The Ecology of Tijuana Estuary, California: An Estuarine Profile

More documents

Recommendations

Info

arat~iphmlated iiqrtt ietiels rn field oxopriments (113 25 50 anij f OO , of incident ZiyhZ) After 2 os ?lore weeks dccxposure to Ihe iighl c~:~dif!ons rcoitcace corrtas af algae were tnkrn fo tl~c iabora!i?rc and Iri.dlrnt"r'lt effects weria ;lss~*t;secl with mc,lsures of chlorophvfl cor7cunt:~l~or~ and ghutGsvnthetiu ilght-rcspor7st curves Her exDc~-i:?t?n?.; wrrc repeated in kvinPc?r arld spring wht*': E:1!~?fl?"~1Prphr1 d~\f~lir:dfi?d lnt~ nigal ft-?dts ,if'ld tr> siJm:rlcr \illk?t111 t)llit*-gfee11 nlyntl were ,3bund;lnl The compr?.sit,on of ?he algal nlnt enrr>i~?ur~ities was sifiliida 113 ti70sf nr Tl]~tikn,r rsltt,%r\r dtinng ptlrlods nf qooti "dal '~irbhir~g i(cr:tiri,n s reitiifi; iitrrpubi i auqgtsl that thc nv$lc?fhes,i of iliadjrr 11980. 1987b) is too i;~rnpl~ w8nter ,lii?ai ccrrnupluntlies friiii-.d 10 ~ncrcase ~\rotlocisvitv rr? $~r$j>r")rtiof? ft1 irlcfcnse.tf lryh! dvLtalcrbi3it~ AlgJdi gnats uu~ckly bsp~~lrlr~ Stglt! s;!rurcxtr:d ia! SOQ GO0 htFtirsteins nl $ tor ti?rrjaerdtures c,xngtnq firm IS C to 3.3 C1 Ctliorophyil conce?rrtrat~un:; uvt?f-e srqr?rfncrlntlv tl~ghcr fcxr digac grown in full sunitght but rdles of ~ahofo%~n:!~esi
Table 19. Net aboveground productiv~ty and net carban productivity fesltmated from plant carbon data of 5/32 178) af salt marsh vascular plants (data are Per m2 yr from Wtnlreld 1980) 0.8 ha area of the marsh. More stations were added for the August sample (n = 56). then cut to 25 stations in 1977 At each station, plants were clipped to ground level within 0.25-m2 circular ~uadrats. Grams dry wt Grdrrls carbon Frequent sampling (Table 20) showed that there were differences in the timing of peak standing crop for each species. Pickleweed reached its maximum in August, while cordgrass peaked in July and again in September following fruit production. The standing crop for all species combined was at its minimum in March and maximum in August of 1976 and 1977 (Figure 52). Whole-marsh sampling was repeated in August of 1978, but efforts in later years were restricted to the lower marsh (Table 21 1. $ldt!li~d f0~1~lhc~ ur~$tjv %O? 2?11 3H 72 ?;iidOS%J t'ilfl~i,~i "%(:
Page 1 and 2:
June 1986 I THE ECOLOGY OF TIJUANA
Page 3 and 4:
The findings in this report are not
Page 5 and 6:
CONVERSION TABLE Metric to U.S. Cus
Page 7 and 8:
Page 4.5 Energy Flow ..............
Page 9 and 10:
Number Page The channel fish cornrn
Page 11 and 12:
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The California Sea
Page 13 and 14:
Figure 1. Lacatlcrn of 71juana Estu
Page 15 and 16:
Figure 3. Map6 of Tijuana Estuary s
Page 17 and 18:
FI(I(uPc$ 4. Wei&rahOt@ patt@rns of
Page 19 and 20:
also limitrng Hot, dry desert winds
Page 21 and 22:
2.3 LAND USE HlSPQWV Through exami!
Page 23 and 24:
The nearby bridge remained, and ext
Page 25 and 26: flushing until mid-December 1984. E
Page 27 and 28: with seawater. Even in years with s
Page 29 and 30: flats ~n winter but not in midsumme
Page 31 and 32: Each "island" of higher topography
Page 33 and 34: The vegetation and soils of the upp
Page 35 and 36: populations (Massey 1979) The brrds
Page 37 and 38: c~n~entrations of insects, especial
Page 39 and 40: Frgufe 29. The Ifght-footed clapper
Page 41 and 42: Figure 30. During winter (above) th
Page 43 and 44: anlmal footprints, In the hardpan f
Page 45 and 46: Tijuana Estuary salt marsh Such exp
Page 47 and 48: Frgura 36 The etraracrel an& tidal
Page 49 and 50: ^_ _I __"___I _-a_. -- fable 7. Inv
Page 51 and 52: Pre- 1980 (excluding Hosrner Rehse
Page 53 and 54: Table 8. Average density (number/m2
Page 55 and 56: changes in envlronment has not been
Page 57 and 58: was dominated by goby species, Cali
Page 59 and 60: compared the ,chthyoplankton commun
Page 61 and 62: Figure 43, Birds of the intertidal
Page 63 and 64: -" and that the community was compo
Page 65 and 66: Willet (1 73) i - Water Depth (cm)
Page 67 and 68: Table 14. Early information on dune
Page 69 and 70: Figure 48. Birds that nest on the s
Page 71 and 72: CHAPTER 4 ECOSYSTEM FldNCTlONlNG St
Page 73 and 74: were no? irght-saturated untri expo
Page 75: Table 17. Conceptual model of chann
Page 79 and 80: _I___ I__-~--- 4.4.1 Nitragen Fluxe
Page 81 and 82: i i t 1 1 I Table 22. Standing crop
Page 83 and 84: calculated from chlorophyll a measu
Page 85 and 86: Dissolved Organic Biomass Carbon De
Page 87 and 88: CHAPTER 5 THE ROLE OF DISTURBANCES
Page 89 and 90: Table 25. Changes in elevation in t
Page 91 and 92: Table 26. Change in pickleweed cano
Page 93 and 94: Table 27. Occurrence (in circular 0
Page 95 and 96: perennials can survive long periods
Page 97 and 98: An experiment was designed to deter
Page 99 and 100: CHAPTER 6 MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
Page 101 and 102: Closely associated with the researc
Page 103 and 104: c. Dredging at Tijuana Estuary will
Page 105 and 106: Table 30. Predicted impacts of redu
Page 107 and 108: footed clapper rails; the picklewee
Page 109 and 110: overwashas, and slabiiizatran rs rl
Page 112 and 113: REFERENCES Allen, L.G. 1980. Struct
Page 114 and 115: Minsky, D. 1984. California least t
Page 116: 30272 -101 REPORT WUMENTATION 1. RE
show all

The Ecology of Tijuana Estuary, California: An Estuarine Profile

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?