Who’s eating what, how and where? Polychaete feeding behavior and geographical distribution in the Gulf of Mexico. Russell Carvalho, Anja Schulze

Texas A & M University at Galveston.

Results on Diversity analysis

Table 2. One-way ANOVA showing correlations for depth v/s guild types based on the total number of species for each group.

  df SS MS F PGroup 1Guild 5 1482596 296519 2.31 0.053Error 70 8977782 128254Total 75 10460378Group 2Guild 6 3371546 561924 9.89 <.0001Error 80 4546604 56833Total 86 7918151Group 4Guild 4 1699928 424982 0 <.0001Error 75 1387766 18504Total 79 3087694Group 5Guild 5 7890654 1578131 0 <.0001Error 24 0 0Total 29 7890654Group 6Guild 5 244508 48902 8.79 <.0001Error 63 350361 5561Total 68 594869Group 7Guild 4 41582728 10395682 34.62 <.0001Error 49 14712298 300251Total 53 56295026Guild 9 11136794 1237422 4.08 <.0001Error 127 38530312 303388Total 136 49667106Group 12Guild 3 4811372 1603791 22.02 <.0001Error 36 2622233 72840Total 39 7433604      The degrees of freedom (DF), sums of squares (SS) and mean square (MS) for each variance component is shown. The variance ratio is given by F (test statistic) and its significance is shown by the p value.

Table 1. Polychaete feeding-guilds as described in Fauchald and Jumars (1979).

Major Feeding mode

Types of Motility

motile

discretely motile

sessile

Burrowers jawed pharynx BMJ - BSX unarmed pharynx BMXCarnivores jawed pharynx CMJ CDJ - unarmed pharynx CMX - -Filter feeders tentaculate - FDT FSTHerbivores - - - jawed pharynx HMJ - -Omnivores jawed pharynx - ODJ -Surface deposit feeders unarmed pharynx SMX SDJ - tentaculate SMT SDT SSTThe feeding-guild is a three-letter code , the first letter indicates the major feeding mode, the second indicates the motility and the third indicates the morphological structure used in feeding; position 1-S, surface deposit-feeder; B, subsurface deposit-feeder; C, carnivore; F, filter-feeder; H, herbivore; position 2-M, motile; D, discretely motile; S, sessile; and position 3-P,pumping; J, jawed; T, tentaculate; X, other structures like unarmed proboscides and eversible sac-like pharynges.

Fig 1 (a-c). Observe density and diversity of polychaetes in the Gulf of Mexico

(a) (b) (c)

Fig 2. (a) Observed percentage of feeding guilds in all samples (b) Observed feeding guilds vs no of species.

(a) (b)

Results on Maxent analysis

Fig 3. (a) Prediction map for Aphaelochaeta marioni (b) Displays test omission rate and predicted area as a function of the cumulative threshold, averaged over 15 replicate runs. (c)The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve averaged over 15 replicate runs. The specificity is defined using predicted area. The average test for area under the curve (AUC) of replicate runs is 0.997, and the standard deviation is 0.001.

Fig 4. Prediction map for the species (a) Spiophanes berkeleyorum (b) Tharyx annulosus and (c) Prionospio ehlersi

VariablePercent

Contribution

Permutation

Importance

Sea surface temp (MAX) 35.2 52.6Photosynthetically available radiation (MEAN) 15.4 12.6pH (MEAN) 10.2 0.3Calcite 9.8 0Sea surface temp (RANGE) 8.3 0Sea surface temp (MIN) 6.8 0Phosphate 3.3 2.3Silicate 1 30Salinity 0 0.4

Table 3. Maxent analysis of Variable Contributions to all species.

(a)

(b)

(c)

Ecological Niche Models of polychaete species in the

Gulf of Mexico

(a) (b) (c)