Possible Demographic Consequences of Intraspecific Shelter Competition Among American Lobsters

Pioneering work by J. Stan Cobb described how habitat architecture and body size scaling affect shelter-related behavior of American lobsters. Subsequent research suggested that shelter availability and competition could set local carrying capacity and demographics for this species. To determine how shelter spacing affects population density, the intensity of intraspecific competition and the distribution of body size for this species, I deployed sets of 10 identically sized artificial shelters spaced at distances of 2.5, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5 and 2.0 meters on otherwise featureless substrate at 10 m depth in mid-coast Maine, U.S.A. Five sets had two parallel strings of five opposing shelters and an additional linear string set 2 to apart without opposing shelters was the most widely separated treatment. Shelters spaced I m apart and closer had higher lobster population densities, more intraspecific competition and higher proportions of empty shelters. Surprisingly, lobsters there were also significantly smaller, declining from 62.7 mm to 50.9 on the carapace (CL) for 2 to linear to 0.25 m spaced shelters, respectively. Nearly all 932 lobsters measured in this study were juvenile (< 90 mm CL) and preharvestable (< 83 mm CL) sized, so mate selection and fishing effects were unlikely. At the scale of the experiment, larger lobsters leave or avoid areas of high lobster population density and intense competition for areas of low population density and relaxed competition (called "demographic diffusion"). Scuba surveys in coastal zones found lobster population densities scale with shelter densities and were highest in boulder habitat where, like the experiment, more than half the shelters were vacant. Fisheries independent scuba and trawl surveys in Maine's shallow coastal zone repeatedly recorded declines of preharvestable, lobsters larger than 60 turn CL in size and increases of those sizes offshore and in deep water. It is possible that this demographic diffusion is driven by behaviors associated with intraspecific shelter competition.

The Impact of Whaling on the Ocean Carbon Cycle: Why Bigger Was Better

Background: Humans have reduced the abundance of many large marine vertebrates, including whales, large fish, and sharks, to only a small percentage of their pre-exploitation levels. Industrial fishing and whaling also tended to preferentially harvest the largest species and largest individuals within a population. We consider the consequences of removing these animals on the ocean's ability to store carbon. Methodology/Principal Findings: Because body size is critical to our arguments, our analysis focuses on populations of baleen whales. Using reconstructions of pre-whaling and modern abundances, we consider the impact of whaling on the amount of carbon stored in living whales and on the amount of carbon exported to the deep sea by sinking whale carcasses. Populations of large baleen whales now store 9.1 x 10(6) tons less carbon than before whaling. Some of the lost storage has been offset by increases in smaller competitors; however, due to the relative metabolic efficiency of larger organisms, a shift toward smaller animals could decrease the total community biomass by 30% or more. Because of their large size and few predators, whales and other large marine vertebrates can efficiently export carbon from the surface waters to the deep sea. We estimate that rebuilding whale populations would remove 1.6 x 10(5) tons of carbon each year through sinking whale carcasses. Conclusions/Significance: Even though fish and whales are only a small portion of the ocean's overall biomass, fishing and whaling have altered the ocean's ability to store and sequester carbon. Although these changes are small relative to the total ocean carbon sink, rebuilding populations of fish and whales would be comparable to other carbon management schemes, including ocean iron fertilization.