Skip to main content
Log in

Effects of harvesting onAscophyllum nodosum (L.) Le Jol. (Fucales, Phaeophyta): a demographic approach

  • Published:
Journal of Applied Phycology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although populations ofAscophyllum nodosum are harvested commercially, little is known about the effects on demographic vital rates (growth, reproduction, survival). This study examines the effects of harvesting season and harvesting intensity on growth, reproduction and mortality of intact fronds in four size classes and in fronds truncated by the harvest. Knowledge of size-specific vital rates was used to evaluate the response of the population to harvesting.

Harvesting season and harvesting intensity did not exert a significant effect on growth. Growth in plots not subject to harvesting was less than in harvested plots. No major differences in growth, reproduction and survival between intact and severed fronds emerged. The number of fronds attaining reproduction was enhanced by increased harvesting intensity and by cutting in summer. Harvesting did not seem to induce breakage, and breakage appeared higher in the uncut plots. Most harvesting treatments did not influence survivorship and survivorship was similar among all size classes. Growth rates were inversely related to sizes of fronds.

Assessment of variation across size classes yielded more accurate estimates of growth rates than those of previously used methods. Accurate size class specific-growth rates will be a useful criterion when regulating intervals between harvests. Furthermore, assessment of size-specific vital rates allows identification of the frond size classes most relevant to the preservation of resources. Because of their fast growth rates and abundance, fronds in class 1, and, to a lesser extent, class 2, are responsible for most of the population regrowth after harvest. In contrast, classes 3 and 4 contribute little to recovery. This finding provides a strong basis for a harvesting strategy that targets the largest fronds.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Baardseth E (1970) A synopsis of biological data on knobbed wrack,Ascophyllum nodosum (Linnaeus) Le Jolis. FAO Fisheries Synopsis 38, 41 pp.

  • Burns R, Mathieson A. (1972) Ecological studies of economic red algae. III. Growth and reproduction of natural and harvested populations ofGigartina stellata (Stackhouse) Batters in New Hampshire. J. exp. mar. Biol. Ecol. 9: 77–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman ARO (1986) Age versus stage: an analysis of age- and size-specific mortality and reproduction in a population ofLaminaria longicruris Pyl. J. exp. mar. Biol. Ecol. 97: 113–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cousens R (1985) Module size distributions and the effects of the algal canopy on the behaviour ofAscophyllum nodosum (L.) Le Jolis. J. exp. mar. Biol. Ecol. 92: 231–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • David H (1943) Studies in the autoecology ofAscophyllum nodosum Le Jol. J. Ecol. 31: 178–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day R, Quinn G (1989) Comparison of treatments after an analysis of variance in ecology. Ecol. Monogr. 59: 433–463.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Wreede RE, Klinger T (1988). Reproductive strategies in algae. In Plant Reproductive Ecology, Lovett Doust J, Lovett Doust L (eds), Oxford University Press, New York, 267–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gendron L (1989) Seasonal growth of the kelpLaminaria longicruris in Baie des Chaleurs, Quebec in relation to nutrient and light availability. Bot. mar. 32: 345–354.

    Google Scholar 

  • Getz W, Haight R (1989) Population Harvesting. Demographic models of Fish, Forest and Animal resources. Monographs in Population Biology 27. Princeton University Press, Princeton 392 pp.

  • Gomez I, Westermeier R (1991) Module regrowth from basal disc inIridaea laminarioides (Rhodophyta, Gigartinales) at Mehuin, Southern Chile. Mar. Ecol. Progr. Ser. 73: 83–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hay C, South G (1979) Experimental ecology with particular reference to proposed commercial harvesting ofDurvillea (Phaeophyta, Durvilleales) in New Zealand. Bot. mar. 22: 431–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurlbert S (1984) Pseudoreplication and the design of ecological field experiments. Ecol. Monogr. 54: 187–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keser M, Larson B (1984) Colonization and growth ofAscophyllum nodosum (Phaeophyta) in Maine. J. Phycol. 20: 83–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keser M, Vadas R, Larson B (1981) Regrowth ofAscophyllum nodosum andFucus vesiculosus under various harvesting regimes in Maine, U.S.A. Bot. Mar. 24: 29–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krebs C (1989) Ecological Methodology. Harper and Row, New York 654 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazo L (1992) Demography of harvested populations ofAscophyllum nodosum. Ph.D. dissertation. Dalhousie Univ. Halifax, NS, Canada, 166 pp.

  • Lazo L, Markham J, Chapman ARO (1994) Herbivory and harvesting: effects on sexual recruitment and vegetative modules ofAscophyllum nodosum. Ophelia 40: 95–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manly B (1990) Stage-structured populations. Sampling, analysis and simulation. Chapman and Hall, New York 187 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathieson A, Shipman J, O'Shea J, Hasevlat R (1976) Seasonal growth and reproduction of estuarine fucoid algae in New England. J. exp. mar. Biol. Ecol. 25: 273–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson W, Conroy A (1989) Effect of harvest method and timing on yield and regeneration of karengo (Porphyra) (Bangiales, Rhodophyta) in New Zealand. J. appl. Phycol. 1: 277–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neter J, Wasserman W, Kutner M (1983) Applied Linear Regression Models. R. Irwin, Inc., Illinois, 547 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peckol P, Harlin M, Krumscheid P (1988) Physiological and population ecology of intertidal and subtidalAscophyllum nodosum (Phaeophyta). J. Phycol. 24: 192–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • SPSS:X (1986) User's Guide. McGraw-Hill, New York, 988 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharp G (1981) An assessment ofAscophyllum nodosum harvesting methods in Southwestern Nova Scotia. Can. tech. Rep. Fish. aquat. Sci. No. 1012, 22 pp.

  • Sharp G (1987)Ascophyllum nodosum and its harvesting in Eastern Canada. FAO Fish. Tech. Pap. 281: 4–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharp G (1991) An assessment ofAscophyllum nodosum resources in Scotia/Fundy 1990. CAFSAC Res. Doc. 91/52, 30 pp.

  • Sharp G, Tremblay DM (1985) A tagging technique for small macrophytes. Bot. Mar. 28: 549–551.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith B (1986) Implications of population dynamics and interspecific competition for harvest management of the seaweedLaminaria. Mar. Ecol. Progr. Ser. 33: 7–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sokal R, Rohlf F (1981) Biometry. Freeman and Co., New York, 859 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Southwood T (1966) Ecological Methods. Chapman and Hall, London, 391 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Underwood A (1981) Techniques of analysis of variance in experimental marine biology and ecology. Oceanogr. mar Biol. Ann. Rev. 19: 513–605.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westermeier R, Moller P (1990) Population dynamics ofMacrocystis pyrifera (L.) C. Agardh in the rocky intertidal of Southern Chile. Bot. mar. 33: 363–367.

    Google Scholar 

  • White J (1981) The allometric interpretation of the self-thinning rule. J. theor. Biol. 89: 475–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zar J (1984) Biostatistical Analysis. Prentice-Hall, New York, 718 pp.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Author for correspondence

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lazo, L., Chapman, A.R.O. Effects of harvesting onAscophyllum nodosum (L.) Le Jol. (Fucales, Phaeophyta): a demographic approach. J Appl Phycol 8, 87–103 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02186311

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02186311

Key words

Navigation