4 Matching Annotations
  1. Last 7 days
    1. Previous studies have shown that the loss of a biogenic habitat in an ecosystem can be functionally replaced (or the loss of function is slowed to some extent) by another habitat-forming organism (Nagelkerken et al., 2016; Sunday et al., 2017).

      What would happen if another habitat-forming organism was introduces to the area? Would it benefit the overall ecology of the area or would it prove to be detrimental to the organisms that already exist in that area? Would it be ethical to perform this in order to prevent the replacement of a habitat?

    2. For example, under acidification, fleshy seaweeds outcompete calcareous species

      How would this potential change impact the organisms that rely on the calcareous species for food or protection?

    3. Molluscs actively chose to colonise T. hirsuta and actively avoided M. galloprovincialis, regardless of warming or pCO2 levels (Table 1).

      What caused molluscs to choose to colonize T. hisuta regardless of warming or pCO2 levels? What deterred them from colonizing M. galloprovincialis?

    4. The native mussel T. hirsuta grew more under warming (Fig. 1; ANOVA Species × Temperature F1,32 = 6.13, P < 0.05; Supplementary Table 2). In contrast, M. galloprovincialis grew the same at ambient and elevated temperatures (Fig. 1; Supplementary Table 2). There was no effect of elevated pCO2 on growth in either of the mussel species (ANOVA CO2 F1,32 = 0.53, P > 0.05; Supplementary Table 2).

      The authors present an interesting point here. The research suggests that temperature is the primary driver for the difference in growth between the native T. hisuta and the M. galloprovincialis. Based on these results, would these results be consistent in another shellfish species with the same tolerance for temperature and sensitivities to carbon dioxide?