| Literature DB >> 30837650 |
Giuseppe Corriero1,2, Cataldo Pierri3,4, Maria Mercurio1,2, Carlotta Nonnis Marzano1,2, Senem Onen Tarantini1, Maria Flavia Gravina2,5, Stefania Lisco2,6, Massimo Moretti2,6, Francesco De Giosa7, Eliana Valenzano6, Adriana Giangrande2,8, Maria Mastrodonato1, Caterina Longo1,2, Frine Cardone1,2.
Abstract
This is the first description of a Mediterranean mesophotic coral reef. The bioconstruction extended for 2.5 km along the Italian Adriatic coast in the bathymetric range -30/-55 m. It appeared as a framework of coral blocks mostly built by two scleractinians, Phyllangia americana mouchezii (Lacaze-Duthiers, 1897) and Polycyathus muellerae (Abel, 1959), which were able to edify a secondary substrate with high structural complexity. Scleractinian corallites were cemented by calcified polychaete tubes and organized into an interlocking meshwork that provided the reef stiffness. Aggregates of several individuals of the bivalve Neopycnodonte cochlear (Poli, 1795) contributed to the compactness of the structure. The species composition of the benthic community showed a marked similarity with those described for Mediterranean coralligenous communities and it appeared to be dominated by invertebrates, while calcareous algae, which are usually considered the main coralligenous reef-builders, were poorly represented. Overall, the studied reef can be considered a unique environment, to be included in the wide and diversified category of Mediterranean bioconstructions. The main reef-building scleractinians lacked algal symbionts, suggesting that heterotrophy had a major role in the metabolic processes that supported the production of calcium carbonate. The large amount of available suspended organic matter in the area could be the main nutritional source for these species, as already suggested in the literature referred to Mediterranean cold-water corals.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30837650 PMCID: PMC6401148 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-40284-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1The study area. Location of the study area and schematic morphological and geological setting of the Monopoli area.
Figure 2Map of the study area with the localization of navigation tracks and dives. Bathymetric map of the study area with remotely operated vehicle navigation tracks (blue) and scuba-diving transects (red).
Figure 3Geophysical mapping results. (A) Side-scan sonar map. Note the presence of channelized erosional forms in the southwestern sector, the complex morphology of the EW-oriented slope, and the blackish deeper sector below the base of the slope. (B) Sub-bottom profiler section across the study area (location shown in red in A). Note that the distribution of bioconstructions on the sea bottom can be detected as signal loss sectors. The general morphology of the area is dominated by the presence of an EW slope, which is probably related to a fault with a similar orientation (red dotted line).
Figure 4Map of the study area produced using geophysical and bionomic data, seabed video, scuba dives and sample analysis with the detail of the mesophotic coral reef distribution.
Figure 5In situ images of the mesophotic coral reef. (A) Sub-vertically and (B) horizontally oriented, both showing heavy siltation over the reef structure.
Figure 6Coral reef block with details of the main builder taxa identified. (A) Sampled block with indication of cut line (red dotted line). (B) Schematic representation of the cutting surface. Red boxes indicate the different positions where pictures C ÷ E were taken within the block; (C) external surface with scleractinian corals and sponges; (D) intermediate portion mainly characterized by serpulid tubes and bivalves; (E) basal portion with bryozoans, serpulids and eroded scleractinian skeletons. Scale bars: A, B = 10 cm; C ÷ E = 1 cm.
Figure 7Contribution of the main taxa to the mesophotic coral reef. Covering values in percentage of the main structuring taxa. The values were obtained from image analysis of: (A) field photo/videos (ECR = Encrusting Coralline Rhodophytes); (B) taxonomic sample analysis. In (C), for molluscs and serpulids, abundance values refer to n° of individuals in 300 ml of bioconstruction (I, II, III = serpulids’ size classes).
Statistical Analysis.
| Factor | df | Mean Sq | F value | Pr( > F) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Depth | 1 | 40 | 0.372 | 0.549 |
| Inclination | 1 | 5017 | 46,609.000 | 1.23e-06*** |
| Depth × Inclination | 1 | 12 | 0.112 | 0.742 |
| Residuals | 20 | 108 |
Two-way ANOVA, demonstrating main and interactive effects of Depth and Substrate Inclination on scleractinian species abundance (n = 24).
**Indicates significant effect (p < 0.01).
Figure 8Box plots of scleractinian covering (%) related to the substratum inclination: Horizontal (H.) vs Vertical (V.) and depth (30 ÷ 35 vs 45 ÷ 50 m).
Figure 9Plane-polarized light microscope photos of thin sections of the mesophotic coral reef. Details of the bioconstruction with (A) visible scleractinian corallites and a serpulid tube; (B) other carbonate-producing taxa, among which serpulids and bryozoans are recognizable (scl = scleractinian; ser = serpulid; bry = bryozoan).
Figure 10The main mesophotic coral reef contributors. Bleached and in vivo coral colonies of Phyllangia americana mouchezii (left column: A,B) and Polycyathus muellerae (right column: C,D). Scale bars: A, C = 1 cm; B, D = 0.5 cm.