>Vertical gradient; >FW overlays SW; >FW flow dominates over tides

Post on 28-Jan-2016

31 views 0 download

Tags:

description

>Vertical gradient; >FW overlays SW; >FW flow dominates over tides. >greater vertical mixing; >Moderate tidal action. >Vertically homogenous; >Vigorous tidal action. Turner et al. 2006 – Hurricane sediments. Turner et al. 2006 – Hurricane sediments. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

transcript

>Vertical gradient; >FW overlays SW;>FW flow dominates over tides

>greater vertical mixing;>Moderate tidal action

>Vertically homogenous; >Vigorous tidal action

Turner et al. 2006 – Hurricane sediments

Turner et al. 2006 – Hurricane sediments

Turner et al. 2006 – Hurricane sediments

- Pulsed Flood Events – natural disturbances drive high productivity & diversity in river, floodplain and estuary

Relationship between FW species percentage and tidal influence

Relationship between species richness and salinity

Table of TFW vs SM conditions

Abiotic gradients along a salinity gradient

Coupled response between Chlorophyll, DOC and DO along the salinity gradient

Salinity zonation patterns and the River Continuum Concept

Odum’s 1984 Dual Gradient Concept

Stream orders = marsh dendritic pattern

River ≠ Estuary ≠ Marsh

Dual Gradient Concept: salinity & marsh stream order gradients

DOC input to estuary

POC input to estuary

DOC gradient along marsh stream orders

Dual Gradient Concept: salinity & marsh stream order gradients

POC gradient along marsh stream orders

Main sources of organic carbon along marsh stream gradient

Nekton as carbon sources and movement among subsystems

Gradients in primary production in estuaries

Juvenile menhaden nursery driven by phytoplankton gradients

Relationship between salinity – menhadenabundance - chlorophyll signatures(Neuse River: 2 May 1984)

Relationship between salinity – menhaden abundance - chlorophyll signatures(Neuse River: 15 May 1984)

Relationship between salinity – menhaden abundance - chlorophyll signatures(Pamlico River: 16 May 1984)

Size ranges were nearly similar so fish considered same cohort

The FW/SW gradient & phytoplankton biomass max were correlated;Generally occurred within 4-6 psu in both rivers and shifted seasonally

Neuse River: 4-6 psu @ 60km during early spring freshet & km 60 in summer

Pamlico River: 4-6 psu @ 30km during early spring freshet & km 10 in summer

Spring – high spring flows = high primary production in lower estuary = nursery

Summer – low summer flows = high primary production in upper estuary = nursery

Creeks have salinity gradients with isolated chlorophyll maxima regardless of location

O = predominantly open estuaryM = moderate/large (>10 ha) closed estuaryS = small (< 10 ha) closed estuary

Subtropical & warm-temperate:O - near top leftM - near the middleS - near lower right

ANOSIM = overall difference in community structure in subtropical & warm-temperate; O most discrete.

less clear in cold-temperate estuaries(no differences).

Cold-temperate:O & M - near top leftS – broad spread

Harrison & Whitfield 2006 estuary typology/community structure model

O = species rich; allows access and recruitment form sea.L/M-C = species poor; closed w/limited access and recruitment from sea.S-C = lowest species richness; due to size and limited habitat diversity and isolation from sea.

A = open systemsB = open & L/M closed systemsC = all but L/M closed mainlyD = all systems but mainly in S closed systems.

Large estuaries – increased habitatheterogeneity & increased diversity

Surface area – linked to mouthwidth & depth, geomorphology &runoff.

Mouth conditions & surface area = different fish communities