Post on 01-Jun-2018
8/9/2019 1999 Lindeman & Snyder. NHB Fishes and Dredging
1/18
508
Abstr act
. - -
Fi s h assembl ages
of
near -
shore
hardbottom
habi tats of southeast
Fl or i da
were
quant i f i ed at t hr ee si t es
from
Apri l 1994 t o
J une
1996
Random
2
x
15 mransects wer e visual l y censured
w t hi n
two
repl i cate
areas at each s i t e
The
hardbottom
at
one
s i t e was buri ed
by
a
dredge
proj ect t o wden a
beach
one
year i nt o t he study At o t a l of 394
transects were sampled
Ei ght y - s i x
taxa 77 i dent i f i ed t o
speci es)
f r o m
36
f a m l i es
were
censured
Grunts
H a e - m u l i d a e w t h e
m o s t
i v r s f a m i l y
11
speci es) ,
f ol l owed
by t he
wrasses
Labri dae) and
parr otf i shes Scari dae)
w th
seven and s i x speci es,
respecti vely
The
most
abundant
speci es
were
s a i l -
ors choi ce aemul on
parr a) , s i l v e r
porgy
pl odus argent eus) , and
cocoa
damsel f -
i sh tegastes
vari abi l i s)
w th
mean
abundances i ndi v i d ual s / t r a ns ect ) of
4
. 5
3
8
and
3 7
respecti vely Earl y
l i f e
st ages new y sett l ed,
ear l y j uv eni l e,
and
j uveni l e) represented over
80
of
t he i ndi v i dual s at
al l
sit es
Newy
sett l ed st ages
of over 20 speci es were
observed i n associ ati on
w th hard-
bott omreef structure Outsi de
o f l a -
goons, nearshore
hardbottomareas
are
t he
pri mary
natural
structures
i n
shal-
l ow
waters of
mainland Fl ori da s east
coast and
wereesti mated t o
have nurs-
er y val ue f or 34 speci es of f i shes
Af ter
one year,
buri al of appr oxi matel y
f i v e
ha
of hardbottomhabi t at at
one
s i t e
l owered t henumbers of
i ndi vi dual s
and
speci es by
over 30x
and
l Ox,
respec-
t i v e l y Due t o
t hei r ear l y
ont ogeneti c
st age, many of t hes e speci es may not
be
adapted f or
hi gh
mobi l i ty
i n
r e-
sponse t o habi tat buri al
Dredgi ng
ef -
f e c t s may
be
ampl i f i ed
by
buri al pr ior
t o andduri ng
spri ng
andsummer peri -
ods
of
peak
l arval r ecrui t ment
Manuscri pt
accept ed
28 August
1998
Fi s h
Bul l
97
: 508- 525 1999)
Nearshorehardbottom
i shes of
southeast Fl ori da andef fects of
habi tat
buri al caused by dredgi ng
Kenyon
C
Lindemn
Di visi on of Mari ne Bi ol ogy and F i s h e r i e s
R os e n s t i e l
School of Mari ne and At mospheri c S c i e n c e
Un i v e r s i t y of M am
4600
Ri ckenbacker
Cswy
M am, F l o r i d a 33149
F -mai l address f or K Li ndeman kl i ndeman@smas. mam.edu
Davi d
B
Snyder
Cont i nental
Shel f
A s s oc i a t e s I nc
759
Par kway St
J u p i t e r
F l o r i d a 33477
The sout heast
coast
of mai nland
Fl or i da i s w t hi n
a
bi ogeogr aphi c
t r ans i t i on
zone of hi gh
mari ne
bi odi versi ty Bri ggs, 1974
;
Gi l mor e,
1995)
Thi s r egi on i s al so under go-
i ng some
of
t he most
rapi d
human
popul at i on growth
of
any area
of
t he
Uni t ed States
Cul l i ton et al
1990)
Due t o t he economc and recre-
ati onal val ue of beaches, subst an-
t i a l
mari ne dredgi ng proj ects up
t o
. 5
x 10 5
m
of f i l l / pr oj ect ) ar e
commony
used
t o
wden
beaches
that ar e subj ect
t o
erosi on
i n
t he
area
COE, 1996) Nearshore
hardbottomhabi t at s ar e t he
p r i -
mary
natural reef
structures
of t hi s
r egi on at
dept hs of
0- 4
m
nd are
of ten
bur i ed
or i ndi rect l y
af f ectedby
these proj ects To
dat e,
no quant i -
t at i v e
st udi es of t he
f i s h
f auna
of
these
habi t at s or t he e f f e c t s
of beach
dredge- and- f i l l proj ects on near-
shore f i shes ar e
avai l abl e
NRC
1995)
Nearshore
hardbottom
habi t at s
of
thi s
area ar e
deri ved
from
accre-
t i onary
r i dges
of
coqui na
mol l usks,
sand,
andshel l
marl whi ch
l i t h i f i e d
paral l el
t o
anci ent
shorel i nes
dur-
i ng Pl ei stocene i ntergl aci al
per i ods
uane and Mei sburger, 1969
Hof f mei st er,
1974) The habi t at
compl exi t y
of
these
l i mestone
struc-
tures
has been expandedbycol oni es
of tube- bui l di ng
pol ychaete
worms
Ki r t l ey and Tanner 1968) and
other i nvert ebrate and macr oal gal
speci es
Gol dber g,
1973
Nel son,
1989 Nelson
and Demetri ades,
1992)
I n sout heast
Fl ori da,
most
nearshore hardbottom
structures
are w t hi n 200
mf
t he shore These
habi t at s are
of t en cent r al l y l ocat ed
between
md shel f reef s t o
t he
east
and
est uar i ne
habi t at s
w t hi n
i n l e t s
t o
t he west Theref ore,
theymay
serve
as
set t l ement
habi t at s
f or
i mm gr at i ng l arvae
or
as
i nt erme-
di ate
nursery
habi t at s f or j uveni l es
em grati ng
out of i nl ets Vare, 1991
Li ndeman, 1997a)
Nonet hel ess,
most
admni s trat i ve r evi ews
have
concl uded t hat
t he f i s h habi t at
val ue of
nearshore
hardbottomand
t he
ef f ect s of dr edge- based
beach
restorati on proj ects ar e mnimal
e g
ACOE,
1996)
Thi s study
quanti f i es nearshore
hardbottom i s h ass embl ages on t he
sout heast
coast of
mai nl and
Fl ori da
over a27-month peri od
The
e f f e c t s
of
dredge- f i l l
pl acement were
al so
examned because t he hardbottom
habi t at
at
one s i t e
was buri ed on
account of
a
beach
r e st o r at i on
proj ect
12 months
i n t o t he study
Threepri mary
obj ecti ves
were
ex-
amned
F i r s t spati al and
t empor al
att r i butes
of f i sh
assembl ages
at
8/9/2019 1999 Lindeman & Snyder. NHB Fishes and Dredging
2/18
Li ndeman nd
Snyder
Nearshorehardbottom i shes of southeast Fl or i da
Fi gure
CARLIN
PARK
Pri mary
study s i tes f or f i s h
surveys
of
nearshorehardbottomhab tats at J upi ter , Fl ori da 26°56 N
80°04 4 W
three
undi st ur bed hardbottoms i t e s were
character-
i zed
Second,
abundances
of
di f f erent l i f e st ages were
comared
to
assess the potenti al nursery val ue
of
nearshore hardbottomhabi t at Thi r d, effects
of
dredge bur i al onnumers
of
i ndi vi dual s and
speci es
were comaredbetween
a
s i t e
subj ected
to
bur i al and
a control s i t e
Methods
Study areas
Fi sh
abundances werequanti tati vel y surveyed on
two nearshore hardbottomsi tes approxi matel y 2
km
north
( Coral Cove) and2 kmout h (Car l i n Park) of
J upi t er
I n l e t ,
Fl ori da
( 26°56 N, 80°04 W fromApri l
509
1994
through
J une
1996 ( F i g
Saml i ng
at both
si tes
extended approxi matel y
100
m
ffshore
to
a
depth
of 4m
Nearshorehardbottomf
s im la r
depth
and
structure at OceanRi dge, i mmedi atel y south
of
t he South
LakeWorth
I nl et
( 26°31 N,
80°02 W
was
al so surveyed f or comparat i ve
pur poses dur i ng the
summer
of
1995
Weathered
l i mestone out cr oppi ngs
were
commn
between
depths
of
0and
4 mt
a l l
si tes
These
struc-
tures
havea
vari ety
of
names e . g Anast asi a
f orma-
t i on
out cr oppi ngs, coqui na
r e e f s , worme e f s but are
referred
to by thei r mst commnname
nearshore
hardbott om
i n
t he
present
st udy I n som
areas,
t he
hardbottom
extended
. 75m
above t he bottom
and
was
hi ghl y convol ut ed
Shoreward port i ons of
t he hardbottomwereexposed at l ow t i de Epi bi ot a
consi st ed
of
a vari ety
of
i nver t ebrat es and
al gae
The
8/9/2019 1999 Lindeman & Snyder. NHB Fishes and Dredging
3/18
8/9/2019 1999 Lindeman & Snyder. NHB Fishes and Dredging
4/18
Li ndemanandSnyder
Nearshore
hardbottom i sh es of southeast F l o r i da
sampl es W t hi n each
s ampl e,
count s
f or
i ndi vi dual
taxa
wereaver aged over al l transects
t o pr ovi de val -
ues f or
t he matr i x These val ues
were
l og- tr ans-
f ormed
[ l og10 n+1) ] to pre vent
abundant taxa from
domnati ng t he
or di nat i on
or cl as s i f i cat i on r e s ul t s
The
t r ansf o r me d mat r i x
was
anal yzed
by
corre-
spondence
anal ysi s
CA) , a method that empl oys a
two-way
wei ght ed aver agi ng al gor i t h m t o pr oduce
s i mul t aneous
or d i nat i on of
s i t es
and t axa
Gauch,
1982 ; J ongman et a l
1995)
These anal yses
were
performed w t h t he
program
CANOCO t er Br aak,
1988) From he
same l og- t r ansf ormed
data matr i x,
normal sampl es ) and i nve rs e t axa)
resemblance
matr i ces were gener ated by usi ng t he Br ay- Cur t i s
d i s s i m l a r i t y i nd ex Br ay and Curt i s , 1957)
Normal
and i nve rs e
r es embl ance
matr i ces
were cl us t e r e d
separ at el y
by t he unwei ghted pai r ed- gr oup
method
of aver agi ng
PGMA) Sneat h
and
Sokal ,
1973)
Al l
d i s s i m l a r i t y
and
cl ust er
anal yses
were computed
w t h
NTSYS-pc
sof t war e Rohl f ,
1997)
To address
t h e s e cond
pr oj ect obj ecti ve, numbers
of
l i f e stages per transect were compared
w t h i n each
s i t e Datawere
anal yzed
by usi nga paramet r i c one-
wayANOVA
when var i ances were
homogeneous
Bart l ett s
t e s t
Aposter i or s
compar i s ons
of
d i f f e r -
ences among
means empl oyed Tukey s HSDtest
Vari ances
of
numbers
of l i f e stages
of
gr unt s
per
transect
at
t he
twoJ upi t e r s i t es
remai ned heteroge-
neous af ter
l o g
10 n+1 t r ansf ormat i on and a
Kr uskal l -
Wal l i s
nonparamet r i c, s i ngl e cl as s i f i cat i onANOVA
was
used Pr o babi l i t y
was
cal cul at ed
usi ng t he
x2
appr oxi mat i on
Two-sampl e
t - t e s t s
f or
unequal
var i -
ances
were
used t o
compare
numbers
of
i ndi vi dual s
at
hardbottom
and natur al sand
s i t e s
Onl y hard-
bottoms ampl es f r o mmonthswhennatur al sand s i t e s
weresampl ed
March
and
Apr i l
1995)
wereused
f or
t h e s e tes ts I n
a l l
stat i st i cal
t e s t s , di f f e r e nce s were
consi dered
si gni f i cant
at P
8/9/2019 1999 Lindeman & Snyder. NHB Fishes and Dredging
5/18
512
Meannumber of
i ndi v i d ua l s / l t r a ns ec t
and
f re q ue nc y
of oc c urre nc e
f or themost
abundant t h r e e f a m l i e s , genera,
and
spec i es at al l
ne a rs h ore
hardbottom
s i t e s
On y p re d re d gi ng d a ta were
used
f or Ca r l i n
Park
s i t e CC
Cor al Cove
148 t r a ns e c t s ) ; CP Ca r l i n
Park
112 t r a n s e c t s ) ; OROcean
R dge
36
t ransec ts)
;
GM
grandmean
Tabl e
1
The
t h r ee
mst abundant
speci es
weret he
s ai l or s
choi ce aemul on
p a r r a ) ,
s i l ver
porgy D pl od us
argenteus), and
cocoa
dams el f i s h St egast es var i abl es)
w t h
means
of 4
. 5
3
. 8
and 3
7
i ndi v i dua l s / t r a ns ec t
over
a l l s i t es
Tabl e 1 Themst
abundant
speci es
at Cora Cove,
s ai l or s
choi ce,
bl ack margate
nsot remus
s u r i n ame ns i s ) ,
and hai ry blenny
abri somus
nuc hi pi nn i s ) , r ep r esent ed 32 of
a l l
i ndi vi dual s Sevenof t he 15 mst abundant
speci es
at Cor al Covewere grunts
At Car l i n
Par k, s i l ver
por gy, cocoa
damsel f i sh, and s ai l or s
choi ce
repre-
s ented 41 of
a l l i ndi vi dual s
Ei ght of t he 16
most
abundant
s pec i es
weregr unt s At
OceanRi dge, t he
mst abundant speci es
were
s i l ver por gy, sergeant
maj or
Abu de f du f s axat i l i s ) , ands ai l or s choi ce Grunt
speci es ranked f i r s t i n f r equency of oc c ur r enc e
per
t r ans ect at Cor al Cove
and
Ocean
Ri dge, and second
at
Car l i n Park
Tabl e
1
Damsel f i sh
speci es ranked
f i r s t i n frequency at Car l i n Parkand
second
at t he
ot her
s i t e s Themost f r equent l y
oc c ur r i n g speci es
over al l
were cocoa damsel f i sh,
ha i r y b l enny
abri somus
nuchi pi nnus ) , and s ai l or s
c hoi c e Tabl e
1
Norma c l us t e r
a na l ys i s
of
saml es
from
al l s i t e s
r e s ol v ed
t h r ee
gr oups t hat
br oa dl y
r e f l ec t ed t empo-
r al
p a t t e r n s Fi g 3
No di s t i nc t
spat i a l gr oupi ngs
emerged
i n
t he
norma
a na l ys i s
Group 1
cons i s t ed
Fi shery Bu l l et i n
97 3) , 1999
of 21
sampl es
ei ght f r o m
Car l i n Par k, t en from
Cor al
Cove,
and t h r ee
fromOceanRi dge) most l y t a ken i n
s pr i ng
and
summer
mnths
Group
2
cons i s t ed
of 8
sampl es
four
e ac h f r om
Car l i n
Park and
Cor a l Cove)
t a ken
i n
mdand
l a t e
summer
Group3
i n cl ude d t he
on l y
w nt e r
sampl es
Feb r ua r y
1995 and
1996)
t a ken
dur i ng t he
pr oj ect
I n v e r s e
c l us t e r a na l ys i s r e ve al e d sev en gr oups
of
t a x a
Fi g 4
Group A c on t a i n ed 26 common
t a x a
i nc l udi ng t he mst f r e que nt l y oc c ur r i n g and
abun-
dant
s pec i es
fromv i s u al sur veys
suc h
as s ai l or s
choi ce,
cocoa
damsel f i sh, ha i r y bl enny,
and s i l ver
porgy Tabl e
1 Thi s
groupc ha ra c te r i zed t he
spr i ng-
summer
group
of
sampl es
d ef i n ed
by normal gr oup
The
remaini ng
s i x
groups cons i s t ed
of
t a xa t hat
were t e mpor a l l y var i abl e
i n t he i r
abundance
and
oc c ur r enc e i n
t he sampl es
Group
B
was
ch ar act er -
i z ed by
s pec i es
t hat o ccurred
at
l ower abundances
Groups
FandGwere
r ep r esent ed
by
s i ngl e
ta xa :
Apogon
macul atusand Ar chosar gus
probat ocephal us,
r e s pe ct i v el y
The
l at t e r
s pec i es
was i mport ant
i n
de-
f i n i n g
normal gr oup
3
Fi g 3
Or d i n at i on of sampl es pr o j ect ed onCA axes 1
and
2
produceda
p a t t e r n t hat
ge ne r a l l y
agr e ed w t h t he
normal
c l us t e r a na l ys i s Fi g 5A) Thee i genva l ue
f or
CA a xi s
was 0. 218 and account ed f or 16. 9
of
t he
Mean
number / t r a ns ec t
r equency
occurrence
CC CP
OR GM CP OR GM
Faml y
Ha emu l i d a e
15 5
17 4 9 4 15 5 89
90
92
90
Pomacentri dae
5 9
7
9 5 7
6
6 81
95
86 87
Spa r i d a e
5 9
3 7
3
9
37
44
38
Labri dae 3 2
3
0
65
64
Genus
Haemul on
9 8 15 3
6
2 11
75 80 42
75
Stegastes
3 4 6 1
4 3
72
89
73
Ani sot r emus 5 7
3
2 4 1
74
39
69
Dpl odus
5 8
3
7 3 8
35
36 65
Spec i es
Haemul on
p a r r a
4 4 5 0
3
4 4 5
62
64 33 59
Dpl odus
argent eus
5 8
3 7 3 8
35 36 36
Stegast es
var i abl es
5 4
3 7
86
71
Labr i somus
nuc hi pi nni s
3 1
2 7
73 69
Abudefduf s a x a t i l i s
3 1 2 3
17 31
Ani sot r emus sur i namensi s
3 5 2 2
36 43
8/9/2019 1999 Lindeman & Snyder. NHB Fishes and Dredging
6/18
Li ndeman
and Snyder Near shor e
hardbottom
f i s h e s
o f s o u t h e a s t F l o r i d a 51 3
var i at i o n
i n
t he dat a s e t , whereas t he ei genval ue
f or
axi s
2
was 0. 124 and
account ed
f o r
9
. 7
of
t he
var i at i o n
i n t he dat a set Sampl es fromAugust and
September at Cor al Cove
and
Car l i n Park separ at ed
f r o m
al l
ot her
sampl es
al ong CA axi s 1
I n gener al ,
sampl es were
not
spr ead
w del y
al ong
axi s
2
;
however , twos ampl es,
May
1995 at OceanRi dgeand
February
1995
at
Car l i n Par k,
di d
separ at e
f r o m t he
ot her s i t e s
The o rdi nat i o n of taxa on CA axes and 2 showed
how t he
taxa were
di s t r i but ed
i n r e l a t i o n
t o t he
hardbottomsamples
al ong
these
same
axes
Fi g
5B)
The
mos t common speci es e g
Tabl e 1
cl ust er ed near
t he
or i gi n of
t he or di nat i on Taxa
w t h hi gh
scores
al ong
axi s
i ncl uded
i nf r equent l y
occur r i ng spe-
c i e s
such
as
Hal i choeres
poeyi ,
Haemul on aur o l i n-
eatum
Mul l oi di chthys mart i ni cus, and Caranxruber
Lowscores on axi s 1 were Echi dna
catenat a,
Acanthurus
chi rurgus,
Chaetodon
ocel l atus,
and
Sci aeni dae
sp Speci es
w t h
hi gh
scores
on
axi s 2
were
Spari soma
aurofrenatum
Chaetodon ocel l atus, and
Spari soma
v i r i d e
Theseweremost abundant
at
Ocean
Ri dge
i n
May
1995 and
were
r esponsi bl e
f or
t he sepa-
r at i on of t hi s
sampl e
f r o m
al l others al ong axi s
2
I n compar i s ons
of
hardbottom
and nat ur al
sand,
20 t ransects over
nat ur al
sand pl ai ns r ecor ded
onl y
f our taxa
Thecl upei d, Harengul aj aguana,
was
most
abundant
18
j uveni l es
i n
two school s t o t al
An uni -
dent i f i ed
Euci nost omus
s p ec i e s ,
Gerres
ci ner eus,
and
Caranx barthol omaei were
al so
r ecor ded
f o u r ,
one,
andone
i ndi vi dual s, r especti vel y)
Hardbottom
habi -
tats typi cal l y had
over
t h i r t y t i mes
t he
i ndi vi dual s
per
t r ansect
as
nat ur al
sand
habi t at s
Two-sampl e
t - t e s t s
compari ng
hardbottomwth sand
habi t at s
rej ect ed
t he
hypot hes i s
of no di f f er ences
i n
mean
number s of
i ndi vi dual s per t r ansect P
8/9/2019 1999 Lindeman & Snyder. NHB Fishes and Dredging
7/18
51
Fi shery
Bu l l e t i n 97 3 , 1999
Figure4
C usteri ng
of f i s h taxaco-occurrenceat threenearshore
hardbottom
s i t e s
by
UP M
nal ysi s
of an
i nverse
Bray-Curti s
di ssi mlarity
mtri x
Numeric
codes
used
i n correspondence
anal ysi s
are
next
toeach
name NS
NewySett l ed
Dashed
l i nes
deli neate
groups
A G
and
Abudefduf
ranked w t hi n t he t en
most
abun-
dant
speci es
from
a l l
three s i t es
Tabl e
Rel at i ve
abundances
of
t he l i f e
st ages
of a l l grunts censused
at t he J upi t er s i t es ar e shown i n F i gure
7
Ear l y j u-
veni l e st ages of t he mst
abundant
speci es,
sai l or s
choi ce,
were
s igni f i cant l y mre
abundant
t han any
ot her l i f e
st age
at
each
of
t he
three
s i t e s
Kr uskal -
Wal l i s
ANOVA P
001, and
a post er i o r i pai rw se
compar i sons
Adul t
sai l ors
choi ce
were
s igni f i cant l y
l ower
i n
abundance
thanj uveni l e s t ages Kr uskal -
Wal l i s
ANOVA P
8/9/2019 1999 Lindeman & Snyder. NHB Fishes and Dredging
8/18
Li ndeman
and
Snyder
: Nearshore hardbottom
i shes
of
southeast F lor ida
Mean number
of i ndiv i dual s/ tr ansect
by l i f e
st age f or the ten
most
abundant
t axa at each of
t hree sit es
Newy Sett l ed ;
EJ
:
Earl y J uveni l e f or haemul i ds onl y
J
:
J uveni l es A Adul t s
Only predredgi ng
data
were used
f or Car l i n
Park
s i t e n
a
= not
avai l abl e
thi rd i n overal l abundance amonggrunt s and
were
represent ed by
al l
l i f e st ages Fi g 7 Tom at e, Hae
mul on
aurol i neatum
r anked
f ourt h
on t he
basi s of l arge
but i nf requent
i nf l uxes of earl y
st ages
Out si de of
t hese
pul ses,
tomate
was not
an
abundant
or
f requentl y
oc -
curr i ng
speci es at any s i t e duri ng any l i f e
st age
Some newyset t l ed gr unt s coul d not be posi ti vel y
i dent i f i ed dur i ng vi sual
surveys and
were pool ed as
Haemul on sp
new y set t l ed l arvae
of Ani sot remus
are di sti ncti ve,
Li ndeman
1997a Thi s group con-
tai ned epi benthi c l arvae of
several
speci es and
rankedtenth i n abundanceamongal l taxa Tabl e
2
and f i f t h
among
haemul i ds
Fi g
7 The
l argest
com
ponent of t hese
uni denti f i ed
school s was pr obabl y
sai l ors choi ce Thi s assumpti on i s based on t he
great er
rel at i ve abundances of sai l ors choi ce
earl y
j uveni l es
at
al l
si tes 2 t he cl ose proxi mt y of sai l ors
choi ce earl y j uveni l es
t o
t hese
newy
set tl ed
Haemul on
sp
and
3
col l ecti ons
of
several newy sett l ed Hae
mul on sp
school s
most commonl y
cont ai ned
sai l ors
choi ce upon
m croscopi c exam nat i on
Earl y st ages of commerci al l y val uabl e speci es
oc -
curred
i nf requentl y dur i ng
t he
surveys,
al t hough
recreati onal l y i mport ant
speci es
were
common The
most abundant
commerci al f am l y
at t he nearshore
hardbottom
si tes
was t he Lutj ani dae
snappers
Four snapper
speci es, total i ng
58 i ndi vi dual s, were
Tabl e 2
Mean
number i ndi vi dual s/t ransect
515
recorded at
al l
si tes
Thi rt y- ei ght
of t hese
were l ane
snapper, Luj anus synagri s Thi rt y-t hree of t hese
were j uveni l es, the maj ori t y
l ess
than
f i v e
cm F i ve
newy sett l ed
i ndi vi dual s
8/9/2019 1999 Lindeman & Snyder. NHB Fishes and Dredging
9/18
516
F i s h er y B u l l e t i n
97 3 , 1999
c i es
andnumbers
of
i ndi v i dual s
per transect f or Apri l
among1994-96 reveal ed
no s i gni f i cant i nter annual
di f f erences ANOVA P=0
34
;ANOVA P - - 0 . 2 1
I den-
t i c a l
compar i s ons
f or J une among t he
same
three-
year peri od reveal ed no
di f f erences
among mean
numbers of
i ndi v i dual s ANOVA
P - - 0
. 0 6 ,
but
s i g -
ni f i c ant
di f f e renc es among
numbers
of
spec i es
ANOVA P
8/9/2019 1999 Lindeman & Snyder. NHB Fishes and Dredging
10/18
Li ndeman and
Snyder
Nearshore
hardbottom
i shes of southeast F lor i da
51
7
Fi gure
6
Abundances
of d i f f e r e nt l i f e hi story
stages
at
theJ upi ter
hardbottom
s i t e s w th 95 confi dence i nte rval s ) AA l
speci es pool ed
B
Pooled
grunt
speci es
onl y
Onl y
pre-
dredgi ng
data were
used f or Carl i n Park
s i t e. NS
Newy
Sett l ed E
Earl y J uveni l e f or grunts onl y)
;
J
J uveni l es;
AAdults ;
PE
Pool ed
Earl y
Stages
=NS+E +
sur veys i n
September
1995 r ecor ded
no
exposed out-
cr ops
or
f i s hes
Duri ng
t he f ol l ow ng
w nte r ,
eros i on
occur r ed
and
t he wdth
of
t he newbeachwas
r educed
Some
out cr ops were r e- exposed by t he
l os s of
dr edge-
f i l l However
w ndand
waves prohi bi ted
vi sual
sam
pl i ng
dur i ng
t h i s
peri od Surveys
i n
Febr uar y,
Apr i l ,
andMayof 1996
22
transects
t o t a l
recorded
no
spe-
ci es
Fi g
9
D scussi on
Fi sh
assembl ages
of
nearshore
hardbottom
The
di ver s i t y
of
f i s hes ut i l i zi ng nearshore har d-
bottom
habi t ats
of mai nl and
F l o r i da
has not been
quant i f i ed
Qual i tati ve
studi es
by
i chthyol ogi sts
ex-
per i enced w t h t he subst ant i al taxonomc probl em
Fi gure 7
Comparat i ve abundances
of
grunts
among 12 taxa
and
l i f e hi story stages
Data
pool ed f romal l Coral
Cove
sur-
veys
and
predredgi ng
Carl i n Park
surveys
260
transects
to tal ) Speci es
represented
by
abbrevi ated genus
and
spe-
c i es
names
w t hi n these di verse,
l arge l y j uveni l e ass embl ages
ar e al so l acki ng Three
studi es
have i ncl uded
sec-
ti ons onnearshore
har dbott om
f i s hes as par t of
l ar ger
pr oj ect
goal s
G lmore 1977) l i s t e d 105 speci es i n
associ at i on w t h
surf
zone ree f s
at
dept hs
l es s
than
twomTwo
addi t i onal speci e s
were added
i n
l ater
papers G l mor e
et al
1983 G l mor e,
1992)
Usi ng
vi sual surveys, Vare
1991)
recorded 118 speci es from
near shor e
hardbottom
s i t es
i n Pal m
Beach County
Futch and Dw nel l 1977)
i ncl uded
a
l i s t
of
34
spe-
ci es
obt ai ned
from
several
i cht hyoci de
col l ecti ons
on
nearshore reefs
I nc l ud i ng speci es
from
these
pri or
studi es,
192
speci es
have nowbeen
recorded i n asso-
ci at i onwthnear shor e hardbottom
habi tats of
mai n-
l and
southeast
Fl or i da
Tabl e
3 . 3
i n Li ndeman,
1997a)
Numbers
of
l abr i somd, bl enni i d,
gobi i d,
and
apogoni d
speci es
may be
under est i mated
ow ng t o
t hei r
smal l
si z e or
crypti c behavi ors
Other
har d-
bott omhabi t at s
of
t he southeas t Uni t ed
States
oc
cur
i n
areas wth subs tant i al l y di f f er ent physi -
8/9/2019 1999 Lindeman & Snyder. NHB Fishes and Dredging
11/18
51
8
Fishery Bul l et i n 97 3 , 1999
ogr aphi c
r egi mes
Sedberry andVan
Dol ah,
1984
Chi appone
and Sul l i van, 1994
and
myshow
d i f -
f er i ng patterns of f i s h
di versi ty
Spati al
and t emporal at t ri but es
of f i sh
assem
bl ages
at
t he three
sit es i n
t he
present
st udy
were
examned
by
usi ng
ordi nat i on
and
cl uster
anal y-
s i s
Vi sual census sampl es col l ected
fromMarch
t hrough J u l y
were
si m l ar
i n speci es
composi t i on
and
rel at i ve abundance
amng
si t es Fi g
3
Thi s
f i ndi ng
i s i n agreement w t h t he
si ml ar
pl ots of
i ndi vi dual
and speci es
abundances
amng
si tes
Fi g
2 The rel ati ve
homogenei t y
of
t hese
sampl es
was
f urt her ref l ected i n
t he
co-occurr ence
of
mny
taxa
i ncl udi ng haemul i ds aeml on parra,
f l avol i neat um
chrysar gyr eum
Ani sotrems
vi rgi ni cus,
A suri namensi s ,
pomacent r i ds
Steg-
ast es
vari abi l i s,
Abudef duf saxati l i s ,
l abri somds
abri soms
nuchi pi nni s , spar i ds D pl odus
hol brooki ,
l
abri ds
Hal i choer es
bi v i t t a t us ,
Thal as-
som
bi f asci at um
and scari ds
Spari soma
rubri -
pi nne
Fi g
4
Wth t he
except i on
of
L
nuchi -
pi nni s
and
S
vari abi l i s, most
taxa
occurred
as
earl y
l i f e
st ages
Saml es from
ate summr August
and
Septem
b e r
were
di sti nct f r om
t he spri ng
and
earl y
sum
mr i n
both cl uster
anal ysi s
and
ordi nat i on
group
2,
F i gs
3
and 5 The onl y two samples taken i n
w n-
t er February
di f f ered f r omal l
other
sampl es
i n
t he
anal yses
group
3,
F i gs
3
and
5
These pat t erns
suggest
that
som seasonal i t y i n
assembl age
struc-
ture
exi sted
Thi s my
r e f l e c t
l a t e spri ng
and
sum
mr peaks
i n
l arval
set t l ement i n cont rast
t o reduced
w nt er set t l ement
and,
p os s i b l y ,
i nf l uxes
of
ol der j u-
veni l es fromi nshor e l agoonal
habi t at s Subst ant i al
numers of
mny
speci es s t i l l
sett l ed
i n l at e
sum
mr
but were possi bl y subj ect
t o
hi gher predat i on
from
ol der
i ndi vi dual s t hat
set t l ed ear l i er i n
t he
year
Vari ous
physi cal
di st urbances e g
w nter
col d
f r o n t s ,
summr hurr i canes and
bi ol ogi cal
phenomna
vari ati on
i n l arval r ecrui t ment
a f f e c t t he
composi -
t i on of f i s h
assembl ages
of nearshore
hardbottom
The turbi di ty gener at ed
by physi cal
di st urbances
const r ai ns t he vi sual
surveys
needed
t o
assess
thei r
i mmdi ate
effects
Nursery
habi t at s
and
nearshore
hardbottom
Wth
i ncreasi ng humn modi f i cat i ons
of
coast al
ar-
eas, det ai l ed
know edge
of
habi t at usage
i s
akeycom
ponent of i nf ormed f i shery andcoast al
l and mnage-
mnt
I dent i f i cat i on
of
essenti al habi t at s i ncl udes
t he
eval uat i on of
spati al
di stri but i ons of
structural
habi -
tats
across
t he shel f and
habi t at
r equi r ement s
of
key
taxa
Several
l i nes of evi dence suggest t hat
nearshor e
har dbot t om
habi t at s al ongt hemai nl and coast
of
east
F l or i da can
serve
as nursery
areas
f or
mnycoast al
f i s h speci es
Over
80 of
t he i ndi vi dual s
at
al l
sit es
were
earl y
l i f e
st ages
Ei ght of t he t op t en speci es
were consi stent l y
r epr esented
by earl y st ages Use
of
har dbot t om
habi t at s was
recorded
f or
new y
sett l ed
st ages
of
mre
t han
20 speci es
I n
addi t i on,
other
nat ural
habi t at s
w t h
subst ant i al
vert i cal
r e l i e f
were
absent
fromt he shal l ow
physi ogr aphi c
regi mes
where
nearshore hardbottomoccurred
Al though
suggesti ve of
nursery val ue,
t hese
l i nes
of evi dence
need t obevi ewed i n t he
appr opri ate con-
text
H ghabundances of
earl y
l i f e st ages
comared
wthadul ts do
not guarant ee t hat
a
habi t at
i s
a
val u-
abl e nursery
H gh
mort al i t y
rates i n
mny reef f i s h
popul ati ons S al e ,
1980 Shul mn
and
Ogden
1987
Ri chards and
Li ndemn,
1987 ; J ones,
1991 suggest
t hat
earl y
st ages
w l l
typi cal l y be mre
abundant
thanadul t s
I f spati al
di stri buti ons
of
al l l i f e st ages
ar e
homgeneous, al l habi t at s
w l l
have
mre
earl y
st ages
than
adul t s
However ,
t he
abundances
of
earl y
stages on
nearshore reef s probabl y
r e f l e c t
mrethan
j ust l arger numers
of
homgeneousl y
di str i buted
recrui ts
Newysett l ed
st ages
of
ei ght
of
t wel ve spe-
ci es of
grunts
and ei ght
of ni ne speci es of snappers
of t he sout heast mi nl and F l or i da
shel f have been
recorded
pri mari l y i n dept hs l ess than
t en
Li nde-
mn
e t al
1998
Adul t s
of
mst speci es are typi -
cal l y
uncommnor absent
i n
shal l ow
habi t at s
There
i s consi derabl e
evi dence
f o r
cross-shel f
habi t at
seg-
8/9/2019 1999 Lindeman & Snyder. NHB Fishes and Dredging
12/18
Li ndemanand
Snyder
Nearshorehardbottom i shes of southeast
Flor i da
51
Figure
Meannumbers of ind vidua s andspeci esat contr ol and
imact
si t es
i n J upi ter , FL
Arrows i ndi cate timngof dredge buri al of hardbottom
reef .
regati on
amng l i f e
st ages
of
many grunt
andsnapper
speci es
fromother regi ons
as
wel l earl y demer sal st ages appear to mst
commn y
use shal l ow
habi t at s
Starck,
1970
Denni s,
1992)
Si ml ar ontogenet i c
di f f erences
i n
di str i buti on
and
abundance
exi st
f or many
ot her
t axa t hat
ut i l i z e
nearshore hardbottomhabi t at s
Determni ng t he
avai l abi l i ty of habi t at
structure
l i m t s
survi val
of earl y
st ages
i s
i mpor t ant
i n assessi ng
nursery val ue Ab-
sences
of habi t at
structure can
resul t i n
i ncr eased predat i on or l owered
growh
Hi xon, 1991) I n southeast main and
Fl ori da, many
nat ur al nearshore mrine
habi t at s
outsi de
of
coastal l agoons andbe-
tween 25°30 N
and
26°20 N Dade and
Broward
Count i es)
are sand pl ai ns
l acki ng
hardbottom
and
subst anti al
t hree- di men-
si onal
structure ACOE 1996)
Athough
l arge stretches
of nearshore hardbottom
exi st
between26°20 N
and
27°50 N Pal m
Beach,
Mar t i n,
St Luci e,
and
I ndi an
Ri ver
Counti es) these
habi t at s are
often
separat ed
by ki l omet ers
of
sand pl ai ns There are no
ot her
natural
habi t at s
i n
t he
same
near-
shore areas t hat can support
equi val ent
abundances
of
earl y
l i f e
st ages These
con-
di ti ons
coul d
promote
a
demographi c
bott l e-
neck
t hat
l i m t s
l ocal
adul t popul at i ons
owng
t o
l i m t e d
habi t at avai l abi l i ty f or
earl y st ages
Despi t e
thei r
shal l ow dept h, nearshore
hardbottom
reef s
are posi ti oned wi thi n cur-
rent andti de
r egi mes
t hat
can
support
con-
si derabl e
l arval
abundances
The occur-
rence of preset t l ement l arvae i n t hese
ar
eas
i s
refl ected by t he abundances of new y sett l ed
st ages
i n
t he
present
st udy
and
l arvae
i n nearshore
zones of
Gul f
of Mexi co
barr i er
i sl ands
Rupl e, 1984
Ross
et al
1987)
Newysett l ed i ndi vi dual s were not
recorded duri ng any
surveys
of pure sand habi t at s
i n t he pr esent study However t he presence
of
nearshore hardbottom
promted
subst anti al
col oni -
z at i on of shal l ow outcrops by l arvae
of
many spe-
c i e s
i ncl udi ng
haemul i ds,
l utj ani ds,
spari ds,
l abri ds,
gerr ei ds,
sci aeni ds, and spar i ds Ecot ones w th hi gh
vert i cal
rel i ef
e . g hardbottomsand i nterf aces near
l edges) somtims
had
l arge
aggregati ons
of
new y
sett l ed st ages
of
t hese taxa
However ,
mcr ohabi t at -
scal e di stri buti ons of
f i shes
on nearshore hardbottom
reminunquanti f i ed
Use
of nearshore hardbottom
reef s
as
nur ser i es
may be
bi di recti onal
across
t he shel f Both
i nshore
and
offshore
mgrati ons dur i ng di ff eri ng ont ogenet i c
st ages can be
faci l i tated
by habi t at s posi ti oned cen-
t ra l ly
on t he shel f Nearshorehardbottommay serve
a
primry
nursery r o le f o r
i ncomng earl y
l i f e st ages
t hat wouldundergo
i ncreased predati on mortal i ty
wi t hout
shel t er
Nearshore hardbottommay al so
serve as
secondary nursery
habi t at f o r j uveni l es
t hat
emgrate out of
i nl ets
t owards offshore reefs Thi s
pattern
i s
seen
i n
gray snapper
and
bl uest r i ped grunt
whi ch
often
sett l e
i ns i de
i nl ets and
pri mari l y
use
nearshore hardbottomas
ol der
j uveni l es
I n addi t i on,
som
speci es
use these str uctures as resi dent nurs-
e r i e s
s e t t l i n g
growi ng- out , and
mturing
sexual l y
as
permnent
resi dents
e g
pomacent r i ds, l abri -
somds) secondar y nur ser y ro le
may
al so
resul t
f r o m i ncreased
growth
because of hi gher
food
avai l -
a b i l i t i e s i n structure- ri ch
envi ronments
The
i nter-
medi at e cross-shel f
posi t i oni ng
andot her
att ri butes
r evi ewed above suggest nearshore
hardbottom
ep-
8/9/2019 1999 Lindeman & Snyder. NHB Fishes and Dredging
13/18
52
0
resents essenti al
f ish
habi tat
for
mny
speci es
f o l -
l owngNO
1996 Bi di recti onal
use
of
nursery
habi tats posi ti oned between i nshore
grassbeds
and
offshore
reef s
requ res further study
Fromabundancepatterns
of
earl y
l i f e
stages and
theabsence
of anynearby
natural
habi tats
wthhi gh
vert i cal
r e l i e f ,
nearshore
hardbottom
of
southeast
mi nl and
Fl ori da
was
esti mted
to
have nursery
val ue f or
34
speci es
Appendix . Emi ri cal correl a-
ti on of
vari ati on
i n
earl ysurvi val
wth
adu t popu a-
ti on si ze
i s an i mortant but rarel yachi eved como-
nent of nurseryarea eval uati on Cominng
experi -
mntal studi es
of
habi tat
requ remnts wth broad
f i e l d
surveys
can
ai d i n connecti ng
organi smscale
attri butes wthpopu ati on-scal e patterns Serafy
et
al .
1997
Earl y
demrsal
stages
of
several
of the
mst
representati ve taxa of
nearshore
hardbottom
e . g
grunt and
damel f i sh
speci es
can be
col l e ct ed and
mni pu ated
i n
the
f i e l d
and
l aboratorywth
rel ati ve
ease Li ndemn,
1986
1997a
.
These
taxa
my
serve
as
usefu mdel s f or nursery habi tat studi es
that ex-
peri mntal l y assess habi tat requ remnts
Ef fects of
dredge-and- f i l l act i vi t i es
on
i chthyofauna
Buri al
of
the
nearshore hardbottomhabi tat
at Carl i n
Parkwth dredged sand signi f i cantl y
l owered
the
abundances
of
both
speci es
and i ndi vidual s
Fi g
9
Before
buri al
54
speci es
wererecorded, wth man
abundances of 38 i ndi vi dual s
and 7. 2
speci es per
transect
n=112 transects After
buri al
eight
spe-
ci es were recordedwthman
abundances
of
l e ss than
one i ndi vi dual
and
speci es per
transect
n=92
transects Noquanti tati ve
studi es
on
the
e f f ec t s of
nearshore
hardbottom
buri al
on
f i shes
are
avai l abl e
i n
the
peer- revi ewed
l i terature f or
comari son
The
f i nal
supplemnta envi ronmntal imact
statemnt EI S for the Carl i n
pro ect
Pal mBeach
Co
Dep
Envi ron
Resources
Managemnt
1994
summrizedseveral agency and contractor surveys
between 1985and 1990at Carl i n
Park
Ten t o
for ty-
eight f ish speci es
were recorded
f romqual i tati ve
surveys
of the
hardbottomStatemnts
regardingthe
habi tat val ue
of
nearshore
reefs and dredgi ng
e f f ec t s
i n
the Carl i n
ParkEIS
emhasi zed the vari abl e
na-
ture
of
reef
exposure
and
forecast that
f i s h i macts
wou d
be mni ml
and
temorary Pri mry
i macts
predi cted f or f i sheswere 1 short- termdi spl acemnt
duri ng constructi on and 2 temorary l oss
of
food
sources
TheEIS
al soemhasi zed
that
i macts wou d
be reduced
by several features
of
the pro ect desi gn
and nearshoreenvi ronmnt . Thesefeatures i ncluded
the
fol l owng
1
the f i shery
val ueof i macted
spe-
ci es was l ow 2 somamunt
of
hardbottomwou d
remn
or would
be constructed f or mti gati on i f
Fi shery
Bu l l e ti n 97 3 ,
1999
needed and 3 constructi onof
the pro ect wou d take
pl ace
when
f i s h popu ati ons were
at
thei r l owest
No
mnti on of di rect or
i ndi rect
mrtal i ty
upon
f i shes
wasmde
The
bi ol ogi cal
assumti ons
wthi n
thi s
EI S
are
siml ar
to
those
f ound
i n
related
documnts
e . g
COE
1996 For the
fol l owng
reasons,
i t i s
sug-
gested
that
som
of
these assumti ons
my
be
tenu-
ous
The
mj ori ty
of
i ndi vi dual s di spl aced
by
hardbottomburi al i n southeast Fl ori da
are
earl y
stages of
economcal l yand eco og cal l y
val uabl e
spe-
ci es
Appendi x Fi gure 9 Earl ydemrsal
l i f e
stages
are parti cu arl y vu nerabl e to predators e . g
ShulmnandOgden, 1987 Dspl acemnt wasper-
mnent
for
mst i ndi vidual s
because
al mst al l pri or
habi tat
was
el i mnated
for at
l east
15
mnths
the
postburi al durati on
of
the
present
study Because
of behavi oral
and
mrphol ogi cal
constrai nts
on
f l i ght
responses, hi ghmrtal i ti es are
probabl yunavoi dabl e
f or
mny
crypti c
speci es
newy sett l ed
l i f e stages,
or
other si te-associ ated
taxa subj ected
t o
di rect habi -
tat
buri al Tabl e 4
.10 in Li ndemn, 1997a
.
Whether
a
f ish
popu ati on i s seasonal l y l ow
at
the t i m
a
pro ect
beg ns i s
i nsigni f i cant
i f dredgi ng w l l bury
the
habi tat i mmdi atel y before
the peak peri od
of
l arval
sett l ement,
2
as i n the Carl i n
Park
pro ect
I n
addi ti on, l oss
of
reef -associ ated
food
sources
was
probabl y substanti al over
thi s
peri od
No substanti al habi tat structure
was
present
wthi n
at l east
0 8 km
f
the
Carl i nPark reef duri ng
i t s buri al The
cl osest
natural structure
was
east-
ward at depths of
at
l east 10mThese deeper
mdshel f
habi tats mybe
uti l i zed
by
rel ati vel y
f ew
grunt and snapper speci es duri ng thenewysett l ed
andearl y
j uveni l e
stages To the
south,
nosubstan-
t i al
hardbottom
was
present
f or
at l east 4
kmTo
the
north,
the
j ett i es
of
the
J upi ter I nl et
were
approxi -
mtel y 2 km
away
However ,
f i shes
i n a northerl y
f l i ght
responsehad
to
negoti ate
awater columwth
zerovi si bi l i t y because dredge f i l l
was
dumed
north-
to-south nyearl y stages
of f i sh
reachi ng the
j et-
t i e s wou d
probabl y
encounter
hi gh
predati on f rom
o der
pi scivores
uti l i zi ng
the
l arge cavi t i es
amng
the
armr-stone bou ders
of
the
a r t i f i c i a l l y
deepened
j etty
area
Li ndemn, 1997a
ostburi al mti gati on
pro ect
usi ngshal l owar t i -
f i c i a l
reef s of l i mstone
bou ders
was
proposed
i n the
z
Hackney
C
T
HPosey,
and SW
Ross 1996 Summry
and recommndati ons I n C T
Hackney
HPosey,
S
W
Ross and
A R
Nor r i s eds .
A
rev iew
and
synthesi s
of data on
surf
zone
f i shes
and i nvertebrates
i n t he south
At l ant i c Bi ght
and the potenti al i mpacts
f rombeach
r enouri shment,
p
108-
111
Rep t
o
U
S
ArmCorps of Engi neers,
Wl mngton Di s-
t r i c t , Wl m ngton, NC
8/9/2019 1999 Lindeman & Snyder. NHB Fishes and Dredging
14/18
Li ndeman
and Snyder Near shor e hardbottom
f i s h e s
o f s o u t h e a s t F l o r i d a
Car l i n Park
EI S
I n
t he
summer of
1998,
thre e
years
af ter
t he
bur i al ,
c ons t r uct i o n
of
appr oxi mat el y
1
ha
of m t i gat i on
reef s
began
I f
constructed bef ore
buri al
and at
s i m l a r
dept h s, m t i gat i on reefs
my
have pr ovi ded
a
r efuge
f or a
s i zeabl e f r act i on
of
t he
thousands
of
di spl aced f i s hes
du r i ng
t he
buri al
of
t he
hardbottom e e f as wel l as thousands
of
subsequent
newr e cr u i t s Evenwi t h promt c ons t r u ct i on o f a r t i -
f i c i a l r e e f s
mny
factors can l i m t t he net pr oduc-
t i o n
of
bi omass GFOSsmn
e t al
1997)
Some
bur-
i ed outcr oppi ngs were uncovered because of
er o s i o n
of
t he pr oj ect f i l l However
s t ruc tura l
suppor t
f o r
two
years of
l arval
r ecr ui t ment ,
shel t er
from
post-
set t l ement pr edati on, and
f o od
f or growt h,
were
pr ob-
abl y el i m nat e d at t he
hardbottom
ur i al s i t e
Nearshore
ha rdb ottom
areas, such as Car l i n Par k,
can be exposed
t o ext ended peri ods of
wave
ener gy
and t u r bi di t y , part i c ul ar l y du r i ng w nter mnths
However
condi t i ons
i n
wi nter
do
not d i l u t e
t he
po-
tent i al s i gni f i c anc e of a r t i f i c i a l buri al duri ng t he
s pr i ng and
summer mnths
These
ar e t he peri ods
of
peak usage of
ha rdb ottomhabi t at s by
new y sett l ed
and
j uveni l e s t ages of
f i s hes
I n t he
absence of dr edg-
i ng,
nearshore
areas t y pi cal l y showh i gh r eef
expo-
sures and
r educt i ons
i n
phy si o l o gi cal s t r es s or s
dur -
i ng t he
spr i ng-summer
r ecrui t ment wndowE l i m -
nat i o n of t h i s r ecrui t ment wndowby
habi t at
buri al
f o r
one or mre
years,
r egardl ess of
wi nter dynam
i c s
my
s ubs ta nt i al l y degrade t he
val ue of
t he
p r i -
mry natural nu rs ery habi t at s al ong t he wndward
shor el i nes
of F l o r i da s east
coast
Theabove r easons
suggest a
r i sk- aver se appr oach
t o
hardbottom
bur i al ,
as
pr evi o us l y suggested f or i nver t ebr at e fauna
Nel son, 1989)
Thecumul at i ve
e f f e c t s
onf i s hes of r epeat ed
buri al
of nearshore habi t at s and other bypr oduct s
of
these
pr oj ects remi n unknown Cascadi ng
di st urbances
w thec osyst em sc al e effects canbe hypot hesi zed f or
anumer of cumul ati ve ant hropogeni c
modi f i cat i ons
i n s o u t h
F l o r i da
e . g Butl er
et
al 1995 Aul t
et
al
1998) Habi t ats af f ected
by dr edgi ng or f i l l i n g
can
show
e f f e c t s
over
t empor al
and spati al s cal es t hat
are r a r el y cons i dered
Vest al
and Ri eser , 1995 ;
Li ndemn,
1997b) For exampl e,
c hr o ni c al l y
el evated
t u r bi di t i es c oul d l ead t o
decl i nes
i n pri mary pr oduc-
t i o n f or
f r equent l y
dredged
ar eas
of
t h e s o ut h eas t
F l o r i da shel f Concl usi ve
st at ement s
on
t he cumul a
t i ve ef f ect s of l ar ge- scal e
dr edgi ng upon
f i s hes
wi l l
ul t i mat el y dependon
t h e cor r el at i on of var i at i o ns
i n
ear l y
sur vi val
wi t h adul t popul ati on
s i z e s
a r a r e l y
achi eved task,
evenwhen
effects
mybe subst ant i al
Os enber g and
Sc hm t t , 1996)
However t he current
absence
of basi c i nf or mat i on
on
both short- and l ong-
term cal es can al s o be
t r e a t e d
as an
opport uni t y
Large dr edge pr oj ects
af f ect i ng m ds h el f and
near -
s h o r e
habi t at s
w l l c ont i nue al o ng
t he southeast
Fl or i da s hel f
at
one- or t wo- year
i nt er val s
Basi c
quest i ons
on
dr edge-and- f i l l ef fects
upon habi t at
use,
pr edati on,
andgr owt h, awai t
s tu dy wi t h i n
a
di ver se
ass embl age
of
nearshore f i s hes
Acknow edgment s
J
Au l t J
Bohnsack, G
Denni s,
G Gi l mor e, P
Gl ynn,
MHarwel l , and H
Wanl ess
pr ovi ded subst ant i al
revi ewcomments
Sever al
anonymus r evi ewers
were
al s o ver y hel pf ul
Co nver s a t i o ns wi t h t he
la t e
Davi d Ki r t l ey
on
s abel l ar i i d reef s were consi st ent l y
val uabl e The as s i s t a nc e of these agency per so nnel
i s
acknowl edged
P Davi s, D F e r r i l l
J
I l i f f AMager ,
and
C
Sul tzmn
Assi st ance
was
al s o pr ovi ded
by
J
Gonzal ez, B
Hart i g,
R
Hudson,
C Leyendecker , M
Perry,
R
Pugl i ese,
M
Ri dl er,
P
Sal e,
E
Schoppaul ,
J
Ser afy, A St one, K
Snyder ,
G
Waugh, andD
Wl der
Fundi ng
was pr ovi ded by the
El i z abet h
OrdwayDunn Foundat i on, t he Ameri can Li t t o r al
Soci et y, Coast al Resear ch and Educat i on, I nc t he
South
At l ant i c F i s her y
Management
Counci l , andt he
Dorr Foundati on
Li terature ci ted
ACOE
AmCorps
of
Engi neers .
1996
Coast of Flori da erosi onandstorm f f e c t s study r e-
gi on I I I
wth
f i nal
envi ronmental
i mact statement
ACOETech
Rep
J acksonvi l le
D s t r i c t
Threevolumes and
appendices A 1
Ault, J
S
J
Bohnsack
andG
Mester
1998
Aetrospecti ve 1979-1996 multi spec es assessment
of coral reef f i s h stocks i n the
Flori da
Keys
Fish Bul l
96 3) :395-414
Bray, J R and
J .
TCurt i s
1957 An
ordinati on
of
the upland
f o r e s t communi t i es of
southernWsconsi n Ecol
Monogr
27
:325-349
Bri ggs,
J .
C
1974 Mari ne
zoogeography McGrawH l l ,
Nework NY,
475
Butler I V J J
HHunt F
Herrnki nd,
J
Chi l dress,RBertelsen, Sharp, TMtthew
J.
Field,
and
HG
Marshal l
.
1995
Cascadi ng
di sturbances
i n
Flori da
Bay,U
S
. A
cyanobacteri a bloom,
sponge
mo r t a l i t y ,
and
i ml i cati ons
f or j uveni lespi ny l obsters
Panul i rus
argus
Mr
Ecol
Prog
Ser
129:119-125
Chi appone,
M
andK Sul l i van
1994 E col ogi c al structureanddynamcsof nearshorehard
bott om
communi t i es i n theFlori da
Keys
Bul l
.
Mr Sci
54 3) :747-756
Cul l i ton, T
J
WarrenTR Goodspeed,
DG
Renter,
B ackwel l , andJ . J
MDonough
1990 Fi fty years of
populati on
change along
the
n at i on s
c oas t s , 1960-2010
Second Rep
Coastal
Trends Seri es
Strat
Assess
Branch, NOAA 41p
P
521
8/9/2019 1999 Lindeman & Snyder. NHB Fishes and Dredging
15/18
522
Dennis,
G
1992 Resource
u t i l i z a t i o n
by members of a gui l d of
benthic
feeding
coral r eef f i s h Ph. D di s s
Uni v
of
Puerto
Ri co,
Mayaguez, Puerto Ri co,
224
p
Duane,
B andEPMei sburger
1969-
Geomrphology
and
sediments
of
thenearshorecon-
ti nental
shel f ,
Mam
t o
Palm
Beach,
Flori da
USACOE
Coastal EngineeringCenter, Tech
Memo No 29, 47 p
Futch,
CR andSE
Dwnel l
1977-
Nearshore
marine
ecology at Hutchinson I sl and,
Flori da 1971-1974-
I V
Lance ets
and f i s hes
Fl a
Mar
Res
Pub] No 24, 23 p
Garci a-Cagide, A R
Clara, and
BV
Koshelev
1994
Reproducci on I n RC aro ed.
Ecologia
del ospeces
marinos
de
Cuba, p 187-262
Centrode
I nvestigaciones
de
Quintana Roo,
Mexi co,
525p
Gauch,HG
1982
Mul tivariate
anal ysi s i n
commun tyecology
Cam
bridge
Univ
Press, Camridge,
298
p
Glmre,
R
G
J r
1977
Fi shes
of
theI ndian
River Lagoonand adj acent wa-
ters,
Flori da
Bul l
Fl
St
Mus
Bio Sci 22 3 , 147p
1992
Striped
croaker,
Bai rdie la
sanctae uciae
I n
CR
G l ber t ed
Rare and endangered bi ot a of
Flori da I I :
Fi shes, p
218 222 Universi ty Press
of
Flori da,
Gainesvi l l e,
FL, 242
p
1995
Envi ronmental
and
biogeographic f act or s
i nf l uenc-
i ng i chthyofaunal di ver s i t y
I ndian
River
Lagoon
Bul l
Mar Sci
57 1
:153-170
Glmre,RG P
A
Hasti ngs
andD
J
Herrema
1983
I chthyofauna addi t i onst o t he
I ndian
River l agoon
and
adj acent waters, east - central Fl or i da Fl a Sci 46
:22-30
Goldberg,
M
1973
Theecol ogy of
the
coral -octocoral
commni tiesof f the
southeast Flori dacoast : geomrphology, species
composi -
t i on, and
zonation
Bul l
Mar Sci
23 3) :465-488
GossmanGD
GPJones,
and eaman
J r
1997
Do a r t i f i c i a l r e ef s i nc r eas e r e gi onal
f i s h producti on?
A
reviewof
exi s t i ng
data
Fisheries
22 4
:17-23
Hxon,
H
1991 Predati onas aprocess
structuri ng
c or a l r eef
f i s h
commni ti es I nPF Sale ed
Theecologyof f i shes on
coral reef s, p
475-500
Academc
Press,
San
D ego,
CA
754
Hoffmeister,
J
E
1974
Land f romthe
sea
the
geologi c
story of south
Flori da Uni vMam Press, Coral Gables,
FL,
143p
HumannP
1994 Reef
f i s h
i dent i f i cat i on
: Flori da, Caribbean,
Bahamas
New
Wrl d
Press,
J ac ks onvi l l e,
FL, 396
p,
Jongman
RHG , J - F ter
Braak, andOFR
van
Tongeren eds
1995- Data
ana ysis
i n commni tyandl andscapeecology
Camri dgeUn v Press, Camri dge,
299
p
J ones,
GP-
1991 Postrecruitment
processes
i n theecologyof
c or a l r e ef
f i s h populati ons amult i f actori al
perspective
I n P. R
Sale
ed
The
ecol ogy of
f i shes oncoral reefs, p
294-330
Aca-
demc Press,
San
D ego,
CA, 754
p
Krt ley,
1994 Areviewandtaxonomc
r e vi s i on of
the
famlySabel -
l ar i i dae, Johnston,
1865
Anne ida
Polychaeta Sabecon
Press
Science
Seri es 1
VeroBch
FL,
223
p
Krt ley,
and
Tanner
1968
Sabel l ar i i d
worm
bui l der s of ama or r eef
type
J
Sed Pet r ol
38 1)
: 73-78
P
Fi sher y
Bul l et i n
97 3 , 1999
LindemanKC
1986
Devel opment of l ar vae of
theFrench
grunt , Haemul on
favolineatum
and
comparati ve
devel opment
of twe ve
westernAtlanti c speciesof Haemul on
Percoi dei ,
Haemu-
fdae Bul l
Mar Sci
39 3 : 673-716
1997a Devel opment of
grunts
and
snappers of southeast
Flori da
c r os s - s hel f di s t r i but i ons
and ef fects
of beach
man-
agement al t er nat i ves-
Ph
. D di ss
Un v Mam, Coral
Gables, FL, 419p
1997b Comparati ve
management of beach system of
Flori daand theAnt i l l es
:
appl i cat i ons
using
ecol ogi cal
as-
sessment
and deci si on
support procedures
I n GCam
ber s ed. Managi ng beach
resources i n t he
small er
Car
ibbean i sl ands, p 134-164 UNESCO
Coastal Region
and
Smal l I s l and Paper 1 269p
LindemanKC GADaz, J
E
Serafy,
andJ S
Ault
1998 Aspati al f ramework
f or assessing cross-shel f habi -
t at
use
among
newy-settl ed
grunts
and
snappers
Proc
Gul f
Cari b Fish I nst
50
: 385-416
NR
Nati onal Research Counci l
1995 Beachnouri shment
and
pr ot ect i on National
Acad-
emyPress, Wshington,
DC
334p
Nelson,
G
1989 Beach
nouri shment andharts bottom
habitats
:
the
case f or cauti on I nS
Tai t
ed
. Proc
1989
Nationa
Conf
BeachPreserv Technol p 109-116 Fl Shore
and
Beach
Preserv
Assoc
Ta lahassee, FL
Nelson,
G andL Demetri ades
1992
Peracari i ds associ ated wth sabe larf d wormrock
Phragmatoporna l apidosa Knberg at
Sebastian
I nl et ,
Flori da, US . A J
Crust
B ol
12 4
: 647- - 654
NOAA Nati onal OceanicandAtmspheri c
Admnistrati on
1996 Magnusen-Stevens
Fi shery
Conservati onand
Man-
agement
Act , as amended
through
Oct
11, 1996
U
S
Dp
Commer NOAATech
Memo
NMFSF/SPO23 121 p
Osenberg,
and
R
J
Schmtt
1996
Detect i ng ecologica
impact s
caused
by human
ac t iv i t i es
I n
R J
Schmtt
and
CW
Osenberg
eds
.
Detecting
ecol ogi cal i mpact s , p
3-15
Academc Press,
SanD ego, CA, 401 p
PalmBeachCountyDept
Env ron
Resources
Management
1994
PalmBeach
County,
Flori da,
shore
protect i on proj ect,
f romMartin
County l i n e
t o LakeWrth I nl et andf rom
southLake
Worth
I nl et t o Broward County l i ne
:
J up i t er /
Carl in
segment
Final suppl emental environmental im
pact statement
Submttedt o
USACOE
Jacksonvi l le
D s-
tr ic t
Of f i ce, 80 pwth appendi ces
Ri chards, . and
K
C
Li ndeman
1987 Recrui tment
dynamcs of r eef f i shes
;
p ankton c pro-
cesses,
settl ement anddemersal
ecol ogi es,
and
f i s her y
ana ysis
Bul l
Mar Sci
41 2) : 392-410
Robins, C
R
and
G
C
Ray
1986
A iedguidet o
At l ant i c
coast f i shes of North
Ameri ca
HoughtonM f f l i nCo Boston, MA 354p
Rohl f ,
F
J
1997
NTSYSpc numeri cal
taxonomy
and
ml ti vari ate
anal ysi s
systemversion
2. 0
Exeter
Publ ishing,
Setauket,
NY,
31p
Ross, ST RHMcMchael
J r
.
and
L Rupl e-
1987
Seasonal
and diel variation i n
thestanding
crop of
f i shes
and
macroinvertebrates
f rom
a
Gulf
of Mexico surf
zone Estuari ne
Coastal
She f Sci
25
: 391-412
Rupl e, L
1984
Occurrenceof l arval f i shes i n thesurf zone
of anorth
ern
Gulf
of Mexicobar r i er i s land
EstuarineCoastal
She f
Sci
18:191-208
8/9/2019 1999 Lindeman & Snyder. NHB Fishes and Dredging
16/18
Li ndeman andSnyder : Nearshorehardbottom i shes of
southeast
Flor i da
Sa e, PF
1980
Theeco ogyof fi shes oncoral reefs
Oceanogr
Mar
B ol
18:367-421
Sedberry,
GR
andRFVan
Dolah
1984 Demersal f i s h
assemb ages
associated
wth
hard-bot-
tomhabi tat i n
the
South Atl anti c B ght of the
US
A
Environ Bi ol
Fi shes
11 4)
: 241-258
Serafy,
J E
K
CLindemn TEHopki ns, and
J S
Aul t
1997 Ef fects of
freshwater
cana d scharges
on
subtrop -
ca mari ne
f ish
assembl ages:
f i eld
and
l aboratory
observati ons Mar Ecol
Prog
Ser 160:161-172
Shulmn
J .
and
J
COgden
1987
Wat control s tr opi cal reef f i s h populati ons : recruit -
ment
or benthi c mrta i ty? Anexamp e i n theCari bbean
reef f i sh, Haemlonfavol i neatum Mar Ecol Prog
Ser
39
: 233-242
Sneath,
PHA
andRR
Sokal
1973
Numeri cal taxonom, the pr i nci pl es andpracti ce of
numeri ca cl assi f i cat i on H Freemn
and
Co
San
Franci sco, CA, 573
p
Starck, A
1970
Bol ogy
of
the
gray
snapper,
Lutj anus
gri seus
Lin-
naeus , i n theFlori da
Keys
Stud Trop
Oceanogr
Uni v
Mam
10:11-150
Stewart-Oaten,
A
1996 Goal s i n envi ronmenta mni tori ng I nRJ
Schmtt
ant] C Osenberg eds .
Detecting ecol ogi cal
impacts,
P
17-26 Academc Press
SanDego,
CA,
401p
Stewart-Oaten,
A
Murdoch
and
K
R
Parker-
1986
Envi ronmental
impact assessment :
pseudore-
pl i cati on i n time?
Ecology
67:929-
940
ter Braak, CJ F
1988 CANOCOa
FORTRANprogramor canon ca
com
mni ty ord nati on Mcrocomputer Power, I thaca
NY
95
Vare, CN
1991 Asurvey analysi s
and
evauationof thenearshore
reefs
si tuated
of f
Palm
BeachCounty, Fl ori da M
S
t he-
si s Fl ori da
Atl anti cUni v
Boca
Raton FL, 165p
Vesta ,
and
Ri eser
1995 Part
Syntheses, wthannotatedbib iography I n:
Methodologiesandmechani sm f or management ofcum-
l at i vecoastal envi ronmenta impacts
NOAH
Coasta Ocean
Program
Deci sionAna ysis Seri esNo 6 NOAA
Coasta
Ocean
Off i ce,
Si l ver
Springs,
MD
139
p
p-
523
8/9/2019 1999 Lindeman & Snyder. NHB Fishes and Dredging
17/18
52
4
F i s h er y B u l l e t i n
97 3 ,
1999
Appendix
Total abundancesof al l speci es vi s ua l l y
surveyed
at
three
nearshore
hardbottom
sites,
southeast Fl ori da
Onl y
predredgi ng
data
were
used f or
Carl i n
Park
s i t e
*
hypothesi zed
t o usenearshore
hardbottomas anurseryhab tat
see
di scussi on
Rank
Commn
nam
Species
Coral
Cove
Carl i n
Park
Ocean
Rdge
Total
Sai l ors
choi ce
I l aemulonparra 649
555
122 1326
2 Si l ver porgy
D pl odus argent eus* 344
647
132
1123
3 Cocoa damel f i sh St egastes
var iabi l i s* 420 600 66
1086
4
Sl i ppery
di ck Hal i choeres bivit tat us 439
327 50 816
5 Hai ry
b enny
Labri somus nuchi pi nni s*
463 262
81
806
6
Sergeant mjor
Abudef duf saxati l i s*
367
199
112
678
7
B ack mrgate
Anisotremus suri namensi s
513 68 55 636
8
Porkf i sh Ani sot remus vi rgini cus*
331
174 61
566
9
Tomate Haernul on
aur ol i neatum*
245 295
8 548
10 Gunt sp
Haernul onsp
266 233 34
533
11 French grunt
Haemul on f l avol i neat um*
134
210 43 387
12
Sml l muth grunt
Haernul on
chrysargyreum
60 222
10
292
13 Wi te
grunt
Haemu on
pl umeri
70
150
221
14 Gassy
sweeper
Pempher i s schomburgki 153
21
32 206
15
Dusky
damel f i sh
S t e g a s t e s f u s c u s *
75
83
9
167
16 Hgh hat
Equetus
acum i nat us*
54
59
13
126
17 Ocean
surgeon
Acanthurus
bahianus
51 12 17
80
18 Doctorf i sh
Acanthurus
chi rurgus 63 Z 7
72
19
Redfi n parrotf i sh Spari som
rubri pi nne*
52 14
2
68
20
Mcjarrasp Euci nostomus
sp
37
20
2
59
21
Spani shgrunt Haemu onmacrostomum 14
35
50
21
Yel l ow
jack
Caranx bart hol omaei
9
41
0
50
23 Yel l owgoatf i sh
Mul l oi di cht hys
mrti ni cus 34 8
0 42
24
Lane snapper
Lu
t j anus synagri s
23 12
3
38
25 B ueheadwasse
Thal assom b fasci atum
22
7
7 36
25 Croaker
sp
Sciaeni d
sp
22 14 0
36
27
Redtai l parrotf i sh Spari som
chrysopterum
16 14 3 33
28
Damel f i shsp Stegastes sp
5 18
32
29
Parrotf i sh
sp
Spari som sp
14
14
0
28
30
Reef croaker
Odontosci on
dentex 13
3
8
24
30
Barj ack
Caranx
ruber
2 20
2 24
32
Chub sp Kyphosus
sp
10 4 23
33
Bri dl edgoby
Coryphopterus glaucofr aenum
2 19
1
22
34
Cownwasse
Hal i choeres mcu i pi nna
8 5
4
17
35
Anchovy
sp
Engrau i d
sp 15
0 0
15
36
Puddi ngwfe
Hal i choeres
radi atus*
4 6 4
14
36
Oangespotted f i l e f i s h Canther hi nes pu l us
2 11
14
38
French
angel f i sh
Pomcanthusparu 5
5
3 13
39 Seaweed
b enny
Parabl enni us mrmreus 2 5 5
12
40
Caesar
grunt I l aemul on
carbonari um 3
7
11
41
Yel l owai l snapper Ocyuruschrysur us* 3
5 2
10
41
Stri pedcroaker Ba i r di e l l a
sanctel uci ae*
10
0
0
10
43 Stopl i ght
parrotf i sh
Spari som vi r i de 4
4
cont i nued
8/9/2019 1999 Lindeman & Snyder. NHB Fishes and Dredging
18/18
Li ndeman
andSnyder :
Nearshore
hardbottom
i shes of southeast Flor i da
5 5
Appendix
continued
Rank
Commn
nam
Species
Cora
Cove
Carl in
Park
Ocean
Rdge Total
43
Redband
parrotf i sh
Spari soma
aurofrenatum
8 9
44 Gaysnapper
Lutj anus gri seus
6 2
8
44
Porgy
sp
Sparid
sp
8 8
44 Bl uestri pedgrunt Haemlonsciurus 2 4 8
44 Spani sh sard ne Sard ne l aauri ta 8
8
49 Mol l yml l er Scartel l a
cr i s tata
2 5 7
49
Blackear wasse Ha ichoerespoeyi 6
7
5 Sheepshead Archosargusprobatocepha us 5 6
5
Bl ue
tang Acanthurus
coeruleus 3
3 6
5
Spottedgoatf i sh Pseudupeneus
macul atus
3 3 6
54 Sadd ed
b enny Ma acoctenus
tr iangul atus* 3
5
55
Barbfi sh
Scorpaenaplumeri 2 4
55
Queen
parrotf i sh
Scarus
vetul a
3 4
57 Fl amfi sh Apogonmacul atus 3 3
57
Ye l owin
mj arra Gerres
cinereus
3 3
57 Bl uerunner Caranx crysos 3 3
57 Spotf inbutterf l yfi sh Chaetodonocel l atus 3
61
Ba l oonfi sh Dodon
hystri x
61 Chainmray
Echidna
catenata
61
Scrawedcowish Lactophrys quadricorn s
61 Schoolmster
Lutj anus
apodus
61
Blenny
sp Bl en idsp 2
61 Cottonwck Haemlonmlanurum 2
6 Geat barracuda Sphyraenabarracuda
2
6
Scrawed
f i l e f i s h
A uterus
scri ptus
2
69
B col or
dame fish
Stegastesparti tus
69
Oangespottedgoby
Nes
l ongus
69 Spani shhogfish Bodianus rufus
69
Spotted
snakeeel
Myri chthys
acumnatus
69
Gay
ange fi sh
Pomacant hus
arcuatus
69
Sharpnose
puff er Canthigaster
rostrata
69 Geater
soapf i sh
Rypti cus saponaceus 1
69 Smoth trunkfi sh
Lactophrys
tr i queter 1
69
Hogfish
Lachnolaims
mxims
69 Puffcheckb enny
Labri soms
bucci ferus
69
Nurse
shark
Gnglymstoma
cirratum
69 Squi r re l f i sh
Holocentrus
rufus
69
Bl ue
ange fi sh
Holacanthus
bermdensi s*
69
Rosy
b enny Ma acoctenus
macropus
69
Spotted
mray Gymnothorax
mri nga
69
Goldenta l
mray
Muraenamli ar is
69
Atl anti c
spadefi sh ChaetodpterusFaber
69 Sand
drum
Umrinacoroi des
Tota taxa 72 60 5 86
Total
indvidua s 5093
4438
960
10491