Facilitation Cascades in Marine Ecosystems: A Synthesis and Future Directions

Gribben, Paul E.; Angelini, Christine; Altieri, Andrew H.; Bishop, Melanie J.; Thomsen, Mads S.; Bulleri, Fabio

doi:10.1201/9780429026379-3

Cited by 42 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 201 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In recent years, there has been growing interest in studying the compound impacts of multiple engineers on their environment and other organisms. A major emphasis in this regard has been the study of habitat cascades, that is, the positive effects on organisms that result from successive habitat creation or amelioration by hierarchy of primary to n th order engineers (sensu [5], e.g., [5][6][7][8][9][10][11]). In these cases, the responses of focal organisms are largely driven by the structural effects of the intermediate engineer.…”

Section: Concluding Remarks: Co-engineering Habitat Cascades and Morementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In such cases, primary and secondary engineers can collectively affect other organisms. These compound engineering effects are frequently sequential, as in the case of habitat cascades (sensu [5]; hierarchical facilitation or facilitation cascades are often used as synonyms e.g., [6,7], but see [5]) where a primary engineer (e.g., a tree) creates living space or ameliorates physical conditions for secondary engineer (e.g., woodpecker or epiphytes) that in turn creates living space or ameliorates physical conditions conditions for other organisms (e.g., arthropods) ( Figure 1A; see [5][6][7][8][9][10][11]). Alternatively, primary and secondary engineers could also have concurrent, combined impacts on one or a few specific abiotic conditions and resources, with secondary engineers either ameliorating or worsening the primary engineering impacts on a focal species or assemblage ( Figure 1B; e.g., [12][13][14]).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Algal Epibionts as Co-Engineers in Mussel Beds: Effects on Abiotic Conditions and Mobile Interstitial Invertebrates

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mussels and macroalgae have long been recognized as physical ecosystem engineers that modulate abiotic conditions and resources and affect the composition of rocky shore assemblages. Their spatial distributions in the intertidal zone frequently overlap, as many algal species thrive as epibionts on mussel beds. Nonetheless, their potential for combined engineering effects has not been addressed to date. Here we illustrate that Porphyra sp.-a desiccation-resistant macroalga that develops mostly epiphytically onto mussel beds-affects temperature, desiccation levels, and mobile interstitial invertebrates in mussel beds. Specifically, we observed that Porphyra cover (a) reduced temperature at the surface of the mussel bed but not at their base, (b) reduced desiccation both at the surface and base of the mussel bed and, (c) increased the densities of an abundant interstitial species-the amphipod Hyale grandicornis-in several study sites/dates. Additionally, we found that the positive responses of these grazing amphipods to Porphyra were driven by physical habitat modification (engineering) rather than food availability. This suggests that co-engineering by Porphyra and mussels generates abiotic states and focal species responses that would not be predictable from their individual effects. We expect that increased appreciation of co-engineering aids our understanding of complex ecological dynamics.

show abstract

Section: Concluding Remarks: Co-engineering Habitat Cascades and Morementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Algal Epibionts as Co-Engineers in Mussel Beds: Effects on Abiotic Conditions and Mobile Interstitial Invertebrates

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Habitat-forming organisms regulate the resources available to other organisms through the provision of food, living space and a refuge from biotic and abiotic stress (Jones, Lawton, & Shachak, 1994;Wright & Gribben, 2017). In doing so, they typically support abundant and highly diverse communities (Gribben et al, 2019;MacArthur & MacArthur, 1961;Thomsen et al, 2018). The characteristics of habitat-formers that determine their value to associated communities are, however, not always clear, but could be regulated by a range of functional traits that relate to morphology (Chemello & Milazzo, 2002;Peeters, 2002), the composition of their tissues (Belovsky, 1981) or the presence of chemical defences (Duffy & Paul, 1992).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Habitat variability in an underwater forest: Using a trait‐based approach to predict associated communities

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By providing food, living space and reducing biotic and abiotic stress, habitat‐formers support diverse communities. The characteristics that mediate their value to associated organisms, however, are not always clear. Traditional assessments of habitat‐former and associated community relationships use broad‐scale classifications to group habitat‐formers according to identity or gross morphology. Trait‐based approaches instead measure traits at the level of the individual and in doing so allow for predictions that are not constrained to taxonomic groups. By measuring at the level of the individual, trait‐based approaches have the potential to capture not only interspecific variability, but also the intraspecific variation that is often ignored by traditional approaches. Trait‐based approaches may therefore provide a novel way to link the characteristics of habitat‐formers to ecosystem functioning. Here we quantified inter‐ and intraspecific variation in six macroalgal species and tested the relative importance of morphological traits and species identity in predicting the abundance of associated fauna. All species of macroalgae displayed substantial intraspecific morphological variation. Morphological traits were more important than species identity in predicting epifaunal abundances. Total surface area was the most important trait when predicting total abundance per thallus, whilst mean frond length was the most important predictor for abundance per gram algal biomass. This suggests that traits that describe the quantity of available habitat were the most important predictors of community abundance, but the shape or architecture of the habitat also contributes to structuring these communities. Our results indicate that trait‐based approaches may be more useful than traditional species‐based approaches when predicting the abundances of fauna associated with habitat‐forming species. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.

show abstract

“…Spillover effects from secondary habitat-formers can influence biodiversity at landscape scales by adding nutrients or ameliorating stress (Gribben et al 2019). For example, in terrestrial habitats fallen pieces of epiphytic Spanish moss (secondary habitat-former) on U.S. oaks (basal habitat-former) increase the biodiversity of ground leaf litter (Angelini and Briggs 2015) and alpine plants ameliorate temperature stress and facilitate other plant species into areas in which they otherwise would not survive (Callaway et al 2002, Cavieres et al 2014.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Facilitation cascades create a predation refuge for biodiversity in a novel connected habitat

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Communities structured via facilitation cascades whereby one habitat-forming species promotes a secondary habitat-forming species with synergistic effects on biodiversity are increasingly documented. Habitat-formers can also extend the realized niche of other habitat-forming species by facilitating their recruitment into novel environments across heterogeneous landscapes. However, further understanding of whether secondary habitat-formers in these novel environments differ in their structure or support different communities from those settled in their natal habitat is required. Here, we investigated whether abiotic and biotic conditions in a novel connected habitat influence biodiversity within a secondary habitat-former facilitated outside its natal habitat. We contrasted the morphology of the habitat-forming alga, Sirophysalis trinodis, and its associated fish and epifaunal community occurring on rocky reef (natal habitat) and on nearby a biogenic hard substrate, live clam shells (novel habitat) in soft sediments. The algae on clams had a different morphology to those on the rocky shore and supported increased abundance of some epifaunal species. A reciprocal transplant experiment of S. trinodis individuals among habitats found that differences in the abundance of epifauna were explained by the increased abundance and consumption rates of predatory fish on the reef habitat compared to soft-sediment habitats, and not by differences in algal morphology between habitats. We demonstrate that facilitation promotes a secondary habitat-former into a novel habitat, which then enhances the abundance of associated epifauna by providing a predation refuge. This study contributes to a small but growing body of research demonstrating landscape-scale effects of facilitation cascades, and that basal habitat-formers can extend the realized niche of secondary habitat-formers and their associated communities.

show abstract

Facilitation Cascades in Marine Ecosystems: A Synthesis and Future Directions

Cited by 42 publications

References 201 publications

Algal Epibionts as Co-Engineers in Mussel Beds: Effects on Abiotic Conditions and Mobile Interstitial Invertebrates

Algal Epibionts as Co-Engineers in Mussel Beds: Effects on Abiotic Conditions and Mobile Interstitial Invertebrates

Habitat variability in an underwater forest: Using a trait‐based approach to predict associated communities

Facilitation cascades create a predation refuge for biodiversity in a novel connected habitat

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About