Iken K et al. (2010), Large-scale spatial distribution patterns of ec...

ECB-ART-48209

PLoS One 2010 Nov 05;511:e13845. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0013845.

Show Gene links Show Anatomy links

Large-scale spatial distribution patterns of echinoderms in nearshore rocky habitats.

Iken K , Konar B , Benedetti-Cecchi L , Cruz-Motta JJ , Knowlton A , Pohle G , Mead A , Miloslavich P , Wong M , Trott T , Mieszkowska N , Riosmena-Rodriguez R , Airoldi L , Kimani E , Shirayama Y , Fraschetti S , Ortiz-Touzet M , Silva A .

???displayArticle.abstract???
This study examined echinoderm assemblages from nearshore rocky habitats for large-scale distribution patterns with specific emphasis on identifying latitudinal trends and large regional hotspots. Echinoderms were sampled from 76 globally-distributed sites within 12 ecoregions, following the standardized sampling protocol of the Census of Marine Life NaGISA project (www.nagisa.coml.org). Sample-based species richness was overall low (<1-5 species per site), with a total of 32 asteroid, 18 echinoid, 21 ophiuroid, and 15 holothuroid species. Abundance and species richness in intertidal assemblages sampled with visual methods (organisms >2 cm in 1 m(2) quadrats) was highest in the Caribbean ecoregions and echinoids dominated these assemblages with an average of 5 ind m(-2). In contrast, intertidal echinoderm assemblages collected from clearings of 0.0625 m(2) quadrats had the highest abundance and richness in the Northeast Pacific ecoregions where asteroids and holothurians dominated with an average of 14 ind 0.0625 m(-2). Distinct latitudinal trends existed for abundance and richness in intertidal assemblages with declines from peaks at high northern latitudes. No latitudinal trends were found for subtidal echinoderm assemblages with either sampling technique. Latitudinal gradients appear to be superseded by regional diversity hotspots. In these hotspots echinoderm assemblages may be driven by local and regional processes, such as overall productivity and evolutionary history. We also tested a set of 14 environmental variables (six natural and eight anthropogenic) as potential drivers of echinoderm assemblages by ecoregions. The natural variables of salinity, sea-surface temperature, chlorophyll a, and primary productivity were strongly correlated with echinoderm assemblages; the anthropogenic variables of inorganic pollution and nutrient contamination also contributed to correlations. Our results indicate that nearshore echinoderm assemblages appear to be shaped by a network of environmental and ecological processes, and by the differing responses of various echinoderm taxa, making generalizations about the patterns of nearshore rocky habitat echinoderm assemblages difficult.

???displayArticle.pubmedLink??? 21079760
???displayArticle.pmcLink??? PMC2974624
???displayArticle.link??? PLoS One

Genes referenced: LOC100887844 LOC115925415 LOC583082

???attribute.lit??? ???displayArticles.show???

References [+] :

Allen, Global biodiversity, biochemical kinetics, and the energetic-equivalence rule. 2002, Pubmed

Allen, Global biodiversity, biochemical kinetics, and the energetic-equivalence rule. 2002, Pubmed
Allen, Kinetic effects of temperature on rates of genetic divergence and speciation. 2006, Pubmed
Barnes, Polarization of competition increases with latitude. 2002, Pubmed
Benedetti-Cecchi, Spatial relationships between polychaete assemblages and environmental variables over broad geographical scales. 2010, Pubmed
Brandt, First insights into the biodiversity and biogeography of the Southern Ocean deep sea. 2007, Pubmed
Bustamante, Gradients of intertidal primary productivity around the coast of South Africa and their relationships with consumer biomass. 1995, Pubmed
Cintra-Buenrostro, Oceanographic conditions and diversity of sea stars (Echinodermata: Asteroidea) in the Gulf of California, México. 2005, Pubmed , Echinobase
Clarke, Climate, energy and diversity. 2006, Pubmed
Coteur, Effects of PCBs on reactive oxygen species (ROS) production by the immune cells of Paracentrotus lividus (Echinodermata). 2001, Pubmed , Echinobase
Cruz-Motta, Patterns of spatial variation of assemblages associated with intertidal rocky shores: a global perspective. 2010, Pubmed
Edmunds, Recovery of Diadema antillarum reduces macroalgal cover and increases abundance of juvenile corals on a Caribbean reef. 2001, Pubmed , Echinobase
Estes, Sea otters: their role in structuring nearshore communities. 1974, Pubmed
Gray, The measurement of marine species diversity, with an application to the benthic fauna of the Norwegian continental shelf. 2000, Pubmed
Guidetti, Relationships among predatory fish, sea urchins and barrens in Mediterranean rocky reefs across a latitudinal gradient. 2007, Pubmed , Echinobase
Halpern, A global map of human impact on marine ecosystems. 2008, Pubmed
Hillebrand, On the generality of the latitudinal diversity gradient. 2004, Pubmed
Konar, Current patterns of macroalgal diversity and biomass in northern hemisphere rocky shores. 2010, Pubmed
Leigh, Wave energy and intertidal productivity. 1987, Pubmed
McClanahan, Causes and consequences of sea urchin abundance and diversity in Kenyan coral reef lagoons. 1990, Pubmed , Echinobase
Menge, Benthic-pelagic links and rocky intertidal communities: bottom-up effects on top-down control? 1997, Pubmed
Mittelbach, Evolution and the latitudinal diversity gradient: speciation, extinction and biogeography. 2007, Pubmed
Neira, [Taxonomic composition and distribution of the echinoderms associations in the littoral ecosystems from the Colombian Pacific]. 2005, Pubmed , Echinobase
Paine, Intertidal community structure : Experimental studies on the relationship between a dominant competitor and its principal predator. 1974, Pubmed , Echinobase
Rönnbäck, Ecosystem goods and services from Swedish coastal habitats: identification, valuation, and implications of ecosystem shifts. 2007, Pubmed
Roy, Dissecting latitudinal diversity gradients: functional groups and clades of marine bivalves. 2000, Pubmed
Sousa, Latitudinal variation in intertidal algal community structure: the influence of grazing and vegetative propagation. 1981, Pubmed , Echinobase
Vázquez-Domínguez, [Diversity and distribution of crustaceans and echinoderms and their relation with sedimentation levels in coral reefs]. 2003, Pubmed
White, A comparison of plotless density estimators using Monte Carlo simulation on totally enumerated field data sets. 2008, Pubmed
Witman, The relationship between regional and local species diversity in marine benthic communities: a global perspective. 2004, Pubmed
Worm, Impacts of biodiversity loss on ocean ecosystem services. 2006, Pubmed

	Figure 1. Global distribution of 76 sampling sites of echinoderm assemblages within the NaGISA program.Due to the large scale of the map, spatially close sites cannot be distinguished. Boxes delineate ecoregions (see text for details).
	Figure 2. Average echinoderm abundances in ecoregions. a. 16x intertidal collections, b. 16x subtidal collections, c. 100x intertidal collections, d. 100x subtidal collections. Numbers below ecoregions specify the number of sites included in each region. See Fig. 1 and text for ecoregions.
	Figure 3. Relative abundances of echinoderm classes in ecoregions. a. 16x intertidal collections, b. 16x subtidal collections, c. 100x intertidal collections, d. 100x subtidal collections. Numbers below ecoregions specify the number of sites included in each region. See Fig 1 and text for ecoregions.
	Figure 4. Expected number of species (ES5) in ecoregions. a. 16x intertidal collections, b. 16x subtidal collections, c. 100x intertidal collections, d. 100x subtidal collections. Numbers below ecoregions specify the number of sites included in each region. See Fig. 1 and text for ecoregions.
	Figure 5. Spearman rank correlations between echinoderm abundance and latitude.Echinoderm abundances are from a. 16x intertidal collections, b. 16x subtidal collections, c. 100x intertidal collections, and d. 100x subtidal collections. See Tables 1 and 2 for correlation coefficients and significance levels.
	Figure 6. Spearman rank correlations between echinoderm species richness (based on estimated number of species ES5) and latitude.Echinoderm abundances are from a. 16x intertidal collections, b. 16x subtidal collections, c. 100x intertidal collections, and d. 100x subtidal collections. See Tables 1 and 2 for correlation coefficients and significance levels.
	Figure 7. Spearman rank correlations between echinoderm taxonomic distinctness and latitude.Echinoderm abundances are from a. 16x intertidal collections, b. 16x subtidal collections, c. 100x intertidal collections, and d. 100x subtidal collections. See Tables 1 and 2 for correlation coefficients and significance levels.