![]() |
| Oceanographic influences on species distributions ![]() Pt. Conception along the coast of Central California operates as a major biogeographic boundary ![]() Typical embayment along the Sonoma coast - can such features act to retain larvae near their site of origin? Another question we are exploring in this arena relates to the topographic complexity of shorelines. How do the irregularities associated with embayments or points at a variety of scales influence alongshore transport? Can topographic complexity in coastal boundary layers contribute to local retention of larvae, and if so, to what degree? These questions and others have direct bearing on population and genetic structure in large numbers of marine species. Selected publications: Gaylord, B., and S.D. Gaines. 2000. Temperature or transport? Range limits in marine species mediated solely by flow. American Naturalist 155: 769-789. Gaines, S.D., B. Gaylord, and J.L. Largier. 2003. Avoiding current oversights in marine reserve design. Ecological Applications 13: S32-S46 (Special Issue on Marine Reserves). Gaylord, B., S.D. Gaines, D.A. Siegel, and M.H. Carr. 2005. Marine reserves can exploit life history and population structure to potentially increase fisheries yields. Ecological Applications 15: 2180-2191. Gaines, S.D., B. Gaylord, L.R. Gerber, A. Hastings, and B. Kinlan. 2007. Connecting places: The ecological consequences of dispersal in the sea. Oceanography 20: 90-99.
Gaines, S.D., S. Lester, G. Eckert, B. Kinlan, R. Sagarin, and B. Gaylord. 2008. Dispersal and geographic ranges in the sea. In: J. Witman and K. Roy (eds), Marine macroecology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. In press. |