Search for: All records

The relative importance of evolutionary history and ecology for traits that drive ecosystem processes is poorly understood. Consumers are essential drivers of nutrient cycling on coral reefs, and thus ecosystem productivity. We use nine consumer “chemical traits” associated with nutrient cycling, collected from 1,572 individual coral reef fishes (178 species spanning 41 families) in two biogeographic regions, the Caribbean and Polynesia, to quantify the relative importance of phylogenetic history and ecological context as drivers of chemical trait variation on coral reefs. We find: (1) phylogenetic relatedness is the best predictor of all chemical traits, substantially outweighing the importance of ecological factors thought to be key drivers of these traits, (2) phylogenetic conservatism in chemical traits is greater in the Caribbean than Polynesia, where our data suggests that ecological forces have a greater influence on chemical trait variation, and (3) differences in chemical traits between regions can be explained by differences in nutrient limitation associated with the geologic context of our study locations. Our study provides multiple lines of evidence that phylogeny is a critical determinant of contemporary nutrient dynamics on coral reefs. More broadly our findings highlight the utility of evolutionary history to improve prediction in ecosystem ecology.

Consumers mediate nutrient cycling through excretion and egestion across most ecosystems. In nutrient‐poor tropical waters such as coral reefs, nutrient cycling is critical for maintaining productivity. While the cycling of fish‐derived inorganic nutrients via excretion has been extensively investigated, the role of egestion for nutrient cycling has remained poorly explored. We sampled the fecal contents of 570 individual fishes across 40 species, representing six dominant trophic guilds of coral reef fishes in Moorea, French Polynesia. We measured fecal macro‐ (proteins, carbohydrates, lipids) and micro‐ (calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, zinc) nutrients and compared the fecal nutrient quantity and quality across trophic guilds, taxa, and body size. Macro‐ and micronutrient concentrations in fish feces varied markedly across species. Genera and trophic guild best predicted fecal nutrient concentrations. In addition, nutrient composition in feces was unique among species within both trophic guilds (herbivores and corallivores) and genera (AcanthurusandChaetodon). Particularly, certain coral reef fishes (e.g.,Thalassoma hardwicke,Chromis xanthura,Chaetodon pelewensisandAcanthurus pyroferus) harbored relatively high concentrations of micronutrients (e.g., Mn, Mg, Zn and Fe, respectively) that are known to contribute to ocean productivity and positively impact coral physiological performances. Given the nutrient‐rich profiles across reef fish feces, conserving holistic reef fish communities ensures the availability of nutritional pools on coral reefs. We therefore suggest that better integration of consumer egestion dynamics into food web models and ecosystem‐scale processes will facilitate an improved understanding of coral reef functioning.

Humans have long sought to restore species but little attention has been directed at how to best select a subset of foundation species for maintaining rich assemblages that support ecosystems, like coral reefs and rainforests, which are increasingly threatened by environmental change.

DNA metabarcoding is an increasingly popular technique to investigate biodiversity; however, many methodological unknowns remain, especially concerning the biases resulting from marker choice. Regions of the cytochromecoxidase subunit I (COI) and 18S rDNA (18S) genes are commonly employed “universal” markers for eukaryotes, but the extent of taxonomic biases introduced by these markers and how such biases may impact metabarcoding performance is not well quantified. Here, focusing on macroeukaryotes, we use standardized sampling from autonomous reef monitoring structures (ARMS) deployed in the world's most biodiverse marine ecosystem, the Coral Triangle, to compare the performance of COI and 18S markers. We then compared metabarcoding data to image‐based annotations of ARMS plates. Although both markers provided similar estimates of taxonomic richness and total sequence reads, marker choice skewed estimates of eukaryotic diversity. The COI marker recovered relative abundances of the dominant sessile phyla consistent with image annotations. Both COI and the image annotations provided higher relative abundance estimates of Bryozoa and Porifera and lower estimates of Chordata as compared to 18S, but 18S recovered 25% more phyla than COI. Thus, while COI more reliably reflects the occurrence of dominant sessile phyla, 18S provides a more holistic representation of overall taxonomic diversity. Ideal marker choice is, therefore, contingent on study system and research question, especially in relation to desired taxonomic resolution, and a multimarker approach provides the greatest application across a broad range of research objectives. As metabarcoding becomes an essential tool to monitor biodiversity in our changing world, it is critical to evaluate biases associated with marker choice.