Living in a potentially toxic environment: comparisons of endofauna in two congeneric sponges from the Great Barrier Reef

The abundance and community composition of the endofauna in 2 species of sponge, Haliclona sp. 1 and Haliclona sp. 2 (phylum Porifera: order Haplosclerida), were examined at different sites on the slope at Heron Island Reef, in the southern Great Barrier Reef, on 2 separate occasions. Both species of Haliclona Occupy Similar habitats on the reef slope and are often found living adjacent to each other, but the major groups of secondary metabolites and the gross external morphology in the 2 species of sponge are different. The 2 species of sponge supported significantly different endofaunal communities, with Haliclona sp. 2 Supporting 3 to 4 times more individuals than Haliclona sp. 1. Fewer demersal zooplankton (copepods), nematodes and some peracarid crustaceans were found in Haliclona sp. I compared with Haliclona sp. 2. There were also differences in the numbers of spionid, nereidid and syllid. polychaetes living in the 2 species of sponge. The only taxon that was more abundant in Haliclona sp. 1 than Haliclona sp. 2 was the spionid Polydorella prolifera, and this difference was only evident on 1. of the 2 occasions. The amount of free space (pores, channels, cavities) for a given weight of sponge was only 19% greater in Haliclona sp. 2 than in Haliclona sp. 1, suggesting other factors, such as the differences in the allelochemicals, may have a role in determining the numbers and types of animals living in these 2 species of sponge.

Effects of physical disturbance on infaunal and epifaunal assemblages in subtropical, intertidal seagrass beds

We assessed the impact of large-scale commercial and recreational harvesting of polychaete worms Marphysa spp. on macrobenthic assemblages in a subtropical estuary in Queensland, Australia, by examining: (1) the spatial extent of harvesting activities and the rate of recovery of the seagrass habitat over an 18 to 20 mo period; (2) the recovery of infauna in and around commercial pits of known age; (3) the indirect effects of physical disturbance from trampling and deposition of sediments during harvesting on epibenthos in areas adjacent to commercial and recreational pits; (4) impacts of potential indirect effects through manipulative experimentation. Harvesting caused a loss of seagrass, changes to the topography and compaction of the sediments associated with the creation of walls around commercial pits, and the deposition of rubble dug from within the pit. The walls and rubble were still evident after 1.8 to 20 mo, but comprised only a small proportion of the total area on the intertidal banks. There was a shift from an intertidal area dominated by Zostera capricorni to one with a mixture of Z. capricorni, Halophila spp. and Halodule uninervis, but there was no overall decline in the biomass of seagrass in these areas. There were distinct impacts from harvesting on the abundance of benthic infauna, especially amphipods, polychaetes and gastropods, and these effects were still detectable after 4 mo of potential recovery. After 12 me, there were no detectable differences in the abundances of these infauna between dug areas and reference areas, which suggested that infauna had recovered from impacts of harvesting; however, an extensive bloom of toxic fireweed Lyngbya majsucula may have masked any remaining impacts. There were no detectable impacts of harvesting on epifauna living in the seagrass immediately around commercial or recreational pits.