EFFECTS OF SIMULATED CYANOBACTERIA BLOOMS AND SEDIMENT RESUSPENSION ON SEVERAL SPONGE SPECIES FROM FLORIDA BAY By DANIELLE PULS A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2015 © 2015 Danielle Puls To Robert and Lisa Puls ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I thank Dr. Donald Behringer for his diligent guidance and support. I thank Dr. Edward Phlips for his insight as a member of my graduate committee. I thank my lab mates, especially Jason Spadaro and Nathan Berkebile, for their unending support and assistance. Finally, I thank my mother, father, brother, and sister for their love and patience. 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...............................................................................................................4 LIST OF TABLES ...........................................................................................................................6 LIST OF FIGURES .........................................................................................................................8 ABSTRACT .....................................................................................................................................9 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................10 2 METHODS .............................................................................................................................18 Viscosity Stress Trials ............................................................................................................18 Sponge Collection ...........................................................................................................18 Experimental Setup .........................................................................................................18 Statistical Analysis ..........................................................................................................20 Sediment Stress Trials ............................................................................................................20 Sponge Collection ...........................................................................................................20 Experimental Setup .........................................................................................................21 Statistical Analysis ..........................................................................................................22 Internal Canal Architecture Analysis ......................................................................................22 Sponge Image Collection ................................................................................................22 Image Analysis ................................................................................................................23 Statistical Analysis ..........................................................................................................24 3 RESULTS ...............................................................................................................................26 Viscosity Stress Trials ............................................................................................................26 Sediment Stress Trials ............................................................................................................27 Internal Canal Architecture Analysis ......................................................................................27 Mean Canal Area .............................................................................................................27 Percent of Porous Area ....................................................................................................29 Number of Canals per Unit Area .....................................................................................29 4 DISCUSSION .........................................................................................................................44 LIST OF REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................53 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .........................................................................................................57 5 LIST OF TABLES Table page 3-1 Results of a one-way ANOVA testing for the effects of viscosity water treatment and time on pumping activity of Spheciospongia vesparium ...................................................31 3-2 Results from a Pearson’s Chi Square test performed on each time interval that Spheciospongia vesparium was exposed to xanthan gum compared to those exposed to seawater only .................................................................................................................31 3-3 Results of a one-way ANOVA testing for the effects of viscosity water treatment and time on pumping activity of Spongia barbara ...................................................................31 3-4 Results from a Pearson’s Chi Square test performed on each time interval that Spongia barbara was exposed to xanthan gum added compared to those exposed to seawater only .....................................................................................................................32 3-5 Results of a one-way ANOVA testing for the effects of viscosity water treatment and time on pumping activity of Hippospongia lachne............................................................32 3-6 Results from a Pearson’s Chi Square test performed on each time interval that Hippospongia lachne was exposed to xanthan gum compared to those exposed to seawater only .....................................................................................................................32 3-7 Results of two, one-way ANOVAs testing for the effects of sediment treatment and time on Spheciospongia vesparium ...................................................................................33 3-8 Results from a Pearson’s Chi Square test performed on each time interval that Speciospongia vesparium was exposed to the sediment treatment compared to those exposed to seawater only ...................................................................................................33 3-9 Result of two, one-way ANOVAs testing for the effects of sediment treatment and time on Tectitethya crypta .................................................................................................34 3-10 Results from a Pearson’s Chi Square test performed on each time interval that Tectitethya crypta was exposed to the sediment treatment compared to those exposed to seawater only .................................................................................................................34 3-11 Results of a one-way ANOVA testing for differences in mean canal area among S. vesparium, H. lachne, S. barbara, S. graminea, and T. crypta for vertical sponge sections ...............................................................................................................................34 3-12 Results from a Tukey’s post-hoc analysis of differences in mean canal area for vertical sponge sections .....................................................................................................35 6 3-13 Results from a one-way ANOVA testing for differences in canal area among S. vesparium, H. lachne, S. barbara, S. graminea, and T. crypta for the outermost slice from vertical sections .........................................................................................................35 3-14 Results from a Tukey’s post-hoc analysis of differences in canal area for the outermost slice from vertical sections................................................................................35 3-15 Results from a one-way ANOVA testing for differences in mean canal area among S. vesparium, H. lachne, S. barbara, S. graminea, and T. crypta for horizontal sponge sections ...............................................................................................................................35 3-16 Results from a Tukey’s post-hoc analysis of differences in mean canal area for horizontal sponge sections .................................................................................................35 3-17 Results from a one-way ANOVA testing the differences in the percent of porous area relative to total area of a vertical section among S. vesparium, H. lachne, S. barbara, S. graminea, and T. crypta .................................................................................................36 3-18 Results from a Tukey’s post-hoc analysis of differences in the percent of porous area relative to total area of a vertical section ...........................................................................36 3-19 Results from a one-way ANOVA testing the differences in the percent of porous area relative to total area of a horizontal section among S. vesparium, H. lachne, S. barbara, S. graminea, and T. crypta ..................................................................................36 3-20 Results from a Tukey’s post-hoc analysis of differences in the percent of porous area relative to total area of a horizontal section .......................................................................36 3-21 Results from a one-way ANOVA testing the differences in the mean number of canals per cm2 area for vertical sections