4.6 Article

High-sediment tolerance in the reef coral Turbinaria mesenterina from the inner Great Barrier Reef lagoon (Australia)

期刊

ESTUARINE COASTAL AND SHELF SCIENCE
卷 78, 期 4, 页码 748-752

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecss.2008.02.025

关键词

physiological tolerance; stress; growth rate; lipid; calcification; Great Barrier Reef; scleractinian coral

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sedimentation is an important stressor on coral reefs subjected to run-off, dredging and resuspension events. Reefs with a history of high-sediment loads tend to be dominated by a few tolerant coral species. A key question is whether such species live close to their tolerance thresholds or near their niche optima. Here, we analyse experimentally the sediment tolerance of a spatially dominant coral, Turbinaria mesenterina (Dendrophylliidae), at nearshore reefs in the central Great Barrier Reef lagoon. Testing was conducted in a 5-week tank experiment under manipulated sediment loading and flow conditions. Physiological stress was assessed based on the behaviour of three key response variables: skeletal growth rate, energy reserves (lipid content) and photosynthetic performance. Because sediment effects are likely to vary between flow regimes, sediment and flow responses were tested using a full factorial design. Sediment loads greater than 110 mg cm(-2) had no effect on any of the physiological variables, regardless of flow (0.7-24 cm s(-1)). Turbinaria mesenterina is thus tolerant to sediment loads an order of magnitude higher than most severe sediment conditions in situ. Likely mechanisms for such tolerance are that: (1) colonies covered in sediment (60-120 mu m) in low-flow were able to clear themselves rapidly (within 45 h); and (2) sediment provides a source of food. These results suggest that intensified sediment regimes on coastal reefs may shift coral communities towards dominance by a few well-adapted species. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.6
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