Endofauna differences between two temperate marine sponges (Demospongiae; Haplosclerida; Chalinidae) from southwest Australia
The endofaunal assemblages associated with two species of sponge from the family Chalinidae (Haliclona sp. 1 and Haliclona sp. 2) were studied at four locations along the south west coast of Australia. The species have distinct morphologies and inhabit similar microhabitats; there is also considerable scientific interest in Haliclona sp. 1 (green Haliclona) due to the unique bioactive compound it produces. A total of 948 and 287 endofaunal individuals were found associated with 16 specimens of both the green Haliclona and Haliclona sp. 2 (brown Haliclona), respectively. Twenty-four endofaunal taxa were found (from mysid shrimps to teleost fish), with the brown Haliclona having a greater density of endofaunal species and individuals than the green Haliclona. The endofaunal assemblages of both species of sponge were significantly different, but only the endofaunal assemblage within the green Haliclona differed significantly among locations. Differences in the abundance and biomass of associated endofauna of each species of sponge can be related to differences in their morphologies, size and internal structure. In the green Haliclona, differences in endofaunal assemblages among locations are unlikely to be due to environmental influences as taxa discriminating each locations assemblage were common to both species of sponge. Numerous endofaunal individuals were found to be reproductively active, and it is clear that the species of sponge provide important habitats for their associated endofauna. This provision of habitat needs to be taken into account when harvesting green Haliclona biomass for supply of its target bioactive compound for further pharmaceutical development.
KeywordsSponge Polychaete Internal Space Sponge Species Brittle Star
The editorial assistance of Dr Jane Fromont, Dr Gary Kendrick, Dr Justin McDonald and Stephen Whalan is greatly appreciated, as are the comments and suggestions of the anonymous reviewers. This research was supported by a University of Western Australia Postgraduate Award and complied with all current laws of Australia. Special thanks are given to Linda Heap, Caine Delacy, Diego Kendrick, David Gull and Craig Lebens (and Lebens Diving Services) for their help in the field.
- Anderson MJ (2001) A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Aust Ecol 26:32–46Google Scholar
- Clarke KR (1993) Non-parametric multivariate analyses of changes in community structure. Aust J Ecol 18:118–127Google Scholar
- Connell SD (2007) Subtidal temperate rocky habitats: habitat heterogeneity at local to continental scales. In: Connell SD, Gillanders BM (eds) Marine Ecology. Oxford University Press, Melbourne, pp 378–401Google Scholar
- Fromont J (1999) Reproduction of some demosponges in a temperate Australian shallow water habitat. Mem Qld Mus 44:185–192Google Scholar
- Jumars PA (2006) Habitat coupling by mid-latitude, subtidal, marine mysids: import-subsidized omnivores. Oceanogr Mar Biol Annu Rev 45: In PressGoogle Scholar
- Serejo CS (1998) Gammaridean and Caprellidean fauna (Crustacea) associated with the sponge Dysidea fragilis Johnston at Arraial do Cabo, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Bull Mar Sci 63:363–385Google Scholar
- Wendt PH, Van Dolah RF, O’Rourke CB (1985) A comparative study of the invertebrate macrofauna associated with seven sponge and coral species collected from the South Atlantic Bight. J Elisha Mitchell Sci Soc 101:187–203Google Scholar
- Williams SL, Keck KL (2001) Seagrass community ecology. In: Bertness MD, Gaines SD, Hay ME (eds) Marine Community Ecology. Sinauer Associates Inc., Sunderland, pp 317–337Google Scholar
- Zar JH (1999) Biostatistical analysis. Prentice Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar