2013
DOI: 10.1017/s0025315413001069
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Benthic diversity and assemblage structure of a north Patagonian rocky shore: a monitoring legacy of the NaGISA project

Abstract: The rocky shore of Punta Este, Golfo Nuevo (Patagonia, Argentina), was sampled by means of the standardized NaGISA (CoML) protocol, that was aimed to generate biodiversity baseline data in six levels, from high intertidal to 10 m depth. Based on the generated data, we analysed the benthic assemblage structure, species richness, mean abundance and the distribution pattern of invertebrate functional groups, typifying species in each intertidal and subtidal level. The intertidal sampled is exposed to extreme phys… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
20
0
2

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
20
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The species of Uruguay, Argentina and Falkland Islands were determined based on WoRMS and Malacolog 4.1.1 databases, in addition to studies conducted in this region (Pastorino, , , , , , ; Forcelli, ; Pastorino & Penchaszadeh, ; Teso & Pastorino, ; Teso et al ., ; Rechimont et al ., ). The number of species considered in each area were 90 (Uruguay), 188 (Argentina) and 102 (Falkland Islands).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The species of Uruguay, Argentina and Falkland Islands were determined based on WoRMS and Malacolog 4.1.1 databases, in addition to studies conducted in this region (Pastorino, , , , , , ; Forcelli, ; Pastorino & Penchaszadeh, ; Teso & Pastorino, ; Teso et al ., ; Rechimont et al ., ). The number of species considered in each area were 90 (Uruguay), 188 (Argentina) and 102 (Falkland Islands).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…A recent review by Katsanevakis et al (2014) for the European seas was also used to cross check and augment our database.For the SW Atlantic Ocean, our main data sources were reviews organized by Lopes (MMA, 2009) for Brazilian coastal waters and byOrensanz et al (2002) for coastal and shelf areas off Argentina and Uruguay. In addition, we consulted the following studies: Genzano et al2006;Darling et al, 2008;Ignacio et al;2010;Irigoyen et al, 2011;Lages et al, 2011; Ferrapeira et al, 2011;Guadalupe Vázquez et al, 2012; Sant'Anna et al, 2012;Sylvester et al, 2013;Bonel et al;Rocha et al, 2013;Riul et al, 2013;Rechimont et al, 2013;Guinder et al, 2013;Schwindt et al, 2014; Freire el al., 2014; Moreira el al., 2014;Marques & Breves, 2014;Altvater & Coutinho, 2015;Ferreira et al, 2015;Carlos-Junior et al, 2015; Sant'Anna et al, 2015. We also searched WoRMS, GISD, National Exotic Marine and Estuarine Species Information System (http://invasions.si.edu/nemesis/index.jsp), the Exotics…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, there is no precise georeferencing in the RLS protocol. Using the protocol presented here where all the surface orientations are considered for the first time in the region, we could detect more than 90% of species estimated for the zone and more species than those recorded previously through extractive methods (Olivier et al, 1966;Bravo, 2013;Rechimont et al, 2013). The distinctive aspect of our study and likely the principal explanation of such disparity in species richness is that in addition to the horizontal surface, vertical, overhang and cavefloor surfaces were included in the sampling design.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 70%