4.4 Article

Coral recruitment is impacted by the presence of a sponge community

期刊

MARINE BIOLOGY
卷 166, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00227-019-3493-5

关键词

-

资金

  1. NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program [NA15NOS4820074]
  2. VI EPSCoR (NSF) [0814417]
  3. National Science Foundation [HRD-1463991]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

As coral cover has declined on Caribbean reefs, space has become occupied by other benthic taxa, including sponges, which may affect the recruitment of new corals, thereby affecting the ability of reefs to recover to coral-dominated states. Sponges may inhibit coral recruitment by pre-empting potential recruitment space, overgrowing recruits, or through allelopathy. This study examined coral recruitment across six coral reef sites surrounding St. Thomas, US Virgin Islands, and the impact of one species of sponge and the sponge community as a whole on coral recruitment. To test the effect of a single species of sponge on coral recruitment, fragments of living or non-living Aplysina cauliformis were attached to terracotta recruitment tiles and deployed at all six sites, along with unoccupied tiles as controls. At two of the sites, a community-level experiment consisted of deploying recruitment tiles in 1m(2) plots that were either cleared of the entire sponge community or control plots where no sponges were removed. Recruitment rates showed a consistent difference among sites over multiple years and experiments. Results of the species-specific experiment showed that the proximity of live or dead A. cauliformis did not affect coral recruitment. However, results of the community-level experiment found greater coral recruitment rates in plots cleared of sponges, suggesting that the presence of the sponge community negatively affected coral recruitment. This study is one of the first to experimentally test and find a significant impact of sponges on coral recruitment, and highlights the need for additional research in this area.

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

4.4
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