Marine Biology

, Volume 142, Issue 6, pp 1195–1206 | Cite as

Differences in the species- and size-composition of fish assemblages in three distinct seagrass habitats with differing plant and meadow structure

  • G. A. HyndesEmail author
  • A. J. Kendrick
  • L. D. MacArthur
  • E. Stewart


Fish faunas were sampled seasonally using a large and a small beam trawl in three seagrass habitats comprising predominantly Amphibolis griffithii or Posidonia sinuosa or Posidonia coriacea, which differ in seagrass and meadow structure. Amphibolis griffithii and P. sinuosa both produce a relatively dense leaf canopy, but the former exhibits a distinct architecture, with the leaf canopy overlying relatively open spaces surrounding woody stems, compared to the uniformly dense blade-like leaves of P. sinuosa which emerge directly from the sediment. In comparison, P. coriacea provides a landscape of patchy seagrass amongst areas of bare sand. Since the latter seagrass habitat contains large areas of sand, fish were also sampled in adjacent unvegetated areas. The number of species and density of fish were greater (P<0.05) in P. sinuosa than in either A. griffithii or P. coriacea. The mean number of species caught using the large trawl ranged from 16 to 24 in the first of these habitats compared to 14–21 and 9–15 in the last two habitats, respectively, and the mean densities ranged between 78 and 291 fish 1000 m−2 in P. sinuosa compared to 31–59 fish 1000 m−2 in A. griffithii and 31–59 fish 1000 m−2 in P. coriacea. The biomass of fish was greater (P<0.05) in both P. sinuosa and A. griffithii than in P. coriacea (4.2–5.3 kg and 3.3–6.2 kg versus 0.7–1.9 kg 1000 m−2, respectively). Furthermore, the size-structure of fish differed among these habitats, where the median weight of fish was 72.1 g in A. griffithii, compared to 7.5 g and 19.8 g in P. sinuosa and P. coriacea, respectively. Ordination and ANOSIM demonstrated that the species-composition differed markedly among the three seagrass habitats (P<0.001), suggesting that fish species display a distinct preference for particular seagrasses characterised by different architecture. Differences in species-composition among the seagrass habitats partly reflected the size-composition of fish in each habitat. The open space below the canopy of A. griffthii is likely to allow larger fish to occupy this habitat, whereas only small fish would be able to penetrate the dense foliage of P. sinuosa. Differences in species- and size-composition of fish among these habitats may be the result of settlement-sized larvae discriminating between particular seagrass and meadow structures, or fish being subject to different levels of predation and/or accessibility to food or space. The species-composition in P. coriacea was highly dispersed and did not differ from that of unvegetated areas. While several species were associated with both P. coriacea and bare-sand habitats, some species did display a high affinity with the seagrass P. coriacea. This may reflect an association with the sparse and narrower leaves of this seagrass or with the patchy occurrence of the seagrass Heterozostera tasmanica, which commonly occurs as an understorey in this habitat.


Fish Assemblage Fish Fauna Bare Sand Seagrass Meadow Seagrass Habitat 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



We thank S. Letch and crew members of Fremantle TAFE's "Maritime Image" and the numerous people who helped in the field. We are also grateful to S. Ayvazian and G. Kendrick and two anonymous referees for their constructive criticisms of the manuscript. Valuable discussions were provided by A. Brearley, M. Cambridge, G. Kendrick, P. Lavery, I. Potter and D. Walker, and statistical advice was provided by R. Clarke. This study was funded by Cockburn Cement Limited.


  1. Aboussouan A, Leis JM (1984) Balistoidei: development. In: Moser HG, Richards WJ, Cohen DM, Fahay MP, Kendall AW, Richardson SL (eds) Ontogeny and systematics of fishes. American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists. Special Publication 1, pp 450–459Google Scholar
  2. Anderson TW (1994) Role of macroalgal structure in the distribution and abundance of a temperate reef fish. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 113:279–290Google Scholar
  3. Bell JD, Westoby M (1986a) Importance of local changes in leaf height and density to fish and decapods associated with seagrasses. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 104:249–274Google Scholar
  4. Bell JD, Westoby M (1986b) Variation in seagrass height and density over a wide spatial scale: effects on common fish and decapods. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 104:275–295Google Scholar
  5. Bell JD, Westoby M (1986c) Abundance of macrofauna in dense seagrass is due to habitat preference, not predation. Oecologia 68:205–209Google Scholar
  6. Bell JD, Westoby M, Steffe AS (1987) Fish larvae settling in seagrass: do they discriminate between beds of different leaf density? J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 111:133–144Google Scholar
  7. Bell JD, Steffe AS, Westoby M (1988) Location of seagrass beds in estuaries: effects on associated fish and decapods. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 122:127–146Google Scholar
  8. Cambridge ML (1999) Growth strategies of Rottnest Island seagrasses. In: Walker DI, Wells FE (eds) The seagrass flora and fauna of Rottnest Island, Western Australia. Western Australian Museum, Perth, pp 1–24Google Scholar
  9. Carr MH (1994) Effects of macroalgal dynamics on the recruitment of temperate reef fish. Ecology 75:1320–1333Google Scholar
  10. Clark BM (1997) Variation in surf-zone fish community structure across a wave-exposure gradient. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 44:659–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clarke KR (1993) Non-parametric multivariate analyses of changes in community structure. Aust J Ecol 18:117–143Google Scholar
  12. Clarke KR, Warwick RM (1994) Change in marine communities: an approach to statistical analysis and interpretations. Plymouth Marine Laboratory, PlymouthGoogle Scholar
  13. Connolly RM (1994) A comparison of fish assemblages from seagrass and unvegetated areas of a southern Australian estuary. Aust J Mar Freshw Res 45:1033–1044Google Scholar
  14. Field JG, Clarke KR, Warwick RM (1982) A practical strategy for analysing multispecies distribution patterns. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 8:37–52Google Scholar
  15. Gomon MF, Glover JCM, Kuiter RH (1994) The fish of Australia's south coast. State Print, AdelaideGoogle Scholar
  16. Heck KL Jr, Orth RJ (1980) Seagrass habitats: the roles of habitat complexity, competition and predation in structuring associated fish and mobile macroinvertebrate assemblages. In: Kennedy VS (ed) Estuarine perspectives. Academic Press, New York, pp 449–462Google Scholar
  17. Heck KL, Able KW, Fahay MP, Roman CT (1989) Fishes and decapod crustaceans of Cape Cod eelgrass meadows: species composition, seasonal abundance patterns and comparison with unvegetated substrates. Estuaries 12:59–65Google Scholar
  18. Hyndes GA (2000) Do fish communities differ among seagrass assemblages? Soc Ital Biol Mar 7:227–230Google Scholar
  19. Hyndes GA, Potter IC, Lenanton RCJ (1996) Habitat partitioning by whiting species (Sillaginidae) in coastal waters. Env Biol Fish 45:21–40Google Scholar
  20. Hyndes GA, Platell ME, Potter IC, Lenanton RCJ (1999) Does the composition of the demersal fish assemblages in temperate coastal waters change with depth and undergo consistent seasonal changes? Mar Biol 134:335–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jenkins GP, Sutherland CR (1997) The influence of habitat structure on nearshore fish assemblages in a southern Australian embayment: colonisation and turnover rate of fishes associated with artificial macrophyte beds of varying physical structure. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 218:103–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jernakoff P, Nielson J (1998) Plant–animal associations in two species of seagrasses in Western Australia. Aquat Bot 60:359–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kendrick AJ, Hyndes GA (2003) Patterns in the abundance and size distribution of syngnathid fishes among habitats in a seagrass-dominated marine environment. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci, in pressGoogle Scholar
  24. Kendrick GA, Eckersley J, Walker DI (1999) Landscape-scale changes in seagrass distribution over time: a case study from Success Bank, Western Australia. Aquat Bot 65:293–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Keulen M van, Borowitzka MA (2000) Comparison of water velocity profiles through morphologically dissimilar seagrasses. Biol Mar Medit 7:143–146Google Scholar
  26. Kuo J, Cambridge ML (1989) A taxonomic study of the Posidonia ostenfeldii complex (Posidoniaceae) with description of four new Australian species. Aquat Bot 20:267–295Google Scholar
  27. Kuo J, McComb AJ (1989) Seagrass taxonomy, structure and development. In: Larkum AWD, McComb AJ, Shepherd SA (eds) Biology of seagrasses: a treatise on the biology of seagrasses with special reference to the Australian region. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  28. Levin PS, Hay ME (1996) Responses of temperate reef fishes to alterations in algal structure and species composition. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 134:37–47Google Scholar
  29. MacArthur LD, Hyndes GA (2001) Differential use of seagrass assemblages by a suite of odacid species. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 52:79–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Martin FD, Cooper M (1981) A comparison of fish faunas found in two tropical Atlantic seagrasses, Thalassia festudinum and Syringodium filiforme. Northeast Gulf Sci 5:31–37Google Scholar
  31. Middleton MJ, Bell JD, Burchmore JJ, Pollard DA, Pease BC (1984) Structural differences in the fish communities of Zostera capricorni and Posidonia australis seagrass meadows in Botany Bay, New South Wales. Aquat Bot 18:89–109Google Scholar
  32. Neira FJ, Bruce BD (1998) Apogonidae: cardinalfishes. In: Neira FJ, Miskiewicz AG, Trnski T (eds) Larvae of temperate Australian fishes. Laboratory guide for larval fish identification. University of Western Australian Press, Perth, pp 174–179Google Scholar
  33. Orth RJ, Heck KL (1980) Structural components of the eelgrass (Zostera marina) meadows in the lower Chesapeake Bay—fishes. Estuaries 3:278–288Google Scholar
  34. Orth RJ, Heck KL, Montfrans J van (1984) Faunal communities in seagrass beds: a review of the influence of plant structure and prey characteristics on predator–prey interactions. Estuaries 7:339–350Google Scholar
  35. Romer GS (1990) Surf zone fish community and species response to a wave energy gradient. J Fish Biol 36:279–287Google Scholar
  36. Rotherham D, West RJ (2002) Do different seagrass species support distinct fish communities in south-eastern Australia? Fish Mar Ecol 9:235–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ruiz GM, Hines AH, Posey MH (1993) Shallow water as a refuge habitat for fish and crustaceans in non-vegetated estuaries: an example from Chesapeake Bay. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 99:1–16Google Scholar
  38. Sogard SM (1989) Colonization of artificial seagrass by fishes and decapod crustaceans: importance of proximity to natural eelgrass. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 133:15–37Google Scholar
  39. Somerfield PJ, Clarke KR (1997) A comparison of some methods commonly used for the collection of sublittoral sediments and their associated fauna. Mar Environ Res 43:145–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stoner AW (1983) Distribution of fishes in seagrass meadows: role of macrophyte biomass and species composition. Fish Bull US 81:837–846Google Scholar
  41. Trautman DA, Borowitzka MA (1999) Distribution of the epiphytic organisms on Posidonia australis and P. sinuosa, two seagrasses with differing leaf morphology. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 179:215–229Google Scholar
  42. Underwood AJ (1981) Techniques of analysis of variance in experimental marine biology and ecology. Oceanogr Mar Biol Annu Rev 19:513–605Google Scholar
  43. Virnstein RW, Curran MC (1986) Colonization of artificial seagrass versus time and distance from source. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 69:1352–1366Google Scholar
  44. Worthington DG, Ferrell DJ, McNeill SE, Bell JD (1992) Effects of shoot density of seagrass on fish and decapods: are correlations evident over larger spatial scales? Mar Biol 112:139–146Google Scholar
  45. Young PC (1981) Temporal changes in the vagile epibenthic fauna of two seagrass meadows (Zostera capricorni and Posidonia australis). Mar Ecol Prog Ser 5:91–102Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. A. Hyndes
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • A. J. Kendrick
    • 1
    • 3
  • L. D. MacArthur
    • 1
  • E. Stewart
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Biological Sciences and BiotechnologyMurdoch UniversityMurdochAustralia
  2. 2.Centre for Ecosystem ManagementEdith Cowan UniversityJoondalupAustralia
  3. 3.Centre for Ecosystem ManagementEdith Cowan UniversityJoondalupAustralia

Personalised recommendations