Advertisement

Marine Biology

, Volume 160, Issue 9, pp 2493–2501 | Cite as

Grazing by sea urchins at the margins of barren patches on Mediterranean rocky reefs

  • Fabio BulleriEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

The role played by the urchins, Paracentrotus lividus and Arbacia lixula, in the formation and persistence of barren areas dominated by encrusting coralline macroalgae is yet to be fully elucidated. This study, carried out in the NW Mediterranean (43° 30′N, 10° 20′E) between February 2005 and April 2006, investigated how the loss or density decrease in one or both urchin species influences the recovery of erect macroalgal stands (dominated by filamentous forms) at the margins of barren areas. At a depth of 4–6 m, three barren patches were assigned to each of the following treatments: (1) control (natural densities of A. lixula and P. lividus); (2) 50 % of the natural density of A. lixula and natural density of P. lividus; (3) total removal of A. lixula and natural density of P. lividus; (4) 50 % of the natural density of P. lividus and natural density of A. lixula; (5) total removal of P. lividus and natural density of A. lixula; (6) 50 % of the natural densities of both A. lixula and P. lividus; (7) total removal of both A. lixula and P. lividus. The effects of the herbivore treatments were evaluated either in the presence or the absence of encrusting corallines. The partial or total removal of A. lixula, P. lividus or both favored the proliferation of filamentous macroalgae at the margins of barren patches. The presence of encrusting corallines reduced the development of these macroalgae. The results of this study suggest that a moderate decrease in the density of just one of the two species can decrease the ability of the herbivore assemblage to control the proliferation of filamentous macroalgae at the margins of barren patches. The extent of barren areas appears, therefore, to be regulated by the outcome of density-dependent interactions between the two species of sea urchins.

Keywords

Macroalgae Barren Area Algal Turf Herbivore Treatment Rocky Reef 
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.

Notes

Acknowledgments

I wish to thank F. Ciuffardi for help with fieldwork and L. Tamburello, J. Grassle and three anonymous reviewers for providing insightful comments on an earlier draft. This research has received funding from the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007–2013) under Grant Agreement No. 266445 for the project Vectors of Change in Oceans and Seas Marine Life, Impact on Economic Sectors (VECTORS) and Grant Agreement No. 287844 for the project.

Supplementary material

227_2013_2244_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (75 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 74 kb)

References

  1. Airoldi L (2000) Effects of disturbance, life histories, and overgrowth on coexistence of algal crusts and turfs. Ecology 81:798–814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Airoldi L, Virgilio M (1998) Responses of turf-forming algae to spatial variations in the deposition of sediments. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 165:271–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson MJ (2001) A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Aust Ecol 26:32–46Google Scholar
  4. Andrew NL (1993) Spatial heterogeneity, sea-urchin grazing, and habitat structure on reefs in temperate Australia. Ecology 74:292–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baynes TW (1999) Factors structuring a subtidal encrusting community in the southern Gulf of California. Bull Mar Sci 64:419–450Google Scholar
  6. Benedetti-Cecchi L, Bulleri F, Cinelli F (1998) Density dependent foraging of sea urchins in shallow subtidal reefs on the west coast of Italy (western Mediterranean). Mar Ecol Prog Ser 163:203–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bonaviri C, Fernandez TV, Fanelli G, Badalamenti F, Gianguzza P (2011) Leading role of the sea urchin Arbacia lixula in maintaining the barren state in southwestern Mediterranean. Mar Biol 158:2505–2513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Breitburg DL (1984) Residual effects of grazing: inhibition of competitor recruitment by encrusting coralline algae. Ecology 65:1136–1143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bulleri F, Benedetti-Cecchi L (2006) Mechanisms of recovery and resilience of different components of mosaics of habitats on shallow rocky reefs. Oecologia 149:482–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bulleri F, Benedetti-Cecchi L, Cinelli F (1999) Grazing by the sea urchins Arbacia lixula L. and Paracentrotus lividus Lam. In the Northwest Mediterranean. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 241:81–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bulleri F, Bertocci I, Micheli F (2002) Interplay of encrusting coralline algae and sea urchins in maintaining alternative habitats. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 243:101–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bulleri F, Tamburello L, Benedetti-Cecchi L (2009) Loss of consumers alters the effects of resident assemblages on the local spread of an introduced macroalga. Oikos 118:269–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bulleri F, Cristaudo C, Alestra T, Benedetti-Cecchi L (2011) Crossing gradients of consumer pressure and physical stress on shallow rocky reefs: a test of the stress-gradient hypothesis. J Ecol 99:335–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Burkepile DE, Hay ME (2008) Herbivore species richness and feeding complementarity affect community structure and function on a coral reef. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:16201–16206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ceccherelli G, Pais A, Pinna S, Sechi N, Chessa LA (2011) Human impact on Paracentrotus lividus: the result of harvest restrictions and accessibility of locations. Mar Biol 158:845–852CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dean TA, Schroeter SC, Dixon JD (1984) Effects of grazing of two species of sea urchins (Strongylocentrotus franciscanus and Lytechinus anamesus) on recruitment and survival of two species of kelp (Macrocystis pyrifera and Pterigophora californica). Mar Biol 78:301–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Duffy JE (2002) Biodiversity and ecosystem function: the consumer connection. Oikos 99:201–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Frantzis A, Berthon JF, Maggiore F (1988) Relation trophique entre les oursin Arbacia lixula et Paracentrotus lividus (Echinoïdea regularia) et le phytobenthos infralittoral superficiel de la baie dePort-Cros (Var, France). Sci Rep Port-Cros Natl Park 14:81–140Google Scholar
  19. Gianguzza P, Bonaviri C, Milisenda G, Barcellona A, Agnetta D, Fernandez TV, Badalamenti F (2010) Macroalgal assemblage type affects predation pressure on sea urchins by altering adhesion strength. Mar Environ Res 70:82–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gorman D, Connell SD (2009) Recovering subtidal forests in human-dominated landscapes. J Appl Ecol 46:1258–1265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Guidetti P (2004) Consumers of sea urchins, Paracentrotus lividus and Arbacia lixula, in shallow Mediterranean rocky reefs. Helgoland Mar Res 58:110–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Guidetti P, Mori M (2005) Morpho-functional defences of Mediterranean sea urchins, Paracentrotus lividus and Arbacia lixula, against fish predators. Mar Biol 147:797–802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Guidetti P, Fraschetti S, Terlizzi A, Boero F (2003) Distribution patterns of sea urchins and barrens in shallow Mediterranean rocky reefs impacted by the illegal fishery of the rock-boring mollusc Lithophaga lithophaga. Mar Biol 143:1135–1142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Harrold C, Reed DC (1985) Food availability, sea urchin grazing, and kelp forest community structure. Ecology 66:1160–1169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hawkins SJ, Hartnoll RG (1983) Grazing of intertidal algae by marine invertebrates. Oceanogr Mar Biol Annu Rev 21:195–282Google Scholar
  26. Hereu B (2006) Depletion of palatable algae by sea urchins and fishes in a Mediterranean subtidal community. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 313:95–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hereu B, Zabala M, Sala E (2008) Multiple controls of community structure and dynamics in a sublittoral marine environment. Ecology 89:3423–3435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hernandez JC, Clemente S, Sangil C, Brito A (2008) The key role of the sea urchin Diadema aff. antillarum in controlling macroalgae assemblages throughout the Canary Islands (eastern subtropical Atlantic): a spatio-temporal approach. Mar Environ Res 66:259–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hillebrand H, Bennett DM, Cadotte MW (2008) Consequences of dominance: a review of evenness effects on local and regional ecosystem processes. Ecology 89:1510–1520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jacinto D, Bulleri F, Benedetti-Cecchi L, Cruz T (2013) Patterns of abundance, population size structure and microhabitat usage of Paracentrotus lividus (Echinodermata: Echinoidea) in SW Portugal and NW Italy. Mar Biol in pressGoogle Scholar
  31. Jaschinski S, Sommer U (2008) Functional diversity of mesograzers in an eelgrass-epiphyte system. Mar Biol 154:475–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Johnson CR, Mann KH (1988) Diversity, patterns of adaptation, and stability of Nova Scotian kelp beds. Ecol Monogr 58:129–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kawamata S (1998) Effect of wave-induced oscillatory flow on grazing by a subtidal sea urchin Strongylocentrotus nudus (A. Agassiz). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 224:31–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Konar B (2000) Seasonal inhibitory effects of marine plants on sea urchins: structuring communities the algal way. Oecologia 125:208–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lawrence JM (1975) On the relationships between marine plants and sea urchins. Oceanogr Mar Biol Annu Rev 13:213–286Google Scholar
  36. Levings SC, Garrity SD (1983) Diel and tidal movements in two co-occurring neritid snails: differences in grazing patterns on a tropical rocky shore. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 67:261–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ling SD, Johnson CR (2012) Marine reserves reduce risk of climate-driven phase shift by restoring size and habitat specific trophic interactions. Ecol Appl 22:1232–1245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ling SD, Ibbott S, Sanderson JC (2010) Recovery of canopy-forming macroalgae following removal of the enigmatic grazing sea urchin Heliocidaris erythrogramma. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 395:135–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Littler MM, Littler DS (1984) Models of tropical reefs biogenesis: the contributions of algae. Prog Phycol Res 3:323–364Google Scholar
  40. Mangialajo L, Chiantore M, Cattaneo-Vietti R (2008) Loss of fucoid algae along a gradient of urbanisation, and structure of benthic assemblages. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 358:63–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Privitera D, Chiantore M, Mangialajo L, Glavic N, Kozul W, Cattaneo-Vietti R (2008) Inter- and intra-specific competition between Paracentrotus lividus and Arbacia lixula in resource-limited barren areas. J Sea Res 60:184–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sala E, Zabala M (1996) Fish predation and the structure of the sea urchin Paracentrotus lividus populations in the NW Mediterranean. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 140:71–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Scheibling RE (1986) Increased macroalgal abundance following mass mortalities of sea urchins (Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis) along the Atlantic coast of Nova Scotia. Oecologia 68:186–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Schiel DR (1982) Selective feeding by the echinoid, Evechinus chloroticus, and the removal of plants from subtidal algal stands in northern New Zealand. Oecologia 54:379–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Shears NT, Babcock RC, Salomon AK (2008) Context-dependent effects of fishing: variation in trophic cascades across environmental gradients. Ecol Appl 18:1860–1873CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Steneck RS, Dethier MN (1994) A functional group approach to the structure of algal-dominated communities. Oikos 69:476–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Terlizzi A, Benedetti-Cecchi L, Bevilacqua S, Fraschetti S, Guidetti P, Anderson MJ (2005) Multivariate and univariate asymmetrical analyses in environmental impact assessment: a case study of Mediterranean subtidal sessile assemblages. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 289:27–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tuya F, Cisneros-Aguirre J, Ortega-Borges L, Haroun RJ (2007) Bathymetric segregation of sea urchins on reefs of the Canarian Archipelago: role of flow-induced forces. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 73:481–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Underwood AJ (1991) Beyond BACI: experimental designs for detecting human environmental impacts on temporal variations in natural populations. Aust J Mar Freshw Res 42:569–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Underwood AJ (1997) Experiments in ecology: their local design and interpretation using analysis of variance. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  51. Underwood AJ (1999) Physical disturbances and their direct effect on an indirect effect: responses of an intertidal assemblage to a severe storm. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 232:125–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Verlaque M, Nedelec H (1983) Biologie de Paracentrotus lividus (Lamark) sur substratum rocheux en Corse (Méditerranée, France): alimentation des adultes. Vie Milieu 33:191–202Google Scholar
  53. Wangensteen OS, Turon X, Perez-Portela R, Palacin C (2011) A wolf in sheep’s clothing: carnivory in dominant sea urchins in the Mediterranean. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 441:117–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Williams GA, Davies MS, Nagarkar S (2000) Primary succession on a seasonal tropical rocky shore: the relative roles of spatial heterogeneity and herbivory. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 203:81–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Witman JD (1987) Subtidal coexistence: storms, grazing, mutualism, and the zonation of kelps and mussels. Ecol Monogr 57:167–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Witman JD, Dayton PK (2001) Rocky subtidal communities. In: Bertness MD, Gaines SD, Hay ME (eds) Marine community ecology. Sinauer, Sunderland, pp 339–366Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dipartimento di BiologiaUniversità di PisaPisaItaly

Personalised recommendations