4.2 Article

Sponge community composition in the Derawan Islands, NE Kalimantan, Indonesia

期刊

MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES
卷 396, 期 -, 页码 169-180

出版社

INTER-RESEARCH
DOI: 10.3354/meps08349

关键词

Sponges; Coral reefs; Marine diversity; East Kalimantan; Berau

资金

  1. Schure-Beijermck-Popping Foundation of the Royal Dutch Academy of Science (KNAW)
  2. A. M. Buitendijk Fund
  3. Pelkwijk Fund
  4. The Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research [ALW IPJ-07002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Coral reef ecosystems in Indonesia are among the most diverse in the world. Conservation, restoration and management of marine biodiversity hotspots such as Indonesia's coral reefs require accurate baseline knowledge of the constituent species and the environmental conditions under which these species thrive. Here we present a study on the habitat structure and diversity, composition and abundance of reef sponges in the Derawan Islands, East Kalimantan, Indonesia. Mean live coral cover across depths and sites was just under 30%, while the mean cover of rubble and dead coral exceeded 40%. The distribution of live coral cover was patchy; the inshore sites had the lowest cover, while some offshore sites also had very low coral cover Clue to the effects of blast fishing. Rubble cover was highest inshore and beyond the barrier reef, whereas dead coral was most abundant in shallow-water and midshore reefs. A total of 168 sponge species or morphospecies were identified, of which Stelletta clavosa, Lamellodysidea herbacea, Niphates sp., Ircinia ramosa and Petrosia nigricans were the most common. Sponge composition varied in relation to distance from the Berau River and water visibility, in addition to sand cover and cover of encrusting corals. Importantly, sponges in the Derawan Islands appeared to thrive in inshore reefs that already had depauperate coral communities. This is in marked contrast to findings elsewhere in Indonesia (NW Java, SW Sulawesi) where inshore communities were depauperate for all taxa sampled.

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

4.2
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