Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T23:02:39.309Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Abundance, size and habitat relation of reef fish on biogenic structures (structure-forming invertebrates) at Anacapa Island, southern California

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2010

Ilana Rosental Zalmon ,
Merit McCrea  and
Milton Stevens Love
Ilana Rosental Zalmon*
Affiliation:
Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense, Centro de Biociências e Biotecnologia, Avenida Alberto Lamego, 2000, 28013-602, Campos dos Goytacazes, RJ, Brazil
Merit McCrea
Affiliation:
Marine Science Institute, University of California, Santa Barbara, California, USA93106
Milton Stevens Love
Affiliation:
Marine Science Institute, University of California, Santa Barbara, California, USA93106
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: I.R. Zalmon, Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense, Centro de Biociências e Biotecnologia, Avenida Alberto Lamego, 2000, 28013-602, Campos dos Goytacazes RJ, Brazil email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A biogenic structure ecosystem of extensive worm tubes of Chaetopterus sp. harbouring different fish species was investigated at Anacapa Island, southern California to determine the numerical abundance, species composition, body size, and seasonality of the ichthyofauna associated, and their relation with the worm patch size. Bimonthly, a 30-m swimming transect and a quadrat-based survey estimated the length of each fish, the type of habitat it occupied, and the worm tube patch size-class. Larger worm mats harboured higher densities of fish, mainly the dominants Rhinogobiops nicholsii and Chaenopsis alepidota, which live inside the worm tube patches. Fish population density varied between the ‘inside’ and ‘edge’ of Chaetopterus beds as smaller and younger individuals were hindered from reaching the middle of the patch by larger, older and territorial individuals. The prevalence of positive and significant correlations between the abundance of smaller individuals of R. nicholsii and specific habitat features (e.g. edge) suggests that the abundance and distribution of juveniles might be habitat-dependent besides intraspecific competition between older and younger individuals. There was a decreasing density of R. nicholsii at greater than 20 cm away from worm tubes and there were no individuals beyond 6 m away from structure. Chaenopsis alepidota was not recorded when the patch size was less than 50% tube coverage. Our results revealed that complex habitat structure had a positive influence on the abundance of juvenile and adult of C. alepidota and R. nicholsii, and suggest that these structured areas are preferentially utilized, which contributes to its patchy distribution pattern. The presence of biological structures in low-relief sedimentary habitats can have critical functional significance even for reef fish. These important habitat features may need to be identified and protected.

Keywords

reef fishbiogenic structurehabitat selectionChaetopteus bedsChaenopsisRhinogobiopssouthern California
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 91 , Special Issue 6: Fish Ecology , September 2011 , pp. 1295 - 1305
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Allen, L.G. (1985) A habitat analysis of the nearshore marine fishes from Southern California. Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Science 84, 133–155.Google Scholar
Anderson, T.W., DeMartini, E.E. and Roberts, D.A. (1989) The relationship between habitat structure, body size and distribution of fishes at a temperate artificial reef. Bulletin of Marine Science 44, 681–697.Google Scholar
Andrews, K.S. and Anderson, T.W. (2004) Habitat-dependent recruitment of two temperate reef fishes at multiple spatial scales. Marine Ecology Progress Series 277, 231–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arbuto-Oropeza, O. and Balart, E. (2001) Community structure of reef fish in several habitats on a rocky reef in the Gulf of California. Marine Ecology 22, 283–305.Google Scholar
Auster, P.J. (1998) A conceptual model of the impacts of fishing gear on the integrity of fish habitats. Conservation Biology 12, 1198–1203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, S.S., McCoy, E.D. and Mushinsky, H.R. (1991) Habitat structure: the physical arrangements of objects in space. London: Chapman & Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blanchette, C.A., Broitman, B.R. and Gaines, S.D. (2006) Intertidal community structure and oceanographic patterns around Santa Cruz Island, CA. Marine Biology 149, 689–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bostroem, C. and Mattila, J. (1999) The relative importance of food and shelter for seagrass-associated invertebrates: a latitudinal comparison of habitat choice by isopod grazers. Oecologia 120, 162–170.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, C., Collins, P. and Brand, A.R. (2003) To what extent does upright sessile epifauna affect benthic biodiversity and community composition? Marine Biology 143, 783–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breitburg, D.L. (1987) Interspecific competition and the abundance of nest sites: factors affecting sexual selection. Ecology 68, 1844–1855.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brink, K.H. and Muench, R.D. (1986) Circulation in the Point Conception–Santa Barbara Channel region. Journal of Geophysical Research 98, 877–895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carr, M.H. (1991) Habitat selection and recruitment of an assemblage of temperate zone reef fishes. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 146, 113–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carr, M.H. (1994) Effects of macroalgal dynamics on recruitment of a temperate reef fish. Ecology 75, 1320–1333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, K.S. (1982) Male reproductive behaviour and spawning success in a temperate zone goby, Coryphopterus nicholsi. Canadian Journal of Zoology 60, 2309–2316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, K.S. (1984) Social spacing in the temperate marine goby Coryphopterus nicholsi. Marine Biology 80, 307–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collie, J.S., Escanero, G.A. and Valentine, P.C. (1997) Effects of bottom fishing on the benthic megafauna of George Banks. Marine Ecology Progress Series 155, 159–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckman, J.E. (1983) Hydrodynamics processes affecting benthic recruitment. Limnology and Oceanography 28, 241–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckman, J.E. (1985) Flow disruption by an animal-tube mimics affects of sediment bacterial colonization. Journal of Marine Research 43, 419–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Floeter, S.R., Krohling, W., Gasparini, J.L., Ferreira, C.E.L. and Zalmon, I.R. (2007) Reef fish community structure on coastal islands of the southeastern Brazil: the influence of exposure and benthic cover. Environmental Biology of Fishes 78, 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freese, L., Auster, P.J., Heifetz, J. and Wing, B.L. (1999) Effects of trawling on seafloor habitat and associated invertebrate taxa in the Gulf of Alaska. Marine Ecology Progress Series 182, 119–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harms, S. and Winant, C.D. (1998) Characteristic patterns of the circulation in the Santa Barbara Channel. Journal of Geophysical Research 103, 3041–3065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hickey, B.M. (1992) Circulation over the Santa Monica–San Pedro basin and shelf. Progress in Oceanography 30, 37–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hixon, M.A. (1991) Predation as a process structuring coral reef fish communities. In Sale, P.F. (ed.) The ecology of fishes on coral reefs. San Diego: Academic Press, pp. 475–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holbrook, S.J., Forrester, G.E. and Schmitt, R.J. (2000) Spatial patterns in abundance of a damselfish reflects availability of suitable habitat. Oecologia 122, 109–120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Horn, M.H. (1980) Diversity and ecological roles of noncommercial fishes in California marine habitats. California Cooperative Oceanic Fisheries Investigation Reports 2, 37–47.Google Scholar
Hovel, K.A. and Lipcius, R.N. (2001) Habitat fragmentation on a seagrass landscape: match size and complexity control blue crab survival. Ecology 82, 1814–1829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennings, S. and Kaiser, M.J. (1998) The effects of fishing on marine ecosystems. Advances in Marine Biology 34, 231–352.Google Scholar
Jones, C.G., Lawton, J.H. and Shackak, M. (1997) Positive and negative effects of organisms as physical ecosystem engineers. Ecology 78, 1946–1957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaiser, M.J., Cheney, K., Spence, F.E., Edwards, D.B. and Radford, K. (1999) Fishing effect in northeast Atlantic shelf seas: patterns in fishing effort, diversity and community structure. VII. The effects of trawling disturbance on the fauna associated with the tubeheads of serpulid worms. Fisheries Research 40, 195–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaiser, M.J., Collie, J.S., Hall, S.J. and Poiner, I.R. (2002) Modifications of marine habitats by trawling activities: prognosis and solutions. Fish and Fisheries 3, 114–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kotrschal, K. and Thomson, D.A. (1986) Feeding patterns in eastern tropical Pacific blennioid fishes (Teleostei: Triterygiidae, Labrisomidae, Chaenopsidae, Blenniidae). Oecologia 70, 367–378.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levin, P.S. (1991) Effects of microhabitat on recruitment variation in a temperate reef fish. Marine Ecology Progress Series 75, 183–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levin, P.S., Petrik, R. and Malone, J. (1997) Interactive effects of habitat selection, food supply and predation on recruitment of an estuarine fish. Oecologia 112, 55–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Luckenbach, M.W. (1986) Sediment stability around animal tubes: the role of hydrodynamic processes and biotic activity. Limnology and Oceanography 31, 779–787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McConnaughey, R.A. and Smith, K.R. (2000) Associations between flatfish abundance superficial sediments in the eastern Bering Sea. Canadian Journal of Fishery and Aquatic Science 57, 2410–2419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, D.J. and Lea, R.N. (1972) Guide to the coastal marine fishes of California. Fish Bulletin of California 157, 1–168.Google Scholar
Nishimoto, M.M. (2000) Distributions of late-larval and pelagic juvenile rockfishes in relation to water masses around the Santa Barbara Channel Islands in early summer, 1996. In Browne, D.R., Mitchell, K.L. and Chaney, H.W. (eds) Proceedings of the Fifth California Islands Symposium, US Minerals Management Service and Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, March 29–April 1 1999. OCS Study MMS 99-0038, pp. 483–491.Google Scholar
Orth, R.J., Heck, Jr K.L. and Van Montfrans, J. (1984) Faunal communities in seagrass beds: a review of the influence of plant structure and prey characteristics on predator–prey relationships. Estuaries 7, 339–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paton, P.W.C. (1994) The effect of edge on avian nest success: how strong is the evidence? Conservation Biology 8, 17–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, C.M. and Ormond, R.F.G. (1987) Habitat complexity and coral reef fish diversity and abundance on Red Sea fringing reefs. Marine Ecology Progress Series 41, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryer, C.H. (1988) Pipefish foraging: effects of fish size, prey size and altered habitat complexity. Marine Ecology Progress Series 48, 37–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryer, C.H., Stoner, A.W. and Titgen, R.H. (2004) Behavioral mechanisms underlying the refuge value of benthic habitat structure for two flatfishes with differing anti-predator strategies. Marine Ecology Progress Series 268, 231–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, H.L (1962) Benthic studies in Buzzards Bay. 1. Animal sediment relationships. Limnology and Oceanography 3, 245–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shucksmith, R., Hinz, H., Bergmann, M. and Kaiser, M.J. (2006) Evaluation of habitat use by adult plaice (Pleuronectes platessa L.) using underwater video survey techniques. Journal of Sea Research 56, 317–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steele, M.A. (1997) The relative importance of processes affecting recruitment of two temperate reef fishes. Ecology 78, 129–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steele, M.A. (1999) Effects of shelter and predators on reef fish. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 233, 65–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stephens, J.S., Singer, M. and Targgart, L. (1989) Notes on the first record of the orangethroat pikeblenny, Chaenopsis alepidota (Gilbert), in mainland California. California Fish and Game 75, 80–183.Google Scholar
Stoner, A.W. and Titgen, R.H. (2003) Biological structures and bottom type influence habitat choices made by Alaska flatfishes. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 292, 43–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Temple, S.A. (1986) Predicting impacts of habitat fragmentation on forest birds: a comparison of two models. In Verner, J., Morisson, M.L. and Ralph, C.J. (eds) Wildlife 2000: modeling habitat relationships of terrestrial vertebrates. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, pp. 301–304.Google Scholar
Tewksbury, J.J., Heil, S.J. and Martin, T.E. (1998) Breeding productivity does not decline with increasing fragmentation in a western landscape. Ecology 79, 2890–2903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, M.L. and Schaeffner, L.C. (2001) Population biology and secondary production of the suspension feeding polychaete Chaetopterus cf. variopedatus: implications for benthic–pelagic coupling in lower Chesapeake Bay. Limnology and Oceanography 46, 1899–1907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thrush, S.F., Schultz, D., Hewitt, J.E. and Talley, D. (2002) Habitat structure in soft-sediment environments and abundance of juvenile snapper Pagrus auratus. Marine Ecology Progress Series 245, 273–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tolimieri, N. (1995) Effects of microhabitat characteristics on the settlement and recruitment of a coral reef fish at two spatial scales. Oecologia 102, 52–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tupper, M. and Boutilier, R.G. (1997) Effects of habitat on settlement, growth, predation risk and survival of a temperate reef fish. Marine Ecology Progress Series 277: 231–244.Google Scholar
Underwood, A.J. (1997) Experiments in ecology: their logical design and interpretation using analysis of variance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Van Dolah, R.F., Wendt, R.H. and Nicholson, N. (1987) Effects of a research trawl on a hard-bottom assemblage of sponges and coral. Fishery Research 5, 39–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Washburn, L., Emery, B. and Paduan, J. (1999) The surface circulation of the Santa Barbara Channel observed with high frequency radar. In Browne, D.R., Mitchell, K.L. and Chaney, H.W. (eds) Proceedings of the Fifth California Islands Symposium, US Minerals Management Service and Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, March 29–April 1, 1999. OCS Study MMS 99-0038, pp. 34–38.Google Scholar
Woodin, S.A. (1978) Refuges, disturbance, and community structure: a marine soft-bottom example. Ecology 59, 274–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zale, A.V. and Merrifield, S.G. (1989) Species profiles: life histories and environmental requirements of coastal fishes and invertebrates (South Florida)—red-building tube worm. US Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Bulletin 82, 1–12.Google Scholar
Zar, J.H. (1999) Biostatistical analysis, 4th edition.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Zühlke, R. (2001) Polychaete tubes create ephemeral community patterns: Lanice conchilega (Pallas, 1776) associations studied over six years. Journal of Sea Research 46, 261–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar