https://commons.ru.ac.za/vital/access/manager/Index en-us 5 https://commons.ru.ac.za/vital/access/manager/Repository/vital:5685 l5mm) were calculated as real densities from randomly placed quads i.e. not from areas of 100% cover. Density decreased up the shore; low, mid and high shore zones were significantly different from each other (ANOVA , p<0.0001; followed by multiple range tests). There was no significant difference between the densities of mussels at exposed and sheltered sites within each zone (ANOVA, p=0.7155). Recruit ( Wed 12 May 2021 19:52:56 SAST ]]> https://commons.ru.ac.za/vital/access/manager/Repository/vital:5741 15 mm) were positively correlated with recruit densities (1-5 mm) for both shore types (p15 mm) was significantly lower on exposed (mean of 3 348.m⁻²) than on sheltered shores (mean of 4 796.m⁻²) (pO.05). The effect of exposure on growth rate formed the focal point of this study and was determined using three different approaches. The first technique, mark-recapture, involved filing notches on the growing edges of mussels in the field. After 111 days, mussels were removed and the growth measured. The second approach used internal growth bands to measure growth rates, once the periodicity with which these bands were laid down was established. Thirdly, using Shepherd's length composition analysis (SLCA), growth rates were determined from length frequency distributions in 11 samples taken over 15 months. The general conclusion from all three approaches was that growth rate was twice as fast on the exposed shores as on the sheltered shores (p Wed 12 May 2021 18:40:51 SAST ]]>