Substrate Effects on the Bioeroding Demosponge Cliona orientalis. 1. Bioerosion Rates

By C. Schönberg. 2002

86 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Biotechnology, Ecology, Ocean Engineering

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/dbc32db87196635263a270064aed8b39cbfac028

How researchers see this paper

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

In Biotechnology

1. M. López-Victoria
2. J. Bell
3. E. Weil
4. B. Peterson
5. S. Zea
6. A. Duckworth

In Ecology

1. M. López-Victoria
2. J. Bell
3. E. Weil
4. B. Peterson
5. S. Zea
6. A. Duckworth

In Ocean Engineering

1. M. López-Victoria
2. J. Bell
3. B. Peterson
4. S. Zea
5. A. Duckworth

Citations in the corpus

• Competition for space between encrusting excavating Caribbean sponges and other coral reef organisms (2006, background): “Small scale factors such as variation in coral colony topography or presence of skeletal or organic barriers (Rützler 1975, Schönberg 2002, 2003), or environmental factors such as temperature (Rützler 2002), may slow sponge excavation rates, allowing corals to escape.”
• The functional roles of marine sponges (2008, background): “…on the factors that influence bioerosion rates including nutrient availability and input, food abundance, type of substratum, sponge physiological state and light (Rützler, 1975; Rose and Risk, 1985; Risk et al., 1995; Hill, 1996; Holmes, 1997, 2000; Schönberg, 2002b; Ward-Paige et al., 2005).”
• Effects of seawater temperature and pH on the boring rates of the sponge Cliona celata in scallop shells (2013, background): “These bioerosion rates fall within the range of other clionaids (Tables 4 in Reis and Ledo 2000; Schönberg 2002), though direct comparisons are problematic due to different experimental methods and environmental conditions.”