Marine Biology

, Volume 21, Issue 3, pp 226–244 | Cite as

Classification and community structure of macrobenthos in the Hampton Roads area, Virginia

  • D. F. Boesch
Article

Abstract

Benthic macrofauna was sampled by grab at 16 stations in Hampton Roads and the adjacent Elizabeth River, Virginia, USA. Samples were taken in February, May and August. Sampling sites and species were grouped by a classification strategy which basically consisted of the Canberra metric dissimilarity-measure and flexible and group average clustering. Following reallocations, 8 site groups and 16 species groups instructively classified the 47 sites and 93 species considered in the analysis. The sites were grouped into “associations” on mud, muddy-sand and sand-bottom, and those in the Elizabeth River. Species groupings distinguished a few species most frequent at Elizabeth River or mud and muddy-sand sites, larger numbers of species restricted to muddy-sand and sand or solely to sand sites, ubiquitous species, epifaunal species which were microhabitat-restricted, and seasonal species. An analysis of numerically dominant species in the different associations indicated the relative importance of ubiquitous species and seasonally abundant species. Community-structure statistics (species diversity, species richness and evenness) showed definite spatial and temporal patterns. Diversity was high at sand and muddy-sand sites and low at mud and Elizabeth River sites. This spatial pattern was predominantly one of species richness. At Elizabeth River and mud stations, diversity increased from February to August because of increased evenness, while at sand and muddy-sand stations, diversity peaked in May in response to both high species richness and high evenness. The applicability of “community concepts”, the causes of substrate specificity, seasonality and species diversity, and the effects of pollution on community structure are discussed.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Armstrong, N. E., P. N. Storrs and E. A. Pearson: Development of a gross toxicity criterion in San Francisco Bay. Proc. 5th int. Conf. Wat. Pollut. Res. 3, 1–15 (1971).Google Scholar
  2. Austin, M. P. and I. Noy-Mier: The problem of non-linearity in ordination: experiments with two-gradient models. J. Ecol. 59, 763–773 (1971).Google Scholar
  3. Bechtel, T. J. and B. J. Copeland: Fish species diversity indices as indicators of pollution in Galveston Bay, Texas. Contr. mar. Sci. 15, 103–132 (1971).Google Scholar
  4. Bender, M. E., R. J. Huggett and H. D. Slone: Heavy metals — an inventory of existing conditions. J. Wash. Acad. Sci. 62, 144–153 (1972).Google Scholar
  5. Boesch, D. F.: Distribution and structure of benthic communities in a gradient estuary, 120 pp. Ph. D. Thesis, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia 1971.Google Scholar
  6. —: Species diversity of marine macrobenthos in the Virginia area. Chesapeake Sci. 13, 206–211 (1972).Google Scholar
  7. Bray, J. R. and J. T. Curtis: An ordination of the upland forest communities of southern Wisconsin. Ecol. Monogr. 27, 325–349 (1957).Google Scholar
  8. Dahlberg, M. D. and E. P. Odum: Annual cycles of species occurrence, abundance, and diversity in Georgia estuarine fish populations. Am. Midl. Nat. 83, 382–392 (1970).Google Scholar
  9. Ebeling, A. W., R. M. Ibara, R. J. Lavenberg and F. J. Rohlf: Ecological groups of deep-sea animals off Southern California. Bull. Los Ang. Cty Mus. nat. Hist. Sci. 6, 1–43 (1970).Google Scholar
  10. Fager, E. W.: Determination and analysis of recurrent groups. Ecology 38, 586–595 (1957).Google Scholar
  11. Field, J. G.: A numerical analysis of changes in the softbottom fauna along a transect across False Bay, South Africa. J. exp. mar. Biol. Ecol. 7, 215–253 (1971).Google Scholar
  12. Folk, R. L.: Petrology of sedimentary rocks, 154 pp. Austin, Texas: Hemphills 1961.Google Scholar
  13. Gower, J. C.: Multivariate analysis and multidimensional geometry. Statistician 17, 13–28 (1967).Google Scholar
  14. Hanks, R. W.: Benthic community formation in a “new” marine environment. Chesapeake Sci. 9, 163–172 (1968).Google Scholar
  15. Hughes, R. N. and M. L. H. Thomas: The classification and ordination of shallow-water benthic samples from Prince Edward Island, Canada. J. exp. mar. Biol. Ecol. 7, 1–39 (1971a).Google Scholar
  16. —: Classification and ordination of benthic samples from Bedeque Bay, an estuary in Prince Edward Island, Canada. Mar. Biol. 10, 227–235 (1971b).Google Scholar
  17. Inman, D. L.: Measures for describing the size distribution of sediments. J. sedim. Petrol. 22, 125–145 (1952).Google Scholar
  18. Jones, G. F.: The benthic macrofauna of the mainland shelf of southern California. Allan Hancock Monogr. mar. Biol. No. 4, 1–219 (1969).Google Scholar
  19. Kendall, M. G.: Discrimination and classification. In: Multivariate analysis, pp 165–185. Ed. by P. R. Krishnaiah. New York: Academic Press 1966.Google Scholar
  20. Lance, G. N. and W. T. Williams: A general theory of classificatory sorting strategies I. Hierarchical systems. Comput. J. 9, 373–380 (1967).Google Scholar
  21. Lie, U. and J. C. Kelley: Benthic infauna communities off the coast of Washington and in Puget Sound: identification and distribution of the communities. J. Fish. Res. Bd Can. 27, 621–651 (1970).Google Scholar
  22. — and D. S. Kisker: Species composition and structure of benthic infauna communities off the coast of Washington. J. Fish. Res. Bd Can. 27, 2273–2285 (1970).Google Scholar
  23. Lloyd, M. and R. J. Ghelardi: A table for calculating the “equitability” component of species diversity. J. Anim. Ecol. 33, 217–225 (1964).Google Scholar
  24. McCloskey, L. R.: The dynamics of the community associated with a marine scleractinian coral. Int. Revue ges. Hydrobiol. 55, 13–81 (1970).Google Scholar
  25. Margalef, R.: Information theory in ecology. Gen. Syst. 3, 36–71 (1958).Google Scholar
  26. Marsh, G. A.: A seasonal study of Zostera epibiota in the York River, Virginia, 155 pp. Ph. D. Thesis, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia 1970.Google Scholar
  27. Mills, E. L.: The community concept in marine zoology, with comments on continua and instability in some marine communities: a review. J. Fish. Res. Bd Can. 26, 1415–1428 (1969).Google Scholar
  28. Noy-Mier, I.: Component analysis of semi-arid vegetation in southeastern Australia, 371 pp. Ph. D. Thesis, Australian National University, Canberra 1971.Google Scholar
  29. Orloci, L.: An agglomerative method for classification of plant communities. J. Ecol. 55, 193–206 (1967).Google Scholar
  30. Orth, R. J.: Observations on the planktonic larvae of Polydora ligni Webster (Polychaeta: Spionidae) in the York River, Virginia. Chesapeake Sci. 12, 121–124 (1971).Google Scholar
  31. Phelps, D. K.: Functional relationships of benthos in a coastal lagoon, 146 pp. Ph. D. Thesis, University of Rhode Island, Kingston 1964.Google Scholar
  32. Pianka, E. R.: Latitudinal gradients in species diversity: a review of concepts. Am. Nat. 100, 33–46 (1966).Google Scholar
  33. Pielou, E. C.: The measurement of diversity in different types of biological collections. J. theor. Biol. 13, 134–144 (1966).Google Scholar
  34. Popham, J. D. and D. V. Ellis: A comparison of traditional, cluster and Zürich-Montpellier analysis of infaunal pelecypod associations from two adjacent sediment beds. Mar. Biol. 8, 260–266 (1971).Google Scholar
  35. Reish, D. J.: An ecological study of pollution in Los Angeles-Long Beach Harbors, California. Occ. Pap. Allan Hancock Fdn 22, 1–119 (1959).Google Scholar
  36. Rhoads, D. C. and D. K. Young: The influence of depositfeeding organisms on sediment stability and community trophic structure. J. mar. Res. 28, 150–178 (1970).Google Scholar
  37. Sager, P. E. and A. D. Hasler: Species diversity in lacustrine phytoplankton, I. The components of the index of diversity from Shannon's formula. Am. Nat. 103, 51–60 (1969).Google Scholar
  38. Sanders, H. L.: Benthic studies in Buzzards Bay. I. Animal-sediment relationships. Limnol. Oceanogr. 3, 245–258 (1958).Google Scholar
  39. —: Marine benthic diversity: a comparative study. Am. Nat. 102, 243–282 (1968).Google Scholar
  40. —, E. M. Goudsmit, E. L. Mills and G. E. Hampson: A study of the intertidal fauna of Barnstable Harbor, Massachusetts. Limnol. Oceanogr. 7, 63–79 (1962).Google Scholar
  41. Shepard, F. P.: Nomenclature based on sand-silt clay-ratios. J. sedim. Petrol. 24, 151–158 (1954).Google Scholar
  42. Sokal, R. R. and P. H. A. Sneath: Principles of numerical taxonomy, 359 pp. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman 1963.Google Scholar
  43. Stephenson, W., W. T. Williams and S. Cook: Computer analyses of Petersen's original data on bottom communities. Ecol. Monogr. 42, 387–415 (1972).Google Scholar
  44. — and G. N. Lance: The macrobenthos of Moreton Bay. Ecol. Monogr. 40, 459–494 (1970).Google Scholar
  45. Thorrington-Smith, M.: West Indian Ocean phytoplankton: a numerical investigation of phytohydrographic regions and their characteristic phytoplankton associations. Mar. Biol. 9, 115–137 (1971).Google Scholar
  46. Thorson, G.: Bottom communities (sublittoral or shallow shelf). Mem. geol. Soc. Am. 67, 461–534 (1957).Google Scholar
  47. —: Some factors influencing the recruitment and establishment of marine benthic communities. Neth. J. Sea Res. 3, 267–293 (1966).Google Scholar
  48. Timonin, A. G.: The structure of plankton communities of the Indian Ocean. Mar. Biol. 9, 281–289 (1971).Google Scholar
  49. Travers, M.: Diversité du microplancton du Golfe de Marseille en 1964. Mar. Biol. 8, 308–343 (1971).Google Scholar
  50. Tulkki, P.: Effect of pollution on the benthos off Gothenburg. Helgoländer wiss. Meeresunters. 17, 209–215 (1968).Google Scholar
  51. Wass, M. L.: Checklist of the marine invertebrates of Virginia. Va Inst. mar. Sci. Spec. Sci. Rep. 24 (revised), 1–55 (1965).Google Scholar
  52. Wass, M. L., J. C. McCain and J. Kerwin: Biological studies. In: A study of the effects of dredging and dredge spoil disposal on the marine environment. Spec. scient. Rep. Va Inst. mar. Sci. (Appl. mar. Sci. Ocean Engng) 8 1–25 (1967).Google Scholar
  53. Wells, H. W.: Sabellaria reef masses in Delaware Bay. Chesapeake Sci. 11, 258–260 (1970).Google Scholar
  54. Whittaker, R. H.: Communities and ecosystems, 162 pp. London: Macmillan 1970.Google Scholar
  55. Williams, W. T.: Principles of clustering. A. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 2, 303–326 (1971).Google Scholar
  56. —, H. T. Clifford and G. N. Lance. Group size dependence: a rational choice between numerical classifications. Comput. J. 14, 157–162 (1971).Google Scholar
  57. Young, D. K. and R. C. Rhoads: Animal-sediment relations in Cape Cod Bay, Massachusetts. I. A transect study. Mar. Biol. 11, 242–254 (1971).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1973

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. F. Boesch
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Virginia Institute of Marine ScienceGloucester PointUSA
  2. 2.Department of ZoologyUniversity of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations