The epibionts of Sargassum muticum in British waters

Withers, R.G.; Farnham, W. F.; Lewey, S. A.; Jephson, N. A.; Haythorn, J.M.; Gray, P. W. G.

doi:10.1007/bf00390650

Cited by 41 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In comparison with other studies, we found relatively few (n = 17) epibiont taxa on Sargassum muticum (80 taxa: Withers et al 1975; 115 taxa: Giver 1999; 82 taxa: Bjaerke & Fredriksen 2003). These studies might suggest that S. muticum is a positive addition to the local flora as it increases diversity of invertebrates through its structural complexity.…”

Section: Positive Interactions Between Non-native Speciescontrasting

confidence: 72%

“…The higher total abundance of epibionts on S. muticum attached to rock than to T. capax siphons (Fig. 3) is intuitively correct, as the rock substrate provides a relatively stable substrate for attachment whereas clam siphons are frequently retracted into the sediment; however, S. muticum individuals attached to T. capax siphons exhibited shorter, bushier morphologies with more lateral braches, potentially providing more surface area for colonization.In comparison with other studies, we found relatively few (n = 17) epibiont taxa on Sargassum muticum (80 taxa: Withers et al 1975; 115 taxa: Giver 1999; 82 taxa: Bjaerke & Fredriksen 2003). These studies might suggest that S. muticum is a positive addition to the local flora as it increases diversity of invertebrates through its structural complexity.…”

contrasting

confidence: 72%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Native clams facilitate invasive species in an eelgrass bed

White

Orr²

2011

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whether the non-native seaweed Sargassum muticum can displace or impact native eelgrass Zostera marina has been debated in the literature, based on differing substrate requirements of the 2 species. Field observations in Bamfield, British Columbia, Canada, revealed that the non-native S. muticum successfully inhabits an eelgrass bed through colonizing siphons of the native clam Tresus capax. Numerical or physical facilitation of S. muticum into the eelgrass bed by T. capax may be tempered by seaweed quality or condition. We used field sampling to investigate whether seaweed condition differs between 2 attachment substrates (clam siphon and rock) as a proxy for habitat quality. Attachment substrate promoted different morphologies of S. muticum; individuals attached to clam siphons expressed morphologies consistent with sheltered areas compared to individuals attached to rock, which expressed wave-exposed morphologies. Habitat association with the different morphologies supported differences in the epibiont communities colonizing S. muticum. Further, S. muticum subsequently facilitated incursion of the non-native tunicates Styela clava and Botrylloides violaceous into the eelgrass bed through habitat provisioning. By facilitating 2 additional invaders, S. muticum enhances the level of invasion in the eelgrass bed. This non-native seaweed has the potential to disrupt the persistence of eelgrass in this system. KEY WORDS: Sargassum muticum · Zostera marina · Non-native species · Facilitation · Tresus capax Resale or republication not permitted without written consent of the publisherMar Ecol Prog Ser 424: [87][88][89][90][91][92][93][94][95] 2011 Despite the ecological and environmental importance of eelgrass beds, their decline has been observed in many areas of the world, i.e. Florida Bay in North America (Fourqurean & Robblee 1999), Japan (Environment Agency of Japan 2000), the European Mediterranean (Marbà et al. 2005), and Australia (Walker et al. 2006). Over the last decade, 90 000 ha of eelgrass loss has been documented, although the actual area lost is certainly greater (Short & WyllieEcheverria 1996). Declines have been attributed to (1) disturbance of coastal and estuarine environments, including industrial, residential, and recreational development, where impacts are most notably manifested in the near-absence of eelgrasses in industrialized ports and areas of intense human coastal development (Short & Wyllie-Echeverria 1996, Orth et al. 2006, and (2) the incursion of non-native species (Orth et al. 2006, Martínez-Lüscher & Holmer 2010.We found the non-native seaweed Sargassum muticum (Yendo) Fensholt (Phaeophyceae: Fucales) colonizing an eelgrass bed at the head of Bamfield Inlet, Bamfield, British Columbia. A non-native seaweed from southeast Asia, Sargassum muticum was accidentally introduced to British Columbia around the 1940s with Japanese oysters Crassostrea gigas that were imported for aquaculture (Scagel 1956). Sargassum muticum is both a fouling species and an opportunist (Critchley...

show abstract

Section: Positive Interactions Between Non-native Speciescontrasting

confidence: 72%

contrasting

confidence: 72%

Native clams facilitate invasive species in an eelgrass bed

White

Orr²

2011

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, it can be considered primarily as an addition to the native macroalgal pool, providing additional habitat space and consequently facilitating epibiota abundances. This was also observed on other European coasts (Withers et al 1975;Viejo 1999;Wernberg et al 2004). Wernberg et al (2004) point out, however, that, in the absence of pre-invasion data, this conclusion warrants caution, as it is equally possible that the epibiota community of native algae undergoes radical change following the invasion of an exotic species.…”

Section: Consequences Of Sargassum Muticum Invasionmentioning

confidence: 77%

How an introduced seaweed can affect epibiota diversity in different coastal systems

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Invasions by non-indigenous species have the potential to alter the biodiversity of recipient systems. The magnitude of this effect often depends on the nature of the invaded communities and the ecology of the invader. We investigated the impacts of the Japanese seaweed Sargassum muticum (Phaeophyceae, Fucales) on biodiversity in a rocky and sedimentary environment on two islands in the North Sea. In each case, we compared the epibiota of non-indigenous S. muticum with epibiota communities on taxonomically related and structurally similar native seaweed hosts. Total and average species richness on S. muticum were similar on the rocky shore (60 species and 22±6 species, respectively) and the sandy shore (64 species and 20±3 species, respectively). However, community structure and species composition differed significantly between the environments. On the rocky shore, another native fucoid seaweed, Halidrys siliquosa, supported an epibiota community very similar to that of the invader. On the sandy shore, the only other abundant native habitat-providing algal species was Fucus vesiculosus. This species supported a different and less diverse assemblage of associated taxa. We conclude that S. muticum enhances epibiota diversity in the sedimentary environment, probably by increasing the substratum availability and habitat heterogeneity. In contrast, it has negligible impacts on epibiota diversity in the rocky shore environment, where it does not represent a fundamentally new habitat component. We conclude that even within the same region, the consequences of non-indigenous species on biodiversity cannot be generalised but depend on the composition and structural complexity of the species in the recipient community.

show abstract

“…They suggested that burial initiates some self-protective response from the plant. To date, 18 species belonging to the genus Sargassum, including S. muticum (Withers et al 1975, Gorham & Lewey 1984, are known to produce tannins and other antibiotic substances (Conover & Sieburth 1964, Stiger et al 2004). These substances inhibit microflora and epibionts (Sieburth & Conover 1965, Ryland 1974) and so could conceivably inhibit microbial degradation of the below-ground Sargassum biomass when parts of the plants become buried in the Zostera bed, providing the self-protective response that Morrell & Farnham (1982) suggested.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Zostera marina seagrass beds enhance the attachment of the invasive alga Sargassum muticum in soft sediments

Tweedley¹,

Jackson²,

Attrill³

2008

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The first reports of Sargassum muticum occurring in British waters coincided with a warning that this invasive alga may replace seagrass beds, particularly those of Zostera marina. Initial fears were allayed when subsequent research suggested that both species required different attachment substrata, and, therefore, S. muticum would be unable to replace Zostera beds on soft sediments. Here, however, we present evidence supporting the original warning: contrary to previous research we found that S. muticum is able to successfully colonise soft sediments and, furthermore, that the presence of Z. marina may aid attachment. The majority of S. muticum plants within Zostera beds studied at Salcombe, SW England, were found attached within the soft sediment; outside of the seagrass bed, however, this occurred in greatly reduced numbers. Therefore, we suggest that the presence of Z. marina may actually enhance S. muticum colonization of soft sediments, trapping drifting fragments and allowing viable algae to settle on the seagrass matrix in an otherwise unfavorable environment. The consequences for the invasion of seagrass beds by S. muticum may therefore be more severe than previously thought. 354: 305-309, 2008 Z. marina beds on soft substrata, the alga was able to replace Z. marina in littoral pools with mixed substratum containing sand, gravel, stones, and shell grit. KEY WORDS: Sargassum muticum · Seagrass · Invasive alga · Zostera marina · Soft sediment Resale or republication not permitted without written consent of the publisherMar Ecol Prog SerDuring other seagrass ecology studies, we observed Sargassum muticum occurring within a Zostera bed (defined as a monospecific bed of the species Z. marina) in the Salcombe-Kingsbridge estuary (Devon, SW England), contrary to the conclusion of bed separation by den Hartog (1997). Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the attachment mechanism and growth of S. muticum within and outside seagrass beds at Salcombe to assess the significance of this observation. We investigated 2 questions: (1) can Sargassum muticum successfully attach on soft substrata, and (2) can Z. marina enhance this attachment? MATERIALS AND METHODSStudy site. Sampling of Sargassum muticum plants occurred within Castle Bay (50°23' N, 03°77' W) of the Salcombe-Kingsbridge Estuary in Devon, SW England (Fig. 1). The system is termed a 'ria', a fairly sheltered drowned river valley with minimal freshwater input producing salinities of around 34 to 35. The shores are gently sloping with a maximum width of 12.5 m. Tides are semi-diurnal with a mean tidal range of 4.6 and 2.0 m at spring and neap tides respectively. Total seagrass extent within the estuary is estimated at 6.3 ha, with 2 ha occurring within Castle Bay (Fig. 1); shoot density averages 240 shoots m -2 . S. muticum has been present in Devon since 1976(Boalch & Potts 1977.Sampling procedure. During a low tide in March 2006, the attachment substratum of Sargassum muticum plants growing in Castle Bay was investigated. The loc...

show abstract

The epibionts of Sargassum muticum in British waters

Cited by 41 publications

References 16 publications

Native clams facilitate invasive species in an eelgrass bed

Native clams facilitate invasive species in an eelgrass bed

How an introduced seaweed can affect epibiota diversity in different coastal systems

Zostera marina seagrass beds enhance the attachment of the invasive alga Sargassum muticum in soft sediments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About