A multi-scale study of the relationships between habitat use and the distribution and abundance patterns of three coral reef angelfishes (Pomacanthidae)

Abstract

The degree to which species partition resources often depends on the spatial scale of the study. To investigate this, we examined the distribution and abundance patterns of 3 relatively rare pygmy angelfishes (family Pomacanthidae: Centropyge) among reef locations, depths and microhabitats at Lizard Island on the Great Barrier Reef. A strong association among species and between species and their habitat was found at some scales, but not others. On a broad scale, the abundances of the 3 species were highest at the same 4 sites (kilometres apart). These sites were all located at headlands, suggesting that the patterns of abundance may be in response to the topographic features of the island at this scale. Differences among species occurred at intermediate scales (10s to 100s of metres), where species were associated with different depth zones or reef locations. Centropyge vroliki occurred shallower than C. bicolor, while the depth distribution of C. bispinosa overlapped with both of these species. Laterally along the fringing reef, C. vroliki were more abundant in areas where both C. bicolor and C. bispinosa were also abundant, but these 2 latter species were not correlated with each other. The proportions of substratum types present in home patches differed among species, to some extent reflecting the benthic composition of the reef area where each occurred. However on a fine scale (metres), all 3 species appeared to use the same substratum type, which consisted of dead branching coral covered in algae, and occasionally formed multi-species groups. Species abundances were not correlated with this commonly used microhabitat, but rather the availability of the substrata characterizing the reef areas in which they were most abundant. Here, although Centropyge species use the same type of microhabitat, they may be an example of species that partition space on the basis of non-preferred resources. For example, all 3 species used home patches containing high proportions of overgrown corals; however where this habitat was not available, C. bicolor used sand and rubble habitat at the reef base, while C. vroliki used coral habitat on the reef crest. Most importantly, this study emphasizes that a multi-scale approach is necessary to determine appropriate scales for examining species associations and resource partitioning in reef fishes.

A comparison of coral reef and coral community fish assemblages in Pacific Panama and environmental factors governing their structure

“…Williams & Polunin (2001) reported positive relationships between algae cover and biomass of reef fish, but other researchers found no such relationship (Chabanet et al, 1997;Friedlander & Parrish, 1998;Eagle et al, 2001). Depth and exposure has also been found to positively correlate with species richness, diversity and abundance on coral and rocky reefs (Roberts & Ormond, 1987;Adjeroud et al, 1998;Friedlander & Parrish, 1998;Ö hman & Rajasuriya, 1998;Ferreira et al, 2001;Arreola-Robles & Elorduy-Garay, 2002;Lecchini et al, 2003;Dominici-Arosemena & Wolff, 2005Brokovich et al, 2006).…”

Substrate Association and Patterns of Microhabitat Use by Fishes at Fernando De Noronha Archipelago (Brazil)

“…MEDEIROS et al, 2010), with speciesspecific responses to particular substrates tending to be weaker in Southwestern Atlantic reefs. Reefs with higher species richness also tend to show higher niche specialization (EAGLE et al, 2001) with abundance of most species being highly dependent on particular habitat features (BROWN, 1984;GASTON et al, 1997). Therefore, one should be able to predict density of fishes at these sites based on particular habitat preferences and the presence of these features at a given environment.…”

“…Furthermore, given that higher competition is expected amongst ecologically similar species (EAGLE et al, 2001), sites with high species richness tend to show higher degrees of niche specialization.…”

Biological community structure on patch reefs in Biscayne National Park, FL, USA

“…Study results are often dependent upon scale and/or the range of habitats being considered (Syms 1995;Eagle et al 2001;Chittaro 2004). Generally, one body of literature supports niche diversification and predicts highly ordered communities (e.g., Connolly et al 2005), while another supports a more stochastic view, highlighting the importance of spatially and temporally variable recruitment of larvae (e.g., Sale and Douglas 1984;Doherty and Fowler 1994).…”