DOCSLIB.ORG

FAU Institutional Repository

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
FAU Institutional Repository FAU Institutional Repository http://purl.fcla.edu/fau/fauir This paper was submitted by the faculty of FAU’s Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute. Notice: ©1983 Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, University of Miami. This manuscript is available at http://www.rsmas.miami.edu/bms and may be cited as: Lewis, F. G., III., & Stoner, A. W. (1983). Distribution of macrofauna within seagrass beds: an explanation for patterns of abundance. Bulletin of Marine Science, 33(2), 296‐304. BULLETIN OF MARINE SCIENCE, 33(2): 296-304, 1983 DISTRIBUTION OF MACROFAUNA WITHIN SEAGRASS BEDS: AN EXPLANATION FOR PATTERNS OF ABUNDANCE F Graham Lewis, III and Allan W Stoner ABSTRACT An examination of macrofaunal microhabitats within a seagrass meadow was conducted in Apalachee Bay (north Florida). Core samples were taken from two substrata within the grassbed, Thalassia testudinum shoots and bare areas among the shoots, and compared with the fauna collected in randomly placed cores. Seagrass samples showed significantly greater numbers of individuals and species than the other two treatments. When compared with either bare substrate or random samples, four times the number ofindividuals and twice the number ofspecies were collected in cores containing seagrass shoots. Random samples were not significantly different from samples taken on the bare substrate. Many of the species undersampled in randomly placed cores were epifaunal and closely associated with the vege­ tation present. Macrobenthic species were classified according to preferred microhabitat (sea­ grass, bare substrate or no preference). It is suggested that macrofaunal density and species richness estimates may be greatly affected by the distribution of plants within the grassbed. This study points out potential difficulties in macrofaunal estimates when the preferred microhabitat of the species under examination is undersampled. Coastal seagrass meadows, although long recognized as potential sources of refuge, food and nursery grounds for a variety ofbenthic invertebrates and fishes (Kikuchi, 1966; Kikuchi and Peres, 1977; Thayer et aI., 1975; McRoy, 1977; and others), have seldom been the subject ofthe extensive quantitative investigations given to unvegetated, soft-bottom habitats. The distribution of benthic macro­ fauna within these seagrass beds has been restricted primarily to description of seagrass-faunal assemblages (Jackson, 1972; Marsh, 1973; 1976; Hooks et aI., 1976; Thorhaug and Roessler, 1977; Heck, 1977; 1979; Nelson, 1979a; 1980). Studies have focused on the relationships ofthe macrofauna to both macrophyte species composition (Ledoyer, 1962; O'Gower andWacasey, 1967; Moore et aI., 1968; Santos and Simon, 1974; Heck and Wetstone, 1977; Young, 1981) and biomass (Orth, 1973; 1977; Heck and Wetstone, 1977; Brook, 1978; Stoner, 1980a; Heck and Orth, 1980). Comparatively, little information exists on the small-scale distributions of macrobenthic invertebrates within a particular sea­ grass habitat (Kita and Harada, 1962; Nagle, 1968; Jacobs and Pierson, 1979). In a recent paper (Lewis and Stoner, 1981), the relative efficiency of three different-sized coring devices used for sampling macrobenthos in Thalassia tes­ tudinum beds in Apalachee Bay, Florida, was examined. The smallest corer (5.5­ em diameter) collected significantly greater numbers ofindividuals than either of the larger devices tested (7.6- and 10.5-cm diameters) when the total area (or volume) of sediment sampled by each was equal. From what is known about the life histories ofspecies collected in seagrass meadows, the majority ofindividuals undersampled by the larger corers were found to be epifaunal in habit and normally observed in close association with vegetation. The increased sampling efficiency of the smaller corer was attributed to the spacing of seagrass shoots and the increased probability of randomly sampling a shoot with the greater number of small cores taken per unit surface area. The present study was designed to examine the hypothesis that the majority of macrofauna (infauna and epifauna) within a seagrass bed is closely associated with the physical structures of the seagrasses present and that estimates of mac- 296 LEWIS AND STONER: ABUNDANCE PATTERNS OF SEAGRASS MACROFAUNA 297 rofaunal species composition and abundance may be greatly influenced by the sampling strategy employed. METHODS All benthic samples were collected on 26 September 1979 from shallow turtlegrass (Thalassia testudinum) beds in Apalachee Bay, Florida, USA. The collection site, as in the previous study (Lewis and Stoner, 1981), was located approximately 5 km southwest from the mouth of the Econfina River (permanent sampling station E12; Livingston, 1975) in approximately \.7-2.0 m of water. Total macrophyte biomass (above- and below-ground) at the time of faunal collection, estimated with the repetitive quadrat technique of Livingston et al. (1976), was 36\.4 g dry wt/rn-, dominated by T. testudinum (7\.0010). Salinity and temperature were 250/00 and 22.5°C, respectively. Sediment charac­ teristics of the sampling site were given by Stoner (1980a). To examine the distribution ofmacrofauna within the seagrass bed, three treatments were employed: (I) diver-operated cores were taken directly over and including one Thalassia shoot (bundle sheath and blades), hereafter called seagrass samples; (2) cores were taken between but not including the Thalassia shoots, hereafter called bare substrate samples; and (3) randomly placed cores were taken which mayor may not have included a seagrass shoot, hereafter called random samples. When taking a sample which included a Thalassia shoot, the corer was lowered while the blades were gently manipulated into the sampler. The spreading ofthe distal portions of the blades in the water column caused some difficulty in sampling and precluded the collection of the entire plant in some cases. However, the stalk, bundle sheath and basal portions of the blades were always sampled. Three 2 X 2-m grids were located adjacent to one another in a visually homogeneous area at the sampling site; each treatment was allocated a separate sampling grid. Twenty replicate cores were taken within each grid with placement of cores based on sets of randomly generated coordinates. In the first two treat­ ments, the nearest Thalassia shoot (seagrass sample) or nearest bare area between shoots (bare sub­ strate) to the random coordinates was chosen for core placement. Short sections of PVC pipe with an inside diameter of 5.1 em (surface area of 20.3 em- per core) were used for coring. Cores were taken to a depth of 10 em as initial investigations on this station (Stoner, 1980a) showed that 98010 of the macrofauna were found in the top 5 ern of a core. Core samples were sieved in the field with a 0.5-mm mesh screen and individually preserved in 10010 buffered Formalin and rose bengal stain. Samples were hand sorted in the laboratory and all amphipods, isopods, decapods, mysids, polychaetes, molluscs and echinoderms were identified to species. Less numerous taxa, such as oligochaetes, nemerteans, cumaceans and sipunculids, were counted but not identified. RESULTS Species composition and abundance (individualsilO cores) of macrofauna col­ lected in the three treatments are shown in Table 1. One hundred and one species (20 amphipods, 38 polychaetes and 43 miscellaneous taxa) were collected in the 60 core samples. Significant differences were found among the three treatments (ANaYA with log transformation and Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis; P < 0.01) in both numbers of individuals and species. Seagrass samples contained over four times the number of individuals and twice the number of species than the numbers recorded for either bare substrate or random samples. No differences were observed in either number ofindividuals or species (Duncan's multiple range test and Kruskal-Wallis multiple comparison; P > 0.10) between the latter two treatments. Although an examination of the variances of the three treatments indicated a significant departure from homoscedasticity for both numbers ofspecies and individuals (Fmax = 6.0 and 10.1, respectively; P < 0.05), analysis ofvariance is robust enough to function well even with significant variance heterogeneity, if equal sample sizes are used (Box, 1954). Parametric analysis ofvariance and non­ parametric Kruskal-Wallis tests yielded identical results. Although the sampling design precluded an estimate ofvariability among sam­ ples leading to a potential confounding of treatment effects with location, prior sampling suggests that the observed differences in numbers of species and indi­ viduals are due to a treatment rather than a location effect. Twelve replicate cores 298 BULLETIN OF MARINE SCIENCE, VOL. 33, NO.2, 1983 Table I. Macrobenthic animals collected from three sampling treatments (Values represent number of individuals collected in 20 replicates) Treatments Species Seagrass Bare Substrate Random Amphipoda Ampelisca vadorum 8 Ampelisca verrilli I I Batea catharinensis 5 I Carinobatea carinata IS 3 5 Cerapus sp. (cf. C. tubularis) 3 I Cymadusa compta 49 3 10 Elasmopus levis 12 Erichthonius brasiliensis 17 2 Gitanopsis tortugae 4 I Grandidierella bonnieroides I Lembos unifasciatus 89 8 II Listriella barnardi 6 3 Luconacia incerta I 2 Lysianopsis alba 12 2 Melita appendiculata I Photis macromanus 3 Rudilemboides naglei 12 6 5 Stenothoe minuta 2 Synchelidium americanum 3 2 Tethygeneia longleyi 57 3 10 Number of individuals 297 35 50 Number of species 18 13
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Life History Patterns of Three Estuarine Brittlestars (Ophiuroidea) at Cedar Key, Florida
    LIFE HISTORY PATTERNS OF THREE ESTUARINE BRITTLESTARS (OPHIUROIDEA) AT CEDAR KEY, FLORIDA by STEPHEN EDWARD STANCYK A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 1974 UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 3 1262 08552 5847 ^ ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I owe a great" deal to all the people who made the completion of this dissertation possible. The members of my committee deserve special tnanks, particularly Drs. Frank Maturo and Thomas Emmel , who were always ready with encouragement and advice. I thank Drs. John Erookbank and Ariel Lugo for their careful reading of the manuscript, and Dr. John Ewel for his timely services. Dr. John Anderson was generous with both equipment and time. Of the many fellow students and friends who assisted me, William Ingram deserves special thanks for his indispensable aid in fostering an agreeable relationship between myself and the computer. John Caldwell, John Paige, Christine Simon and Michael Oesterling were of particular help in the field, and I would like to thank Dave David, Renee Lindsay,- Kent Murphey, Dave Godman and Steve Salzman for their assistance in the. laboratory. Marine biologists are often in need of a sa c e haven in a storm, and V.am therefore very grateful to Lee and Esta Belcher and thei wonderful family for their hospitality, and for making my work at Cedar Key such a pleasurable experience. Ms-:. Lib by Coker typed the final manuscript, and Mr. Paul Laessle provided. materia Is and advice for completion of the figures.
    [Show full text]
  • Benthic Invertebrate Community Monitoring and Indicator Development for Barnegat Bay-Little Egg Harbor Estuary
    July 15, 2013 Final Report Project SR12-002: Benthic Invertebrate Community Monitoring and Indicator Development for Barnegat Bay-Little Egg Harbor Estuary Gary L. Taghon, Rutgers University, Project Manager [email protected] Judith P. Grassle, Rutgers University, Co-Manager [email protected] Charlotte M. Fuller, Rutgers University, Co-Manager [email protected] Rosemarie F. Petrecca, Rutgers University, Co-Manager and Quality Assurance Officer [email protected] Patricia Ramey, Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum, Frankfurt Germany, Co-Manager [email protected] Thomas Belton, NJDEP Project Manager and NJDEP Research Coordinator [email protected] Marc Ferko, NJDEP Quality Assurance Officer [email protected] Bob Schuster, NJDEP Bureau of Marine Water Monitoring [email protected] Introduction The Barnegat Bay ecosystem is potentially under stress from human impacts, which have increased over the past several decades. Benthic macroinvertebrates are commonly included in studies to monitor the effects of human and natural stresses on marine and estuarine ecosystems. There are several reasons for this. Macroinvertebrates (here defined as animals retained on a 0.5-mm mesh sieve) are abundant in most coastal and estuarine sediments, typically on the order of 103 to 104 per meter squared. Benthic communities are typically composed of many taxa from different phyla, and quantitative measures of community diversity (e.g., Rosenberg et al. 2004) and the relative abundance of animals with different feeding behaviors (e.g., Weisberg et al. 1997, Pelletier et al. 2010), can be used to evaluate ecosystem health. Because most benthic invertebrates are sedentary as adults, they function as integrators, over periods of months to years, of the properties of their environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Jacksonville, Florida 1998 Odmds Benthic Community Assessment
    JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA 1998 ODMDS BENTHIC COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT Submitted to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4 61 Forsyth St. Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Prepared by Barry A. Vittor & Associates, Inc. 8060 Cottage Hill Rd. Mobile, Alabama 36695 (334) 633-6100 November 1999 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ………………………………………….……………………………3 LIST OF FIGURES ……………………..………………………………………………..4 1.0 INTRODUCTION ………..…………………………………………………………..5 2.0 METHODS ………..…………………………………………………………………..5 2.1 Sample Collection And Handling ………………………………………………5 2.2 Macroinfaunal Sample Analysis ……………………………………………….6 3.0 DATA ANALYSIS METHODS ……..………………………………………………6 3.1 Assemblage Analyses ..…………………………………………………………6 3.2 Faunal Similarities ……………………………………………………….…….8 4.0 HABITAT CHARACTERISTICS ……………………………………………….…8 5.0 BENTHIC COMMUNITY CHARACTERIZATION ……………………………..9 5.1 Faunal Composition, Abundance, And Community Structure …………………9 5.2 Numerical Classification Analysis …………………………………………….10 5.3 Taxa Assemblages …………………………………………………………….11 6.0 1995 vs 1998 COMPARISONS ……………………………………………………..11 7.0 SUMMARY ………………………………………………………………………….13 8.0 LITERATURE CITED ……………………………………………………………..16 2 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Station locations for the Jacksonville, Florida ODMDS, June 1998. Table 2. Sediment data for the Jacksonville, Florida ODMDS, June 1998. Table 3. Summary of abundance of major taxonomic groups for the Jacksonville, Florida ODMDS, June 1998. Table 4. Abundance and distribution of major taxonomic groups at each station for the Jacksonville, Florida ODMDS, June 1998. Table 5. Abundance and distribution of taxa for the Jacksonville, Florida ODMDS, June 1998. Table 6. Percent abundance of dominant taxa (> 5% of the total assemblage) for the Jacksonville, Florida ODMDS, June 1998. Table 7. Summary of assemblage parameters for the Jacksonville, Florida ODMDS stations, June 1998. Table 8. Analysis of variance table for density differences between stations for the Jacksonville, Florida ODMDS stations, June 1998.
    [Show full text]
  • Tube Epifaum of the Polychaete Phyllopchaetopterus Socialis
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Repository Open Access to Scientific Information from Embrapa Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science (1995) 41, 91–100 Tube epifauna of the Polychaete Phyllochaetopterus socialis Claparède Rosebel Cunha Nalessoa, Luíz Francisco L. Duarteb, Ivo Pierozzi Jrc and Eloisa Fiorim Enumod aDepartamento de Zoologia, CCB, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, 50670-901, Recife, PE, Brazil, bDepartamento de Zoologia, Instituto Biologia, C.P. 6109, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, 13.081-970, Campinas, SP, Brazil, cEmbrapa, NMA, Av. Dr. Julio Soares de Arruda, 803 CEP 13.085, Campinas, SP, Brazil and dProtebras, Rua Turmalina, 79 CEP 13.088, Campinas, SP, Brazil Received 8 October 1992 and in revised form 22 June 1994 Keywords: Polychaeta; tubes; faunal association; epifauna; São Sebastião Channel; Brazil Animals greater than 1 mm, found among tangled tubes of Phyllochaetopterus socialis (Chaetopteridae) from Araçá Beach, São Sebastião district, Brazil, were studied for 1 year, with four samples in each of four seasons. They comprised 10 338 individuals in 1722·7 g dry weight of polychaete tubes, with Echino- dermata, Polychaeta (not identified to species) and Crustacea as the dominant taxa. The Shannon–Wiener diversity index did not vary seasonally, only two species (a holothurian and a pycnogonid) showing seasonal variation. Ophiactis savignyi was the dominant species, providing 45·5% of individuals. Three other ophiuroids, the holothurian Synaptula hidriformis, the crustaceans Leptochelia savignyi, Megalobrachium soriatum and Synalpheus fritzmuelleri, the sipunculan Themiste alutacea and the bivalve Hiatella arctica were all abundant, but most of the 68 species recorded occurred sparsely.
    [Show full text]
  • <I>Diopatra Cuprea</I>
    BULLETIN OF MARINE SCIENCE, 40(1): 11-21, 1987 ROLE OF DIOPATRA CUPREA BOSC (POLYCHAETA: ONUPHIDAE) TUBES IN STRUCTURING A SUBTROPICAL INFAUNAL COMMUNITY Suzanne M. Ban and Walter G. Nelson ABSTRACT An a priori hypothesis predicted that in the vicinity of aggregated Diopatra cuprea tubes an enhanced infaunal density and species richness would be found, resulting from a biological refuge effect of the tubes. To test this hypothesis, cores were taken over a 5-month period in both vegetated, Halodule wrighti! Aschers. beds, and unvegetated areas of a site in the Indian River lagoon, Florida. An inner, 0.01 m2, frame was placed to enclose densities of 0, I, or 4 D. cuprea tubes, while an outer concentric, 0.02 m2, frame was placed so that it enclosed the smaller frame, plus a surrounding area lacking in D. cuprea tubes. The presence of D. cuprea tubes was found to have no consistent significant effect on the abundance and number of infaunal species found in either the vegetated or unvegetated areas. Laboratory experiments employing a benthic predator, Callinectes, were carried out in order to determine whether D. cuprea tubes andlor H. wrightii rhizome mats actually constitute a barrier to predation. Significantly higher survivorship of the bivalve Mulinia lateralis Say, used as prey, was found in laboratory treatments containing 10 tubes per 0.01 m2 versus treatments containing 4 or a tubes per 0.01 m2. Highest survivorship of bivalves was found in treatments containing a H. wrightii rhizome mat; tubes placed within the mat did not enhance clam survivorship. The discrepancy between the findings of this study, and previous studies on the refuge effect of D.
    [Show full text]
  • Foraging and Mobility in Three Species of Aciculata (Annelida: Polychaeta)
    FORAGING AND MOBILITY IN THREE SPECIES OF ACICULATA (ANNELIDA: POLYCHAETA) PARDO, E. V. and AMARAL, A. C. Z. Departamento de Zoologia, Instituto de Biologia, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, C. P. 6109, CEP 13083-970, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil Correspondence to: Erica Veronica Pardo, Departamento de Zoologia, Instituto de Biologia, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, C. P. 6109, CEP 13083-970, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil, e-mail: [email protected] Received February 3, 2005 – Accepted August 22, 2005 – Distributed November 1, 2006 (With 1 figure) ABSTRACT Aspects of feeding, such as food capture and ingestion, as well as mobility of the polychaetes Eurythoe complanata, Marphysa formosa and Diopatra aciculata, from São Sebastião Channel (São Sebastião, state of São Paulo) were observed in laboratory conditions. Eurythoe complanata, a carnivorous species, fed exclusively on pieces of fish with the aid of strong muscular retractable lips, and detected the presence of food by chemical stimuli. Diopatra aciculata, an omnivorous species, captured and ingested different kinds of food with the aid of its jaws, generating a flow of water through its tube by which it detects the presence of food and oxygenates its gills. Marphysa formosa also used its jaws to bite and lacerate food. These species showed greater or lesser degrees of intolerance to light. Keywords: foraging, mobility, Aciculata, Polychaeta, Annelida. RESUMO Forrageamento e mobilidade em Polychaeta Alguns aspectos da atividade alimentar, tais como a captura e ingestão de alimento, bem como a mobilidade dos poliquetas Eurythoe complanata, Marphysa formosa e Diopatra aciculata, procedentes do Canal de São Sebastião (São Sebastião, SP), foram observados em laboratório.
    [Show full text]
  • Benthic Habitats of the Delaware
    BENTHICHABITATSOF THEDELAWAREBAY BenthicHabitatsoftheDelawareBay BenthicHabitatsofDelawareBay MarkG.Anderson,JosephA.M.Smith,andBartholomewD.Wilson INTRODUCTION ThissectiondescribesandmapsthemajorphysicalhabitatsoftheDelawareBayseafloor.Weused informationonbenthicorganisms,theirdistributionandtheirrelationshipstophysicalfeatures,to delimitadistinctsetofenvironmentsrepresentingthevarietyofbenthichabitatsintheBay.As individualspeciesareadaptedtovariationsindepth,sedimentsize,seabedtopographyandsalinity,we examinedthesefactorsinrelationshiptotheorganismcompositionandclassifiedthemintobasictypes toillustratethediversityofconditionsexistingontheseafloor.Wehopethatthisbenthichabitatmapof theDelawareBay,basedonpreviouslycollecteddata,willprovideabetterunderstandingofthe abundanceanddistributionofseafloorhabitattypes. Benthicorganismsarethosethatinhabittheseafloor;fromtheGreekwordbenthos,meaning“depths ofthesea.”Basedonajustasmallsample(246samples),theseafloorhabitatsoftheDelawareBay containover300speciesin8phylaincluding: 106speciesofarthropods(crabs,lobsters,shrimp,barnacles) 75speciesofmollusks(clams,scallops,squid,limpets,seaslugs,snails) 130speciesofannelids(seaworms) 8speciesofechinoderms(seastars,seaurchins,seacucumbers,sanddollars) 5speciesofcnidarians(corals,anemones,jellyfish) 4speciesofchordates(seasquirts) 1speciesofporiferans(sponges) 6speciesofnemerteans(ribbonworms) Thedistributionsandlifehistoriesofbenthicorganismsaretiedtotheirphysicalenvironment.Filter feederstendtodominateonshallowsandybottomswhiledepositfeeders,maydominateinfine
    [Show full text]
  • Tube-Forming Polychaetes Enhance Invertebrate Diversity and Abundance in Sandy Sediments of Mozambique, Africa
    African Journal of Marine Science 2011, 33(2): 327–332 Copyright © NISC (Pty) Ltd Printed in South Africa — All rights reserved AFRICAN JOURNAL OF MARINE SCIENCE ISSN 1814–232X EISSN 1814–2338 doi: 10.2989/1814232X.2011.600433 Short Communication Tube-forming polychaetes enhance invertebrate diversity and abundance in sandy sediments of Mozambique, Africa MS Thomsen1,2*, MF Muth3 and KJ McGlathery3 1 Marine Department, National Environmental Research Institute, University of Aarhus, PO Box 4000, Roskilde, Denmark 2 School of Plant Biology, University of Western Australia, Crawley 6009 WA, Australia 3 Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia, 291 McCormick Rd, Clark Hall, Charlottesville, VA 22904, USA * Corresponding author, e-mail: [email protected] Manuscript received March 2011; accepted May 2011 In marine soft-bottom systems, polychaetes can increase habitat complexity by constructing rigid tubes (e.g. several onuphid species) that contrast with surrounding topographically flat sediments. These structures can provide predation refuges and increase larval settlement and thereby increase the richness and abundance of fauna. We collected invertebrate samples from an intertidal flat with low onuphid tube density (2.7 m–2) in Mozambique and document that more organisms (70 times higher mollusc abundances) and more species (15 times more mollusc species) were found associated with solitary tubes of an onuphid polychaete compared with surrounding sand habitats. These results are in agreement with tube versus sand comparisons from soft-bottom systems in the North Atlantic where polychaete tube densities are often much higher. Keywords: habitat formation, onuphid polychaete, species richness, western Indian Ocean Introduction Species that form or modify habitat, often referred to as (Thomsen et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Initial Survey of Plum Island's Marine Habitats
    Initial Survey of Plum Island’s Marine Habitats New York Natural Heritage Program Initial Survey of Plum Island’s Marine Habitats Emily S. Runnells Matthew D. Schlesinger Gregory J. Edinger New York Natural Heritage Program and Steven C. Resler Dan Marelli InnerSpace Scientific Diving A report to Save the Sound April 2020 Please cite this report as follows: New York Natural Heritage Program and InnerSpace Scientific Diving. 2020. Initial survey of Plum Island’s marine habitats. Report to Save the Sound. Available from New York Natural Heritage Program, Albany, NY. Available at www.nynhp.org/plumisland. Cover photos (left to right, top to bottom): Bryozoans and sponges; lion’s mane jellyfish; flat-clawed hermit crab; diver recording information from inside quadrat; bryozoans, sponges and northern star corals. All photos herein by the authors. Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 1 Methods ............................................................................................................................................................... 1 Results .................................................................................................................................................................. 6 Discussion and Next Steps ............................................................................................................................... 9 Acknowledgments...........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Key to the Common Shallow-Water Brittle Stars (Echinodermata: Ophiuroidea) of the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea
    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228496999 Key to the common shallow-water brittle stars (Echinodermata: Ophiuroidea) of the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea Article · January 2007 CITATIONS READS 10 702 1 author: Christopher Pomory University of West Florida 34 PUBLICATIONS 303 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE All content following this page was uploaded by Christopher Pomory on 21 May 2014. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately. 1 Key to the common shallow-water brittle stars (Echinodermata: Ophiuroidea) of the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea CHRISTOPHER M. POMORY 2007 Department of Biology, University of West Florida, 11000 University Parkway, Pensacola, FL 32514, USA. [email protected] ABSTRACT A key is given for 85 species of ophiuroids from the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea covering a depth range from the intertidal down to 30 m. Figures highlighting important anatomical features associated with couplets in the key are provided. 2 INTRODUCTION The Caribbean region is one of the major coral reef zoogeographic provinces and a region of intensive human use of marine resources for tourism and fisheries (Aide and Grau, 2004). With the world-wide decline of coral reefs, and deterioration of shallow-water marine habitats in general, ecological and biodiversity studies have become more important than ever before (Bellwood et al., 2004). Ecological and biodiversity studies require identification of collected specimens, often by biologists not specializing in taxonomy, and therefore identification guides easily accessible to a diversity of biologists are necessary.
    [Show full text]
  • Two New Brittle Star Species of the Genus Ophiothrix
    Caribbean Journal of Science, Vol. 41, No. 3, 583-599, 2005 Copyright 2005 College of Arts and Sciences University of Puerto Rico, Mayagu¨ez Two New Brittle Star Species of the Genus Ophiothrix (Echinodermata: Ophiuroidea: Ophiotrichidae) from Coral Reefs in the Southern Caribbean Sea, with Notes on Their Biology GORDON HENDLER Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, 900 Exposition Boulevard, Los Angeles, California 90007, U.S.A. [email protected] ABSTRACT.—Two new species, Ophiothrix stri and Ophiothrix cimar, inhabit shallow reef-platforms and slopes in the Southern Caribbean, and occur together at localities in Costa Rica and Panama, nearly to Colombia. What appears to be an undescribed species resembling O. cimar has been reported from eastern Venezuela. In recent years, reefs where the species were previously observed have deteriorated because of environmental degradation. As a consequence, populations of the new species may have been reduced or eradicated. The new species have previously been mistaken for O. angulata, O. brachyactis, and O. lineata. Ophiothrix lineata, O. stri, and O. cimar have in common a suite of morphological features pointing to their systematic affinity, and a similar pigmentation pattern consisting of a thin, dark, medial arm stripe flanked by two pale stripes. Ophiothrix lineata is similar to Indo-Pacific members of the subgenus Placophiothrix and closely resembles Ophiothrix stri. The latter is extremely similar to O. synoecina, from Colombia, and both can live in association with the rock-boring echinoid Echinometra lucunter. Although O. synoecina is a protandric hermaphrodite that reportedly broods its young externally, the new species are gonochoric and do not brood.
    [Show full text]
  • Benthic Macroinvertebrate Sampling
    Benthic Macroinvertebrate Sampling Norton Basin, Little Bay, Grass Hassock Channel, and the Raunt Submitted to: The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Submitted by: Barry A. Vittor & Associates, Inc. Kingston, NY February 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................1 2.0 STUDY AREA......................................................................................................3 2.1 Norton Basin........................................................................................................ 3 2.2 Little Bay ............................................................................................................. 3 2.3 Reference Areas.................................................................................................... 3 2.3.1 The Raunt .................................................................................................... 3 2.3.2 Grass Hassock Channel ............................................................................... 4 3.0 METHODS..........................................................................................................4 3.1 Benthic Grab Sampling......................................................................................... 4 4.0 RESULTS.............................................................................................................7 4.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrates................................................................................
    [Show full text]