1977 and 2021.
Table 1. Top 10-most productive journals publishing papers on the impact of climate change on mangroves.

3.2. International Cooperation, Collaborative Network and Funding Bodies

The countries involved in mangrove research, particularly looking into the impact of climate change, shows a striking disparity in the distribution of articles between continents. A total of 139 countries were detected (Figure 3). In terms of geographic distribution, the United States (1328 papers), Australia (734 papers), and China (477 papers) together accounted for more than 50% of the total number of publications (n = 4458). India, Brazil, Germany, Mexico, and England are next in order.
Figure 3. The total number of research publications on the impact of climate change on mangroves per country on mangrove forest-related studies. The darker orange reflects the greater number of manuscripts, while lighter shades reflect a moderate number to fewer publications.
Research scholars’ cooperation in generating new scientific knowledge is called scientific collaboration [47]. Mangrove-related studies have specific geographical attention. Most researchers adopt the principle of proximity in the sample selected for their studies, so the geographical distribution among countries can reflect the depth and breadth of research on relevant aspects in different regions. There are 137 nodes and 852 linked lines in the country collaboration mapping from CiteSpace (Figure 4). The largest extent of mangroves is found in Asia (40.8%), followed by the Americas (30.4%), Africa (18.3%), and Oceania (10.4%) [48]. While the world’s remaining mangrove forests are spread across 118 countries, approximately 75% of mangroves are concentrated in just 15 countries which include Indonesia, Brazil, Australia, Mexico, Nigeria, Malaysia, Myanmar, Bangladesh, Cuba, India, Papua New Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Mozambique, Madagascar, and Philippines [49]. This is reflected in the country cooperation network analysis, where there are definitely large quantities of publications coming out from these 15 countries based on the size of the nodes. It was seen that some of the major contributors in the field of mangrove-related research were countries from the European Union, Japan, and England, despite having a meagre to no mangrove cover. This could be associated with the availability of funding from these countries to conduct research together with their partnering institutions worldwide (Table 2).
Figure 4. An interactive illustration of the cooperation network among countries that have published research on the impact of climate change on mangroves from 1977–2021. The lines connecting the nodes represent the strength of connections between research fields, with thicker lines indicating a higher intensity of connections. The size of the nodes signifies the frequency of co-occurrence in the research fields. The nodes are color-coded to represent the year of publication, e.g., red representing 2021, yellow representing 2019, blue representing 2015, and purple representing 2012.
Table 2. Top 10 major grant providers related to climate impact on mangrove research.
The National Science Foundation led the funding agencies for topics related to mangroves vis-à-vis climate change with the highest number of research publications—with 293—closely followed by the Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC), supporting 283 publications (Table 2). The names and numbers of the top 10 funding agencies were from the United States of America, China, Australia, Brazil, Mexico, the United Kingdom, Japan, and the European Union.

3.3. Important Research Disciplines

CiteSpace’s “Category” node type was used to generate a visualization map showing the disciplinary categories represented by 4458 papers analyzed in this study. The correlation burst detection analysis can detect the activity of research disciplines. After being simplified by pathfinder network scaling, an 86-node network of research discipline co-occurrence from 1977 to 2021 was obtained (Figure 5). The studies on the climatic impact on mangroves have been multifaceted through different disciplines, as demonstrated by the network map (Figure 5). The five research disciplines include Environmental Sciences, Marine Freshwater Biology, Ecology, Geosciences Multidisciplinary, and Oceanography. Environmental Sciences, the largest contributor with 31.5% of the total publications, provides a comprehensive understanding of the impacts of climate change on mangrove forests in relation to broader environmental issues. Marine Freshwater Biology, with 978 publications, focuses on the biological implications of changes in sea levels and salinity levels on mangrove forests and associated species. Ecology, with 812 publications, investigates the role of mangrove forests in coastal ecosystems and the consequences of their decline as a result of climate change. Geosciences Multidisciplinary, with 735 publications, examines mangrove forests’ physical and geological aspects, including their response to sea-level rise and increased extreme weather activities. Finally, with 630 publications, Oceanography explores the oceanographic processes affecting mangrove forests, such as changes in water temperature, circulation patterns, and wave patterns. These five research disciplines provide a comprehensive understanding of the impact of climate change on mangrove forests, integrating the environmental, biological, physical, and oceanographic perspectives.
Figure 5. Network links between research disciplines. The lines connecting the nodes represent the strength of connections between research fields, with thicker lines indicating a higher intensity of connections. The size of the nodes signifies the frequency of co-occurrence in the subject category. The nodes are color-coded to represent the year of publication, e.g., red representing 2021, yellow representing 2019, blue representing 2015, and purple representing 2012.

3.4. Research Cluster Analysis

Cluster analysis is a popular method of statistical data analysis and knowledge discovery because of its ability to uncover latent semantic themes in textual data [50,51]. Cluster analysis can divide a large body of research data into various units based on the relative degree of term correlation, making it easier to identify the research themes, trends, and connections within a given field of study [51,52]. A cluster’s homogeneity can be quantified using an index called the mean silhouette, with values ranging from −1 to 1. The average silhouette value for each cluster was determined using CiteSpace. The higher the value, the more similar the cluster’s members are to one another [53]. The network showed 42 clusters in the context of the scientometric analysis mapping the link between climate change and mangroves (Table 3) and (Figure 6). In conducting this analysis, we employed the two primary algorithms available in Citespace, namely the Log-Likelihood (LLR) and Latent Semantic Index (LSI) algorithms. The LLR algorithm assesses the similarity between the text content and topics, while the LSI algorithm categorizes technical terminologies. The literature referenced by the citing literature from 1977 to 2021 served as the data source for the scientometric study carried out using the co-citation network of cited references, as shown in Figure 7.
Table 3. Top-ranked clusters and labels produced by LSI and LLR on mangrove forest-related studies.
Figure 6. The reference co-citation network of publications on mangroves and climate change from 1977 to 2021 was analyzed. The size of the nodes in the network reflects the frequency of citation, while the colors of the nodes, ranging from magenta (1977) to yellow (2021), indicate the progression of research over time. The colored connections represent co-citation relationships. The network was further divided into 42 clusters through network clustering analysis.
Figure 7. Timeline co-citation cluster analysis. Nodes represent reference names, whereas lines represent connections between those references. The size of the nodes in the network reflects the frequency of citation, while the colors of the nodes, ranging from magenta (1977) to yellow (2021), indicate the progression of research over time. References with strong citation bursts are shown with red nodes.
The largest cluster (#0) has 207 members and a silhouette value of 0.908. It is labelled as carbon stock by LLR and mangrove forest by LSI. The second largest cluster (#1) has 194 members and a silhouette value of 0.904. It is labelled as Saudi Arabia by LLR and mangrove forest by LSI. The third largest cluster (#2) has 159 members and a silhouette value of 0.874. It is labelled as range expansion by LLR and coastal wetland by LSI. The major citing article of all these three clusters is by Osland et al. [54], where they described the impacts on conservation strategies in the mangrove forests along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico. In their conclusion, they noted that changes in precipitation rate, hydrological, and estuarine regimes would be the most significant factors impacting mangroves in this region around the turn of the century. In addition to climatic variations, accelerated sea-level rise, intensified tropical cyclones, elevated carbon dioxide, land use change, eutrophication, and invasive non-native species are anticipated to have a disproportionately large impact on mangrove forests by altering inundation and salinity regimes, which have a substantial impact on the structure and function of mangrove ecosystems.
The fourth-largest cluster (#3) has 124 members and a silhouette value of 0.908, labelled as sea-level rise by both LLR and LSI. The major citing article of the cluster is Osland et al. [55] where they quantified the distribution of surface elevation table-marker horizon (SET-MH) stations along the Gulf of Mexico coast (USA), taking into consideration the gradients of temperature, precipitation, elevation, and relative sea-level rise. The study area included the coasts of all five U.S. states along the northern Gulf of Mexico (i.e., Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas). They suggested a need for long-term data of more than ten years for modelling and monitoring purposes, specifically looking at ecologically-relevant abiotic gradients at both local and regional scales.
The fifth largest cluster (#4) has 87 members and a silhouette value of 0.951, labelled as Moreton Bay southeast Queensland, by LLR, sea-level rise by LSI. The primary cited article of this cluster is Kumara et al. [56], which reported on the survival, growth, accumulation of aboveground biomass, dynamics of the sediment surface elevation, and accumulation of nitrogen in mangrove sediments in their investigation of the effects of sea level rise. Vertical accretion and surface elevation change were used to calculate the sea level rise and fall. Moreton Bay Marine Park is home to approximately 35 of the 65 species of mangroves found globally [57]. The complexity of this thriving habitat and the rich biodiversity it supports have piqued researchers’ interest. Seven species of seagrass, covering 189 km2, thrive in Moreton Bay [58]. By 2050, increasing sea levels, high tides, storm surges, and waves, particularly from tropical cyclones and east coast lows, are anticipated to cause accelerated coastal erosion and increased floodings of some low-lying areas in the Moreton Bay region [59].
Timelines for document co-citation analyses are useful for explaining the window of time during which a study was most widely covered by academics (Figure 7). From 2010 to 2021, there have been bursts in citations for research clusters on (#0) “carbon stock”, (#1) “Saudi Arabia”, (#2) “range expansion”, (#3) “nature-based flood mitigation” and (#9) “mangrove-dominated survey”. Taken together, these studies highlight the expanding focus on mangroves to sequester carbon and its roles in mitigating floods. Due to its resistance and tolerance to ocean warming, mangroves’ expansion is closely related to climate change. Under the effects of climate change, these regions are anticipated to become local hotspots for mangrove dissemination, development, range expansion, and displacement of salt marsh [55]. Increased terrestrial C storage due to expanding mangroves has the potential to act as a significant cooling effect on a global scale [60].

3.5. Highly Cited Publications Based on Co-Citation Analysis

CiteSpace’s visualized analysis of 4458 publications yielded a co-citation network (frequency of two different documents are cited together in other documents) with 1782 nodes, and 3770 links or connections indicate co-citations between nodes [61]. The larger the node, the higher a document is cited, demonstrating its impact on mangrove and climate change research. In the present document co-citation clustering analysis, the relationship between the top contributing references and the research clusters was mapped (Figure 8). It illustrates that the most influential references are representative of a number of key clusters, including “carbon stock”, “seasonal variation”, “soil elevation”, and “range expansion”. The evolution of mangrove and climate change research over the last three decades was analyzed using a co-citation analysis. The results were tabulated and separated into three-time frames to understand the trends better. Table 4 represents the major citing articles from 2010 to 2021, Table 5 represents articles from 2000 to 2010, and Table 6 represents articles from 1990 to 2000. This analysis provides valuable insights into the historical trend of research on this topic and can be used to predict future research directions and advancements.
Figure 8. Document co-citation clustering analysis for mangrove and climate change publications.
Table 4. Co-citation analysis of major citing articles pertinent to mangrove and climate change (2010–2021).
Table 5. Co-citation analysis of major citing articles pertinent to mangrove and climate change (2000–2010).
Table 6. Co-citation analysis of major citing articles pertinent to mangrove and climate change (1990–2000).
The top 10 highly cited publications were represented by four major research clusters as—#0—“carbon stock”, #2—“range expansion”, #3—“sea-level rise”, and #6—“anatomy physiology growth”. The highest cited publication in terms of citation count was by Tomlinson (1986, 2016), entitled “The Botany of Mangroves”. The publication introduced mangroves, including their taxonomy, habitat-specific features, reproduction, and socioeconomic value. This was followed by Hamilton and Casey [63], who successfully developed a Global Database of Continuous Mangrove Forest Cover for the 21st Century (CGMFC-21) to map the global mangrove forest coverage for 2000–2012. The paper’s focus highlighted several key issues, including carbon stocks, climate change, biodiversity, food security, coastal livelihoods, and conservation-related issues that impacted the mangrove cover. Despite tremendous progress in the rest of the world, the concern is within the Southeast Asia region, where the rapid expansion of aquaculture has led to substantial mangrove deforestation [67].
Two publications on the list specifically highlighted the impact of sea-level rise on mangroves. One of them was published in Nature by Lovelock et al. [64], describing the impact of sea-level rise on Indo-pacific mangrove forests. They developed a model that calculated the survivability of mangroves in elevated sea levels by comparing the mean sea level to astronomical tide data within the region. Based on their modelling data, they were able to conclude that the survivability of Indo-pacific mangrove forests due to sea-level rise is strongly correlated to the availability of suspended matter that helps in the soil-surface elevation. It was observed that river damming significantly affected the sediment supply to mangrove forests, directly affecting the survivability of mangrove forests within this region; for example, over 80% reduction of sediment supply in the Chao Phraya River Delta has caused a significant impact on the mangrove forest in Thailand. The next publication by Krauss et al. [33] is a review published in the New Phytologist describing the adaptability strategies of mangrove forests to rising sea levels. They demonstrated the ecological attributes of mangroves that controlled the elevation gains or losses in mangrove forests. Aerial roots help in slowing the velocity of water, promoting sedimentation. Next is the elevation gain achieved by the litterfall accumulation on the soil surface, followed by the benthic mat formation from microbial and algal decomposition. The structural characteristics of mangrove roots have also been recorded as adaptation strategies in maintaining soil elevation. They also highlighted environmental and climatic impacts such as rainfall variability and elevated CO2 levels to contribute to the elevation change that could impact the mangrove forest.
Two publications represented the impact of “carbon stock” on mangrove forests. The first was a publication in Nature Geoscience by Donato et al. [65], showing a correlation between carbon emission and mangrove loss. Their data showed that mangrove forests in the tropics are among the most carbon-dense forests dominated by the soil carbon pools found in below-ground storage. The second publication reviews the mangrove forests’ ability to capture and store carbon by Alongi [32]. Seven summary points were highlighted in the review, which included (i) mangrove forests being highly productive—the carbon stock of mangrove forests was 956 tCha−1, which was almost four times higher than rain forests (241 tCha−1), (ii) mangroves actively capture sediment particles averaging to about 58% of the total soil carbon, (iii) mangroves contribute to an average 10%–15% of the total carbon sequestration in the ocean, (iv) mangrove deforestation will have a detrimental impact on the ecological aspects of the planet, (v) more than half of the total mangrove litterfall contribute dissolved organic carbon towards adjacent coastal zones, (vi) groundwater from the forest delivers to about 70% dissolved inorganic carbon material to adjacent waters, (vii) over 90% of the mangrove gross primary production is by canopy respiration, surface soil and mangrove waterways respiration.
Table 5 presents a co-citation analysis of major citing articles on topics related to mangroves and climate change during the period 2000–2010. The articles summarized in the table highlight various impacts of climate change on mangroves, including the loss of biodiversity, temperature change, the global condition of mangrove forests, carbon sequestration, restoration and management of wetlands, risk assessment of ecosystems, adaptation of mangrove forests to rising sea levels, habitat assessment, carbon loss from ecosystems, and the impact of natural disasters such as hurricanes on peat collapse in mangrove forests. The articles, which were published in different journals, cover a wide range of domains in the mangrove and climate change research field. These domains include biodiversity loss and risk assessment of ecosystems, temperature change and global condition of mangrove forests, carbon sequestration and ecosystem production, restoration and management of wetlands, adaptation of mangrove forests to climate change, habitat assessment and species diversity, and the impact of natural disasters on mangrove forests.
Table 6 presents the co-citation analysis of major citing articles relevant to mangroves and climate change between 1990–2000. The articles pertain to the domains of marine ecosystems, global sea level rise, geology and reef sequences, tidal currents and suspended sediment, soil conditions and root oxygen concentrations, carbon flux measurements, and the impacts of climate change on mangrove ecosystems.
Recent, ongoing bursts can infer future patterns in an area; hence burst detection may be utilized extensively to investigate research trends [88]. “Citation bursts” demonstrate correlations between publications and sudden increases in citations. CiteSpace allows for two kinds of burst detection: citation-based and occurrence-based [89]. This study also applied this algorithm to generate the latest citation burst for examining the growing trends of climate’s effect on mangrove studies. In total, 25 papers were categorized to represent various future trends. Table 7 provides a summary of the top ten future directions based on the recent surge in citations.
Table 7. Top 10 references with the strongest citation bursts.
Six out of the top 10 publications with the highest citation burst in a period were also members of the highest cited articles (Table 4). They were articles by Donato et al. [65], Giri et al. [49], Tomlinson [62], Alongi [32], Krauss et al. [33], Lovelock et al. [64], and Cavanaugh et al. [66]. Six out of the ten articles presented had a citation burst that ended relatively present (2019–2021), which suggests a surge in publications and research topics pertaining to them which included Tomlinson [62], Alongi [32], Mcleod et al. [91], Krauss et al. [33], Lovelock et al. [64] and Cavanaugh et al. [66]. These six articles with recent burst covered three main research clusters, which included #0—“carbon stock”, #3—“sea-level rise”, and #6—“anatomy physiology growth”. The highly cited article by Mcleod et al. [91] reviewed the role of coastal vegetation in sequestering CO2. They described the role of coastal ecosystems, including the mangroves, salt marshes and seagrasses, in global carbon sequestration. It is widely accepted that more than half of the C-sequestered in the mangrove, seagrass beds, and salt marshes originated externally.

3.6. Keywords Co-Occurrence Analysis

Co-occurrence analysis is based on the principle of counting the frequency with which a set of keywords appears in the same document, clustering these words based on the number of occurrences, reflecting the affinity of these words, and then analyzing the structural shifts of the disciplines and topics represented by these words [93]. Keywords, primarily words and phrases that describe the fundamental ideas of articles, can be used to track the development of research areas and domains [94,95]. We used CiteSpace to create a map of keyword occurrences and relative frequency, with the strongest burst keywords and co-occurrences highlighted and the mapping language deciphered in this study. From CiteSpace, 856 keywords and 4412 links were retrieved between 1976 and 2021. The broad array of research on mangroves was shown by many linked lines (more than the number of nodes—856) and complex linkages between keywords. Analysis of high-frequency keywords revealed 11 categories as research hotspots and frontiers in the field of climatic impact on mangroves (Figure 9): #0 “Palynology”, #1 “Remote sensing”, #2 “Coral reef”, #3 “Blue carbon”, #4 “Photosynthesis”, #5 “Heavy metals”, #6 “Climate change”, #7 “Behaviour”, #8 “Embryonic development”, #9 “Coastal management”, #10 “Southeast Asia”. Table 8 displays the results of a clustering classification of mangrove research and development based on the meanings provided by its keywords.
Figure 9. Keyword clustering analysis for mangrove and climate change publications (1977–2021).
Table 8. Most frequent keyword label describing the cluster label for mangrove and climate change literature (1977–2021).
The top 10 frequently given keywords that appeared in the 4458 articles have appeared more than 150 times (Table 9). These keywords could represent the research trends and popular topics. “Climate change”, “forest”, “sea level rise”, “dynamics” and “ecosystem” were the five top keywords with a strength of frequency of above 370. The most recent spike was found in articles that included the keyword “climate change”, with a peak occurring between the years 2018 and 2022. “Forest”, “sea-level rise”, “dynamics”, “mangrove”, “sediment”, and “growth” are among the early keywords to have been heavily used.
Table 9. Top 10 frequently used keywords for mangrove and climate change publications (1977–2021).
The relative importance of the keywords is represented by the size of the node. More significance is assigned to larger nodes [96]. Nodes that are close to each other have a higher relationship [96,97]. The rapid growth and shifting boundaries of a field can be traced back to the popularity of certain keywords. Rapidly increasing keyword searches can reveal shifts at the field’s cutting edge and foretell future growth patterns. These searches were shown in keyword co-occurrence networks from 1990–2000 (Figure 10), 2000–2010 (Figure 11), and 2010–2021 (Figure 12). Figure 13 presents the historical summaries and evolution paths of emerging research topics in mangrove–climate change studies based on the keyword analysis. The keywords appearing on the timeline have been listed chronologically and based on their frequency of usage. This timeline provides an overview of the development of research topics related to the impact of climate change on mangroves over the past thirty years. Notably, during 1990 to 2000, the research focus was on keywords such as “growth”, “evolution”, “dynamics”, ”sediment”, and “hydrodynamics”. From 2000 to 2010, research topics shifted towards keywords such as “nitrogen”, “carbon”, “seasonal variation”, “organic matter”, and “climate change”. Finally, from 2010 to 2022, research interest evolved towards keywords such as “blue carbon”, “sequestration”, “expansion”, “carbon stock”, “wave attenuation”, “accumulation rates”, and “coastal vulnerability”. These trends in keyword usage over time reflect the changes in research priorities and provide valuable insights into the ongoing scientific discourse and knowledge advancement in the field of mangrove–climate change studies.
Figure 10. Keyword co-occurrence network from 1990 to 2000 for mangrove and climate change-related publications.
Figure 11. Keyword co-occurrence network from 2000 to 2010 for mangrove and climate change-related publications.
Figure 12. Keyword co-occurrence network from 2010 to 2021 for mangrove and climate change-related publications.
Figure 13. Evolution of research topics in mangrove-climate change studies from 1977 to 2021.

3.7. Dual Map Overlay

To gain a comprehensive understanding of the evolution of the field, we performed a dual map overlay analysis using CiteSpace. This analysis provides an interactive representation of the relationships between disciplines and the distribution of individual publications from different organizations [98]. The dual map overlay of journals illustrates the subject distribution of journals, with the left side of the graph displaying citing journals and the right side indicating cited journals. The citation relationships between articles in cited journals and articles in cited journals are represented by colored lines [99,100]. A change in the trajectory of citations from one region to another can be used to identify the influence of articles from a different discipline. The depth of these trajectories, as measured by the Z-score, reflects the accumulated citations of the works [98]. Figure 14 provides insight into the citation patterns of works on the impact of climate change on mangrove forests. The dominant citing region, Ecology, Earth, Marine, was found to have influenced two distinct domains, Earth, Ecology, Geophysics (Z-score of 4.17) and Plant, Ecology, Zoology (Z-score of 7.74).
Figure 14. Domain-level citation patterns in mangrove and climate change-related research from 1977 to 2021.

4. General Discussion

The global average yearly rate of mangrove loss is estimated to be 1–2%, with losses during the last quarter century ranging from 35–80% [92]. This is likely due to relative climatic risks such as sea-level rise as well as non-climate-related anthropogenic stresses [20,21,101,102,103]. We must address several crucial questions to enhance our comprehension of the fate of mangrove forests on the cusp of global climate change: (1) the impact of climate change on mangroves; (2) mangrove resilience and adaptation strategies; and (3) policies and regulations for mangrove conservation.

4.1. The Impact of Climate Change on Mangroves

By serving as coastal greenbelts [104], the mangroves are able to cope-up naturally with a few consequences of climate change from their adaptive nature [64]. Hence, these wetlands were recognized as part of the Ecosystem-based Adaptation (EBA) for climate change in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) nearly a decade ago [105,106]. However, several perturbations associated with climate change (e.g., extreme heat, high precipitation, frequent storms, and sea level rise) remain a threat to the mangrove cover worldwide [107,108]. Mangroves may be significantly altered by climate change; one potential impact on mangroves is an expansion of their range, as rising sea levels and warming temperatures may create more suitable habitats for these trees to thrive. The global poleward expansion of mangrove range limits exemplifies the expansion and contraction of species’ geographic ranges resulting from climate change [68,109]. Reduced frequency and intensity of extreme freeze events brought on by climate change are predicted to alter biotic interactions, leading to the tropicalization of some formerly temperate ecosystems as tropical biota expand poleward and displace temperate biota [110,111]. Similar processes are likely to govern the distribution and abundance of freeze-sensitive organisms along the subtropical coasts (e.g., China, Australia, New Zealand, western Mexico, southern Africa, and western South America).
An increasing number of studies have confirmed that mangroves are expanding their range as a direct result of global warming. For instance, mangrove forests, specifically the black mangrove (Avicennia germinans), are expanding in the Gulf of Mexico states of Texas, Louisiana, and Florida [112]. Cavanaugh et al. [66] found a correlation between the significant expansion of mangroves in Florida between 1984 and 2011 and a decline in the frequency of discrete cold occurrences. They detected a decline in mangrove cover that only occurred as the temperature dropped below the −4 °C threshold for mangrove forests. Similarly, a study in the Pacific Islands found that mangroves are also moving further inland as sea levels rise and that the rate of this inland migration is increasing [113]. Other studies have also documented the expansion of mangrove ranges in response to climate change in various locations around the world, including in Latin America [68], Africa [114], and Asia [115]. In many instances, these range expansions have been accompanied by alterations in the composition and diversity of mangrove ecosystems, as some species may be more or less able to adapt to the altered conditions [116,117].
One of the most important impacts of climate change on mangrove forests is sea level rise. Mangrove forests are at risk of flooding and extinction as a result of rising sea levels [33,64]. The summary of the detrimental effects of sea-level rise due to climate change is shown in Table 10.
Table 10. Effects of sea-level rise on mangrove forests.
Coastal management and residing communities must create alternative strategies and consider them to deal with the risks posed by sea level rise to lessen these effects. This might entail taking steps like erecting sea walls, creating flood-protection barriers, or moving communities to higher ground [122]. However, the construction of physical barriers may also negatively impact the existing mangrove cover [123]. Coastal wetland ecosystems are highly sensitive to changes in precipitation regimes, as indicated by numerous studies. For instance, the relationship between rainfall variables and mangrove expansion was found to be positive in Moreton Bay, Australia, with changes in rainfall being the key factor driving the rate of landward encroachment [124]. On the northern coast of the Persian Gulf and Oman Sea, reduced precipitation of 43%, increased evaporation and salinity from the year 2000 resulted in low mangrove cover [92,125,126,127]. Research conducted in the Iranian province of Qeshm found that variations in precipitation significantly affected the development of mangroves there [128]. Similarly, climatic models and decadal climatic trends of Brazil’s extensive mangrove forests are predicted to experience drought stress as a result of rising temperatures and falling precipitation [129,130]. In contrast, a sudden drop in average annual rainfall did not impact the Net Ecosystem Production (NEP) in the Pichavaram mangrove ecosystem in India [131], but higher rainfall levels were found to impact the NEP and caused a decrease in soil effluxes in western Everglades National Park, Florida [132]. Similarly, Liu and Lai [133] estimated that heavy precipitation reduced the Gross Primary Productivity (GPP) level in a humid Hong Kong mangroves by 32.6%. The effects of changes in precipitation patterns on mangrove forests brought on by climate change are shown in Table 11.
Table 11. Precipitation variability pattern on mangrove forests.
Examining the complex and multifaceted effects of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere on mangrove forests is another crucial impact of climate change. The relationship between elevated atmospheric CO2 levels and mangrove growth has been explored and found to be species-specific. The location of the mangroves and the interactive effects of CO2 with salinity and nutrient availability can play a significant role in the mangrove’s response. Changes in species patterns within estuaries may occur as a result of different species’ abilities to respond to the changing drivers [137]. Experiments indicate that mangrove growth is enhanced in the presence of additional nutrients, and conversely, a decline in growth may result in decreased utilization and a potential buildup of dissolved soil nutrients [138].
The potential of Indonesian mangrove forests to serve as a tool for global climate change mitigation was assessed by Murdiyarso et al. [103]. The study estimated the carbon stocks of these forests to be approximately over 1000 MgCha−1, translating to an average of 3.14 PgC when scaled to the country’s mangrove extent of 2.9 Mha. Despite this significant carbon storage capacity, Indonesia has lost 40% of its mangroves over the past three decades, primarily due to aquaculture development, resulting in annual emissions of 0.07–0.21 Pg CO2e. Although mangrove deforestation only accounts for 6% of Indonesia’s total forest loss [139], reversing this trend would result in a reduction in emissions equivalent to 10–31% of the estimated annual emissions from land-use sectors. Similarly, the potential of Sundarban mangroves as a tool for mitigating global climate change was investigated by Rodda et al. [140]. These tidal forests, known to be the world’s largest block of halophytic mangrove forests, were found to be a net carbon sink with a mean net primary production of 276 gCm−2 yr−1. The study analyzed the carbon balance and seasonal dynamics of this pristine mangrove ecosystem and found that the variations in CO2 fluxes are largely influenced by environmental factors such as temperature, vapour pressure deficit, rainfall, and active photosynthetic radiation. The study conducted by Van Vinh et al. [141] analyzed the seasonal variability of CO2 emissions in Can Gio, the largest mangrove forest in Vietnam. The findings indicated that the initial rainfall pulse of the monsoon season resulted in the highest CO2 emissions from both the soil and tree trunks, likely due to an increase in ecosystem photosynthesis and a decrease in ecosystem respiration. The study also suggested that the persistent high temperatures prevalent in Southern Vietnam contributed to these elevated CO2 emissions. A study on CO2 and CH4 emissions within a Rhizophora spp. mangrove forest in New Caledonia found that CO2 emissions were highly variable and primarily influenced by tides [142]. CO2 emissions were higher during spring tides compared to neap tides, which was attributed to increased microbial activity within the soil and greater exchange surface between the soil and water column. The effects of increased atmospheric CO2 on mangrove forests are shown in Table 12.
Table 12. Increased atmospheric CO2 variability on mangrove forests.

4.2. Adaptation Strategies and Resilience of Mangroves in Connection to Climate Change

Mangroves are capable of tolerating a diverse range of environmental conditions, including variable water levels, exposure to saltwater, and fluctuations in temperature. Research has established that mangroves can dissipate up to 76% of wave energy and reduce wind velocity by 50% [147,148], making them effective in providing protection against hurricanes and storms. However, mangroves are also susceptible to the impacts of climate change, such as rising sea levels, increased frequency and intensity of storms, alterations to water quality, and long-term changes to their structure and composition [92,149,150,151,152]. Despite these challenges, mangroves exhibit physiological traits that enhance their resilience to extreme weather events, such as large nutrient reserves, rapid nutrient turnover rates, and tolerance to inundation and salinity. These adaptations allow mangrove species to recover from storm damage through the re-sprouting of epicormic shoots [148,153].
The resilience of mangrove ecosystems to adapt to changing sea levels by migrating inland has been well documented. However, the expansion of coastal developments and the corresponding increase in human activity impede this natural migration, making it crucial to monitor changes in surface elevation within mangrove ecosystems [33,152]. The exposure of low-lying coastal communities to the effects of sea level rise, driven by factors such as demographic and settlement trends and anthropogenic subsidence, has become growing concern [21,154]. Human activities, such as deforestation, conversion of upstream areas to agriculture, urban development, and aquaculture, can significantly increase sedimentation within mangrove ecosystems, which can negatively affect their productivity. Increased sedimentation can weaken mangrove trees, bury their aerial roots, and create a favourable environment for the invasion of terrestrial plants [155,156]. Furthermore, the inflow of freshwater can alter mangrove ecosystems’ salinity and result in species composition changes [157]. Development activities, such as dams, reservoirs, and sand mining, can also reduce the sediment supply to mangroves and cause subsidence, further threatening their survival [158]. As sea levels continue to rise, mangroves are retreating inland in response. However, as human activity continues to expand further inland, the available area for mangroves to retreat is shrinking, presenting an even greater threat to their continued existence [156,159]. The mangroves’ adaptation strategies against climate change’s impacts are shown in Table 13.
Table 13. Adaptation strategies and resilience of mangrove forests.

4.3. Policies and Regulations for Mangrove Conservation

Multiple initiatives and policy frameworks have been established to aid in the conservation of mangrove forests. The Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar Convention), signed in 1971, provides a framework for the preservation and responsible use of wetlands, including mangroves. By designating wetlands of international importance and adopting measures for their conservation and management, the parties of the convention aim to preserve these important ecosystems [166]. Examples of Ramsar sites that have had a positive impact on mangrove conservation include the Xuan Thuy Wetland Reserve in Vietnam [167], Sungai Pulai Forest Reserve in Malaysia [168], Pichavaram mangrove in India [169], Koh Kapik in Cambodia [170], and the Gulf of Montijo Ramsar Site in Panama [171].
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), signed in 1992, aims to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere. Mangroves play a role in mitigating the effects of climate change by serving as a sink for carbon dioxide. As a result, the UNFCCC includes provisions for conserving and enhancing carbon sinks, including mangroves, through initiatives such as REDD+ [172].
The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has developed Mangrove Management Guidelines, providing recommendations for the sustainable use and protection of these ecosystems [173]. The Global Mangrove Alliance, a partnership of over 30 organizations, seeks to conserve and restore mangroves around the world. With the support of over 100 specialists in mangrove research, finance, and policy, the alliance aims to increase the number of protected mangroves, improve the management of existing forests, and promote sustainable use. The alliance’s goal is to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and restore 20% of the world’s mangroves by 2030 [174,175].
In addition to these international initiatives, several national and regional policies and frameworks are in place to support mangrove conservation. These can include laws and regulations protecting mangroves, conservation and restoration funding, and programs promoting the sustainable use of mangroves. To improve mangrove forest governance, Indonesia, home to the world’s largest mangrove regions, has adopted several creative laws and initiatives that have resulted in a large-scale mangrove conservation and restoration programme [176,177]. Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) is an example of its policy that has resulted in the government expanding the role of forestry in climate change mitigation. The notion of blue carbon is being adopted, and mangrove forests have been added to Indonesia’s national greenhouse gas inventory and are now being evaluated as an alternative natural climate solution [177].

5. Conclusions

Along with standardization of the methods for mangrove inventory, and carbon assessment, the research in line to predict and face the challenges of climate change is crucial. According to Rogers et al. [178], some of the actions that can be taken to ensure that mangroves continue to flourish include benchmarking and improving mangrove health and extent, reducing inconsistent mangrove governance, and prioritizing the landscape for restoration. To ensure the success of scientific projects and policies, findings from the research should be disseminated among interested parties and encouraged by citizen scientists [179,180]. The research findings are to be applied without compromise to ongoing management initiatives for any necessary modifications.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, T.C.S. and M.N.A.; methodology, T.C.S. and F.L.; software, T.C.S. and N.H.A.R.; validation, B.S., I.G., V.R. and J.B.; formal analysis, Z.V.-G. and M.N.A.; investigation, Z.V.-G. and J.B.; resources, I.G., F.L. and B.S.; data curation, J.B.; writing—original draft preparation, T.C.S. and F.L.; writing—review and editing, M.N.A.; visualization, T.C.S.; supervision, B.S.; project administration, M.N.A.; funding acquisition, M.N.A., I.G., V.R., Z.V.-G. and J.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Higher Edu-cation Malaysia under the LRGS program (LRGS/1/2020/UMT/01/1; LRGS UMT Vot No. 56040) entitled ‘Ocean climate change: potential risk, impact and adaptation towards marine and coastal ecosystem services in Malaysia’. The work was also supported by the PASIFIC program GeoRecoproject funding from the European Union’s Horizon2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curiegrant agreement No.847639 and from the Ministry of Education and Science.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not related.

Data Availability Statement

No data was generated from the study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Cannicci, S.; Lee, S.Y.; Bravo, H.; Cantera-Kintz, J.R.; Dahdouh-Guebas, F.; Fratini, S.; Fusi, M.; Jimenez, P.J.; Nordhaus, I.; Porri, F. A functional analysis reveals extremely low redundancy in global mangrove invertebrate fauna. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2021, 118, e2016913118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Li, Y.; Wen, H.; Wang, F. Analysis of the Evolution of Mangrove Landscape Patterns and Their Drivers in Hainan Island from 2000 to 2020. Sustainability 2022, 15, 759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Brooks, J.; Rivera, A.; Chen Austin, M.; Tejedor-Flores, N. A Machine Learning-Based Approach to Estimate Energy Flows of the Mangrove Forest: The Case of Panama Bay. Sustainability 2023, 15, 664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Chowdhury, A.; Naz, A.; Dasgupta, R.; Maiti, S.K. Blue Carbon: Comparison of Chronosequences from Avicennia marina Plantation and Proteresia coarctata Dominated Mudflat, at the World’s Largest Mangrove Wetland. Sustainability 2022, 15, 368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Lai, J.; Cheah, W.; Palaniveloo, K.; Suwa, R.; Sharma, S. A Systematic Review of the Physicochemical and Microbial Diversity of Well-Preserved, Restored, and Disturbed Mangrove Forests: What Is Known and What Is the Way Forward? Forests 2022, 13, 2160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Aja, D.; Miyittah, M.K.; Angnuureng, D.B. Quantifying Mangrove Extent Using a Combination of Optical and Radar Images in a Wetland Complex, Western Region, Ghana. Sustainability 2022, 14, 16687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Cardenas, S.M.; Cohen, M.C.; Ruiz, D.P.; Souza, A.V.; Gomez-Neita, J.S.; Pessenda, L.C.; Culligan, N. Death and Regeneration of an Amazonian Mangrove Forest by Anthropic and Natural Forces. Remote Sens. 2022, 14, 6197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Cruz Portorreal, Y.; Reyes Dominguez, O.J.; Milanes, C.B.; Mestanza-Ramón, C.; Cuker, B.; Pérez Montero, O. Environmental Policy and Regulatory Framework for Managing Mangroves as a Carbon Sink in Cuba. Water 2022, 14, 3903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Ellison, A.M.; Farnsworth, E.J.; Merkt, R.E. Origins of mangrove ecosystems and the mangrove biodiversity anomaly. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 1999, 8, 95–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Farnsworth, E. Issues of spatial, taxonomic and temporal scale in delineating links between mangrove diversity and ecosystem function. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. Lett. 1998, 7, 15–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Hemingson, C.R.; Bellwood, D.R. Biogeographic patterns in major marine realms: Function not taxonomy unites fish assemblages in reef, seagrass and mangrove systems. Ecography 2018, 41, 174–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Wolanski, E.; Mazda, Y.; Ridd, P. Mangrove hydrodynamics. Trop. Mangrove Ecosyst. 1992, 41, 43–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Tomiczek, T.; Wargula, A.; Lomónaco, P.; Goodwin, S.; Cox, D.; Kennedy, A.; Lynett, P. Physical model investigation of mid-scale mangrove effects on flow hydrodynamics and pressures and loads in the built environment. Coast. Eng. 2020, 162, 103791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Field, C.D. Rehabilitation of mangrove ecosystems: An overview. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 1999, 37, 383–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Sandilyan, S.; Kathiresan, K. Mangrove conservation: A global perspective. Biodivers. Conserv. 2012, 21, 3523–3542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Green, E.; Clark, C.; Mumby, P.; Edwards, A.; Ellis, A. Remote sensing techniques for mangrove mapping. Int. J. Remote Sens. 1998, 19, 935–956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Akbar Hossain, K.; Masiero, M.; Pirotti, F. Land cover change across 45 years in the world’s largest mangrove forest (Sundarbans): The contribution of remote sensing in forest monitoring. Eur. J. Remote Sens. 2022, 55, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Samsudin, M.; Khalit, S.; Azid, A.; Yunus, K.; Zaudi, M.; Badaluddin, N.; Saudi, A. Spatial analysis of heavy metals in mangrove estuary at east coast Peninsular Malaysia: A preliminary study. J. Fundam. Appl. Sci. 2017, 9, 680–697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Alongi, D.M. Present state and future of the world’s mangrove forests. Environ. Conserv. 2002, 29, 331–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Samsudin, M.S.; Azid, A.; Khalit, S.I.; Sani, M.S.A.; Lananan, F. Comparison of prediction model using spatial discriminant analysis for marine water quality index in mangrove estuarine zones. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2019, 141, 472–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Khalit, S.I.; Samsudin, M.S.; Azid, A.; Yunus, K.; Zaudi, M.A.; Sharifuddin, S.S.; Husin, T.M. A preliminary study of marine water quality status using principal component analysis at three selected mangrove estuaries in East Coast Peninsular Malaysia. Malays. J. Fundam. Appl. Sci. 2017, 13, 764–768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Laegdsgaard, P.; Johnson, C. Why do juvenile fish utilise mangrove habitats? J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 2001, 257, 229–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Sheaves, M. Nature and consequences of biological connectivity in mangrove systems. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2005, 302, 293–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Joel, E.L.; Bhimba, V. Isolation and characterization of secondary metabolites from the mangrove plant Rhizophora mucronata. Asian Pac. J. Trop. Med. 2010, 3, 602–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Bhimba, B.V.; Meenupriya, J.; Joel, E.L.; Naveena, D.E.; Kumar, S.; Thangaraj, M. Antibacterial activity and characterization of secondary metabolites isolated from mangrove plant Avicennia officinalis. Asian Pac. J. Trop. Med. 2010, 3, 544–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Thampanya, U.; Vermaat, J.; Sinsakul, S.; Panapitukkul, N. Coastal erosion and mangrove progradation of Southern Thailand. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 2006, 68, 75–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Santhakumar, V.; Haque, A.E.; Bhattacharya, R. An economic analysis of mangroves in South Asia. In Economic Development in South Asia; Tata McGraw Hill: New Delhi, India, 2005; pp. 368–437. [Google Scholar]
  28. Boto, K.G.; Wellington, J.T. Soil characteristics and nutrient status in a northern Australian mangrove forest. Estuaries 1984, 7, 61–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Sippo, J.Z.; Lovelock, C.E.; Santos, I.R.; Sanders, C.J.; Maher, D.T. Mangrove mortality in a changing climate: An overview. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 2018, 215, 241–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Kristensen, E.; Bouillon, S.; Dittmar, T.; Marchand, C. Organic carbon dynamics in mangrove ecosystems: A review. Aquat. Bot. 2008, 89, 201–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Walters, B.B.; Rönnbäck, P.; Kovacs, J.M.; Crona, B.; Hussain, S.A.; Badola, R.; Primavera, J.H.; Barbier, E.; Dahdouh-Guebas, F. Ethnobiology, socio-economics and management of mangrove forests: A review. Aquat. Bot. 2008, 89, 220–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Alongi, D.M. Carbon cycling and storage in mangrove forests. Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 2014, 6, 195–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Krauss, K.W.; McKee, K.L.; Lovelock, C.E.; Cahoon, D.R.; Saintilan, N.; Reef, R.; Chen, L. How mangrove forests adjust to rising sea level. New Phytol. 2014, 202, 19–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Mendoza-Muñoz, M.; Vega-Muñoz, A.; Carlos-Vivas, J.; Denche-Zamorano, Á.; Adsuar, J.C.; Raimundo, A.; Salazar-Sepúlveda, G.; Contreras-Barraza, N.; Muñoz-Urtubia, N. The Bibliometric Analysis of Studies on Physical Literacy for a Healthy Life. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 15211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Ahadi, A.; Singh, A.; Bower, M.; Garrett, M. Text mining in education—A bibliometrics-based systematic review. Educ. Sci. 2022, 12, 210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Szomszor, M.; Adams, J.; Fry, R.; Gebert, C.; Pendlebury, D.; Potter, R.; Rogers, G. Interpreting Bibliometric Data. Front. Res. Metr. Anal. 2020, 5, 628703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Pranckutė, R. Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The titans of bibliographic information in today’s academic world. Publications 2021, 9, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Mejia, C.; Wu, M.; Zhang, Y.; Kajikawa, Y. Exploring topics in bibliometric research through citation networks and semantic analysis. Front. Res. Metr. Anal. 2021, 6, 742311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Chen, C. How to Use CiteSpace (6.1.R2); Lean Publishing: Victoria, BC, Canada, 2022; p. 137. [Google Scholar]
  40. Ho, Y.-S.; Mukul, S.A. Publication performance and trends in mangrove forests: A bibliometric analysis. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Mohd Razali, S.; Radzi, M.A.; Marin, A.; Samdin, Z. A bibliometric analysis of tropical mangrove forest land use change from 2010 to 2020. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2021, 24, 11530–11547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Saravanan, G.; Dominic, J. Bibliometric analysis of mangrove literature 2001–2012. Seaweed Resour. Util. 2013, 35, 226–237. [Google Scholar]
  43. Jiang, L.; Yang, T.; Yu, J. Global trends and prospects of blue carbon sinks: A bibliometric analysis. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 65924–65939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. George, B.; Varathan, P.; Suchithra, T. Meta-analysis on big data of bioactive compounds from mangrove ecosystem to treat neurodegenerative disease. Scientometrics 2020, 122, 1539–1561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Azra, M.N.; Noor, M.I.M.; Eales, J.; Sung, Y.Y.; Ghaffar, M.A. What evidence exists for the impact of climate change on the physiology and behaviour of important aquaculture marine crustacean species in Asia? A systematic map protocol. Environ. Evid. 2022, 11, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Retallack, G.J. Reconstructing Triassic vegetation of eastern Australasia: A new approach for the biostratigraphy of Gondwanaland. Alcheringa 1977, 1, 247–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Katz, J.S.; Martin, B.R. What is research collaboration? Research Policy 1997, 26, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Spalding, M. World Atlas of Mangroves; Routledge: London, UK, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  49. Giri, C.; Ochieng, E.; Tieszen, L.L.; Zhu, Z.; Singh, A.; Loveland, T.; Masek, J.; Duke, N. Status and distribution of mangrove forests of the world using earth observation satellite data. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2011, 20, 154–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Chen, C.; Morris, S. Visualizing evolving networks: Minimum spanning trees versus pathfinder networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE symposium on information visualization 2003 (IEEE Cat. No. 03TH8714), Seattle, WA, USA, 19–21 October 2003; pp. 67–74. [Google Scholar]
  51. Zhong, Z.; Zheng, L.; Luo, Z.; Li, S.; Yang, Y. Invariance matters: Exemplar memory for domain adaptive person re-identification. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Long Beach, CA, USA, 15–20 June 2019; pp. 598–607. [Google Scholar]
  52. Olawumi, T.O.; Chan, D.W. A scientometric review of global research on sustainability and sustainable development. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 183, 231–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Yang, H.; Shao, X.; Wu, M. A review on ecosystem health research: A visualization based on CiteSpace. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Osland, M.J.; Feher, L.C.; López-Portillo, J.; Day, R.H.; Suman, D.O.; Menéndez, J.M.G.; Rivera-Monroy, V.H. Mangrove forests in a rapidly changing world: Global change impacts and conservation opportunities along the Gulf of Mexico coast. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 2018, 214, 120–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Osland, M.J.; Griffith, K.T.; Larriviere, J.C.; Feher, L.C.; Cahoon, D.R.; Enwright, N.M.; Oster, D.A.; Tirpak, J.M.; Woodrey, M.S.; Collini, R.C. Assessing coastal wetland vulnerability to sea-level rise along the northern Gulf of Mexico coast: Gaps and opportunities for developing a coordinated regional sampling network. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0183431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Kumara, M.; Jayatissa, L.P.; Krauss, K.W.; Phillips, D.; Huxham, M. High mangrove density enhances surface accretion, surface elevation change, and tree survival in coastal areas susceptible to sea-level rise. Oecologia 2010, 164, 545–553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Narayan, Y.R.; Pandolfi, J.M. Benthic foraminiferal assemblages from Moreton Bay, South-East Queensland, Australia: Applications in monitoring water and substrate quality in subtropical estuarine environments. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2010, 60, 2062–2078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Roelfsema, C.; Phinn, S.; Udy, N.; Maxwell, P. An integrated field and remote sensing approach for mapping seagrass cover, Moreton Bay, Australia. J. Spat. Sci. 2009, 54, 45–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Lovelock, C.E.; Feller, I.C.; Reef, R.; Hickey, S.; Ball, M.C. Mangrove dieback during fluctuating sea levels. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 1680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Doughty, C.L.; Langley, J.A.; Walker, W.S.; Feller, I.C.; Schaub, R.; Chapman, S.K. Mangrove range expansion rapidly increases coastal wetland carbon storage. Estuaries Coasts 2016, 39, 385–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Shi, Y.; Liu, X. Research on the literature of green building based on the Web of Science: A scientometric analysis in CiteSpace (2002–2018). Sustainability 2019, 11, 3716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Tomlinson, P. The Botany of Mangroves; Cambridge University Press: London, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  63. Hamilton, S.E.; Casey, D. Creation of a high spatio-temporal resolution global database of continuous mangrove forest cover for the 21st century (CGMFC-21). Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2016, 25, 729–738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Lovelock, C.E.; Cahoon, D.R.; Friess, D.A.; Guntenspergen, G.R.; Krauss, K.W.; Reef, R.; Rogers, K.; Saunders, M.L.; Sidik, F.; Swales, A. The vulnerability of Indo-Pacific mangrove forests to sea-level rise. Nature 2015, 526, 559–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Donato, D.C.; Kauffman, J.B.; Murdiyarso, D.; Kurnianto, S.; Stidham, M.; Kanninen, M. Mangroves among the most carbon-rich forests in the tropics. Nat. Geosci. 2011, 4, 293–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Cavanaugh, K.C.; Kellner, J.R.; Forde, A.J.; Gruner, D.S.; Parker, J.D.; Rodriguez, W.; Feller, I.C. Poleward expansion of mangroves is a threshold response to decreased frequency of extreme cold events. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2014, 111, 723–727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Richards, D.R.; Friess, D.A. Rates and drivers of mangrove deforestation in Southeast Asia, 2000–2012. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2016, 113, 344–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Saintilan, N.; Wilson, N.C.; Rogers, K.; Rajkaran, A.; Krauss, K.W. Mangrove expansion and salt marsh decline at mangrove poleward limits. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2014, 20, 147–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Waycott, M.; Duarte, C.M.; Carruthers, T.J.; Orth, R.J.; Dennison, W.C.; Olyarnik, S.; Calladine, A.; Fourqurean, J.W.; Heck, K.L., Jr.; Hughes, A.R. Accelerating loss of seagrasses across the globe threatens coastal ecosystems. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2009, 106, 12377–12381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Loarie, S.R.; Duffy, P.B.; Hamilton, H.; Asner, G.P.; Field, C.B.; Ackerly, D.D. The velocity of climate change. Nature 2009, 462, 1052–1055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Chmura, G.L.; Anisfeld, S.C.; Cahoon, D.R.; Lynch, J.C. Global carbon sequestration in tidal, saline wetland soils. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 2003, 17, 1111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Erwin, K.L. Wetlands and global climate change: The role of wetland restoration in a changing world. Wetl. Ecol. Manag. 2009, 17, 71–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Halpern, B.S.; Selkoe, K.A.; Micheli, F.; Kappel, C.V. Evaluating and ranking the vulnerability of global marine ecosystems to anthropogenic threats. Conserv. Biol. 2007, 21, 1301–1315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. McKee, K.L.; Cahoon, D.R.; Feller, I.C. Caribbean mangroves adjust to rising sea level through biotic controls on change in soil elevation. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2007, 16, 545–556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Gratwicke, B.; Speight, M.R. The relationship between fish species richness, abundance and habitat complexity in a range of shallow tropical marine habitats. J. Fish Biol. 2005, 66, 650–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Amiro, B.D.; Barr, A.G.; Barr, J.; Black, T.A.; Bracho, R.; Brown, M.; Chen, J.; Clark, K.; Davis, K.; Desai, A. Ecosystem carbon dioxide fluxes after disturbance in forests of North America. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 2010, 115, G00K02. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Cahoon, D.R.; Hensel, P.; Rybczyk, J.; McKee, K.L.; Proffitt, C.E.; Perez, B.C. Mass tree mortality leads to mangrove peat collapse at Bay Islands, Honduras after Hurricane Mitch. J. Ecol. 2003, 91, 1093–1105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Duarte, C.M.; Cebrián, J. The fate of marine autotrophic production. Limnol. Oceanogr. 1996, 41, 1758–1766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Nicholls, R.J.; Hoozemans, F.M.; Marchand, M. Increasing flood risk and wetland losses due to global sea-level rise: Regional and global analyses. Glob. Environ. Chang. 1999, 9, S69–S87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Stirling, C.; Esat, T.; Lambeck, K.; McCulloch, M. Timing and duration of the Last Interglacial: Evidence for a restricted interval of widespread coral reef growth. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 1998, 160, 745–762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Furukawa, K.; Wolanski, E.; Mueller, H. Currents and sediment transport in mangrove forests. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 1997, 44, 301–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Hoorn, C. Marine incursions and the influence of Andean tectonics on the Miocene depositional history of northwestern Amazonia: Results of a palynostratigraphic study. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 1993, 105, 267–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Kautsky, N.; Rönnbäck, P.; Tedengren, M.; Troell, M. Ecosystem perspectives on management of disease in shrimp pond farming. Aquaculture 2000, 191, 145–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Smith, T.J.; Robblee, M.B.; Wanless, H.R.; Doyle, T.W. Mangroves, hurricanes, and lightning strikes. BioScience 1994, 44, 256–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. McKee, K.L. Soil physicochemical patterns and mangrove species distribution–reciprocal effects? J. Ecol. 1993, 81, 477–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Ellison, J.C.; Stoddart, D.R. Mangrove ecosystem collapse during predicted sea-level rise: Holocene analogues and implications. J. Coast. Res. 1991, 7, 151–165. [Google Scholar]
  87. Hemminga, M.; Slim, F.; Kazungu, J.; Ganssen, G.; Nieuwenhuize, J.; Kruyt, N. Carbon outwelling from a mangrove forest with adjacent seagrass beds and coral reefs (Gazi Bay, Kenya). Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1994, 106, 291–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Qin, F.; Zhu, Y.; Ao, T.; Chen, T. The development trend and research frontiers of distributed hydrological models—Visual bibliometric analysis based on citespace. Water 2021, 13, 174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Luo, X.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, L.; Huang, G. Visualization of Chinese CBM research: A scientometrics review. Sustainability 2017, 9, 980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Mcleod, E.; Chmura, G.L.; Bouillon, S.; Salm, R.; Björk, M.; Duarte, C.M.; Lovelock, C.E.; Schlesinger, W.H.; Silliman, B.R. A blueprint for blue carbon: Toward an improved understanding of the role of vegetated coastal habitats in sequestering CO2. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2011, 9, 552–560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Alongi, D.M. Mangrove forests: Resilience, protection from tsunamis, and responses to global climate change. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 2008, 76, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Gilman, E.L.; Ellison, J.; Duke, N.C.; Field, C. Threats to mangroves from climate change and adaptation options: A review. Aquat. Bot. 2008, 89, 237–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Zhang, Z.; Zou, Y. Research hotspots and trends in heritage building information modeling: A review based on CiteSpace analysis. Humanit. Soc. Sci. Commun. 2022, 9, 394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Lee, P.-C.; Su, H.-N. Investigating the structure of regional innovation system research through keyword co-occurrence and social network analysis. Innovation 2010, 12, 26–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Liu, Z.; Yin, Y.; Liu, W.; Dunford, M. Visualizing the intellectual structure and evolution of innovation systems research: A bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics 2015, 103, 135–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Liao, H.; Tang, M.; Luo, L.; Li, C.; Chiclana, F.; Zeng, X.-J. A bibliometric analysis and visualization of medical big data research. Sustainability 2018, 10, 166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Chen, C. CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2006, 57, 359–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Chen, C.; Leydesdorff, L. Patterns of connections and movements in dual-map overlays: A new method of publication portfolio analysis. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2014, 65, 334–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Ping, Q.; He, J.; Chen, C. How many ways to use CiteSpace? A study of user interactive events over 14 months. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2017, 68, 1234–1256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Miao, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Yin, L. Trends in hepatocellular carcinoma research from 2008 to 2017: A bibliometric analysis. PeerJ 2018, 6, e5477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. FAO. High-Level Conference on World Food Security: The Challenges of Climate Change and Bioenergy; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2008; 48p. [Google Scholar]
  102. Duke, N.C.; Meynecke, J.-O.; Dittmann, S.; Ellison, A.M.; Anger, K.; Berger, U.; Cannicci, S.; Diele, K.; Ewel, K.C.; Field, C.D. A world without mangroves? Science 2007, 317, 41–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Murdiyarso, D.; Purbopuspito, J.; Kauffman, J.B.; Warren, M.W.; Sasmito, S.D.; Donato, D.C.; Manuri, S.; Krisnawati, H.; Taberima, S.; Kurnianto, S. The potential of Indonesian mangrove forests for global climate change mitigation. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2015, 5, 1089–1092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Wang, Y.-S.; Gu, J.-D. Ecological responses, adaptation and mechanisms of mangrove wetland ecosystem to global climate change and anthropogenic activities. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegrad. 2021, 162, 105248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Vignola, R.; Locatelli, B.; Martinez, C.; Imbach, P. Ecosystem-based adaptation to climate change: What role for policy-makers, society and scientists? Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Chang. 2009, 14, 691–696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Rizvi, A.R.; Baig, S.; Verdone, M. Ecosystems Based Adaptation: Knowledge Gaps in Making an Economic Case for Investing in Nature Based Solutions for Climate Change; International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources: Gland, Switzerland, 2015; Volume 48. [Google Scholar]
  107. De Lacerda, L.D.; Borges, R.; Ferreira, A.C. Neotropical mangroves: Conservation and sustainable use in a scenario of global climate change. Aquat. Conserv. Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 2019, 29, 1347–1364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Wagner, G.M.; Sallema-Mtui, R. The Rufiji Estuary: Climate change, anthropogenic pressures, vulnerability assessment and adaptive management strategies. In Estuaries: A Lifeline of Ecosystem Services in the Western Indian Ocean; Springer: Cham, Germany, 2016; pp. 183–207. [Google Scholar]
  109. Parmesan, C.; Yohe, G. A globally coherent fingerprint of climate change impacts across natural systems. Nature 2003, 421, 37–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Parmesan, C. Ecological and evolutionary responses to recent climate change. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2006, 37, 637–669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Vergés, A.; Steinberg, P.D.; Hay, M.E.; Poore, A.G.; Campbell, A.H.; Ballesteros, E.; Heck, K.L., Jr.; Booth, D.J.; Coleman, M.A.; Feary, D.A. The tropicalization of temperate marine ecosystems: Climate-mediated changes in herbivory and community phase shifts. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2014, 281, 20140846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Giri, C.; Long, J. Is the geographic range of mangrove forests in the conterminous United States really expanding? Sensors 2016, 16, 2010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Godoy, M.D.; de Lacerda, L.D. Mangroves response to climate change: A review of recent findings on mangrove extension and distribution. An. Acad. Bras. Ciênc. 2015, 87, 651–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Raw, J.L.; Van der Stocken, T.; Carroll, D.; Harris, L.R.; Rajkaran, A.; Van Niekerk, L.; Adams, J.B. Dispersal and coastal geomorphology limit potential for mangrove range expansion under climate change. J. Ecol. 2023, 111, 139–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Osland, M.J.; Hartmann, A.M.; Day, R.H.; Ross, M.S.; Hall, C.T.; Feher, L.C.; Vervaeke, W.C. Microclimate influences mangrove freeze damage: Implications for range expansion in response to changing macroclimate. Estuaries Coasts 2019, 42, 1084–1096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Record, S.; Charney, N.; Zakaria, R.; Ellison, A.M. Projecting global mangrove species and community distributions under climate change. Ecosphere 2013, 4, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Sarker, S.K.; Matthiopoulos, J.; Mitchell, S.N.; Ahmed, Z.U.; Al Mamun, M.B.; Reeve, R. 1980s–2010s: The world’s largest mangrove ecosystem is becoming homogeneous. Biol. Conserv. 2019, 236, 79–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Loucks, C.; Barber-Meyer, S.; Hossain, M.A.A.; Barlow, A.; Chowdhury, R.M. Sea level rise and tigers: Predicted impacts to Bangladesh’s Sundarbans mangroves: A letter. Clim. Chang. 2010, 98, 291–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Li, S.; Meng, X.; Ge, Z.; Zhang, L. Vulnerability assessment of the coastal mangrove ecosystems in Guangxi, China, to sea-level rise. Reg. Environ. Chang. 2015, 15, 265–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Gilman, E.L.; Ellison, J.; Jungblut, V.; Van Lavieren, H.; Wilson, L.; Areki, F.; Brighouse, G.; Bungitak, J.; Dus, E.; Henry, M. Adapting to Pacific Island mangrove responses to sea level rise and climate change. Clim. Res. 2006, 32, 161–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Barua, P.; Chowdhury, S.; Sarker, S. Climate change and its risk reduction by mangrove ecosystem of Bangladesh. Bangladesh Res. Publ. J. 2010, 4, 208–255. [Google Scholar]
  122. Sarkar, M.; Kabir, S.; Begum, R.A.; Pereira, J.J.; Jaafar, A.H.; Saari, M.Y. Impacts of and adaptations to sea level rise in Malaysia. Asian J. Water Environ. Pollut. 2014, 11, 29–36. [Google Scholar]
  123. Donner, S.D.; Webber, S. Obstacles to climate change adaptation decisions: A case study of sea-level rise and coastal protection measures in Kiribati. Sustain. Sci. 2014, 9, 331–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Eslami-Andargoli, L.; Dale, P.; Sipe, N.; Chaseling, J. Mangrove expansion and rainfall patterns in Moreton Bay, southeast Queensland, Australia. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 2009, 85, 292–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Mafi-Gholami, D.; Zenner, E.K.; Jaafari, A.; Bui, D.T. Spatially explicit predictions of changes in the extent of mangroves of Iran at the end of the 21st century. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 2020, 237, 106644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Etemadi, H.; Smoak, J.M.; Abbasi, E. Spatiotemporal pattern of degradation in arid mangrove forests of the Northern Persian Gulf. Oceanologia 2021, 63, 99–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Mafi-Gholami, D.; Mahmoudi, B.; Zenner, E.K. An analysis of the relationship between drought events and mangrove changes along the northern coasts of the Persian Gulf and Oman Sea. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 2017, 199, 141–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Alireza, S.M.; Mansour, J.B. Satellite based assessment of the area and changes in the Mangrove ecosystem of the QESHM island, Iran. J. Environ. Res. Dev. 2012, 7, 1052–1060. [Google Scholar]
  129. Bernardino, A.F.; Netto, S.A.; Pagliosa, P.R.; Barros, F.; Christofoletti, R.A.; Rosa Filho, J.S.; Colling, A.; Lana, P.C. Predicting ecological changes on benthic estuarine assemblages through decadal climate trends along Brazilian Marine Ecoregions. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 2015, 166, 74–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Servino, R.N.; de Oliveira Gomes, L.E.; Bernardino, A.F. Extreme weather impacts on tropical mangrove forests in the Eastern Brazil Marine Ecoregion. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 628, 233–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Gnanamoorthy, P.; Selvam, V.; Burman, P.K.D.; Chakraborty, S.; Karipot, A.; Nagarajan, R.; Ramasubramanian, R.; Song, Q.; Zhang, Y.; Grace, J. Seasonal variations of net ecosystem (CO2) exchange in the Indian tropical mangrove forest of Pichavaram. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 2020, 243, 106828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Barr, J.G.; Engel, V.; Fuentes, J.D.; Zieman, J.C.; O’Halloran, T.L.; Smith III, T.J.; Anderson, G.H. Controls on mangrove forest-atmosphere carbon dioxide exchanges in western Everglades National Park. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 2010, 115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Liu, J.; Lai, D.Y. Subtropical mangrove wetland is a stronger carbon dioxide sink in the dry than wet seasons. Agric. For. Meteorol. 2019, 278, 107644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Munji, C.A.; Bele, M.Y.; Idinoba, M.E.; Sonwa, D.J. Floods and mangrove forests, friends or foes? Perceptions of relationships and risks in Cameroon coastal mangroves. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 2014, 140, 67–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Wong, P.P.; Losada, I.J.; Gattuso, J.-P.; Hinkel, J.; Khattabi, A.; McInnes, K.L.; Saito, Y.; Sallenger, A. Coastal Systems and Low-lying Areas. In Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2014; pp. 361–409. [Google Scholar]
  136. Hilaluddin, F.; Yusoff, F.; Natrah, F.; Lim, P. Disturbance of mangrove forests causes alterations in estuarine phytoplankton community structure in Malaysian Matang mangrove forests. Mar. Environ. Res. 2020, 158, 104935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Alongi, D.M. Impact of global change on nutrient dynamics in mangrove forests. Forests 2018, 9, 596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Reef, R.; Slot, M.; Motro, U.; Motro, M.; Motro, Y.; Adame, M.F.; Garcia, M.; Aranda, J.; Lovelock, C.E.; Winter, K. The effects of CO2 and nutrient fertilisation on the growth and temperature response of the mangrove Avicennia germinans. Photosynth. Res. 2016, 129, 159–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Margono, B.A.; Potapov, P.V.; Turubanova, S.; Stolle, F.; Hansen, M.C. Primary forest cover loss in Indonesia over 2000–2012. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2014, 4, 730–735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Rodda, S.R.; Thumaty, K.C.; Fararoda, R.; Jha, C.S.; Dadhwal, V.K. Unique characteristics of ecosystem CO2 exchange in Sundarban mangrove forest and their relationship with environmental factors. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 2022, 267, 107764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Van Vinh, T.; Allenbach, M.; Joanne, A.; Marchand, C. Seasonal variability of CO2 fluxes at different interfaces and vertical CO2 concentration profiles within a Rhizophora mangrove forest (Can Gio, Viet Nam). Atmos. Environ. 2019, 201, 301–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Jacotot, A.; Marchand, C.; Allenbach, M. Tidal variability of CO2 and CH4 emissions from the water column within a Rhizophora mangrove forest (New Caledonia). Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 631, 334–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  143. Reef, R.; Lovelock, C.E. Historical analysis of mangrove leaf traits throughout the 19th and 20th centuries reveals differential responses to increases in atmospheric CO2. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2014, 23, 1209–1214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Driever, S.M.; Baker, N.R. The water–water cycle in leaves is not a major alternative electron sink for dissipation of excess excitation energy when CO2 assimilation is restricted. Plant Cell Environ. 2011, 34, 837–846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Ellison, J. Climate Change and Sea Level Rise Impacts on Mangrove Ecosystems; International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources: Gland, Switzerland, 1994; p. 108. [Google Scholar]
  146. Lovelock, C.E.; Ellison, J. Vulnerability of mangroves and tidal wetlands of the Great Barrier Reef to climate change. In Climate Change and the Great Barrier Reef: A Vulnerability Assessment; Johnson, J.E., Marshall, P.A., Eds.; The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority: Townsville, Australia, 2007; pp. 237–269. [Google Scholar]
  147. Zhang, Q.; Wu, X.; Xue, S.; Liang, K.; Cong, W. Study of hydrodynamic characteristics in tubular photobioreactors. Bioprocess Biosyst. Eng. 2012, 36, 143–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Aung, T.T.; Mochida, Y.; Than, M.M. Prediction of recovery pathways of cyclone-disturbed mangroves in the mega delta of Myanmar. For. Ecol. Manag. 2013, 293, 103–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Padhy, S.; Dash, P.; Bhattacharyya, P. Challenges, opportunities, and climate change adaptation strategies of mangrove-agriculture ecosystem in the Sundarbans, India: A review. Wetl. Ecol. Manag. 2022, 30, 191–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Baldwin, A.; Egnotovich, M.; Ford, M.; Platt, W. Regeneration in fringe mangrove forests damaged by Hurricane Andrew. Plant Ecol. 2001, 157, 151–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Galeano, A.; Urrego, L.E.; Botero, V.; Bernal, G. Mangrove resilience to climate extreme events in a Colombian Caribbean Island. Wetl. Ecol. Manag. 2017, 25, 743–760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Ward, R.; Burnside, N.; Joyce, C.; Sepp, K.; Teasdale, P. Improved modelling of the impacts of sea level rise on coastal wetland plant communities. Hydrobiologia 2016, 774, 203–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Ward, R.D.; Friess, D.A.; Day, R.H.; Mackenzie, R.A. Impacts of climate change on mangrove ecosystems: A region by region overview. Ecosyst. Health Sustain. 2016, 2, e01211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Oppenheimer, M.; Glavovic, B.C.; Hinkel, J.; van de Wal, R.; Magnan, A.K.; Abd-Elgawad, A.; Cai, R.; Cifuentes-Jara, M.; DeConto, R.M.; Ghosh, T.; et al. Sea Level Rise and Implications for Low-lying Islands, Coasts and Communities Supplementary Material. In IPCC Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate; Pörtner, H.-O., Roberts, D.C., Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Tignor, M., Poloczanska, E., Mintenbeck, K., Alegría, A., Nicolai, M., Okem, A., et al., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2019; pp. 321–445. [Google Scholar]
  155. Ellison, J. Geomorphology and sedimentology of mangroves. In Coastal Wetlands: An Integrated Ecosystem Approach; Elsevier B.V.: Oxford, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  156. Jones, S. From Source to Sink: How Linking Upstream Fluvial Processes to Mangrove Sedimentation Can Improve Mangrove Management Strategies. Oceanogr. Fish. 2020, 12, 555835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Cano-Ortiz, A.; Musarella, C.M.; Fuentes, J.C.P.; Gomes, C.J.P.; Del Rio, S.; Canas, R.Q.; Cano, E. Analysis of the conservation of Central American mangroves using the phytosociological method. In Mangrove Ecosystem Ecology and Function; Intech Publisher: London, UK, 2018; pp. 189–206. [Google Scholar]
  158. Anthony, E.J. Wave influence in the construction, shaping and destruction of river deltas: A review. Mar. Geol. 2015, 361, 53–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Woodroffe, C.D.; Rogers, K.; McKee, K.L.; Lovelock, C.E.; Mendelssohn, I.; Saintilan, N. Mangrove sedimentation and response to relative sea-level rise. Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 2016, 8, 243–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  160. MacKenzie, R.A.; Foulk, P.B.; Klump, J.V.; Weckerly, K.; Purbospito, J.; Murdiyarso, D.; Donato, D.C.; Nam, V.N. Sedimentation and belowground carbon accumulation rates in mangrove forests that differ in diversity and land use: A tale of two mangroves. Wetl. Ecol. Manag. 2016, 24, 245–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Wijayasinghe, M.M.; Jayasuriya, K.G.; Gunatilleke, C.; Gunatilleke, I.; Walck, J.L. Effect of salinity on seed germination of five mangroves from Sri Lanka: Use of hydrotime modelling for mangrove germination. Seed Sci. Res. 2019, 29, 55–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Duke, N.C.; Lo, E.; Sun, M. Global distribution and genetic discontinuities of mangroves–emerging patterns in the evolution of Rhizophora. Trees 2002, 16, 65–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Arnaud-Haond, S.; Teixeira, S.; Massa, S.I.; Billot, C.; Saenger, P.; Coupland, G.; Duarte, C.M.; Serrao, E. Genetic structure at range edge: Low diversity and high inbreeding in Southeast Asian mangrove (Avicennia marina) populations. Mol. Ecol. 2006, 15, 3515–3525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Jones, H.P.; Hole, D.G.; Zavaleta, E.S. Harnessing nature to help people adapt to climate change. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2012, 2, 504–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Zimmer, M.; Ajonina, G.N.; Amir, A.A.; Crgagg, S.M.; Crooks, S.; Dahdouh-Guebas, F.; Duke, N.C.; Fratini, S.; Friess, D.A.; Helfer, V. When nature needs a helping hand: Different levels of human intervention for mangrove (re-) establishment. Front. For. Glob. Chang. 2022, 5, 784322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Rattan, R.; Sharma, B.; Kumar, R.; Saigal, V.; Shukla, S. Ramsar Convention: History, Structure, Operations, and Relevance; Sharma, S., Singh, P., Eds.; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2021; p. 320. [Google Scholar]
  167. Seto, K.C.; Fragkias, M. Mangrove conversion and aquaculture development in Vietnam: A remote sensing-based approach for evaluating the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2007, 17, 486–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Razali, S.M.; Nuruddin, A.A.; Kamarudin, N. Mapping mangrove density for conservation of the RAMSAR site in Peninsular Malaysia. Int. J. Conserv. Sci. 2020, 11, 153–164. [Google Scholar]
  169. Selvam, V.; Ravichandaran, K.; Karunakaran, V.; Mani, K.; Beula, E.J.; Gnanappazham, L. Pichavaram Mangrove Wetlands: Situation Analysis; International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources: Chennai, India, 2010; p. 39. [Google Scholar]
  170. Partridge, G.; Finlayson, C. Climate change adaptation planning for an internationally important wetland, the Muir–Byenup System Ramsar Site in south-west Australia. Mar. Freshw. Res. 2022, 73, 1263–1277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Gross, J.; Flores, E.E.; Schwendenmann, L. Stand structure and aboveground biomass of a Pelliciera rhizophorae mangrove forest, Gulf of Monitjo Ramsar site, Pacific Coast, Panama. Wetlands 2014, 34, 55–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Busch, P.-O. The climate secretariat: Making a living in a straitjacket. In Managers of Global Change: The Influence of International Environmental Bureaucracies; Biermann, F., Siebenhüner, B., Eds.; The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2009; pp. 245–264. [Google Scholar]
  173. Hickmann, T.; Widerberg, O.; Lederer, M.; Pattberg, P. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Secretariat as an orchestrator in global climate policymaking. Int. Rev. Adm. Sci. 2021, 87, 21–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Friess, D.A.; Yando, E.S.; Abuchahla, G.M.; Adams, J.B.; Cannicci, S.; Canty, S.W.; Cavanaugh, K.C.; Connolly, R.M.; Cormier, N.; Dahdouh-Guebas, F. Mangroves give cause for conservation optimism, for now. Curr. Biol. 2020, 30, R153–R154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  175. Adame, M.F.; Connolly, R.M.; Turschwell, M.P.; Lovelock, C.E.; Fatoyinbo, T.; Lagomasino, D.; Goldberg, L.A.; Holdorf, J.; Friess, D.A.; Sasmito, S.D. Future carbon emissions from global mangrove forest loss. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2021, 27, 2856–2866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  176. Banjade, M.; Liswanti, N.; Herawati, T.; Mwangi, E. Governing Mangroves: Unique Challenges for Managing Indonesia’s Coastal Forests; Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR): Bogor, Indonesia, 2017; p. 57. [Google Scholar]
  177. Sidik, F.; Lawrence, A.; Wagey, T.; Zamzani, F.; Lovelock, C.E. Blue carbon: A new paradigm of mangrove conservation and management in Indonesia. Mar. Policy 2023, 147, 105388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Rogers, K.; Boon, P.I.; Branigan, S.; Duke, N.C.; Field, C.D.; Fitzsimons, J.A.; Kirkman, H.; Mackenzie, J.R.; Saintilan, N. The state of legislation and policy protecting Australia’s mangrove and salt marsh and their ecosystem services. Mar. Policy 2016, 72, 139–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Zauki, N.A.M.; Satyanarayana, B.; Fairuz-Fozi, N.; Nelson, B.R.; Martin, M.B.; Akbar-John, B.; Chowdhury, A.J.K. Citizen science frontiers horseshoe crab population regain at their spawning beach in East Peninsular Malaysia. J. Environ. Manag. 2019, 232, 1012–1020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Nayak, A.; Equbal, J.; Sanghamitra Rout, S.; Dash, B.; Thiruchitrambalam, G.; Bhadury, P.; Behara, S.; Raut, D. Macrobenthic community of an anthropogenically influenced mangrove associated estuary on the East coast of India: An approach for ecological assessment. Front. Mar. Sci. 2022, 9, 1008912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Journal Statistics
Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.
Download PDF
Ingestion of Species-Specific dsRNA Alters Gene Expression and Can Cause Mortality in the Forest Pest, Ips calligraphus
Previous
Hierarchical Task Analysis (HTA) for Application Research on Operator Work Practices and the Design of Training and Support Systems for Forestry Harvester
Next