ALBERT

All Library Books, journals and Electronic Records Telegrafenberg

feed icon rss

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
  • Biology  (1)
  • Seaweed competition  (1)
  • 1
    facet.materialart.
    Unknown
    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service | Silver Spring, MD
    In:  http://aquaticcommons.org/id/eprint/8954 | 403 | 2012-07-02 15:05:17 | 8954 | United States National Marine Fisheries Service
    Publication Date: 2021-06-29
    Description: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: At present, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) criteria used to assess whether a population qualifies for inclusion in the CITES Appendices relate to (A) size of the population, (B) area of distribution of the population, and (C) declines in the size of the population. Numeric guidelines are provided as indicators of a small population (less than 5,000 individuals), a small subpopulation (less than 500 individuals), a restricted area of distribution for a population (less than 10,000 km2), a restricted area of distribution for a subpopula-tion (less than 500 km2), a high rate of decline (a decrease of 50% or more in total within 5 years or two generations whichever is longer or, for a small wild population, a decline of 20% or more in total within ten years or three generations whichever is longer), large fluctuations (population size or area of distribution varies widely, rapidly and frequently, with a variation greater than one order of magnitude), and a short-term fluctuation (one of two years or less).The Working Group discussed several broad issues of relevance to the CITES criteria and guidelines. These included the importance of the historical extent of decline versus the recent rate of decline; the utility and validity of incorporating relative population productivity into decline criteria; the utility of absolute numbers for defining small populations or small areas; the appropriateness of generation times as time frames for examining declines; the importance of the magnitude and frequency of fluctuations as factors affecting risk of extinction; and the overall utility of numeric thresh-olds or guidelines.
    Keywords: Biology ; Ecology ; Fisheries
    Repository Name: AquaDocs
    Type: monograph
    Format: application/pdf
    Format: application/pdf
    Format: 70
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    Electronic Resource
    Electronic Resource
    Springer
    Oecologia 113 (1998), S. 231-238 
    ISSN: 1432-1939
    Keywords: Key words Coral ; Corallivory ; Florida ; Predation ; Seaweed competition
    Source: Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2000
    Topics: Biology
    Notes: Abstract On Caribbean coral reefs, high rates of grazing by herbivorous fishes are thought to benefit corals because fishes consume competing seaweeds. We conducted field experiments in the Florida Keys, USA, to examine the effects of grazing fishes on coral/seaweed competition. Initially, fragments of Porites divaracata from an inshore habitat were transplanted into full-cage, half-cage, and no-cage treatments on a fore-reef. Within 48 h, 56% of the unprotected corals in half-cage and no-cage treatments (62 of 111) were completely consumed. Stoplight parrotfish (Sparisoma viride) were the major coral predators, with redband parrotfish (S. aurofrenatum) also commonly attacking this coral. Next, we transplanted fragments of P. porites collected from the fore-reef habitat where our caging experiments were being conducted into the three cage treatments, half in the presence of transplanted seaweeds, and half onto initially clean substrates. The corals were allowed to grow in these conditions, with concurrent development of competing seaweeds, for 14 weeks. Although seaweed cover and biomass were both significantly greater in the full-cage treatment, coral growth did not differ significantly between cage treatments even though corals placed with pre-planted seaweeds grew significantly less than corals placed on initially clean substrate. This surprising result occurred because parrotfishes not only grazed algae from accessible treatments, but also fed directly on our coral transplants. Parrotfish feeding scars were significantly more abundant on P. porites from the half and no-cage treatments than on corals in the full cages. On this Florida reef, direct fish predation on some coral species (P. divaracata) can exclude them from fore-reef areas, as has previously been shown for certain seaweeds and sponges. For other corals that live on the fore-reef (P. porites), the benefits of fishes removing seaweeds can be counterbalanced by the detrimental effects of fishes directly consuming corals.
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...