Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-c52kr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T10:45:13.548Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Relationships between macroinfaunal invertebrates and physicochemical factors in two sandy beaches of Patagonia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2009

María Martha (Pitu) Mendez*
Affiliation:
Grupo de Ecología en Ambientes Costeros, Centro Nacional Patagónico (CENPAT–CONICET), Boulevard Brown 2915 (U9120ACD) Puerto Madryn, Argentina
Evangelina Schwindt
Affiliation:
Grupo de Ecología en Ambientes Costeros, Centro Nacional Patagónico (CENPAT–CONICET), Boulevard Brown 2915 (U9120ACD) Puerto Madryn, Argentina
Alejandro Bortolus
Affiliation:
Grupo de Ecología en Ambientes Costeros, Centro Nacional Patagónico (CENPAT–CONICET), Boulevard Brown 2915 (U9120ACD) Puerto Madryn, Argentina
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: M.M. Mendez, Grupo de Ecología en Ambientes Costeros, Centro Nacional Patagónico (CENPAT–CONICET), Boulevard Brown 2915 (U9120ACD) Puerto Madryn, Argentina email: mendez@cenpat.edu.ar
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The interest in the knowledge of the ecology of soft-sediment communities is increasing due to the importance that these environments pose to ecologists and environmentalists. However, the ecology of Argentinean sandy beaches is almost unknown, in spite of being relatively common landscapes. In this work we describe and compare the macroinfaunal assemblages in the two largest sandy beaches within the Monte León National Park, the first marine-coastal park of Argentina. Macrobenthic samples were collected and environmental descriptions were performed by quantifying and comparing the organic matter content, grain size distribution and depth of the substratum available for macroinfaunal colonization. Results show that polychaetes and crustaceans are the dominant taxa and that the two beaches differ in the physicochemical characteristics, suggesting that a relation between the benthic fauna and physicochemical factors exists. Although they appeared similar at the landscape scale in preliminary visual surveys, the geomorphological differences between habitats are likely to drive strong differences in the structure of the macroinfaunal assemblages. The monitoring of visible landscape features is likely to undermine the efficiency of protection and managing strategies if not complemented by geomorphological and ecological surveys of less visible ecosystem variables.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2009
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Map of South America showing the location of Monte León National Park and the zones of the sites studied. Numbers indicate average depths in each zone. WCP, wave cut platform; S, sediment.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Average Shannon diversity index (H, +SD) in sandy beaches (A) of IML (black) and EA (white) and for different zones at IML beach (B) for different depths: 0 to 5 cm (white), 5 to 10 cm (grey) and 10 to 25 cm (black). Identical letters indicate no statistically significant differences.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Average Shannon diversity index (H, +SD, A) and average density of the polychaete Abarenicola assimilis (+SD, B) for different depths in the deep zone at EA beach in autumn (black) and spring (white). Average percentage OMC (+SD, C) for IML in autumn (black), EA in autumn (vertical lines), IML in spring (white) and EA in spring (horizontal lines). Average density of the polychaete Spiophanes bombyx (+SD, D) and average density of the amphipod Phoxocephalopsis gallardoi (+SD, E) for different depths: 0 to 5 cm (white), 5 to 10 cm (grey) and 10 to 25 cm (black) at IML beach. Identical letters indicate no statistically significant differences.

Figure 3

Table 1. Taxonomic list of the organisms observed. EA, El Arco beach; IML, Isla Monte León beach; n.i., not indentified. Numbers indicate average density (ind · m−3) for each taxa.

Figure 4

Table 2. Results of the t-tests evaluating differences in the OMC between beaches at different depths for the two seasons.

Figure 5

Fig. 4. Percentages of the different grain size fractions (A) (CS, coarse sand; MS, medium sand, FS, fine sand; VFS, very fine sand; S+C, silt+clay) for IML in autumn (black), EA in autumn (vertical lines), IML in spring (white) and EA in spring (horizontal lines). Average depth of the sediment column (+SD, B) for autumn (black) and spring (white) in IML and EA. Identical letters indicate no statistically significant differences.