Form variation and productivity of an intertidal foliose Gigartina species (Rhodophyta) in relation to wave exposure
Conference paper
Abstract
Gametophytes from lower intertidal populations of the South African rhodophyte Gigartina radula, collected from sites subjected to different conditions of wave exposure, were compared with respect to various morphological, physiological and population attributes. A multivariate analysis of 13 variables revealed that variation in most parameters does not correlate directly with the wave exposure gradient. A clear pattern of response is revealed that suggests that environmental stresses occur at both the exposed and the sheltered sites although they are more extreme at the exposed sites. A number of important variables, notably photosynthetic production, showed maximum values in plants from semi-exposed sites.
Key words
Gigartina polymorphy Rhodophyta seaweed South Africa wave exposurePreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- Anderson, R. J., R. H. Simons & N. G. Jarman, 1990. Commercial seaweeds in southern Africa: utilization and research. S. afr. J. mar. Sci. 8: in press.Google Scholar
- Armstrong, S. L., 1987. Mechanical properties of the tissues of the brown alga Hedophyllum sessile (C. Ag.) Setchell: variability with habitat. J. exp. mar. Biol. Ecol. 114: 143–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Cousens, R., 1982. The effects of exposure to wave action on the morphology and pigmentation of Ascophyllum nodosum (L.) Le Jolis in south-eastern Canada. Bot. mar. 25: 191–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Cheshire, A. C. & N. D. Hallam, 1988. Morphology of the southern bull-kelp (Durvillea potatorum, Durvilleales, Phaeophyta) from King Island (Bass strait, Australia). Bot. mar. 31: 139–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- De Paula, E. J. & E. C. De Oliviera, 1982. Wave exposure and ecotypical differentiation in Sargassum cymosum (Phaeophyta-Fucales). Phycologia 21: 145–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Doty, M. S., 1971. Measurement of water movement in reference to benthic algal growth. Bot. mar. 14: 32–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Gerard, V. A. & K. H. Mann, 1979. Growth and production of Laminaria longicruris (Phaeophyta) populations exposed to different intensities of water movement. J. Phycol. 15: 33–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Johnston, C. S., 1969. The ecological distribution and primary production of macrophytic marine algae in the eastern Canaries. Int. Revue ges. Hydrobiol. 54: 473–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Koehl, M. A. R., 1986. Seaweeds in moving water: form and mechanical function. In T. J. Givnish (ed.), On the Economy of Plant Form and Function. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 603–634.Google Scholar
- Koehl, M. A. R. & S. A. Wainwright, 1977. Mechanical adaptations of a giant kelp. Limnol. Oceanogr. 22: 1067–1071.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Littler, M. M., 1980. Morphological form and photosynthetic performances of marine macroalgae: tests of a functional/ form hypothesis. Bot. mar. 22: 161–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Littler, M. M. & S. N. Murray, 1974. The primary productivity of marine macrophytes from a rocky intertidal community. Mar. Biol. 27: 131–135.Google Scholar
- Littler, M. M., D. R. Martz & D. S. Littler, 1983. Effects of recurrent sand deposition on rocky intertidal organisms: importance of substrate heterogeneity in a fluctuating environment. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 11: 129–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Marsden, W. J. N., L. V. Evans & J. A. Callow, 1983. Analysis of character variation in Fucus L. I. Discriminant analysis of morphometric estimates. Bot. mar. 26: 383–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- McEachreon, J. C. T. & M. L. H. Thomas, 1987. Attachment strength of Ascophyllum nodosum (L.) Le Jolis and exposure to wave action. Bot. mar. 30: 217–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- McQuaid, C. D. & G. M. Branch, 1985. Trophic structure of rocky intertidal communities: response to wave action and implications for energy flow. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 22: 153–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Muus, R. J., 1968. A field method for measuring exposure by means of plaster balls: a preliminary account. Sarsia 34: 61–68.Google Scholar
- Niell, F. X., C. Jimenez & J. A. Fernandez, 1987. The forms of Fucus spiralis L. in the Canary Islands: discriminant and canonical analysis applied to define a new form. Bot. mar. 30: 27–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Neushul, M, 1972. Functional interpretation of Benthic Marine Algal morphology. In I. A. Abbott & M. Kurogi (eds), Contributions to the Benthic Marine Algae of the North Pacific. Japanese Society of Phycology, Kobe: 47–74.Google Scholar
- Norton, T. A., 1969. Growth form and environment in Saccorhiza polyschides. J. mar. biol. Ass. U. K. 49: 1025–1045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Norton, T. A., A. C. Mathieson & M. Neushul, 1982. A review of seaweed form and function. Bot. mar. 25: 501–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Norton, T. A., 1986. The ecology of macroalgae in the Firth of Clyde. Proc. roy. Soc. Edinburgh 90B: 255–269.Google Scholar
- Russell, G., 1986. Variation and natural selection in marine macroalgae. Oceanogr. mar. Biol. annu. Rev. 24: 309–377.Google Scholar
- Schonbeck, M. & T. A. Norton, 1979. Growth forms of Fucus distichus in the San Juan Islands of Washington State. Bot. mar. 22: 217–222.Google Scholar
- South, R. G. & C. H. Hay, 1974. Variation in morphology and standing crop in New Zealand of Durvillea antarctica (Chamisso) Hariot in relation to exposure and latitude. Proc. int. Seaweed Symp. 5: 489–498.Google Scholar
- Strickland, J. D. & T. R. Parsons, 1968. A practical handbook of seawater analysis. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. Bull. 167: 1–311.Google Scholar
- Wheeler, W. N., 1978. Ecophysiological studies on the giant kelp Macrocystis. Ph. D. Thesis, Univ. of California, Santa Barbara, 179 pp.Google Scholar
Copyright information
© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1990