Spatio-temporal variability of micro- and meiobenthic communities in a White Sea intertidal sandflat

Azovsky, Andrey I.; Chertoprood, E. S.; Saburova, Maria; Polikarpov, Igor

doi:10.1016/j.ecss.2004.03.005

Cited by 46 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For some of the dinophytes too, correlations were found between abundance and the organic matter content (r s > 0.5, P < 0.05). In agreement with the distribution patterns found in the present study, Azovsky et al (2004) noticed that small dinoflagellates (of the genus Gymnodinium) predominate in coarse, well-sorted sand, whereas relatively large dinoflagellates, such as Toluga britannica, were the main dominants in fine silty sands. Further possible mechanisms influencing the MPB distribution include, for example, spatial variations in nutrient availability, grazing (e.g.…”

supporting

confidence: 79%

Microphytobenthic dynamics in a Wadden Sea intertidal flat – Part II: Seasonal and spatial variability of non-diatom community components in relation to abiotic parameters

Scholz

Liebezeit

2012

European Journal of Phycology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The microphytobenthos colonizing the intertidal flats forms an important component of the Wadden Sea. Ten sampling points along a 1-km transect were studied in a fringe area of the Soltho¨rn tidal flat, southern North Sea, in order to determine seasonal differences in the microphytobenthos. An accompanying paper deals with the major component of the flora, the diatoms; here we, focus on the minor taxonomic groups. From May 2008 to May 2009 surface sediments were collected during low tide. Variation of environmental factors as well as microphytobenthic density (abundance and chlorophyll a) were monitored. The area investigated was a mixed-sediment mudflat, with a gradient from coarse to fine. Highest biomass was obtained in summer 2008 with 215.9 AE 12.6 mg chlorophyll a m -2 . In late autumn the chlorophyll a concentration decreased continuously at all investigated stations. Lowest values were detected in December 2008. Species abundances varied considerably both along the transect and seasonally, depending on species-specific requirements as well as hydrodynamic conditions (tidal currents). Higher densities of benthic pro-and eukaryotic microalgae were observed in sites characterized by fine sediments. Apart from the diatoms, the most abundant microphytobenthic group was the cyanophytes. Coccoid cyanophytes, mainly Merismopedia sp., were most abundant during summer, with cell numbers up to 5.72 Â 10 6 cells cm À2, while diatoms dominated in winter, spring and autumn. Filamentous cyanophytes, particularly Microcoleus chthonoplastes, were most abundant during autumn, while coccoid chlorophytes (spring: Chlorococcum submarinum, Crucigenia tetrapedia, Tetraselmis suecica), euglenophytes (summer: Euglena obtusa), dinophytes (autumn: Amphidinium operculatum, A. herdmanii) and cryptophytes (autumn: Hillea marina, Hemiselmis virescens) contributed to the microphytobenthos during warmer seasons. The statistical analysis confirmed that the composition of the microphytobenthos was related to sediment features and to characteristics of particular seasons.

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 79%

Microphytobenthic dynamics in a Wadden Sea intertidal flat – Part II: Seasonal and spatial variability of non-diatom community components in relation to abiotic parameters

Scholz

Liebezeit

2012

European Journal of Phycology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, a positive correlation between β diversity and scale has been found for birds and mammals (Koleff & Gaston 2002, Melo et al 2009), Mediterranean macrofauna (Munari & Mistri 2008), deep-sea nematodes (Danovaro et al 2009), and cladoceran zooplankton (Declerck et al 2011). Intertidal harpacticoids present a noticeable increase in β diversity when the spatial scale in creases from centimeters to tens of meters (Azovsky et al 2004, Rose & Seifried 2006. For Antarctic macro fauna, habitat heterogeneity has a strong in fluence on β diversity at a wide range of scales up to 290 km, while the effects of productivity are low and are significant only at the largest scales (Thrush et al 2010).…”

Section: Diversity Measures: Methodological Aspectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Broad-scale patterns in local diversity of marine benthic harpacticoid copepods (Crustacea)

Azovsky¹,

Garlitska²,

Chertoprud³

2012

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The α and β diversity of benthic harpacticoids were estimated using 103 published datasets from all over the world, with depths ranging from the intertidal zone to 5600 m. α diversity (expected number of species per 100 individuals) was correlated with organic matter flux to the bottom, and this effect was depth-dependent, with the correlation being negative from the shallowest waters up to 33 m and positive in deeper waters. α diversity was also positively correlated with depth itself and depended on the sediment properties and duration of study, but showed no latitudinal trend. β diversity (estimated as the slope of the species accumulation curve) was negatively correlated with latitude and positively correlated with the spatial extent and depth range of sampling. The effect of latitude and extent was mainly pronounced for the intertidal zone, whereas the depth range was the most significant factor in the deep waters. Additionally, β diversity was higher on sands and mixed sediments than on silt or mud. Latitude explained 45% of the β diversity variation in the littoral zone, 18% in the upper sublittoral, and less than 5% in deeper zones. Thus, α and β diversity act as independent and spatially uncorrelated components of overall regional diversity, driven by different mechanisms. Variations in β diversity presumably reflect spatial heterogeneity and form the latitudinal gradient in the shallowest waters. Deeper, trophic conditions play the leading role, and thus α diversity contributes the major proportion of the total diversity variance there and is responsible for the bathymetric gradient.KEY WORDS: Harpacticoida · α diversity · β diversity · Latitude · Depth · Productivity Resale or republication not permitted without written consent of the publisherMar Ecol Prog Ser 460: [63][64][65][66][67][68][69][70][71][72][73][74][75][76][77] 2012 the equator has been observed for some groups, e.g. foraminiferans (Culver & Buzas 2000) or marine macrobenthos (Rex et al. 1993, Gray 2002. Nevertheless, comprehensive meta-analysis does not show any consistent differences between hemispheres, despite some variations among the oceans (Hillebrand 2004). The strength of the gradient varies systematically with body mass across organism groups, generally decreasing or even vanishing for the smallest organisms (Hillebrand & Azovsky 2001, Hillebrand 2004. For macrofauna, latitudinal patterns are not identical, however. Some of regional studies have failed to detect this pattern (e.g. peaks in diversity at midlatitude in both Atlantic and Pacific gastropods, Roy et al. 1998); or even showed regionally opposite trends (Renaud et al. 2009 and references therein). It is unclear whether these differences are caused by regional peculiarities or by the restricted geographical range of stations sampled (Renaud et al. 2009). Furthermore, regional diversity shows consistently stronger and steeper latitudinal gradients than local (α) diversity (Clarke & Lidgard 2000, Hillebrand 2004, thus posing the question of systematic varia...

show abstract

“…Apparently, this was the only scale at which a pattern common to most organisms emerged. Patterns became idiosyncratic Azovsky et al (2004) both for modular and individual organisms when moving above the scale of meters (Farnsworth & Ellison 1996, Hyder et al 1998, Hughes et al 1999, Hull 1999, Jenkins et al 2001, Olabarria & Chapman 2001). Finally, very few studies examined simultaneously spatial and temporal variation, so that tests of space × time interactions are uncommon in the literature (Kennelly & Underwood 1992, Åberg & Pavia 1997, Underwood & Chapman 1998b, Menconi et al 1999, Jenkins et al 2000, Chapman 2002, Ysebaert & Herman 2002, De Biasi et al 2003.…”

Section: Review Of the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Patterns of distribution of marine assemblages from rocky shores: evidence of relevant scales of variation

Fraschetti¹,

Terlizzi²,

Benedetti‐Cecchi³

2005

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

247

190

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasing evidence indicates that spatial and temporal pattern in ecological systems are not independent from the scale of measurement. In this study we used a hierarchical sampling design to examine spatial pattern in assemblages of algae and invertebrates in midshore and lowshore habitats of rocky coasts in the Mediterranean Sea, increasing the range of scales usually covered by this type of study in marine habitats. To put our results in a broader context, we also conducted a review of the literature targeting studies that explicitly investigated spatial patterns with hierarchical designs. We addressed two main questions: 1- how does small-scale variability compare to large-scale patterns of variation? 2- is there any pattern of variability that can be generalized across species and habitats? The review of the literature indicated that hierarchical analyses of spatial pattern have been limited to a narrow range of habitats and taxa and that very few studies have addressed regional scales of variation (1000s of km). The available data, however, did identify a general pattern: variability was larger at small spatial scales (meters) in almost all habitats, whereas variation over larger spatial scales (10s to 100s of km) depended on the specific habitat and taxa examined. In our case study, we obtained measures of spatial variability through the use of two alternative methods: hierarchical nested design and independent estimate of spatial variance between pairs of quadrats. Both approaches provided further support to the patterns displayed by the analysis of the literature. Most response variables exhibited large variation over small spatial scales, while the significance of mid- to large-scale variability differed between midshore and lowshore habitats and among taxa. Though a proper understanding of large-scale patterns will require additional comparisons across wide geographical areas, small-scale variability emerges as a general property of benthic assemblages in marine coastal habitats. We suggest that this pattern is common to a wide range of natural systems where assemblages are influenced by complex sets of physical and biological processes like those operating in the marine environment

show abstract

Spatio-temporal variability of micro- and meiobenthic communities in a White Sea intertidal sandflat

Cited by 46 publications

References 25 publications

Microphytobenthic dynamics in a Wadden Sea intertidal flat – Part II: Seasonal and spatial variability of non-diatom community components in relation to abiotic parameters

Microphytobenthic dynamics in a Wadden Sea intertidal flat – Part II: Seasonal and spatial variability of non-diatom community components in relation to abiotic parameters

Broad-scale patterns in local diversity of marine benthic harpacticoid copepods (Crustacea)

Patterns of distribution of marine assemblages from rocky shores: evidence of relevant scales of variation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About