The response of macrofauna communities and shorebirds to macrophyte wrack subsidies on exposed sandy beaches of southern California

By J. Dugan, D. Hubbard, M. D. Mccrary, M. Pierson. 2003

524 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Oceanography

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/895c76190b7f0e4784bc2670353276a04e09fce3

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

1. M. Lastra
2. I. Rodil
3. Jesús López
4. S. Hawkins
5. D. Hubbard
6. J. Dugan
7. C. Simenstad
8. Jonathan B. Cohen

In Oceanography

1. M. Lastra
2. Jesús López
3. I. Rodil
4. Erasmo C. Macaya
5. Louise B. Firth
6. S. Hawkins
7. R. D. L. Huz
8. W. Arntz

Citations in the corpus

• Nesting Density and Reproductive Success of Piping Plovers in Response to Storm- and Human-Created Habitat Changes (2009, background): “Furthermore, on many recreational and residential beaches, wrack is removed by mechanical raking, and off-road vehicle use also has been demonstrated to destroy the wrack line (Goldin 1993), which can reduce shorebird foraging opportunities (Dugan et al. 2003).”
• Effects of ocean sprawl on ecological connectivity: impacts and solutions (2017, background): “Wrack is an important source of carbon, nutrients and shelter for in-vertebratecommunities of intertidaland supratidalshorelines(Grif fi ths and Stenton-Dozey, 1981; Polis and Hurd, 1996; Dugan et al., 2003).”
• Exploiting beach filling as an unaffordable experiment: Benthic intertidal impacts propagating upwards to shorebirds (2006, background): “The few instances in which managerial decisions, such as the opening and closing of fisheries (Defeo, 1998; Brazeiro and Defeo, 1999) or the removal of wrack from a beach (Dugan et al., 2003), have been utilized as experiments have greatly increased our understanding of processes that organize sandy”
• Processing of allochthonous macrophyte subsidies by sandy beach consumers: estimates of feeding rates and impacts on food resources (2008, background): “In turn, spatial and temporal variability in wrack composition and biomass may aVect composition, abundance and demographic rates of amphipods and other consumers within the beach community (Stenton-Dozey and GriYths 1983; Dugan et al. 2003).”
• Partitioning of primary production among giant kelp (Macrocystis pyrifera), understory macroalgae, and phytoplankton on a temperate reef (2011, background): “Much Macrocystis biomass is transported to beaches (Dugan et al. 2003) or bathyal environments (Harrold et al.”
• Ecology of freshwater shore zones (2010, background): “In addition to any effects resulting from sediment compaction from machines used to remove wrack, wrack removal can reduce organic matter in shoreline soils and sediments (Dugan et al. 2003; Malm et al. 2004), reduce nutrient concentrations offshore (Malm et al.”
• Shorebird use of an exposed sandy beach in southern California (2003, background): “That community includes wrack-associated and suspensionfeeding species, all of which may serve as prey for shorebirds (Dugan et al., 2003).”
• Effects of Shoreline Modifications on Supratidal Macroinvertebrate Fauna on Puget Sound, Washington Beaches (2010, background): “The negative impact of shoreline modifications on the deposition of organic debris, especially wrack, is noteworthy because it is habitat for much of the supratidal fauna that contributes to the nearshore detritus-based food web (Dugan et al. 2003; Romanuk and Levings 2003a).”
• Multiple scavengers respond rapidly to pulsed carrion resources at the land–ocean interface (2013, background): “Yuen, 2000) Isopods, Polychaetes, Beetles Various drift carrion California, USA (Dugan et al., 2003)”
• Biological impacts of oil pollution and cleaning in the intertidal zone of exposed sandy beaches: Preliminary study of the “Prestige” oil spill (2005, background): “…between the macrofauna and the physical variables analysed, especially sediment grain size, its effect on the intertidal fauna has been shown by other authors (Jaramillo andMcLachlan, 1993; McLachlan et al., 1993; Brazeiro, 2001), but not on the supratidal macrofauna (Dugan et al., 2003).”
• Differential effects of native and invasive algal wrack on macrofaunal assemblages inhabiting exposed sandy beaches (2008, methodology): “Many sandy beaches worldwide receive large amounts of drift seaweed from offshore algal beds and closer rocky intertidal shores (Inglis, 1989; Rossi and Underwood, 2002; Dugan et al., 2003).”
• Annual cycle of wrack supply to sandy beaches: effect of the physical environment (2011, methodology): “Coverage was measured using the line intercept method (Dugan et al. 2003).”
• Production and fate of kelp detritus (2012, unknown): “Deposits of kelp detritus on beaches also are readily colonized by meio- and macrofauna (Hayes 1974, Koop et al. 1982, Griffiths et al. 1983, McLachlan 1985, Inglis 1989, Dugan et al. 2003).”
• The humboldt current system of northern and central chile : Oceanographic processes, ecological interactions and socioeconomic feedback (2007, background): “The transfer of large amounts of algal fragments from subtidal kelp forests toward the shore has been considered as a principal food source, structuring and maintaining macrofauna communities on sandy beaches (Colombini et al. 2000, Dugan et al. 2003).”