4.4 Article

The effects of seafloor habitat complexity on survival of juvenile fishes: Species-specific interactions with structural refuge

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jembe.2006.03.018

关键词

behavior; foraging tactics; habitat complexity; juvenile survival; mobile fishing gear; prey vulnerability

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Marine fishes are often associated with structurally complex microhabitats that are believed to provide a refuge from predation. However, the effects of habitat complexity on predator foraging success can be strongly modified by predator and prey behaviors. We conducted a series of laboratory experiments to evaluate the effects of sea floor habitat complexity on juvenile fish survivorship using multiple predator (striped searobin and summer flounder) and prey (winter flounder, scup, and black sea bass) species to identify potentially important species-habitat interactions. Three habitats of varying complexity (bare sand, shell, and sponge) common to coastal marine environments were simulated in large aquaria (2.4 m diameter, 2400 L volume). Prey survivorship increased significantly with greater habitat complexity for each species combination tested. However, examination of multiple prey and predator species across habitats revealed important effects of predator x habitat and prey x habitat interactions on prey survival, which appeared to be related to species-specific predator and prey behavior in complex habitats. Significant species x habitat interactions imply that the impact of reduced seafloor habitat complexity may be more severe for some species than others. Our results indicate that the general effects of scalloor habitat complexity on juvenile fish survivorship may be broadly applicable, but that the interaction of particular habitats with search tactics of predators as well as habitat affinities and avoidance responses of prey can produce differences among species that contribute to variable mortality. (c) 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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