Variable effects of ascidian competitors on oysters in a Florida epifaunal community

Dalby, J. E.; Young, Craig M.

doi:10.1016/0022-0981(93)90183-o

Cited by 18 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The species Ascidia curvata, A. sydneiensis, Botryllus planus and Clavelina oblonga occur on oyster cultures (DALBY & YOUNG 1993, TOKIOKA 1952; Cystodytes dellechiajei has been found on shrimp nets (MILLAR 1988); …”

Section: 13mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cultures are very favorable for colonization by ascidians, since the substrates are simple and associated with ecological disturbances (LAMBERT 2001(LAMBERT , 2005b. In at least one study, ascidians growing over cultured oysters did not influence the oyster growth rates (DALBY & YOUNG 1993), yet in some circumstances the cover due to ascidians may be so great that they must exert a strong impact on the cultured animals.…”

Section: 16mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Introduced ascidians in Paranaguá Bay, Paraná, southern Brazil

Rocha

Kremer

2005

Rev. Bras. Zool.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Exotic (introduced) species are a growing problem in ports worldwide and comprise the most important impacts in marine ecosystems. Periodic monitoring to detect introduced species is extremely important for effective population control. Here we sampled ascidian species near the port of Paranaguá for a taxonomic study of this fauna to attempt to detect introduced species. Larval stages in ascidians are short-lived, and dispersal is restricted to small distances, and so ascidians are very good bioindicators for exotic introductions due to ship transport. Four locations were sampled within Paranaguá Bay (Ilha das Cobras, Pier Tenenge, Ilha do Mel and Ilha da Galheta) and one location outside of the bay (Parque dos Meros). Information for the nearby fauna and for geographic distributions of the species involved was obtained from the literature. Eighteen species were found: Perophora multiclathrata (Sluiter, 1904), Ascidia curvata (Traustedt,1882), A. sydneiensis Stimpson, 1855, Clavelina oblonga Herdman, 1880, Cystodytes dellechiajei (Della Valle, 1877), Eudistoma carolinense van Name, 1945, Distaplia bermudensis van Name, 1902, Didemnum granulatum Tokioka, 1954, Diplosoma listerianum (Milne-Edwards, 1841), Lissoclinum fragile (van Name, 1902), Botryllus planus (van Name, 1902), B. tuberatus Ritter & Forsyth 1917, Botrylloides nigrum Herdman, 1886, Symplegma rubra Monniot, 1972, Styela canopus (Savigny, 1816), S. plicata (Lesueur, 1823), Microcosmus exasperatus Heller, 1878 and Molgula phytophila Monniot, 1970. The known geographic distributions based on the literature and collections suggest that three species are native, one is a inter-regional introduction, two are introduced from the Pacific and the remaining 12 are cryptogenic.

show abstract

Section: 13mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: 16mentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduced ascidians in Paranaguá Bay, Paraná, southern Brazil

Rocha

Kremer

2005

Rev. Bras. Zool.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Coexistence between these 2 suspension-feeders has been previously described by Dalby & Young (1993), who tested the tolerance of oysters to ascidian overgrowth in Florida, and by Petersen et al (1997), who compared the growth rate of mussels and ascidians in eelgrass meadows. However, ascidians are generally considered as trophic competitors that could limit and/or retard oyster development (Jackson 1983, Stuart & Klumpp 1984 by exerting high grazing pressure on the phytoplankton (Riisgård et al 1995).…”

Section: Seasonal Patterns In Ocu Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…This direct impact of cultivated species is reinforced by the development of biofouling communities (David 1970, Agius et al 1977, Arakawa 1990, Dalby & Young 1993, Mazouni 1995, Lamy 1996 which colonize the oyster shells particularly when farming structures are constantly submerged. Several studies on the physio-ABSTRACT: This study was based on in situ experiments conducted in a shellfish lagoon (Thau, France) to determine the interactions between suspended oyster Crassostrea gigas Thunberg cultures and their environment at a seasonal scale.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Composition of biofouling communities on suspended oyster cultures: an in situ study of their interactions with the water column

Mazouni¹,

Gaertner²,

Deslous-Paoli³

2001

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Surprisingly, however, there are circumstances where biofouling is beneficial, or at least, does not affect production. For example, fouling can enhance shellfish growth (Dalby and Young 1993), increase primary production of phytoplankton and therefore food availability to shellfish (Lodeiros et al 2002;Ross et al 2002;Le Blanc et al 2003), provide shellfish with protection against predation (Wahl et al 1997;Manning and Lindquist 2003), facilitate the settlement of commercially farmed shellfish (Hickman and Sause 1984;Fitridge 2011) or mitigate disease risk (Paclibare et al 1994). These examples, however, are the exception, and biofouling is primarily deleterious to the cost effective production of shellfish and fish.…”

Section: Common Fouling Organisms In Aquaculture Settingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact and control of biofouling in marine aquaculture: a review

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biofouling in marine aquaculture is a specific problem where both the target culture species and/or infrastructure are exposed to a diverse array of fouling organisms, with significant production impacts. In shellfish aquaculture the key impact is the direct fouling of stock causing physical damage, mechanical interference, biological competition and environmental modification, while infrastructure is also impacted. In contrast, the key impact in finfish aquaculture is the fouling of infrastructure which restricts water exchange, increases disease risk and causes deformation of cages and structures. Consequently, the economic costs associated with biofouling control are substantial. Conservative estimates are consistently between 5-10% of production costs (equivalent to US$ 1.5 to 3 billion yr 71 ), illustrating the need for effective mitigation methods and technologies. The control of biofouling in aquaculture is achieved through the avoidance of natural recruitment, physical removal and the use of antifoulants. However, the continued rise and expansion of the aquaculture industry and the increasingly stringent legislation for biocides in food production necessitates the development of innovative antifouling strategies. These must meet environmental, societal, and economic benchmarks while effectively preventing the settlement and growth of resilient multi-species consortia of biofouling organisms.

show abstract

Variable effects of ascidian competitors on oysters in a Florida epifaunal community

Cited by 18 publications

References 12 publications

Introduced ascidians in Paranaguá Bay, Paraná, southern Brazil

Introduced ascidians in Paranaguá Bay, Paraná, southern Brazil

Composition of biofouling communities on suspended oyster cultures: an in situ study of their interactions with the water column

The impact and control of biofouling in marine aquaculture: a review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About