Cryptofauna of the epilithic algal matrix on an inshore coral reef, Great Barrier Reef

Kramer, Michael J.; Bellwood, David R.; Bellwood, Orpha

doi:10.1007/s00338-012-0924-x

Cited by 66 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These productive EAMs also provide habitats and settlement surfaces for coral reef invertebrates (Birrell et al 2008, Diaz-Pulido et al 2010, Kramer et al 2012, 2013. Any reductions in grazing can lead to the development of long, unpalatable algal turfs (Goatley and Bellwood 2013).…”

Section: Subtle Signs Of Ecosystem Degradation: Grazing and Algal Turfsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sediments and herbivory as sensitive indicators of coral reef degradation

Goatley¹,

Bonaldo²,

Fox³

et al. 2016

E&S

112

142

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Around the world, the decreasing health of coral reef ecosystems has highlighted the need to better understand the processes of reef degradation. The development of more sensitive tools, which complement traditional methods of monitoring coral reefs, may reveal earlier signs of degradation and provide an opportunity for pre-emptive responses. We identify new, sensitive metrics of ecosystem processes and benthic composition that allow us to quantify subtle, yet destabilizing, changes in the ecosystem state of an inshore coral reef on the Great Barrier Reef. Following severe climatic disturbances over the period 2011-2012, the herbivorous reef fish community of the reef did not change in terms of biomass or functional groups present. However, fish-based ecosystem processes showed marked changes, with grazing by herbivorous fishes declining by over 90%. On the benthos, algal turf lengths in the epilithic algal matrix increased more than 50% while benthic sediment loads increased 37-fold. The profound changes in processes, despite no visible change in ecosystem state, i.e., no shift to macroalgal dominance, suggest that although the reef has not undergone a visible regime-shift, the ecosystem is highly unstable, and may sit on an ecological knife-edge. Sensitive, process-based metrics of ecosystem state, such as grazing or browsing rates thus appear to be effective in detecting subtle signs of degradation and may be critical in identifying ecosystems at risk for the future.

show abstract

Section: Subtle Signs Of Ecosystem Degradation: Grazing and Algal Turfsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sediments and herbivory as sensitive indicators of coral reef degradation

Goatley¹,

Bonaldo²,

Fox³

et al. 2016

E&S

112

142

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, decapods are potentially important contribu tors to coral reef ecosystem health, per forming roles such as defending live coral from predators (Pratchett 2001) or re moving parasites from fishes (Becker & Grutter 2004). Yet there are many other lesser-known crustacean taxa, such as Amphi poda, Cumacea, Cyclopoida, Harpacticoida, Isopoda, Ostracoda and Tana i -dacea, which also perform important ecological roles (Klumpp et al1988, Preston & Doherty 1994, Takada et al 2008, Kramer et al 2012. Their roles in the food chain and as major prey items are particularly well documented (Edgar & Shaw 1995, Keable 1995, Glynn & Enochs 2011, Kramer et al 2013.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Benthic Crustacea on coral reefs: a quantitative survey

Kramer

Bellwood²,

Bellwood³

2014

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Benthic crustaceans are an important component of the coral reef fauna, yet our understanding of their ecological significance is incomplete. To determine the community structure, abundance, biomass and productivity of benthic Crustacea at Lizard Island, a mid-shelf reef on the Great Barrier Reef, Australia, we investigated 5 major microhabitats: dead coral, coral rubble, sand, epilithic algal matrix (EAM) and fine-branching live coral. Crustacean communities differed significantly among habitats, with the exception of dead coral and coral rubble. Dead coral was the most important microhabitat type in terms of crustacean abundance (7838 ± 628 ind. 100 cm −2 , mean ± SE), biomass (0.75 ± 0.13 g m −2 , wet weight) and estimated productivity (0.17 ± 0.043 g 100 cm −2 yr −1 ash free dry weight). These values were 2 to 3 orders of magnitude greater than those for the least important habitats (EAM and fine-branching live coral). Despite their abundance, the average crustacean body length was just 0.79 ± 0.32 mm, largely due to the dominance of harpacticoid copepods. In contrast, decapods exhibited very low abundances, but yielded the greatest biomass and productivity and were particularly abundant in dead coral and coral rubble. The results highlight the importance of small crustaceans and dead coral microhabitats as valuable contributors to the trophic structure of coral reefs.

show abstract

“…Small parrotfishes inhabit the epilithic algal matrix (EAM) following settlement [43], preying on small cryptobenthic crustaceans and other invertebrates [29]. While these invertebrates are highly abundant on coral reefs [44], the rate at which small parrotfishes expand their home ranges suggests that not all invertebrates are available to the fish and that larger ranges are needed to access adequate food resources. The complex three-dimensional structure of the EAM might provide shelter for the prey.…”

Section: (B) Trophic Constraints On Home Rangesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The ontogeny of home ranges: evidence from coral reef fishes

2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of home ranges is fundamental to ecology. Numerous studies have quantified how home ranges scale with body size across taxa. However, these relationships are not always applicable intraspecifically. Here, we describe how the home range of an important group of reef fish, the parrotfishes, scales with body mass. With masses spanning five orders of magnitude, from the early postsettlement stage through to adulthood, we find no evidence of a response to predation risk, dietary shifts or sex change on home range expansion rates. Instead, we document a distinct ontogenetic shift in home range expansion with sexual maturity. Juvenile parrotfishes displayed rapid home range growth until reaching approximately 100-150 mm length. Thereafter, the relationship between home range and mass broke down. This shift reflected changes in colour patterns, social status and reproductive behaviour associated with the transition to adult stages. While there is a clear relationship between body mass and home ranges among adult individuals of different species, it does not appear to be applicable to size changes within species. Ontogenetic changes in parrotfishes do not follow expected mass -area scaling relationships.

show abstract

Cryptofauna of the epilithic algal matrix on an inshore coral reef, Great Barrier Reef

Cited by 66 publications

References 60 publications

Sediments and herbivory as sensitive indicators of coral reef degradation

Sediments and herbivory as sensitive indicators of coral reef degradation

Benthic Crustacea on coral reefs: a quantitative survey

The ontogeny of home ranges: evidence from coral reef fishes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About