Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Spatial variability of infaunal nematode and polychaete assemblages in two muddy subtidal habitats

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Marine Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Spatial variation of populations and their assemblages is an important component of many aspects of ecology, including the maintenance of species diversity. In nature, organisms are generally aggregated in patches or form gradients or other spatially related patterns. This investigation quantified the degree of spatial structure in benthic invertebrate assemblages. It examined the distribution of infaunal assemblages of different size, mobility and contrasting life-history strategies (i.e. meiofaunal nematodes and macrofaunal polychaetes) in two offshore muddy habitats in the Celtic Deep and the NW Irish Sea off the west coast of the United Kingdom. The more heterogeneous habitat in the NW Irish Sea was characterised by higher tidal stress and bottom temperature while greater water depth, mean particle diameter and organic carbon content was typical for the comparatively homogeneous environment in the Celtic Deep. In both habitats, the environmental conditions became increasingly dissimilar with separation. A total of 125 nematode and 88 polychaete species were recorded with 69% of the nematode and 49% of polychaete species present at both study sites. Occurrence frequency of species, species diversity and average similarity of assemblage composition was higher in the Celtic Deep than in the NW Irish Sea. Results from correlation analyses revealed statistically robust relationships of community similarity and sample distance. Given their small size and low mobility, nematodes were more susceptible to within-habitat physical variability than larger-sized, more mobile polychaetes. This, coupled with limits to long-distance dispersal and likely restrictions in gene flow, resulted in a significant decrease in community similarity with distance at the spatial scales sampled (i.e. within 0.1–23 km). Polychaetes, in contrast, combined a higher dispersal potential (>23 km) with a relatively high tolerance to within-habitat environmental variability and these were the most likely causes for non-significant relationships between the similarity of their assemblages and sample distance. The potential mechanisms causing the observed variation and implications of results for environmental management strategies are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andrássy I (1956) Die Rauminhalts- und Gewichtsbestimmung der Fadenwürmer (Nematoden). Acta Zool 2:1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Armonies W (1988) Active emergence of meiofauna from intertidal sediment. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 43:151–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armonies W (1994) Drifting meio- and macrobenthic invertebrates on tidal flats in Königshafen: a review. Helgol wiss Meeresunters 48:299–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Attrill MJ, Depledge MH (1997) Community and population indicators of ecosystem health: targeting links between levels of biological organisation. Aquat Toxicol 38:183–197

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bhaud M, Duchêne J-C (1996) Change from planktonic to benthic development: is life cycle evolution an adaptive answer to the constraints of dispersal? Oceanol Acta 19:335–346

    Google Scholar 

  • Bilton DT, Paula J, Bishop JDD (2002) Dispersal, genetic differentiation and speciation in estuarine organisms. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 55: 937–952

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blake JA (1991) Revision of some genera and species of Cirratulidae (Polychaeta) from the Western North Atlantic. Ophelia 5(Suppl):17–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Bone D, Viéitez JM (2002) Spionidae (Annelida: Polychaeta) from the Parque Nacional Morrocoy, Falcón, Venezuela. Rev Biol Trop 50(1):69–75

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brooksa RA, Purdy CN, Bell SS, Sulak KJ (2006) The benthic community of the eastern US continental shelf: a literature synopsis of benthic faunal resources. Cont Shelf Res 26:804–818

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burrows MT, Robb L, Nickell LA, Hughes DJ (2003) Topography as a determinant of search paths of fishes and mobile macrocrustacea on the sediment surface. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 285/286:235–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callaway R (2006) Tube worms promote community change. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 308:49–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carson HS, Hentschel BT (2006) Estimating the dispersal potential of polychaete species in the Southern California Bight: implications for designing marine reserves. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 316:105–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke KR, Gorley RN (2006) PRIMER v6. User manual. PRIMER-E Ltd, Plymouth

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke KR, Warwick RM (1994) Change in marine communities: an approach to statistical analysis and interpretation. Plymouth Marine Laboratory, Plymouth

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke KR, Somerfield PJ, Chapman MG (2006) On resemblance measures for ecological studies, including taxonomic dissimilarities and zero-adjusted Bray–Curtis coefficient for denuded assemblages. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 330:55–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coull BC, Palmer MA (1984) Field experimentation in meiofaunal ecology. Hydrobiologia 118:1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Derycke S, Remerie T, Vierstraete A, Backeljau T, Vanfleteren J, Vincx M, Moens T (2005) Mitochondrial DNA variation and cryptic speciation within the free-living marine nematode Pellioditis marina. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 309:91–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer KR (1986) Coastal and estuarine sediment dynamics. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Edgar GJ, Barrett NS (1999) Effects of the declaration of marine reserves on Tasmanian reef fishes, invertebrates and plants. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 242:107–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edgar GJ, Barrett NS (2002) Benthic macrofauna in Tasmanian estuaries: scales of distribution and relationships with environmental variables. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 270:1–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fauchald F, Jumars PA (1979) The diet of worms: a study of polychaete feeding guilds. Oceanogr Mar Biol Annu Rev 17:193–284

    Google Scholar 

  • Findlay SEG (1981) Small-scale spatial distribution of meiofauna on a mud- and sandflat. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 12:471–484

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flather RA, Proctor R, Wolf J (1991) Oceanographic forecast models. In: Farmer DG, Rycroft MJ (eds) Computer modelling in the environmental sciences. IMA conference series 28. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp 15–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleeger JW, Decho A (1987) Spatial variability of interstitial meiofauna: a review. Stygologia 3:35–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Flint RW, Rabalais NN (1980) Polychaete ecology and niche patterns: Texas continental shelf. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 3:193–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraschetti S, Terlizzi A, Benedetti-Cecci L (2005a) Patterns of distribution of marine assemblages from rocky shores: evidence of relevant scales of variation. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 296:13–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraschetti S, Terlizzi A, Bussotti S, Guarnieri G, D’Ambrosio P, Boero F (2005b) Conservation of Mediterranean seascapes: analyses of existing protection schemes. Mar Env Res 59:309–332

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gambi MC, Giangrande A (1986) Distribution of soft bottom polychaetes in two coastal areas of the Tyrrhenian Sea (Italy): structural analysis. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 23:847–862

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • García-Charton JA, Pérez-Ruzafa A (1999) Ecological heterogeneity and the evaluation of the effects of marine reserves. Fish Res 42: 1–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giere O (1993) Meiobenthology—the microscopic fauna in aquatic sediments. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall SJ (1994) Physical disturbance and marine benthic communities: life in unconsolidated sediments. Oceanogr Mar Biol Annu Rev 32:179–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartmann-Schröder (1996) Annelida, Borstenwürmer, Polychaeta, 2nd revised edn. The fauna of Germany and adjacent seas with their characteristics and ecology, vol 58. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena

  • Hayward PJ, Ryland JS (1990) The marine fauna of the British Isles and North–West Europe. Introduction and Protozoans to Arthropods, vol I. Oxford Science Publications, Claredon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Heip C, Vincx M, Vranken G (1985) The ecology of marine nematodes. Oceanogr Mar Biol Annu Rev 23:399–489

    Google Scholar 

  • Hensley RT (1996) A preliminary survey of benthos from the Nephrops norvegicus mud grounds in the north-western Irish Sea. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 42:457–465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodda M (1990) Variation in estuarine littoral nematode populations over three spatial scales. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 30:325–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter E, Aldridge JN, Metcalfe JD, Arnold GP (2003) Geolocation of free-ranging fish on the European continental shelf as determined from environmental variables. Mar Biol 142:601–609

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huston MA (1996) Biological diversity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson MS, Black R (1998) Effects of isolation by distance and geographical discontinuity on genetic subdivision of Littoraria cingulata. Mar Biol 132:295–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones B, Laslett RE (1994) Methods for analysis of trace metals in marine and other samples. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Directorate of Fisheries Research, Lowestoft

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones DS, Suter GW, Hull RN (1997) Toxicological benchmarks for screening contaminants of potential concern for effects on sediment-associated biota: 1997 revision. US Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management, Washington DC

  • Kaiser MJ, Rogers SI, McCandless DT (1994) Improving quantitative surveys of epibenthic communities using a modified 2 m beam trawl. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 106:131–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendall MA, Widdicombe S (1999) Small scale patterns in the structure of macrofaunal assemblages of shallow soft sediments. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 237:127–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kern JC (1990) Active and passive aspects of meiobenthic copepod dispersal at two sites near Mustang Island, Texas. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 60: 211–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lombard AT, Reyers B, Schonegevel LY, Cooper J, Smith-Adao LB, Nel DC, Froneman PW, Ansorge IJ, Bester MN, Tosh CA, Strauss T, Akkers T, Gon O, Leslie RW, Chown SL (2007) Conserving patterns and processes in the Southern Ocean: designing a marine protected area for the Prince Edward Islands. Antarct Sci 19:39–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackie ASY, Parmiter C, Tong LKY (1997) Distribution and diversity of Polychaeta in the Southern Irish Sea. Bull Mar Sci 60:467–481

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrisey DJ, Howitt L, Underwood AJ, Stark JS (1992) Spatial variation in soft-sediment benthos. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 81:197–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olabarria C, Chapman MG (2001) Comparison of patterns of spatial variation of microgastropods between two contrasting intertidal habitats. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 220:201–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer MA (1988) Dispersal of marine meiofauna: a review and conceptual model explaining passive transport and active emergence with implications for recruitment. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 48:81–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer MA, Gust G (1985) Dispersal of meiofauna in a turbulent tidal creek. J Mar Res 43:179–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parapar J, O’ Connor B, Besteiro C, Urgorri V (1994) Abyssoninoe hibernica (McIntosh) (Polychaeta, Lumbrineridae): a valid species from Northeast Atlantic. Sarsia 79:157–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips FE, Fleeger JW (1985) Meiofauna meso-scale variability in two estuarine habitats. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 21:745–756

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Platt HM, Warwick RM (1983) Free-living marine nematodes. Part I. British enoploids. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Platt HM, Warwick RM (1988) Free-living marine nematodes. Part II. British chromadorids. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn GP, Keough MJ (2002) Experimental design and data analysis for biologists. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Reiss H (2005) Catch efficiency of a standardized 2 m beam trawl (Epicatch). Report of the ICES Bethos Ecology Working Group 2005, Annex 6, ICES CM 2005/E:07

  • Rouse GW, Pleijel F (2001) Polychaetes. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Schratzberger M, Gee JM, Rees HL, Boyd SE, Wall CM (2000) The structure and taxonomic composition of sublittoral meiofauna assemblages as an indicator of the status of the marine environment. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 80:969–980

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Service M, Mitchell SH, Oliver WT (1996) Heavy metals in the superficial sediments of the N–W Irish Sea. Mar Poll Bull 32:828–830

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shanks AL, Grantham BA, Carr MH (2003) Propagule dispersal distance and the size and spacing of marine reserves. Ecol Appl 13(Suppl): 159–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Somerfield PJ, Gage JD (2000) Community structure of the benthos in Scottish Sea-lochs. IV. Multivariate spatial pattern. Mar Biol 136: 1133–1145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Somerfield PJ, Warwick RM (1996) Meiofauna in marine pollution monitoring programmes. A laboratory manual. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Directorate of Fisheries Research, Lowestoft

  • Somerfield PJ, Rees HL, Warwick RM (1995) Interrelationships in community structure between shallow-water marine meiofauna and macrofauna in relation to dredging disposal. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 127: 103–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stobutzki IC (2001) Marine reserves and the complexity of larval dispersal. Rev Fish Biol Fish 10:515–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terlizzi A, Anderson MJ, Fraschetti S, Benedetti-Cecchi B (2007) Scales of spatial variation in Mediterranean subtidal sessile assemblages at different depths. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 332:25–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Todaro MA, Fleeger JW, Hu YP, Hrincevich AW, Foltz DW (1996) Are meiofaunal species cosmopolitan? Morphological and molecular analysis of Xenotrichula intermedia (Gastrotricha: Chaetonotida). Mar Biol 125:735–742

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Underwood AJ, Chapman MG (1996) Scales of spatial patterns of distribution of intertidal invertebrates. Oecologia 107:212–224

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Molen J, Rogers SI, Ellis JR, Fox CJ, McCloghrie P (2007) Dispersal patterns of the eggs and larvae of spring-spawning fish in the Irish Sea, UK. J Sea Res. doi:10.1016/j.seares.2007.07.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Hoey G, Degraer S, Vincx M (2004) Macrobenthic community structure of soft-bottom sediments at the Belgian continental shelf. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 59:599–613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warwick RM, Platt HM, Somerfield PJ (1998) Free-living marine nematodes. Part III. British monhysterids. Field Studies Council, Shrewsbury

    Google Scholar 

  • Wieser W (1953) Die Beziehung zwischen Mundhöhlengestalt, Ernährungsweise und Vorkommen bei freilebenden marinen Nematoden. Arkiv Zool 4(26):439–484

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the scientists, officers and crew of RV “Cefas Endeavour” for practical assistance in the collection of samples. Claire Mason conducted the particle size analyses and Nicola Lauder carried out the trace metal analyses. Robert Brown gave valuable advice on the statistical analysis of the data. This manuscript has greatly benefited from discussions with Richard Warwick and Paul Somerfield and comments from Angus Atkinson and three anonymous reviewers. The work was supported by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (research project AE1148).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, Lowestoft Laboratory, Pakefield Road, Lowestoft, Suffolk, NR33 0HT, UK

    M. Schratzberger, T. A. D. Maxwell, K. Warr, J. R. Ellis & S. I. Rogers

Authors
  1. M. Schratzberger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. T. A. D. Maxwell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. K. Warr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J. R. Ellis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. S. I. Rogers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Schratzberger.

Additional information

Communicated by A. Atkinson.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material (PPT 153 kb)

Supplementary material (PPT 149 kb)

Appendix

Appendix

Tables 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13

Table 7 Mean abundance (±SE) of discriminating nematode species (sample−1) in the Celtic Deep
Full size table
Table 8 Mean abundance (±SE) of discriminating nematode species (sample−1) in the NW Irish Sea
Full size table
Table 9 Mean abundance (±SE) of discriminating polychaete species (sample−1) in the Celtic Deep
Full size table
Table 10 Mean abundance (±SE) of discriminating polychaete species (sample−1) in the NW Irish Sea
Full size table
Table 11 Feeding type and adult length of discriminating nematode species in the Celtic Deep and the NW Irish Sea
Full size table
Table 12 Feeding type and adult length of discriminating polychaete species in the Celtic Deep and the NW Irish Sea
Full size table
Table 13 Dispersal method of discriminating polychaete species in the Celtic Deep and the NW Irish Sea
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schratzberger, M., Maxwell, T.A.D., Warr, K. et al. Spatial variability of infaunal nematode and polychaete assemblages in two muddy subtidal habitats. Mar Biol 153, 621–642 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-007-0836-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-007-0836-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation