Differences in fouling community composition and space occupation across broad spatial and temporal scales
Sessile marine invertebrate (biofouling) communities have served as an important model in ecology for evaluating fundamental patterns and processes, including invasion dynamics, which vary at broad spatial and temporal scales. Here, we tested for differences in biofouling community development among...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022-12-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Marine Science |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2022.933405/full |
| _version_ | 1828091739849621504 |
|---|---|
| author | Elizabeth B. Jewett Elizabeth B. Jewett Katherine N. Lawson Kristen J. Larson Brianna M. Tracy Safra Altman Andrew L. Chang Scott Cowan Jeffrey A. Crooks Tamar Huber Elizabeth H. Wells Gregory M. Ruiz |
| author_facet | Elizabeth B. Jewett Elizabeth B. Jewett Katherine N. Lawson Kristen J. Larson Brianna M. Tracy Safra Altman Andrew L. Chang Scott Cowan Jeffrey A. Crooks Tamar Huber Elizabeth H. Wells Gregory M. Ruiz |
| author_sort | Elizabeth B. Jewett |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Sessile marine invertebrate (biofouling) communities have served as an important model in ecology for evaluating fundamental patterns and processes, including invasion dynamics, which vary at broad spatial and temporal scales. Here, we tested for differences in biofouling community development among three biogeographically distinct bays in North America (Chesapeake Bay, Tampa Bay, and San Francisco Bay), exploring possible explanations for differential non-native species success. In particular, we aimed to examine if San Francisco Bay (a global hotspot for non-native species richness) differed in composition and space occupation, especially since open space can facilitate colonization. Additionally, we explored how biogeography, assembly and succession dynamics over the short and long term, and space availability affect marine communities across broad spatial scales. Patterns of community assembly differed among bays, with more bare space and less secondary cover (species settling on species) in San Francisco Bay. San Francisco Bay was also distinguished by a higher percent cover of Tunicata (almost all of which are non-native and historically absent) over multiple time scales. Cirripedia recruited on bare panels in all three Bays but cover increased only in Tampa Bay, as soak time increased. Tube-dwelling Polychaeta distinguished Chesapeake Bay from Tampa Bay and San Francisco Bay. Low-salinity events temporarily restructured the communities in all three bays. Whether differences among bays reflect coastal versus bay-specific patterns remains to be tested. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-11T06:17:38Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-9e44f68f1f3c45d08eb24a6797ac39b6 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2296-7745 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-11T06:17:38Z |
| publishDate | 2022-12-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Marine Science |
| spelling | doaj.art-9e44f68f1f3c45d08eb24a6797ac39b62022-12-22T04:41:01ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Marine Science2296-77452022-12-01910.3389/fmars.2022.933405933405Differences in fouling community composition and space occupation across broad spatial and temporal scalesElizabeth B. Jewett0Elizabeth B. Jewett1Katherine N. Lawson2Kristen J. Larson3Brianna M. Tracy4Safra Altman5Andrew L. Chang6Scott Cowan7Jeffrey A. Crooks8Tamar Huber9Elizabeth H. Wells10Gregory M. Ruiz11Smithsonian Environmental Research Center, Edgewater, MD, United StatesOceanic and Atmospheric Research Division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Silver Spring, MD, United StatesState University of New York (SUNY) College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Syracuse, NY, United StatesSmithsonian Environmental Research Center, Edgewater, MD, United StatesOceanography Department, United States Naval Academy, Annapolis, MD, United StatesUnited States Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS, United StatesSmithsonian Environmental Research Center, Edgewater, MD, United StatesSmithsonian Environmental Research Center, Edgewater, MD, United StatesTijuana River National Estuarine Research Reserve, Imperial Beach, CA, United StatesSmithsonian Environmental Research Center, Edgewater, MD, United StatesCalifornia Department of Water Resources, Sacramento, CA, United StatesSmithsonian Environmental Research Center, Edgewater, MD, United StatesSessile marine invertebrate (biofouling) communities have served as an important model in ecology for evaluating fundamental patterns and processes, including invasion dynamics, which vary at broad spatial and temporal scales. Here, we tested for differences in biofouling community development among three biogeographically distinct bays in North America (Chesapeake Bay, Tampa Bay, and San Francisco Bay), exploring possible explanations for differential non-native species success. In particular, we aimed to examine if San Francisco Bay (a global hotspot for non-native species richness) differed in composition and space occupation, especially since open space can facilitate colonization. Additionally, we explored how biogeography, assembly and succession dynamics over the short and long term, and space availability affect marine communities across broad spatial scales. Patterns of community assembly differed among bays, with more bare space and less secondary cover (species settling on species) in San Francisco Bay. San Francisco Bay was also distinguished by a higher percent cover of Tunicata (almost all of which are non-native and historically absent) over multiple time scales. Cirripedia recruited on bare panels in all three Bays but cover increased only in Tampa Bay, as soak time increased. Tube-dwelling Polychaeta distinguished Chesapeake Bay from Tampa Bay and San Francisco Bay. Low-salinity events temporarily restructured the communities in all three bays. Whether differences among bays reflect coastal versus bay-specific patterns remains to be tested.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2022.933405/fullbenthiccommunity developmentfoulinghard substrateinvasivemarine |
| spellingShingle | Elizabeth B. Jewett Elizabeth B. Jewett Katherine N. Lawson Kristen J. Larson Brianna M. Tracy Safra Altman Andrew L. Chang Scott Cowan Jeffrey A. Crooks Tamar Huber Elizabeth H. Wells Gregory M. Ruiz Differences in fouling community composition and space occupation across broad spatial and temporal scales Frontiers in Marine Science benthic community development fouling hard substrate invasive marine |
| title | Differences in fouling community composition and space occupation across broad spatial and temporal scales |
| title_full | Differences in fouling community composition and space occupation across broad spatial and temporal scales |
| title_fullStr | Differences in fouling community composition and space occupation across broad spatial and temporal scales |
| title_full_unstemmed | Differences in fouling community composition and space occupation across broad spatial and temporal scales |
| title_short | Differences in fouling community composition and space occupation across broad spatial and temporal scales |
| title_sort | differences in fouling community composition and space occupation across broad spatial and temporal scales |
| topic | benthic community development fouling hard substrate invasive marine |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2022.933405/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT elizabethbjewett differencesinfoulingcommunitycompositionandspaceoccupationacrossbroadspatialandtemporalscales AT elizabethbjewett differencesinfoulingcommunitycompositionandspaceoccupationacrossbroadspatialandtemporalscales AT katherinenlawson differencesinfoulingcommunitycompositionandspaceoccupationacrossbroadspatialandtemporalscales AT kristenjlarson differencesinfoulingcommunitycompositionandspaceoccupationacrossbroadspatialandtemporalscales AT briannamtracy differencesinfoulingcommunitycompositionandspaceoccupationacrossbroadspatialandtemporalscales AT safraaltman differencesinfoulingcommunitycompositionandspaceoccupationacrossbroadspatialandtemporalscales AT andrewlchang differencesinfoulingcommunitycompositionandspaceoccupationacrossbroadspatialandtemporalscales AT scottcowan differencesinfoulingcommunitycompositionandspaceoccupationacrossbroadspatialandtemporalscales AT jeffreyacrooks differencesinfoulingcommunitycompositionandspaceoccupationacrossbroadspatialandtemporalscales AT tamarhuber differencesinfoulingcommunitycompositionandspaceoccupationacrossbroadspatialandtemporalscales AT elizabethhwells differencesinfoulingcommunitycompositionandspaceoccupationacrossbroadspatialandtemporalscales AT gregorymruiz differencesinfoulingcommunitycompositionandspaceoccupationacrossbroadspatialandtemporalscales |