Download Total score: 62/100 Title [[4/4 – you`ve got all the important bits here

Total score: 62/100
Title [[4/4 – you’ve got all the important bits here]]
Niche Diversity, Species-Habitat, and Species-Species Associations in a
Monterey, California Kelp Forest Ecosystem
Stephanie Nguyen
Clarity [[10/14 – be careful to finish your sentences and avoid hanging prepositions
(look that up!), work on connecting ideas across multiple sentences. Work on
organizing your ideas so that they send a coherent and relevant message]]
Introduction [[10/20 – you need to more thoroughly explain the broad ecological
concepts, provide examples of similar studies from the literature, more explicitly
identify your specific questions, more clearly explain why Hopkins and kelp forests
are good for this kind of study, and explain the novelty of your study. Look at all the
notes I gave you on your last paper for direction]]
Resource partitioning is believed to play an important role maintaining diversity in
both terrestrial and marine ecosystems (Griffin 2008). Because species are in
perpetual competition with other species for space, food, and other resources, their
survival often depends on specialization to minimize this competition. [[you need ot
describe this broad ecological context more and provide more references]] For
example Patiria Miniata and Pisaster Giganteus are both sea stars, but where P.
Miniata occupies lower reliefs with sandy substrates, P. Giganteus occupies rocky
reefs [[even though they’re both seastars, they have different diets, so probably
don’t compete for the same resources]]. The purpose of our study was to better
understand species-habitat as well as species-species associations in the marine
ecosystem. We hypothesized that if associations between species-habitat and
species-species exist, then how strong are these associations be [[?? I don’t think
this sentence got finished?]]. In order to test this, we observed local invertebrate
and algae species through a Swath survey [[need to describe]]. Our research was
conducted in the Monterey kelp forest, at Hopkins Marine Reserve. The kelp forest is
a good area to study this system because it is a biological ecosystem that constantly
changes with the resources available. [[what about the diversity of species and
habitat characteristics?]] This kelp forest in particular at Hopkins Marine Reserve is
only accessible by scientific divers conducting research that is cleared by the
workers of the facility itself. Because it is not accessible to the public, this area is
exceptionally pristine and results found here may vary from those found in areas
disturbed by public access. [[usually you want to explain why the results are likely
applicable to other areas, not isolated to the one area you studiesd]]
Methods [[8/18 – look back at my instructions from before for ideas about how to
improve this. You’re missing most of the important elements of a methods section]]
General Approach
Our research was to test if habitat association existed between organisms in the
kelp forest then this species would be found in certain habitats. To test our
hypothesis, we performed observational data collection where organisms were
observed through Swath survey. [[what type of organisms? How?]]
The Study System
This study took place during Spring 2012 on April 17th. Sampling occurred at
Hopkins Research Facility located in Monterey, California, 121° 54’ 11.39” W. This
area is a marine reserve, which means it is legally protected from fishing and habitat
disruption. [[why is this important? Any other factors that make it a good place for
this kind of study?]]
Data Analysis
Our hypothesis was that if associations between species-habitat and species-species
exist, then how strong are these associations be. To answer this we would observe
the relationship between a few certain invertebrate and algae species and view the
common habitat they thrive in as well as other species they thrive among. [[this
doesn’t describe the data analysis at all]
[[you need to describe why you did what you did and relate it to specific
hypotheses]]
Sampling Techniques
To determine the niche diversity in associations with invertebrates and algae in the
kelp forest, our Bioe161 class consisting of 23 students performed Swath survey in
various 30 meters by 2 meters areas. The sampling took place off of a permanent
transect which could be distinguished by a bright orange buoy. We sampled in
buddy pairs at the 90-135 meter marks in 5-meter increments. Each pair swam to
their assigned meter mark and two transects were performed. The first sampling
was done towards the deep water at 90° bearing, followed by a second sampling
done towards shallow water at 270° bearing. Data was recorded whenever an
organism from the data sheet was seen along the transect tape laid out by each pair.
Swath survey sampling did not include any gear aside from a meter tape to measure
out 30m to lie out a transect line. To perform Swath survey sampling, each pair
observed what was found to a one-meter diameter on their assigned side of the
tape.
Results [[11/16 – you should be making sense of the patterns you see, not just
listing them. Also please put your figures all in one section (not interspersed with
the text and put more informative captions on them. See my previous instructions
for more details about how this section should look.]]
Statistical analysis was used to explain how relative habitat and UPC species were to
Swath species (Figure 1). The very small p-values presented in the graph show that
habitat and UPC species are in fact relevant in associations with Swath species.
Figure 1: This Analysis of Variance table shows statistical data provided to justify
the relativity of habitat and UPC species to Swath species.
Effect
Coefficient Standard Std.
Tolerance t
p-Value
Error
Coefficient
CONSTANT
48.55678 0.692425 0
.
70.12565 <0.000001
HABITAT
0.058553 0.005849 0.121764 0.959664 10.01058 <0.000001
UPC
0.040386 0.009174 0.053544 0.959664 4.401989 0.000011
Analysis of Variance
Source
SS
Regression
Residual
df
27,400.85 2
1.32E+06 6,900
Mean
F-Ratio p-Value
Squares
13,700.42 71.53002 <0.000001
191.53392
We did not have to do any calculations ourselves, but were provided with a percent
variance table (Figure 2). This table is used to help explain Swath species and their
relationship based on UPC species abundance and habitat. [[and what does this tell
you with respect to your hypotheses?]]
Source
Percent of variance
explained in Swath
Species abundances
Habitat attributes
76%
UPC Species
abundances
24%
Figure 2: This table shows
the percentage of Swath
species and their correlation
to habitat (76%) and UPC
species abundances (24%).
Out of all the species surveyed during our Swath survey, we focused on eight, which
were the most abundant out of all the species observed. Two algae species used
were Cystosiera Osmundacea and Macrocystis Pyrifera. The six invertebrate species
included Balanus Nubilus, Syela Montereyensis, Cryptochiton Stelleri, Lithopoma
Gibberosa, Patiria Miniata, and Pisaster Giganteus. To explain our hypothesis of
habitat association, we observed positive and negative association for relief and
substrate for each species (Figure 3). The reliefs described were flat, shallow,
moderate, and high. The substrates used were sand, cobble, boulder and bedrock.
The two algae, C. Osmundacea and M. Pyrifera both show moderate positive
associations with bedrock substrate and shallow relief, displaying some negative
association with the remaining points, but what was recorded did not deviate much
from expected. B. Nubulis displayed strong positive associations with high and
moderate relief and boulder substrate, which deviated highly from expected as well
as showing negative relief elsewhere with shallower reliefs and substrates
associated with shallow reliefs. S. Montereyensis had strong positive relief in
bedrock substrate and shallow relief correlating with strong negative associations
to flat and sand. C. Stelleri showed strong positive association to cobble and boulder
on moderate relief with strong negative relation to sand and flat. L. Gibberosa
displayed negative values that deviated from expected for sand, cobble, and
moderate relief, but only had a positive value for high relief. P. Miniata had values
that did not deviate drastically from the dotted expected line but was mostly
associated with flat relief on sand. P. Giganteus deviated only slightly from expected
with its positive value of boulder and negative for bedrock.
To explain our hypothesis of species to species associations, we compared the 8
mentioned species found during the Swath survey to 33 UPC species found during a
previous UPC survey. Associations were grouped by graphs of Patiria Miniata and
Pisaster Giganteus (Figure 4), Cryptochiton Stelleri and Lithopoma Gibberosa (Figure
5), Balanus Nubilus and Styela Montereyensis (Figure 6), and lastly Cystoseira
Osmundacea and Macrocystis Pyrifera (Figure 7). P. Miniata showed moderate
positive association with barnacles, bare sand substrate, branchy red algae,
bryozoans, sponges and other Laminaria with only Corynactis Californica showing
moderate negative values. P. Giganteus displayed negative values of colonial
tunicate, Corynactis California, and lacy red algae with positive associations with turf
algae and Dictyoneurum Califonicum. C. Stelleri had moderate positive associations
with branchy red algae, Dictyoneurum Californicum, hydroids, sponges and turf
algae with negative associations that included colonial tunicate, encrusting and lacy
red algae, shell substrate and solitary tunicate. L. Gibberosa had strong positive
associations with branchy red algae, bryozoans, Cystosiera Osmundacea,
Dictyoneurum Californicum, and Phragmatopoma. Moderate negative associations
were seen with anemone, dead holdfasts, Diopatra Ornata, and leafy red algae. S.
Montereyensis had moderate positive associations with articulated coralline, bushy
red algae, and crustose coralline. A strong negative association for S. Montereyensis
was seen with shell; moderate negative associations with bare rock and bare sand
substrate were also observed. B. Nubilus had a strong positive association with
hydroids and cup corals with only slight negative associations with shell substrate
and solitary tunicate. M. Pyrifera had a very strong association with solitary tunicate
with slight associations in encrusting red algae, Dictyoneurum Californicum, and
colonial tunicate. Slight negative associations were observed with dead holdfasts
and lacy red algae. C. Osmundacea had moderate positive associations with branchy
red algae, crustose coralline, Dictyoneurum Californicum, Laminaria and Macrocystis
Pyrifera holdfasts and slight negative associations with sponges, Phragmatopoma,
and dead holdfasts. [[I don’t want a laundry list, I want you to call out the common
and relevant patterns and use them to address your hypotheses]]
Figure 4: These two graphs show UPC species association with Patiria Miniata and
Pisaster Giganteus.
Figure 5: These two graphs show UPC species association with Cyrtochiton Stelleri
and Lithopoma Gibberosa.
Figure 6: These two graphs show UPC species association with Balanus Nubilus and
Steyela Montereyensis.
Figure 7: These two graphs show UPC species association with Cystoseira
Osmundacea and Macrocystis Pyrifera.
Discussion [[13/22 – you need to work on pulling out the big picture patterns and
relating it all to the big ecological questions from the intro. Also, you should
specifically address your hypotheses. You did use some of the scientific literature to
compare your study to previous ones, but you could do this better if you had the big
questions in mind. ]]
To test our hypothesis of whether habitat associations exist with the Swath species
observed, we took into account the substrates and reliefs that the organisms were
found on (Figure 3).
C. Osmundacea showed positive associations found on bedrock substrate in shallow
relief. Negative associations with sand and moderate relief further justified the
positive associations. C. Osmundacea is often found in rocky shallow areas, and not
on reefs or boulders as our provided. C. Osmundacea is often found in abundance
with few other bushy algae as encrusting coralline and red turf algae that cover
most of the hard stratum (Dean 1989). This further justifies our species to species
association where C. Osmundacea is found in relative abundance with bushy red
algae, encrusting coralline and other brown algae to be true.
M. Pyrifera also displayed similar associations as C. Osmundacea for habitat
association with moderate positive associations to moderate relief and bedrock
substrate, negative associations to flat relief with sand and cobble substrate further
emphasizes the positive associations. M. Pyrifera forests often occur on low relief
bedrock reefs (Reed 2008). M. Pyrifera has a strong positive species association to
solitary tunicates (primarily Styela Montereyensis). S. Montereyensis that are
commonly found on hard substrata (Young 1980). S. Montereyensis and M. Pyrifera
are often found in the same area, as they tend to occupy similar reliefs and
substrates.
B. Nubilus show habitat associations to boulder and high relief that surpass the
deviation from expected suggesting they prefer to inhabit high areas in the reef.
Hydroids show the highest positive association in species to species association
with B. Nubilus.
S. Montereyensis had moderate positive associations of shallow relief and bedrock
substrate that was further emphasized by the moderate negative associations of
sand and flat relief. In species associations, S. Montereyensis showed moderate
positive associations to articulated and crustose coralline as well as bushy algae.
However, Ascidians such as Styela Montereyensis share habitats dominated
primarily by cup coral and sponges (Young 1995). Although this does not mean
Young’s statement contradicts our data. We observed all of these species in the area
we surveyed.
C. Stelleri was observed to have positive habitat associations to moderate relief with
cobble and boulder substrate that was further emphasized by negative sand
substrate and flat relief. C. Stelleri had a moderate positive species association to
branchy red algae and turf algae. Usually Cryptochiton Stelleri are concealed among
red algae to which they feed (Heath 1905).
L. Gibberosa had positive association to high relief, with boulder and sand substrate
that showed negative associations as well as negative moderate relief. Species to
species associations L. Gibberosa had strongest positive associations to branchy red
algae and Cystoseira Osmundacea.
P. Miniata was commonly found in flat relief and sandy substrates that was
emphasized by negative associations to moderate and high relief. P. Miniata had
negative species to species associations with Corynactis Californica. C. Californica
species are common on the vertical faces of rocky reefs (Chadwick 1987). This
negative species association to C. Californica further emphasizes P. Miniata and its
associations to flat relief.
P. Giganteus had positive associations to boulder substrate and moderate relief, with
negative associations to bedrock. We observed this ourselves due to P. Giganteus
and P. Miniata never occupying the same space. From our data, we found that P.
Miniata prefer flat relief which leaves higher relief to be occupied by P. Giganteus. P.
Giganteus had negative species to species associations with Corynactis Californica, as
discussed before with P. Miniata, prefer vertical faces of rocky reef. With P. Miniata
occupying flat relief and C. Californica occupying high relief, moderate relief is left
for P. Giganteus, in which we observed in our survey and data.
A few inconsistencies are present in the data that was collected. Incorrect sampling
techniques among the 23 students could have skewed the data. Since it was the first
sampling transect of a new class, we could have misinterpreted what was observed
and tried to identify familiar things as opposed to unfamiliar. We may have also
confused certain species of organisms as well as what reliefs and substrates were
considered on the data sheet. Aside from that, data could have also been skewed by
the buoy being moved as well as incorrect sampling spots with confusion of meter
marks, which occurred with my buddy and I. Astrid and I sampled at an incorrect
meter mark to which we thought was our 100m mark due to the movement of the
buoy. This may have also skewed data, as we were not in the 5m increment
differences as with what other students observed. A final alternative to our data was
the season at which we observed our research. Bioe161 had always been during the
fall and spring sampling for this class had never been done prior. During the
springtime, there is more competition for space since this is a time of high
reproduction. The habitat association with the observed organisms could have been
different from what had been previously seen due to a chance in the ecological
environment seasonally. The results found here also could not completely accurate
with a single sample day and in turn should be observed over a could of spring
seasons in order to observe more accurate associations with organisms during the
spring.
References [[6/6]]
Dean T. A., K Thies, and S. L. Lagos. 1989. Survival of Juvenile Giant Kelp: The effects
of demographic factors, competitors, and grazers. Ecology 70 (2): 483-495.
Reed D. C. , A. Rassweiler, and K. K. Arkema. 2008. Biomass rather than growth rate
determines variation in net primary production by giant kelp. Ecology 89 (9): 24932505.
Young C. M. and L. F. Braithwaite. 1980. Orientation and current-induced flow in the
stalked ascidian Styela Montereyensis. Biological Bulletin 159 (2): 428-440.
Young C. M. and E. Vazquez. 1995. Morphology, larval development, and distribution
of Bathypera Feminalba n. sp. (ascidiacea: pyuridae), a deep-water ascidian from the
fjords and sounds of British Columbia. Invertebrate Biology 114 (1): 89-106.
Chadwick N. E. 1987. Interspecific aggressive behavior of corallimorpharian
Corynactis Californica (cnidaria: anthozoa): effects on sympatric corals and sea
anemones. Biological Bulletin 173 (1): 110-125.
Heath H. 1905. The excretory and circulatory systems of Cryptochiton Stelleri Midd.
Biological Bulletin 9 (4): 213-225.
Griffin J. N., K. L. De La Haye, S. J. Hawkins, R. C. Thompson, and S. R. Jenkins. 2008.
Predator diversity and ecosystem functioning: density modifies the effect of
resource partitioning. Ecology 89 (2): 298-305.