Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Biodiversity ‘hotspots’, patterns of richness and endemism, and taxonomic affinities of tropical Australian sponges (Porifera)

  • Published:
Biodiversity & Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

‘Hotspots’ of biodiversity (taxonomic richness, endemism, taxonomic affinities between communities) at small (α), medium (β) and larger (γ) scales of diversity were examined for marine sponge populations throughout tropical and subtropical Australia, with the faunas of Vanuatu, Palau and Thailand used as outgroups for comparison. Spatial and numerical (ordination) models and hierarchic classifications delineated 37 β and 13 γ scale faunas from 1343 investigated localities using a pool of 2324 species. The Australian taxonomic literature was ignored completely to avoid the many still unresolved taxonomic problems and to allow equal treatment of collecting localities. Richness and endemism varied considerably between marine areas, for species and genera at all spatial scales, with gradients strongly corroborated by hierarchic taxonomic relationships between faunas. Richness and endemism were equally effective indicators of biodiversity ‘hotspots’, whereas species-level vs. genus-level data produced differing patterns, with the latter substantially underestimating biodiversity and marine area relationships, and consequently a poor 'surrogate’ for species data. Patterns of taxa shared between adjacent areas were more informative than richness and endemism data alone, as they more accurately reflect the processes in these areas. Latitudinal gradients in sponge diversity were not evident, whereas various environmental factors were prominent at α scales and biogeographic factors were prominent at β and γ scales of diversity. An example of a small (α) scale diversity fauna revealed substantial spatial heterogeneity (mean of 41 spp/locality, 33% apparently endemic, and a total fauna of 226 spp) containing few ubiquitous species (40% or 78 spp), with adjacent reefs having relatively low faunal similarity (mean 33%). Faunas at the medium (β) scale of diversity were less heterogeneous (mean 127 spp/region, 27% apparently endemic to a particular region, with a total fauna of 2324 spp), containing a significantly larger dataset (829 spp) found in >1 region to assess taxonomic affinities. At the larger (γ) scale of diversity faunas were far more heterogeneous (mean 263 spp/region, 47% apparently endemic to a particular region) containing a smaller dataset (only 588 spp or 26% of the fauna with >1 species/region) to assess taxonomic affinities. Consequently, sponge faunas at the α and γ scales of diversity are ineffective and inappropriate as biodiversity models, respectively, with γ scale diversity also less relevant as a practical tool for marine resource management and marine area conservation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anonymous 1997. Marine Industry Development Strategy. Department of Industry, Science and Tourism, Canberra.

  • Barber P.H., Palumbi S.R., Erdmann M.V. and Moosa M.K. 2000. A marineWallace's line? Nature 406: 692-693.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balmford A. and Long A. 1996. Across-country analyses of biodiversity congruence with current conservation efforts in the tropics. Conservation Biology 9: 1539-1547.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanchard D. and Bourget E. 1999. Scales of coastal heterogeneity: influence of intertidal community structure. Marine Ecology Progress Series 179: 163-173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bridgewater P.B. 2000. The Global Taxonomic Initiative-a perspective from the user community. The New Panorama of Animal Evolution. XVIIIth International Congress of Zoology. 28 August-2 September 2000. Hellenic Zoological Society, Athens, p. 153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunt J.S. 1987. The Australian marine environment. In: Dyne G.R. and Walton D.W. (eds), Fauna of Australia.Vol 1A. General Articles. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, pp. 17-42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler A.J. and Connolly R.M. 1999. Assemblages of sessile marine invertebrates: still changing after all these years? Marine Ecology Progress Series 182: 109-118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler T. 2000. Life on earth. Museums Journal July: 18-21.

  • Clifford H.T. and Stephenson W. 1975. An Introduction to Numerical Classification. Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crame J.A. and Clarke A. 1997. The historical component of marine taxonomic diversity gradients. In: Ormond R.F.G., Gage J.D. and Angel M.V. (eds), Marine Biodiversity: Patterns and Processes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 258-273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davie P.J.F. and Hooper J.N.A. 1998. Patterns of biodiversity in the marine invertebrate and fish communities of Moreton Bay. In: Tibbets I.R., Hall N.J. and DennisonW.D. (eds), Moreton Bay and Catchment. University of Queensland, Brisbane, pp. 331-346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies P. 1994. Evolution of the Great Barrier Reef. Australian Geologist 92: 21-24.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Voogd N.J., van Soest R.W.M. and Hoeksema B.W. 1999. Cross-shelf distribution of southwest Sulawesi reef sponges. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 44: 147-154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fauchald K. 2000. The taxonomic impediment in the study of marine invertebrates. The New Panorama of Animal Evolution. XVIIIth International Congress of Zoology, 28 August-2 September 2000. Hellenic Zoological Society, Athens, p. 152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grassle J.F. 1991. Deep-sea benthic biodiversity. The ocean bottom supports communities that may be as diverse as those of any habitat on Earth. Biodiversity 41: 464-469.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray J.S. 1997. Gradients in marine biodiversity. In: Ormond R.F.G., Gage J.D. and Angel M.V. (eds), Marine Biodiversity: Patterns and Processes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 18-34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guichard F. and Bourget E. 1998. Topographic heterogeneity, hydrodynamics and benthic community structure: a scale dependent cascade. Marine Ecology Progress Series 135: 89-100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillis D.M. and Bull J.J. 1993. An empirical test of bootstrapping as a method for assessing confidence in phylogenetic analysis. Systematic Biology 42: 182-192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoeksema B.W. 2000. The East Indies triangle of marine biodiversity. In: Hopley D., Hopley P.M., Tamelander J. and Done T. (eds), Ninth International Coral Reef Symposium. World Coral Reefs in the New Millennium: bridging research and management for sustainable development. State Ministry for the Environment, Indonesia, Indonesian Institute of Sciences & The International Society for Reef Studies, Bali, Indonesia, p.45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooper J.N.A. 1991. Revision of the family Raspailiidae (Porifera: Demospongiae), with description of Australian species. Invertebrate Taxonomy 5: 1179-1415.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooper J.N.A. 1994. Coral reef sponges of the Sahul Shelf-a case for habitat preservation. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 36: 93-106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooper J.N.A. 1996. Revision of Microcionidae (Porifera: Poecilosclerida: Demospongiae), with description of Australian species. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 40: 1-626.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooper J.N.A. and Levi C. 1994. Biogeography of Indo-west Pacific sponges: Microcionidae, Raspailiidae, Axinellidae. In: van Soest R.W.M., van Kempen T.M.G. and Braekman J.-C. (eds), Sponges in Time and Space. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 191-212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooper J.N.A. and Wiedenmayer F. 1994. Porifera. In: Wells A. (ed.), Zoological Catalogue of Australia Vol. 12. CSIRO, Melbourne, pp. 1-621.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooper J.N.A., Kennedy J.A., List-Armitage S.E., Cook S.D. and Quinn R. 1999. Biodiversity, species composition and distribution of marine sponges in northeast Australia. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 44: 263-274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooper J.N.A., Kennedy J.A. and van Soest R.W.M. 2000. Annotated checklist of sponges (Porifera) of the South China Sea region. The Raffles Bulletin of Zoology Supplement (8): pp. 125-207.

  • Huston M. 1985. Patterns of species diversity on coral reefs. Annual Reviews of Ecology and Systematics 16: 149-177.

    Google Scholar 

  • IMCRA Technical Group (1998) Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation for Australia. An ecosystem-based classification for marine and coastal environments.Version 3.3. Environment Australia, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen R., Borowitzka L., Bray N., Davies P., Fandry C., Jeffriess B., Johnson C., Hudlow T., Lennard D., Marsh H., Pigram C. and Reichelt R. (1999) Australia's Marine Science and Technology Plan. The Marine Science and Technology Plan Working Group. Ausinfo, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerr J.T. 1997. Species richness, endemism, and choice of areas for conservation. Conservation Biology 11: 1094-1100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klautau M., Sole-Cava A.M. and Borojevic R. 1994. Biochemical systematics of sibling sympatric species of Clathrina (Porifera: Calcarea). Biochemical Systematics and Ecology 22: 367-375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klautau M., Russo C.A.M., Lazoski C., Boury-Esnault N., Thorpe J.P. and Sole-Cava A.M. 1999. Does cosmopolitanism result from overconservative systematics? A case study using the marine sponge Chondrilla nucula. Evolution 53: 1414-1422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohn A.J. 1997. Why are coral reef communities so diverse? In: Ormond R.F.G., Gage J.D. and Angel M.V. (eds), Marine Biodiversity: Patterns and Processes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 201-215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehnert H. and Fischer H. 1999. Distribution patterns of sponges and corals down to 107 m off North Jamaica. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 44: 307-331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mace G.M., Balmford A., Boitani L., Cowlishaw G., Dobson A.P., Faith D.P. et al. 2000. It's time to work together and stop duplicating conservation efforts. Nature 405: 393.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maddock A. and Du Plessis M.A. 1999. Can species data only be appropriately used to conserve biodiversity? Biodiversity and Conservation 8: 603-615.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medlin L. 1998. When the boat comes in. Nature 395: pp658.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer C. and Paulay G. 2000. Indo-west Pacific diversity: phylogenetic evidence from cowries for a mozaic of causes. In: Hopley D., Hopley P.M., Tamelander J. and Done T. (eds), Ninth International Coral Reef Symposium.World Coral Reefs in the New Millennium: bridging research and management for sustainable development. State Ministry for the Environment, Indonesia, Indonesian Institute of Sciences & The International Society for Reef Studies, Bali, Indonesia, p. 45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers N., Mittermeier R.A., Mittermeier C.G., da Fonseca G.A.B. and Kents J. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403: 853-858.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Geographic Society 2000. The Coral World Map. Committee for Research and Exploration, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ormond R.F.G., Gage J.D. and Angel M.V. 1997. Marine Biodiversity: Patterns and Processes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 201-215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce A.F. and Walker D.I. 1991. The Leeuwin Current: an influence on the coastal climate and marine life of Western Australia. Journal of the Royal Society of Western Australia 74: 1-140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poore G.C.B. 1995. Biogeography and diversity of Australia's marine biota. In: Zann L.P. and Kailola P. (eds), State of the Marine Environment Report for Australia. Technical Annex 1: The Marine Environment. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Department of Environment, Sport and Territories, Canberra, pp. 75-84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poore G.C.B. and Wilson G.D.F. 1993. Marine species richness. Nature 361: 597-598.

    Google Scholar 

  • Possingham H. 1999. The Global Taxonomic Initiative (GTI) and the taxonomic impediment: what are they and why should I care? Southern Connection 16: 6-8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richer De Forges B., Koslow J.A. and Poore G.C.B. 2000. Diversity and endemism of the benthic seamount fauna in the southwest Pacific. Nature 405: 944-947.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts C.M., Hawkins J.P., McAllister D.E., McClean C.J. and Werner T. 2000. Global priority regions for coral reef conservation. In: Hopley D., Hopley P.M., Tamelander J. and Done T. (eds), Ninth International Coral Reef Symposium. World Coral Reefs in the New Millennium: bridging research and management for sustainable development. State Ministry for the Environment, Indonesia, Indonesian Institute of Sciences & The International Society for Reef Studies, Bali, Indonesia, p. 223.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Soest R.W.M. 1993. Distribution of sponges on the Mauritanian continental shelf. In: Wolff W.J., van der Land J., Nienhuis P.H. and de Wilde P.A.W.J. (eds), Ecological studies in the coastal waters of Mauritania. Hydrobiologia 258: 95-106.

  • van Soest R.W.M. 1994. Demosponge distribution patterns. In: van Soest R.W.M., van Kempen T.M.G. and Braekman J.-C. (eds), Sponges in time and space. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 213-224.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Soest R.W.M. and Hajdu E. 1997. Marine area relationships from twenty sponge phylogenies: A comparison of methods and coding strategies. Cladistics 13: 1-20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sole-Cava A.M., Boury-Esnault N., Vacelet J. and Thorpe J.P. 1992. Biochemical genetic divergence and systematics in sponges of the genera Corticium and Oscarella (Demospongiae: Homoscleromorpha) in the Mediterranean Sea. Marine Biology 113: 299-304.

    Google Scholar 

  • SPSS (1999) Systat 9.0. SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swofford D.L. 2000. Paup. Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony.Version 4.0b4a. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor J.D. 1997. Diversity and structure of tropical Indo-Pacific benthic communities: Relation to regimes of nutrient input. In: Ormond R.F.G., Gage J.D. and Angel M.V. (eds), Marine Biodiversity: Patterns and Processes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 178-199.

    Google Scholar 

  • United States Hydrographic Office 1947. Atlas of Surface Currents. United States Hydrographic Office, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vane-Wright R.I., Humphries C.J. and Williams P.H. 1991.What to protect?-Systematics and the agony of choice. Biological Conservation 55: 235-254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanney J.-R. 1991. Introduction a la Geographie de l'Ocean. Une vue nouvelle du monde. Oceanis 17(1-2): 1-214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veron J.E.N. 1993. A biogeographic database of hermatypic corals. Species of the central Indo-pacific. Genera of the World. Australian Institute of Science Monograph Series Vol 1: pp. 1-433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veron J.E.N. 1995. Corals in Space and Time. The Biogeography and Evolution of the Scleractinia. University of New South Wales Press, Sydney.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker R.H. and Farquhar G. 1998. An evaluation of the Australian Biological Resources Study and the Biodiversity Program. Consultative report produced for Environment Australia. Environment Australia, Canberra, January 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams P.H., Gaston K.J. and Humphries C.J. 1994. Do conservationists and molecular biologists value differences between organisms in the same way? Biodiversity Letters 2: 67-78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams P.H., Gaston K.J. and Humphries C.J. 1997. Mapping biodiversity value worldwide: combining higher-taxon richness from different groups. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Biological Sciences 264: 141-148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson C.R. and Cheshire A.C. 1989. Patterns in the distribution of sponge populations across the central Great Barrier Reef. Coral Reefs 8: 127-134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson E.O. 1992. The Diversity of Life. Belknap, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson E.O. 2000. Biodiversity.Vanishing before our eyes. Time Special Edition 16A, April-May, Time Australia Magazine, Sydney, pp. 29-34.

  • Woerheide G. 1998. The reef cave dwelling ultraconservative coralline demosponge Astrosclera willeyana Lister 1900 from the Indo-Pacific. Facies 38: 1-88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woerheide G., Degnan D.M. and Hooper J.N.A. 2000. Population phylogenetics of the common Coral reef sponges Leucetta spp. and Pericharax spp. (Porifera: Calcarea) from the Great Barrier Reef and Vanuatu. In: Hopley D., Hopley P.M., Tamelander J. and Done T. (eds), Ninth International Coral Reef Symposium. World Coral Reefs in the New Millennium: bridging research and management for sustainable development. State Ministry for the Environment, Indonesia, Indonesian Institute of Sciences & The International Society for Reef Studies, Bali, Indonesia, p. 23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zar J.H. 1999. Biostatistical Analysis. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Queensland Centre for Biodiversity, Queensland Museum, South Brisbane, Australia

    John N.A. Hooper & John A. Kennedy

  2. AstraZeneca R&D Griffith University, Australia

    Ronald J. Quinn

Authors
  1. John N.A. Hooper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John A. Kennedy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ronald J. Quinn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hooper, J.N., Kennedy, J.A. & Quinn, R.J. Biodiversity ‘hotspots’, patterns of richness and endemism, and taxonomic affinities of tropical Australian sponges (Porifera). Biodiversity and Conservation 11, 851–885 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015370312077

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015370312077

Search

Navigation