Skip to main content
Log in

Integrating edge effects into studies of habitat fragmentation: a test using meiofauna in seagrass

  • Conservation Ecology - Original Paper
  • Published:
Oecologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Habitat fragmentation is thought to be an important process structuring landscapes in marine and estuarine environments, but effects on fauna are poorly understood, in part because of a focus on patchiness rather than fragmentation. Furthermore, despite concomitant increases in perimeter:area ratios with fragmentation, we have little understanding of how fauna change from patch edges to interiors during fragmentation. Densities of meiofauna were measured at different distances across the edges of four artificial seagrass treatments [continuous, fragmented, procedural control (to control for disturbance by fragmenting then restoring experimental plots), and patchy] 1 day, 1 week and 1 month after fragmentation. Experimental plots were established 1 week prior to fragmentation/disturbance. Samples were numerically dominated by harpacticoid copepods, densities of which were greater at the edge than 0.5 m into patches for continuous, procedural control and patchy treatments; densities were similar between the edge and 0.5 m in fragmented patches. For taxa that demonstrated edge effects, densities exhibited log-linear declines to 0.5 m into a patch with no differences observed between 0.5 m and 1 m into continuous treatments. In patchy treatments densities were similar at the internal and external edges for many taxa. The strong positive edge effect (higher densities at edge than interior) for taxa such as harpacticoid copepods implies some benefit of patchy landscapes. But the lack of edge effects during patch fragmentation itself demonstrates the importance of the mechanisms by which habitats become patchy.

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

Access this article

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
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Attrill MJ, Strong JA, Rowden AA (2000) Are macroinvertebrate communities influenced by seagrass structural complexity? Ecography 23:114–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell SS, Brooks RA, Robbins BD, Fonseca MS, Hall MO (2001) Faunal response to fragmentation in seagrass habitats: implications for seagrass conservation. Biol Conserv 100:115–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell SS, Hicks GRF (1991) Marine landscapes and faunal recruitment: a field test with seagrasses and copepods. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 73:61–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bender DJ, Contresas TA, Fahrig L (1998) Habitat loss and population decline: a meta analysis of the patch size effect. Ecology 79:517–533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bierregaard RO, Lovejoy TE, Kapos V, dos Santos AA, Hutchings RW (1992) The biological dynamics of tropical rainforest fragments: a prospective comparison of fragments and continuous forest. Bioscience 42:859–866

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black KP, Hatton D, Rosenberg MA (1993) Locally and externally-driven dynamics of a large semi-enclosed bay in southern Australia. J Coast Res 9:509–538

    Google Scholar 

  • Bologna PAX, Heck KL (2000) Impacts of seagrass habitat architecture on bivalve settlement. Estuaries 23:449–457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bologna PAX, Heck KL (2002) Impact of habitat edges on density and secondary production of seagrass-associated fauna. Estuaries 25:1033–1044

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boström C, Jackson EL, Simenstad CA (2006) Seagrass landscapes and their effects on associated fauna: a review. Estuarine Coast Shelf Sci 68:383–403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowden DA, Rowden AA, Atrill MJ (2001) Effect of patch size and in-patch location on the infaunal macroinvertebrate assemblages of Zostera marina seagrass beds. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 259:133–154

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Buffan-Dubau E, Carman KR (2000) Diel feeding behavior of meiofauna and their relationships with microalgal resources. Limnol Oceanogr 45:381–395

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bulthuis DA, Axelrad DM, Mickelson MJ (1992) Growth of the seagrass Heterozostera tasmanica limited by nitrogen in Port Phillip Bay, Australia. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 89:269–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connolly RM, Hindell JS (2006) Review of nekton patterns and ecological processes in seagrass landscapes. Estuarine Coast Shelf Sci 68:433–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Troch M, Chepurnov V, Gheerardyn H, Vanreusel A, Olafsson E (2006) Is diatom size selection by harpacticoid copepods related to grazer size? J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 332:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donovan TM, Jones PW, Annand EM, Thompson FR (1997) Variation in local-scale edge effects: mechanisms and landscape context. Ecology 78:2064–2075

    Google Scholar 

  • Eggleston DB, Elis WD, Etherington LL, Dahlgren P, Posey MH (1999) Organism responses to habitat fragmentation and diversity: habitat colonisation by estuarine macrofauna. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 236:107–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eggleston DB, Etherington LL, Elis WE (1998) Organism response to habitat patchiness: species and habitat recruitment of decapod crustaceans. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 223:111–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fagan WF, Cantrell RS, Cosner C (1999) How habitat edges change species interactions. Am Nat 153:165–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fahrig L (2003) Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 34:487–515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fonseca MS, Cahalan JA (1992) A preliminary evaluation of wave attenuation by 4 species of seagrass. Estuarine Coast Shelf Sci 35:565–576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fonseca MS, Fisher JS (1986) A comparison of canopy friction and sediment movement between 4 species of seagrass with reference to their ecology and restoration. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 29:15–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gambi MC, Nowell ARM, Jumars PA (1990) Flume observations on flow dynamics in Zostera marina (eelgrass) beds. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 61:159–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hindell JS, Jenkins GP, Keough MJ (2002) Variability in the numbers of post-settlement King George whiting (Sillaginidae: Sillaginodes punctata, Cuvier) in relation to predation, habitat complexity and artificial cage structure. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 268:13–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hovel KA, Fonesca MS, Myer DL, Kenworthy WJ, Whitfield PE (2002) Effects of seagrass landscape structure, structural complexity and hydrodynamic regime on macrofaunal densities in North Carolina seagrass beds. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 243:11–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hovel KA, Lipcius RN (2002) Effects of seagrass habitat fragmentation on juvenile blue crab survival and abundance. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 271:75–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irving AD, Tanner JE, McDonald BK (2007) Priority effects on faunal assemblages within artificial seagrass. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 340:40–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jelbart JE, Ross PM, Connolly RM (2006) Edge effects and patch size in seagrass landscapes: an experimental test using fish. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 319:93–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins GP, Wheatley MJ, Poore AGB (1996) Spatial variation in recruitment, growth, and feeding of post settlement King George whiting, Sillaginodes punctata, associated with seagrass beds of Port Phillip Bay, Australia. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 53:350–359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins GP, Keough MJ, Hamer PA (1998) The contributions of habitat structure and larval supply to broad-scale recruitment variability in a temperate zone, seagrass-associated fish. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 226:259–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendrick AJ, Hyndes GA (2005) Variations in the dietary compositions of morphologically diverse syngnathid fishes. Environ Biol Fish 72:415–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuo J (2005) A revision of the genus Heterozostera (Zosteraceae). Aquat Bot 81:97–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur RH, Wilson EO (1967) The theory of island biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • McGarigal K, Cushman SA (2002) Comparative evaluation of experimental approaches to the study of habitat fragmentation effects. Ecol Appl 12:335–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy H (2007) Responses of meiofauna to edge effects, patch attributes and hydrodynamics. BSc(Hons) Thesis, University of Melbourne

  • Orth RJ, Carruthers TJB, Dennison WC, Duarte CM, Fourqurean JW, Heck KL, Hughes AR, Kendrick GA, Kenworthy WJ, Olyarnik S, Short FT, Waycott M, Williams SL (2006) A global crisis for seagrass ecosystems. Bioscience 56:987–996

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer MA (1988) Epibenthic predators and marine meiofauna: separating predation, disturbance and hydrodynamic effects. Ecology 69:1251–1259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker M, Mac Nally R (2002) Habitat loss and the habitat fragmentation threshold: an experimental evaluation of impacts on richness and total abundances using grassland invertebrates. Biol Conserv 105:217–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson CH, Luettich RA Jr, Micheli F, Skilleter GA (2004) Attenuation of water flow inside seagrass canopies of differing structure. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 268:81–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Picket STA, White PS (1985) The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics. Academic, Orlando

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramage DL, Schiel DR (1999) Patch dynamics and response to disturbance of the seagrass Zostera novazelandica on intertidal platforms in southern New Zealand. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 189:275–288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed BJ, Hovel KA (2006) Seagrass habitat disturbance: how loss and fragmentation of eelgrass Zostera marina influences epifaunal abundance and diversity. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 326:133–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ries L, Sisk TD (2004) A predictive model of edge effects. Ecology 85:2917–2926

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robbins BD, Bell SS (1994) Seagrass landscapes: a terrestrial approach to the marine subtidal environment. Trends Ecol Evol 9:301–304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts DA, Poore AGB (2005) Habitat configuration effects colonisation of epifauna in a marine algal bed. Biol Conserv 127:18–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schonewald-Cox CM, Bayless JW (1986) The boundary model: a geographical analysis of design and conservation of nature reserves. Biol Conserv 38:305–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Short FT, Wyllie-Echeverria S (1996) Natural and human-induced disturbance of seagrasses. Environ Conserv 23:17–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sogard SM (1989) Colonization of artificial seagrass by fishes and decapods crustaceans: importance of proximity to natural eelgrass. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 133:15–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephens SE, Koons DN, Rotella JJ, Willey DW (2003) Effects of habitat fragmentation on avian nesting success: a review of the evidence at multiple spatial scales. Biol Conserv 115:101–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Summerson HC, Peterson CH (1984) Role of predation in organising benthic communities of a temperate-zone seagrass bed. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 15:63–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanner JE (2003) Patch shape and orientation influences on seagrass epifauna are mediated by dispersal abilities. Oikos 100: 517–524

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanner JE (2005) Edge effects in fauna in fragmented seagrass meadows. Aust Ecol 30:210–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanner JE (2006) Landscape ecology of interactions between seagrass and mobile epifauna: the matrix matters. Estuarine Coast Shelf Sci 68:404–412

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner MG, Gardner RH, O’Neill RV (2001) Landscape ecology in theory and practice. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Upston J, Booth DJ (2003) Settlement and density of juvenile fish assemblages in natural, Zostera capricorni (Zosteraceae) and artificial seagrass beds. Environ Biol Fish 66:91–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Villard M, Trzcinski MK, Merriam G (1999) Fragmentation effects on forest birds: relative influence of woodland cover and configuration on landscape occupancy. Conserv Biol 13:774–783

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Virnstein RW, Curran MC (1986) Colonisation of artificial seagrass versus time and distance from source. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 29:279–288

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank G. Walker-Smith for help with harpacticoid identification; T. Smith, R. Watson and D. Hatton for field assistance; and M. Keough for statistical assistance. We are grateful to the Australian Research Council for a grant to R.M.C., J.S.H. and G.P.J., and the Victorian Marine Science Consortium for use of facilities. The experiments presented here comply with Australia law.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. S. Hindell.

Additional information

Communicated by Pete Peterson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Warry, F.Y., Hindell, J.S., Macreadie, P.I. et al. Integrating edge effects into studies of habitat fragmentation: a test using meiofauna in seagrass. Oecologia 159, 883–892 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-008-1258-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-008-1258-9

Keywords

Navigation