Advertisement

Hydrobiologia

, Volume 683, Issue 1, pp 287–296 | Cite as

Habitat-related differences in recruitment and survival of early recruits of the invasive Sargassum muticum (Phaeophyta, Sargassaceae) in northern Portugal

  • Carla A. Monteiro
  • Aschwin H. Engelen
  • Rui SantosEmail author
Primary Research Paper

Abstract

Habitat-related differences in recruitment and early survival of the invasive seaweed Sargassum muticum were investigated in relation to the lunar phase (gamete release trigger) and meso-grazing between mid-intertidal and low-intertidal pools in northern Portugal. In situ experiments were performed to determine recruitment and to test the effect of intertidal level (mid-intertidal and low-intertidal pools), grazing (no cage, cage and open cage), and lunar phase (full, new and each quarter moon) on recruit survival during reproductive seasons in two consecutive years. Our results show clearly that recruitment and survival were higher in the mid-intertidal than in low-intertidal environment in both study periods. Caging treatments affected recruit survival in both environments, however, differences in patterns suggesting differences in grazing pressure due to differences in grazer density and/or the assemblages. It therefore seems that grazing on early recruits of this invader might contribute to the resistance to proliferation. Mid-intertidal pools constitute a more favourable environment for recruits of S. muticum than the low-intertidal, which may explain the mainly mid-intertidal distribution of the species in Portugal.

Keywords

Grazing Intertidal Lunar phase Recruitment Sargassum muticum Survival 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are thankful to the ‘Associação dos Amigos do Mar’ in Viana do Castelo, for supporting us during the entire sample period and K. Sjøtun for helpful comments and J. Howard for help in reviewing this manuscript. This study was supported by the projects ‘ALIENS—ALgal Introductions to EuropeaN Shores’, EVK3-2001-0008 and ‘The invasive theory of the pest seaweed Sargassum muticum in Southern Portugal’, POCTI/MAR/55377/2004. A.H. Engelen was supported by scholarship SFRH/BPD/7153/2001 and SFRH/BPD/63703/2009 of the Portuguese Science Foundation (FCT).

References

  1. Alvarez, M. E. & J. H. Cushman, 2002. Community-level consequences of a plant invasion: effects on three habitats in coastal California. Ecological Applications 12: 1434–1444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrew, N. L. & R. M. Viejo, 1998. Effects of wave exposure and intraspecific density on the growth and survivorship of Sargassum muticum (Sargassaceae: Phaeophyta). European Journal of Phycology 33: 251–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arenas, F. & C. Fernández, 2000. Size structure and dynamics in a population of Sargassum muticum (Phaeophyceae). Journal of Phycology 36: 1012–1020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arrontes, J., F. Arenas, C. Fernández, J. M. Rico, J. Oliveros, B. Martínez, R. M. Viejo & D. Alvarez, 2004. Effect of limpets on mid-shore species assemblages in northern Spain. Marine Ecology Progress Series 277: 117–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bertness, M. D., G. C. Trussel, P. J. Ewanchuk & B. R. Silliman, 2002. Do alternate stable community states exist in the Gulf of Maine rocky intertidal zone? Ecology 83: 3434–3448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boaventura, D., M. Alexander, P. Della Santina, N. D. Smith, P. Ré, L. C. Fonseca & S. J. Hawkins, 2002a. The effects of grazing on the distribution and composition of low-shore algal communities on the central coast of Portugal and on the southern coast of Britain. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology Ecology 267: 185–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boaventura, D., P. Ré, L. C. Fonseca & S. J. Hawkins, 2002b. Intertidal rocky shore communities of the continental Portuguese coast: analysis of distribution patterns. Marine Ecology 23: 69–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Britton-Simmons, K. H., 2004. Direct and indirect effects of the introduced alga Sargassum muticum on benthic, subtidal communities of Washington State, USA. Marine Ecology Progress Series 277: 61–78. Google Scholar
  9. Cervin, G., M. Lindegarth, R. M. Viejo & P. Åberg, 2004. Effects of small-scale disturbances of canopy and grazing on intertidal assemblages on the Swedish west coast. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology Ecology 302: 35–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chapman, A. R. O., 1989. Abundance of Fucus spiralis and ephemeral in a high eulittoral zone: effects of grazers, canopy and substratum type. Marine Biology 102: 565–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dethier, M. N. & D. O. Duggins, 1988. Variation in strong interactions in the intertidal zone along a geographical gradient: a Washington-Alaska comparison. Marine Ecology Progress Series 50: 97–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Druehl, L. D., 1973. Marine transplantations. Science 179: 12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dudgeon, S. & P. S. Petraitis, 2005. First year demography of the foundation species, Ascophyllum nodosum, and its community implication. Oikos 109: 405–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Eggleston, D. B., W. E. Elis, L. L. Etherington, C. P. Dahlgren & M. H. Posey, 1999. Organism responses to habitat fragmentation and diversity: habitat colonization by estuarine macrofauna. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 236: 107–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Engelen, A., C. Espírito-Santo, T. Simões, C. Monteiro, E. A. Serrão, G. A. Pearson & R. Santos, 2008. Periodicity of propagule expulsion and settlement in the competing native and invasive brown seaweeds, Cystoseira humilis and Sargassum muticum (Phaeophyta). European Journal of Phycology 43: 275–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Engelen, A. H., N. Henriques, C. A. Monteiro & R. Santos, 2011. Mesograzers prefer mostly native seaweeds over the invasive brown seaweed Sargassum muticum. Hydrobiologia 669: 157–165.Google Scholar
  17. Hawkins, S. J. & R. G. Hartnoll, 1983. Grazing of intertidal algae by marine invertebrates. Oceanography and Marine Biology: An Annual Review 21: 195–282.Google Scholar
  18. Hawkins, S. J. & R. G. Hartnoll, 1985. Factors determining the upper limits of intertidal canopy-forming algae. Marine Ecology Progress Series 20: 265–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hawkins, S. J., R. G. Hartnoll, J. M. Kain & T. A. Norton, 1992. Plant–animal interactions on hard substrata in the Northeast Atlantic. In John, D. M., S. J. Hawkins & J. H. Price (eds), Plant–Animal Interactions in the Marine Benthos. Oxford University Press, Oxford: 1–32.Google Scholar
  20. Heck, K. L., J. R. Pennock, J. F. Valentine, L. D. Coen & S. A. Sklenar, 2000. Effects of nutrient enrichment and small predator density on seagrass ecosystems: an experimental assessment. Limnology and Oceanography 45: 1041–1057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jenkins, S. R., S. J. Hawkins & T. A. Norton, 1999. Direct and indirect effects of a macroalgal canopy and limpet grazing in structuring a sheltered intertidal community. Marine Ecology Progress Series 188: 81–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Johnson, L. E. & S. H. Brawley, 1998. Dispersal and recruitment of a canopy-forming intertidal alga: the relative roles of a propagule availability and post-settlement process. Oecologia 117: 517–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Keane, R. M. & M. J. Crawley, 2002. Exotic plant invasions and the enemy release hypothesis. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 17: 164–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kendrick, G. A., 1994. Effects of propagule settlement density and adult canopy on survival of recruits of Sargassum spp. (Sargassaceae: Phaeophyta). Marine Ecology Progress Series 103: 129–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Koehl, M. A. R. & S. A. Wainwright, 1977. Mechanical adaptation of a giant kelp. Limnology and Oceanography 22(6): 1067–1071.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ladah, L., R. Bermudez, G. Pearson & E. Serrão, 2003. Fertilization success and recruitment of dioecious and hermaphroditic fucoid seaweeds with contrasting distributions near their southern limit. Marine Ecology Progress Series 262: 163–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lawton, J. H. & K. C. Brown, 1986. The population and community ecology of invading insects. Philosophical Transaction of the Royal Society of London B—Biological Sciences 314: 607–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Levin, P. S., J. A. Coyer, R. Petrik, & T. P. Good, 2002. Community-wide effects of non-indigenous species on temperate rocky reefs. Ecology 83: 3182–3193.Google Scholar
  29. Lotze, H. K. & B. Worm, 2001. Strong bottom-up and top-down control of early life stages of macroalgae. Limnology and Oceanography 46: 749–757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mack, R. N., D. Simberloff, W. M. Lonsdale, H. Evans, M. Clout & F. A. Bazzaz, 2000. Biotic invasions: causes, epidemiology, global consequences, and control. Ecological Applications 10: 689–710.Google Scholar
  31. McNeill, S. E. & P. G. Fairweather, 1993. Single large or several small marine reserves? An experimental approach with seagrass fauna. Journal of Biogeography 20: 429–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Monteiro, C., A. H. Engelen & R. Santos, 2009a. Macro- and mesoherbivores prefer native seaweeds over the invasive brown seaweed Sargassum muticum: a potential regulating role on invasions. Marine Biology 156: 2505–2515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Monteiro, C., A. H. Engelen, E. A. Serrão & R. Santos, 2009b. Habitat differences in the timing of reproduction of the invasive alga Sargassum muticum (Phaeophyta, Sargassaceae) over tidal and lunar cycles. Journal of Phycology 45: 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Morgan, E., 2001. The moon and life on earth. Earth, Moon and Plants 85–86: 279–290.Google Scholar
  35. Norton, T. A., 1977. Ecological experiments with Sargassum muticum. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 57: 33–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Parker, T. & A. R. O. Chapman, 1994. Separating the grazing effects of periwinkles and amphipods on a seaweed community dominated by Fucus distichus. Ophelia 39: 75–91.Google Scholar
  37. Parker, I. M., D. Simberloff, W. M. Lonsdale, K. Goodell, M. Wonham, P. M. Kareiva, M. H. Williamson, B. Von Holle, P. B. Moyle, B. E. Byers & L. Goldwasser, 1999. Impact: towards a framework for understanding the ecological effect of invaders. Biological Invasions 1: 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Parker, J. D., D. E. Burkepile & M. E. Hay, 2006. Opposing effects of native and exotic herbivores on plant invasions. Science 311: 1459–1461.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pearson, G. A. & E. A. Serrão, 2006. Revisiting synchronous gamete release by fucoid algae in the intertidal zone: fertilization success and beyond? Integrative and Comparative Biology 46: 587–597.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pearson, G., E. A. Serrão & M. L. Cancela, 2001. Suppression subtractive hybridization for studying gene expression during aerial exposure and desiccation in fucoid algae. European Journal of Phycology 36(4): 359–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rosemond, A. D., P. J. Mulholland & J. W. Elwood, 1993. Top-down and bottom-up control of stream periphyton: effects of nutrients and herbivores. Ecology 74: 1264–1280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rueness, J., 1989. Sargassum muticum and other introduced Japanese macroalgae: biological pollution of European coasts. Marine Pollution Bulletin 20(4): 173–176.Google Scholar
  43. Schiel, D. R. & M. S. Foster, 2006. The population biology of large brown seaweeds: ecological consequences of multi-phase life histories in dynamic coastal environments. Annual Reviews of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 37: 343–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Simberloff, D., 2001. Biological invasions—how are they affecting us, and what can we do about them? Western North American Naturalist 61(3): 308–315.Google Scholar
  45. Sjøtun, K., S. F. Eggereide & T. Høisæter, 2007. Grazer-controlled recruitment of the introduced Sargassum muticum (Phaeophyceae, Fucales) in northern Europe. Marine Ecology Progress Series 342: 127–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Steen, H. & J. Rueness, 2004. Comparison of survival and growth in germlings of six fucoid species (Fucales, Phaeophyceae) at two different temperature and nutrient regimes. Sarsia 89: 175–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Underwood, H., 1984. The pineal and circadian rhythms. In Reiter, R. J. (ed.), The Pineal Gland. Raven Press, New York: 221–252.Google Scholar
  48. Underwood, A. J. & P. Jernakoff, 1981. Effects of interactions between algae and grazing gastropods on the structure of a low-shore intertidal community. Oecologia 48: 221–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Vadas, R. L., W. A. Wright & S. L. Miller, 1990. Recruitment of Ascophyllum nodosum: wave action as a source of mortality. Marine Ecology Progress Series 61: 263–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Vadas, R. L., S. Johnson & T. A. Norton, 1992. Recruitment and mortality of early pos-settlement stages of benthic algae. British Phycological Journal 27: 331–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Viejo, R. M., P. Åberg, G. Cervin & M. Lindegarth, 1999. The interactive effects of adult canopy, germling density and grazing on germling survival of the rockweed Ascophyllum nodosum. Marine Ecology Progress Series 187: 113–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Villele, X. & M. Verlaque, 1995. Changes and degradation in a Posidonia oceanica bed invaded by the introduced alga Caulerpa taxifolia in the North Western Mediterranean. Botanica Marina 38: 79–87.Google Scholar
  53. Vitousek, P. M., C. D’António, L. L. Loope, M. Rejmànek & M. Westbrooks, 1997. Introduced species: a significant component of human-caused global change. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 21: 1–16.Google Scholar
  54. Wilcove, D. S., D. Rothstein, J. Dubow, A. Phillips & E. Losos, 1998. Quantifying threats to imperiled species in the United States. BioScience 48: 607–615.Google Scholar
  55. Wilson, C. G., 1989. Post-dispersal seed predation of an exotic weed, Mimosa pigra L., in the Northern Territory. Australian Journal of Ecology 14: 235–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wilson, E. O., 1992. The diversity of life. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  57. Yates, J. L. & P. Peckol, 1993. Effects of nutrient availability and herbivory on polyphenolics in the seaweed Fucus vesiculosus. Ecology 74(6): 1757–1766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carla A. Monteiro
    • 1
  • Aschwin H. Engelen
    • 1
  • Rui Santos
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.CCMAR, ALGAE-Marine Plant EcologyUniversity of AlgarveFaroPortugal

Personalised recommendations