4.4 Article

Functional responses of mangrove fauna to forest degradation

Journal

MARINE AND FRESHWATER RESEARCH
Volume 73, Issue 6, Pages 762-773

Publisher

CSIRO PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1071/MF21257

Keywords

biodiversity; faunal response; forest quality; functional plasticity; functional redundancy; habitat provisioning; species composition; tropical forests

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Structural degradation of mangroves through tree removal has a negative impact on faunal diversity, with reductions in abundance, species richness, and biodiversity. Canopy cover is a critical predictor of faunal responses, and functional composition changes with increasing degradation.
Structural degradation of mangroves through the partial removal of trees is globally pervasive and likely to affect ecological functioning, including habitat provisioning for biodiversity. Biodiversity responses will depend on the severity of degradation, yet few studies have contraste and quantified several degradation states. Addressing this knowledge gap, we sampled faunal diversity across a range of mangrove forests in southern Kenya. Canopy cover was the strongest predictor of faunal responses among forest structural variables. Faunal abundance, species richness and biodiversity all decreased with reduction in canopy cover, and taxonomic and functional composition changed. The trophic diversity of crabs peaked at intermediate canopy cover, with degraded habitats having more generalist species and fewer specialists. Functional redundancy was unaffected by canopy thinning. The decline in functional diversity and richness of brachyuran crabs with canopy cover implies that resource-use efficiency weakens with increasing degradation. Our results are indicative of significant alterations to forest functioning with degradation, because epibenthic fauna are important regulators of mangrove ecosystem processes, including nutrient cycling and carbon.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available