| Literature DB >> 24025973 |
Alf Norkko1, Anna Villnäs, Joanna Norkko, Sebastian Valanko, Conrad Pilditch.
Abstract
Size is a fundamental organismal trait and an important driver of ecosystem functions. Although large individuals may dominate some functions and provide important habitat structuring effects, intra-specific body size effects are rarely investigated in the context of BEF relationships. We used an in situ density manipulation experiment to explore the contribution of large, deep-burrowing bivalves to oxygen and nutrient fluxes across the sediment-water interface. By manipulating bivalve size structure through the removal of large individuals, we held species identity constant, but altered the trait characteristics of the community. The number of large bivalves was the best predictor of ecosystem functioning. Our results highlight that (a) accounting for body size provides important insights into the mechanisms underpinning biodiversity effects on ecosystem function, and (b) if local disturbances are recurrent, preventing individuals from reaching large sizes, the contribution of large adults may be lost, with largely unknown implications for ecosystem functionality.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24025973 PMCID: PMC6505624 DOI: 10.1038/srep02646
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Dead adult bivalves on the sediment surface after a hypoxic disturbance event, which resulted in major changes in ecosystem function.
The bivalves Mya arenaria and Macoma balthica are comparatively long-lived and the mature stages may take 5–10 years to re-establish after disturbance.
Species numbers, total community and bivalve abundances and biomasses across treatments
| Disturbed | Control | Elevated | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | ave | SE | ave | SE | ave | SE |
| Maximum no of spp. | 11 | 11 | 10 | |||
| Average no of spp. | 8.7 | 0.4 | 8.8 | 0.3 | 8.8 | 0.3 |
| Community abundance (ind. m−2) | 27564.3 | 1769.5 | 20568.3 | 1463.9 | 20816.2 | 2161.5 |
| Bivalves abundance | 4975.5 | 944.5 | 3030.3 | 602.2 | 3593.9 | 609.0 |
| 4272.3 | 814.2 | 2606.1 | 498.5 | 3146.6 | 553.7 | |
| 71.8 | 47.1 | 3.3 | 2.2 | 96.6 | 46.6 | |
| Community biomass (g wwt m−2) | 56.2 | 12.9 | 97.8 | 17.6 | 458.1 | 39.4 |
| Bivalve biomass | 11.0 | 2.2 | 81.8 | 18.1 | 440.8 | 39.8 |
| 8.2 | 2.1 | 58.6 | 13.8 | 296.9 | 19.6 | |
| 0.1 | 0.0 | 21.0 | 14.6 | 143.2 | 38.5 | |
Figure 2Multidimensional scaling analysis of community (a) abundance and (b) biomass.
C = control, D = disturbed, E = elevated.
Results from the multivariate permutational analysis (PERMANOVA) of differences in total abundance and biomass between treatments. C = control, D = disturbed, E = elevated
| PERMANOVA | df | SS | MS | Pseudo-F | P(perm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abundance | |||||
| Treatment | 2 | 2692 | 1346.1 | 1.525 | 0.126 |
| Residual | 33 | 29126 | 882.6 | ||
| Total | 35 | 31818 |
Figure 3Relationships between residual biomass (total community biomass less bivalve biomass), bivalve biomass and the number of large bivalves (> 5 mm), and community respiration (O2) and nutrient (NH4+ and PO43−) fluxes.
Lines indicate a significant relationhip.
Correlation coefficients between macrofauna variables and solute fluxes derived from DistLMs. Marginal tests examine a single predictor separately, while partial tests take into account the effect of the remaining predictors. Residual refers to macrofauna community parameters less the contribution of adult and juvenile bivalves
| O2-flux | PO4-flux | NH4-flux | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | Marginal | Partial | Marginal | Partial | Marginal | Partial |
| # adult bivalves | 0.61 | 0.47 | 0.73 | 0.54 | 0.89 | 0.71 |
| # juvenile bivalves | 0.47 | 0.25 | 0.24 | 0.07 | 0.15 | 0.03 |
| Residual abundance | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.10 | 0.09 | 0.16 | 0.14 |
| Residual biomass | 0.19 | 0.14 | 0.43 | 0.16 | 0.41 | 0.17 |
| # species | 0.48 | 0.26 | 0.32 | 0.07 | 0.21 | 0.09 |
*p < 0.05;
**p < 0.01;
***p < 0.001.