Tool Use by Four Species of Indo-Pacific Sea Urchins

Barrett, Glyn; Revell, Dominic; Harding, Lucy; Mills, Ian G.; Jorcin, Axelle; Stiefel, Klaus M.

doi:10.3390/jmse7030069

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some tropical urchin species such as Pseudoboletia maculata can move rubble pieces at a rate of up to 2 cm per minute (Barrett et al 2019). The mean size of rubble pieces used by sea urchins is generally small (5.6 ± 0.68 cm 2 ) and individuals can be covered with anywhere from 5 to nearly 100 fragments (Barrett et al 2019). These urchins can cause significant disruption to the substrate, which attracts fishes including wrasse (e.g., Coris batuensis ) and sand perch ( Parapercis sp.)…”

Section: Rubble Mobilization Drivers and Consequencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Common on coral reefs, the collector urchin, Tripnuestes gratilla, is known to mask itself with debris to protect itself from wave exposure, predation or light (Park and Cruz 2004) and can cover $ 25% of its surface with rubble (Ziegenhorn 2016). Some tropical urchin species such as Pseudoboletia maculata can move rubble pieces at a rate of up to 2 cm per minute (Barrett et al 2019). The mean size of rubble pieces used by sea urchins is generally small (5.6 AE 0.68 cm 2 ) and individuals can be covered with anywhere from 5 to nearly 100 fragments (Barrett et al 2019).…”

Section: Biogenic Rubble Movementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Coral rubble dynamics in the Anthropocene and implications for reef recovery

Kenyon

Doropoulos

Wolfe

et al. 2022

Limnology & Oceanography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With rubble predicted to increase on coral reefs worldwide, we review the physical, biological, and ecological dynamics of rubble beds, with a focus on how rubble generation, mobilization, binding, and coral recruitment is expected to change on future reefs. Major disturbances, including storms and coral bleaching, are predicted to increase in intensity and frequency, and-like localized impacts including blast fishing and ship groundingsgenerate large quantities of coral rubble. Reefs will have increasingly smaller recovery windows between successive disturbances, leading to persistence of unstable rubble beds on reefs. With more severe storms and increased bioerosion on future reefs, rubble mobilization thresholds will be met more often as smaller, less complex rubble pieces are generated. If rubble remains stable for adequate time, it can be bound by organisms including sponges and coralline algae, and eventually be cemented. However, increasing rubble mobilization frequencies will reduce the time available for binding, while changing ocean chemistry could reduce the efficacy of calcifying binders. Ultimately, increased rubble cover will negatively impact coral recruitment into rubble beds. Rubble mobilization abrades and smothers corals, and rubble beds typically experience altered environmental and ecological conditions to the coral frameworks that precede them. Several knowledge gaps exist in relation to improved rubble mobilization thresholds, binding rates and strengths, and coral survival in varying rubble bed types and hydrodynamic regimes. Addressing these knowledge gaps will improve our ability to predict the recovery trajectory of rubble beds and assess the need for stabilization interventions.

show abstract

Section: Rubble Mobilization Drivers and Consequencesmentioning

confidence: 99%