Aspects of Biodeposition by Oysters and Other Invertebrate Filter Feeders1

Haven, Dexter S.; Morales-Alamo, Reinaldo

doi:10.4319/lo.1966.11.4.0487

Cited by 229 publications

(102 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This food resource availability causes the concentration of many organisms (shrimps, crabs, fish etc.) at the oyster rearing grounds, thus, in addition to the change in bottom characteristics, leads to a shift in the food web structure [52,53]. As reported by White & Wilson and Milewski & Chapman [54,55], oyster beds provide refuges and feeding grounds for various coastal organisms such as fish crustaceans, mollusks, worms etc., and many predators are found among these organisms feeding on different sizes of oysters.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Feeding ecology of the mangrove oyster, <i>Crassostrea gasar</i> (Dautzenberg, 1891) in traditional farming at the coastal zone of Benin, West Africa

Adité¹,

Sonon²,

Gbedjissi³

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wild collection management and farming of the mangrove oyster (Crassostrea gasar) occurring widely at the Benin (West Africa) coastal zone require knowledge on the feeding ecology to explore energy sources and nutritional needs. Six hundred thirty (630) individuals of C. gasar have been sampled in the rearing site at the Benin coastal lagoon to investigate on the trophic ecology of this cultivated bivalve. The diet analysis revealed that C. gasar is a filter-feeder foraging mainly on phytoplankton (72.70%) and substrate particles (22.95%). This trophic specialization results from anatomical structure, mainly the presence of gills which facilitate the filtering of number of plankton taxa. Dominant phytoplanktons ingested comprised of Diatomophycea (33.52%), Chlorophycae (17.19%), Scenedesmacae (13.80%), Dictyosphaeriacae (3.79%), and Pleurococcacae (2.75%). Eight genuses of phytoplankton, Polycystis, Coelosphaerium, Protococcus, Botryoccocus, Crucigenia, Melosira, Cyclotella, and Gyrosigma dominated the diet of C. gasar with aggregated volumetric proportions reaching 69.06% of the diet. Higher occurrences were recorded mainly for Melosira occurring in 263 (41.75%) stomachs, substrate particles in 211 (33.49%), and Polycystis in 151 (23.97%). C. gasar exhibited a high niche breadths varying from 4.54 to 5.78, suggesting that this bivalve consumed a high variety of food items, thus exhibiting a degree of trophic plasticity. Diet overlaps ( jk ) among different size classes were high and varied from 0.71 to 0.98, indicating an ontogenetic diet shift pattern in C. gasar. Probably, to adapt to the benthic-muddy environment and to increase survival, C. gasar has evolved a specialized feeding mechanism and strategy to retrieve only needed nutrients for growth and to reject awful and nondigestible foods. Also, at the oyster rearing grounds, there is an evidence of shift in the food web structure leading to an increase of the biological productivity at the coastal zone. The output from this study is a valuable documentation for the sustainable development of oyster aquaculture, wild stock management and conservation. However, further scientific knowledge on nutritional needs, phytoplankton toxicity and habitat degradation, and improvement of farming techniques are required for an integrated oyster management.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Feeding ecology of the mangrove oyster, <i>Crassostrea gasar</i> (Dautzenberg, 1891) in traditional farming at the coastal zone of Benin, West Africa

Adité¹,

Sonon²,

Gbedjissi³

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Statistical analysis of the dataset indicated that this change was a function of reef presence and sample elevation. Decreased particle size is likely caused by a combination of reduction of physical energy from wave attenuation by the reef structure [26] plus accretion of bio-deposits from live oysters [27]. Our site is located along the Intracoastal Waterway, and receives wave energy from boat wakes as well as wind driven waves.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Changes in Sediment Characteristics upon Oyster Reef Restoration, NE Florida, USA

Southwell¹,

Veenstra²,

Adams³

et al. 2017

J Coast Zone Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

debated [11,12,14,15], but less research has been devoted to the effect of oyster reefs on the surrounding sediment. Reefs act to attenuate wave energy, possibly facilitating deposition of fine sediment [8]; this process may work in concert with oyster filtration to increase light penetration that may then shift ecosystems towards more benthic primary producers [6]. Finer particles and much higher organic matter (OM) content in oyster-associated sediments suggests a substantial role for carbon and nutrient removal by burial [8,17] and benthic algal uptake where light penetration is sufficient [6]. However, mesocosm experiments show that physical factors such as bottom shear can influence sediment resuspension and benthic micro-algal biomass, making the system more complex and the likelihood of OM burial versus remineralization more difficult to predict [7]. Several recent studies suggest that sediments associated with natural and restored oyster reefs have high rates of denitrification and may thus represent important sites for long term nitrogen removal [17][18][19][20]. Whole-creek studies and some mesocosm studies do not parse the contributions of the oysters themselves versus the associated sediments but rather consider the reef-sediment system as a whole [3,5,17]. Indeed, it is difficult to separate these effects because the presence of the reef will likely alter the depositional environment and ultimately the biogeochemistry of the surrounding sediment.

show abstract

“…Mussel beds enlarge the sink function of a tidal flat by filtration {Verwey, 1952; Haven & Morales Alamo, 1966;Dame et al, 1980;Doering et al, 1986). However, this may depend on the weather situation.…”

Section: Clearance Ratementioning

confidence: 99%

Benthic-pelagic flux rates on mussel beds: tunnel and tidal flume methodology compared

Asmus

Prins

et al. 1992

Helgolander Meeresunters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Material flux rates in an intertidal mussel bed were measured synchronously over two tidal cycles in June 1989 with Benthic Ecosystem Tunnels and a double lane flume. The tunnels enclosed the near bottom water, whereas the flume canalized the total water column. One tunnel was set up in a mussel bed and another one in an adjacent sand bottom as a control. The flume enclosed a mussel lane and a sand lane. In the tunnel and in the flume the mussel bed revealed ammonium and phosphate discharge. At the same time, phytoplankton, dominated by Phyaeocystis globosa, was taken up intensively. These flux rates showed the same tendency but they were higher in the flume than in the tunnel. Different tendencies and flux rates for oxygen and particulate organic matter (POC, PN) were found in flume and tunnel These differences demonstrate the importance of water column processes regarding the material exchange of a mussel bed. Tunnels enclose smaller bodies of water and are therefore expected to detect even small effects of the benthos on the passing water. In flumes, benthic influence may be diluted over the entire water column but conditions are more natural. The use of flumes is restricted to shallow waters while tunnels have the potential to be used at any depth.

show abstract

Aspects of Biodeposition by Oysters and Other Invertebrate Filter Feeders1

Cited by 229 publications

References 9 publications

Feeding ecology of the mangrove oyster, <i>Crassostrea gasar</i> (Dautzenberg, 1891) in traditional farming at the coastal zone of Benin, West Africa

Feeding ecology of the mangrove oyster, <i>Crassostrea gasar</i> (Dautzenberg, 1891) in traditional farming at the coastal zone of Benin, West Africa

Changes in Sediment Characteristics upon Oyster Reef Restoration, NE Florida, USA

Benthic-pelagic flux rates on mussel beds: tunnel and tidal flume methodology compared

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Aspects of Biodeposition by Oysters and Other Invertebrate Filter Feeders1

Cited by 229 publications

References 9 publications

Feeding ecology of the mangrove oyster, &lt;i&gt;Crassostrea gasar&lt;/i&gt; (Dautzenberg, 1891) in traditional farming at the coastal zone of Benin, West Africa

Feeding ecology of the mangrove oyster, &lt;i&gt;Crassostrea gasar&lt;/i&gt; (Dautzenberg, 1891) in traditional farming at the coastal zone of Benin, West Africa

Changes in Sediment Characteristics upon Oyster Reef Restoration, NE Florida, USA

Benthic-pelagic flux rates on mussel beds: tunnel and tidal flume methodology compared

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Feeding ecology of the mangrove oyster, <i>Crassostrea gasar</i> (Dautzenberg, 1891) in traditional farming at the coastal zone of Benin, West Africa

Feeding ecology of the mangrove oyster, <i>Crassostrea gasar</i> (Dautzenberg, 1891) in traditional farming at the coastal zone of Benin, West Africa