| Literature DB >> 28348927 |
Michael R S Coffin1, Kyle M Knysh1, Emma F Theriault1, Christina C Pater1, Simon C Courtenay2, Michael R van den Heuvel1.
Abstract
Eutrophic aquatic habitats are characterized by the proliferation of vegetation leading to a large standing biomass that upon decomposition may create hypoxic (low-oxygen) conditions. This is indeed the case in nutrient impacted estuaries of Prince Edward Island, Canada, where macroalgae, from the genus Ulva, form submerged ephemeral mats. Hydrological forces and gases released from photosynthesis and decomposition lead to these mats occasionally floating to the water's surface, henceforth termed floating mats. Here, we explore the hypothesis that floating mats are refugia during periods of sustained hypoxia/anoxia and examine how the invertebrate community responds to it. Floating mats were not always present, so in the first year (2013) sampling was attempted monthly and limited to when both floating and submerged mats occurred. In the subsequent year sampling was weekly, but at only one estuary due to logistical constraints from increased sampling frequency, and was not limited to when both mat types occurred. Water temperature, salinity, and pH were monitored bi-weekly with dissolved oxygen concentration measured hourly. The floating and submerged assemblages shared many of the same taxa but were statistically distinct communities; submerged mats tended to have a greater proportion of benthic animals and floating mats had more mobile invertebrates and insects. In 2014, sampling happened to occur in the weeks before the onset of anoxia, during 113 consecutive hours of sustained anoxia, and for four weeks after normoxic conditions returned. The invertebrate community on floating mats appeared to be unaffected by anoxia, indicating that these mats may be refugia during times of oxygen stress. Conversely, there was a dramatic decrease in animal abundances that remained depressed on submerged mats for two weeks. Cluster analysis revealed that the submerged mat communities from before the onset of anoxia and four weeks after anoxia were highly similar to each other, indicating recovery. When mobile animals were considered alone, there was an exponential relationship between the percentage of animals on floating mats, relative to the total number on both mat types, and hypoxia. The occupation of floating mats by invertebrates at all times, and their dominance there during hypoxia/anoxia, provides support for the hypothesis that floating mats are refugia.Entities:
Keywords: Amphipod; Anoxia; Community ecology; Ephemeral algae; Estuary; Eutrophication; Hypoxia; Invertebrate; Ulva
Year: 2017 PMID: 28348927 PMCID: PMC5366062 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.3080
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ ISSN: 2167-8359 Impact factor: 2.984
Figure 1Map of study area.
(A) Prince Edward Island in context of eastern North America, (B) PEI estuaries that were sampled indicated by a red triangle and labeled, (C) Logger and sampling location within Wheatley River estuary, the site of the natural experiment.
Site characteristics and water chemistry information.
Site characteristics and average water chemistry measurements for each site over the course of sampling. Water chemistry values (salinity, pH and dissolved oxygen (mg/L)) were averaged over the entire sampling season (n = 6) from 0.5 m above the substrate, i.e., where the logger was located, and additionally 0.5 m below the water’s surface for dissolved oxygen only. Watershed area and N-loading are courtesy of the Prince Edward Island provincial government and based on 2010 land-use layers. Pressure loggers were deployed in summer 2015 at the same locations as the dissolved oxygen loggers. Variability is presented as ± 1 S.E. for water chemistry values.
| Site | Sampling times | Watershed area (km2) | N-Loading (kg/ha/yr) | Mean tidal amplitude (m) | Salinity | pH | Average DO mg/L (bottom/top) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kildare | 2 | 5.54 | 21.12 | 0.33 | 21.7 ± 0.5 | 7.54 ± 0.04 | 6.5 ± 0.9 / 9.5 ± 1.6 |
| Mill | 1 | 11.65 | 16.15 | 0.47 | 23.1 ± 0.5 | 7.52 ± 0.05 | 5.9 ± 1.0 / 8.3 ± 2.3 |
| Montague | 1 | 19.65 | 10.67 | 0.82 | 23.2 ± 0.9 | 7.49 ± 0.05 | 5.5 ± 0.4 / 5.9 ± 0.7 |
| Murray | 2 | 7.11 | 5.37 | 0.83 | 24.0 ± 1.0 | 7.58 ± 0.05 | 5.9 ± 0.8 / 9.0 ± 1.2 |
| Souris | 2 | 4.85 | 10.82 | 0.68 | 24.6 ± 0.9 | 7.57 ± 0.08 | 8.0 ± 0.8 / 9.2 ± 1.9 |
| Stanley | 2 | 8.64 | 10.65 | 0.39 | 24.2 ± 0.6 | 7.58 ± 0.04 | 6.0 ± 0.7 / 7.2 ± 1.7 |
| Wheatley | 3 | 6.14 | 12.64 | 0.44 | 24.4 ± 0.4 | 7.64 ± 0.04 | 7.2 ± 0.4 / 8.6 ± 1.3 |
| Wheatley (2014) | 6 | 6.14 | 12.64 | 0.44 | 24.0 ± 0.3 | 7.91 ± 0.03 | 8.4 ± 0.6 / 8.6 ± 0.6 |
Colour coded list of species found in each habitat type and study site.
List of all taxa found at every estuary studied. Animals found in Wheatley were combined for both field seasons. Mat type is defined by colored cells where blue cells containing the letter ‘S’ represent taxa found on submerged mats only, yellow cells containing the letter ‘F’ represent taxa found only on floating mats, and green cells containing the letter ‘B’ represent taxa found in both habitats. Mobile taxa are indicated with an asterisk (*).
| Species | Kildare | Mill | Stanley | Wheatley | Souris | Montague | Murray |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nassariidae: | F | S | B | B | B | B | |
| Hyrdobiidae | B | B | B | B | B | B | B |
| Cerithiidae | S | S | B | ||||
| Pyramidellidae | S | B | |||||
| Cylichnidae: | S | F | S | ||||
| Columbellidae: | S | B | |||||
| Littorinidae: | F | B | B | B | |||
| Marginellidae | S | ||||||
| Myidae: | B | B | S | S | S | F | |
| Veneridae: | S | S | S | F | S | F | |
| Mytilidae | B | B | B | S | S | B | |
| Ostreidae: | S | ||||||
| Nereidae | B | B | B | B | S | ||
| Capitellidae | B | F | S | B | B | ||
| Nephtyidae: | S | S | S | S | S | ||
| Orbiniidae | S | S | S | S | |||
| Spionidae | S | S | S | S | |||
| Pectiniridae | S | S | |||||
| Terebellidae | S | ||||||
| Polynoidae | S | S | S | ||||
| Serpulidae: | F | ||||||
| Naididae | F | F | F | S | F | ||
| * Gammaridae: | B | B | B | B | B | B | B |
| * Gammaridae: | B | B | B | B | B | F | B |
| * Gammaridae: | F | S | F | S | B | S | |
| * Ampithoidae | F | F | |||||
| * Corophiidae | B | B | B | B | B | B | |
| * Janiridae: | S | B | B | ||||
| Palaemonidae: | S | F | |||||
| Crangonidae: | S | ||||||
| Leptocheliidae | S | ||||||
| Argulidae: | F | ||||||
| F | |||||||
| * Chironomidae: Orthocladiinae | F | F | B | F | F | ||
| * Chironomidae: Chironominae: Chironomini | B | S | S | F | F | S | |
| Ephydridae | F | F | F | F | F | F | |
| Ceratopogonidae | F | ||||||
| Tipulidae ( | F | ||||||
| Nitidulidae | B | ||||||
| Curculionidae | F | F | |||||
| Dytiscidae | F | ||||||
| Haliplidae | F | ||||||
| Hydrophilidae | F | F | F | F | |||
| Elmidae | F | ||||||
| Vespidae | F | ||||||
| Gerridae | F | ||||||
| Corixidae | F | F | |||||
| Forficulidae | S | ||||||
| Salticidae | F | ||||||
| Limnesiidae | F |
Figure 2Ordination of invertebrate community data for floating and submerged mats from all sites.
Principal Coordinate Ordination for the floating mat survey, seven estuaries discriminated by mat type. Each circle is the Bray-Curtis similarity from a sample, squareroot transformed, sampling times and sites are not distinguished here. Vector length corresponds to the magnitude of the coefficient, which in linear combination with the other variables makes up the axis. The cutoff for this correlation coefficient was set to r < 0.35.
Statistical analyses (PERMANOVAs) for community data.
PERMANOVAs were performed on Bray-Curtis distances, abundances were square-root transformed prior to analysis, for invertebrate communities sampled in the (1) Mat Survey and (2) Natural Experiment. For the former, “Site” and “Mat Type (Site)” were random factors. For the Natural Experiment, “Time” and “Mat Type (Time)” were pooled (see ‘Data analysis’).
| PERMANOVA | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Source | SS | MS | Pseudo-F | Estimate of components of variation | |||
| Site | 6 | 69,836 | 11,639 | 2.7734 | 23.029 | ||
| Mat type (site) | 7 | 29,923 | 4274.7 | 5.5301 | 22.089 | ||
| Residuals | 92 | 71,116 | 773 | 27.803 | |||
| Total | 105 | 1.81 e–5 | |||||
| Mat type (time) | 9 | 32,280 | 3586.7 | 8.9028 | 25.234 | ||
| Residuals | 40 | 16,115 | 402.88 | 20.072 | |||
| Total | 49 | 48,395 |
Notes.
Column headings are standard for an ANOVA design:
degrees of freedom
Sum of Squares
Mean Square
is the permutated F-statistic
significance level
No two sites were significantly different, at each site floating ≠ submerged mats.
At each time floating ≠ submerged mats.
List of species which contribute most to the Bray-Curtis dissimilarity matrices for the 2013 Mat Survey and the 2014 Natural Experiment.
Top ten taxa contributing to the similarity within and dissimilarity between floating and submerged mats (SIMPER analysis) for (1) the Mat Survey and (2) the Natural Experiment. Taxa shown in bold type indicate those whose highest average abundances (individuals/g) occurred in the mat type shown (abundances are back-transformed from the square root data).
| Floating mats | Submerged mats | Contrasting taxa: | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Avg. similarity within floating mats = 35.98% | Avg. similarity within submerged mats = 36.95% | Avg. dissimilarity between mat types = 67.86% | ||||||
| Taxon | Average abundance | Contribution % | Taxon | Average abundance | Contribution % | Taxon | Contribution % | |
| Mat Survey (2013) | 1.21 | 34.7 | 14.56 | |||||
| Hydrobiidae | 1.32 | 31.7 | Hydrobiidae | 13.99 | ||||
| 8.12 | ||||||||
| Corophiidae | 0.19 | 7.1 | 0.69 | 7.4 | Corophiidae | 6.20 | ||
| Mytilidae | 0.03 | 1.4 | 3.2 | |||||
| Orthocladiinae | Mytilidae | 2.65 | ||||||
| 0.02 | 0.57 | Cerithiidae | 2.28 | |||||
| 2.23 | ||||||||
| < | 1.98 | |||||||
| < | Chironmini | 0.09 | 1.1 | 1.91 | ||||
Figure 3Hourly dissolved oxygen concentration (mg/L) with mobile invertebrates on floating and submerged mats.
Hourly dissolved oxygen concentration (mg/L) represented as the green line. On each sampling date are the average number of mobile taxa (±1 S.E.) of five replicates for either submerged (red circles) or floating (black circles) mats.
Figure 4Ordination of invertebrate community data for floating and submerged mats from Wheatley River.
Principal Coordinate Ordination for the 2014 Natural Experiment in Wheatley River, discriminated by mat type. Each filled circle is the Bray-Curtis similarity from a sample, squareroot transformed, and statistically significant groups encircled according to a CLUSTER analysis at 60% similarity. Vector length corresponds to the magnitude of the coefficient, which in linear combination with the other variables makes up the axis. The cutoff for this correlation coefficient was set to r < 0.5.
Figure 5Non-linear regression for the percentage of mobile taxa on floating mats versus the number of hours that were hypoxic in the 48 h preceding sampling.
Data (2013 and 2014) were fit using a first order rate equation but forced to an asymptote at 100% (equation and r2 on figure). An error with the dissolved oxygen logger in Murray River forced the exclusion of those data.