Marine Ecology Progress Series Inter-Research
Marine Ecology Progress Series

IR Home



MEPS
Home
Editors
Forthcoming
Information
Subscribe


Journals
Home
MEPS
AME
CR
DAO
ESEP
Search
Subscribe

Book Series
EE Books
Top Books
Order

Discussion Forums
Home

Research
Endangered Species Programs

Institutions
International Ecology Institute
Eco-Ethics International Union

Foundation
Otto Kinne Foundation

MEPS 220:131-136 (2001)

Abstract

Productivity estimation in Halodule wrightii Aschers: comparison of leaf-clipping and leaf-marking techniques and the importance of clip height

Joseph L. Kowalski1, Hudson R. DeYoe1,*, Terry C. Allison1, James E. Kaldy2

1Department of Biology, The University of Texas - Pan American, 1201 West University Dr., Edinburg, Texas 78539
2Texas A&M University, Oceanography Department, College Station, Texas 77843, USA

*E-mail: hdeyoe@panam.edu

ABSTRACT: We compared estimates of Halodule wrightii leaf growth rates obtained from leaf-clipping and leaf-piercing methods in a south Texas lagoon. Leaf clipping underestimated leaf production from 15 to 37% in winter and 25 to 60% in summer relative to leaf piercing. The underestimation of leaf-clipping derived growth rates were corrected using a linear regression between leaf growth rates determined by leaf-clipping and leaf-piercing methods. To examine the effect of clip height on H. wrightii leaf growth rate estimation, leaves were clipped at 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 cm above the sediment. Leaves clipped at 2 cm exhibited the fastest leaf growth rate (average = 3.66 mm d-1) while leaves clipped at 8 cm had the slowest rate (average = 2.30 mm d-1). Depressed leaf growth rates for 8 cm clip height were likely due to the slowing of growth rate with increasing leaf age. Reduced growth rate for the 0 cm clip height treatment may be attributable to removal of nearly all photosynthetic tissue and limited below-ground resources. In design of leaf-clipping studies, it is suggested that the selection of clip height and the period of growth after clipping be optimized for each season of a study.

KEY WORDS: Leaf clipping · Leaf piercing · Productivity techniques · Halodule wrightii · Texas · Seagrass

Full text in pdf format

Published in MEPS Vol. 220 (2001) on September 27
Print ISSN: 0171-8630; Online ISSN: 1616-1599. Copyright © Inter-Research, Oldendorf/Luhe, 2001

Copyright © 2001; Inter-Research
Webmaster: webmaster@int-res.com