Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T11:12:28.878Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Artificial reef influence on the surrounding infauna—north coast of Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 August 2011

Ilana Rosental Zalmon ,
Catarina Dalvi Boina  and
T.C.M. Almeida
Ilana Rosental Zalmon*
Affiliation:
Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense, Centro de Biociências e Biotecnologia, Avenida Alberto Lamego, 2000, 28013-602, Campos dos Goytacazes, RJ, Brazil
Catarina Dalvi Boina
Affiliation:
Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense, Centro de Biociências e Biotecnologia, Avenida Alberto Lamego, 2000, 28013-602, Campos dos Goytacazes, RJ, Brazil
T.C.M. Almeida
Affiliation:
Universidade do Vale do Itajaí, CTTMAR, Rua Uruguai 458, Itajaí, 88302-130, SC, Brazil
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: I.R. Zalmon, Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense, Centro de Biociências e Biotecnologia, Avenida Alberto Lamego, 2000, 28013-602 Campos dos Goytacazes, RJ, Brazil email: ilana@uenf.br
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

There have been many efforts to appraise the extent to which artificial reefs affect the surrounding community, but few studies addressed whether benthic assemblages change with distance from the reef. We experimentally assessed the relationship between infauna abundance and richness with increased distance (0, 5, 25, 50, 100 and 300 m) from reefballs deployed on a flat and homogeneous bottom, 9-m deep, on the north coast of Rio de Janeiro, south-eastern Brazil. Benthic taxon richness and abundance varied significantly between surveys with higher values in February 2007. Both numerical indicators changed similarly with distance, but more noticeably between 300 m and the other distance treatments where abundance was highest. A non-metric multidimensional scaling ordination revealed that macrobenthic assemblages were very heterogeneous with significant differences between surveys but not among sampling distances. A canonical correspondence analysis including species, distances and sediment variables showed that the distances 5, 25 and 100 m were related to organic matter and mud (fine sediment), while 0 and 300 m distances were more related to the non-organic variables, such as the percentage of gravel, sand and calcium carbonate. Spatial variations in the parameters of the sediment alone did not explain the distribution of the associated infauna, given the similarity of the community at different distances. It is suggested that the influence of artificial reefs is quickly dissipated due to strong bottom sea currents, indicating a reduced impact or influence of these reefs on the surrounding infauna.

Keywords

artificial reefmacrobenthic communitysedimentorganic matterBrazil
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 92 , Issue 6 , September 2012 , pp. 1289 - 1299
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Airoldi, L., Abbiati, M., Beck, M.W., Hawkins, S.J., Jonsson, P.R.Martin, D., Moschella, P.S., Sundelof, A., Thompson, R.C. and Aberg, P. (2005) An ecological perspective on the deployment and design of low-crested and other hard coastal defense structures. Coastal Engeneering 52, 1073–1087.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amaral, A.C.Z. and Nonato, E.F. (1996) Annelida Polychaeta: características, glossário e chaves para famílias e gêneros da costa brasileira. Campinas: Editora da UNICAMP.Google Scholar
Ambrose, R.F. and Anderson, T.W. (1990) Influence of an artificial reef on the surrounding infaunal community. Marine Biology 107, 42–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, M.J. (2005) PERMANOVA: A FORTRAN Computer Program for Permutational Multivariate Analysis of Variance. Department of Statistics, University of Auckland. New Zealand.Google Scholar
Badalamenti, F. and D'Anna, G. (1996) Monitoring techniques for zoobenthic communities: influence of the artificial reef on surrounding infaunal community. In Proceedings of the First Conference of the European Artificial Reef Research Network. Ancona, Italy: European Artificial Reef Research, pp. 347–358.Google Scholar
Badalamenti, F., Chemello, R., D'Anna, G., Henriquez Ramos, P. and Riggio, S. (2002) Are artificial reefs comparable to neighbouring natural rocky areas? A mollusk case study in the Gulf of Castellammare (NW Sicily). ICES Journal of Marine Science 59, 127–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barros, F., Underwood, A.J. and Lindergarth, M. (2001) The influence of rock reefs on structure of benthic macrofauna in nearby soft-sediments. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 52, 191–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boaventura, D., Moura, A., Leitão, F., Carvalho, C., Cúrdia, J., Pereira, P., Fonseca, L., Santos, M. and Monteiro, C. (2006) Macrobenthic colonization of artificial reefs on the southern coast of Potugal (Ancão, Algarve). Hydrobiologia 555, 335–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bray, R.N., Miller, A.C. and Gessey, G.C. (1981) The fish connection: a trophic link between planktonic and rocky reef communities. Science 215, 204–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brotto, D.S., Krohling, W. and Zalmon, I.R. (2006) Fish community modeling agents on an artificial reef on the northern coast of Rio de Janeiro–Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Oceanography 54, 205–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brotto, D.S. and Zalmon, I.R. (2007) The effect of artificial reef structural complexity and benthic colonization on gill net fish assemblages. Tropical Oceanography 35, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caddy, J.F. (1999) Fisheries management in the twenty-first century: will new paradigms apply? Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 9, 1–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conceição, R.N.L., Marinho, R.A., Franklin, W. Jr, Lopes, J. and Carpegiani, B. (2007) Projeto Recifes Artificiais Marinhos: apoio à pesca artesanal em Paracuru, Ceará, Brasil. 1—Instalação e monitoramento. Arquivos de Ciências do Mar 40, 72–77.Google Scholar
Danovaro, R., Gambi, C., Mazzola, A. and Mirto, S. (2002) Influence of artificial reefs on the surrounding infauna: analysis of meiofauna. ICES Journal of Marine Science 59, 356–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, N., Vanblaricom, G.R. and Dayton, P.K. (1982) Man-made structures on marine sediments: effects on adjacent benthic communities. Marine Biology 70, 295–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dean, W.E. Jr (1974) Determination of carbonate and organic matter in calcareous sediments and sedimentary rocks by loss ignition: comparison with other methods. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 44, 242–248.Google Scholar
Fabi, G., Luccarini, F., Psnfili, M., Solustri, C. and Spagnolo, A. (2002) Effects of an artificial reef on the surrounding soft-bottom community (central Adriatic Sea). ICES Journal of Marine Science 59, 343–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frazer, T.K., Lindberg, W.J. and Stanton, G.R. (1991) Predation on sand dollars by Gray triggerfish, Ballistes capriscus, in the north-eastern Gulf of Mexico. Bulletin of Marine Science 48, 159–164.Google Scholar
Fritz, W.J. and Moore, J.N. (1988) Basics of physical stratigraphy and sedimentology. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Furukawa, K. (2000) The role of a man-made headland in generating patches in coastal waters of Ise Bay, Japan. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 50, 33–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godoy, E.A.S., Almeida, T.C.M. and Zalmon, I.R. (2002) Fish assemblages and environmental variables on an artificial reef—Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. ICES Journal of Marine Science 59, 138–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guiral, D., Gourbalt, N. and Helleouet, M. (1995) Sediment nature and meiobenthos of an artificial reef (Acadja) used for extensive aquaculture. Oceanologica Acta 18, 543–555.Google Scholar
Hueckel, G.J., Buckley, R.M. and Benson, B.L. (1989) Mitigating rock habitat loss using artificial reefs. Bulletin of Marine Science 44, 913–922.Google Scholar
Krohling, W., Brotto, D.S. and Zalmon, I.R. (2006) Functional role of fouling community on an artificial reef at the northern coast of Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Oceanography 54, 183–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krohling, W., Brotto, D.S. and Zalmon, I.R. (2008) Epibenthic colonization on an artificial reef in a stressed environment off the north coast of the Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil. Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology 51, 215–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langlois, T.J., Anderson, M.J. and Babcock, R.C. (2005) Reef associated predators influence adjacent soft-sediment communities. Ecology 89, 1508–1519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langlois, T.J., Anderson, M.J. and Babcock, R.C. (2006) Inconsistent effects on different size classes of macrofauna in adjacent sand habitats. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 334, 269–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lorenzi, L. (2004) Estrutura das associações infaunais sublitorais de Substrato inconsolidado adjacente a recifes artificiais e naturais (Paraná, Brasil). PhD thesis. Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil.Google Scholar
Lorenzi, L. and Borzone, C.A. (2009) Variabilidade da infauna adjacente a estruturas rochosas na plataforma rasa do litoral do Paraná, Brasil. Zoologia 26, 716–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manly, B.F.J. (1997) Randomization, bootstrap and Monte Carlo methods in biology. 2nd edition. London: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
Melo, G.A.S. (1996) Manual de identificação dos Brachyura (caranguejos e siris) do litoral brasileiro. São Paulo: Editora Plêiade.Google Scholar
Nelson, W.G., Navratil, P.M., Savercool, D.M. and Vose, F.E. (1988) Short-term effects of stabilized oil ash reefs on the marine benthos. Marine Pollution Bulletin 19, 623–627.Google Scholar
Osenberg, C.W., Mary, C.M. St, Wilson, J.A. and Lindberg, W.J. (2002) A quantitative framework to evaluate the attraction–production controversy. ICES Journal of Marine Science 59, 214–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parrish, J.D. and Zimmerman, R.J. (1977) Utilization by fishes of space and food resources on an offshore Puerto Rican coral reef and its surroundings. Proceedings of 3rd International Coral Reef Symposium 1, 297–303.Google Scholar
Pickering, H. (1996) Artificial reefs of bulk waste materials: a scientific and legal review of the suitability of using the cement stabilized by-products of coal-fired power stations. Marine Pollution 20, 483–497.Google Scholar
Posey, M.H. and Ambrose, W.G. Jr (1994) Effects of proximity to an offshore hard-bottom reef on infaunal abundances. Marine Biology 118, 745–753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reed, D.C., Schroeter, S.C., Huang, D., Anderson, T. and Ambrose, R.F. (2006) Quantitative assessment of different artificial reef designs in mitigating losses to kelp forest fishes. Bulletin of Marine Science 78, 133–150.Google Scholar
Reineck, H.E. and Singh, I.B. (1973) Depositional sedimentary environments. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Relini, G., Relini, M., Giovanni, T. and Angelis, G. (2002a) Trophic relationships between fishes and an artificial reef. ICES Journal of Marine Science 59, 36–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Relini, G., Relini, M., Torchia, G. and Palandri, G. (2002b) Ten years of censuses of fish fauna on the Loano artificial reef. ICES Journal of Marine Science 59, 132–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rios, E.C. (1994) Seashells of Brazil. 2nd edition. Rio Grande: FURG.Google Scholar
Santos, M.N. and Monteiro, C.C. (1997). The Olhão artificial reef system (South Portugal): fish assemblages and fishing yield. Fisheries Research 30: 33–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santos, L.N., Brotto, D.S. and Zalmon, I.R. (2010). Fish responses to increasing distance from artificial reefs on the Southeastern Brazilian Coast. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 386, 54–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snelgrove, P.V.R. and Butman, C.A. (1994) Animal–sediment relationships revisited: cause versus effect. Oceanography and Marine Biology: an Annual Review 32, 111–177.Google Scholar
Soares-Gomes, A., Oliveira, E.B., Gabardo, I.T., Carreira, R.S. and Fernandez, G.B. (2000) Benthic meiofauna study around an offshore oil production platform in Campos Basin, southeast Brazilian continental shelf. In Proceedings of the 5th Congress on Marine Science, Marcuba, Havana. CD-ROM Edition.Google Scholar
Souza, T.A., Godoy, J.M., Godoy, M.L.D.P., Moreira, I., Carvalho, Z.L., Salomão, M.S. and Rezende, C.E. (2010) Use of multitracers for the study of water mixing in the Paraíba do Sul River estuary. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity 101, 564–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steimle, F., Foster, K., Kropp, R. and Conlin, B. (2002) Benthic macrofauna productivity enhancement by an artificial reef in Delaware Bay, USA. ICES Journal of Marine Science 59, 100–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suguio, K. (1973) Introdução à sedimentologia. São Paulo: Edgard Blücher/EDUSP.Google Scholar
Svane, I. and Petersen, J.K. (2001) On the problems of epibioses, fouling and artificial reefs: a review. Marine Ecology 22, 169–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ter Braak, C.J.F. (1986) Canonical correspondence analysis: a new eigenvector technique for multivariate direct gradient analysis. Ecology 67, 1167–1179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Underwood, A.J. (1998) Design, implementation and analysis of ecological and environmental experiments: pitfalls in the maintenance of logical structures. In Experimental ecology: issues and perspectives. Resetarits, W.J. and Bernardo, J. (eds) Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 325–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valentin, J.L. and Monteiro-Ribas, W.M. (1993) Zooplancton community structure on the east-southeast Brazilian continental shelf (18-32oS latitude). Continental Shelf Research 13. 407–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warwick, R.M. and Clarke, K.R. (1993) Increased variability as a symptom of stress in marine communities. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 172, 215–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wentworth, C.K. (1922) A scale of grade e class terms of clastic sediments. Journal of Geology 30, 377–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilding, T.A. (2006) The benthic impacts of the Loch Linmhe artificial reef. Hydrobiologia 555, 345–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilding, T. and Sayer, M.D.J. (2002) Evaluating artificial reef performance: approaches to pre- and post-deployment research. ICES Journal of Marine Science 59, 222–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zalmon, I.R. and Gomes, F.C. (2003) Comunidade incrustante em diferentes materiais de um recife artificial no litoral norte do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. Biotemas 16, 57–80.Google Scholar
Zalmon, I.R., Novelli, R., Gomes, M.P. and Faria, V.V. (2002) Experimental results of an artificial reef program on the Brazilian coast north of Rio de Janeiro. ICES Journal of Marine Science 59, 83–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar