DOCSLIB.ORG

Coral Reef Assessment: an Index Utilizing Sediment Constituents

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Coral Reef Assessment: an Index Utilizing Sediment Constituents University of South Florida Scholar Commons Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate School 2005 Coral Reef Assessment: An Index Utilizing Sediment Constituents Camille A. Daniels University of South Florida Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd Part of the American Studies Commons Scholar Commons Citation Daniels, Camille A., "Coral Reef Assessment: An Index Utilizing Sediment Constituents" (2005). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/2847 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Coral Reef Assessment: An Index Utilizing Sediment Constituents by Camille A. Daniels A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science College of Marine Science University of South Florida Major Professor: Pamela Hallock-Muller, Ph.D David Mann, Ph.D Carl Beaver, Ph.D Maya Trotz, Ph.D Date of Approval: July 25, 2005 Keywords: SEDCON, community structure, bioerosion, water quality, bioindicator © Copyright 2005, Camille Daniels ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am grateful for the diligent efforts and support of my major professor, Dr. Pamela Hallock Muller. She sets the precedent for being an excellent advisor and mentor, and I am honored to work with her. I also thank my committee, Carl Beaver, David Mann, and Maya Trotz for their time and critical perspective during the review of my thesis. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute Coral Reef Team (FWRI-CRT) collected sediment samples at the Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Program (CREMP) sites in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. Special thanks go to Walter Jaap, longtime member of the FWRI-CRT for initiating the sediment sampling at CREMP sites in 2001, for his expertise and advice, for providing data access, and also for collecting the samples from the Florida Middle Grounds. Michael Callahan (FWRI-CRT) contributed information and assistance throughout this project, including sample collection at CREMP sites and the Florida Middle Grounds. Dr. Dana E. Williams of NOAA, Miami, FL provided sediment samples and associated data from Navassa. I greatly appreciate my colleagues in the Reef Indicators Lab for their endless support and generosity, especially Libby Carnahan and Beth Fisher, who collected the samples from Key Largo (FKNMS permit number 2003-002). Many thanks to Barbara Lidz and Nicole Caesar at the U.S.Geological Survey, and to Heidi Souder at the Center for Ocean Technology, all in St. Petersburg. The SEDCON Index was proposed during bioindicator research funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency – ORD-NCER "Science to Achieve Results Program” (STAR-GAD-R825869), P. Hallock Muller, Principal Investigator. Development of the SEDCON Index was supported by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/National Undersea Research Center UNCW Subcontract 2003-24A. Water quality data were provided by the SERC/FIU Water Quality Monitoring Network, which is supported by SFWMD/SERC Cooperative Agreements #C-10244 and #C-13178, as well as EPA Agreement #X994621-94-0. Thanks to Dr. Ashanti Pyrtle for her guidance and funding through the NSF-FGLSAMP Bridge to the Doctorate Program, and the Von Rosenstiels for their financial support of students at the College of Marine Science. My graduate career would not have been possible without the help and encouragement of Dr. Paul LaRock at Louisiana State University. This manuscript is dedicated to my parents and sisters, whose love, support, and inspiration, motivate me to achieve. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES....................................................................................................... iii LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................... vi ABSTRACT............................................................................................................... viii INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................1 The SEDCON Index ..........................................................................................5 Assessment Relevance.......................................................................................7 Ecological Relevance.........................................................................................9 Whole Grain or Thin Section Analysis? ..........................................................10 PROJECT OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................11 METHODS ..................................................................................................................12 Study Sites .......................................................................................................12 Water Quality Data ..........................................................................................18 Sediment Analyses...........................................................................................19 Statistical Analyses ..........................................................................................23 RESULTS ....................................................................................................................25 Grain Size Analysis..........................................................................................25 Constituent Analysis ........................................................................................31 SIMPER Analyses ...........................................................................................40 SEDCON INDEX CALCULATION...........................................................................50 RESULTS OF INDEX CALCULATIONS.................................................................53 Inter-region evaluation for CREMP sites ........................................................64 Comparison of SI with benthic cover data.......................................................67 Water quality comparisons ..............................................................................71 DISCUSSION..............................................................................................................74 Bias and grain size ...........................................................................................74 Sediment composition......................................................................................75 SEDCON Index equation.................................................................................76 Synthesis of constituent data and index values................................................77 Temporal trends ...............................................................................................78 Coral Cover......................................................................................................79 Influence of Abiotic Parameters ......................................................................81 Strengths and Restrictions................................................................................82 i Future investigation and Recommendations....................................................83 CONCLUSIONS..........................................................................................................84 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................85 APPENDICES .............................................................................................................92 Appendix I PCA eigenvectors and values for 2001 CREMP sites ..........93 Appendix II Materials and Methods for SEDCON Index sample Processing .............................................................................95 Appendix III SEDCON Index procedure ...................................................96 ii LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Categories of sediment constituents used for the SEDCON Index........5 Table 2 Description of Key Largo area site samples; abbreviations are used in text and subsequent figures and tables.............................................17 Table 3 Depths for Florida Middle Grounds and Navassa sites .......................17 Table 4 SERC Water Quality Monitoring Network sampling list (Boyer and Jones, 2002; Callahan, 2005) ........................................................18 Table 5 CREMP sites with associated water quality stations (adapted from Callahan, 2005)....................................................................................19 Table 6 Roles of carbonate producers in reef community structure and the SEDCON Index..............................................................................22 Table 7 Scale for particle size fractionation for sediment samples (Wentworth, 1922)...............................................................................25 Table 8 Grain size data for Key Largo samples for intrasite comparison ( bold indicates median grain size; KL- represents Key Largo)...........26 Table 9 Grain size data for all CREMP sites ( bold indicates median grain size).....................................................................................................27 Table 10 Grain size data for Florida Middle Grounds samples ( bold indicates median grain size)................................................................................30
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Mouthpiece
    Our Web Page The Mouthpiece www.activedivers. org/ May 2003 THE ACTIVE DIVERS ASSOCIATION NEWSLETTER April-May Dive Schedule Sat. 4-26 PM North Key Largo Sites may include: The Christ of the Abyss, the Elbow, N. Dry Rocks, N. N. Dry Rocks, Grecian Rocks, Carysfort, Shark Reef. Average depth 30’, usually no current. Average visibility is 30-50’ with many tropi- cals, morays, cudas. Sun. 5-4 PM Islamorada Just 4 miles past Tavernier, sites may include: Hammerhead, The Canyon, El I nfante, Crocker, No Name, The Valley Aquarium, Alligator. Average depth 30-40’, visibility 40-50’. Some current, many fish, shallow wrecks Sat. 5-10 PM Tavernier Sites may include: Conch Reef, Davis Ledge, Hens & Chickens, Little Conch, Capt. Tom’s Ledge, 40’ Ledge, Fish Trap, Horseshoe. Average depth 30’, average visibility 40-60’, many morays, schooling tropicals, un- usual pillar corals. Sat. 5-17 AM Biscayne Park (inc tanks) Sites may include: Rocky Reef, Elkhorn Forest, Ball Buoy, Far Out Reef, Cuda Ledge. Usually no currents, massive corals, small caves. The Keys “Best Kept Secret”, only one commercial boat allowed in area. Depth 20-30’, vis 30-60’. Sat. 5-24 PM Tenneco Towers (Advanced) Choice of more than 40 wrecks. Some unlike anywhere else: Jet airliner, M-60 Tanks, Tankers, Freighters, Tugs, Barges. Most are intact with penetration possible. Average depth 90’, visibility 40-50’. Expect cur- rents and dramatic profiles, many fish. See advanced criterion this issue. All Dives $35.00 New for 2003! Members may now take advantage of NEW DIVE PACS and freeze 2002 prices for this year! Look at these savings 10 packs—10 dives for only $290 Save up To $60 5 packs—5 dives for only $150 Save up to $25 You may use these pacs for any local dive except Biscayne National Park.
    [Show full text]
  • STAFF WORKING PAPER SUMMARY of SELECTED PEARL HARBOR MARINE NATURAL RESOURCES DATA from 1999 – 2015 - in SUPPORT of PROPOSED PROJECT P 516 Prepared by Stephen H
    1 STAFF WORKING PAPER SUMMARY OF SELECTED PEARL HARBOR MARINE NATURAL RESOURCES DATA FROM 1999 – 2015 - IN SUPPORT OF PROPOSED PROJECT P 516 Prepared by Stephen H. Smith Marine Ecologist SSC Scientific Diving Services March 18, 2015 Introduction Overview. The objective of this Staff Working Paper is to summarize selected data gathered by the author between 1999 and February 2015. During that time period, the author conducted a variety of assessments throughout Pearl Harbor and the Pearl Harbor Entrance Channel. The specific resources which will be addressed in this partial summary are: 1) corals, 2) selected fin fish species and Essential Fish Habitat (EFH), 3) sea turtles, 4) miscellaneous and 5) perceived data gaps. This summary is not intended to reiterate material already presented in the Pearl Harbor INRMP or the many other documents which contain pertinent marine natural resource data; it is intended to summarize unpublished and/or unreported data gathered by the author. In this document, Pearl Harbor is defined as the area north of Hammer Point, as designated on Nautical Chart No. 19366 (Oahu South Coast Pearl Harbor). The Pearl Harbor Entrance Channel (PHEC) is defined as the area south of Hammer Point between the channel markers on the eastern and western sides of the PHEC and extending to the outermost Channel Marker Buoys (No. 1 on the west side and No. 2 on the east side). Figure 1 illustrates the boundaries of the P 516 project assessment area. All the data summarized in this document was gathered by the author, with periodic biological support from Donald Marx, and others.
    [Show full text]
  • Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary
    Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Review and Discussion February 19, 2020 IJ Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission This is a review and discussion of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary’s (FKNMS) Restoration Blueprint, the FWC’s role in managing the fisheries resources within the FKNMS, proposed regulatory actions, and next steps. Division: Marine Fisheries Management Authors: Jessica McCawley, John Hunt, Martha Guyas, and CJ Sweetman Contact Phone Number: 850-487-0554 Report date: February 17, 2020 Unless otherwise noted, images throughout the presentation are by FWC or Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. FKNMS Process Reminder • Oct. and Dec. - FKNMS discussions • Jan. - FWC staff meetings with diverse stakeholder organizations • Today - Look at all relevant aspects of plan and consider FWC's proposed response • April - FWC comments due • Summer 2020 - FWC begin rulemaking process for state waters As a management partner in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS), FWC has been engaged in review of the Restoration Blueprint (Draft Environmental Impact Statement, DEIS) over the past several months. In October and December, the Commission discussed the FKNMS Restoration Blueprint. In January, FWC staff met with a variety of stakeholders to better understand their comments on particular issues addressed within the DEIS. Today, the presentation will cover all relevant aspects of the plan and staff recommendations based on a review of the science and stakeholder comments, which will be outlined in the next two slides. FWC requested and has been granted an extension for submitting agency comments to the FKNMS until April. Following the Commission’s response to the FKNMS, FWC will consider rulemaking for fisheries management items state waters.
    [Show full text]
  • Keys Sanctuary 25 Years of Marine Preservation National Parks Turn 100 Offbeat Keys Names Florida Keys Sunsets
    Keys TravelerThe Magazine Keys Sanctuary 25 Years of Marine Preservation National Parks Turn 100 Offbeat Keys Names Florida Keys Sunsets fla-keys.com Decompresssing at Bahia Honda State Park near Big Pine Key in the Lower Florida Keys. ANDY NEWMAN MARIA NEWMAN Keys Traveler 12 The Magazine Editor Andy Newman Managing Editor 8 4 Carol Shaughnessy ROB O’NEAL ROB Copy Editor Buck Banks Writers Julie Botteri We do! Briana Ciraulo Chloe Lykes TIM GROLLIMUND “Keys Traveler” is published by the Monroe County Tourist Development Contents Council, the official visitor marketing agency for the Florida Keys & Key West. 4 Sanctuary Protects Keys Marine Resources Director 8 Outdoor Art Enriches the Florida Keys Harold Wheeler 9 Epic Keys: Kiteboarding and Wakeboarding Director of Sales Stacey Mitchell 10 That Florida Keys Sunset! Florida Keys & Key West 12 Keys National Parks Join Centennial Celebration Visitor Information www.fla-keys.com 14 Florida Bay is a Must-Do Angling Experience www.fla-keys.co.uk 16 Race Over Water During Key Largo Bridge Run www.fla-keys.de www.fla-keys.it 17 What’s in a Name? In Marathon, Plenty! www.fla-keys.ie 18 Visit Indian and Lignumvitae Keys Splash or Relax at Keys Beaches www.fla-keys.fr New Arts District Enlivens Key West ach of the Florida Keys’ regions, from Key Largo Bahia Honda State Park, located in the Lower Keys www.fla-keys.nl www.fla-keys.be Stroll Back in Time at Crane Point to Key West, features sandy beaches for relaxing, between MMs 36 and 37. The beaches of Bahia Honda Toll-Free in the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • FKNMS Lower Region
    se encuentran entre los entre encuentran se Florida la de Cayos los de coralinos arrecifes Los agua. del salinidad la o como los erizos y pepinos de mar. Las hierbas marinas son una base para la crianza del crianza la para base una son marinas hierbas Las mar. de pepinos y erizos los como aves, peces y tortugas que se enredan en ella o la ingieren, confundiéndola con alimentos. con confundiéndola ingieren, la o ella en enredan se que tortugas y peces aves, grados C), ni más cálidas de 86 grados F (30 grados C), ni a cambios pronunciados de la calidad la de pronunciados cambios a ni C), grados (30 F grados 86 de cálidas más ni C), grados atíes y diversos peces, y son el hábitat de organismos marinos filtradores, así como forrajeros, como así filtradores, marinos organismos de hábitat el son y peces, diversos y atíes delicados puede asfixiarlos, romperlos o erosionarlos. La basura puede resultar mortal para las para mortal resultar puede basura La erosionarlos. o romperlos asfixiarlos, puede delicados vivir a la exposición continua de aguas del mar a temperaturas por debajo de los 68 grados F (18 F grados 68 los de debajo por temperaturas a mar del aguas de continua exposición la a vivir ue at motned acdn lmnii.Poocoa lmnoalstrua,man- tortugas, las a alimento Proporcionan alimenticia. cadena la de importante parte tuyen que las aves mueran de hambre. El cordel de pescar y la basura que se enreda en los corales los en enreda se que basura la y pescar de cordel El hambre.
    [Show full text]
  • Matters Arising
    Nature Vol. 278 15 March 1979 281 matters arising Holocene reef growth available figures for growth rates at 30m 1. Lighty, R. G., Macintyre, I. G. & Stuckenrath, R. Nature 276, 59~0 ( 1978). on the edge depth there is certainly subjective evi­ 2. Macintyre, I. G. & Glynn, P. W. Proc. 7th Caribbean Geo!. dence that they are slow. There are com­ Con{. Guadeloupe, 14 (I 97 4 ). of the Florida Shelf monly <2m of 'frame' projecting above 3. Adey, W. H. Atoll Res. Bull. 187, 1-67 (1975). 4. Easton, W. H. & Olson, E. A. Bull. geol. Soc. Am. 87, the sand surface. In effect, relief from 711-719 (1976). 5. Goreau, T. F. & Gorcau, N. I. Bull. mar. Sci. 23, 399-464 LIGHTY ET AL. I have raised several present-day surfaces in these depths is no (1973). important lines of speculation concerning gre.ater, and may perhaps be less, than on 6. Goreau, T. F. & Land, L. S. Soc. econ. Paeleont. Miner. the growth of reefs in the Florida and the 'inactive' structures to the north. Spec. Pub/. 18,77-89 (1974). 7. Newell, N.D. & Rigby, J. K. Soc. econ. Paeleonr. Miner. Bahamas areas and elsewhere in the Thus, it seems reasonable to assume Spec. Pub/. 5, 15-79 (1957). Caribbean. The principal contribution of first that surfaces which could have 8. Shinn, E. A. J. Sed. Petrol. 33,291-303 (1963). 9. Ginsburg, R. N. & James, N. P. Geotimes 18, 23-24 these authors has been to show an supported active coral growth at a time of (1973).
    [Show full text]
  • Key West & the Lower Keys
    © Lonely Planet Publications Key West & the Lower Keys in the ’60s to lend the island a South 40 NEWFOUND HARBOR Pacific look when it was used as the set- ting for the movie PT-109. Location: 0.5 nautical miles (1km) A series of mooring buoys are in place south of Newfound Harbor Keys along the west side of the reef, and day Depth Range: Surface-18ft (5m) marker 50 lies to the south. The top of Access: Boat the reef is very shallow, rising almost Expertise Rating: Novice to the surface in two places. Maximum depth is about 8ft (2.4m) on the land- -169 ward side and 18ft (5m) on the seaward side. Soft corals dominate much of the Closer to shore than most other reefs, reef, but boulder-like accumulations this sanctuary preservation area is a of calcium carbonate from hard corals good alternative when weather pre- form the basic structure. vents diving at nearby Looe Key. Just Fishermen frequented the reef until northwest is low-lying Little Palm Is- the summer of 1997 when the SPA went land, now home to an exclusive resort. into effect, and the resident fish popula- The namesake palm trees were planted tion has been steadily increasing ever Key West & Lower Keys Snipe Keys Mud Keys 24º40’N 81º55’W 81º50’W 81º45’W 81º40’W Waltz Key Basin Lower Harbor Bluefish Channel Keys Bay Keys Northwest Channel Calda Bank Cottrell Key Great White Heron National Wildlife Refuge Big Coppitt Key Fleming Key 24º35’N Lower Keys Big Mullet Key Medical Center 1 Stock Island Boca Chica Key Mule Key Key West Naval Air Station Duval St Archer Key Truman Ave Flagler
    [Show full text]
  • The Epizootiology of Coral Diseases in South Florida
    The Epizootiology of Coral Diseases in South Florida Research and Development EPA/600/R-05/146 May 2006 The Epizootiology of Coral Diseases in South Florida by Deborah L. Santavy1, Jed Campbell1, Robert L. Quarles1, James M. Patrick1, Linda M. Harwell1, Mel Parsons2 , Lauri MacLaughlin3 , John Halas3, Erich Mueller4, 5, Esther C. Peters4, 6, Jane Hawkridge4, 7 1United States Environmental Protection Agency National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory Gulf Ecology Division 1 Sabine Island Drive Gulf Breeze, FL 32561 2United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4 Science and Ecosystems Support Division 980 College Station Road Athens, GA 30605 3NOAA, Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Upper Region, MM 95 Overseas Highway Key Largo, FL 33037 4Mote Marine Laboratory Center for Tropical Research 24244 Overseas Highway (US 1) Summerland Key, FL 33042 5Perry Institute for Marine Science 100 N. U.S. Highway 1, Suite 202 Jupiter, FL 33477 6Tetra Tech, Inc. 10306 Eaton Place, Suite 340 Fairfax, VA 22030 7Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Monkstone House, City Road Peterborough, United Kingdom PE1 1JY Notice The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Office of Research and Development (ORD), National Health and Environmental Effect Research Laboratory (NHEERL), Gulf Ecology Division (GED), the U.S. Department of Commerce (U.S. DOC) National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA) National Marine Sanctuary Program Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS), and the U.S. Department of Interior (DOI) National Park Service (NPS) Dry Tortugas National Park (DTNP) jointly conducted this program. The report has undergone U.S. EPA’s peer and administrative reviews and has received approval for publication as a U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • An Environmental Assessment of the John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park and the Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary (Unpublished 1983 Report)
    An environmental assessment of the John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park and the Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary (Unpublished 1983 Report) Item Type monograph Authors Voss, Gilbert L.; Voss, Nancy A.; Cantillo, Andriana Y.; Bello, Maria J. Publisher NOAA/National Ocean Service/National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science Download date 07/10/2021 01:47:07 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/1834/19992 NOAA/University of Miami Joint Publication NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS CCMA 161 NOAA LISD Current References 2002-6 University of Miami RSMAS TR 2002-03 Coastal and Estuarine Data Archaeology and Rescue Program AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE JOHN PENNEKAMP CORAL REEF STATE PARK AND THE KEY LARGO CORAL REEF MARINE SANCTUARY (Unpublished 1983 Report) November 2002 US Department of Commerce University of Miami National Oceanic and Atmospheric Rosenstiel School of Marine and Administration Atmospheric Science Silver Spring, MD Miami, FL a NOAA/University of Miami Joint Publication NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS CCMA 161 NOAA LISD Current References 2002-6 University of Miami RSMAS TR 2002-03 AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE JOHN PENNEKAMP CORAL REEF STATE PARK AND THE KEY LARGO CORAL REEF MARINE SANCTUARY (Unpublished 1983 Report) Gilbert L. Voss Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science University of Miami Nancy A. Voss Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science University of Miami Adriana Y. Cantillo NOAA National Ocean Service Maria J. Bello NOAA Miami Regional Library (Editors, 2002) November 2002 United States National Oceanic and Department of Commerce Atmospheric Administration National Ocean Service Donald L. Evans Conrad C. Lautenbacher, Jr.
    [Show full text]
  • Spatially Distinct and Regionally Endemic Symbiodinium Assemblages in the Threatened Caribbean Reef-Building Coral Orbicella Faveolata
    Coral Reefs (2015) 34:535–547 DOI 10.1007/s00338-015-1277-z REPORT Spatially distinct and regionally endemic Symbiodinium assemblages in the threatened Caribbean reef-building coral Orbicella faveolata Dustin W. Kemp • Daniel J. Thornhill • Randi D. Rotjan • Roberto Iglesias-Prieto • William K. Fitt • Gregory W. Schmidt Received: 28 October 2014 / Accepted: 19 February 2015 / Published online: 27 February 2015 Ó Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015 Abstract Recently, the Caribbean reef-building coral Or- with species of Symbiodinium in clades A (type A3), B (B1 bicella faveolata was listed as ‘‘threatened’’ under the U.S. and B17), C (C3, C7, and C7a), and D (D1a/Symbiodinium Endangered Species Act. Despite attention to this species’ trenchii). Within-colony distributions of Symbiodinium conservation, the extent of geographic variation within O. species correlated with light availability, cardinal direction, faveolata warrants further investigation. O. faveolata is and depth, resulting in distinct zonation patterns of en- unusual in that it can simultaneously harbor multiple ge- dosymbionts within a host. Symbiodinium species from netically distinct and co-dominant species of endosymbiotic clades A and B occurred predominantly in the light-exposed dinoflagellates in the genus Symbiodinium. Here, we inves- tops, while species of clade C generally occurred in the tigate the geographic and within-colony complexity of shaded sides of colonies or in deeper-water habitats. Fur- Symbiodinium-O. faveolata associations from Florida Keys, thermore, geographic comparisons of host–symbiont asso- USA; Exuma Cays, Bahamas; Puerto Morelos, Mexico; and ciations revealed regional differences in Symbiodinium Carrie Bow Cay, Belize. We collected coral samples along associations.
    [Show full text]
  • Reef Explorer Guide Highlights the Underwater World ALLIGATOR of the Florida Keys, Including Unique Coral Reefs from Key Largo to OLD CANNON Key West
    REEF EXPLORER The Florida Keys & Key West, "come as you are" © 2018 Monroe County Tourist Development Council. All rights reserved. MCTDU-3471 • 15K • 7/18 fla-keys.com/diving GULF OF FT. JEFFERSON NATIONAL MONUMNET MEXICO AND DRY TORTUGAS (70 MILES WEST OF KEY WEST) COTTRELL KEY YELLOW WESTERN ROCKS DRY ROCKS SAND Marathon KEY COFFIN’S ROCK PATCH KEY EASTERN BIG PINE KEY & THE LOWER KEYS DRY ROCKS DELTA WESTERN SOMBRERO SHOALS SAMBOS AMERICAN PORKFISH SHOALS KISSING HERMAN’S GRUNTS LOOE KEY HOLE SAMANTHA’S NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY OUTER REEF CARYSFORT ELBOW DRY ROCKS CHRIST GRECIAN CHRISTOF THE ROCKS ABYSS OF THE KEY ABYSSA LARGO (ARTIFICIAL REEF) How it works FRENCH How it works PICKLES Congratulations! You are on your way to becoming a Reef Explorer — enjoying at least one of the unique diving ISLAMORADA HEN & CONCH CHICKENS REEF MOLASSES and snorkeling experiences in each region of the Florida Keys: LITTLE SPANISH CONCH Key Largo, Islamorada, Marathon, Big Pine Key & The Lower Keys PLATE FLEET and Key West. DAVIS CROCKER REEF REEF/WALL Beginners and experienced divers alike can become a Reef Explorer. This Reef Explorer Guide highlights the underwater world ALLIGATOR of the Florida Keys, including unique coral reefs from Key Largo to OLD CANNON Key West. To participate, pursue validation from any dive or snorkel PORKFISH HORSESHOE operator in each of the five regions. Upon completion of your last reef ATLANTIC exploration, email us at [email protected] to receive an access OCEAN code for a personalized Keys Reef Explorer poster with your name on it.
    [Show full text]
  • Abiotic Factors Control Sponge Ecology in Florida Mangroves
    MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES Vol. 339: 93–98, 2007 Published June 6 Mar Ecol Prog Ser Abiotic factors control sponge ecology in Florida mangroves Joseph R. Pawlik*, Steven E. McMurray, Timothy P. Henkel University of North Carolina Wilmington, Center for Marine Science, 5600 Marvin K. Moss Lane, Wilmington, North Carolina 28409, USA ABSTRACT: It is well documented that biotic effects play an important role in determining the distri- bution and abundance of sponges on Caribbean coral reefs: predation by fishes restricts some species to refugia, and allelopathic interactions result in a competitive hierarchy for space. Recently, it has been proposed that biotic effects are similarly important in mangrove habitats; specifically, that sponges common to mangrove habitats grow fast and rapidly out-compete species otherwise found in reef habitats for prop-root space. To begin to test this hypothesis, 9 species of common reef sponges were transplanted to prop roots at 3 mangrove sponge sites with different flow regimes (as measured with plaster clods) near Key Largo, Florida. Reef sponges transplanted to all 3 mangrove sites declined in health and died, most within 60 d, while those back-transplanted to a reef site survived and grew. Reef sponge decline was most rapid at sites with the lowest flow during periods of the month with the least tidal flux, when a combination of freshwater input, high temperature and turbid- ity were likely responsible for their demise. We conclude that some mangrove sites that support sponge growth do so because the species found there can endure the abiotic conditions of mangrove habitats, and not because of competitive dominance over species otherwise found on the reef.
    [Show full text]