Skip to main content
Log in

Structure of an intertidal sandy-beach community in North Carolina

  • Published:
Chesapeake Science

Abstract

A series of 452 samples collected from November 1964 through February 1966 from a North Carolina sandy beach contained 27,219 invertebrates representing 41 species. The sandy-beach community, as composed of a homogeneous group of organisms, was identified through the use of an index of faunal affinity. Community structure is described in terms of abundance, frequency diversity, and feeding types. Six species,Neohaustorius schmitzi, Acanthohaustorius millsi, Donax variabilis, Scolelepis squamata, Exosphaeroma diminutum, andHaploscoloplos fragilis comprise 97% of the fauna by number. Niche differences among these species are discussed.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature Cited

  • Bowers, D. E. 1964. Natural history of two beach hoppers of the genusOrchestoidea (Crustacea: Amphipoda) with reference to their complemental distributions.Ecology 45(4):677–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coe, W. R., 1955. Ecology of the bean clamDonax gouldii, on the coast of southern California.Ecology 36(3):512–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croker, R. A. 1967. Niche diversity in five sympatric species of intertidal amphipods (Crustacea: Haustoriidae).Ecol. Monogr. 37:173–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dexter, D. M. 1967a. Population dynamics of the sandy-beach amphipodNeohaustorius schmitzi Bousfield. Ph.D. thesis, University of North Carolina.

  • — 1967b. Niche diversity of haustoriid amphipods in North Carolina.Chesapeake Sci. 8(3): 187–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Efford, I. E. 1965. Aggregation in the sand crabEmerita analoga.J. Anim. Ecol. 34:63–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fager, E. F. 1963. Communities of organisms.In M. N. Hill (ed.) The Sea. Vol. 2:415–437.

  • Fox, D. L., 1950. Comparative metabolism of organic detritus by inshore animals.Ecology 31(1): 100–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macfadyen, A. 1954. The invertebrate fauna of Jan Mayen Island (East Greenland).J. Anim. Ecol. 23:261–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDougal, K. D. 1943. Sessile marine invertebrates of Beaufort, North Carolina.Ecol. Monogr. 13:322–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearse, A. S., H. J. Humm, andG. W. Wharton. 1942. Ecology of sand beaches at Beaufort, North Carolina.Ecol. Monogr. 12:136–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raymont, J. E. G. 1955. The fauna of an intertidal mud flat.Deep Sea Res. 3 (Suppl.):178–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, H. L. 1960. Benthic studies in Buzzards Bay. III. The structure of the soft-bottom community.Limnol. Oceanogr. 5(2):138–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1968. Marine benthic diversity: A comparative study.Amer. Nat. 120:243–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J. E. 1932. The shell gravel deposits, and the infauna of the Eddystone Grounds.J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U.K. 18(1):243–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dexter, D.M. Structure of an intertidal sandy-beach community in North Carolina. Chesapeake Science 10, 93–98 (1969). https://doi.org/10.2307/1350837

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1350837

Keywords

Navigation