Skip to main content
  • Environmental Evaluation
  • Published:

Methods for ecological monitoring: Biological interactions in a rocky subtidal community

Abstract

Whilst both abiotic and biotic factors affect communities, biological interactions are widely believed to be the most important factors structuring subtidal communities. Among the potential biological interactions a few “key ” species may regulate species fluctuations. A rocky subtidal community in the Oslofjord (Norway) has been investigated using stereophotography, field experiments and manipulations (settlement plates, scraping, cages). The purpose was to develop a method for biological monitoring of chronic pollution effects. Around 60 species were identified in the community. The most permanent occupants wereLithothamnion sp. (25–30% cover) andPomatoceros triqueter (ca. 20% cover). The most important fluctuation was induced by the rapid growth of the hydroidLaomedea longissima to a 100% cover in June and its rapid disappearance. Free space covered more than 30% except in the period with large hydroid occurrence. The most active settlement period was in summer and autumn. The most important predators observed wereCoryphella sp.,Asterias rubens andPasmmechinus miliaris.Coryphella grazed upon the hydroids andAsterias andPsammechinus foraged on settled organisms which resulted in an increase of free space. Predation and recruitment in that order are probably the two most important factors structuring the studied community. The “key ” species were therefore the three predators. A monitoring programme should concentrate on these predators and their influence on the success of recruitment and the abundance of hydroids and free space, since these species control the natural fluctuations in the studied community. The stereophotographic method combined with simple settlement-plate experiments seems suitable for such a monitoring programme.

Literature cited

  • Anger, K., 1978. Development of a subtidal epifaunal community at the island of Helgoland. — Helgoländer wiss. Meeresunters.31, 457–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dayton, P. K., 1971. Competition, disturbance, and community organisation: The provision and subsequent utilization of space in a rocky intertidal community. — Ecol. Monogr.41, 351–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dayton, P. K., 1972. Toward an understanding of community resilience and the potential effects of enrichment to the benthos at McMurdo Sound, Antarctica. Proceedings of the colloquium on conservation problems in Antarctica. Ed. by B. C. Parker. Allen Press, Lawrence, Ks, 81–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karlson, R., 1978. Predation and space utilization patterns in a marine epifaunal community. — J. exp. mar. Biol. Ecol.31, 225–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kvalvågnæs, K., Green, N. & Rørslett, B., 1976. Stereofotografering. Et hjelpemiddel i akvatisk biologi. Norsk Institutt for Vannforskning, NIVA, Oslo, 89–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, J. M., 1975. On the relationships between marine plants and sea urchins. — Oceanogr. mar. Biol.13, 213–286.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, J. R., 1964. The ecology of rocky shores. Engl. Univ. Press, London, 323 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, J. R., 1976. Long-term ecological surveillance: Practical relaties in the rocky littoral. — Oceanogr. mar. Biol.14, 371–390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Løyning, P., 1922. Nudibranchfaunaen i Drøbaksundet. — Skr. norske VidenskAkad. (Mat.-nat. Kl.)6, 1–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundälv, T., 1971. Quantitative studies on rocky-bottom biocoenoses by underwater photogrammetry: A methodical study. — Thalassia jugosl.7, 201–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menge, B. A., 1976. Organization of the New England rocky intertidal community: Role of predation, competition, and environmental heterogeneity. — Ecol. Monogr.46, 355–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paine, R. T., 1966. Food web complexity and species diversity. — Am. Nat.100, 65–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paine, R. T., 1969. ThePisaster-Tegula interaction: Prey patches, predator food preference, and intertidal community structure. — Ecology50, 950–961.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paine, R. T., 1976. Size-limited predation: An observational and experimental approach with theMytilus-Pisaster interaction. — Ecology57, 858–873.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, C. H., 1979. The importance of predation and competition in organizing the intertidal epifaunal communities of Barnegat Inlet, New Jersey. — Oecologia39, 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutherland, J. P. & Karlson, R. H., 1977. Development and stability of the fouling community at Beaufort, North Carolina. — Ecol. Monogr.47, 425–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, T. E. & Brown, G. H., 1976. British opistobranch molluscs. Acad. Press, London, 203 pp. (Synopses of the British fauna. Nr. 8)

    Google Scholar 

  • Torlegård, A. K. I. & Lundälv, T. L., 1974. Underwater analytical system. — Photogramm. Engng40, 287–293.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Christie, H. Methods for ecological monitoring: Biological interactions in a rocky subtidal community. Helgolander Meeresunters 33, 473–483 (1980). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02414772

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02414772

Keywords