Sponge Grounds as Key Marine Habitats: A Synthetic Review of Types, Structure, Functional Roles, and Conservation Concerns
This chapter reviews the major known monospecific and multispecific sponge aggregations in the world’s oceans. They are shown to occur from the intertidal to abyssal depths, in tropical, temperate, and high latitudes and sometimes to create spectacular formations, such as glass sponge reefs, lithistid reef-like fields, and carnivorous sponge grounds. Sponge aggregations are recognized as singular vulnerable habitats that deserve special research attention and legal protection. However, this review reveals that there is only a poor and fragmentary understanding of the main biological, environmental, and geochemical factors that favor and maintain these systems, including the food supply, which is fundamental knowledge. There is also a particular lack of information regarding reproductive biology, growth rates, life spans, and the main factors causing mortality, all crucial drivers for understanding population and community dynamics and for developing conservation strategies. The sponge aggregations have been shown to increase the structural complexity of the habitats, attracting a larger variety of organisms and locally enhancing biodiversity. From the very few cases in which sponge biomass and sponge physiology have been reliably approached jointly, phenomenal fluxes of matter and energy have been inferred. Through their benthic-pelagic coupling, some of the densest sponge aggregations have a significant local or regional impact on major biogeochemical cycles and food webs. Physical damage and habitat destruction derived from man-driven activities along with epidemic diseases facilitated by global environmental alterations emerge as major threats to the future of the sponge aggregations.
KeywordsPorifera Benthic-pelagic coupling Food chains Reef Mangrove Deep-sea benthos Arctic benthos Antarctic benthos Conservation biology Vulnerable habitats
The authors thank colleagues and institutions for kind picture contributions: Kevin Coate (Fig. 1a), Tracey Bates (Fig. 3c–e), Chip Clark (Fig. 3a, b), and Carla Piantoni (Fig. 3c), Institute of Marine Research (Figs. 1b, c and 4b), Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (Fig. 6c, d), National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) of New Zealand (Figs. 6d and 7a, b), and Neptune Minerals Inc. (Fig. 7d, e), and Alfred Wegener Institute/Marum, University of Bremen, Germany (Fig. 8a, 8d-g). This study has benefitted from funding by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (CTM2012-37787) to MM; from the Caribbean Coral Reef Ecosystems Program and the National Museum of Natural History, Washington to KR, CD, and MM (Contribution Number 986); from Stiftung Drittes Millennium, Fundación Biodiversidad, and the Ministerio de Agricultura, Alimentación y Medio Ambiente to Oceana and RA; from NIWA, New Zealand Foundation for Research, Science and Technology, and CSIRO’s Division of Marine and Atmospheric Research to MK; the Natural Sciences and Engineering Council of Canada for Discovery and Ship Time grants to SPL; from the Norwegian Research Council to RJB and HTR; from The Norwegian Oil and Gas and the Norwegian Biodiversity Information Centre to HTR; and from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Council of Canada for Discovery and Ship Time grants to SPL.
- Arellano S, Lee O, Lafi F, Yang J, Wang Y, Young C, et al. Deep sequencing of Myxilla (Ectyomyxilla) methanophila, an epibiotic sponge on cold-seep tubeworms, reveals methylotrophic, thiotrophic, and putative hydrocarbon-degrading microbial associations. Microb Ecol. 2013;65(2):450–61. doi:10.1007/s00248-012-0130-y.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Brown R. 2015. Reproduction and genetic structure in a reef-forming glass sponge, Aphrocallistes vastus. MSc Thesis, University of Alberta. https://era.library.ualberta.ca/files/n870zt81x#.VtaVnK2DNTo.
- Conway KW, Krautter M, Barrie JV, Whitney F, Thomson RE, Reiswig H, et al. Sponge reefs in the Queen Charlotte Basin, Canada: controls on distribution, growth and development. In: Freiwald A, Roberts JM, editors. Cold-water corals and ecosystems. Berlin: Springer; 2005. p. 605–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ekins M, Erpenbeck D, Hall K, Wörheide G, Hooper JNA. Staying well connected: lithistid sponges on seamounts. J Mar Biol Assoc UK. 2016;96(2):437–451. doi:10.1017/S0025315415000831.Google Scholar
- FAO. Report of the technical consultation on international guidelines for the management of deep-sea fisheries in the high seas Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2009. Report no. 881.Google Scholar
- Ghiold J. The sponges that spanned Europe. New Sci. 1991;129(1754):58–62.Google Scholar
- Janussen D, Tendal OS. Diversity and distribution of Porifera in the bathyal and abyssal Weddell Sea and adjacent areas. Deep-Sea Res II. 2016;96(2):429-436. doi:10.1017/S0025315415000466.Google Scholar
- Janussen D, Downey RV. Porifera. In: De Broyer C, Koubbi P, Griffiths H, Raymond B, d’Udekem d’Acoz C, Van de Putte A, editors. Biogeographic atlas of the Southern Ocean. Cambridge: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research; 2014. p. 94–102.Google Scholar
- Kahn A, Vehring L, Brown R, Leys S. Dynamic change, recruitment, and resilience in reef-forming glass sponges. J Mar Biol Assoc UK. 2016;96(2):429–436. doi:10.1017/S0025315415000466.Google Scholar
- Kelly M. The marine Fauna of New Zealand. Porifera: lithistid Demospongiae (Rock Sponges), The marine fauna of New Zealand. Wellington: National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA); 2007.Google Scholar
- Kelly M, Ellwood M, Tubbs L, Buckeridge J. The lithistid Demospongiae in New Zealand waters: species composition and distribution. In: Custódio MR, Lôbo-Hajdu G, Hajdu E, Muricy G, editors. Porifera research: biodiversity, innovation and sustainability, vol série livros. Rio de Janeiro: Museu Nacional du Rio de Janeiro; 2007. p. 393–404.Google Scholar
- Koschinsky A, Billings A, Devey C, Dubilier N, Duester A, Edge D, et al. Discovery of new hydrothermal vents on the southern Mid-Atlantic Ridge (4° S–10° S) during Cruise M68/1. InterRidge News. 2006;15:9–15.Google Scholar
- Maldonado M, Ribes M, Van Duyl FC. Nutrient fluxes through sponges: biology, budgets, and ecological implications. Adv Mar Biol. 2012;62:114–82. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-394283-8.00003-5.Google Scholar
- Maldonado M. Sponge waste that fuels marine oligotrophic food webs: a re-assessment of its origin and nature. Mar Ecol. 2015;1–15. doi:10.1111/maec.12256.Google Scholar
- Murillo FJ, Muñoz PD, Cristobo J, Ríos P, González C, Kenchington E, et al. Deep-sea sponge grounds of the Flemish Cap, Flemish Pass and the Grand Banks of Newfoundland (Northwest Atlantic Ocean): distribution and species composition. Mar Biol Res. 2012;8(9):842–54. doi:10.1080/17451000.2012.682583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Pomponi SA, Kelly M, Reed J, Wright AD. Diversity and bathymetric distribution of lithistid sponges in the tropical western Atlantic region. Bull Biol Soc Wash. 2001;10:344–53.Google Scholar
- Reiswig HM. Population dynamics of three Jamaican Demospongiae. Bull Mar Sci. 1973;23:191–226.Google Scholar
- Rützler K, Díaz MC, van Soest RWM, Zea S, Smith K, Alvarez B, et al. Diversity of sponge fauna in mangrove ponds, Pelican Cays, Belize. Atoll Res Bull. 2000;477:231–50.Google Scholar
- Rützler K. The role of sponges in the Mesoamerican barrier-Reef ecosystem, Belize. In: Becerro MA, Uriz MJ, Maldonado M, Turon X, editors. Adv Mar Biol. 2012;61(61):211–271. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-387787-1.00002-7.Google Scholar
- Wiedenmayer F. Contributions to the knowledge of post-Paleozoic neritic and archibental sponges (Porifera). Schweiz Paläontol Abhand. 1994;116:1–147.Google Scholar