TABLE 2.

Richness and diversity estimates for bacterial 16S rRNA gene clone libraries from wild and aquacultured M. laxissima sponges from both aquaculture systems and from surrounding water samples

Source (na)	Distanceb	Richnessc	ACEd	Chao1e	Shannonf	1/Simpsong
Flowthrough aquaculture system
Wild M. laxissima (2001) (n = 119)	0.2	8	14	10	0.97	2.2
	0.03	18	37	36	2.2	6.3
6-Mo-aquacultured sponge (n = 85)	0.2	22	28	26	2.6	9.3
	0.03	52	89	85	3.8	71.4
2-Yr-aquacultured sponge (n = 47)	0.2	16	22	23	2.4	9.7
	0.03	28	60	50	3.1	30
Recirculating aquaculture system
Wild M. laxissima (2004) (n = 67)	0.2	13	29	24	1.9	5.2
	0.03	28	71	66	2.6	8.3
1-Mo-aquacultured sponge (n = 67)	0.2	11	13	11	1.8	4.2
	0.03	32	77	59	3.1	21.7
Water samples
Seawater (n = 37)	0.2	11	13	12	2.2	8.6
	0.03	21	46	34	2.8	20
Aquarium (n = 51)	0.2	14	17	16	2.4	10.8
	0.03	28	48	45	3.1	33.3

^an, number of gene sequences analyzed.

^b80% identity was estimated as the phylum-level distance (D = 0.20), and 97% identity was estimated as the species-level distance (D = 0.03).

^cRichness is based on observed unique OTUs.

^dNonparametric statistical prediction of total richness of different OTUs based on distribution of abundant (>10) and rare (≤10) OTUs.

^eNonparametric statistical predictions of total richness of OTUs based on distribution of singletons and doubletons.

^fShannon diversity index. A higher number represents more diversity.

^gReciprocal of Simpson's diversity index. A higher number represents more diversity.