4.0 Article

In hospite Symbiodinium photophysiology and antioxidant responses in Acropora muricata on a coast-reef scale: implications for variable bleaching patterns

期刊

SYMBIOSIS
卷 68, 期 1-3, 页码 61-72

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s13199-016-0380-4

关键词

Acropora muricata; Bleaching susceptibility; Total phenolic contents; Antioxidant activities; Photophysiology; Temperature and light fluctuations

资金

  1. University of Mauritius
  2. Tertiary Education Commission (TEC) of Mauritius

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Understanding susceptibility to bleaching may indicate how corals cope with increasing seawater temperatures resulting from climate change. In Belle Mare lagoon, Mauritius, Acropora muricata colonies at reef sites but not near the coast exhibited bleaching. We compared seawater temperatures and light intensity both on a summer day and a winter day at a reef station and a near-coast station. The total phenolic contents, non-enzymatic antioxidant activities of the coral holobiont, in situ photophysiological parameters of in hospite Symbiodinium as well as their cladal diversity were assessed. Both sites had comparable maximum temperatures but fluctuations were higher in the near-coast station (2-3 A degrees C) compared to the reef station (1-1.5 A degrees C) on both days. Light intensity was higher on the summer day than the winter day at both stations. Higher total phenolic contents and ferrous reducing antioxidant potential were observed in near-coast colonies than in reef colonies on the summer day. Only Clade A-like Symbiodinium sp. variants were detected at both locations, but higher maximum relative electron transport rates and maximum non-photochemical quenching were measured in near-coast colonies. Our data show that the near-coast colonies exhibited enhanced photophysiological responses, antioxidant activities and increased total phenolic contents in response to higher thermal and light fluctuations. This acclimatization may explain the variability in bleaching along a coast-reef scale.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据