* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download 1015 Johansson C
Survey
Document related concepts
Transcript
Herbivory and sea urchin predation for ecosystem resilience By Charlotte Johansson, David Bellwood and Martial Depczynski Introduction Coral reefs under pressure Human impacts Increasing disturbance to reefs Loss of vital functions (ecological roles) Gradual erosion of resilience Introduction Resilience “the capacity of a system to absorb disturbance and reorganize while undergoing change so as to still retain essentially the same function, structure, identity and feedbacks” (Walker et al 2004) To understand how ecosystem processes will be affected by disturbances we need to look at the species that contribute to them and what the strength of their combined functional role is Introduction Functions are; Processes (feeding) – movement or storage of materials or energy (Bellwood et al 2004) Functional groups; A collection of species that perform or influence the same function, irrespective of their taxonomic affinities (e.g. herbivores, nitrogen fixers etc) (Bellwood et al 2004) Introduction 4 roving herbivorous groups Herbivores Macroalgae Browsers Turfalgae Grazers Scrapers Excavators Introduction Fine scale approach when evaluating resilience: 1. Alternative organism (coral/algae) 2. Herbivorous fish Functional redundancy (same functional role) Functional diversity (different functional role) Responses 3. Non-fish herbivores (sea urchins) Aim 1. Quantify the distribution of: Macroalgae Herbivorous fish Non-fish herbivores (sea urchins) 2. Evaluate the extent to which herbivorous fish and urchins are likely to control macroalgae Study location Ningaloo Reef, Western Australia 1. Alternative organisms Proportion ± SE 0.6 0.6 Coral 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 Slope Back Lagoon Macroalgae Slope Back Lagoon 2. Herbivorous fish Density (100m-2 ) ± SE 10 Density of herbivores 8 Browsers Excavators Grazers Scrapers 6 4 2 0 Slope Back Lagoon 2. Herbivorous fish Excavators SR = 2 FD = 1 1.0 SR = 2 FD = 1 SR = 2 FD = 1 Abundance (%) 0.5 0.0 C. sordidus C. microrhinos C. sordidus C. sordidus C. microrhinos C. microrhinos Grazers 1.0 SR = 13 FD = 5 SR = 16 FD = 5 SR = 8 FD = 4 0.5 0.0 Slope Back Lagoon Abundance Bioerosion 300 16 Eroded material (kg.m-2.yr-1: ± SE) Density (100m2) ± SE 3. Non-fish herbivores 200 100 0 Slope Back Lagoon C. microrhinos C. sordidus E. mathaei 12 8 4 0 Slope Back Lagoon 3. Non-fish herbivores Important role on Ningaloo Reef What is driving the pattern of urchins, especially on the slope Is it a lack of predators? Urchins = reef degradation 3. Non-fish herbivores 10 Successful 8 6 4 2 0 3. Non-fish herbivores Density 100m-2 ± SE 0.4 0.640 0.537 0.3 Balistidae Labridae Lethrinidae Tetradontidae 0.423 0.2 0.1 0 Slope Back Lagoon Conclusion Macroalgae abundant in lagoon (despite herbivores) Urchins abundant on slope (despite predators - except specialist balistids) Urchins and algae often signs of degradation - here they appear to not be Ningaloo Reef, although relatively intact, appears to be functionally distinct to other reef systems Acknowledgements Prof D. Bellwood, Dr. M. Depczynski, Dr. A. Hoey and I. van de Leemput JCU, ARC Centre of Excellence AIMS, AIMS@JCU, DEC Colleagues in the lab and field