DOCSLIB.ORG

Application of Seaweeds to Integrated Multi-Trophic Aquaculture in Southern Australia: Identifying and Investigating Suitable Native Species

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Application of Seaweeds to Integrated Multi-Trophic Aquaculture in Southern Australia: Identifying and Investigating Suitable Native Species Application of seaweeds to integrated multi-trophic aquaculture in southern Australia: identifying and investigating suitable native species Kathryn. H. Wiltshire Presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy School of Biological Sciences The University of Adelaide June 2020 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................................. II THESIS ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................... VIII DECLARATION ............................................................................................................................ X ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................. XI CHAPTER 1. GENERAL INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 1 1 Introduction................................................................................................................. 2 1.1 Integrated multi-trophic aquaculture and the South Australian context ............... 2 1.2 Potentially suitable native seaweeds ...................................................................... 7 1.3 Selection of candidate species for research .......................................................... 11 1.4 Assessing suitability for IMTA ................................................................................ 14 1.4.1 Feasibility of propagation and cultivation ..................................................... 15 1.4.2 Suitable areas and conditions for cultivation ................................................ 19 1.4.3 Nutrient removal and storage ........................................................................ 21 2 Research aims and thesis outline .............................................................................. 21 Chapter 2. Field trials for aquaculture of native southern Australian seaweeds. ........... 23 Chapter 3. Comparing maximum entropy modelling methods to inform aquaculture site selection for novel seaweed species. ............................................................................... 25 Chapter 4. Exploring novel Rhodophyta species for aquaculture and nutrient remediation. ..................................................................................................................... 26 ii Chapter 5. Hatchery production and nutrient remediation potential of the common kelp Ecklonia radiata. ............................................................................................................... 29 Chapter 6. General discussion .......................................................................................... 31 3 References ................................................................................................................. 31 CHAPTER 2. FIELD TRIALS FOR AQUACULTURE OF NATIVE SOUTHERN AUSTRALIAN SEAWEEDS .......................................................................................................................................... 45 Abstract ................................................................................................................................ 49 1 Introduction............................................................................................................... 50 2 Materials and Methods ............................................................................................. 55 2.1. Seaweed material .................................................................................................. 55 2.2. Feasibility of reproduction .................................................................................... 56 2.3. Initial field experiment .......................................................................................... 57 2.4. Fish farm field trial ................................................................................................. 60 2.5. Chemical analyses .................................................................................................. 62 2.6. Statistics ................................................................................................................. 62 3 Results ....................................................................................................................... 64 3.1. Field trial environmental conditions ..................................................................... 64 3.2. Brown seaweed reproduction ............................................................................... 64 3.3. initial field experiment results ............................................................................... 65 3.1. Fish farm field trial results ..................................................................................... 71 iii 4 Discussion .................................................................................................................. 76 5 References ................................................................................................................. 83 CHAPTER 3. COMPARING MAXIMUM ENTROPY MODELLING METHODS TO INFORM AQUACULTURE SITE SELECTION FOR NOVEL SEAWEED SPECIES ............................................ 91 Supplementary material ..................................................................................................... 107 Supplementary tables ................................................................................................. 107 Supplementary figures ................................................................................................ 112 CHAPTER 4. EXPLORING NOVEL RHODOPHYTA SPECIES FOR AQUACULTURE AND NUTRIENT REMEDIATION ........................................................................................................................ 122 Abstract .............................................................................................................................. 126 1 Introduction............................................................................................................. 127 2 Materials and Methods ........................................................................................... 130 2.1 Seaweed material ................................................................................................ 130 2.2 Initial species comparison experiment ................................................................ 130 2.3 Temperature response experiment .................................................................... 132 2.4 Further investigation of S. robusta ...................................................................... 134 2.4.1 Light and ammonium responses .................................................................. 134 2.4.2 Nitrogen uptake rates .................................................................................. 137 2.4.3 Explant production ....................................................................................... 139 2.5 Chemical analyses ................................................................................................ 140 2.6 Bayesian methods ............................................................................................... 141 iv 3 Results ..................................................................................................................... 142 3.1 Initial species comparison results ........................................................................ 142 3.2 Temperature responses of S. robusta and G. australe ........................................ 143 3.3 Further investigations of Solieria robusta ........................................................... 144 3.3.1 Light and ammonium responses .................................................................. 144 3.3.2 Nitrogen uptake rates .................................................................................. 150 3.3.3 Explant production ....................................................................................... 151 4 Discussion ................................................................................................................ 153 4.1 Suitability for IMTA of the four species investigated .......................................... 153 4.2 Temperature, light and nutrient responses ........................................................ 155 4.3 Informing suitable sites and cultivation periods ................................................. 158 4.4 Seedstock production .......................................................................................... 160 4.5 Conclusions .......................................................................................................... 162 5 References ............................................................................................................... 163 Supplementary material ..................................................................................................... 171 Supplementary results for tissue N data analysis (section 3.1). .................................... 171 Supplementary results for Solieria robusta explant production data analysis (section 3.3.3) ............................................................................................................................... 173 CHAPTER 5. HATCHERY PRODUCTION AND NUTRIENT REMEDIATION POTENTIAL OF THE KELP ECKLONIA RADIATA ...............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A White Paper on the Status and Needs of Largemouth Bass Culture in the North Central Region
    A WHITE PAPER ON THE STATUS AND NEEDS OF LARGEMOUTH BASS CULTURE IN THE NORTH CENTRAL REGION Prepared by Roy C. Heidinger Fisheries and Illinois Aquaculture Center Southern Illinois University-Carbondale for the North Central Regional Aquaculture Center Current Draft as of March 29, 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION AND JUSTIFICATION OF THE DOCUMENT ....................2 CURRENT STATUS OF THE INDUSTRY ........................................2 Markets ...................................................................2 Supply/Demand ..........................................................2 Legality ...................................................................3 BIOLOGY/AQUACULTURE TECHNOLOGY .....................................3 Biology ...................................................................4 Culture ....................................................................4 Brood Stock ............................................................4 Fry and Fingerling Production ................................................5 Diseases and Pests ........................................................6 Water Quality, Handling, and Transport ........................................7 CRITICAL LIMITING FACTORS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................7 Nutrition ..................................................................7 Production Densities ..........................................................8 Marketing .................................................................8 Diseases ..................................................................8
    [Show full text]
  • Mechanisms of Ecosystem Stability for Kelp Beds in Urban Environments
    Mechanisms of ecosystem stability for kelp beds in urban environments By Simon E Reeves November 2017 Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies I DECLARATIONS This declaration certifies that: (i) This thesis contains no material that has been accepted for a degree or diploma by the University or any other institution. (ii) The work contained in this thesis, except where otherwise acknowledged, is the result of my own investigations. (iii) Due acknowledgement has been made in the text to all other material used (iv) The thesis is less than 100,000 words in length, exclusive of tables, maps, bibliographies and appendices. Signed: (Simon Reeves) Date: 1/12/2017 Statement of authority of access This thesis may be available for loan and limited copying in accordance with the Copyright Act 1968. Signed: (Simon Reeves) Date: 1/12/2017 II 20/7/18 ABSTRACT Ecologists have long been interested in determining the role biotic relationships play in natural systems. Even Darwin envisioned natural systems as "bound together by a web of complex relations”, noting how “complex and unexpected are the checks and relations between organic beings” (On the Origin of Species, 1859, pp 81-83). Any event or phenomenon that alters the implicit balance in the web of interactions, to any degree, can potentially facilitate a re-organisation in structure that can lead to a wholescale change to the stability of a natural system. As a result of the increasing diversity and intensity of anthropogenic stressors on ecosystems, previously well-understood biotic interactions and emergent ecological functions are being altered, requiring a reappraisal of their effects.
    [Show full text]
  • Partnering with Extractive Industries for the Conservation of Biodiversity in Africa
    Partnering with Extractive Industries for the Conservation of Biodiversity in Africa: A Guide for USAID Engagement November 2008 This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by the Biodiversity Analysis and Technical Support (BATS) Team. PARTNERING WITH EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRIES FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BIODIVERSITY IN AFRICA: A GUIDE FOR USAID ENGAGEMENT November 2008 Biodiversity Assessment and Technical Support Program (BATS) EPIQ IQC: EPP-I-00-03-00014-00, Task Order 02 Dr. Joao Stacishin de Queiroz Brian App Renee Morin Wendy Rice Biodiversity Analysis and Technical Support for USAID/Africa (BATS) is funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development, Bureau for Africa, Office of Sustainable Development (AFR/SD). This program is implemented by Chemonics International Inc., World Conservation Union, World Wildlife Fund, and International Program Consortium in coordination with program partners: the U.S. Forest Service/International Programs and the Africa Biodiversity Collaborative Group. ON THE COVER (Left to Right): Bauxite shipment, Guinea (BATS / Brian App), Oil platform construction site, Namibia (Alexander Hafemann), Illegal Timber Processing, Madagascar (BATS /Steve Dennison), Artisanal Fishing Tools, Mali (BATS / Brian App) The authors’ views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. CONTENTS Introduction 1 Section I Analysis of Risk and Potential
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Ecology Progress Series 483:117
    Vol. 483: 117–131, 2013 MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES Published May 30 doi: 10.3354/meps10261 Mar Ecol Prog Ser Variation in the morphology, reproduction and development of the habitat-forming kelp Ecklonia radiata with changing temperature and nutrients Christopher J. T. Mabin1,*, Paul E. Gribben2, Andrew Fischer1, Jeffrey T. Wright1 1National Centre for Marine Conservation and Resource Sustainability (NCMCRS), Australian Maritime College, University of Tasmania, Launceston, Tasmania 7250, Australia 2Biodiversity Research Group, Climate Change Cluster, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales 2007, Australia ABSTRACT: Increasing ocean temperatures are a threat to kelp forests in several regions of the world. In this study, we examined how changes in ocean temperature and associated nitrate concentrations driven by the strengthening of the East Australian Current (EAC) will influence the morphology, reproduction and development of the widespread kelp Ecklonia radiata in south- eastern Australia. E. radiata morphology and reproduction were examined at sites in New South Wales (NSW) and Tasmania, where sea surface temperature differs by ~5°C, and a laboratory experiment was conducted to test the interactive effects of temperature and nutrients on E. radiata development. E. radiata size and amount of reproductive tissue were generally greater in the cooler waters of Tasmania compared to NSW. Importantly, one morphological trait (lamina length) was a strong predictor of the amount of reproductive tissue, suggesting that morphological changes in response to increased temperature may influence reproductive capacity in E. radiata. Growth of gametophytes was optimum between 15 and 22°C and decreased by >50% above 22°C. Microscopic sporophytes were also largest between 15 and 22°C, but no sporophytes developed above 22°C, highlighting a potentially critical upper temperature threshold for E.
    [Show full text]
  • Imported Food Risk Statement Hijiki Seaweed and Inorganic Arsenic
    Imported food risk statement Hijiki seaweed and inorganic arsenic Commodity: Hijiki seaweed Alternative names used for Hijiki include: Sargassum fusiforme (formerly Hizikia fusiforme, Hizikia fusiformis, Crystophyllum fusiforme, Turbinaria fusiformis), Hizikia, Hiziki, Cystophyllum fusiforme, deer-tail grass, sheep- nest grass, chiau tsai, gulfweed, gulf weed ,hai ti tun, hai toe din, hai tsao, hai tso, hai zao, Hijiki, me-hijiki, mehijiki, hijaki, naga-hijiki, hoi tsou, nongmichae. Analyte: Inorganic arsenic Recommendation and rationale Is inorganic arsenic in Hijiki seaweed a medium or high risk to public health? Yes No Uncertain, further scientific assessment required Rationale: Inorganic arsenic is genotoxic and is known to be carcinogenic in humans. Acute toxicity can result from high dietary exposure to inorganic arsenic. General description Nature of the analyte: Arsenic is a metalloid that occurs in inorganic and organic forms. It is routinely found in the environment as a result of natural occurrence and anthropogenic (human) activity (WHO 2011a). While individuals are often exposed to organic and inorganic arsenic through the diet, it is the inorganic species (which include arsenate V and arsenite III) that are more toxic to humans. Only inorganic arsenic is known to be carcinogenic in humans (WHO 2011a). Inorganic arsenic contamination of groundwater is common in certain parts of the world. Dietary exposure to inorganic arsenic occurs predominantly from groundwater derived drinking-water, groundwater used in cooking and commonly consumed foods such as rice and other cereal grains and their flours (EFSA 2009; WHO 2011a; WHO 2011b). However fruits and vegetables have also been found to contain levels of inorganic arsenic in the range of parts per billion (FSA 2012).
    [Show full text]
  • Rock Lobster Hab Itat Assessment Figure 20. Nine Mile Reef Video
    36 Rock Lobster Habitat Assessment Figure 20. Nine Mile Reef video survey sites (see Table 4 for biota codes). a. NMR01a low profile reef, sessile invertebrates. d. NMR03a low profile reef, sessile invertebrates. b. NMR02a low profile reef, sessile invertebrates. e. NMR05a high profile reef, sessile invertebrates. c. NMR03a low profile reef, sessile invertebrates. f. NMR06a low profile reef, sessile invertebrates. Rock Lobster Habitat Assessment 37 g. NMR06a low profile reef, sessile invertebrates. i. NMR09a low profile reef, sessile invertebrates. h. NMR08a High profile reef, sessile j. NMR09a low profile reef. invertebrates. Figure 21. Nine Mile Reef video still images. Rock Lobster Habitat Assessment 38 Rock Lobster Habitat Assessment Figure 22. Torquay and Ocean Grove (western area) video survey sites (see Table 4 for biota codes). 39 40 Rock Lobster Habitat Assessment Figure 23. Torquay and Ocean Grove (eastern area) video survey sites (see Table 4 for biota codes). a. OGT05a low profile reef, sessile invertebrates. d. OGT12a patchy low profile reef, sessile invertebrates / E. radiata b. OGT06a patchy low profile reef. e. OGT16a low profile reef, E. radiata / Cystophora spp. c. OGT11a high profile reef, E. radiata. F. OGT17a sediment, A. antarctica. Rock Lobster Habitat Assessment 41 g. OGT18a patchy low profile reef, Cystophora j. OGT24a patchy low profile reef, sessile spp. invertebrates (Butterfly perch). h. OGT22a low profile reef, E. radiata / Cystophora k. OGT27a patchy low profile reef ‐ cobble. spp. i. OGT23a low profile reef, E. radiata. l. OGT30a patchy low profile reef, E. radiata. Rock Lobster Habitat Assessment 42 m. OGT32a low profile reef, Cystophora spp. p.
    [Show full text]
  • Medicinal Values of Seaweeds
    Medicinal Values of Seaweeds Authors Abdul Kader Mohiuddin Assistant Professor, Department of Pharmacy, World University, Dhanmondi, Dhaka, Bangladesh Publication Month and Year: November 2019 Pages: 69 E-BOOK ISBN: 978-81-943354-3-6 Academic Publications C-11, 169, Sector-3, Rohini, Delhi Website: www.publishbookonline.com Email: [email protected] Phone: +91-9999744933 Page | 1 Page | 2 Medicinal Values of Seaweeds Abstract The global economic effect of the five driving chronic diseases- malignancy, diabetes, psychological instability, CVD, and respiratory disease- could reach $47 trillion throughout the following 20 years, as indicated by an examination by the World Economic Forum (WEF). As per the WHO, 80% of the total people principally those of developing countries depend on plant- inferred medicines for social insurance. The indicated efficacies of seaweed inferred phytochemicals are demonstrating incredible potential in obesity, T2DM, metabolic syndrome, CVD, IBD, sexual dysfunction and a few cancers. Hence, WHO, UN-FAO, UNICEF and governments have indicated a developing enthusiasm for these offbeat nourishments with wellbeing advancing impacts. Edible marine macro-algae (seaweed) are of intrigue in view of their incentive in nutrition and medicine. Seaweeds contain a few bioactive substances like polysaccharides, proteins, lipids, polyphenols, and pigments, all of which may have useful wellbeing properties. People devour seaweed as nourishment in different structures: crude as salad and vegetable, pickle with sauce or with vinegar, relish or improved jams and furthermore cooked for vegetable soup. By cultivating seaweed, coastal people are getting an alternative livelihood just as propelling their lives. In 2005, world seaweed generation totaled 14.7 million tons which has dramatically increased (30.4 million tons) in 2015.
    [Show full text]
  • Edible Seaweed from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
    Edible seaweed From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Edible seaweed are algae that can be eaten and used in the preparation of food. They typically contain high amounts of fiber.[1] They may belong to one of several groups of multicellular algae: the red algae, green algae, and brown algae. Seaweeds are also harvested or cultivated for the extraction of alginate, agar and carrageenan, gelatinous substances collectively known as hydrocolloids or phycocolloids. Hydrocolloids have attained commercial significance, especially in food production as food A dish of pickled spicy seaweed additives.[2] The food industry exploits the gelling, water-retention, emulsifying and other physical properties of these hydrocolloids. Most edible seaweeds are marine algae whereas most freshwater algae are toxic. Some marine algae contain acids that irritate the digestion canal, while some others can have a laxative and electrolyte-balancing effect.[3] The dish often served in western Chinese restaurants as 'Crispy Seaweed' is not seaweed but cabbage that has been dried and then fried.[4] Contents 1 Distribution 2 Nutrition and uses 3 Common edible seaweeds 3.1 Red algae (Rhodophyta) 3.2 Green algae 3.3 Brown algae (Phaeophyceae) 3.3.1 Kelp (Laminariales) 3.3.2 Fucales 3.3.3 Ectocarpales 4 See also 5 References 6 External links Distribution Seaweeds are used extensively as food in coastal cuisines around the world. Seaweed has been a part of diets in China, Japan, and Korea since prehistoric times.[5] Seaweed is also consumed in many traditional European societies, in Iceland and western Norway, the Atlantic coast of France, northern and western Ireland, Wales and some coastal parts of South West England,[6] as well as Nova Scotia and Newfoundland.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultivating the Macroalgal Holobiont: Effects of Integrated Multi-Trophic Aquaculture on the Microbiome of Ulva Rigida (Chlorophyta)
    fmars-07-00052 February 10, 2020 Time: 15:0 # 1 ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 12 February 2020 doi: 10.3389/fmars.2020.00052 Cultivating the Macroalgal Holobiont: Effects of Integrated Multi-Trophic Aquaculture on the Microbiome of Ulva rigida (Chlorophyta) Gianmaria Califano1, Michiel Kwantes1, Maria Helena Abreu2, Rodrigo Costa3,4,5 and Thomas Wichard1,6* 1 Institute for Inorganic and Analytical Chemistry, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Jena, Germany, 2 ALGAplus Lda, Ílhavo, Portugal, 3 Institute for Bioengineering and Biosciences, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal, 4 Centre of Marine Sciences, University of Algarve, Faro, Portugal, 5 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, United States, 6 Jena School for Microbial Communication, Jena, Germany Ulva is a ubiquitous macroalgal genus of commercial interest. Integrated Multi-Trophic Aquaculture (IMTA) systems promise large-scale production of macroalgae due to Edited by: their high productivity and environmental sustainability. Complex host–microbiome Bernardo Antonio Perez Da Gama, interactions play a decisive role in macroalgal development, especially in Ulva spp. Universidade Federal Fluminense, due to algal growth- and morphogenesis-promoting factors released by associated Brazil bacteria. However, our current understanding of the microbial community assembly and Reviewed by: Alejandro H. Buschmann, structure in cultivated macroalgae is scant. We aimed to determine (i) to what extent University of Los Lagos, Chile IMTA settings influence the microbiome associated with U. rigida and its rearing water, (ii) Henrique Fragoso Santos, to explore the dynamics of beneficial microbes to algal growth and development under Universidade Federal Fluminense, Brazil IMTA settings, and (iii) to improve current knowledge of host–microbiome interactions.
    [Show full text]
  • Improved Growth of Hydroponically Grown Rough Lemon (Citrus Jambhiri Lush) Seedlings Treated with Kelp and Vermicast Extracts
    Improved growth of hydroponically grown rough lemon (Citrus jambhiri lush) seedlings treated with kelp and vermicast extracts by LINDSAY MUCHENA Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree MSc (Agric) Horticulture In the Department of Plant Production and Soil Sciences University of Pretoria Supervisor: Mr J.T. Vahrmeijer Co-Supervisors: Dr D. Marais Prof E.S. du Toit June 2017 Declaration I, Lindsay Muchena do hereby declare that this dissertation, which I do hereby submit for the degree of Master of Science in Horticulture at University of Pretoria, is my own work and has never been submitted by myself at any other academic institution. Except where duly acknowledged, the research work reported herein is as a result of my own investigations. L Muchena Signature: June 2017 i Acknowledgements I would like to express my deepest gratitude to: My Lord and Saviour, Lord Jesus Christ, for his divine guidance throughout my studies. Mr JT Vahrmeijer, Dr D Marais and Prof ES du Toit for their solid assistance throughout my studies. Dr NJ Taylor for assisting me with the photosynthesis equipment. My husband, Mathew Banda for helping me with manual work, data collection and moral support during experiments. Lucy Muchena, for assisting me to change nutrient solutions and for moral support throughout the course of my studies. The Citrus Research International (CRI) and Citrus academy for funding. My family and friends for their unwavering support. ii Conference contributions Oral Presentations L Muchena, JT Vahrmeijer, D Marais and ES du Toit, 2017. Improved growth of hydroponically grown rough lemon (Citrus jambhiri lush) seedlings treated with kelp and compost extracts.
    [Show full text]
  • Safety Assessment of Brown Algae-Derived Ingredients As Used in Cosmetics
    Safety Assessment of Brown Algae-Derived Ingredients as Used in Cosmetics Status: Draft Report for Panel Review Release Date: August 29, 2018 Panel Meeting Date: September 24-25, 2018 The 2018 Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel members are: Chair, Wilma F. Bergfeld, M.D., F.A.C.P.; Donald V. Belsito, M.D.; Ronald A. Hill, Ph.D.; Curtis D. Klaassen, Ph.D.; Daniel C. Liebler, Ph.D.; James G. Marks, Jr., M.D.; Ronald C. Shank, Ph.D.; Thomas J. Slaga, Ph.D.; and Paul W. Snyder, D.V.M., Ph.D. The CIR Executive Director is Bart Heldreth, Ph.D. This report was prepared by Lillian C. Becker, former Scientific Analyst/Writer and Priya Cherian, Scientific Analyst/Writer. © Cosmetic Ingredient Review 1620 L Street, NW, Suite 1200 ♢ Washington, DC 20036-4702 ♢ ph 202.331.0651 ♢ fax 202.331.0088 [email protected] Distributed for Comment Only -- Do Not Cite or Quote Commitment & Credibility since 1976 Memorandum To: CIR Expert Panel Members and Liaisons From: Priya Cherian, Scientific Analyst/Writer Date: August 29, 2018 Subject: Safety Assessment of Brown Algae as Used in Cosmetics Enclosed is the Draft Report of 83 brown algae-derived ingredients as used in cosmetics. (It is identified as broalg092018rep in this pdf.) This is the first time the Panel is reviewing this document. The ingredients in this review are extracts, powders, juices, or waters derived from one or multiple species of brown algae. Information received from the Personal Care Products Council (Council) are attached: • use concentration data of brown algae and algae-derived ingredients (broalg092018data1, broalg092018data2, broalg092018data3); • Information regarding hydrolyzed fucoidan extracted from Laminaria digitata has been included in the report.
    [Show full text]
  • Interaction Between the Canopy Dwelling Echinoid Holopneustes Purpurescens and Its Host Kelp Ecklonia Radia Ta
    MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES Vol. 127: 169-181, 1995 Published November 2 Mar Ecol Prog Ser 1 Interaction between the canopy dwelling echinoid Holopneustes purpurescens and its host kelp Ecklonia radia ta Peter D. Steinberg* School of Biological Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia ABSTRACT: I examined the interaction between the unusual, canopy dwelling echinoid Holopneustes purpurescens and its main host plant, the kelp Ecklonia radiata. During a 4 yr study at Cape Banks, New South Wales, Australia, H. purpurescens reached densities as high as 1 ind. per thallus of E. rad~ataand >l7 mw2,with densities declining strongly in the latter years of the study. These sea urchins also occurred, although at lower densities, on the dictyotalean alga Homoeostrichus sinclairii. H. pur- purescens consumed laminae of E. radiata in the field at the rate of -1 g large ind.-l (diameter >40 mm) d'l Consumption by the sea urchins was not affected by variation in phlorotannin levels among lami- nae. The impact of feeding by H. purpurescens on E. radiata, measured as (1) changes in the biomass of the kelps and (2) changes in thallus elongation rates, was examined in field experiments done in 2 seasons in which different numbers and sizes of sea urchins were caged with individual E. radiata. In spring, all densities and sizes of H. purpurescens caused significant damage (biomass) to E. radiata after 4 wk, and higher densities (2 per kelp thallus) of large sea urch~nsresulted in kelp mortality. No measurable damage occurred in autumn, with all kelps losing large amounts of biomass.
    [Show full text]