1,722,228 research outputs found

    Caging experiments: relationship between mesh size and artifacts

    No full text
    In marine sediments, cages, are widely used to detect effects of predation on infauna. Artifacts due to the use of cages have been, instead, poorly estimated. In this study we have analysed the changes in macrofauna and in sediment composition when cages of different mesh sizes are used to exclude predators. In a shallow micro-tidal flat, the effect of three mesh sizes (2, 6 and 18 mm) was tested on sediment and macrofauna, using cages that excluded predators (EC), partial cages (PC) and natural sediment (un-caged plots, UC). PC allowed the predators to feed on the sediment, but modified the sediment similarly to the complete cages. Changes were measured for the abundance and species composition of macrofauna and for sediment total organic matter (TOM), chlorophyll-a, proteins and water content. The use of cages did not alter TOM and water content, whereas chlorophyll-a and phaeopigments were more abundant under the cages. The deep-burrowing shrimp Upogebia pusilla also increased under cages of any mesh-size. There was, instead, an effect on the abundance of macrofauna only when the smallest mesh size was used. Surprisingly, the exclusion of predators decreased the abundances of Tanais dulongii, Oligochaetes, Brania oculata, whereas the abundance of Aphelochaeta marionii changed when both PC and EC were put in the sediment. Collectively, all these findings indicated that for surface animals the use of small mesh sizes can bias the interpretation of results

    Response of deposit-feeders to exclusion of epibenthic predators in a Mediterranean intertidal flat

    No full text
    Deposit-feeders are common components of macrofaunal assemblages in intertidal soft sediments. Predation has been considered to have a central role in affecting their distribution and population dynamics. This study investigates the effect of epibenthic predators on deposit-feeders, inhabiting the shallow layers of the sediment (surface and subsurface) and also the deepest layers (e.g., burrowing shrimp Upogebia pusilla; Petagna). The experiment was conducted in summer 2000 (August–September) at three different sites on an intertidal flat in Mediterranean Sea. In the field, predators were excluded using cages, placed on the surface of the sediment. It was predicted that under the cages, (i) abundances of animals would increase and (ii) species composition of assemblages would change as an effect of the exclusion of predators. Potential artefacts caused by the cages were controlled using partial cages (PC). Composition of organic matter and porosity were also analysed under PC and in natural controls to test whether the presence of cages would change sediment characteristics on the surface. At the end of the experiment, there were no significant differences in the composition of organic matter between PC and the undisturbed sediment (UC). After 8 weeks from the beginning of the experiment, exclusion of predators enhanced the abundance of U. pusilla. There were, however, no clear-cut changes in the species composition of macrofaunal assemblages and densities of animals did not increase under the cages. Indeed, some animals (Oligochaeta, Brania oculata, and Tanais dulongii) were less abundant under the cages (EC) than outside (PC and UC). We propose that predation might play a role in regulating interspecific relationships among some surface deposit-feeders and the burrowing shrimp U. pusilla. [KEYWORDS: Epibenthic predators; Caging experiment; Macrofauna; Upogebia pusilla; Intertidal; Soft-bottom; Mediterranean]

    Recovery of the macrozoobenthic community after severe dystrophic crises in a mediterranean coastal lagoon (Orbetello, Italy)

    No full text
    The Orbetello lagoon, one of the largest Western Mediterranean lagoons, was affected by high algal blooms and severe anoxic crises in 1992 and 1993, with fish mortality throughout most of the lagoon and a drastic reduction of benthic species. Many measures were undertaken between 1994 and 1996 to remove the severe eutrophication of this lagoon. Such measures included harvesting of the floating seaweed biomass, removal of all wastewater and sea channel enlargement by dredging activity. The aim of the present research was to study the macrozoobenthic assemblage in 1999 and to compare it with previous research in order to assess the recovery of the lagoon. A total of 106 taxa and 45175 individuals were collected in three areas (sea inlets, western and eastern lagoon) having different organic matter loading during winter and summer. The results of multivariate and correlation analyses indicated that trophic status and its seasonal dynamics were crucial in determining species distribution among the different areas. Moreover, comparison of the macrozoobenthic structure between winter 1995 and 1999 showed differences in species composition and structural parameters in the western and eastern lagoon, where a clear recovery of benthic assemblages was observed in 1999, However, the dominance of opportunistic species in most of the lagoon and the decrease in some structural parameters during summer suggested that this basin still presented signs of disturbance in 1999, six years after the last extended anoxic crises and even after completion of the restoration measures carried out in the environment. It was hypothesized that a secondary disturbance, sustained by a high seasonal release of nutrients from the sediments, could create considerable deviations from the expected improvement in benthic conditions

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore