Marine Mussels. Elizabeth Gosling

Чтение книги онлайн.

Читать онлайн книгу Marine Mussels - Elizabeth Gosling страница 49

Marine Mussels - Elizabeth Gosling

Скачать книгу

and emergent rock, over a time series (5, 10, 15 months) and among seasons (three successive five‐month intervals). In tidepools, mussels naturally occurred in small patches (median <25 cm2), while mussels on emergent rock formed extensive beds with decimetre‐scale gaps, but these beds started as small patches following disturbance such as ice scour. For their experimental patches (15 cm2) in both habitats, the authors assessed the relative importance of physical (wave disturbance) and biological (predation, growth, recruitment and immigration) processes in determining patch size and structure. Individual experimental and natural patches varied greatly in size over time, but mean patch area remained relatively constant. Mean size of individuals in experimental patches decreased due to the loss of larger mussels, while numbers increased due to recruitment. Wave disturbance appeared to be more important than predation in determining patch structure and dynamics, although losses due to either process did not differ consistently between habitats over time. Growth rates were low (≤0.4mm per month), but were greater in tidepools than on emergent rock, whereas recruitment and immigration rates generally did not differ between habitats. Although each process contributed to changes in patch size and structure, overall they did not result in a marked divergence in mean patch area or biomass between tidepools and emergent rock over the 15‐month experiment. This study highlights how integrative approaches, with monitoring of patches and of individuals within patches, can provide detailed mechanistic understanding of patch structure and dynamics.

      Waves are not only associated with hydrodynamic stress but can also carry heavy loads of sand, periodically disturbing intertidal shores through sand burial or sand scour (reviewed in McQuaid et al. 2015). Acting as an agent of disturbance, sand removes plant tissue, epiphytes or invertebrates with poor attachment to the rock surface through scouring and decreases light, oxygen and substratum available to organisms through burial. It can lead to temporary species impoverishment by selective elimination of maladapted species, although in the longer term it may also enhance species richness by increasing habitat heterogeneity, allowing within‐shore coexistence of sand‐intolerant species and those associated with sand deposits (McQuaid & Dower 1990).

      Unexpectedly, sand stress strongly affects the survival of M. galloprovincialis and P. perna individuals but is not related to their physiological tolerances and does not explain their vertical zonation. When buried under sand, P. perna mortality rates are higher than those of M. galloprovincialis in both laboratory and field experiments, yet it is P. perna that dominates the low shore where sand inundation is recurrent (Zardi et al. 2006). Although both species accumulate sediments within the shell valves while still alive and sand buried, the quantities are much greater for P. perna, causing intense visible damage and clogging of the gills, which explains its higher mortality rates. Presumably, the accumulation of sand within the shell of P. perna is linked to its gaping behaviour. Wave and sand stress vary also in time, altering the timing and mortality rates of the two mussel species (Zardi et al. 2008). During periods of high sand accumulation in mussel beds, the indigenous species has increased mortality rates that are higher than those of M. galloprovincialis, while the pattern is reversed during winter, when wave action is high (Zardi et al. 2008). When sand stress is high, the less stable secondary substratum of sand and shell fragments weakens the attachment strength of mussels living within a bed. Consequently, the indigenous species loses its advantage in attachment strength over the invasive species, and this results in a seasonal shift in the competitive balance between the two.

      The mechanism driving these successional events is generally thought to be competition with larger, later‐colonising species assuming competitive dominance over smaller, early‐succession species, until finally sea mussels dominate. M. californianus exhibits competitive dominance: small barnacles are smothered, larger barnacles such as Semibalanus cariosus are overgrown and abraded and goose‐neck barnacles, Pollicipes polymerus, are slowly crushed to death. Both M. californianus and Semibalanus cariosus have refuge in size from predation by whelks Nucella spp., and thus could potentially monopolise all space were it not for predation by sea stars, Pisaster ochraceus, from lower positions on the shore and for

Скачать книгу