Epifaunal diversity patterns within and among seagrass meadows suggest landscape‐scale biodiversity processes

• Published in: Ecosphere (Washington, D.C) Vol. 9; no. 11
• Main Authors: Whippo, Ross, Knight, Nicole S., Prentice, Carolyn, Cristiani, John, Siegle, Matthew R., O'Connor, Mary I.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Washington John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01.11.2018
• Subjects: Biodiversity; Community composition; Conservation; Ecosystem services; Environmental conditions; estuary; foundation species; grazer; Habitats; invertebrate; Invertebrates; Landscape; Marine ecosystems; metacommunity; Salinity; seagrass; seascape ecology; Secondary productivity; Zostera marina
• ISSN: 2150-8925; 2150-8925
• DOI: 10.1002/ecs2.2490

Coastal seascapes can support high animal diversity and secondary productivity that attracts conservation interest and provides ecosystem services. Though the importance of spatial structure in marine habitats is well known, determining the dominant spatial scale for biodiversity patterns is an often‐overlooked dimension of the ecological and conservation value of seagrass meadows. We estimated biodiversity patterns at fine (0.28 m2), meadow and seascape scales to explore whether seagrass‐associated biodiversity patterns are consistent with spatial processes such as abiotic habitat filtering or metacommunity dynamics in a northeast Pacific seascape. In Barkley Sound, British Columbia, we quantified epifaunal biodiversity on eelgrass (Zostera marina) to test three hypotheses: Taxonomic diversity and composition (1) vary randomly within meadows but (2) vary systematically among meadows reflecting meadow location or environmental conditions, and (3) spatial patterns are stable over time. We sampled epifaunal invertebrates in a systematic spatial grid within nine eelgrass meadows. We found that epifaunal community composition varied as much over a few meters within the same meadow as among meadows separated by kilometers and of different sizes and wave exposures. In each meadow, we observed less than three‐quarters of the species in the regional species pool, and we observed non‐random spatial aggregation within many species. Even with spatial turnover, assemblages were more similar than predicted by null models based on random species distributions, suggesting that some species tend to co‐occur in high abundance. These spatial biodiversity patterns were not clearly explained by meadow location, area, or abiotic conditions, except that there were differences in clusters of meadows distinguished by their salinity (more marine vs. more fresh). Our results indicate that effective conservation and understanding of how seagrass can support high biodiversity and ecosystem function may require consideration of spatial connections among meadows, and not just the condition of the meadows themselves.