Marine Biology

, 163:32 | Cite as

Spatial synchrony of amphipods in giant kelp forests

Original paper

Abstract

Amphipods are abundant in marine ecosystems worldwide and are important as prey and as consumers of macrophytes and detritus in food webs. Due to the spatially complex and dynamic nature of giant kelp (Macrocystis pyrifera) forests, assessment of the abundances of giant kelp and amphipods through time and space should provide insight into their potential interactions within the system. In an extensive field study within the surface canopy of giant kelp, the abundance of amphipods was quantified on artificial substrates at an array of 18 sites within kelp forests along Point Loma, California, USA, from July to October 2009 and 2010. Biomass of giant kelp canopy was estimated using remotely sensed imagery, and the spatial synchrony (autocorrelation through time) of kelp canopy was compared with synchrony of caprellid and non-caprellid amphipods. Caprellids exhibited high spatial synchrony that did not decrease with distance, while non-caprellids were synchronous on local scales, indicating high spatial heterogeneity in abundance through time. Gammarids showed a rapid exponential decrease in synchrony within the first 550 m that was consistent with synchrony of giant kelp. This suggests a local-scale biotic link between non-caprellids and giant kelp canopy, whereas caprellid synchrony is more likely to be influenced by regional-scale environmental variables. Caprellids and other amphipods are important prey resources for common kelp forest fishes, so these differences may in turn affect the spatial distributions of these predators. Moreover, excretion by amphipods may be an important source of nitrogen to giant kelp during periods of nitrogen limitation.

References

  1. Anderson T (1994) Role of macroalgal structure in the distribution and abundance of a temperate reef fish. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 113:279–290. doi:10.3354/meps113279 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bell TW, Cavanaugh KC, Reed DC, Siegel DA (2015) Geographical variability in the controls of giant kelp biomass dynamics. J Biogeogr 42:2010–2021. doi:10.1111/jbi.12550 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bjørnstad ON, Ims RA, Lambin X (1999) Spatial population dynamics: analyzing patterns and processes of population synchrony. Trends Ecol Evol 14:427–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bray RN, Ebeling AW (1975) Food, activity, and habitat of three picker-type microcarnivorous fishes in the kelp forests off Santa Barbara, California. Fish Bull 73:815–829Google Scholar
  5. Buonaccorsi JP, Elkinton JS, Evans SR, Liebhold AM (2001) Measuring and testing for spatial synchrony. Ecology 82:1668–1679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burkepile DE, Allgeier JE, Shantz AA, Pritchard CE, Lemoine NP, Bhatti LH, Layman CA (2013) Nutrient supply from fishes facilitates macroalgae and suppresses corals in a Caribbean coral reef ecosystem. Sci Rep 3:1493. doi:10.1038/srep01493 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Caine EA (1977) Feeding mechanisms and possible resource partitioning of the Caprellidae (Crustacea: Amphipoda) from Puget Sound, USA. Mar Biol 42:331–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Caine EA (1979) Functions of swimming setae within caprellid amphipods (Crustacea). Biol Bull 156:169–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Caine EA (1980) Ecology of two littoral species of caprellid amphipods (Crustacea) from Washington, USA. Mar Biol 56:327–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Caine EA (1991) Caprellid amphipods: fast food for the reproductively active. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 148:27–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cavanaugh K, Siegel D, Reed D, Dennison P (2011) Environmental controls of giant-kelp biomass in the Santa Barbara Channel, California. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 429:1–17. doi:10.3354/meps09141 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cavanaugh KC, Kendall BE, Siegel DA, Reed DC, Alberto F, Assis J (2013) Synchrony in dynamics of giant kelp forests is driven by both local recruitment and regional environmental controls. Ecology 94:499–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cavanaugh KC, Siegel DA, Raimondi PT, Alberto F (2014) Patch definition in metapopulation analysis: a graph theory approach to solve the mega-patch problem. Ecology 95:316–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chapman JW (2007a) Amphipoda: chapter 39. The light and smith manual: intertidal invertebrates from central California to Oregon, 4th edn. University of California Press, California, pp 545–618Google Scholar
  15. Chapman MG (2007b) Colonization of novel habitat: tests of generality of patterns in a diverse invertebrate assemblage. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 348:97–110. doi:10.1016/j.jembe.2007.04.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Christie H, Norderhaug K, Fredriksen S (2009) Macrophytes as habitat for fauna. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 396:221–233. doi:10.3354/meps08351 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cole VJ, Chapman MG, Underwood AJ (2007) Landscapes and life-histories influence colonisation of polychaetes to intertidal biogenic habitats. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 348:191–199. doi:10.1016/j.jembe.2007.05.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Coyer JA (1979) The invertebrate assemblage associated with Macrocystis pyrifera and its utilization as a food resource by kelp forest fishes. Dissertation, University of Southern CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  19. Coyer JA (1984) The invertebrate assemblage associated with the giant kelp, Macrocystis pyrifera, at Santa Catalina Island, California: a general description with emphasis on amphipods, copepods, mysids, and shrimps. Fish Bull 82:55–66Google Scholar
  20. Cruz-Rivera E, Hay ME (2000) The effects of diet mixing on consumer fitness: macroalgae, epiphytes, and animal matter as food for marine amphipods. Oecologia 123:252–264. doi:10.1007/s004420051012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Davenport AC, Anderson TW (2007) Positive indirect effects of reef fishes on kelp performance: the importance of mesograzers. Ecology 88:1548–1561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dayton PK, Tegner MJ, Parnell PE, Edwards PB (1992) Temporal and spatial patterns of disturbance and recovery in a kelp forest community. Ecol Monogr 62:421–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Duffy JE, Hay ME (2000) Strong impacts of grazing amphipods on the organization of a benthic community. Ecol Monogr 70:237–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Eckman JE (1983) Hydrodynamic processes affecting benthic recruitment. Limnol Oceanogr 28:241–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Edgar GJ (1992) Patterns of colonization of mobile epifauna in a Western Australian seagrass bed. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 157:225–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Edgar GJ, Klumpp DW (2003) Consistencies over regional scales in assemblages of mobile epifauna associated with natural and artificial plants of different shape. Aquat Bot 75:275–291. doi:10.1016/s0304-3770(02)00194-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Edgar GJ, Robertson AI (1992) The influence of seagrass structure on the distribution and abundance of mobile epifauna: pattern and process in a Western Australian Amphibolis bed. J Exp Mar Biol 160:13–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Eggleston DB, Elis WE, Etherington LL, Dahlgren CP, Posey MH (1999) Organism responses to habitat fragmentation and diversity: habitat colonization by estuarine macrofauna. J Exp Mar Biol 236:107–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Farlin J, Lewis L, Anderson T, Lai C (2010) Functional diversity in amphipods revealed by stable isotopes in an eelgrass ecosystem. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 420:277–281. doi:10.3354/meps08873 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Feary DA, Wellenreuther M, Clements KD (2009) Trophic ecology of New Zealand triplefin fishes (Family Tripterygiidae). Mar Biol 156:1703–1714. doi:10.1007/s00227-009-1205-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gaylord B et al (2007) Spatial patterns of flow and their modification within and around a giant kelp forest. Limnol Oceanogr 52:1838–1852CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Graham MH (2002) Prolonged reproductive consequences of short-term biomass loss in seaweeds. Mar Biol 140:901–911. doi:10.1007/s00227-001-0761-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Guerra-García JM, Tierno de Figueroa JM (2009) What do caprellids (Crustacea: Amphipoda) feed on? Mar Biol 156:1881–1890. doi:10.1007/s00227-009-1220-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Guerra-Garcia JM, Corzo J, Garcia-Asencio I (2000) Seasonal fluctuations of Phtisica marina Slabber (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Caprellidea) in estuarine zone of southwest Spain. Pol Arch Hydrobiol 47:527–531Google Scholar
  35. Guerra-García JM, Ros M, Gordillo I, Cabezas MP, Baeza-Rojano E, Izquierdo D, Corzo J, Domínguez J, Varona S (2010) Distribution patterns of intertidal and shallow water caprellids associated with macroalgae along the Iberian Peninsula. Zoöl Baetica 21:101–129Google Scholar
  36. Hanisak MD (1983) The nitrogen relationships of marine macroalgae. In: Carpenter EJ, Capone DG (eds) Nitrogen in the marine environment. Academic Press, New York, pp 699–730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hauser A, Attrill MJ, Cotton PA (2006) Effects of habitat complexity on the diversity and abundance of macrofauna colonising artificial kelp holdfasts. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 325:100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hepburn C, Frew R, Hurd C (2012) Uptake and transport of nitrogen derived from sessile epifauna in the giant kelp Macrocystis pyrifera. Aquat Biol 14:121–128. doi:10.3354/ab00382 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Holbrook SJ, Schmitt RJ (1986) Food acquisition by competing surfperch on a patchy environmental gradient. Environ Biol Fish 16:135–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hughes ARR, Bando KJ, Rodriguez LF, Williams SL (2004) Relative effects of grazers and nutrients on seagrasses: a meta-analysis approach. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 282:87–99Google Scholar
  41. Jessen MP (1969) The ecology and taxonomy of the Caprellidae (order, Amphipoda-suborder, Caprellidea) of the Coos Bay, Oregon, area. University of MinnesotaGoogle Scholar
  42. Kendall MM, Widdicombe S, Davey JJ, Somerfield PP, Austen MCV, Warwick RM (1996) The biogeography of islands: preliminary results from a comparative study of the isles of Scilly and Cornwall. J Mar Biol Assoc U K 76:219. doi:10.1017/s0025315400029155 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lagos NA, Tapia FJ, Navarrete SA, Castilla JC (2007) Spatial synchrony in the recruitment of intertidal invertebrates along the coast of central Chile. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 350:29–39. doi:10.3354/meps07105 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lewis LS, Anderson TW (2012) Top-down control of epifauna by fishes enhances seagrass production. Ecology 93:2746–2757CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lowry JK, Myers AA (2013) A phylogeny and classification of the Senticaudata subord. nov. (Crustacea: Amphipoda). Zootaxa 3610:1–80. doi:10.11646/zootaxa.3610.1.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mace AJ, Morgan SG (2006) Larval accumulation in the lee of a small headland: implications for the design of marine reserves. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 318:19–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. McCauley DJ et al (2015) Carbon stable isotopes suggest that hippopotamus-vectored nutrients subsidize aquatic consumers in an East African river. Ecosphere 6. doi:10.1890/ES14-00514.1
  48. McCurdy DG, Forbes MR (2005) Foraging and impacts by benthic fish on the intertidal amphipod Corophium volutator. J Crustacean Biol 25:558–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Menge BA, Chan F, Nielsen KJ, Di Lorenzo E, Lubchenco J (2009) Climatic variation alters supply-side ecology: impact of climate patterns on phytoplankton and mussel recruitment. Ecol Monogr 79:379–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Moore SE, Grebmeier JM, Davies JR (2003) Gray whale distribution relative to forage habitat in the northern Bering Sea: current conditions and retrospective summary. Can J Zool 81:734–742. doi:10.1139/Z03-043 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Moran PAP (1953) The statistical analysis of the Canadian lynx cycle. Aust J Zool 1:291–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Morton D, Anderson T (2013) Spatial patterns of invertebrate settlement in giant kelp forests. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 485:75–89. doi:10.3354/meps10329 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Nakaoka M, Toyohara T, Matsumasa M (2001) Seasonal and between-substrate variation in mobile epifaunal community in a multispecific seagrass bed of Otsuchi Bay, Japan. Mar Ecol 22:379–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. North WJ, Zimmerman RC (1984) Influences of macronutrients and water temperatures on summertime survival of Macrocystis canopies. In: Eleventh international seaweed symposium, pp 419–424Google Scholar
  55. Okamoto DK, Schmitt RJ, Holbrook SJ, Reed DC (2012) Fluctuations in food supply drive recruitment variation in a marine fish. Proc R Soc B 279:4542–4550. doi:10.1098/rspb.2012.1862 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Page H, Dugan J, Schroeder D, Nishimoto M, Love M, Hoesterey J (2007) Trophic links and condition of a temperate reef fish: comparisons among offshore oil platform and natural reef habitats. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 344:245–256. doi:10.3354/meps06929 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Pérez-Matus A, Shima J (2010) Density- and trait-mediated effects of fish predators on amphipod grazers: potential indirect benefits for the giant kelp Macrocystis pyrifera. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 417:151–158. doi:10.3354/meps08820 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Poore AG (1994) Selective herbivory by amphipods inhabiting the brown alga Zonaria angustata. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 107:113–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Poore AG (2004) Spatial associations among algae affect host use in a herbivorous marine amphipod. Oecologia 140:104–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Poore AG (2005) Scales of dispersal among hosts in a herbivorous marine amphipod. Austral Ecol 30:219–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Reed DC, Rassweiler A, Carr MH, Cavanaugh KC, Malone DP, Siegel DA (2011) Wave disturbance overwhelms top-down and bottom-up control of primary production in California kelp forests. Ecology 92:2108–2116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Regnault M (1987) Nitrogen excretion in marine and fresh-water crustacea. Biol Rev 62:1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Roberts DA, Poore AG (2006) Habitat configuration affects colonisation of epifauna in a marine algal bed. Biol Conserv 127:18–26. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2005.07.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Ronowicz M, Legeżyńska J, Kukliński P, Włodarska-Kowalczuk M (2013) Kelp forest as a habitat for mobile epifauna: case study of Caprella septentrionalis Kröyer, 1838 (Amphipoda, Caprellidae) in an Arctic glacial fjord. Polar Res. doi:10.3402/polar.v32i0.21037 Google Scholar
  65. Rule MJ, Smith SD (2005) Spatial variation in the recruitment of benthic assemblages to artificial substrata. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 290:67–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Saunders CG (1966) Dietary analysis of caprellids (Amphipoda). Crustaceana 10:314–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Schneider DC, Harrington BA (1981) Timing of shorebird migration in relation to prey depletion. Auk 98:801–811Google Scholar
  68. Smith SD, Rule MJ (2002) Artificial substrata in a shallow sublittoral habitat: Do they adequately represent natural habitats or the local species pool? J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 277:25–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Takeuchi I, Yamakawa H, Fujiwara M (1990) Density fluctuation of caprellid amphipods (Crustacea) inhabiting the red alga Gelidium amansii (Lamouroux) Lamouroux, with emphasis on Caprella okadai Arimoto. La Mer 28:36Google Scholar
  70. Taylor RB, Cole RG (1994) Mobile epifauna on subtidal brown seaweeds in northeastern New Zealand. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 115:271–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Taylor R, Rees TAV (1998) Excretory products of mobile epifauna as a nitrogen source for seaweeds. Limnol Oceanogr 43:600–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Thiel M, Guerra-García JM, Lancellotti DA, Vásquez N (2003) The distribution of littoral caprellids (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Caprellidea) along the Pacific coast of continental Chile. Rev Chil Hist Nat 76:297–312Google Scholar
  73. Thom R, Miller B, Kennedy M (1995) Temporal patterns of grazers and vegetation in a temperate seagrass system. Aquat Bot 50:201–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Tilman D, Kareiva PM (1997) Spatial ecology: the role of space in population dynamics and interspecific interactions. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  75. Underwood AJ, Chapman MG (2006) Early development of subtidal macrofaunal assemblages: relationships to period and timing of colonization. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 330:221–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. van Montfrans J, Wetzel RL, Orth RJ (1984) Epiphyte–grazer relationships in seagrass meadows: consequences for seagrass growth and production. Estuaries 7:289–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Wagner HH, Fortin M-J (2005) Spatial analysis of landscapes: concepts and statistics. Ecology 86:1975–1987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Wiens JA (1989) Spatial scaling in ecology. Funct Ecol 3:385–397Google Scholar
  79. Woods CM (2009) Caprellid amphipods: An overlooked marine finfish aquaculture resource? Aquaculture 289:199–211. doi:10.1016/j.aquaculture.2009.01.018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Zimmerman RC, Kremer JN (1984) Episodic nutrient supply to a kelp forest ecosystem in Southern California. J Mar Res 42:591–604. doi:10.1357/002224084788506031 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dana N. Morton
    • 1
    • 2
  • Tom W. Bell
    • 3
  • Todd W. Anderson
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Biology and Coastal and Marine InstituteSan Diego State UniversitySan DiegoUSA
  2. 2.Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Marine BiologyUniversity of California, Santa BarbaraSanta BarbaraUSA
  3. 3.Earth Research InstituteUniversity of California, Santa BarbaraSanta BarbaraUSA

Personalised recommendations