Correlations between chaetodontid fishes and coral communities of the Gulf of Aqaba (Red Sea)

Bouchon‐Navaro, Yolande; Bouchon, Claude

doi:10.1007/978-94-009-2325-6_3

Cited by 37 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Predictable assemblages occurred within each zone across all locations, with few species found across all four zones. Conspicuous zonation of butterflyfishes has also been reported from Aqaba, Red Sea (Bouchon-Navaro & Bouchon, 1989) and Moorea, French Polynesia (Bouchon-Navaro, 1981;Berumen & Pratchett, 2006b). Distinct zonation of butterflyfishes may be (Sale, 1980;Williams, 1980;Doherty, 1983), though small-scale variations (e.g.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Interspecific variation in distributions and diets of coral reef butterflyfishes (Teleostei: Chaetodontidae)

Pratchett

Berumen

2008

Journal of Fish Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined within-reef distributions for 19 species of butterflyfishes (Chaetodontidae) at Lizard Island, northern Great Barrier Reef, Australia, and compared spatial patterns of abundance among species with contrasting diets. Spatial variation in abundance of butterflyfishes was most prominent among physiognomic reef zones mainly due to significant zonation of eight species, including four obligate hard-coral feeders (Chaetodon trifascialis, Chaetodon baronessa, Chaetodon plebeius and Chaetodon lunulatus) and four generalist species (Chaetodon auriga, Chaetodon citrinellus, Chaetodon kleinii and Chaetodon rafflesi). Distributions of obligate hard-coral feeders were closely associated with spatial variation in percentage cover of scleractinian corals, but no more restricted compared with facultative hard-coral feeders or non-coral feeders. Species with highest dietary specialization (C. trifascialis and C. baronessa), however, exhibited the most pronounced zonation patterns and were restricted to habitats with greatest abundance of their preferred prey. While there are conspicuous links between dietary specialization v. spatial patterns in abundance of butterflyfishes, it remains unclear whether dietary specialization is the cause or consequence of more restricted distributions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Interspecific variation in distributions and diets of coral reef butterflyfishes (Teleostei: Chaetodontidae)

Pratchett

Berumen

2008

Journal of Fish Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several studies have examined the relationship between coral cover and the abundance of corallivores, primarily chaetodontids (Bell and Galzin 1984;Bell et al 1985;Bouchon-Navaro and Bouchon 1989;Harmelin-Vivien 1989;Zekeria and Videler 2000;Bozec et al 2005). The strength of the correlation varies, but positive relationships appear to be strongest when coral cover is low (Bell et al 1985).…”

Section: Influence Of Corals On Corallivore Abundance and Conditionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diversity and functional importance of coral‐feeding fishes on tropical coral reefs

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction 287How widespread is corallivory? 288What corals do corallivores eat? 288Facultative and obligate corallivory 288Diet and feeding preferences 292Spatial variation in dietary composition 296Impact of corallivores on the coral communities 297Influence of corals on corallivore abundance and condition 299Role of corallivory in coral reef ecosystems 301 AbstractFishes that feed from live corals (corallivores) are a conspicuous component of healthy coral reef environments. However, knowledge of the occurrence and ecological significance of this feeding mode is fragmentary. Historically, very few fish were considered capable of feeding from live coral, and those few that did were considered ecologically insignificant. More recently, the role of corallivores has been re-evaluated; published records document 128 corallivorous fish species from 11 different families, with 69 of these belonging to the family Chaetodontidae. Other families, including the Labridae, Tetraodontidae, Balistidae, Monacanthidae, Pomacentridae and Scaridae, all have between seven and ten coral-feeding species. Onethird of coral-feeding fishes feed almost exclusively on corals, with more than 80% of their diet based on coral. Corallivorous fish show distinct prey preferences and consume only a small subset of available corals, usually the genera Acropora, Pocillopora and Porites. This selective predation by corallivores can limit abundance and distribution of preferred corals. Chronic predation by corallivores may also exacerbate effects of coral disturbance (e.g. climate-induced coral bleaching), impeding reef recovery and causing further coral loss. Conversely, the cover of preferred corals can be a primary determinant of corallivore abundance and physiological condition. Owing to this close association, obligate corallivores invariably decline in response to loss of coral cover. Increased knowledge of the number of corallivores and their diets suggest that this feeding mode is more important to coral reef food webs than traditionally thought.

show abstract

“…Habitat structure is also likely to mediate key events operating at the scale of individuals by providing shelter from predation (Hixon and Beets 1993) and modifying competitive interactions and survivorship (Jones 1988b). However, empirical studies have been divided about whether fish are strongly (e.g., Bell and Galzin 1984, Bell et al 1985, Findley and Findley 1985, Bouchon-Navaro and Bouchon 1989, Hart et al 1996 or weakly (e.g., Roberts et al 1988, Fowler 1990, Booth and Beretta 1994, Cox 1994, Green 1996) associated with habitat variables. Unfortunately many of these studies are difficult to compare and evaluate, due to confounding factors and the different ranges of habitat conditions considered (Jones and Syms 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disturbance, Habitat Structure, and the Dynamics of a Coral-Reef Fish Community

Syms

Jones

2000

Ecology

233

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coral reef fishes occupy habitats that are patchy and subject to frequent natural disturbances. Although different types of disturbance are likely to generate different community responses, the relationship between different disturbance agents and their effects on reef fish communities has not been examined experimentally. We studied a set of natural patch reefs, dominated by a diverse array of soft and hard coral cover, at Lizard Island on the Great Barrier Reef (northeastern Australia). The fish assemblages on the reefs were sampled over 4 mo to establish baseline values and then experimentally disturbed. Two types of disturbance were carried out in a factorial combination: pulsed mortality by removing all fish from reefs and pulsed habitat disturbance. Habitat disturbance was applied at two levels: Level 1 consisted only of damaging all live hard corals with a hammer; Level 2 consisted of damaging all live hard corals, and in addition, using a hammer to reduce the height and complexity of the reef matrix. We then monitored the experiment for a further 19 mo, including two recruitment seasons. Unmanipulated control assemblages persisted through time, and despite large changes in total abundance, species composition remained consistent relative to disturbed treatments. Assemblages disturbed by fish removal were resilient, with recolonization from both immigration and larval settlement effectively removing differences between removal treatments and controls 3 mo after manipulation. Habitat disturbance alone generated differences between experimental and control assemblages, which persisted for the duration of the experiment. The more extreme level of habitat disturbance generated more extreme changes in fish assemblages when no pulsed mortality occurred. Habitat disturbance in combination with pulsed mortality generated similar community responses as the habitat disturbance treatment alone. However, fish removal had the effect of eliminating the difference between fish assemblages on reefs subjected to different levels of habitat disturbance. Community response to habitat disturbance was driven by species‐specific patterns of reduced abundance of species associated with live coral in combination with increased numbers of those associated with rubble. Declines in the abundance of coral associates on damaged reefs were abrupt, with no recovery observed for the duration of the experiment. In contrast, increases in the abundance of rubble associates were more ephemeral, in that initial high levels of recruitment and immigration were followed by a high rate of loss. Habitat disturbance also generated reefs that typically supported lower fish abundance, fewer species, and increased evenness relative to controls. Our results support a model of patch‐reef fish assemblages organized by a combination of deterministic factors (such as habitat structure) and stochastic processes (such as recruitment). These disparate mechanisms operate in concert to generate reasonably consistent patterns of community structure. Habitat struc...

show abstract

Correlations between chaetodontid fishes and coral communities of the Gulf of Aqaba (Red Sea)

Cited by 37 publications

References 17 publications

Interspecific variation in distributions and diets of coral reef butterflyfishes (Teleostei: Chaetodontidae)

Interspecific variation in distributions and diets of coral reef butterflyfishes (Teleostei: Chaetodontidae)

Diversity and functional importance of coral‐feeding fishes on tropical coral reefs

Disturbance, Habitat Structure, and the Dynamics of a Coral-Reef Fish Community

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About