Click
here to close Hello! We notice that
you are using Internet Explorer, which is not supported by Echinobase
and may cause the site to display incorrectly. We suggest using a
current version of Chrome,
FireFox,
or Safari.
PLoS One
2018 Jan 01;133:e0194796. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194796.
Show Gene links
Show Anatomy links
Time- and depth-wise trophic niche shifts in Antarctic benthos.
Calizza E
,
Careddu G
,
Sporta Caputi S
,
Rossi L
,
Costantini ML
.
???displayArticle.abstract???
Climate change is expected to affect resource-consumer interactions underlying stability in polar food webs. Polar benthic organisms have adapted to the marked seasonality characterising their habitats by concentrating foraging and reproductive activity in summer months, when inputs from sympagic and pelagic producers increase. While this enables the persistence of biodiverse food webs, the mechanisms underlying changes in resource use and nutrient transfer are poorly understood. Thus, our understanding of how temporal and spatial variations in the supply of resources may affect food web structure and functioning is limited. By means of C and N isotopic analyses of two key Antarctic benthic consumers (Adamussium colbecki, Bivalvia, and Sterechinus neumayeri, Echinoidea) and Bayesian mixing models, we describe changes in trophic niche and nutrient transfer across trophic levels associated with the long- and short-term diet and body size of specimens sampled in midsummer in both shallow and deep waters. Samplings occurred soon after the sea-ice broke up at Tethys Bay, an area characterised by extreme seasonality in sea-ice coverage and productivity in the Ross Sea. In the long term, the trophic niche was broader and variation between specimens was greater, with intermediate-size specimens generally consuming a higher number of resources than small and large specimens. The coupling of energy channels in the food web was consequently more direct than in the short term. Sediment and benthic algae were more frequently consumed in the long term, before the sea-ice broke up, while consumers specialised on sympagic algae and plankton in the short term. Regardless of the time scale, sympagic algae were more frequently consumed in shallow waters, while plankton was more frequently consumed in deep waters. Our results suggest a strong temporal relationship between resource availability and the trophic niche of benthic consumers in Antarctica. Potential climate-driven changes in the timing and quality of nutrient inputs may have profound implications for the structure of polar food webs and the persistence of their constituent species, which have adapted their trophic niches to a highly predictable schedule of resource inputs.
???displayArticle.pubmedLink???
29570741
???displayArticle.pmcLink???PMC5865725 ???displayArticle.link???PLoS One
Fig 1. Isotopic signatures of food sources.Mean (±S.E.) δ13C and δ15N values of basal food sources at Tethys Bay (Ross Sea, Antarctica). Coarse (C), fine (F) and ultra-fine (UF) refer to different size fractions of organic matter in sediment (Sed). Resource guilds are indicated with colours, i.e. blue: sympagic resources; green: pelagic resources; brown: organic matter in sediments; purple: benthic primary producers.
Fig 2. Isotopic niches of consumers.Isotopic distribution of A. colbecki (ADA) and S. neumayeri (STE) in shallow (15–25 m depth) and deep (50–150 m depth) waters in the long term (Tissue, based on analysis of soft tissues) and short term (Gut, based on analysis of gut contents). Polygons enclosing isotopic data represent the total isotopic area (TA) occupied by each population, while ellipses are the standard ellipse areas (SEAc) encompassing the core (around 40%) of each population.
Fig 3. Trophic links between consumers and resources.Resource-consumer food webs depicting the diet composition of the bivalve A. colbecki and the echinoderm S. neumayeri in shallow (15–25 m depth) and deep (50–150 m depth) waters in the long term (Tissue: black arrows, based on analysis of soft tissues) and short term (Gut: red arrows, based on analysis of gut contents). Arrow width is proportional to the interaction strength between consumers and resources. Resource guilds are grouped by colour, i.e. brown: organic matter in sediment, including coarse (C), fine (F) and ultra-fine (UF) sediment (Sed.) fractions; purple: benthic primary producers, including the red algae Iridea cordata (I. cord.) and epiphytic diatoms (Epi.); green: plankton, including phytoplankton and zooplankton; blue: sympagic algae, including diatoms (Diat.) and filamentous algae (Fil.) growing at the interface between sea-ice and water (Int.) or within the ice core (IC).
Fig 4. Body size and diet.Dietary change with specimen size in shallow (15–25 m depth) and deep (50–150 m depth) waters in the long term (Tissue, based on analysis of soft tissues) and short term (Gut, based on analysis of gut contents) (mixSIAR, R software, version 2.15.2). (a) = A. colbecki; (b) = S. neumayeri. The software predicts the contribution of resources over a wider size range than that of the original samples; the red shaded areas indicate the size range actually observed for the specimens analysed (note differences on the horizontal axes between panels). Each coloured line indicates a given resource. A: interface sympagic diatoms, B: I. cordata, C: phytoplankton, D: ultra-fine sediment, E: zooplankton, F: ice-core diatoms, G: epiphytic benthic diatoms, H: ice-core filamentous sympagic algae, I: interface filamentous sympagic algae, J: coarse sediment, K: fine sediment.
Araújo,
The ecological causes of individual specialisation.
2011, Pubmed
Araújo,
The ecological causes of individual specialisation.
2011,
Pubmed
Brose,
Consumer-resource body-size relationships in natural food webs.
2006,
Pubmed
Calizza,
Effect of habitat degradation on competition, carrying capacity, and species assemblage stability.
2017,
Pubmed
Chown,
The changing form of Antarctic biodiversity.
2015,
Pubmed
Clark,
Light-driven tipping points in polar ecosystems.
2013,
Pubmed
Constable,
Climate change and Southern Ocean ecosystems I: how changes in physical habitats directly affect marine biota.
2014,
Pubmed
Griffiths,
Antarctic marine biodiversity--what do we know about the distribution of life in the Southern Ocean?
2010,
Pubmed
,
Echinobase
Gutt,
The Southern Ocean ecosystem under multiple climate change stresses--an integrated circumpolar assessment.
2015,
Pubmed
Hoegh-Guldberg,
The impact of climate change on the world's marine ecosystems.
2010,
Pubmed
Jackson,
Comparing isotopic niche widths among and within communities: SIBER - Stable Isotope Bayesian Ellipses in R.
2011,
Pubmed
Jackson,
Population-level metrics of trophic structure based on stable isotopes and their application to invasion ecology.
2012,
Pubmed
Maunsell,
Changes in host-parasitoid food web structure with elevation.
2015,
Pubmed
McMeans,
Food Web Structure in Temporally-Forced Ecosystems.
2015,
Pubmed
Melbourne-Thomas,
Testing paradigms of ecosystem change under climate warming in Antarctica.
2013,
Pubmed
Norkko,
Trophic structure of coastal Antarctic food webs associated with changes in sea ice and food supply.
2007,
Pubmed
,
Echinobase
Post,
Getting to the fat of the matter: models, methods and assumptions for dealing with lipids in stable isotope analyses.
2007,
Pubmed
Quartino,
Evidence of macroalgal colonization on newly ice-free areas following glacial retreat in Potter Cove (South Shetland Islands), Antarctica.
2013,
Pubmed
Rooney,
Structural asymmetry and the stability of diverse food webs.
2006,
Pubmed
Rooney,
Integrating food web diversity, structure and stability.
2012,
Pubmed
Saba,
Winter and spring controls on the summer food web of the coastal West Antarctic Peninsula.
2014,
Pubmed
Sanders,
Individual and species-specific traits explain niche size and functional role in spiders as generalist predators.
2015,
Pubmed
Smith,
Trophic interactions within the Ross Sea continental shelf ecosystem.
2007,
Pubmed
Svanbäck,
Intraspecific competition drives increased resource use diversity within a natural population.
2007,
Pubmed
Woodward,
Body size in ecological networks.
2005,
Pubmed