Macrobenthos abundance and distribution on a spatially patterned intertidal flat

Weerman, Ellen J.; Herman, Peter M. J.; Koppel, Johan van de

doi:10.3354/meps09332

Cited by 31 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The destabilizing impact of M. balthica in the later stage of the erosion process may result from the organisms' functioning in the sediment (e.g., burrowing, deposit-feeding), which alters sediment properties and structure, but also from microscale roughness created by organisms' shells and burrows. In general, deposit-feeding macrofauna reduce the stabilizing effect of microalgae and biofilms on the surface of the "muddy" sediments by grazing and subsequently decreasing sediment cohesiveness (Austen et al 1999;Lelieveld et al 2004;Weerman et al 2011;Pratt et al 2014), and therefore we would have expected a destabilizing effect of M. balthica on the initial erosion of the surface sediment. Further, both s c and the abundance of M. balthica were negatively correlated with vegetation coverage at 0 m (Supplementary information 3), which suggest that the sediment was eroded more easily in vegetated patches with lower abundance of M. balthica.…”

Section: Variablementioning

confidence: 99%

Sediment properties, biota, and local habitat structure explain variation in the erodibility of coastal sediments

Joensuu

Pilditch

Harris

et al. 2017

Limnology & Oceanography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sediment resuspension is a frequent phenomenon in coastal areas and a key driver for many ecosystem functions. Sediment resuspension is often linked to biological and anthropogenic activities, which in combination with hydrodynamic forcing initiate sediment erosion and resuspension, if the erosion threshold (s c ) is exceeded. Despite its importance to ecosystem functions very few studies have provided measurements on natural assemblages for subtidal sediments. The aim of this study was to determinate key environmental variables regulating sediment resuspension potential across a sedimentary gradient in a subtidal coastal environment. In order to explore this, we sampled 16 sites encompassing a wide variety in environmental variables (e.g., grain size distribution, macrofaunal communities, vegetation) in the Gulf of Finland, Baltic Sea. A corebased erosion device (EROMES) was used to determine sediment resuspension potential measures of erosion threshold, erosion rate (ER), and erosion constant (m e ). Based on abiotic and biotic properties sampled, sediments diverged into two distinct groups; cohesive ("muddy") and noncohesive ("sandy") sediments. Results showed that abiotic sediment properties explained 38-53% and 15-36% of the total variation in resuspension potential measures in "muddy" and "sandy" sediments, respectively. In cumulative models, biota accounted for 12-26% and 6-24% to the total variation in "muddy" and "sandy" sediments, respectively. Sediment erodibility and resuspension potential of natural sediments is highly variable from local habitats to a larger seascape scale. Our results underline the importance of biota to resuspension potential measures in spatially variable environments.

show abstract

Section: Variablementioning

confidence: 99%

Sediment properties, biota, and local habitat structure explain variation in the erodibility of coastal sediments

Joensuu

Pilditch

Harris

et al. 2017

Limnology & Oceanography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…), (iv) light penetration (percentage of surface light at the sediment surface), (v) benthic microalgal biomass, and (vi) benthic microalgal production. We hypothesized that (i) ocean warming and ocean acidification and their interaction would positively influence benthic microalgae, macroalgae, Zostera, and sediment fauna (8,24,49); (ii ) macroalgae would negatively affect benthic microalgae, Zostera, and light availability (24,61,62); (iii) Zostera would negatively affect light availability; (iv) sediment fauna would negatively affect benthic microalgae (63,64); and (v) macroalgae and decreased light availability (shading) would negatively affect benthic microalgal biomass and production (65,66).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consumers mediate the effects of experimental ocean acidification and warming on primary producers

Alsterberg

Eklöf

Gamfeldt

et al. 2013

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

147

132

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is well known that ocean acidification can have profound impacts on marine organisms. However, we know little about the direct and indirect effects of ocean acidification and also how these effects interact with other features of environmental change such as warming and declining consumer pressure. In this study, we tested whether the presence of consumers (invertebrate mesograzers) influenced the interactive effects of ocean acidification and warming on benthic microalgae in a seagrass community mesocosm experiment. Net effects of acidification and warming on benthic microalgal biomass and production, as assessed by analysis of variance, were relatively weak regardless of grazer presence. However, partitioning these net effects into direct and indirect effects using structural equation modeling revealed several strong relationships. In the absence of grazers, benthic microalgae were negatively and indirectly affected by sediment-associated microalgal grazers and macroalgal shading, but directly and positively affected by acidification and warming. Combining indirect and direct effects yielded no or weak net effects. In the presence of grazers, almost all direct and indirect climate effects were nonsignificant. Our analyses highlight that (i) indirect effects of climate change may be at least as strong as direct effects, (ii) grazers are crucial in mediating these effects, and (iii) effects of ocean acidification may be apparent only through indirect effects and in combination with other variables (e. g., warming). These findings highlight the importance of experimental designs and statistical analyses that allow us to separate and quantify the direct and indirect effects of multiple climate variables on natural communities.food web | global warming | herbivory | species interaction | top-down

show abstract

“…Second, herbivores may facilitate macroalgae by selectively grazing on the epiphytes that would otherwise compete with macroalgae for nutrients and light (Duffy, 1990;Guidone et al, 2010;Raberg and Kautsky, 2008). Finally, in soft-bottomed environments, surface depositfeeding gastropods can impact nutrient cycling, benthic microalgae, and oxygenation of surface sediment (Ieno et al, 2006;McLenaghan et al, 2011;Pillay et al, 2009;Premo, 2011;Weerman et al, 2011). By removing benthic microalgae, "bull-dozing" sediments, or otherwise altering the redox status at the sediment surface, snails can promote benthic-pelagic coupling by increasing the efflux of N mineralized in the sediments to the water column where it is presumably available for uptake by macroalgae (Ieno et al, 2006;McLenaghan et al, 2011;Raffaelli, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Do snails facilitate bloom-forming macroalgae in a eutrophic estuary?

Yarrington

Tyler

Altieri

2013

Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Macrobenthos abundance and distribution on a spatially patterned intertidal flat

Cited by 31 publications

References 49 publications

Sediment properties, biota, and local habitat structure explain variation in the erodibility of coastal sediments

Sediment properties, biota, and local habitat structure explain variation in the erodibility of coastal sediments

Consumers mediate the effects of experimental ocean acidification and warming on primary producers

Do snails facilitate bloom-forming macroalgae in a eutrophic estuary?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About