4.3 Article

Benthic macrofauna associated with decomposition of leaves in a mangrove forest in Ilheus, State of Bahia, Brazil

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0025315411001482

关键词

Annelida; Crustacea; litter bag; succession; benthic macrofauna

资金

  1. National Council of Technological and Scientific Development (CNPq) [CTHidro 14/2005, 133343-2006/5]
  2. CAPES-DS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We identified and quantified the benthic macrofauna associated with decomposing leaves of Rhizophora mangle and Laguncularia racemosa, to observe the differences in the abundance and composition of macrofauna between these mangrove species, and to examine whether the abundance and composition of organisms changed with different stations and collection times. Benthic macrofauna, mainly polychaetes and amphipods, were recorded from the fifth day after the installation of the experiment. Annelids including Oligochaeta and Polychaeta were the most numerous group. Crustacea were represented by peracarids (Amphipoda and Tanaidacea) and decapods. Of Hexapoda, only juvenile forms and pupae were present. The most abundant polychaete species was Perinereis brevicirrata, followed by Capitella cf. capitata, Heteromastus filiformis and Neanthes succinea. In one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) there were no statistical differences between the macrofauna of mangrove species, seasons, or collection times, except among collection times for R. mangle litter bags. Two-way ANOVA showed homogeneity for macrofauna abundance between the groups of collection times for both mangrove species. The richness was similar for R. mangle litter bags, and showed a significant difference for L. racemosa. Abundance and richness were also similar between the mangrove species. The colonization of detritus by benthic invertebrates followed a successional sequence during the decomposition process. This suggests that the density of these organisms and their foraging behaviour affected the decomposition rates of leaves of R. mangle and L. racemosa.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据