雷州湾海域网衣污损生物群落的周年变化特征

doi:10.14012/i.cnki.fjsc.2023.02.005

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

了解雷州湾海域网衣污损生物群落变化规律,为网箱防污和绿色养殖提供科学依据。2020年6月至2021年6月于雷州湾东南码头养殖网箱中开展上、下水层的周年挂网实验。结果表明,共检出污损生物35种,分属11门28科35属,主要类群包括节肢动物门、软体动物门及绿藻门,冬季污损生物种类最少(7种);全年优势种共有15种,其中上水层12种、下水层15种,上水层的丰度和生物量分别较下水层高8.50 ind·cm^-2、0.01 g·cm^-2,且上水层污损生物附着量和体型较大;上、下水层总种类数(29~32)、多样性指数(H',0.985~2.010)、均匀度指数(J,0.539~0.852)、丰富度指数(d,0.539~2.856)数值相近;利用Excel和SPSS对56个网衣样本分别进行多样性和单因素方差分析,冬季多样性指数、丰富度指数低于其他季节,但均匀度指数在季节间无明显变化。冗余分析显示,温度(平均贡献率为44.95%)和盐度(平均贡献率为31.90%)是影响污损生物群落结构的主要环境因素。

关键词: 网衣污损生物, 群落结构, 环境因子, 挂网实验, 雷州湾

Abstract:

To understand the changing laws of net fouling biological communities in the Leizhou Bay and provide a scientific basis for cage anti-fouling and green farming,the annual hanging net experiment divided into upper and down water layers carried out at the southeast wharf of Leizhou Bay from June 2020 to June 2021.The results showed that a total of 35 species of fouling organisms were detected, belonging to 11 phylums, 28 families and 35 genus.The spatial characteristics were the total number of species (29~32), Shannon-Wiener index (H', 0.985~2.010), Pielou index (J, 0.539~0.852), and Margalef index (d,0.539~2.856) in the upper and lower water layers.The abundance was higher than that in the lower water layer (8.50 ind·cm^-2), and the biomass was higher than that in the lower water layer (0.01 g·cm^-2), which showed that the fouling organisms in the upper water layer were larger in fouling and body size.The seasonal variation was characterized by the least species in winter (7 species).Using Excel and SPSS, the diversity and univariate analysis of 56 net samples were carried out respectively.The results showed that Shannon-Wiener index (H') and Margalef index (d) in winter were lower than those in other seasons, but evenly there was no difference in the Pielou index (J); compared with time accumulation, the most types of nets were attached throughout the year, then could conclude that the longer the time, the richer the species diversity.The RDA analysis showed that temperature affects the structure of the fouling biological community.The main groups of net fouling organisms in the waters of Leizhou Bay include Arthropoda, Molluscs and Chlorophyta.Spatially, there was little difference in biodiversity between upper and lower water layer.The biodiversity in spring, summer and autumn was larger than that in winter, while temperature (average contribution rate: 44.95%) and salinity (average contribution rate: 31.90%) were the main environmental factors affecting the community structure.

Key words: netted fouling organism, community structure, environmental factors, hanging net experiment, Leizhou Bay

中图分类号:

S967.3

周家丽, 傅建融, 曾嘉维, 陈志劼, 王学锋, 刘丽. 雷州湾海域网衣污损生物群落的周年变化特征[J]. 渔业研究, 2023, 45(2): 133-146.

ZHOU Jiali, FU Jianrong, ZENG Jiawei, CHEN Zhijie, WANG Xuefeng, LIU Li. Species composition and seasonal characteristics of the fouling organisms in the cage culturing waters of Leizhou Bay, Guangdong Province[J]. Journal of Fisheries Research, 2023, 45(2): 133-146.

图/表 9

参考文献 36

[1]	张凯, 丛巍巍, 桂泰江, 等. 海洋水产养殖业中的生物污损与控制[J]. 材料导报, 2020, 34(S1):78-81.
[2]	小远. 2018世界渔业和水产养殖状况报告[J]. 渔业致富指南, 2018(21):6-7.
[3]	宋协法, 孙跃, 何佳, 等. 深水网箱清洗技术及装备研究进展[J]. 渔业现代化, 2021, 48(5):1-9.
[4]	石建高, 余雯雯, 赵奎, 等. 海水网箱网衣防污技术的研究进展[J]. 水产学报, 2021, 45(3):472-485.
[5]	郑东强, 黄宗国. 大亚湾海水养殖箱、笼上附着的污损生物[J]. 水产学报, 1990(1):15-24.
[6]	Sen K, Erdogan U H, Cavas L. Prevention of biofouling on aquaculture nets with ecofriendly antifouling paint formulation[J]. Coloration Technology, 2020, 136(2):120-129. DOI URL
[7]	陈志劼, 吕少梁, 陆丽仪, 等. 雷州半岛东部近岸海域大型底栖甲壳动物群落结构及其影响因子[J]. 广东海洋大学学报, 2021, 41(1):17-25.
[8]	刘苏静. 烟台近海海域典型污损生物调查及其防除研究[D]. 烟台: 中国科学院烟台海岸带研究所, 2016.
[9]	刘勐伶, 严涛. 南海污损生物生态研究进展[J]. 海洋通报, 2006, 25(1):84-91.
[10]	方芳, 严涛. 南海污损生物研究的现状及展望[J]. 热带海洋学报, 2004, 23(1):76-85.
[11]	胡煜峰, 曹文浩, 张慧, 等. 近海污损生物生态研究及建议[J]. 广州化工, 2012, 40(21):6-7.
[12]	陈新, 曹阳, 商群, 等. 南海近岸污损生物群落时空差异初步研究[C]// 中国海洋湖沼学会.中国海洋湖沼学会第十次会员代表大会暨2012海洋腐蚀与生物污损学术研讨会论文集. 青岛: 中国海洋湖沼学会, 2012:12.
[13]	曾嘉维, 林坤, 王学锋, 等. 雷州湾附近海域鱼类群落结构及其与环境因子的关系[J]. 中国水产科学, 2019, 26(1):108-117.
[14]	陈春亮, 张才学. 雷州湾浮游植物群落结构特征及其环境影响分析[J]. 应用海洋学学报, 2016, 35(2):174-182.
[15]	任先秋. 中国动物志:无脊椎动物第41卷甲壳动物亚门端足目钩虾亚目[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2006.
[16]	任先秋. 中国动物志:无脊椎动物第43卷甲壳动物亚门端足目钩虾亚目 2[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2012.
[17]	刘瑞玉, 任先秋. 中国动物志:无脊椎动物第42卷甲壳动物亚门蔓足下纲围胸总目[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2007.
[18]	王祯瑞. 中国动物志:软体动物门双壳纲贻贝目[J]. 科学出版社, 1997.
[19]	Flanders Marine Institute. 世界海洋物种登记网址[DB/OL].(2022-11-05)[2022-10-01]. https://www.marinespecies.org/.
[20]	中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局, 中国国家标准化管理委员会. 海洋调查规范第6部分:海洋调查资料交换:GB/T 1276.6—2007[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2008.
[21]	Pinkas L, Oliphant M S, Iverson I L K. 1971.Food habits of albacore, bluefin tuna, and bonito in California waters[J]. Fish Bulletin, 152:1-105.
[22]	Greene J K, Grizzle R E. Successional development of fouling communities on open ocean aquaculture fish cages in the western Gulf of Maine, USA[J]. Aquaculture, 2007, 262(2-4):289-301. DOI URL
[23]	水柏年, 郭迪飞. 舟山深水网箱污损生物季节性变化分析[J]. 南方水产科学, 2008, 4(4):36-41.
[24]	Bosch-Belmar M, Escurriola A, Milisenda G, et al. Harmful fouling communities on fish farms in the SW Mediterranean Sea: composition, growth and reproductive periods[J]. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 2019, 7(9):288. DOI URL
[25]	Sliskovic M, Jelic-Mrcelic G, Antolic B, et al. The fouling of fish farm cage nets as bioindicator of aquaculture pollution in the Adriatic Sea (Croatia)[J]. Environmental Monitoring & Assessment, 2011, 173(1-4):519-532.
[26]	Lin H S, Wang J J, Liu W, et al. Fouling community characteristics in subtropical coastal waters of the southwestern East China Sea[J]. Acta Oceanologica Sinica, 2017, 36(10):70-78. DOI URL
[27]	Yan T, Yan W, Dong Y, et al. Marine fouling of offshore installations in the northern Beibu Gulf of China[J]. International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation, 2006, 58(2):99-105.
[28]	Amini N, Rezai H, Pourjomeh F, et al. Spatial and temporal variations of biofouling on the oil platforms around Khark Island, Persian Gulf[J]. Indian journal of marine sciences, 2016, 45(12):1714-1718.
[29]	Ramadan S E, Kheirallah A M, Abdel-Salam K M. Marine fouling community in the Eastern harbour of Alexandria, Egypt compared with four decades of previous studies[J]. Mediterranean Marineence, 2006, 7(2):19-29.
[30]	Ramadan S E, Kheirallah A M, Abdelsalam K M. Factors controlling marine fouling in some Alexandria Harbours, Egypt[J]. Mediterranean Marine Science, 2012, 7(2):31-54. DOI URL
[31]	黄桂芳, 郑国富, 魏观渊, 等. 福建围头海域深水网箱养殖区污损生物[J]. 海洋学报, 2007, 29(1):98-104.
[32]	君珊, 王东波, 周健华, 等. 拉萨河流域浮游植物群落结构特征及与环境因子的关系[J]. 生态学报, 2019, 39(3):787-798.
[33]	严涛, 曹文浩. 黄、渤海污损生物生态特点及研究展望[J]. 海洋学研究, 2008, 26(3):107-118.
[34]	Dziubińska A, Janas U. Submerged objects - a nice place to live and develop.Succession of fouling communities in the Gulf of Gdańsk, Southern Baltic[J]. Oceanological & Hydrobiological Studies, 2007, 36(4):65-78.
[35]	Nogata Y, Tokikuni N, Yoshimura E, et al. Salinity limitations on larval settlement of four barnacle species[J]. Sessile Organisms, 2011, 28(2):47-54. DOI URL
[36]	曹文浩, 严瑾, 丰美萍, 等. 盐度对中国东南沿海两种常见藤壶幼虫发育的影响[J]. 热带海洋学报, 2018, 37(6):85-91. DOI

水层 Water layer	物种名称 Species	平均密度 /ind·cm^-2 Average density	平均密度 /g·cm^-2 Average density	IRI	生活方式 Lifestyle	功能性群体 Functional group
上 Upper	指拟钩虾 Gammaropsis digitata	14.370	0.036	4 648	M	D
	网纹藤壶 Amphibalanus reticulatus	0.982	0.183	3 948	SE	S
	加尔板钩虾 Stenothoe gallensis	5.470	0.022	1 961	M	D
	笔螅 Pennaria disticha	7.700	0.008	1 845	SE	S
	巴西地钩虾 Podocerus brasiliensis	4.404	0.018	1 576	M	D
	夏威夷明钩虾 Parhyale hawaiensis	2.512	0.016	1 024	M	D
	斑马纹贻贝 Dreissena polymorpha	0.346	0.040	853	A	S
	翡翠贻贝 Perna virids	0.144	0.043	729	A	S
	莫顿蜾蠃蜚 Corophium mortonii	1.004	0.005	323	M	D
	浒苔 Enteromorpha prolifera	0.214	0.009	140	A	PP
	变化短齿蛤 Brachidontes variabilis	0.176	0.021	131	A	S
	厚壳贻贝 Mytilus coruscus	0.017	0.017	71	A	S
下 Down	指拟钩虾 Gammaropsis digitata	23.120	0.031 6	3 645	M	D
	加尔板钩虾 Stenothoe gallensis	11.800	0.022 8	2 652	M	D
	网纹藤壶 Amphibalanus reticulatus	0.740	0.114 0	2 425	SE	S
	巴西地钩虾 Podocerus brasiliensis	4.340	0.021 6	4 473	M	D
	翡翠贻贝 Perna virids	0.780	0.105 2	1 989	A	S
	笔螅 Pennaria disticha	7.000	0.009 2	1 194	SE	S
	斑马纹贻贝 Dreissena polymorpha	0.100	0.034 8	762	A	S
	莫顿蜾蠃蜚 CoropHium mortonii	0.000	0.005 6	585	M	D
	夏威夷明钩虾 Parhyale hawaiensis	0.260	0.005 6	273	M	D
下 Down	石莼 Ulva lactuca	0.240	0.013 2	185	A	PP
	红巨藤壶 Megabalanus rosa	0.000	0.016 8	117	SE	S
	变化短齿蛤 Brachidontes variabilis	0.740	0.016 0	103	A	S
	浒苔 EnteromorpHa prolifera	0.340	0.002 8	40	A	PP
	厚壳贻贝 Mytilus coruscus	0.080	0.018 4	31	A	S
	异枝江蓠 Gracilaria bailinae	0.130	0.001 1	25	A	PP

水层 Water layer	物种名称 Species	平均密度 /ind·cm^-2 Average density	平均密度 /g·cm^-2 Average density	IRI	生活方式 Lifestyle	功能性群体 Functional group
上 Upper	指拟钩虾 Gammaropsis digitata	14.370	0.036	4 648	M	D
	网纹藤壶 Amphibalanus reticulatus	0.982	0.183	3 948	SE	S
	加尔板钩虾 Stenothoe gallensis	5.470	0.022	1 961	M	D
	笔螅 Pennaria disticha	7.700	0.008	1 845	SE	S
	巴西地钩虾 Podocerus brasiliensis	4.404	0.018	1 576	M	D
	夏威夷明钩虾 Parhyale hawaiensis	2.512	0.016	1 024	M	D
	斑马纹贻贝 Dreissena polymorpha	0.346	0.040	853	A	S
	翡翠贻贝 Perna virids	0.144	0.043	729	A	S
	莫顿蜾蠃蜚 Corophium mortonii	1.004	0.005	323	M	D
	浒苔 Enteromorpha prolifera	0.214	0.009	140	A	PP
	变化短齿蛤 Brachidontes variabilis	0.176	0.021	131	A	S
	厚壳贻贝 Mytilus coruscus	0.017	0.017	71	A	S
下 Down	指拟钩虾 Gammaropsis digitata	23.120	0.031 6	3 645	M	D
	加尔板钩虾 Stenothoe gallensis	11.800	0.022 8	2 652	M	D
	网纹藤壶 Amphibalanus reticulatus	0.740	0.114 0	2 425	SE	S
	巴西地钩虾 Podocerus brasiliensis	4.340	0.021 6	4 473	M	D
	翡翠贻贝 Perna virids	0.780	0.105 2	1 989	A	S
	笔螅 Pennaria disticha	7.000	0.009 2	1 194	SE	S
	斑马纹贻贝 Dreissena polymorpha	0.100	0.034 8	762	A	S
	莫顿蜾蠃蜚 CoropHium mortonii	0.000	0.005 6	585	M	D
	夏威夷明钩虾 Parhyale hawaiensis	0.260	0.005 6	273	M	D
下 Down	石莼 Ulva lactuca	0.240	0.013 2	185	A	PP
	红巨藤壶 Megabalanus rosa	0.000	0.016 8	117	SE	S
	变化短齿蛤 Brachidontes variabilis	0.740	0.016 0	103	A	S
	浒苔 EnteromorpHa prolifera	0.340	0.002 8	40	A	PP
	厚壳贻贝 Mytilus coruscus	0.080	0.018 4	31	A	S
	异枝江蓠 Gracilaria bailinae	0.130	0.001 1	25	A	PP