4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Coral reefs in a high-latitude, siliciclastic barrier island setting: reef framework and sediment production at Inhaca Island, southern Mozambique

期刊

CORAL REEFS
卷 22, 期 4, 页码 485-497

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00338-003-0339-9

关键词

Mozambique; high-latitude reefs; high turbidity; restricted framework development; sediment assemblages

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Inhaca Island (southern Mozambique) is located in a high-latitude setting along the seaward margins of the estuarine Maputo Bay and is subject to fluctuations in temperature and salinity, and high sedimentation and turbidity levels. Coral reefs are developed sporadically along the margins of intertidal channels, but framework development is severely restricted. Coral growth is bathymetrically limited (never exceeding 6-m depth), and framework accumulation is only present in the upper 1-2 m. Massive Porites sp. produce a basic reef structure, with other coral genera (mainly Acropora sp., Favia sp., Platygyra sp., Pocillopora sp., and Montipora sp.) colonizing available substrata. Sediment samples also indicate restricted carbonate sediment production, with siliciclastics (mainly quartz) a major sediment contributor (often >90%) and carbonate grain assemblages differing from those normally associated with lower-latitude reefs. Although corals, molluscs and coralline algae (including rhodoliths) represent dominant grain constituents, Halimeda is absent and there is a low diversity (four species identified) of benthic foraminifera (mainly Amphistegina sp.). Grain associations are therefore somewhat transitional in character, comprising elements of both tropical (chlorozoan) and temperate (foramol) grain assemblages. These patterns of reef and associated carbonate production emphasize the marginal character of these reef environments, which form one end member in a broad spectrum of marginal reef systems that are now being identified in a range of both high- and low-latitude settings.

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

4.5
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