Linking Hydrogeomorphology and Food Webs in Intertidal Creeks
Intertidal creeks are shallow, photic ecosystems that potentially serve as sources of prey for many predators within estuaries. In a previous study, the link between nekton community structure and hydrogeomorphological variables for eight intertidal creeks was assessed for North Inlet estuary, South Carolina. Herein, we advance their findings through ecological network analysis of foodweb structure within two creeks and infer nekton trophic relationships to geomorphology and potential influences of hydrological condition and change. A summer network of a shallow, wide creek demonstrated greater carbon recycling, trophic efficiency and flow through consumers than that of a deep, narrow creek representing the same period. We infer greater export of nekton carbon from the former creek. These results were supported by analyses of nekton effective trophic levels and guilds across the eight creeks. Shallow, wide intertidal creeks appear to provide both physical and foodweb attributes that promote good nekton habitat relative to deeper and narrower creeks. Human alterations to flow regimes and sea-level rise have the ability to affect geomorphology of individual creeks and the landscape as a whole. These changes in turn have the potential to alter food webs of intertidal creeks and their ability to serve as sources of food for the larger estuary.
KeywordsGuild Nekton Network analysis Trophic
- Asmus, M.L., and H.N. McKellar Jr. 1989. Network analysis of the North Inlet salt marsh ecosystem. In Network analysis in marine ecology: methods and applications, ed. F. Wulff, J.G. Field, and K.H. Mann, 206–219. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. FGR.Google Scholar
- Christian, R.R., J.K. Dame, G. Johnson, C.H. Peterson, and D. Baird. 2004. Monitoring and modeling of the Neuse River Estuary, phase 2: Functional assessment of environmental phenomena through network analysis. UNC-WRRI Report No. 343-E. Raleigh, NC. 93 pp.Google Scholar
- Christian, R.R., D. Baird, J. Luczkovich, J.C. Johnson, U. Scharler, and R.E. Ulanowicz. 2005. Role of network analysis in comparative ecosystem ecology of estuaries. In Complexity in aquatic food webs: an ecosystem approach, ed. A. Belgrano, U.M. Scharler, J. Dunne, and R.E. Ulanowicz, 25–40. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Cohen, J.E., R. Beaver, S. Cousins, D. DeAngelis, L. Goldwasser, K. Heong, R. Holt, A. Kohn, J. Lawton, N. Martinez, R. O’Malley, L. Page, B. Patten, S. Pimm, G. Polis, M. Rejimanek, T. Schoener, K. Schoenly, W.G. Sprules, J. Teal, R. Ulanowicz, P. Warren, H. Wilbur, and P. Yodzis. 1993. Improving food webs. Ecology 74: 252–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Dame, J.K. 2005. Evaluation of ecological network analysis for ecosystem-based management. Ph.D. Dissertation, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC.Google Scholar
- Fagherazzi, S., M.L. Kirwan, S.M. Mudd, G.R. Guntenspergen, S. Temmerman, A. D’Alpaos, J. van de Koppel, J.M. Rybczyk, E. Reyes, C. Craft, and J. Clough. 2012. Numerical models of salt marsh evolution: ecological, geomorphic and climatic factors. Reviews of Geophysics 50: RG1002, doi:10.1029/2011RG000359.
- Higgins, R.P., and H. Thiel. 1988. Introduction to the study of meiofauna. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.Google Scholar
- Hildebrand, S.F., and W.C. Schroeder. 1928. Fishes of the Chesapeake Bay. Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Fisheries 43(1): 1–366.Google Scholar
- Hughes, Z.J., D.M. Fitzgerald, C.A. Wilson, S.C. Pennings, K. Wieski, and A. Mahadevan. 2009. Rapid headward erosion of marsh creeks in response to sea level rise. Geophysical Research Letters 36: L03602, doi:10.1029/2008GL036000.
- Johnson, J. 2007. Maryland Chesapeake Bay Program mesozooplankton monitoring surveys data dictionary. USEPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office. Annapolis, Maryland. http://www.chesapeakebay.net/documents/3684/6_mdmzdoc.pdf.
- Kneib, R.T. 1997. The role of tidal marshes in the ecology of estuarine nekton. Oceanography and Marine Biology: An Annual Review 35: 163–220.Google Scholar
- Kneib, R.T. 2000. Salt marsh ecoscapes and production transfers by estuarine nekton in the southeastern United States. In Concepts and controversies in tidal marsh ecology, ed. M.P. Weinstein and D.A. Kreeger, 267–291. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
- Mackinson, S., G. Daskalov, J.J. Heymans, S. Neira, H. Arancibia, M. Zetina-Rejón, H.Q. Cheng, M. Coll, F. Arreguin-Sanchez, K. Keeble, and L. Shannon. 2009. Which forcing factors fit? Using ecosystem models to investigate the relative influence of fishing and changes in primary productivity on the dynamics of marine ecosystems. Ecological Modelling 220: 2972–2987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Novakowski, K.I., R. Torres, L.R. Gardner, and G. Voulgaris. 2004. Geomorphic analysis of tidal creek networks. Water Resources Research 40, WO5401, doi:10.1029/2003WR002722.
- Odum, W.E., and E.J. Heald. 1975. Trophic analyses of an estuarine mangrove community. Bulletin of Marine Science 22: 671–738.Google Scholar
- Ulanowicz, R.E. 1987. NETWRK4: a package of computer algorithms to analyze ecological flow networks. Solomons: University of Maryland, Chesapeake Bay Laboratory.Google Scholar
- Ulanowicz, R.E. 1995. Ecosystem trophic foundations: Lindeman exonerate. In Complex ecology: the part–whole relationship in ecosystems, ed. B.C. Patten and S.E. Jorgensen, 549–560. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
- Wulff, F., J.G. Field, and K.H. Mann (eds.). 1989. Network analysis in marine ecology: methods and applications. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. FGR.Google Scholar