Burgess Thesis 2008
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DEVELOPMENT OF INVERTEBRATE ASSEMBLAGES ON ARTIFICIAL REEF CONES OFF SOUTH CAROLINA: COMPARISON TO AN ADJACENT HARD-BOTTOM HABITAT A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree MASTER OF SCIENCE in ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES by DANY E. BURGESS MAY 2008 at THE GRADUATE SCHOOL AT THE COLLEGE OF CHARLESTON Approved by: Dr. Elizabeth Wenner, Thesis Advisor Dr. Jeff Hyland Dr. Rachael King Mr. Robert Martore Dr. Amy T. McCandless, Dean of Graduate Studies ACKNOWLEGDEMENTS First and foremost, I would like to thank my committee members, Elizabeth Wenner (advisor), Rachael King, Jeff Hyland, and Bob Martore for their time, guidance, and patience throughout the course of this project. Special thanks to Bob Martore and the Artificial Reef Program for providing financial support for as long as I needed it; to the staff of the SERTC lab for generously sharing their workspace and supplies; to Jessica Boynton for GIS assistance; and to Mike Arendt and Stephen Blackmore for database management and moral support. In addition, I would like to thank the talented scientists and fellow graduate students who dedicated many uncompensated hours to helping me collect and identify thousands of critters: David Knott, Susan DeVictor, Dale Calder, Dave Pawson, Richard Heard, Joe Cowan, Nadia Meyers, Ian Moody, Daryl Stubbs, Bryan Frasier, Chris Bradshaw, and especially Rachael King. Thanks also to the crews of the R/V Palmetto and the R/V Silver Crescent for providing field transportation, to the MARMAP program for the use of their electronic balance, and to the infinitely helpful and accommodating faculty and staff of the MES program. Finally, I would like to dedicate the completion of this thesis to my family, particularly my parents, David and Kathy Burgess, who have always believed that I could be whatever I wanted; to my sister, who never stopped speaking to me even when I truly deserved it; also to my amazing grandparents, Cynthia and Joseph Miller, who have been dragged to more ceremonies and backyard tea parties than they probably care to count, and always kept smiling. Their support over the years, both emotional and financial, has kept me on the path to achieving my dreams. Their lessons – mainly to respect and care for the environment and all its creatures – had a hand in shaping those dreams. I love you guys. Thank you all so much for sharing this experience with me. I would not have been able to do it without you. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................... iv LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................. vi ABSTRACT.............................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................2 Objectives...................................................................................................10 MATERIALS AND METHODS...........................................................................12 Study Sites ..................................................................................................12 Preliminary Site Visit.................................................................................14 Field Sampling...........................................................................................14 Laboratory Processing of Scraped Samples..............................................15 Analysis of Digital Photographs and Archived Video Data ......................17 Statistical Analyses – Univariate Methods ................................................18 Statistical Analyses – Multivariate Methods..............................................20 RESULTS ..............................................................................................................22 Description of Study Sites ..........................................................................22 Species Number, Species Richness, Abundance, and Biomass..................23 Diversity Indices ........................................................................................24 Species Composition – Artificial Reefs......................................................24 Species Composition – Natural Reef..........................................................26 Similarity Indices .......................................................................................27 DISCUSSION........................................................................................................31 Community Composition............................................................................31 Community Indices.....................................................................................34 Age of Artificial Reefs ................................................................................36 Influence of Other Factors.........................................................................39 Implications for Fisheries Management ....................................................40 Future Directions.......................................................................................42 CONCLUSIONS....................................................................................................44 LITERATURE CITED ..........................................................................................46 FIGURES...............................................................................................................55 TABLES ................................................................................................................81 APPENDICES .......................................................................................................96 iii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 1.) Map of study locations, showing approximate position of artificial and natural reefs to the Charleston peninsula.....................................56 2.) Configuration of artificial and natural reefs .....................................................57 3.) Dimensions of the Swiss Cone .........................................................................58 4.) Digital photograph of a preserved scrape sample collected from Julian’s Ledge station A during August 2005...................................................59 5.) Digital photographs of ossicles, viewed with a compound microscope, and corresponding sea cucumber specimens............................................................60 6.) Digital photographs of scrape samples collected from Julian’s Ledge stations during 2005...............................................................................61 7.) Digital photographs of scrape samples collected from Area 53 during 2005 .........................................................................................62 8.) Digital photographs of scrape samples collected from Area 51 during 2005 .........................................................................................63 9 a-b.) a.) Mean number of species (s) per 15 cm² quadrat for each reef site, and b.) total number of species in all scrape samples for each reef site............................................................................64 10.) Median species richness (SR) per 15 cm² quadrat for Area 53, Area 51, and Julian’s Ledge.............................................................65 11 a-b.) a.) Median number of individuals (n) per 15 cm² quadrat for each reef site, and b.) total number of individuals in all scrape samples for each reef site........................................................66 12.) Mean biomass per 15 cm² quadrat for Area 53, Area 51, and Julian’s Ledge .........................................................................................67 13 a-b.) Median values of a.) diversity (H´) and b.) evenness (J´) per 15 cm² quadrat for Area 53, Area 51, and Julian’s Ledge..................68 14.) Percent contribution of major taxa (≥1%) to the total abundance of Area 53 ....................................................................................69 iv 15.) Percent contribution of major enumerated taxa (≥1%) to the total abundance of Area 51 ....................................................................................70 16.) Percent contribution of major enumerated taxa (≥1%) to the total abundance of Julian’s Ledge............................................................................71 17.) Percent contribution of major sessile taxa to the total number of sessile species from Area 53 ......................................72 18.) Percent contribution of major sessile taxa to the total number of sessile species from Area 51 ......................................73 19.) Percent contribution of major sessile taxa to the total number of sessile species from Julian’s Ledge...............................................74 20 a-b.) Dorsal views of a.) female and b.) male specimens of Limnotheres nasutus, collected from the northeast and northwest stations of Area 53...................................................................75 21.) Normal Canberra Metric cluster dendrogram (replicates pooled by sum of species abundance)...........................................76 22.) Inverse Canberra Metric cluster dendrogram (replicates pooled by sum of species abundance).............................................................77 23.) Normal Jaccard similarity dendrogram (replicates pooled by presence/absence).........................................................78