Advertisement

Polar Biology

, Volume 31, Issue 10, pp 1225–1231 | Cite as

Ecological traits of benthic assemblages in shallow Antarctic waters: does ice scour disturbance select for small, mobile, secondary consumers with high dispersal potential?

  • Dan A. SmaleEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

Benthic communities in nearshore habitats around Antarctica are strongly influenced by ice disturbance. It has been suggested that where ice scour disturbance is severe, the relative importance of certain ecological groups is elevated. I examined the relative contributions of mobility, size, feeding strategy and development mode groups to total faunal abundance and species richness in relation to ice disturbance at Adelaide Island, West Antarctic Peninsula. The contributions of ecological groups were assessed along a depth/disturbance gradient from 5 to 25 m depth at two sites. At one site, the relative abundance of the low mobility group was significantly greater at low disturbance levels, whilst the relative abundance of the high dispersal group (taxa with pelagic larvae) was elevated at high disturbance levels. At the other site, the relative abundance of secondary consumers was greater at high disturbance levels. Even over small spatial scales, certain ecological traits seem advantageous to a fauna shaped by intense, catastrophic ice scour.

Keywords

Ice disturbance Polar ecology Reproductive strategies Benthic communities Disturbance gradient 

Notes

Acknowledgments

I would sincerely like to thank A. Clarke, D. Barnes and L. Peck for enlightening discussions, at various times, which encouraged me to write this paper. The UK NFSD and the Rothera marine teams of 2004 and 2005 are thanked for their support and assistance throughout the fieldwork. This work was funded by the British Antarctic Survey’s core science programme, BIOFLAME.

References

  1. Barnes DKA, Brockington S (2003) Zoobenthic biodiversity, biomass and abundance at Adelaide Island, Antarctica. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 249:145–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bowden DA (2005) Quantitative characterization of shallow marine benthic assemblages at Ryder Bay, Adelaide Island, Antarctica. Mar Biol 146:1235–1249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bowden DA, Clarke A, Peck LS, Barnes DKA (2006) Antarctic sessile marine benthos: colonisation and growth on artificial substrata over three years. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 316:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown KM, Fraser KPP, Barnes DKA, Peck LS (2004) Links between the structure of an Antarctic shallow-water community and ice-scour frequency. Oecologia 141:121–129PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Conlan KE, Lenihan HS, Kvitek RG, Oliver JS (1998) Ice scour disturbance to benthic communities in the Canadian High Arctic. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 166:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gutt J, Schickan T (1998) Epibiotic relationships in Antarctic benthos. Antarct Sci 10:398–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gutt J, Starmans A (2001) Quantification of iceberg impact and benthic recolonisation patterns in the Weddell Sea (Antarctica). Polar Biol 24:615–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Jazdzeski K, Teodorczyk W, Sicinski J, Kontek B (1991) Amphipod crustaceans as an important component of zoobenthos of the shallow Antarctic sublittoral. Hydrobiologia 223:105–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kaiser MJ, Ramsay K, Richardson CA, Spencer BE, Brand AR (2000) Chronic fishing disturbance has changed shelf sea benthic community structure. J Anim Ecol 69:494–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kaiser MJ, Spencer BE (1996) The effects of beam-trawl disturbance on infaunal communities in different habitats. J Anim Ecol 65:348–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lenihan HS, Oliver JS (1995) Anthropogenic and natural disturbances to marine benthic communities in Antarctica. Ecol Appl 5:311–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Nonato EF, Brito TAS, De Paiva PC, Petti MAV, Corbisier TN (2000) Benthic megafauna of the nearshore zone of Martel Inlet (King George Island, South Shetland Islands, Antarctica): depth zonation and underwater observations. Polar Biol 23:580–588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Palma AT, Poulin E, Silva MG, San Martin RB, Munoz CA, Diaz AG (2007) Antarctic shallow subtidal echinoderms: is ecological success of broadcasters related to ice disturbance? Polar Biol 30:343–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Pearse JS, Lockhart SJ (2004) Reproduction in cold water: paradigm changes in the 20th century and a role for cidaroid sea urchins. Deep Sea Res Part II 51:1533–1549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Pearse JS, McClintock JB, Bosch I (1991) Reproduction of Antarctic benthic marine invertebrates: tempos, modes and timing. Am Zool 31:65–80Google Scholar
  16. Poulin E, Boletzky SV, Feral J (2001) Combined ecological factors permit classification of development patterns in benthic marine invertebrates: a discussion note. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 257:109–115PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Poulin E, Palma AT, Feral J (2002) Evolutionary versus ecological success in Antarctic benthic invertebrates. Trends Ecol Evolut 17:218–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Presler P (1986) Necrophagous invertebrates of the Admiralty Bay of King George Island (South Shetland Islands, Antarctica). Pol Polar Res 7:25–61Google Scholar
  19. Richardson ME, Hedgepeth JW (1977) Antarctic soft-bottom, macrobenthic community adaptations to a cold, stable, highly productive, glacially affected environment. In: Llano GA (ed) Adaptations within Antarctic ecosystems. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, pp 181–196Google Scholar
  20. Slattery PN, Oliver JS (1986) Scavenging and other feeding habits of lysianassid amphipods (Orchomene spp.) from McMurdo Sound, Antarctica. Polar Biol 6:171–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Smale DA (2007) Ice disturbance intensity structures benthic communities in nearshore Antarctic waters. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 349:89–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Smale DA (2008) Continuous benthic community change along a depth gradient in Antarctic shallows: evidence of patchiness but not zonation. Polar Biol 31:189–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Smale DA, Barnes DKA, Fraser KPP (2007a) The influence of depth, site exposure and season on the intensity of iceberg scouring in nearshore Antarctic waters. Polar Biol 30:769–779CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Smale DA, Barnes DKA, Fraser KPP (2007b) The influence of ice scour on benthic communities at three contrasting sites at Adelaide Island, Antarctica. Austral Ecol 32:878–888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Smale DA, Barnes DKA, Fraser KPP, Mann PJ, Brown MP (2007c) Scavenging in Antarctica: intense variation between sites and seasons in shallow benthic necrophagy. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 349:405–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Todd CD (1998) Larval supply and recruitment of benthic invertebrates: do larvae always disperse as much as we believe? Hydrobiologia 375–376:1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Zamorano JH (1983) Zonacion y biomasa de la macrofauna betonica en Bahia South, Archipelago de palmer, Antarctica. Inst Antarctico Chil Ser Cient 30:27–38Google Scholar
  28. Zamorano JH, Duarte WE, Moreno CA (1986) Predation upon Laternula elliptica (Bivalva, Anatinidae): A field manipulation in South Bay, Antarctica. Polar Biol 6:139–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.British Antarctic Survey, Natural Environment Research CouncilCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations