| Literature DB >> 29448932 |
Stefano Cannicci1,2, Marco Fusi3, Filippo Cimó2, Farid Dahdouh-Guebas4,5,6, Sara Fratini7,8.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The spatial distribution of mangrove crabs has been commonly associated with tree zonation and abiotic factors such as ground temperature and soil granulometry. Conversely, no studies were designed to investigate the role of competition for resources and predation in shaping crab distribution in mangroves, despite these biotic factors are recognised as key determinants for spatial patterns observed in the communities colonising rocky and sandy intertidal habitats.We studied floral and faunal assemblages in two zones of a Sri Lankan mangrove, a man-made upper intertidal level and a natural eulittoral, mid-shore one. Leaf choice experiments were designed to study both feeding rate and intra and inter-specific interactions for food of sesarmid crabs in the two habitats in order to better understand crab spatial distribution.Entities:
Keywords: Aggressive behaviour; Distribution patterns; Environmental factors; Indo-Pacific mangroves; Sesarmid crabs
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29448932 PMCID: PMC5815208 DOI: 10.1186/s12898-018-0164-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Ecol ISSN: 1472-6785 Impact factor: 2.964
Fig. 1A Map of Sri Lanka, indicating the major cities, rivers and climatic zones (adapted from [44]). The small black box represents the area in B. B Satellite image of the study area (2004), indicating sampling sites (adapted from [47]). The dashed black box represents the littoral fringe adjacent to the raised motorable track, whereas the dotted black box represents the mangrove forest interior. Numbers 1 and 2 indicate, respectively Galu Ganga and Thalpe Ela
Fig. 2Characterisation of the two study sites. The soil texture (a), the percentage cover of the different trees (b), the pattern of surface temperature along the 24 h (c) and the abundance of the different crabs (d) are shown for the forest floor and the elevated littoral fringe, respectively
Fig. 3Feeding activity of the four observed crab species as recorded on the forest floor (a) and at the elevated littoral fringe (b) during nocturnal, twilight and daytime hours
Results of the two-way PERMANOVAs performed on the numbers of each experimental crab species feeding at the two study sites during different times of the day
| Source | DF |
|
|
|
| ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MS | P-F | P | MS | P-F | P | MS | P-F | P | MS | P-F | P | ||
| Site (Si) | 1 | 4.88 | 17.97 | < 0.001 | 32.64 | 79.39 | < 0.001 | 61.63 | 96.89 | < 0.001 | 69.24 | 96.96 | < 0.001 |
| Daytime (Dt) | 2 | 0.40 | 1.48 | 0.24 | 0.16 | 0.40 | 0.67 | 0.33 | 0.52 | 0.59 | 0.12 | 0.17 | 0.85 |
| Si × Dt | 2 | 1.09 | 4.03 | 0.02 | 0.92 | 2.23 | 0.11 | 0.70 | 1.09 | 0.25 | 0.36 | 0.36 | 0.70 |
| RES | 84 | 0.27 | 0.41 | 0.64 | 0.71 | ||||||||
| TOT | 89 | 89 | 89 | 89 | |||||||||
For each test and each factor (RES residuals), DF the degrees of freedom, MS mean square, P-F values of Pseudo-F statistic, P the probability level, are shown
Fig. 4Number of leaves of the different species collected in the experimental plots
Results of the 3-factor ANOVA performed on leaves removal at the two experimental sites, within the different daytimes
| Source | DF | MS | F | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leaves (Le) | 2 | 2.15 | 21.17 | < 0.001 |
| Site (Si) | 1 | 0.18 | 1.77 | 0.19 |
| Daytime (Dt) | 2 | 0.01 | 0.05 | 0.95 |
| Le × Si | 2 | 0.13 | 1.27 | 0.29 |
| Le × Dt | 4 | 0.07 | 0.7 | 0.60 |
| Si × Dt | 2 | 0.20 | 1.93 | 0.15 |
| Le × Si × Dt | 4 | 0.17 | 1.66 | 0.17 |
| RES | 72 | 0.10 | ||
| TOT | 89 |
DF degrees of freedom, MS mean square, F values of F statistic, P the probability level, are shown
Feeding experiments and intra- and inter-specific agonistic interactions observed at the two intertidal levels
| Elevated littoral fringe | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feeder | TOT removed | Stolen |
|
|
|
|
|
| 50 (5.85%) | 4 | 1 (25.0%) | 0 | 3 (75.0%) | 0 |
|
| 222 (26.03%) | 14 | 1 (7.1%) | 11 (78.6%) | 2 (14.3%) | 0 |
|
| 422 (49.47%) | 46 | 6 (13%) | 18 (39.1%) | 22 (47.8) | 0 |
|
| 159 (18.64%) | 18 | 1 (5.6%) | 7 (38.9%) | 8 (44.4%) | 2 (11.1%) |
For each of the observed species (feeder), the total numbers of leaves removed (TOT removed), the numbers of leaves stolen from another crab in agonistic encounters (Stolen) and numbers (and percentages) of agonistic interactions for each pair of species are shown. 0 means no interactions between pairs of species