TITLE PAGE - acumen - The University of Alabama

More documents

Recommendations

Info

FIGURE 3.1 Mean (bars are standard errors) in control (black circles) and manipulation (white squares) reaches in Bluff River Cave, Jackson Co., AL, U.S.A. of (a) organic matter, (b) total macroinvertebrate biomass, (c) obligate cave macroinvertebrate biomass, (d) facultative macroinvertebrate biomass, (e) Cambarus hamulatus, (f) Cambarus tenebrosus, (g) Gyrinophilus palleucus, and (h) Eurycea sp. Vertical dashed line indicates beginning of litter amendment ........................................... 70 FIGURE 3.2 Non-metric multidimensional scaling ordination plot of the macroinvertebrate communities in the control (black symbols) and manipulation (white symbols) reaches pre- (circles) and post-addition (triangles) from Bluff River Cave, Jackson Co., AL, U.S.A. Data points are based on untransformed macroinvertebrate biomass data that were averaged within reaches each sampling month (see text) ................................................................................................................................71 FIGURE 3.3 Non-metric multidimensional scaling ordination plots based on untransformed biomass of seven taxa that contributed 82-91% to the overall dissimilarity among all pair-wise cave comparisons between the control and manipulation reaches preand post-addition. The diameter of each circle is proportional to taxon biomass (mg dry mass m -2 ). (a) Caecidotea, (b) Oligochaeta, (c) Ephemeroptera, (d) Polypedilum, (e) Tanypod genus A, (f) Tanypod genus B, (g) Paraphaenocladius. Stress = 0.12 for all figures .................................................................................. 72 FIGURE 3.4 Relationship between organic matter biomass and macroinvertebrate biomass in cave and forested headwater surface streams. Included in the graph are data from the control reach (CR) and manipulation reach (MR) pre-and post-litter amendment in Bluff River Cave stream, three other cave streams in northeastern Alabama (Huntsman et al. 2001, Chapter 5), and forested headwater streams at Coweeta Hydrologic Laboratory Southern Research Station (C53, C54, C55) with (grey triangles) and without (black diamonds) litter exclusion (Wallace et al. 1999, Cross et al. 2006, Meyer et al. 1998). AFDM = ash-free dry mass ........... 73 FIGURE 4.1 Annual growth increment (mm y -1 ) vs. mean ocular carapace length (mm) for Orconectes australis crayfish in Hering, Limrock, Tony Sinks and Shelta (Cooper, 1975) caves. Dashed lines are results of least squared regression. For the Shelta Cave data, only crayfish that were marked for ≥11 months were included in the reconstruction of Cooper’s growth models [see Methods: Cooper’s (1975) growth models] and in the least squared regression line...................................... 96 FIGURE 4.2 Growth models for Orconectes australis from Hering, Limrock and Tony Sinks caves. Lines indicate the upper and lower 95% confidence intervals for each model.................................................................................................................... 97 xv
FIGURE 4.3 Growth models for Orconectes australis from Hering, Limrock and Tony Sinks caves. Dotted lines are upper and lower 95% confidence intervals. The pooled size-frequency distribution for each population is plotted to the right of each growth model. To the left of the size-frequency distribution are box and whisker plots. The boxes are the 25th and 75th percentile containing the mean (dashed line) and median (solid line); whiskers are error bars; dots are the 5th and 95th percentiles ............................................................................................................ 98 FIGURE 4.4 Growth models for Orconectes australis from Shelta Cave. Black and grey solid lines are a reconstruction of Cooper’s (1975) maximum and mean growth models. The black dotted lines are the upper and lower 95% confidence intervals and the black dashed line is the mean for the growth model that was constructed using a subset of Cooper’s (1975) data and this study’s modeling technique [see Methods: Cooper’s (1975) growth models]. The pooled size-frequency distribution for the population is plotted to the right of the growth model. To the left of the sizefrequency distribution is a box and whisker plot. The box represents the 25th and 75th percentile with the mean (dashed line) and median (solid line); whiskers are error bars; dots are the 5th and 95th percentiles .................................................. 99 FIGURE 5.1 (A) Box and whisker plot of organic matter (left y-axis) and macroinvertebrate biomass (right y-axis) in Hering, Limrock, and Tony Sinks caves. Grey boxes are the 25 th and 75 th percentile and whiskers are the 5 th and 95 th percentiles. The dashed and solid lines within each box are the mean and median, respectively. (B) Biomass (left y-axis) and secondary production (right y-axis) estimates for Orconectes australis in Hering, Limrock, and Tony Sinks caves. Bars are 95% confidence intervals. AFDM = ash-free dry mass. Significant differences (P < 0.05) indicated by different letters. Note that different case letters do not indicate significant differences ........................................................................................ 130 FIGURE 5.2 (A) Organic matter supply rate and (B) macroinvertebrate production in Hering, Limrock, and Tony Sinks caves with crayfish demand based on diets of organic matter and macroinvertebrates, respectively. (C) Organic matter and (D) macroinvertebrate surpluses in Hering, Limrock, and Tony Sinks caves. AFDM = ash-free dry mass. Asterisks indicate significant differences between resource supply rates and macroinvertebrate production and crayfish demand (e.g. nonoverlapping 95% confidence intervals) ............................................................. 131 xvi
Page 1 and 2: THE INFLUENCE OF ENERGY AVAILABILIT
Page 3 and 4: ABSTRACT Detritus from surface envi
Page 5 and 6: LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS m
Page 7 and 8: NC IL ON U.K. VIAT VIE Fig. North C
Page 9 and 10: AIC K-S Akaike information criterio
Page 11 and 12: laboratory work and was an excellen
Page 13 and 14: LIST OF TABLES TABLE 2.1 TABLE 2.2
Page 15: LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 2.1 (a) Box
Page 19 and 20: chemolithoautotrophy-based systems;
Page 21 and 22: ecology, 51, 31-53. Gibert J. & Cul
Page 23 and 24: CHAPTER 2 EFFECTS OF ORGANIC MATTER
Page 25 and 26: community structure in cave “pits
Page 27 and 28: communities and how variation in co
Page 29 and 30: the different source locations was
Page 31 and 32: of natural-log transformed data (%
Page 33 and 34: peak in organic matter in Big Mouth
Page 35 and 36: Figs. 5a, b). The breakdown rate of
Page 37 and 38: per litter bag. Similarly, Huntsman
Page 39 and 40: ags was the greater retention of li
Page 41 and 42: Historically, limited resource inpu
Page 43 and 44: Culver, D.C. & Pipan, T. (2009) The
Page 45 and 46: Merritt, R.W., Cummins, K.W. & Berg
Page 47 and 48: Table 1. Mean (1 S.D.) macroinverte
Page 49 and 50: Table 2. Mean (±1 S.D.) daily temp
Page 51 and 52: Figure 1. (a) Box and whisker plot
Page 53 and 54: Figure 3. Non-metric multidimension
Page 55 and 56: Figure 5. Box and whisker plot of l
Page 57 and 58: streams, while the obligate-cave sp
Page 59 and 60: More recent observational and exper
Page 61 and 62: of netting (mesh size 2.5×1.5-cm)
Page 63 and 64: the two end-members. This conservat
Page 65 and 66: crop organic matter significantly i
Page 67 and 68:
macroinvertebrate biomass to levels
Page 69 and 70:
and surface streams (20-35,000 g m
Page 71 and 72:
these factors, the stable isotope a
Page 73 and 74:
surface streams. Thus, it is likely
Page 75 and 76:
subsides to ecosystem dynamics have
Page 77 and 78:
populations. Journal of Applied Eco
Page 79 and 80:
Poulson T.L. & Lavoie K.H. (2001) T
Page 81 and 82:
Wood P., Gunn J. & Perkins J. (2002
Page 83 and 84:
Table 2. Mean (±1 standard deviati
Page 85 and 86:
Table 2. Continued Chironomini Para
Page 87 and 88:
Figure 1. Mean (bars are standard e
Page 89 and 90:
Figure 3. Non-metric multidimension
Page 91 and 92:
CHAPTER 4 REXAMINING EXTREME LONGEI
Page 93 and 94:
individuals, he predicted that it w
Page 95 and 96:
A phylogeographic study by Buhay &
Page 97 and 98:
differences in size structure among
Page 99 and 100:
and females in Tony Sinks Cave were
Page 101 and 102:
Estimates of life span for O. austr
Page 103 and 104:
available size-classes were well re
Page 105 and 106:
References Anonymous (1999) Cave Sc
Page 107 and 108:
Huryn A.D. & Wallace J.B. (1987) Pr
Page 109 and 110:
Whitmore N. & Huryn A.D. (1999) Lif
Page 111 and 112:
Table 2. Estimated life span (years
Page 113 and 114:
Figure 1. Annual growth increment (
Page 115 and 116:
Figure 3. Growth models for Orconec
Page 117 and 118:
CHAPTER 5 CONSUMER-RESOURCE DYNAMIC
Page 119 and 120:
following incidental inputs of orga
Page 121 and 122:
Temperature data were not available
Page 123 and 124:
minimum (Venarsky et al., 2012b). A
Page 125 and 126:
100% organic matter (i.e., maximum
Page 127 and 128:
Macroinvertebrate biomass varied si
Page 129 and 130:
Discussion The energy-limitation hy
Page 131 and 132:
crayfish captured in most months we
Page 133 and 134:
systems is likely high, especially
Page 135 and 136:
function of microbial films in grou
Page 137 and 138:
Crustacean Biology, 4, 35-54. Momot
Page 139 and 140:
Whitmore N. & Huryn A. (1999) Life
Page 141 and 142:
Table 2. Assimilation efficiencies
Page 143 and 144:
Table 3. Continued Tanypodinae 0.03
Page 145 and 146:
Table 5. Estimates of mean wood and
Page 147 and 148:
Figure 1. (A) Box and whisker plot
Page 149 and 150:
CHAPTER 6 OVERALL CONCLUSIONS Due t
Page 151 and 152:
characteristics (e.g., higher growt
Page 153 and 154:
characteristics, highly efficient p
show all

TITLE PAGE - acumen - The University of Alabama

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?