| Literature DB >> 30340566 |
Vasco M N C S Vieira1, Inês E Lopes2, Joel C Creed3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Biomass-density relations have been at the centre of a search for an index which describes the health of seagrass meadows. However, this search has been complicated by the intricacy of seagrass demographics and their complex biomass-density relations, a consequence mainly of their modular growth and clonality. Concomitantly, biomass-density upper boundaries have been determined for terrestrial plants and algae, reflecting their asymptotic maximum efficiencies of space occupation. Each stand's distance to its respective biomass-density upper boundary reflects its effective efficiency in packing biomass, which has proved a reliable ecological indicator in order to discriminate between taxonomic groups, functional groups and clonal vs. non-clonal growth.Entities:
Keywords: Coastal; Ecosystem; Index; Meadow; Nutrient; Pollution; Seagrass
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30340566 PMCID: PMC6195692 DOI: 10.1186/s12898-018-0200-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Ecol ISSN: 1472-6785 Impact factor: 2.964
Fig. 1Biomass–density relationships. The trajectories in (a) are a schematic of the generalized observed pattern with the stands’ specific relationships dependent from resource availability. These were not drawn from observed data nor represent any specific taxon. The trajectories in (b) are taxon specific Boundary Lines drawn from data of Weller [9]. The trajectories in (c) are the interspecific boundary lines (IBL) of plants [20], algae [12] and seagrass (estimated in this study)
Meta-data used for the seagrass biomass–density relation
| Species | Sources | No. obs. | Location | Latitude |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Agostini et al. [ | 12 | Urbinu lagoon, Corsica | 42.02 |
|
| Duarte and Sand-Jensen [ | 47 | Ebro Delta, Spain | 40.72 |
|
| Sghaier et al. [ | 36 | Monastir Bay, Tunisia | 35.37 |
|
| Peduzzi and Vukovic [ | 17 | Golf of Trieste, Italy | 45.7 |
|
| Cunha e Duarte [ | 5 | Ria Formosa, Portugal | 37.10 |
|
| Hall et al. [ | 12 | Florida Bay, USA | 25.14 |
|
| Creed (this study) | 992 | Multiple sites, American continent | – |
|
| Terrados and Pons [ | 5 | Magaluf, Mallorca Island, Spain | 39.30 |
|
| Terrados and Pons [ | 5 | Ses Salines, Mallorca Island, Spain | 39.15 |
|
| Keulen [ | 14 | Shoalwater bay, Queensland, Australia | − 22.42 |
|
| Collier et al. [ | 18 | Cockburn & Warnbro sounds, Western Australia | − 32.17 |
|
| Fraser and Kendrick [ | 45 | Cockburn & Warnbro sounds, Western Australia | − 32.17 |
|
| Hall et al. [ | 2 | Florida Bay, USA | 25.14 |
|
| Larsson [ | 3 | Inhaca & Portuguese Islands, Mozambique | − 25.9 |
|
| Hall et al. [ | 197 | Florida Bay, USA | 25.14 |
|
| Tamasko and Hall [ | 56 | Charlotte Harbour, Florida, USA | 26.9 |
|
| Galegos et al. [ | 30 | Cancún, Mexico | 21 |
|
| Enríquez and Pantoya-Reyes [ | 9 | Puerto Morales, Cancún, Mexico | 20.87 |
|
| Paynter et al. [ | 3 | Punta Cahuita, Costa Rica | 9.7 |
|
| Kaldy and Dunton [ | 20 | Laguna Madre, Texas, USA | 26.13 |
|
| Medina-Gómez et al. [ | 6 | Bahia de la Ascencion, Mexico | 19.7 |
|
| Lee et al. [ | 18 | Dadae Bay, Geoje Island, Korea | 34.43 |
|
| Ruesink et el. [ | 20 | Stackpole, Willapa Bay, Washington, USA | 46.59 |
|
| Ruesink et el. [ | 20 | Oysterville, Willapa Bay, Washington, USA | 46.54 |
|
| Ruesink et el. [ | 20 | Nahcotta, Willapa Bay, Washington, USA | 46.49 |
|
| Lee et al. [ | 18 | Dadae Bay, Geoje Island, Korea | 34.43 |
|
| Olesen and Sand-Jensen [ | 32 | North America, Europe & Japan | 30 to 56 |
|
| Kim et al. [ | 46 | Seomjin Estuary, South Korea | 34.9 |
|
| Krause-Jensen et al. [ | 766 | Oresund strait | 55.6 |
|
| Möller et al. [ | 9 | Prangli, Baltic Sea, Finland | 59.63 |
|
| Möller et al. [ | 7 | Sõru, Baltic Sea, Finland | 58.69 |
|
| Möller et al. [ | 2 | Saarnaki, Baltic Sea, Finland | 58.80 |
|
| Möller et al. [ | 3 | Ahelaid, Baltic Sea, Finland | 58.74 |
|
| Ruesink et el. [ | 4 | Stackpole, Willapa Bay, Washington, USA | 46.59 |
|
| Ruesink et el. [ | 5 | Oysterville, Willapa Bay, Washington, USA | 46.54 |
|
| Ruesink et el. [ | 5 | Nahcotta, Willapa Bay, Washington, USA | 46.49 |
|
| Jones et al. [ | 34 | British Isles and Nothern Ireland | 50.6 to 54.6 |
|
| Cabaço et al. [ | 276 | Ria Formosa, Portugal | 37.10 |
|
| Cabaço et al. [ | 16 | Ria Formosa, Portugal | 37.10 |
|
| Garcia-Marín et al. [ | 13 | Ria Formosa, Portugal | 37.1 |
|
| Garcia-Marín et al. [ | 13 | Huelva, Spain | 37.2 |
|
| Garcia-Marín et al. [ | 13 | Cadiz, Spain | 36.5 |
|
| Plus et al. [ | 54 | Thau Lagoon | 43.4 |
|
| Plus et al. [ | 22 | Thau Lagoon | 43.4 |
Fig. 2Estimation of the perpendicular distances (dgrass). These are estimated from the observed (obs) and estimated (est) biomass (B) and density (D), and the seagrass IBL
Fig. 3Seagrass biomass-shoot density relations worldwide. Biomass (B) and shoot density (D) of seagrasses, their interspecific boundary line (IBL) given by log10B = 4.569 − 0.438∙log10D, and stands’ distances to the IBL (dgrass). Status of seagrass meadows was labelled as ‘healthy seagrass meadows’ inhabiting favourable environments, and ‘unhealthy seagrass meadows’ inhabiting less favourable environments
Fig. 4Biomass-shoot density relations specific of each taxon. Green markers. All seagrass observations; black markers—selected seagrass observations
Fig. 5Seagrass discrimination by efficiency of space occupation. Each stands’ distances to the seagrass IBL (dgrass) is used as a measure of this efficiency. This measure was compared a among taxa worldwide and b for the case study of Dadae Bay [49]. Box and whiskers represent the quartiles of the sample distribution
Fig. 6Effect of depth on the efficiency of space occupation of seagrasses. Each stands’ distances to the seagrass IBL (dgrass) is used as a measure of this efficiency. Zostera marina was sampled in the Seomjin estuary—South Korea [57] and in the Oresond strait, Baltic Sea [56]. Posidonia sinuosa was sampled in Cockburn Sound and Warnbro Sound, Western Australia [78]. Box and whiskers represent the quartiles of the sample distribution, and asterisks represent outliers
Fig. 7Seasonality of the seagrass efficiency of space occupation. The seagrass efficiency of space occupation is evaluated from the distance to the seagrass IBL (dgrass)
Fig. 8Effects of amonium and phosphate on the efficiency of space occupation (dgrass) by Zostera noltii and Thalassia testudinum stands. Stands in Ria Formosa are in a gradient of closeness to a wastewater treatment plant, and measured seasonally. Site 1 was the closest and more polluted and site 4 the furthest away and least polluted [45]. Stands in the Thau Lagoon sampled by Plus et al. [48]. T. testudinum stands sampled by Kaldy and Dunton [66]. Model fits by Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) and Linear-in-the-parameters Oblique Least Squares (LOLS) [81]. The LOLS was fit by the new debuged software provided as Additional file 3
Fig. 9Abiotic drivers of the efficiency of space occupation (dgrass) by Zostera noltii in the Thao lagoon. The dgrass of stands sampled by Plus et al. [48] is dependent from temperature (T) and photosynthetic active radiation at the bottom (PARb). The dgrass fit was performed by Ordinary Least Squares (OLS). All four panels are different perspectives of the same 3D plot showing the surface fit by Eq. (1)
Fig. 10The dgrass of Zostera noltii stands in southern Iberia. Stands from Ria Formosa, Portugal in natural (R) or highly impacted (I) locations, from Huelva (H) and from Cádiz (C). Correlation coefficients (r) estimated disregarding H1 sampled during 2011