|
Figure 1. Experimental temperature regimes, experimental design and setup. Implemented temperatures for the four temperature treatments, Ambient (A), Ambient Sinusoidal (A-S), Warm (W) and Warm Sinusoidal (W-S; A). Energy uptake of individuals was summed at three different scales: (i) at the scale of short-term variability (2-day blocks in repeated 8-day sinusoidal temperature cycles, summed over the entire experiment: maximum temperature (1: Max), mean temperature after the maximum (2: Descending), minimum temperature (3: Min) and mean temperature after the minimum (4: Ascending); B), (ii) at the medium-term variability scale of seasonal summer temperature shifts (energy uptake as sum over 16-day blocks indicated by coloured bars in (A): Pre-heat, Heat and Post-heat), as well as (iii) at the scale of climate change impacts (identified by comparisons of ambient vs. warm treatments in ‘constant’ and sinusoidal fluctuating settings, using energy uptake as sum and growth over the entire ~2-months experimental duration; compare upper and lower diagrams in A). The treatments were realized within twelve indoor mesocosms, three mesocosms serving one temperature treatment (each mesocosm contained six 2 L experimental units, three of which contained single individuals of Asterias rubens (orange) and three of which contained single individuals of Hemigrapsus takanoi (yellow), N = 9; C).
|
|
Figure 2. Energy uptake and change in wet weight of Asterias rubens. Energy uptake (A) and change in wet weight (B) during 72 days of experimentation, under ambient or warm and ‘constant’ or sinusoidal fluctuating temperature conditions (sum over the entire period, climate change in Fig. 1A). Data are presented as boxplots (median, upper and lower quartile (75th and 25th percentile), whiskers (1.5 times the interquartile range, outliers; N = 9). Significant differences between single treatment combinations were identified using a post hoc Tukey test at p < 0.05 and are indicated by lower-case letters.
|
|
Figure 3. Phase dependent energy uptake of Asterias rubens. Energy uptake over 72 days of experimentation, summed for the four phases of the sinusoidal fluctuating cycle (short-term variability scale) for the ambient sinusoidal (A) and the warm sinusoidal (B) treatments, at maximum temperature (Max), mean temperature after the maximum (Descending), minimum temperature (Min) and mean temperature after the minimum (Ascending). All phases of a cycle are also illustrated in Fig. 1B. Data are presented as boxplots (median, upper and lower quartile (75th and 25th percentile), whiskers (1.5 times the interquartile range, outliers; N = 9). Significant differences between single treatment combinations were identified using a PERMANOVA pair-wise test at p < 0.05 and are indicated by lower-case letters.
|
|
Figure 4. Period dependent energy uptake of Asterias rubens. Energy uptake under ambient (A), ambient sinusoidal (B), warm (C) and warm sinusoidal (D) temperature treatments (medium-term variability scale). Data were separated into three equally long 16-day time periods: Pre-heat (July 19th to August 4th), Heat (August 4th to August 20th) and Post-heat (August 20th to September 5th). Data are presented as boxplots (median, upper and lower quartile (75th and 25th percentile), whiskers (1.5 times the interquartile range, outliers; N = 9). Significant differences between single treatment combinations were identified using a post hoc Tukey test at p < 0.05 and are indicated by lower-case letters.
|
|
Figure 5. Energy uptake and change in wet weight of Hemigrapsus takanoi. Energy uptake (A) and change in wet weight (B) during 64 days of experimentation, under ambient or wa rm and ‘constant’ or sinusoidal fluctuating temperature conditions (sum over the entire period, climate change in Fig. 1B). Data are presented as boxplots (median, upper and lower quartile (75th and 25th percentile), whiskers (1.5 times the interquartile range, outliers; N = 9). Significant differences between single treatment combinations were identified using a post hoc Tukey test at p < 0.05 and are indicated by lower-case letters.
|
|
Figure 6. Phase dependent energy uptake of Hemigrapsus takanoi. Energy uptake over 64 days of experimentation, summed for the four phases of the sinusoidal fluctuating cycle (short-term variability scale) for the ambient sinusoidal (A) and the warm sinusoidal (B) treatments, at maximum temperature (Max), mean temperature after the maximum (Descending), minimum temperature (Min) and mean temperature after the minimum (Ascending). All phases of a cycle are illustrated in Fig. 1B. Data are presented as boxplots (median, upper and lower quartile (75th and 25th percentile), whiskers (1.5 times the interquartile range, outliers; N = 9). Significant differences between single treatment combinations were identified using a post hoc Tukey test at p < 0.05 and are indicated by lower-case letters.
|
|
Figure 7. Period dependent energy uptake of Hemigrapsus takanoi. Energy uptake under ambient (A), ambient sinusoidal (B), warm (C) and warm sinusoidal (D) temperature treatments (medium-term variability scale). Data were separated into three equally long 16-day time periods: Pre-heat (July 19th to August 4th), Heat (August 4th to August 20th) and Post-heat (August 20th to September 5th). Data are presented as boxplots (median, upper and lower quartile (75th and 25th percentile), whiskers (1.5 times the interquartile range, outliers; N = 9).
|
