4.7 Article

Substrate mediates consumer control of salt marsh cordgrass on Cape Cod, New England

期刊

ECOLOGY
卷 90, 期 8, 页码 2108-2117

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1890/08-1396.1

关键词

Cape Cod, New England, USA; consumer pressure; crab herbivory; marsh die-off; peat substrate; salt marsh productivity; Sesarma reticulatum; Spartina alterniflora; top-down control

类别

资金

  1. Rhode Island Sea
  2. NSF Ecology Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cordgrass die-offs in Cape Cod, Massachusetts, USA, salt marshes have challenged the view that the primary production of New England salt marshes is controlled by physical factors. These die-offs have increased dramatically over the last decade and are caused by the common herbivorous marsh crab Sesarma reticulatum, but other factors that control crab impacts remain unclear. We examined the influence of plant nutrient supply and disturbances on Sesarma herbivory by fertilizing plots and creating experimental disturbances, since previous studies have revealed that they mediate the intensity of herbivory in other Western Atlantic marshes. Neither nutrient enrichment nor experimental disturbances affected crab grazing intensity despite their strong effects in other marsh systems. Within and among Cape Cod salt marshes, however, Sesarma burrows are concentrated on peat substrate. Surveys of 10 Cape Cod marshes revealed that burrow density, depth, and complexity are all much higher on peat than on sand or mud substrate, and paralleling these patterns, crab abundance, herbivore pressure, and the expansion of die-off areas are markedly higher on peat than on other substrates. Complementing work hypothesizing that predator release is triggering increased crab herbivory in Cape Cod marshes, these results suggest that cordgrass die-offs are constrained to the peat substrate commonly found on the leading edge of marshes and that the vulnerability of New England salt marshes to crab herbivory and future die-offs may be predictable.

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

4.7
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