Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T12:30:58.719Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Decrease in Lithothamnion sp. (Rhodophyta) primary production due to the deposition of a thin sediment layer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2008

Pablo Riul*
Affiliation:
Departamento de Sistemática e Ecologia, CCEN, Universidade Federal da Paraíba, 58059- 900, João Pessoa, PB, Brasil
Carlos Henrique Targino
Affiliation:
Departamento de Sistemática e Ecologia, CCEN, Universidade Federal da Paraíba, 58059- 900, João Pessoa, PB, Brasil
Julyana Da Nóbrega Farias
Affiliation:
Departamento de Botânica, CCB, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, 88010-970, Florianópolis, SC, Brasil
Pieter Teunis Visscher
Affiliation:
Department of Marine Sciences, University of Connecticut, Groton, CT 06340, USA
Paulo Antunes Horta
Affiliation:
Departamento de Botânica, CCB, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, 88010-970, Florianópolis, SC, Brasil
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: Pablo Riul Departamento de Sistemática e Ecologia CCEN, Universidade Federal de Paríba, 58059-900 João Pessoa PBBrasil email: [email protected]

Abstract

Coralline algae are important reef-builders which can form nodules, known as rhodoliths, occurring worldwide in beds sustaining a high biodiversity. Although considered a non-renewable resource, they are exploited as a source of calcium carbonate used mainly for agricultural purposes. In Brazil between 96,000 and 120,000 metric tonnes of rhodoliths are extracted per year. Besides the direct impact caused by removal on the coralline bed, the dredge process may also produce a plume of fine sediment, which can change the primary production of the remaining organisms. In this study, four treatments, with three replicates, were used to acquire Lithothamnion sp. net photosynthetic rates with and without a sediment layer using a Clark-type oxygen microelectrode and micromanipulator. The results demonstrated that, under controlled conditions, the addition of a thin sediment layer resulted in a 30% reduction of the irradiance, decreasing the Lithothamnion sp. net production in 70%. For this reason direct and indirect effects of mechanical exploitation of the rhodolith beds should be included in future studies that focus on environmental impacts of dredging activity, whether it is linked to the extraction of these algae.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Barbera, C. et al. (2003) Conservation and management of northeast Atlantic and Mediterranean maerl beds. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 13, S65S76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bjoerk, M., Nohammed, S.M., Bjoerklund, M. and Semesi, A. (1995) Coralline algae, important coral-reef builders threatened by pollution. Ambio 24, 502505.Google Scholar
Blake, C. and Maggs, C.A. (2003) Comparative growth rates and internal banding periodicity of maerl species (Corallinales, Rhodophyta) from northern Europe. Phycologia 42, 606612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briand, X. (1991) Seaweed harvesting in Europe. In Guiry, M.D. and Blunden, G. (eds) Seaweed resources in Europe: uses and potential, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 259308Google Scholar
Broecker, W. and Peng, T. (1974) Gas exchange rates between air and sea. Tellus 26, 2135.Google Scholar
Epping, E.H.G., Khalili, A. and Thar, R. (1999) Photosynthesis and the dynamics of oxygen consumption in a microbial mat as calculated from transient oxygen microprofiles. Limnology and Oceanography 44, 19361948.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fabricius, K. and De'ath, G. (2001) Environmental factors associated with the spatial distribution of crustose coralline algae on the Great Barrier Reel. Coral Reefs 19, 303309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foster, M.S. (2001) Rhodoliths: between rocks and soft places. Journal of Phycology 37, 659667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grall, J. and Hall-Spencer, J.M. (2003) Problems facing maerl conservation in Brittany. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 13, S55S64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall-Spencer, J. (2005) Ban on maerl extraction. Marine Pollution Bulletin 50, 121.Google Scholar
Horta, P.A. (2000) Macroalgas do infralitoral do sul e sudeste do Brasil: taxonomia e biogeografia. PhD thesis. Instituto de Biociências. Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brasil.Google Scholar
Horta, P.A. (2002) Bases para identificação das coralináceas não articuladas do litoral brasileiro—uma síntese do conhecimento. Biotemas 15, 744.Google Scholar
Littler, M.M., Littler, D.S., Blair, S.M. and Norris, J.N. (1985) Deepest known plant life discovered on an uncharted seamount. Science 227 5759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lobban, C.S. and Harrison, P.J. (1997) Seaweed ecology and physiology 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Martin, S., Clavier, J., Chauvaud, L. and Thouzeau, G. (2007) Community metabolism in temperate maerl beds. I. Carbon and carbonate fluxes. Marine Ecology Progress Series 335, 1929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Necchi Junior, O. (2004) Photosynthetic responses to temperature in tropical lotic macroalgae. Phycological Research 52, 140148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickney, J. and Zingmark, R.G. (1991) Effect of tidal stage and sun angles on intertidal benthic microalgal productivity. Marine Ecology Progress Series 76, 8189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Revsbech, N.P. and Jørgensen, B.B. (1986) Microelectrodes: their use in microbial ecology. Advances in Microbial Ecology 9, 293352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Revsbech, N.P. (1989) An oxygenmicroelectrode with a guard athode. Limnology and Oceanography 34, 474478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, R.D., Külh, M., Glud, R.N. and Rysgaard, S. (2002) Primary production of crustose coralline red algae in a high Arctic fjord. Journal of Phycology 38, 273283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwarz, A.M., Hawes, L., Andrew, N., Mercer, S., Cummings, V. and Thrush, S. (2005) Primary production potential of non-geniculate coralline algae at Cape Evans, Ross Sea, Antarctica. Marine Ecology Progress Series 294, 131140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steller, D.L., Riosmena-Rodriiguez, R., Foster, M.S. and Roberts, C.A. (2003) Rhodolith bed diversity in the Gulf of California: the importance of rhodolith structure and consequences of disturbance. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 13, S5S20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ursi, S., Pedersén, M., Plastino, E. and Snoeijs, P. (2003) Intraspecific variation of photosynthesis, respiration and photoprotective carotenoids in Gracilaria birdiae (Gracilariales: Rhodophyta). Marine Ecology 142, 9971007.Google Scholar
Visscher, P.T., Beukema, J. and van Gemerden, H. (1991) In situ characterization of sediments: measurements of oxygen and sulfide profiles with a novel combined needle electrode. Limnology and Oceanography 36, 14761480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, S., Blake, C., Berges, J.A. and Maggs, C.A. (2004) Environmental tolerances of free-living coralline algae (maerl): implications for European Marine conservation. Biological Conservation 120, 279289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolff, W.J., van der Land, J., Nienhuis, P.H. and de Wilde, P.A.W.J. (1993) The functioning of the ecosystem of the Banc d'Arguin, Mauritania: a review. Hydrobiologia 258, 211222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woelkerling, W.J. (1988) The coralline red algae: an analysis of genera and subfamilies of nongeniculate Corallinaceae. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zar, J.H. (1999) Biostatistical analysis. 4th edn. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar