benthic habitats in florida bay · benthic habitats in florida bay michael j. durako1, m. o. hall2,...

Benthic Habitats in

Florida Bay

Michael J. Durako1, M. O. Hall2, M. J. Butler3, D. C. Behringer4

1Department of Biology and Marine Biology, University of North Carolina Wilmington, Wilmington, NC, USA2Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL, USA3Department of Biological Sciences, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, USA4Program in Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA

How I used to view FB Benthic Habitats

Florida Bay Benthic Habitats

Prager and Halley 1997

Importance of Hardbottom Habitats

Behringer & Butler 2006 Oecologia

Stable isotope analysis suggests that:• algae, not seagrass, is the major source of primary productivity for hard-bottom higher trophic webs (sponge, mollusc, echinoderm, lobster)

A Brief Historical Perspective

"Those who cannot remember the past, are condemned to repeat it,"

George Satayana

Seagrass Die-off

• First observed summer of 1987 by fishing guides in northern Bay bights, following several years of drought & no hurricanes

• Most severe in central and SW bay

• Only affected dense Thalassia testudinumin basins and edges of basins – 4000 ha lost 24000 ha affected

• Halodule wrightii rapidly colonized die-off areas

• Waters initially clear (1988- early 91)

SPOT image W of Rabbit KeyFeb 1987 vs Nov 1988

Conceptual Models

Carlson & Durako Zieman et al.

Phytoplankton Blooms 1991- 1995

• Fall 1991 – Synechococcus bloom • Chronic turbidity in the western basins

– 2o seagrass mortality (1991-1998 RKB)

510000 512000 514000 516000 518000

Longitude (UTM)

2759000

2761000

2763000

2765000

2767000

Latit

ude

(UTM

)

-5.00

-3.00

-2.00

-1.00

-0.50

0.50

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

Cha

nge

inC

over

/Abu

ndan

ceVa

lue

Spring 1994Durako et al. 2002

• Sponge community structure changed

• Juvenile lobster population structure, shelter use, & seasonal recruitment changed at local, regional, & Keys-wide scales

• Hypothesized ecological linkages: blooms → sponges → lobster

Sponge Die-off & Cascading Disturbances

Photo Credit: Rod Bertelsen

Die-offs & blooms were major disturbances

• Disturbance “resets the successional clock”• 2o succession of seagrasses & hardbottom

– Thalassia SS lifespan 5-10 yr• Genets - >100 yr?

– Sponges also long lived• decades to centuries

• Recovery from disturbance– prop scars: 2-5 yrs– groundings 5 to 15 yrs– dredge holes > 30 yrs

Whitfield et al 2002

Jud Kenworthy NOAA

• Started in Spring 1995• 10 Basins• >300 stations• Systematic random

sampling• Spring & Fall• Spatial & Temporal • Distribution & Structure• Disease vs Stress • 12 macrophyte sp/groups

Fish HabitatAssessment Program (FHAP)

Modified Braun-Blanquet Scale

Braun-Blanquet - Abundance & Distribution

• 4- 8 replicate .25m2

quadrats per station

• 30 stations basin-1

FHAP

Landry 2005

Distribution

Durako 1999

Species Diversity

Calusa

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Blackwater

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Crane

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Eagle

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Madeira

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Rankin

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Twin

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Whipray

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Thalassia Density and Frequency

Johnson

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Rabbit

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Rankin BlackwaterMadeiraWhipray

Johnson Eagle

CraneCalusaTwinRabbit

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Mea

n D

ensi

tyM

ean

Den

sity

Freq

uenc

y (%

)Fr

eque

ncy

(%)

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

FHAP

Landry 2005

Halodule Density and FrequencyBlackwater

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Calusa

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Eagle

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Johnson

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Madeira

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Rabbit

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Rankin

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Twin

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Whipray

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Crane

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Rankin BlackwaterMadeiraWhipray

Johnson Eagle

CraneCalusaTwinRabbit

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Mea

n D

ensi

tyM

ean

Den

sity

Freq

uenc

y (%

)Fr

eque

ncy

(%)

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

FHAP

Landry 2005

FHAP-SF 2005-?

Macrophyte Distribution & Abundance 2005-2007

2005

2006

2007

Macrophyte Abundance 1995-2007

Johnson Key Blackwater Sound

FHAP

FHAP-SF

Old vs New BB

Coral Distribution & Abundance

Chartrand & Durako accepted

2006

Photobiology

S. radians & T. testudinum exhibit similar response to light environment

May serve as an eco-indicator where T. testudinum is absent

Will CERP affect coralcommunities in FB?

Twin populationLowest Fv/Fm

Lowest S toleranceAcclimation

Chartrand et al. submitted

Will CERP affect Sponge & Octocoralcommunities?•All sponges tested survived sub-optimal salinities better in winter than summer; the reverse was true of octocorals.

•Sponge & Octocoral survival was similar whether exposed to low salinity for a few days or a few weeks (i.e., press vs. pulse experiments).

0

25

50

75

100

C. alloclada H. lachne I. campana I. variabilis S. vesparium

15 ppt 25 ppt 30 ppt 35 ppt

% S

urv

ived

Species

0

25

50

75

100

C. alloclada H. lachne I. campana I. variabilis S. vesparium

15 ppt 25 ppt 35 ppt 45 ppt

% S

urv

ived

Species

Butler unpubl. data

Angular Sea WhipPurple Sea Plume

n = 6 - 16 per treatment

15 20 453525

NoneSurvived

Salinity (psu)

20

40

60

80

100

0

Perc

ent S

urvi

val

n = 8 per treatment

15 20 4535

NoneSurvived

25

NoneSurvived

NoneSurvived NA

Salinity (psu)

Sponges

summer

winter

Octocoralssummer winter

Hard-bottom Monitoring: 2002 - 2007

2002 - 20072002 Only

Sites• 132 sites in 2002; 32 -40 sites in 2003-2007

Methods• surveyed annually in June/July• 4 permanent 2 x 25m transects/site• 16 permanent 1m2 quadrats/site

Measurements• Abundance of 55 taxa (24 spp. sponge)• Size structure selected sponges & octocorals• Lobster population structure & disease

Impacts of Recent Algal Blooms on Hard-Bottom Communities

Before

After

Pre-bloom & Post-bloom Surveys 2007 -2008

Survey locations

• 18 sites chosen from central region of ODU / FMRI hard-bottom monitoring sites

• Sessile fauna surveys: July & Oct 2007• Lobster surveys: July 2007 & Mar 2008

Moderate ImpactsSevere ImpactsModerate ImpactsSevere ImpactsModerate ImpactsSevere Impacts

Loggerhead sponges: ↓ 67%Vase sponges: ↓ 90%Other sponges: ↓ 50%Commercial sponges: ↓ 95%

Severe Impacts- 22 of 24 sponge species killed

Severe Impacts- 22 of 24 sponge species killed

Loggerhead sponges: ↓ 100%Vase sponges: ↓ 100%Other sponges: ↓ 90%Commercial sponges: ↓ 100%

Moderate ImpactSevere ImpactModerate ImpactSevere Impact

Little or No Impact

Summary of 2007 Bloom Effects on Sponges

• Impact of blooms on hard-bottom communities appears to be similar to that in 1991-1992, although bloom genesis different

• Sponge die-off was widespread and full recovery will take decades if no further blooms

• Sponge tolerance may be related to species-specific difference in filtration efficiencies

• Ecosystem filtration capacity and habitat structure is greatly diminished in impacted areas, with cascading effects on juvenilelobster abundance and aggregation with possible effects on theirpredator-prey and disease dynamics

Banktops

• Not affected by die-off• However, >11,500 in prop scars w/in FB &

they are (Hallac et al. in press & poster)

Kevin Kirsch & Jud Kenworthy NOAA

Global Climate Change• Sea Level

– Banks are predicted to keep up, however, basin depths are predicted to

• Prop scarring/groundings ? • chance of stratification in basins

– potential for O2 stress• potential for light limitation for benthic macrophytes

Jud Kenworthy NOAA

Global Climate Change• ↓ pH (aka Ocean Acidification)

– Affect CO2 & CO32- availability

• (Campbell & Fourqurean) Stable carbon isotope ratios reflect differences in carbon acquisition

• (Koch) Temp & pH affects O2 demand, carbonate dissolution,clonal growth & reproductive ecology

www.wbgu.de/Images/sn_2006_en/4.1-2.png

Global Climate Change• Temperature

– (Bergh) Variation in coral bleaching and species resiliency

– Defoliation of seagrasses – esp. on banktops– (Koch et al.) BOD & ↓Ruppia flowering

Global Climate Change• Hurricane frequency/intensity?

Tt distribution & abundanceBefore vs After Irene

WQ Effects on Benthic Habitats

– Herbert & Fourqurean• P & S control Tt productivity

– Halun & Fourqurean• nutrients, grazing, nutrients+grazing → Tt,Sf, & Hw

– Frankovich et al.• P, S & clarity affect spatio-temporal dynamics of SAV in the

Lakes region of FB– Fourqurean

• Long-term eutrophication of nearshore seagrasses

• 14 poster presentations on Benthic Habitats– Salinity, nutrients, temperature, light, prop scars, &

modeling

Thank You

Disease, Oxygen & Sulfide

Borum et al. 2004Durako and Kuss 1994

Bay-to-Region Scale Benthic Habitat Assessments

Fourqurean et al. 2002

FHAP

Johnson Key

Eastern Bay

Central BayWestern Bay

BLK

Ecological Zones based onT. testudinum morphometrics

Hackney and Durako 2005

West East

North-CentralSouth-Central

Ecological Zones based on light availability

Phlips et al. 1995

Syringodium Density and FrequencyWhipray

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Twin

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Rankin

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Rabbit

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Madeira

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Johnson

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Eagle

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Crane

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n A

bund

ance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Calusa

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Blackwater

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Mea

n Ab

unda

nce

0

1

2

3

4

5

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Rankin BlackwaterMadeiraWhipray

Johnson Eagle

CraneCalusaTwinRabbit

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Mea

n D

ensi

tyM

ean

Den

sity

Freq

uenc

y (%

)Fr

eque

ncy

(%)

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

FHAP

Landry 2005

Thalassia

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Bay

Sca

le A

bund

ance

0

200

400

600

800

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Halodule

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Bay

Sca

le A

bund

ance

0

50

100

150

200

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Halophila

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Bay

Sca

le A

bund

ance

0

50

100

150

200

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Syringodium

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Bay

Sca

le A

bund

ance

0

50

100

150

200

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Ruppia

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Bay

Sca

le A

bund

ance

0

50

100

150

200

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Acetabularia

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Bay

Sca

le A

bund

ance

0

50

100

150

200

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Caulerpa

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Bay

Sca

le A

bund

ance

0

50

100

150

200

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Drift Reds

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Bay

Sca

le A

bund

ance

0

50

100

150

200

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Halimeda

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Bay

Sca

le A

bund

ance

0

50

100

150

200

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Penicillus

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Bay

Sca

le A

bund

ance

0

50

100

150

200

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Sargassum

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Bay

Sca

le A

bund

ance

0

50

100

150

200

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Florida Bay- Overall

Macrophyte Density and Frequency

Batophora

95S

95F

96S

96F

97S

97F

98S

98F

99S

99F

00S

00F

01S

01F

02S

02F

03S

03F

04S

Bay

Sca

le A

bund

ance

0

50

100

150

200

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Sampling Design

15 permanent transect stationsco-located near long-term WQmonitoring stations.

Sampled twice yr-1

Epiphytes & leaf morphology

Macrophyte Abundance 1995-2007

Johnson Key Twin Key Blackwater Sound

% Killed0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

Spongia barbaraSpongia cheris

Spongia gramineaIrcinia felix

Hippospongia lachneHytrios sp.

Anthosigmella variansAaptos sp.

Haliclona/GeodiaLissodendoryx sp.

Aplysinia sp.Halichondria melandocia

Ircinia campanaChondrilla nuclea

Tedania ignisTethya crypta

Adocia sp.Ircinia sp.

Speciospongia vespariaNiphates erecta

Cinachyra sp.

Mean+ 1sd

Vulnerability of Sponge Species(Percentage of each species killed on bloom-impacted sites)

MostTolerant

LeastTolerant