Comparative efficiency of Mytilus edulis as engineering species for shallow-water fouling communities on artificial structures in the White Sea
Currently, there is little comparative data on ‘efficiency’ of different engineering species, i.e. species richness, density and biomass of the associated organisms that have been supported by engineering species. The use of fouling communities makes it possible to compare the efficiency of differen...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2021-05, Vol.101 (3), p.511-525 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 525 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 511 |
container_title | Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom |
container_volume | 101 |
creator | Khalaman, Vyacheslav V. Komendantov, Alexander Yu Golubovskaya, Nina S. Manoylina, Polina A. |
description | Currently, there is little comparative data on ‘efficiency’ of different engineering species, i.e. species richness, density and biomass of the associated organisms that have been supported by engineering species. The use of fouling communities makes it possible to compare the efficiency of different engineering species under the same conditions, which is necessary to obtain correct estimates and difficult to do when studying natural bottom communities. In this study, we have analysed the fouling communities in four different mussel culture farms in the White Sea to test the following hypotheses. (1) Different engineering species (mussel Mytilus edulis, solitary ascidian Styela rustica, sponge Halichondria panicea) have different assemblages of the associated vagile fauna. (2) Mytilus edulis is the most efficient engineering species, i.e. species richness, species diversity, density and biomass of the associated vagile fauna is higher in the mussel communities than in those dominated by Styela rustica or Halichondria panicea. The first hypothesis was confirmed, while the second was rejected. In all the culture farms studied, all parameters of the mussel-associated vagile fauna were not higher and in most cases were even lower than those of the fauna associated with ascidians or sponges. The reason for this seems to be the very dense packing of mussels in patches. Therefore, Mytilus edulis is not the most efficient engineering species among fouling organisms, at least in the conditions of the subarctic White Sea. The data obtained are particularly important in view of the ever-increasing volume of anthropogenic substrate and fouling communities in coastal marine ecosystems. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1017/S0025315421000424 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2569346516</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S0025315421000424</cupid><sourcerecordid>2569346516</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c247t-9cc41bd7aa5f17e91a0db9d7467cd87d4d52f1ea8ad517e2a03c542868fdbdec3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kM1KxDAUhYMoOP48gLuA62rSpk27lME_UFyM4rLcSW5mMrTNmKTKPIWvbIqCC3F1L_d851w4hJxxdsEZl5cLxvKy4KXIOWNM5GKPzLiomkzKqtkns0nOJv2QHIWwSQyvZD0jn3PXb8FDtO9I0RirLA5qR52hj7touzFQ1GNnA4W0DSs7IHo7rGjYYkIDNc7TsIaucx_ZB0T06ZL4RCjX9-Ng40S5gYKPdoqHjoboRxVHnwQ70LhG-rq2EekC4YQcGOgCnv7MY_Jyc_08v8senm7v51cPmcqFjFmjlOBLLQFKwyU2HJheNlqKSipdSy10mRuOUIMuk54DK1Tqpq5qo5caVXFMzr9zt969jRhiu3GjH9LLNi-rphBVyatE8W9KeReCR9Nuve3B71rO2qn39k_vyVP8eKBfeqtX-Bv9v-sLFcOImQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2569346516</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparative efficiency of Mytilus edulis as engineering species for shallow-water fouling communities on artificial structures in the White Sea</title><source>Cambridge University Press Journals Complete</source><creator>Khalaman, Vyacheslav V. ; Komendantov, Alexander Yu ; Golubovskaya, Nina S. ; Manoylina, Polina A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Khalaman, Vyacheslav V. ; Komendantov, Alexander Yu ; Golubovskaya, Nina S. ; Manoylina, Polina A.</creatorcontrib><description>Currently, there is little comparative data on ‘efficiency’ of different engineering species, i.e. species richness, density and biomass of the associated organisms that have been supported by engineering species. The use of fouling communities makes it possible to compare the efficiency of different engineering species under the same conditions, which is necessary to obtain correct estimates and difficult to do when studying natural bottom communities. In this study, we have analysed the fouling communities in four different mussel culture farms in the White Sea to test the following hypotheses. (1) Different engineering species (mussel Mytilus edulis, solitary ascidian Styela rustica, sponge Halichondria panicea) have different assemblages of the associated vagile fauna. (2) Mytilus edulis is the most efficient engineering species, i.e. species richness, species diversity, density and biomass of the associated vagile fauna is higher in the mussel communities than in those dominated by Styela rustica or Halichondria panicea. The first hypothesis was confirmed, while the second was rejected. In all the culture farms studied, all parameters of the mussel-associated vagile fauna were not higher and in most cases were even lower than those of the fauna associated with ascidians or sponges. The reason for this seems to be the very dense packing of mussels in patches. Therefore, Mytilus edulis is not the most efficient engineering species among fouling organisms, at least in the conditions of the subarctic White Sea. The data obtained are particularly important in view of the ever-increasing volume of anthropogenic substrate and fouling communities in coastal marine ecosystems.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0025-3154</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1469-7769</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S0025315421000424</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Anthropogenic factors ; Biodiversity ; Biomass ; Coastal ecosystems ; Culture ; Density ; Efficiency ; Engineering ; Farms ; Fauna ; Fouling ; Fouling organisms ; Halichondria panicea ; Hypotheses ; Marine ecosystems ; Marine invertebrates ; Marine molluscs ; Mollusks ; Mussel culture ; Mussels ; Mytilus edulis ; Organisms ; Population ; Shallow water ; Species diversity ; Species richness ; Styela rustica ; Substrates</subject><ispartof>Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 2021-05, Vol.101 (3), p.511-525</ispartof><rights>Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c247t-9cc41bd7aa5f17e91a0db9d7467cd87d4d52f1ea8ad517e2a03c542868fdbdec3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c247t-9cc41bd7aa5f17e91a0db9d7467cd87d4d52f1ea8ad517e2a03c542868fdbdec3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5426-0607</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0025315421000424/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,314,780,784,27924,27925,55628</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Khalaman, Vyacheslav V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Komendantov, Alexander Yu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Golubovskaya, Nina S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Manoylina, Polina A.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparative efficiency of Mytilus edulis as engineering species for shallow-water fouling communities on artificial structures in the White Sea</title><title>Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom</title><addtitle>J. Mar. Biol. Ass</addtitle><description>Currently, there is little comparative data on ‘efficiency’ of different engineering species, i.e. species richness, density and biomass of the associated organisms that have been supported by engineering species. The use of fouling communities makes it possible to compare the efficiency of different engineering species under the same conditions, which is necessary to obtain correct estimates and difficult to do when studying natural bottom communities. In this study, we have analysed the fouling communities in four different mussel culture farms in the White Sea to test the following hypotheses. (1) Different engineering species (mussel Mytilus edulis, solitary ascidian Styela rustica, sponge Halichondria panicea) have different assemblages of the associated vagile fauna. (2) Mytilus edulis is the most efficient engineering species, i.e. species richness, species diversity, density and biomass of the associated vagile fauna is higher in the mussel communities than in those dominated by Styela rustica or Halichondria panicea. The first hypothesis was confirmed, while the second was rejected. In all the culture farms studied, all parameters of the mussel-associated vagile fauna were not higher and in most cases were even lower than those of the fauna associated with ascidians or sponges. The reason for this seems to be the very dense packing of mussels in patches. Therefore, Mytilus edulis is not the most efficient engineering species among fouling organisms, at least in the conditions of the subarctic White Sea. The data obtained are particularly important in view of the ever-increasing volume of anthropogenic substrate and fouling communities in coastal marine ecosystems.</description><subject>Anthropogenic factors</subject><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Biomass</subject><subject>Coastal ecosystems</subject><subject>Culture</subject><subject>Density</subject><subject>Efficiency</subject><subject>Engineering</subject><subject>Farms</subject><subject>Fauna</subject><subject>Fouling</subject><subject>Fouling organisms</subject><subject>Halichondria panicea</subject><subject>Hypotheses</subject><subject>Marine ecosystems</subject><subject>Marine invertebrates</subject><subject>Marine molluscs</subject><subject>Mollusks</subject><subject>Mussel culture</subject><subject>Mussels</subject><subject>Mytilus edulis</subject><subject>Organisms</subject><subject>Population</subject><subject>Shallow water</subject><subject>Species diversity</subject><subject>Species richness</subject><subject>Styela rustica</subject><subject>Substrates</subject><issn>0025-3154</issn><issn>1469-7769</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kM1KxDAUhYMoOP48gLuA62rSpk27lME_UFyM4rLcSW5mMrTNmKTKPIWvbIqCC3F1L_d851w4hJxxdsEZl5cLxvKy4KXIOWNM5GKPzLiomkzKqtkns0nOJv2QHIWwSQyvZD0jn3PXb8FDtO9I0RirLA5qR52hj7touzFQ1GNnA4W0DSs7IHo7rGjYYkIDNc7TsIaucx_ZB0T06ZL4RCjX9-Ng40S5gYKPdoqHjoboRxVHnwQ70LhG-rq2EekC4YQcGOgCnv7MY_Jyc_08v8senm7v51cPmcqFjFmjlOBLLQFKwyU2HJheNlqKSipdSy10mRuOUIMuk54DK1Tqpq5qo5caVXFMzr9zt969jRhiu3GjH9LLNi-rphBVyatE8W9KeReCR9Nuve3B71rO2qn39k_vyVP8eKBfeqtX-Bv9v-sLFcOImQ</recordid><startdate>202105</startdate><enddate>202105</enddate><creator>Khalaman, Vyacheslav V.</creator><creator>Komendantov, Alexander Yu</creator><creator>Golubovskaya, Nina S.</creator><creator>Manoylina, Polina A.</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H95</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5426-0607</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202105</creationdate><title>Comparative efficiency of Mytilus edulis as engineering species for shallow-water fouling communities on artificial structures in the White Sea</title><author>Khalaman, Vyacheslav V. ; Komendantov, Alexander Yu ; Golubovskaya, Nina S. ; Manoylina, Polina A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c247t-9cc41bd7aa5f17e91a0db9d7467cd87d4d52f1ea8ad517e2a03c542868fdbdec3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Anthropogenic factors</topic><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Biomass</topic><topic>Coastal ecosystems</topic><topic>Culture</topic><topic>Density</topic><topic>Efficiency</topic><topic>Engineering</topic><topic>Farms</topic><topic>Fauna</topic><topic>Fouling</topic><topic>Fouling organisms</topic><topic>Halichondria panicea</topic><topic>Hypotheses</topic><topic>Marine ecosystems</topic><topic>Marine invertebrates</topic><topic>Marine molluscs</topic><topic>Mollusks</topic><topic>Mussel culture</topic><topic>Mussels</topic><topic>Mytilus edulis</topic><topic>Organisms</topic><topic>Population</topic><topic>Shallow water</topic><topic>Species diversity</topic><topic>Species richness</topic><topic>Styela rustica</topic><topic>Substrates</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Khalaman, Vyacheslav V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Komendantov, Alexander Yu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Golubovskaya, Nina S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Manoylina, Polina A.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 1: Biological Sciences & Living Resources</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><jtitle>Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Khalaman, Vyacheslav V.</au><au>Komendantov, Alexander Yu</au><au>Golubovskaya, Nina S.</au><au>Manoylina, Polina A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparative efficiency of Mytilus edulis as engineering species for shallow-water fouling communities on artificial structures in the White Sea</atitle><jtitle>Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom</jtitle><addtitle>J. Mar. Biol. Ass</addtitle><date>2021-05</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>101</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>511</spage><epage>525</epage><pages>511-525</pages><issn>0025-3154</issn><eissn>1469-7769</eissn><abstract>Currently, there is little comparative data on ‘efficiency’ of different engineering species, i.e. species richness, density and biomass of the associated organisms that have been supported by engineering species. The use of fouling communities makes it possible to compare the efficiency of different engineering species under the same conditions, which is necessary to obtain correct estimates and difficult to do when studying natural bottom communities. In this study, we have analysed the fouling communities in four different mussel culture farms in the White Sea to test the following hypotheses. (1) Different engineering species (mussel Mytilus edulis, solitary ascidian Styela rustica, sponge Halichondria panicea) have different assemblages of the associated vagile fauna. (2) Mytilus edulis is the most efficient engineering species, i.e. species richness, species diversity, density and biomass of the associated vagile fauna is higher in the mussel communities than in those dominated by Styela rustica or Halichondria panicea. The first hypothesis was confirmed, while the second was rejected. In all the culture farms studied, all parameters of the mussel-associated vagile fauna were not higher and in most cases were even lower than those of the fauna associated with ascidians or sponges. The reason for this seems to be the very dense packing of mussels in patches. Therefore, Mytilus edulis is not the most efficient engineering species among fouling organisms, at least in the conditions of the subarctic White Sea. The data obtained are particularly important in view of the ever-increasing volume of anthropogenic substrate and fouling communities in coastal marine ecosystems.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/S0025315421000424</doi><tpages>15</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5426-0607</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0025-3154 |
ispartof | Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 2021-05, Vol.101 (3), p.511-525 |
issn | 0025-3154 1469-7769 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2569346516 |
source | Cambridge University Press Journals Complete |
subjects | Anthropogenic factors Biodiversity Biomass Coastal ecosystems Culture Density Efficiency Engineering Farms Fauna Fouling Fouling organisms Halichondria panicea Hypotheses Marine ecosystems Marine invertebrates Marine molluscs Mollusks Mussel culture Mussels Mytilus edulis Organisms Population Shallow water Species diversity Species richness Styela rustica Substrates |
title | Comparative efficiency of Mytilus edulis as engineering species for shallow-water fouling communities on artificial structures in the White Sea |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T14%3A43%3A02IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparative%20efficiency%20of%20Mytilus%20edulis%20as%20engineering%20species%20for%20shallow-water%20fouling%20communities%20on%20artificial%20structures%20in%20the%20White%20Sea&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20the%20Marine%20Biological%20Association%20of%20the%20United%20Kingdom&rft.au=Khalaman,%20Vyacheslav%20V.&rft.date=2021-05&rft.volume=101&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=511&rft.epage=525&rft.pages=511-525&rft.issn=0025-3154&rft.eissn=1469-7769&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S0025315421000424&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2569346516%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2569346516&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_S0025315421000424&rfr_iscdi=true |