Although cascading effects of top predators can help structure communities, their influence may vary across habitats that differentially protect prey. Therefore, to understand how and to what degree habitat complexity can affect trophic interactions in adjacent habitats, we used a combination of a broad regional-scale survey, manipulative field trials, and an outdoor mesocosm experiment to quantify predator–prey interaction strengths across four trophic levels. Within estuaries of the southeastern USA, bonnethead sharks (Sphyrna tiburo) hunt blue crabs on mudflats and adjacent oyster reefs, two habitats with vastly different aboveground structure. Using 12-h tethering trials of blue crabs we quantified habitat-dependent loss rates of 37% on reefs and 78% on mudflats. We hypothesized that the sharks’ predatory effects on blue crabs would cascade down to release a lower-level mud crab predator, which subsequently would increase juvenile oyster mortality, but that the cascade strength would be habitat-dependent. We experimentally manipulated predator combinations in split-plot mesocosms containing reef and mudflat habitats, and quantified oyster mortality. Bonnetheads exerted strong consumptive and non-consumptive effects on blue crabs, which ceased eating oysters in the sharks’ presence. However, mud crabs, regardless of shark and blue crab presence, continued to consume oysters, especially within the structural refuge of the reef where they kept oyster mortality high. Thus, bonnetheads indirectly boosted oyster survival, but only on the mudflat where mud crabs were less active. Our work demonstrates how structural differences in adjacent habitats can moderate trophic cascades, particularly when mesopredators exhibit differential use of structure and different sensitivities to top predators.

Functional trait variation within and across populations can strongly influence population, community, and ecosystem processes, but the relative contributions of genetic vs. environmental factors to this variation are often not clear, potentially complicating conservation and restoration efforts. For example, local adaptation, a particular type of genetic by environmental (GE) interaction in which the fitness of a population in its own habitat is greater than in other habitats, is often invoked in management practices, even in the absence of supporting evidence. Despite increasing attention to the potential for GE interactions, few studies have tested multiple populations and environments simultaneously, limiting our understanding of the spatial consistency in patterns of adaptive genetic variation. In addition, few studies explicitly differentiate adaptation in response to predation from other biological and environmental factors. We conducted a reciprocal transplant experiment of first-generation eastern oyster (Crassostrea virginica) juveniles from six populations across three field sites spanning 1000 km in the southeastern Atlantic Bight in both the presence and absence of predation to test for GE variation in this economically valuable and ecologically important species. We documented significant GE variation in survival and growth, yet there was no evidence for local adaptation. Condition varied across oyster cohorts: Offspring of northern populations had better condition than offspring from the center of our region. Oyster populations in the southeastern Atlantic Bight differ in juvenile survival, growth, and condition, yet offspring from local broodstock do not have higher survival or growth than those from farther away. In the absence of population-specific performance information, oyster restoration and aquaculture may benefit from incorporating multiple populations into their practices.