DOCSLIB.ORG

Informe Union Capitulos Final

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Informe Union Capitulos Final INFORME FINAL Proyecto "DISEÑO DE UN PLAN DE CONSERVACIÓN Y MONITOREO DEL ÁREA MARINA COSTERA PROTEGIDA DE MÚLTIPLES USOS ISLA GRANDE DE ATACAMA (AMCP-MU IGA)" Elaborado por: Con Colaboración de: Informe Final "DISEÑO DE UN PLAN DE CONSERVACION Y MONITOREO DEL AREA MARINA COSTERA PROTEGIDA DE MULTIPLES USOS ISLA GRANDE DE ATACAMA (AMCP-MU IGA)" Jefe de Proyecto Alejandro Pérez Matus Equipo de Trabajo Luis Figueroa Fábrega Montserrat Rodríguez Ruiz Catalina Ruz Muñoz Siomara Astorga Díaz Sandra Tapia Faggioni Asesor Externo Rodrigo Estévez Octubre 05, 2019 CONTENIDO ACRÓNIMOS ...................................................................................................................................... 7 GLOSARIO .......................................................................................................................................... 9 I INTRODUCCIÓN ....................................................................................................................... 12 II ANTECEDENTES ....................................................................................................................... 13 III OBJETIVOS ............................................................................................................................... 21 Objetivo General .................................................................................................................................................. 21 Objetivos Específicos ............................................................................................................................................ 21 CAPÍTULO 1: DIAGNÓSTICO ACTUALIZADO DE LOS OBJETOS DE CONSERVACIÓN DE BIODIVERSIDAD (ODCB) Y OBJETOS DE BIENESTAR HUMANO (ODBH) IDENTIFICADOS Y PRIORIZADOS EN EL AMCP- MU IGA ............................................................................................................................................ 22 1.1 Introducción ........................................................................................................................................... 22 1.2 Metodología ........................................................................................................................................... 22 1.2.1 Análisis bibliométrico de la información existente. ....................................................................... 22 1.2.2 Identificación, sistematización y selección de los Objetos de Conservación Biológica (OdCB) y Objetos de Conservación Cultural (OdCC) ...................................................................................................................... 26 1.2.3 Análisis de viabilidad de los Objetos de Conservación .................................................................. 28 1.2.4 Identificación, recopilación y sistematización de los Servicios Ecosistémicos y Objetos de Bienestar Humano. ....................................................................................................................................................... 30 1.2.5. Análisis Socioeconómico e identificación de actores relevantes. .................................................. 33 1.3 Resultados .............................................................................................................................................. 34 3 Informe Final “Plan de Conservación y Monitoreo para el Área Marina Costera Protegida de Múltiples Usos Isla Grande de Atacama” 1.3.1 Análisis bibliométrico de la información existente. ....................................................................... 34 1.3.2 Identificación, sistematización y selección de los Objetos de Conservación Biológica (OdCB) y Objetos de Conservación Cultural (OdCC) ...................................................................................................................... 37 1.3.3 Análisis de viabilidad de los Objetos de Conservación .................................................................. 69 1.3.4 Identificación, recopilación y sistematización de los Servicios Ecosistémicos y Objetos de Bienestar Humano. ....................................................................................................................................................... 76 CAPÍTULO 2: DIAGNÓSTICO Y MODELO CONCEPTUAL DE AMENAZAS A LOS OBJETOS DE CONSERVACIÓN Y OBJETOS DE BIENESTAR HUMANO ..................................................................... 88 2.1 Introducción ........................................................................................................................................... 88 2.2 Metodología ........................................................................................................................................... 88 2.2.1 Identificación y Clasificación de las amenazas de los OdC y su impacto sobre los OdBH. ............. 88 2.2.2 Reglas de decisión empleadas en el análisis de amenazas ............................................................ 90 2.2.3 Proceso de Validación Amenazas ................................................................................................... 91 2.2.4 Análisis de vulnerabilidad al cambio climático .............................................................................. 91 2.2.6 Conceptualización y análisis situacional del AMCP-MU IGA. ......................................................... 92 2.3 Resultados .............................................................................................................................................. 93 2.3.1 Identificación y Clasificación de las amenazas de los OdC y su impacto sobre los OdBH .............. 93 2.3.2 Análisis de amenazas y Resultados Taller de Validación ................................................................ 97 2.3.3 Análisis de vulnerabilidad al cambio climático ............................................................................ 100 2.3.4 Conceptualización y análisis situacional del AMCP-MU IGA. ....................................................... 102 CAPÍTULO 3: PLAN DE ACCIÓN Y ZONIFICACIÓN DEL AMCP-MU ISLA GRANDE DE ATACAMA ....... 108 3.1 Introducción ..........................................................................................................................................108 3.2 Metodología ..........................................................................................................................................110 3.2.1 Desarrollo de objetivos, estrategias, cadenas de resultados, metas y actividades ..................... 110 3.2.2 Usos y Zonificación ....................................................................................................................... 116 3.1.3 Análisis costo-beneficio ............................................................................................................... 119 3.3 Resultados .....................................................................................................................................................119 4 Informe Final “Plan de Conservación y Monitoreo para el Área Marina Costera Protegida de Múltiples Usos Isla Grande de Atacama” 3.3.1 Desarrollo de objetivos, estrategias, cadenas de resultados, metas y actividades ..................... 119 3.3.2 Usos y Zonificación ............................................................................ ¡Error! Marcador no definido. CAPÍTULO 4: PROGRAMA DE MONITOREO Y SEGUIMIENTO DE LOS ODC Y ODBH ....................... 198 4.1 Introducción ..........................................................................................................................................198 4.2 Metodología Monitoreo Marinos ..........................................................................................................202 4.2.1 Definición sitios de monitoreo .......................................................................................................... 202 4.2.2. Submareal y focos de surgencia ....................................................................................................... 205 4.2.3 Monitoreo Intermareal e isla chata ............................................................................................. 213 4.3 Metodología de monitoreo El Morro y su entorno ................................................................................219 4.3.1 Vegetación del Morro........................................................................................................................ 219 4.3.2 Reptiles del Morro ....................................................................................................................... 221 4.4 Metodología de monitoreo Isla Grande de Atacama .............................................................................223 4.4.1 Censo de Pingüinos y Aves marinas. ............................................................................................ 223 4.4.2 Vegetación de IGA ........................................................................................................................ 227 4.5 Metodología de monitoreo Humedal Río Copiapó y Zonas Húmedas ....................................................228 4.5.1 Aves del Humedal ........................................................................................................................ 228 4.5.2 Vegetación del Humedal y Zonas Húmedas ................................................................................. 230 4.5.3 Variabilidad del cuerpo de agua .................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • OREGON ESTUARINE INVERTEBRATES an Illustrated Guide to the Common and Important Invertebrate Animals
    OREGON ESTUARINE INVERTEBRATES An Illustrated Guide to the Common and Important Invertebrate Animals By Paul Rudy, Jr. Lynn Hay Rudy Oregon Institute of Marine Biology University of Oregon Charleston, Oregon 97420 Contract No. 79-111 Project Officer Jay F. Watson U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 500 N.E. Multnomah Street Portland, Oregon 97232 Performed for National Coastal Ecosystems Team Office of Biological Services Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Department of Interior Washington, D.C. 20240 Table of Contents Introduction CNIDARIA Hydrozoa Aequorea aequorea ................................................................ 6 Obelia longissima .................................................................. 8 Polyorchis penicillatus 10 Tubularia crocea ................................................................. 12 Anthozoa Anthopleura artemisia ................................. 14 Anthopleura elegantissima .................................................. 16 Haliplanella luciae .................................................................. 18 Nematostella vectensis ......................................................... 20 Metridium senile .................................................................... 22 NEMERTEA Amphiporus imparispinosus ................................................ 24 Carinoma mutabilis ................................................................ 26 Cerebratulus californiensis .................................................. 28 Lineus ruber .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mpariso Ing of Nt C70 S G in Sitk So
    mpariso ing of nt C70 S g in Sitk So ska S 6 AlaskaSea Grant Colic e Pnig»u» 8 Jriing 11 University ol Alaska Fa»hanks 1'airhanks, A laska 99775-5 0 907! 474-7086 A Comparisonof TwoRearing Sites of the Giant KelpMacrocysris integrifolia in Sitka Sound, Alaska SamuelH. Rahung Alaska Aquaculture1»corporated P,O. Box 1288 Wrangeil. Alaska 99929 ~r< AK-N r-90 02 1990 Pnee: $3.SO Elmer E. RasmusonLibrary Cataloging-in-PublicationData Rabung, Samuel H. A comparisonof two rearingsites of thegiant kelp Macrocystis integrifolia in Sitka Sound, Alaska. AK-S G-90-02! 1. Macrocystis integrifolia. 2. Kelps. 3. Marine algae--Alaska Sitka Sound. I. Alaska Sea Grant College Program. II. Title, III. Series: Alaska sea grant report; 90-02. QK569.L53R33 1990 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This publicationwas produced by theAlaska Sea Grant College Program, Cover design andartwork is by KarenLundquist, text formatting is by RuthOlson, and editing is by Sue Keller. Alaska SeaGrant is cooperativelysupported by the U.S. Departmentof Commerce, NOAA Office of SeaGrant and Extramural Programs, under grant number NA86AA-D- SG041,project number A/75-01; and by theUniversity of Alaskawith fundsappropriated by the state, Samuel Rabung submitted this paper to the Aquatic ResourcesDepartment, Sheldon Jackson College, Sitka, Alaska, as a senior thesis in December 1987. The Universityof A]askaFairbanks provides equal education and employmcnt tor all, regardlessof race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, disability, statusas a Vietnam era or disabled veteran, marital status,changes
    [Show full text]
  • Quenching by 02 in Various Algae and Higher Plants Received for Publication March 29, 1983 and in Revised Form July 26, 1983
    P1ant Physiol. (1983) 73, 886-888 0032-0889/83/73/0886/03/$00.50/0 Electron Transport-Dependent Chlorophyll-a Fluorescence Quenching by 02 in Various Algae and Higher Plants Received for publication March 29, 1983 and in revised form July 26, 1983 DOUG BRUCE, WILLIAM VIDAVER, KONRAD COLBOW, AND RADOVAN POPOVIC Photobiology Group, Departments ofPhysics and Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia V5A 1S6 CANADA ABSTRACT aquarium at 15°C with a 16 h photoperiod. Phaseolus vulgaris and Zea mays were greenhouse grown under natural illumina- A comparison of chlorophyll-a fluorescence in brown algae (Macro- tion; plants used were 2 to 4 weeks old. For Fmav' determinations cystis integrfolia, Fucus vesiculosis), green algae (Scenedesmusobliquus, in bean and corn, 8-mm leaf discs were floated on an aqueous Ulva sp.) and higher plants (bean, corn) show differences in the relative solution of IuM DCMU in the dark for 1 h prior to measurement. fluorescence intensities and induction time courses which charcterize To determine Fmav in seaweed, 8-mm discs were suspended in a each type of plant. These differences are not reflected in either the seawater solution of IMm DCMU for I h in the dark; kelp blade maximum fluorescence emission in the presence of 3-(3,4-dichloro- discs were first suspended in seawater for 30 min to allow partial phenyl)-1,1-dimethylurea (F.) or the nonvariable fluorescence (Fo). removal of the mucopolysaccarides which interfere with DCMU Constaucy of F, and F.., suggests functional similarities of photosystem inhibition. All seaweeds were kept at 10 to 1 5C in seawater until II and associated antennae pigments in the various classes of plants.
    [Show full text]
  • Ochrophyta Part II Notebook Requirements (14 Drawings) 1
    Ochrophyta Part II Notebook Requirements (14 drawings) 1. Desmarestia sp.- 2 drawings (thallus from press and trichothallic growth) 2. Laminaria setchelli- 3 drawings (thallus and sorus cross section) 3. Macrocystis pyrifera – 4drawings (entire thallus, apical end, transverse cross section, longitudinal section) 4. Nereocystis leutkeana – 1 drawings (entire thallus) 5. Pterygophora californica – 1 drawing (entire thallus) 6. Alaria marginata – 1 drawing (entire thallus from press) 7. Egregia menziesii – 2 drawing (entire thallus of adult plant, one brach of a young plant) 8. Unknown(s) - steps to key D. Order Desmarestiales Species: Desmarestia spp. • Draw the entire thallus of Desmarestia. (Use the herbarium pressing) • Look at a prepared slide and draw what you see. Q: What kind of growth does Desmarestia exhibit? E. Order Laminariales Family Laminariaceae Species: Laminaria setchellii The holdfast of this species is composed of stiff, branched haptera. Each holdfast produces a single, long stipe. Sori appear as irregular darkened patches on the blades, but not all blades have sori. 1. Prepare and draw a cross section of the sorus. Look for and label sporangia, cortex and medulla. 2. Examine and draw the overall thallus. Label holdfast, stipe, blade, sori and the location of the meristem. 3. Look at the prepared slide, draw and label what you see. Species: Macrocystis pyrifera To transport sugars throughout the plant body of this large kelp, M. pyrifera has sieve elements in the medulla. • Examine and sketch the thallus of M. pyrifera. Label stipe, blades, sporophylls, holdfast, pneumatocysts and location of intercalary meristem. • Examine and sketch the apical end of M. pyrifera noting the scimitar blade.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparison of Two Rearing Sites of the Giant Kelp Macrocystis Integrifolia in Sitka Sound, Alaska
    Alaska Sea Grant College Program 138 Irving II University of Alaska Fairbanks Fairbanks, Alaska 99775-5040 (9(Jl) 474-7086 A Comparison of Two Rearing Sites of the Giant Kelp Macrocystis integrifolia in Sitka Sound, Alaska Samuel H. Rabung Alaska Aquaculture Incorporated P.O . Box 1288 Wrangell, Alaska 99929 AK-SG-90-02 1990 Price: $3.50 Elmer E. Rasmuson Library Cataloging-in-Publication Data Rabung, Samuel H. A comparison of two rearing sites of the giant kelp Macrocystis integrifolia in Sitka Sound, Alaska. (AK-SG-90-02) 1. Macrocystis integrifolia. 2. Kelps. 3. Marine algae--Alaska--Sitka Sound. I. Alaska Sea Grant College Program. II. Title. Ill. Series: Alaska sea grant report ; 90-02. QKS69.LS3R33 1990 doi:10.4027/ctrsgkmisa.1990 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This publication was produced by the Alaska Sea Grant College Program. Cover design and artwork is by Karen Lundquist, text formatting is by Ruth Olson, and editing is by Sue Keller. Alaska Sea Grant is cooperatively supported by the U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Office of Sea Grant and Extramural Programs, under grant number NA86AA-D- SG041, project number AnS-OI; and by the University of Alaska with funds appropriated by the state. Samuel Rabung submitted this paper to the Aquatic Resources Department, Sheldon Jackson College, Sitka, Alaska, as a senior thesis in December 1987. The University of Alaska Fairbanks provides equal education and employment for all, regardless of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, disability, status as a Vietnam era or disabled veteran, marital status, changes in marital status, pregnancy, or parenthood pursuant to applicable state and federal lows.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Mesograzers and UV Radiation
    Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 325 (2005) 214–227 www.elsevier.com/locate/jembe Induction of defenses and within-alga variation of palatability in two brown algae from the northern-central coast of Chile: Effects of mesograzers and UV radiation Erasmo C. Macayaa, Eva Rotha¨uslerb, Martin Thiela,*, Markus Molisc,1, Martin Wahlc aFacultad Ciencias del Mar, Universidad Cato´lica del Norte, Larrondo 1281, Coquimbo, Chile bInstitut fu¨r Aquatische O¨ kologie, Albert-Einstein-Str. 3, 18057 Rostock, Germany cLeibniz Institute of Marine Sciences, Marine Ecology–Marine Zoology, Du¨sternbrooker Weg 20, 24105 Kiel, Germany Received 10 November 2004; received in revised form 5 May 2005; accepted 9 May 2005 Abstract Macroalgae possess different defense mechanisms in response to herbivory. Some species produce anti-herbivore secondary metabolites, but production of these substances can be costly. Therefore, algae may produce defensive metabolites only in response to herbivory (inducible defense) or defend particular parts of the alga differentially (within-alga variation). In the present study, we examined whether two species of brown algae from the SE-Pacific show evidence of inducible chemical defense (non-polar compounds) or within-alga variation of defense, which we estimated in form of palatability of differently treated algae to amphipod grazers (with live algae and agar-based food containing non-polar algal extracts). In Glossophora kunthii (C. Agardh) J. Agardh, we observed an increase in palatability after algae were acclimated for 12 days without grazers. Subsequent addition of grazers for 12 days then resulted in a reduction of palatability indicating the existence of inducible defense.
    [Show full text]
  • Giant Kelp and Bull Kelp Macrocystis Pyrifera; Nereocystis Luetkeana
    Seaweeds: Giant Kelp and Bull Kelp Macrocystis pyrifera; Nereocystis luetkeana British Columbia Harvest by hand July 2017 Alasdair Lindop, Ocean Wise Research Analyst Disclaimer: Ocean Wise® strives to have all assessments reviewed for accuracy and completeness by external scientists with expertise in ecology, fisheries science and aquaculture. Scientific review, however, does not constitute an endorsement of the Ocean Wise seafood program or its recommendations on the part of the reviewing scientists. Ocean Wise is solely responsible for the conclusions reached in this report. Seafood Watch Standard used in this assessment: Standard for Fisheries vF3.2 About Ocean Wise Seafood and Recommendation Policy The Ocean Wise® seafood program evaluates the ecological sustainability of wild-caught and farmed seafood commonly found in the Canadian marketplace. Ocean Wise defines sustainable seafood as originating from sources, whether wild-caught or farmed, which can maintain or increase production in the long-term without jeopardizing the structure or function of affected ecosystems. Ocean Wise makes its science-based recommendations available to the public in the form of reports that are available to view on our mobile app and download from www.ocean.org/seafood. Ocean Wise also works directly with restaurants, markets, and seafood suppliers to ensure they have the most up to date scientific information regarding sustainable seafood. The options are highlighted on their menus and display cases with the Ocean Wise symbol, making it easier for consumers to make informed seafood choices. Sustainability recommendations are supported by assessments that synthesise and analyse the most current ecological, fisheries and ecosystem science on a species, then evaluate this information against the programs conservation ethic to arrive at a recommendation.
    [Show full text]
  • Laminariales, Phaeophyceae) Supports Substantial Taxonomic Re-Organization1
    J. Phycol. 42, 493–512 (2006) r 2006 Phycological Society of America DOI: 10.1111/j.1529-8817.2006.00204.x A MULTI-GENE MOLECULAR INVESTIGATION OF THE KELP (LAMINARIALES, PHAEOPHYCEAE) SUPPORTS SUBSTANTIAL TAXONOMIC RE-ORGANIZATION1 Christopher E. Lane,2 Charlene Mayes Centre for Environmental and Molecular Algal Research, University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, NB, Canada E3B 6E1 Louis D. Druehl Bamfield Marine Sciences Centre, Bamfield, BC, Canada V0R 1B0 and Gary W. Saunders Centre for Environmental and Molecular Algal Research, University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, NB, Canada E3B 6E1 Every year numerous ecological, biochemical, Key index words: Costariaceae; Laminariales; long and physiological studies are performed using branch attraction; nested analyses; phylogenetics; members of the order Laminariales. Despite the Saccharina fact that kelp are some of the most intensely stud- ied macroalgae in the world, there is significant de- bate over the classification within and among the The order Laminariales Migula, commonly called three ‘‘derived’’ families, the Alariaceae, Lamina- kelp, includes the largest algae in the world, reaching riaceae, and Lessoniaceae (ALL). Molecular phylo- up to 50 m in length (Van den Hoek et al. 1995). Kelp genies published for the ALL families have are ubiquitous in coastal waters of cold-temperate re- generated hypotheses strongly at odds with the cur- gions from the Arctic to the Antarctic, and their size rent morphological taxonomy; however, conflicting and biomass establishes a unique and essential habitat phylogenetic hypotheses and consistently low levels for hundreds of species (Steneck et al. 2002). They are of support realized in all of these studies have re- used as a food source in Asia and Europe, and are also sulted in conservative approaches to taxonomic re- economically important for their extracts (Chapman visions.
    [Show full text]
  • Canopy-Forming Kelps As California's Coastal Dosimeter: 131I from Damaged Japanese Reactor Measured in Macrocystis Pyrifera
    Article pubs.acs.org/est Canopy-Forming Kelps as California’s Coastal Dosimeter: 131I from Damaged Japanese Reactor Measured in Macrocystis pyrifera Steven L. Manley*,† and Christopher G. Lowe† † Department of Biological Sciences, California State University, Long Beach, California 90840 United States ABSTRACT: The Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant, damaged by an earthquake and tsunami on March 11, 2011 released large amounts of 131I into the atmosphere, which was assimilated into canopy blades of Macrocystis pyrifera sampled from coastal California. The specific activity calculated to the estimated date of deposition/assimilation ranged from 0.6 to 2.5 Bq gdwt−1, levels greater than those measured from kelps from Japan and Canada prior to the release. These 131I levels represent a significant input into the kelp forest ecosystem. Canopy-forming kelps are a natural coastal dosimeter that can measure the exposure of the coastal environment to 131I and perhaps other radioisotopes released from nuclear accidents. An organizational mechanism should be in place to ensure that they are sampled immediately and continuously after such releases. ■ INTRODUCTION functions as an antioxidant, scavenging reactive oxygen species.8 The Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant in Japan, damaged by Most of the surface area of Macrocystis resides in mature canopy 9 131 earthquake and tsunami on March 11, 2011, began to release blades where iodine uptake is very rapid. Atmospheric Iis ’ significant radioactive material into the atmosphere March 12, deposited on the earth s surface in precipitation and Macrocystis 131 with the main explosion occurring March 14.1 Some of the is ideal for detecting I present in the atmosphere because the 131 35 canopies are directly exposed to precipitation at the sea/air radioactive materials released included I(t1/2 = 8.0 d), S interface.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Kelp Phenolic Compounds on the Feeding-Associated Mobility of the Herbivore Snail Tegula Tridentata
    Accepted Manuscript Effects of kelp phenolic compounds on the feeding-associated mobility of the herbivore snail Tegula tridentata Mariana Pereira, Fadia Tala, Miriam Fernández, Maria Dulce Subida PII: S0141-1136(15)00067-7 DOI: 10.1016/j.marenvres.2015.04.012 Reference: MERE 3997 To appear in: Marine Environmental Research Received Date: 1 December 2014 Revised Date: 30 March 2015 Accepted Date: 28 April 2015 Please cite this article as: Pereira, M., Tala, F., Fernández, M., Subida, M.D., Effects of kelp phenolic compounds on the feeding-associated mobility of the herbivore snail Tegula tridentata, Marine Environmental Research (2015), doi: 10.1016/j.marenvres.2015.04.012. This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 1 Effects of kelp phenolic compounds on the feeding-associated mobility of the 2 herbivore snail Tegula tridentata 3 4 Mariana Pereira 1,2 , Fadia Tala 3, Miriam Fernández 2, Maria Dulce Subida *2 5 6 1. EMBC, Biology Department (WE11), Ghent University, Marine Biology Research 7 group, Krijgslaan 281/S8, Belgium 8 2. Center for Marine Conservation, Estación Costera de Investigaciones Marinas, 9 Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Casilla 114-D, Santiago de Chile 10 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Consequences of Light Reduction for Anti-Herbivore Defense and Bioactivity Against Mussels in Four Seaweed Species from Northern-Central Chile
    Vol. 381: 83–97, 2009 MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES Published April 17 doi: 10.3354/meps07943 Mar Ecol Prog Ser Consequences of light reduction for anti-herbivore defense and bioactivity against mussels in four seaweed species from northern-central Chile Christian Pansch1,*, Osvaldo Cerda2, Mark Lenz1, Martin Wahl1, Martin Thiel2, 3 1Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences at the University of Kiel, IFM-GEOMAR, Marine Ecology, Düsternbrooker Weg 20, 24105 Kiel, Germany 2Departamento de Biología Marina, Facultad de Ciencias del Mar, Universidad Católica del Norte, Larrondo 1281, Coquimbo, Chile 3Centro de Estudios Avancados en Zonas Aridas, CEAZA, Coquimbo, Chile ABSTRACT: It is widely assumed that the production of secondary metabolites against grazing and fouling is costly for seaweeds in terms of metabolic energy and should therefore be reduced under conditions of resource limitation. Here we tested the hypothesis that anti-herbivore defenses and bioactivity against mussels in 4 brown seaweeds from northern-central Chile will be reduced when light is limited. In a 2 wk experiment, seaweeds were kept under different low-light conditions (~76 to 99% reduction of ambient sunlight) and grazing situations. Subsequently, we tested their anti- herbivore defense against a common amphipod grazer in feeding assays with living algal tissue and reconstituted food pellets. A standard test employing the production of byssus threads by mussels was furthermore used as an indicator for deterrents in crude algal extracts. All investigated seaweeds showed decreased growth under the stepwise light reduction. Lessonia nigrescens exhibited reduced defense ability under severe low-light conditions when living tissue was offered to the amphipod, probably caused by changes in the tissue structure or in nutritional traits.
    [Show full text]
  • Different Kelp Life Stages Modulated by Herbivory: Compensatory Growth Versus 2 Population Damage
    1 Different kelp life stages modulated by herbivory: compensatory growth versus 2 population damage 3 4 João N. Franco 1,2,¥, Thomas Wernberg 3, Iacopo Bertocci 1,4 , David Jacinto 5, Paulo 6 1 7 1 1,2 5 Maranhão , Tânia Pereira , Brezo Martinez , Francisco Arenas , Isabel Sousa-Pinto , 6 Fernando Tuya 8 7 1 CIIMAR, Centro Interdisciplinar de Investigação Marinha e Ambiental, Terminal de 8 Cruzeiros do Porto de Leixões, Av. General Norton de Matos s/n, 4450-208, 9 Matosinhos, Portugal. ¥ Email:[email protected] 10 2 Departamento de Biologia, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade do Porto, Rua do 11 Campo Alegre s/n, 4150-181 Porto, Portugal 12 3 School of Biological Sciences & UWA Oceans Institute (M470), University of 13 Western Australia, Crawley WA 6009, Australia 14 4 Stazione Zoologica Anton Dohrn, Villa Comunale, 80121, Naples, Italy 15 5 MARE - Marine and Environmental Sciences Centre, Laboratório de Ciências do Mar, 16 Universidade de Évora, apartado 190, 7520-903 Sines, Portugal 17 6 MARE –Marine and Environmental Sciences Centre, ESTM, Instituto Politécnico de 18 Leiria, 2520-641 Peniche, Portugal 19 7 Rey Juan Carlos University, Calle Tulipán sn., 28933 Móstoles, Madrid, Spain 20 8 IU-ECOAQUA, Grupo en Biodivesidad y Conservación, Marine Sciences Faculty, 21 Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, 35017, Las Palmas, Canary Islands, Spain 22 23 24 25 26 27 Abstract 28 Partitioning the effects of herbivory on the different life stages of primary producers is 29 key to understanding the population-wide consequences of herbivory. We assessed the 30 performance of microscopic (MiS<1 mm) juveniles, macroscopic (MaS) juveniles and 31 adult kelp ( Laminaria ochroleuca ) under contrasting herbivory regimes through a 32 herbivore exclusion field experiment.
    [Show full text]