Marine ecology progress series 340:163
MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES
Vol. 340: 163–171, 2007
Published June 18
Mar Ecol Prog Ser
Changes in South African rocky intertidal
invertebrate community structure associated with
the invasion of the mussel Mytilus galloprovincialis
Tamara B. Robinson1, 2,*, George M. Branch1, Charles L. Griffiths1, 2,
Anesh Govender1, Philip A. R. Hockey3
1Marine Biology Research Institute, Zoology Department, University of Cape Town, Private Bag X 03,
Rondebosch 7701, South Africa
2Centre of Invasion Biology, Zoology Department, University of Cape Town, Private Bag X 03,
Rondebosch 7701, South Africa
3DST/NRF Centre of Excellence at the Percy FitzPatrick Institute, University of Cape Town, Private Bag X 03,
Rondebosch 7701, South Africa
ABSTRACT: Since the establishment of the alien mussel
Mytilus galloprovincialis in South Africa,several authors have studied its interactions with individual indigenous species. However, thebroader implications of this invasion on the intertidal zone remain undocumented. This paper analy-ses the impacts of this mussel on the rocky-shore invertebrate community structure at Marcus Islandon the west coast of South Africa. The effects of the invasion were linked to 3 key elements and werenot consistently spread across the intertidal zone, but were focused within the mid-to-low shore.
Firstly, physical stress in the mid-intertidal zones was ameliorated by the presence of
M. galloprovin-cialis beds. Secondly, habitat complexity was increased where
M. galloprovincialis replaced barerock or less complex secondary habitat. Thirdly, habitat became less patchy as mussel beds blan-keted the shore. Consequently, invertebrate density and species richness increased substantially, andcommunity composition changed significantly in the mid-shore. Lower on the shore, significantchanges in invertebrate community structure were driven by a switch from mono-layered beds of thesmall indigenous mussel
Aulacomya ater to multilayered beds of
M. galloprovincialis, despite nochange in total species richness.
KEY WORDS: Alien mussel · Community structure · Marine invasions ·
Mytilus galloprovincialis ·Rocky shores
Resale or republication not permitted without written consent of the publisher
the impacts of alien species on the biological structureof the communities they invade.
The spread of alien species is altering the composi-
One alien species that has received substantial atten-
tion of marine communities on a global scale (Ruiz et
tion at the level of species-specific effects is the mytilid
al. 1999, Mack et al. 2000, Grosholz 2002) and has
mussel
Mytilus galloprovincialis along the South
been identified as a major threat to biodiversity (Occhi-
African coast
. As the most abundant and widespread
pinti-Ambrogi & Savini 2003). Many studies have con-
invasive marine species in this region (Robinson et al.
sidered direct interactions between alien and indige-
2005),
M. galloprovincialis has partially displaced the
nous species (Berman & Carlton 1991, Byers 2000,
local mussels
Choromytilus meridionalis and
Aula-
Byrnes & Witman 2003, Bachelet et al. 2004, Le Pape et
comya ater along the west coast (Hockey & Van Erkom
al. 2004), but relatively little attention has been paid to
Schurink 1992), while exhibiting spatial segregation
Inter-Research 2007 · www.int-res.com
Mar Ecol Prog Ser 340: 163–171, 2007
with the indigenous mussel
Perna perna on the south
present in low numbers) and again in 2001, by which
coast (Robinson et al
. 2005). As a consequence of the
time
M. galloprovincialis was well established and had
rapid growth rate, high fecundity and desiccation toler-
invaded much of the South African coast (Robinson et
ance of this invasive mussel (Van Erkom Schurink &
al. 2005). In 1980, 7 intertidal zones were identified
Griffiths 1990, Hockey & Van Erkom Schurink 1992), its
and sampled. They were (in descending order of tidal
arrival resulted in a net upshore shift in the zonation of
intertidal mussel beds. Due to extremely high recruit-
(1) The
Porphyra zone, consisting of patchy beds of
ment rates (up to 20 000 recruits m–2; Harris et al. 1998),
the alga
Porphyra capensis.
M. galloprovincialis presently dominates primary rock
(2) The
Ulva zone, characterised by mixed beds of the
surfaces at the expense of various competitively inferior
algae
Ulva capensis and
Ulva (=
Enteromorpha) linza.
limpet species (Branch & Steffani 2004). By excluding
(3) The
Granularis zone, dominated by the limpet
the limpet
Scutellastra granularis from open rock,
M. galloprovincialis has reduced the number of individ-
(4) The algal turf zone, covered by a moss-like red al-
uals that occur directly on rock, although at the same
gal community dominated by
Caulacanthus ustulatus.
time it offers the potential of increasing overall
S. gran-
(5) The
Gigartina zone, characterised by the algae
ularis density by providing a favourable settlement and
Gigartina radula and
Pterosiphonia cloiophylla.
recruitment substratum for juveniles (Griffiths et al.
(6) The
Aulacomya zone, dominated by the ribbed
1992, Hockey & Van Erkom Schurink 1992). A second
mussel
Aulacomya ater.
limpet species,
Scutellastra argenvillei, has also been
(7) The
Choromytilus zone, comprising beds of the
significantly affected by this invasion, although the
black mussel
Choromytilus meridionalis.
strength of the interaction between these 2 species is
In 1980, 10 to 16 quadrats, each of 0.01 m2, were
mediated by wave action (Steffani & Branch 2003a,b).
selected randomly in each zone from within areas of
On exposed shores,
M. galloprovincialis outcompetes
100% algal or mussel cover. These quadrats were
S. argenvillei and dominates the primary substratum,
cleared, and all mobile and sessile invertebrates
while, on semi-exposed shores, the mussel is relatively
>1 mm in size were counted and identified to species
scarce and
S. argenvillei maintains dominance in open
level. In the
Granularis zone, where invertebrates tend
rock space (Steffani & Branch 2003a,b).
to be large and sparsely distributed, animals were
Besides the biological role of mussels on rocky shores,
counted
in situ in 27 quadrats of 0.5 m2.
they also form an important biotic substratum (Seed &
In 2001, the same survey protocol was used, with 2
Suchanek 1992). Mussel beds impact surrounding
exceptions. Firstly,
Mytilus galloprovincialis had over-
community structure as the highly complex configura-
run most of the
Granularis zone, making it inappropri-
tion of mussel matrices offers a multitude of micro-
ate to employ the 0.5 m2 quadrats previously used to
habitats, which ameliorate fluctuating environmental
sample this zone, and 0.01 m2 quadrats were cleared.
conditions and provide protection from predation
Secondly, 7 samples were taken per zone. These were
(Gosselin & Chia 1995). The physical presence of the
randomly, horizontally interspersed between the 1980
mussel shells also constitutes a suitable hard substratum
samples. To ensure equivalent areas were analysed
for settlement and development of co-occurring species.
in 1980 and 2001, in each zone a randomly selected
Despite substantial work on the ecological impacts of
subset of 7 samples from 1980 was compared with the
Mytilus galloprovincialis and the known role of mus-
7 samples taken in 2001. All calculations, except those
sels as biotic substratum, the impact of this invasion on
of rarefaction curves, were conducted using the ran-
the intertidal community has not been considered. In
dom sub-sample.
an effort to elucidate community impacts of such inva-
Prior to univariate analyses, data were tested for nor-
sions, this study characterises changes in intertidal in-
mality using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov 1-sample test
vertebrate community composition following invasion
and for homogeneity of variances using Levene's test.
of South African rocky shores by
M. galloprovincialis.
All univariate analyses were conducted using STATIS-TICA for Windows (Version 6), StatSoft Inc. (2004),with α set at 0.05.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Densities per square metre of mussels and other
invertebrates were compared before and after the
This study took place on the southern shores of Mar-
Mytilus galloprovincialis invasion (1980 versus 2001)
cus Island in Saldanha Bay (33° 02.59' S, 17° 58.26' E)
using the Mann-Whitney
U-test. Each intertidal zone
on the west coast of South Africa. The distribution and
was considered separately.
abundance of intertidal invertebrates was recorded in
To estimate the sufficiency of our sample size and
1980, before the invasion of
Mytilus galloprovincialis
compare species richness between times in the respec-
was recognised (although this species may have been
tive zones, sample-based rarefaction curves (Gotelli &
Robinson et al.: Changes in community structure associated with an exotic mussel
Colwell 2001) and the incidence-based richness esti-mate Chao 2 (Chao 1987) were calculated using theprogramme EstimateS (Colwell 2005).
Community composition (based on numerical abun-
dance) was analysed separately for each intertidalzone using multivariate techniques in the PRIMERsoftware package (Plymouth Marine Laboratory)and non-standardised, fourth-root transformed data.
ANOSIM was employed to detect significant changesin community structure between 1980 and 2001. SIM-PER resolved which species were responsible for thesechanges. Non-metric multidimensional scaling wasused to generate graphic illustrations of the differencesbetween the 1980 and 2001 communities in each zone.
In 2001, only 6 of the original 7 intertidal zones could
be detected. The algal turf zone could no longer be dis-tinguished and thus could not be resampled. Despitethe exclusion of this zone from the following analyses,it should be noted that the disappearance of a zone initself represents a major change in community struc-ture. As the vertical heights of the respective zoneswere not recorded in 1980, it was not possible to deter-mine if this zone had become dominated by
Mytilusgalloprovincialis, or if it had been incorporated into thezones previously occurring above or below it.
Fig. 1. Mean densities (+ SD) of the various mussel species
The densities of the various mussel species in each
recorded per square metre in each intertidal zone on Marcus
zone in 1980 and 2001 are shown in Fig. 1. In 1980,
Island in 1980 and 2001.
Mytilus galloprovincialis may have
Choromytilus meridionalis occurred at relatively low
been present in low numbers in the 1980 survey, but unde-
densities of 2000 to 5000 m–2 across most of the shore,
tected due to misidentification (n.s.: no significant difference in
overall mussel densities between years; *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01)
except in the
Granularis zone and in the algal-domi-nated zones higher on the shore. The smaller
Aulacomyaater attained much higher densities, but was confined tothe lower intertidal zone. In 2001,
Mytilus gallopro-
were substantial and significant increases in inverte-
vincialis was recorded in all sampling zones, with the ex-
brate density (p < 0.01), whereas decreases occurred in
ception of the
Porphyra zone, and dominated 4 out of 5 of
the
Gigartina and
Aulacomya zones (respectively, p <
these zones, reaching densities of 2000 to 10 000 m–2. In
0.05 and p < 0.01). The increases reflected invasion by
the mid
-shore
Ulva and
Granularis zones, the
M. gallo-
Mytilus galloprovincialis of zones that previously sup-
provincialis invasion increased the total number of mus-
ported few mussels. The reduction in invertebrate den-
sels present, but did not replace those present prior to its
sity in the
Gigartina zone was a result of the disappear-
invasion. This was, however, not the case in the
Aula-
ance of a single gastropod species (
Aetoniella nigra),
comya and
Choromytilus zones, where the invasion
which was common in 1980. The decline in the
Aula-
markedly decreased the densities of indigenous mussel
comya zone reflected a shift from the typically smaller
species, particularly
A. ater. By 2001, there had been a
but abundant
Aulacomya ater to larger but less dense
shift in the distribution and abundance of mussels from
M. galloprovincialis and a reduction in crustacean num-
the
Aulacomya zone to higher up the shore, with all
bers
. Except in the
Porphyra and
Aulacomya zones,
zones except the
Aulacomya zone showing an increase
there was a dramatic increase in the density of mussels
in overall mussel density (Fig. 1).
between 1980 and 2001. The most striking increase
In the
Porphyra and
Choromytilus zones there were no
occurred in the
Granularis zone, where mussels were
significant differences in the overall densities of inverte-
absent in 1980, but, in 2001, occurred at a density of
brates between 1980 and 2001 (Mann-Whitney
U-tests,
2660 individuals m–2 (4012 SD). In contrast, there was a
p < 0.05; Fig. 2). In the
Ulva and
Granularis zones there
marked decrease in density of mussels in the
Aulacomya
Mar Ecol Prog Ser 340: 163–171, 2007
capensis. In the
Gigartina zone, the small gastropods
Aetoniella nigra and
Tricolia neritina contributed themost to the 93.7% dissimilarity between years. Both spe-cies were abundant in 1980 (mean densities of 14 771 m–2[6107 SD] and 5729 m–2 [2758 SD], respectively), butwere absent in 2001. Within the
Aulacomya zone,
Aula-comya ater, which decreased dramatically between 1980and 2001, contributed most to the 96.8% dissimilarity be-tween the pre- and post-invasion communities. Similarly,community differences in the
Choromytilus zone wereexplained primarily by the replacement of
Choromytilusmeridionalis by
M. galloprovincialis.
The role of mussels as dominant species affecting
community structure of benthic intertidal habitats iswell established (Petraitis 1995, Tokeshi & Romero1995, Enderlein & Wahl 2004, Miyamoto & Noda 2004).
Mussels play a regulating role in community structurein 3 ways. Firstly, through their monopolisation of pri-mary rock space (Ruiz Sebastián et al. 2002, Steffani &Branch 2003b), secondly, by providing secondary habi-tat in the form of a 3-dimensional matrix (which pro-vides habitat for other species and may enhance theirrecruitment; Crooks & Khim 1999, Miyamoto & Noda2004), and thirdly, through their biological activities
Fig. 2. Mean densities (+ SD) of invertebrates recorded per
(e.g. by filter-feeding they remove large quantities of
square metre in each zone on Marcus Island in 1980 and 2001,coded by major taxonomic groups. Note the difference in the
particulate matter and plankton from near-shore
scales of the
y-axes in the 2 data sets (n.s.: no significant
waters, reducing larval settlement of some associated
difference in invertebrate density between years; *p < 0.05;
species; Tsuchiya & Nishihira 1986, Asmus & Asmus
1991). The structural complexity of mussel beds pro-vides a multitude of microhabitats that ameliorate fluc-
zone. In particular,
A. ater decreased from 18 529
tuating environmental conditions and offer protection
(5905 SD) to 514 (367 SD) individuals m–2.
from predation (Dumas & Witman 1993). Thus, it is not
Sample-based rarefaction curves reached a plateau
surprising that the intertidal fauna on Marcus Island
only in the
Porphyra zone in 2001 (Fig. 3). Chao 2 esti-
changed considerably following the arrival of the inva-
mates of total species richness showed a significant
sive mussel
Mytilus galloprovincialis.
decline in the
Porphyra zone in 2001, with increases in
As invasions by marine alien species are to a large
the
Ulva and
Granularis zones (based on the lack of
extent unpredictable, it is exceptionally difficult to
overlapping confidence intervals; Fig. 4). No signifi-
assess the impact of these species through replicated
cant changes in total species richness were detected in
experimental manipulations. As such, this study makes
the 3 zones lowest on the shore.
use of data collected at a single point in time in 1980
The communities in all 6 zones changed significantly
(prior to the invasion of
Mytilus galloprovincialis) in
between 1980 and 2001, even when the contribution
order to make comparisons with post-invasion commu-
made by
Mytilus galloprovincialis was excluded
nities. This pre-invasion data, however, has limitations
(ANOSIM, p < 0.01; Fig. 5). In the
Porphyra zone, 90% of
that govern the extent of the current comparison.
the average difference between these 2 groups was
Firstly, no data on the algal component of the intertidal
accounted for by a decrease in the abundance of 1 spe-
community were collected. Secondly, no measure of
cies, the isopod
Exosphaeroma varicolor. Over the same
biomass was made for any species. Thirdly, no assess-
period, the
Ulva and
Granularis zones, respectively, had
ment was made of open rock space, and, lastly, a small
average community dissimilarities of 86.4 and 99.8%.
number of samples were collected. In order to assess
In both zones, this difference was explained primarily
the adequacy of our sample size, rarefied species accu-
by increased densities of the nudibranch
Onchidella
mulation curves were constructed. Only in the
Por-
Robinson et al.: Changes in community structure associated with an exotic mussel
Fig. 3. Sample-based rarefaction species curves with 95% confidence intervals for all sampling zones in 1980 (s) and 2001 (d)
phyra zone in 2001 was an asymptote reached, indicat-
changes solely to the invasion of
M. galloprovincialis.
ing that the sampling effort was too low to fully charac-
Nonetheless, inter-annual changes of species richness
terise species composition. However, the Chao 2 inci-
and abundance within the benthic communities of
dence-based richness estimate is still considered an
Saldanha Bay (in which Marcus Island is located) are
appropriate measure of total diversity as it usually
known to be minimal (Jackson & McGibbon 1991), and
requires ca. 50% of species to be sampled (Colwell &
it is likely that a similar pattern applies to intertidal
Coddington 1994). As no long-term continuous moni-
toring has taken place on Marcus Island, it is not possi-
The
Mytilus galloprovincialis invasion affected the
ble to unequivocally ascribe the observed community
indigenous mussels
Aulacomya ater and
Choromytilus
Mar Ecol Prog Ser 340: 163–171, 2007
stocks and often occupies heavily silted and sandyareas among rocks (T. B. Robinson pers. obs.), bothhabitats rarely occupied by
M. galloprovincialis alongthe South African coast. Due to the presence of theserefuges, it is highly unlikely that
C. meridionalis willbe driven to local extinction by the appearance of
M. galloprovincialis.
The change in community structure in the
Porphyra
zone is unlikely to be a consequence of the musselinvasion, as
Mytilus galloprovincialis does not occurthis high on the shore. Crustacea and insect larvaedominated in both 1980 and 2001, and minor changesin abundance of these taxa probably result from sea-sonal variation in abundance of the dominant alga
Por-phyra capensis (Griffin et al. 1999).
Prior to the arrival of
Mytilus galloprovincialis, both
the
Ulva and
Granularis zones were patchy environ-ments, comprising mainly bare rock interspersed withpatches of algae and large limpets. These zones weretherefore spatially simple habitats in which physicalstress would have played an important role in deter-mining biological assemblages. However, followingthe mussel invasion, the patchy mosaic of bare rock,algae and limpets was transformed to a less patchy butstructurally more complex mussel matrix. Reducedpatchiness in the
Granularis zone is reflected in thereduction in sample variability from 1980 to 2001(Fig. 5). Thus, the physical stresses previously typicalof these zones were ameliorated, and the nature of thehabitat in these zones was dramatically altered. Thisaccounts for the massive increase in invertebrate den-sity, total species richness, as well as the changes in
Fig. 4. Chao 2 estimates (+ 95% confidence intervals) for all
community composition recorded in these zones.
sampling zones on Marcus Island in 1980 and 2001 (n.s.: no sig-nificant difference based on overlapping confidence intervals)
In the
Gigartina zone, the density of mussels
remained unaltered, despite changes in the speciescomposition (Fig. 1). However, unlike the indigenous
meridionalis in several ways. In the low-shore (
Aula-
mussels,
Mytilus galloprovincialis develops multi-lay-
comya zone), the density of
A. ater decreased by
ered beds (Hockey & Van Erkom Schurink 1992,
almost 2 orders of magnitude as this slow-growing
McQuaid & Phillips 2000). Consequently, the invasion
species was outcompeted by
M. galloprovincialis.
has resulted in an increase in structural complexity in
There was also a decrease in the overall density of
this zone. Despite this change, total species richness
mussels in this zone, as the small
A. ater has been
remained unaltered. This is in line with findings by
largely replaced by the larger
M. galloprovincialis. In
Hammond (2001) who recorded no difference in infau-
the high- to mid-shore, densities of
A. ater increased
nal species diversity between indigenous mussels and
dramatically as protection provided by
M. galloprovin-
M. galloprovincialis. The substantial decrease in the
cialis beds enabled this species to survive high on the
invertebrate density was due to extreme reductions in
shore, from where it was precluded previously by
the number of gastropods
Aetoniella nigra and
Tricolia
virtue of its intolerance to desiccation (Van Erkom
neritina, although it remains unclear whether these
Schurink & Griffiths 1990), although it was still numer-
decreases are a consequence of natural variation, or
ically far subordinate. The most striking impact of the
reflect changes induced by the arrival of
M. gallo-
M. galloprovincialis invasion was the total replace-
ment of
C. meridionalis in both the
Aulacomya and
Because the
Aulacomya zone was previously charac-
Choromytilus zones and, to a lesser extent in the
terised by the presence of mussel beds, the invasion of
Gigartina zone (Fig. 1). It should, however, be noted
Mytilus galloprovincialis is unlikely to have altered the
that
C. meridionalis still thrives in substantial subtidal
uniformity of the habitat in this zone to any great
Robinson et al.: Changes in community structure associated with an exotic mussel
Fig. 5. Non-metric multidimensional scaling of species abundance (fourth-root transformed) for all 6 sampling zones (a) to (f) in
1980 (s) and 2001 (d), excluding the contribution made by
Mytilus galloprovincialis
extent. However,
Aulacomya ater decreased consider-
be a consequence of its relatively slow growth rate
ably in density between 1980 and 2001 (from 18 529
(Hockey & Van Erkom Schurink 1992, Van Erkom
to 514 individuals m–2), while
M. galloprovincialis
Schurink & Griffiths 1993).
conversely increased. The switch from mono-layered
The
Choromytilus zone was originally characterised
beds of small mussels to multilayered beds of large
by substantial beds of this indigenous mussel. The ar-
mussels resulted in a significant reduction in the over-
rival of
Mytilus galloprovincialis, thus, did not replace
all density of mussels present in this zone. Van Erkom
the type of habitat present, but altered it from a single-
Schurink & Griffiths (1990) reported a density of
layered mussel bed, typical of
Choromytilus meridion-
10 000
A. ater m–2 in this zone at Marcus Island. Thus,
alis, to a multi-layered mussel matrix associated with
it would appear that
A. ater has decreased progres-
M. galloprovincialis (Griffiths et al
. 1992). As a result,
sively in abundance at Marcus Island since the arrival
no change was recorded in total species richness. The
of
M. galloprovincialis. The poor competitive ability of
fact that
M. galloprovincialis reached its highest densi-
A. ater (relative to
M. galloprovincialis) is thought to
ties in this lower-most zone is unexpected, as the den-
Mar Ecol Prog Ser 340: 163–171, 2007
sity of this species on South African shores is generally
cies (
Carcinus maenas (L.) &
Cancer irroratus Say). J Exp
accepted to be maximal in the mid-intertidal zone (Van
Mar Biol Ecol 169:89–101
Enderlein P, Wahl M (2004) Dominance of blue mussels ver-
Erkom Schurink & Griffiths 1990).
sus consumer-mediated enhancement of benthic diversity.
In conclusion, the biological impacts of the
Mytilus
J Sea Res 51:145–155
galloprovincialis invasion on intertidal invertebrate
Gosselin LA, Chia F (1995) Distribution and dispersal of early
communities were linked to 3 key elements and were
juvenile snails: effectiveness of intertidal microhabitats
not evenly spread across the shore. Firstly, physical
as refuges and food sources. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 128:213–223
stress in the mid- to high-shore zones was ameliorated
Gotelli N, Colwell RK (2001) Quantifying biodiversity: proce-
by the presence of
M. galloprovincialis. Secondly, habi-
dures and pitfalls in the measurement and comparison of
tat complexity was increased in zones where
M. gallo-
species richness. Ecol Lett 4:379–391
provincialis replaced bare rock or biota that provided a
Griffin NJ, Bolton JJ, Anderson RJ (1999) Distribution and pop-
ulation dynamics of
Porphyra (Bangailes, Rhodophyta) in
physically less complex secondary habitat. Thirdly,
the southern Western Cape, South Africa. J Appl Phycol 11:
patchiness was reduced, at least in the
Granularis zone.
Mytilus galloprovincialis is an aggressive invader,
Griffiths CL, Hockey PAR, Van Erkom Schurink C, Le Roux PJ
and, apart from exhibiting strong competitive interac-
(1992) Marine invasive aliens on South African shores:
tions with other species along the South African coast
implications for community structure and trophic function-ing. S Afr J Mar Sci 12:713–722
(Branch & Steffani 2004, Robinson et al
. 2005), it has
Grosholz ED (2002) Ecological and evolutionary conse-
also resulted in striking direct and indirect changes to
quences of coastal invasions. Trends Ecol Evol 17:22–27
the invertebrate community structure of rocky-shores.
Hammond W (2001) Factors affecting the infauna associated
with mussel beds. MSc thesis, University of Cape Town
Harris JM, Branch GM, Elliott BL, Currie B, Dye AH,
Acknowledgements. We thank the National Research Foun-
McQuaid CD, Tomalin BJ, Velasquez C (1998) Spatial and
dation, Marine and Coastal Management, the Mellon Foun-
temporal variability in recruitment of intertidal mussels
dation, the Marine Biology Research Institute (University of
around the coast of southern Africa. S Afr J Zool 33:1–11
Cape Town) and the Centre for Invasion Biology (University
Hockey PAR, Van Erkom Schurink C (1992) The invasive biol-
of Cape Town) for funding this project.
ogy of the mussel
Mytilus galloprovincialis on the south-ern African coast. Trans R Soc S Afr 48:123–139
Jackson LF, McGibbon S (1991) Human activities and factors
affecting the distribution of macrobenthic fauna in Sal-
Asmus RM, Asmus H (1991) Mussel beds: Limiting or promot-
danha Bay. S Afr J Aquat Sci 17:89–102
ing phytoplankton? J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 148:215–232
Le Pape O, Guerault D, Desaunay Y (2004) Effect of an inva-
Bachelet G, Simon-Bouhet B, Desclaux C, Gracia-Meunier P
sive mollusk, American slipper limpet
Crepidula fornicata,
and 6 others (2004) Invasion of the eastern Bay of Biscay
on habitat suitability for juvenile common sole
Solea solea
by the nassariid gastropod
Cyclope neritea: origin and
in the Bay of Biscay. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 277:107–115
effects on resident fauna. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 276:147–159
Mack RN, Simberloff D, Lonsdale WM, Evans H, Clout M,
Berman J, Carlton JT (1991) Marine invasion processes: inter-
Bazzaz FA (2000) Biotic invasions: causes, epidemiology,
actions between native and introduced marsh snails. J Exp
global consequences, and control. Ecol Appl 10:689–710
Mar Biol Ecol 150:267–281
McQuaid CD, Phillips TE (2000) Limited wind-driven disper-
Branch GM, Steffani CN (2004) Can we predict the effects of
sal of intertidal mussel larvae:
in situ evidence from the
alien species? A case-history of the invasion of South
plankton and the spread of the invasive species
Mytilus
Africa by
Mytilus galloprovincialis (Lamarck). J Exp Mar
galloprovincialis in South Africa. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 201:
Biol Ecol 300:189–215
Byers JE (2000) Competition between two estuarine snails:
Miyamoto Y, Noda T (2004) Effects of mussels on competi-
implications for invasions of exotic species. Ecology
tively inferior species: competitive exclusion to facilitation.
Mar Ecol Prog Ser 276:293–298
Byrnes J, Witman JD (2003) Impact assessment of an invasive
Occhipinti-Ambrogi A, Savini D (2003) Biological invasions
flatworm,
Convoluta convoluta, in the southern Gulf of
as a component of global change in stressed marine eco-
Maine. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 293:173–191
systems. Mar Pollut Bull 46:542–551
Chao A (1987) Estimating the population size for capture-
Petraitis PS (1995) The role of growth in maintaining spatial
recapture data with unequal catchability. Biometrics 43:
dominance by mussels (
Mytilus edulis). Ecology 76:
Colwell RK (2005) EstimateS: statistical estimation of spe-
Robinson TB, Griffiths CL, McQuaid CD, Rius M (2005)
cies richness and shared species from samples, Ver-
Marine alien species of South Africa — status and impacts.
sion 7.5. User's guide and application. Available at
Afr J Mar Sci 27:297–306
Ruiz GM, Fofonoff P, Hines AH, Grosholz ED (1999) Non-
Colwell RK, Coddington JA (1994) Estimating terrestrial bio-
indigenous species as stressors in estuarine and marine
diversity through extrapolation. Philos Trans R Soc Lond
communities: assessing invasion impacts and interactions.
Ser B 345:101–118
Limnol Oceanogr 44:950–972
Crooks JA, Khim HS (1999) Architectural vs biological effects
Ruiz Sebastián C, Steffani CN, Branch GM (2002) Homing
of a habitat-altering, exotic mussel,
Musculista senhousia.
and movement patterns of a South African limpet
Scutel-
J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 240:53–75
lastra argenvillei in an area invaded by an alien mussel
Dumas JV, Witman JD (1993) Predation by herring gulls
Mytilus galloprovincialis. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 243:111–122
(
Larus argentatus Coues) on two rocky intertidal crab spe-
Seed R, Suchanek TH (1992) Population and community ecol-
Robinson et al.: Changes in community structure associated with an exotic mussel
ogy of
Mytilus. In: Gosling E (ed) The mussel
Mytilus: ecol-
Mar Ecol Prog Ser 119:167–176
ogy, physiology, genetics and culture. Elsevier, New York
Tsuchiya M, Nishihira M (1986) Islands of
Mytilus edulis as a
Steffani CN, Branch GM (2003a) Spatial comparisons of pop-
habitat for small intertidal animals: effect of
Mytilus age
ulations of an indigenous limpet
Scutellastra argenvillei
structure on the species composition of the associated
and an alien mussel
Mytilus galloprovincialis along a gra-
fauna and community organization. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 31:
dient of wave energy. Afr J Mar Sci 25:195–212
Steffani CN, Branch GM (2003b) Temporal changes in an
Van Erkom Schurink C, Griffiths CL (1990) Marine mussels of
interaction between an indigenous limpet
Scutellastra
southern Africa—their distribution patterns, standing
argenvillei and an alien mussel
Mytilus galloprovincialis:
stocks, exploitation and culture. J Shellfish Res 9:75–85
effects of wave exposure. Afr J Mar Sci 25:213–229
Van Erkom Schurink C, Griffiths CL (1993) Factors affecting
Tokeshi M, Romero L (1995) Filling a gap: dynamics of space
relative rates of growth in four South African mussel spe-
occupancy on a mussel dominated subtropical rocky shore.
cies. Aquaculture 109:257–273
Editorial responsibility: Steven Morgan (Contributing Editor),
Submitted: May 3, 2006; Accepted: December 1, 2006
Bodega Bay, California, USA
Proofs received from author(s): May 28, 2007
Source: http://portal.nceas.ucsb.edu/working_group/valuation-of-coastal-habitats/meta-analysis/papers-for-meta-analysis-database/rocky-intertidal/robinson%20et%20al%2007.pdf/attachment_download/file
LASIX® (furosemide) Tablets 20, 40, and 80 mg WARNING LASIX® (furosemide) is a potent diuretic which, if given in excessive amounts, can lead to a profound diuresis with water and electrolyte depletion. Therefore, careful medical supervision is required and dose and dose schedule must be adjusted to the individual patient's needs. (See DOSAGE AND ADMINISTRATION.) DESCRIPTION LASIX® is a diuretic which is an anthranilic acid derivative. LASIX tablets for oral administration contain furosemide as the active ingredient and the following inactive ingredients: lactose monohydrate NF, magnesium stearate NF, starch NF, talc USP, and colloidal silicon dioxide NF. Chemically, it is 4-chloro-N-furfuryl-5-sulfamoylanthranilic acid. LASIX is available as white tablets for oral administration in dosage strengths of 20, 40 and 80 mg. Furosemide is a white to off-white odorless crystalline powder. It is practically insoluble in water, sparingly soluble in alcohol, freely soluble in dilute alkali solutions and insoluble in dilute acids. The CAS Registry Number is 54-31-9. The structural formula is as follows:
Jersey Alcohol Profile Health Intelligence Unit, November 2015 HIU INFORMATION READER Document purpose Report on Alcohol indicators for Jersey in 2015 Jersey Alcohol Profile 2015 Health Intelligence Unit Publication date 17 November 2015 States of Jersey Statistics Unit, States of Jersey Police, Social Circulation list Security, HSSD, Superintendent Registrar Biennial report on alcohol use and its consequences for Islanders in Jersey for 2015. Information on consumption and patterns of