Advertisement

Meiobenthos as a Component of Anthropogenic Disturbance Assessment in the Abyssal Pacific Environment

  • Teresa Radziejewska
Chapter
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Earth System Sciences book series (BRIEFSEARTHSYST)

Abstract

Effects of disturbance in the marine environment are assessed, in situ or in the laboratory, based on various indicators, including measures of change in benthic community attributes (abundance, biomass, composition, diversity). The benthic organisms used usually represent the macrobenthos, but the meiobenthos is increasing frequently recommended for such assessments. In anticipation of the polymetallic nodule extraction from the abyssal Pacific areas, a number of field experiments were conducted in which seafloor alteration resembling that accompanying nodule mining, or effects similar to those expected from mining activities, was simulated using various devices: a test miner (the 1975–1980, with a 2006 follow-up, DOMES experiment in CCFZ), a plough-harrow (the 1989–1996 DISCOL experiment in the Peru Basin, S Pacific), and a Benthic Disturber (Benthic Impact Experiments or BIEs: the 1991–1993 US-Russian Joint BIE, the 1994–1997 JET, and the 1995–2000 IOM BIE, all in CCFZ). The severity of impact was assessed by analysing, more or less comprehensively, changes in meiobenthic community-related variables which included qualitative (taxonomic composition, with a finer resolution in nematodes and harpacticoid copepods) and quantitative (abundances of total meiobenthos and of the key taxa, relative abundances) characteristics. Attempts were also made to assess the degree of recovery from the disturbance by re-sampling the disturbed areas at various time intervals post-disturbance. Meiobenthic communities were observed to be affected by the disturbance, reduced abundances immediately post-disturbance being the major community-level manifestation of impact. Effects observed during follow-up studies differed considerably ; although, in most cases, the overall community recovery was recorded, sometimes as early as several months after the disturbance, the composition of both nematode and harpacticoid taxocoenes was altered. The causes underlying the alteration are difficult to be unequivocally explained. The patch mosaic effects which could have been at play could have been accompanied by effects of some natural phenomena such as episodes of phytodetritus sedimentation known to affect deep-sea meiobenthic communities.

Keywords

Meiobenthos Deep sea Pacific CCFZ Disturbance Nodule mining Impact assessment Experiment Free-living Nematoda Copepoda Harpacticoida 

References

  1. Adams WJ, Kimerle RA, Barnett JW (1992) Sediment quality and aquatic life assessment. Environ Sci Technol 26:1864–1875CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahnert A, Schriever G (2001) Response of abyssal copepoda harpacticoida (crustacea) and other meiobenthos to an artificial disturbance and its bearing on future mining for polymetallic nodules. Deep Sea Res II 48:779–3794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aller JY (1997) Benthic community response to temporal and spatial gradients in physical disturbance within a deep-sea western boundary region. Deep-Sea Res I 44:39–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alongi DM (1985) Effect of physical disturbance on population dynamics and trophic interactions among microbes and meiofauna. J Mar Res 43:351–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Anonymus (1987) Chapter 6 Environmental considerations. In: Marine minerals: exploring our new ocean frontier. US Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, OTA-0-342, Washington, D.C., 215-245 (accessed via www.vws.princeton.edu)
  6. Austen MC, McEvoy AJ (1997) The use of offshore meiobenthic communities in laboratory microcosm experiments: response to heavy metal contamination. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 211:247–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Austen MC, Widdicombe S, Villano-Pitacco N (1998) Effects of biological disturbance on diversity and structure of meiobenthic nematode communities. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 174:33–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baker CM, Bett BJ, Billett DSM et al (2001) An environmental perspective. In: WWF/IUCN, the status of natural resources on the high seas. WWF/IUCN, Gland, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  9. Balsamo M, Semprucci F, Frontalini F et al (2012) Meiofauna as a tool for marine ecosystem biomonitoring. In: Cruzado A (ed) Marine ecosystems. InTech, doi:  10.5772/34423
  10. Barnes DKA (1999) The influence of ice on polar nearshore benthos. J Mar Biol Ass UK 79:401–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Barnes B, Sidhu HS, Roxburgh H (2006) A model integrating patch dynamics, competing species and the intermediate disturbance hypothesis. Ecol Model 194:414–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Barnett B, Yamauchi H (1995) Deep sea sediment resuspension system used for the Japan deep sea impact experiment. In: Yamazaki T, Aso K, Okano Y et al. (eds) Proceedings of ISOPE—Ocean Mining Symposium, pp 175–179, Tsukuba, Japan, 21–22 Nov 1995Google Scholar
  13. Berge S, Markussen JM, Vigerust G (1991) Environmental consequences of deep seabed mining. Problem areas and regulations. Fridtjof Nansen Institute, LysakerGoogle Scholar
  14. Bett BJ, Narayanaswamy BE (2014) Genera as proxies for species α- and β-diversity: tested across a deep-water Atlantic-Arctic boundary. Mar Ecol doi:  10.1111/maec.12100
  15. Boesch DF, Rosenberg R (1981) Response to stress in marine benthic communities. In: Barrett GW, Rosenberg R (eds) Stress effects on natural ecosystems. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Borja A, Muxika I (2005) Guidelines for the use of AMBI (AZTI’s Marine Biotic Index) in the assessment of the benthic ecological quality. Mar Poll Bull 50:787–789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Borowski C (2001) Physically disturbed deep-sea macrofauna in the Peru Basin, southeast Pacific, revisited 7 years after the experimental impact. Deep-Sea Res II 48:3809–3839CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Brockett T, Richards CZ (1994) Deepsea mining simulator for environmental impact studies. Sea Technol 35(8):77–82Google Scholar
  19. Burd BJ (2002) Evaluation of mine tailings effects on a benthic marine infaunal community over 29 years. Mar Environ Res 53:481–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cadotte MW (2007) Competition-colonization trade-offs and disturbance effects at multiple scales. Ecology 88:823–829CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cardinale BJ, Nelson K, Palmer MA (2000) Linking species diversity to the functioning of ecosystems: on the importance of environmental context. Oikos 91:175–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Carman KR, Thistle D, Fleeger JW et al (2004) Influence of introduced CO2 on deep-sea metazoan meiofauna. J Oceanog 60:767–772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Chung JS (2013) Commercial mining system development for manganese nodules: take direct-to- or incremental-to-5,000-m approach? In: Chung JS, Komai T (eds) Proceedings of 10th ISOPE Ocean Mining Gas Hydrates Symposium, pp 1–4, Szczecin, Poland, 22–26 Sep 2013Google Scholar
  24. Chung JS, Schriever G, Sharma R et al (eds) (2002) Deep seabed mining environment: preliminary engineering and environmental assessment. ISOPE Spec Rep OMS-EN-1, ISOPE, Cupertino, California, USAGoogle Scholar
  25. Clarke KR, Warwick RM (2001) Change in marine communities: an approach to statistical analysis and interpretation, 2nd edn. Primer-E, PlymouthGoogle Scholar
  26. Colangelo MA, Macrí T, Ceccherelli VU (1996) A field experiment on the effect of two types of sediment disturbance on the rate of recovery of a meiobenthic community in a eutrophicated lagoon. Hydrobiologia 329:57–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Connell JH (1978) Diversity in tropical rain forests and coral reefs. Sci New Ser 199:1302–1310Google Scholar
  28. Cowie PR, Widdicombe S, Austen MC (2000) Effects of physical disturbance on an estuarine intertidal community: field and mesocosm results compared. Mar Biol 136:485–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Creed EL, Coull BC (1984) Sand dollar, Mellita quinquiesperforata (Leske), and sea pansy, Renilla reniformis (Cuvier): effects on meiofaunal abundance. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 84:225–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Danovaro R (2000) Benthic microbial loop and meiofaunal response to oil-induced disturbance in coastal sediments: a review. Inter J Environ Poll 13:380–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Dye AH, Lasiak TA (1986) Microbenthos, meiobenthos and fiddler crabs: trophic interactions in a tropical mangrove sediment. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 32:259–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Fleeger JW, Shirley TC, Carls MG et al (1996) Meiofaunal recolonization experiment with oiled sediments. Am Fish Soc Symp 18:271–285Google Scholar
  33. Flentje W, Lee SE, Virnovskaia A et al (2012) Polymetallic nodule mining: innovative concepts for commercialisation. University Southampton, LRET Collegium 2012 Series, 5Google Scholar
  34. Fontaubert AC de (2001) Legal and political considerations. In: WWF/IUCN, the status of natural resources on the high-seas. WWF/IUCN, Gland, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  35. Franz DR, Friedman I (2002) Effects of a macroalgal mat (Ulva lactuca) on estuarine sand flat copepods: an experimental study. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 271:209–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Fukushima T (1995) Overview “Japan Deep-Sea Impact Experiment = JET”. In: Yamazaki T, Aso K, Okano Y et al (eds) Proceedings of ISOPE—Ocean Mining Symposium, pp 47–53, Tsukuba, Japan, 21-22 Nov 1995Google Scholar
  37. Gallucci F, Moens T, Vanreusel A et al (2008) Active colonisation of disturbed sediments by deep-sea nematodes: evidence for the patch mosaic model. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 367:173–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Glasby GP (2000) Lessons learned from deep-sea mining. Science 289:551–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Glasby GP (2002) Deep seabed mining: past failures and future prospects. Mar Geores Geotechnol 20:161–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Glover AG, Smith CR (2003) The deep-sea floor ecosystem: current status and prospects of anthropogenic change by the year 2025. Environ Conserv 30:219–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Grassle JF, Morse-Porteous LS (1987) Macrofaunal colonization of disturbed deep-sea environments and the structure of deep-sea benthic communities. Deep-Sea Res 34:1911–1950CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Gray JS, Elliott M (2009) Ecology of marine sediments. From science to management, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  43. Green RH (1979) Sampling design and statistical methods for environmental biologists. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  44. Halpern BS, Selkoe KA, Michell F et al (2007) Evaluating and ranking the vulnerability of global marine ecosystems to anthropogenic threats. Conserv Biol 21:1301–1315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Hein JR, Petersen S (2013) The geology of manganese nodules. In: Baker E, Beaudoin Y (eds) Deep sea minerals: manganese nodules, a physical, biological, environmental, and technical review, vol 1B. Secretariat of the Pacific Community, GRID-ArendalGoogle Scholar
  46. Hill RA, Chapman PM, Mann GS et al (2000) Level of detail in ecological risk assessments. Mar Poll Bull 40:471–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Hobbs CH (2002) An investigation of potential consequences of marine mining in shallow water: an example from the mid-Atlantic coast of the United States. J Coast Res 18:94–101Google Scholar
  48. Huxham M, Roberts I, Bremner J (2000) A field test of the intermediate disturbance hypothesis in the soft-bottom intertidal. Int Rev Hydrobiol 85:379–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Jewett SC, Feder HM, Blanchard A (1999) Assessment of the benthic environment following offshore placer gold mining in the northeastern Bering Sea. Mar Environ Res 48:91–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Jumars PA (1981) Limits to predicting and detecting benthic community responses to manganese nodule mining. Mar Mining 3:213–229Google Scholar
  51. Kaneko (Sato) T, Ogura K, Fukushima T (1995) Preliminary results of meiofauna and bacteria abundance in an environmental impact experiment. In: Yamazaki T, Aso K, Okano Y et al (eds) Proceedings of ISOPE—Ocean Mining Symposium, Tsukuba, Japan, pp 181–186Google Scholar
  52. Kaneko (Sato) T, Maejima Y, Teishima Y (1997) The abundance and vertical distribution of abyssal benthic fauna in the Japan Deep-sea impact experiment. In: Chung JS, Das BM, Matsui T et al (eds) Proceedings of 7th ISOPE Conference, vol 1. Honolulu, USA, pp 475–480Google Scholar
  53. Khripounoff A, Caprais J-C, Crassous P (2006) Geochemical and biological recovery of the disturbed seafloor in polymetallic nodule fields of the Clipperton-Clarion Fracture Zone (CCFZ) at 5, 000-m depth. Limnol Oceanog 51:2033–2041Google Scholar
  54. Kontar EA, Sokov AV (1994) A benthic storm in northeastern tropical Pacific over the fields of manganese nodules. Deep-Sea Res 41:1069–1089CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Kotliński R, Stoyanova V (1998) Physical, chemical, and geological changes of marine environment caused by the benthic impact experiment at the IOM BIE site. In: Chung JS, Olagnon M, Kim CH et al (eds) Proceedings of 8th ISOPE Conference, vol 2. Montreal, Canada, pp 277–281Google Scholar
  56. Lambshead PJD, Hodda M (1994) The impact of disturbance on measurements of variability in marine nematode populations. Vie Milieu 44:21–27Google Scholar
  57. Lavering IH (1994) Marine environments of Southeast Australia (gippsland shelf and bass strait) and the impact of offshore petroleum exploration and production activity. Mar Geores Geotechnol 12:201–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. La Rosa T, Mirto S, Mazzola A et al (2001) Differential responses of benthic microbes and meiofauna to fish-farm disturbance in coastal sediments. Environ Poll 112:427–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Lee HJ, Vanhove S, Peck LS et al (2001) Recolonsation of meiofauna after catastrophic iceberg scouring in shallow Antarctic sediments. Polar Biol 24:918–925CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Lodge M, Johnson D, Le Gurun G et al (2014) Seabed mining: international seabed authority environmental management plan for the Clarion-Clipperton Zone. A partnership approach. Mar Pol 49:66–72Google Scholar
  61. Magni P, Hyland I, Manzella G et al (eds) (2005) Proceedings of the workshop “indicators of stress in the marine benthos”, Torregrande-Oristano, Italy, Paris, UNESCO/IOC, IMC, 2005. (IOC Workshop Rep 195) (IMC Spec Publ ISBN 88-85983-01-4), 8–9 Oct 2004Google Scholar
  62. Mahatma R (2009) Meiofauna communities of the Pacific nodule province: abundance, diversity and community structure. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Oldenburg, Oldenburg, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  63. Markussen JM (1994) Deep seabed mining and the environment: consequences, perceptions, and regulations. In: Bergesen HO, Parmann G (eds) Green globe yearbook of international co-operation on environment and development 1994. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  64. Martin J, Sanchez-Cabeza JA, Eriksson M et al (2009) Recent accumulation of trace metals in sediments at the DYFAMED site (Northwestern Mediterranean Sea). Mar Poll Bull 59:146–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Miljutin DM, Miljutina MA, Martinez Arbizu P et al (2011) Deep-sea nematode assemblage has not recovered 26 years after experimental mining of polymetallic nodules (Clarion-Clipperton Fracture Zone, Tropical Eastern Pacific). Deep Sea Res I 58:885–897Google Scholar
  66. Mincks SL, Smith CR, DeMaster DJ (2005) Persistence of labile organic matter and microbial biomass in Antarctic shelf sediments: evidence of a sediment food bank. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 300:3–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Mirto S, La Rosa T, Gambi C et al (2002) Nematode community response to fish-farm impact in the western Mediterranean. Environ Poll 116:203–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Morgan CL, Odunton NA, Jones AF (1999) Synthesis of environmental impacts of deep seabed mining. Mar Geores Geotechnol 17:307–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Mullineaux LS (1987) Organisms living on manganese nodules and crusts: distribution and abundance at three North Pacific sites. Deep-Sea Res 34:165–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Mullineaux LS (1988) The role of settlement in structuring a hard-substratum community in the deep sea. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 120:247–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. National Research Council (1984) Deep seabed stable reference areas. National Academic Press, Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
  72. Nilsson C, Grelsson G (1995) The fragility of ecosystems: a review. J Appl Ecol 32:677–692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Ozturgut E, Anderson GD, Burns RE et al (1978) Deep ocean mining of manganese nodules in the North Pacific: pre-mining environmental conditions and anticipated mining effects. NOAA Techn Mem, ERL MESA-33Google Scholar
  74. Ozturgut E, Lavelle JW, Burns RE (1981) Impacts of manganese nodule mining on the environment: results from pilot-scale mining tests in the North equatorial Pacific. In: Geyer RA (ed), Marine environmental pollution. 2. Dumping and Mining. Elsevier, Oceanography Series 27BGoogle Scholar
  75. Pearson TH (1981) Stress and catastrophe in marine benthic ecosystems. In: Barrett GW, Rosenberg R (eds) Stress effects on natural ecosystems. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  76. Pearson TH, Rosenberg R (1978) Macrobenthic succession in relation to organic enrichment and pollution of the marine environment. Oceanog Mar Biol Ann Rev 16:229–311Google Scholar
  77. Pogrebov VB, Fokin SI, Galtsova VV et al (1997) Benthic communities as influenced by nuclear testing and radioactive waste disposal off Novaya Zemlya in the Russian Arctic. Mar Poll Bull 35:333–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Powell EN, Bright TJ, Woods A et al (1983) Meiofauna and the thiobios in the east flower garden brine seep. Mar Biol 72:269–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Radziejewska T (2002) Responses of deep-sea meiobenthic communities to sediment disturbance simulating effects of polymetallic nodule mining. Int Rev Hydrobiol 87:459–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Radziejewska T, Masłowski J (1997) Macro- and meiobenthos of the Arkona Basin (western Baltic Sea): differential recovery following hypoxic events. In: Hawkins LE, Hutchinson S, Jensen AC et al (eds) The responses of marine organisms to their environments. Proceedings 30th European marine biology symposium, University of Southampton, SouthamptonGoogle Scholar
  81. Radziejewska T, Drzycimski I, Galtsova VV et al (2001a) Changes in genus-level diversity of meiobenthic free-living nematodes (Nematoda) and harpacticoids (Copepoda Harpacticoida) at an abyssal site following experimental sediment disturbance. In: Chung JS, Stoyanova V (eds) Proceedings of 4th Ocean Mining Symposium, Szczecin, Poland, pp 38–43Google Scholar
  82. Radziejewska T, Rokicka-Praxmajer J, Stoyanova V (2001b) IOM BIE revisited: meiobenthos at the IOM BIE site 5 years after the experimental disturbance. In: Chung JS, Stoyanova V (eds) Proceedings of 4th Ocean Mining Symposium, Szczecin, Poland, pp 63–68Google Scholar
  83. Ramirez-Llodra E, Tyler PA, Baker MC et al (2011) Man and the last great wilderness: human impact on the deep sea. PLoS ONE 6:e22588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Rees HL, Boyd SE, Schratzberger M et al (2006) Role of benthic indicators in regulating human activities at sea. Environ Sci Policy 9:496–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Rhoads DC (1974) Organism-sediment relations on the muddy sea floor. Oceanog Mar Biol Ann Rev 12:263–300Google Scholar
  86. Roxburgh SH, Shea K, Wilson JB (2004) The intermediate disturbance hypothesis: patch dynamics and mechanisms of species coexistence. Ecology 85:359–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Savage C, Field JG, Warwick RM (2001) Comparative meta-analysis of the impact of offshore marine mining on macrobenthic communities versus organic pollution studies. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 221:265–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Schratzberger M, Warwick RM (1998) Effects of physical disturbance on nematode communities in sand and mud: a microcosm experiment. Mar Biol 130:643–650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Schratzberger M, Dinmore TA, Jennings S (2002) Impacts of trawling on the diversity, biomass and structure of meiofauna assemblages. Mar Biol 14:83–93Google Scholar
  90. Schratzberger M, Rees HL, Boyd SE (2000) Effects of simulated deposition of dredged material on structure of nematode assemblages–the role of contamination. Mar Biol 137:613–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Schriever G (1995) DISCOL—disturbance and recolonization experiment of a manganese nodule area of the Southeastern Pacific. In: Yamazaki T, Aso K, Okano Y et al (eds) Proceedings of ISOPE—ocean mining symposium, pp 163–166, Tsukuba, Japan, 21–22 Nov 1995Google Scholar
  92. Schriever G, Bussau C, Thiel H (1991) DISCOL–precautionary environmental impact studies for future manganese nodule mining and first results on meiofauna abundance. Proc Adv Mar Technol Conf 4:47–57Google Scholar
  93. Schriever G, Ahner A, Bluhm H et al (1997) Results of the large-scale deep-sea experimental study DISCOL during eight years of investigation. In: Chung JS, Das BM, Matsui T, Thiel H (eds) Proceedings of 7th ISOPE Conference, vol 2. Honolulu, Hawaii, pp 438–444Google Scholar
  94. Sherman KM, Coull BC (1980) The response of meiofauna to sediment disturbance. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 46:59–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Sherman KM, Reidenauer JA, Thistle D et al (1983) Role of a natural disturbance in an assemblage of marine free-living nematodes. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 11:23–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Shirayama Y (1999) Biological results of the JET project: an overview. In: Chung JS, Sharma R (eds) Proceedings of 3rd Ocean Mining Symposium, pp 185–190, Goa, India, 8–10 Nov 1999Google Scholar
  97. Smith CR, Levin LA, Koslow A et al (2008) The near future of the deep seafloor ecosystems. In: Polunin N (ed) Aquatic ecosystems: trends and global prospects. Cambridge Univ Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  98. Smith EP (2002) BACI design. In: El-Shaarawi A, Piegorsch WW (eds) Encyclopedia of environmetrics, vol 1. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  99. Smith S, Heydon R (2013) Processes related to the technical development of marine mining. In: Baker E, Beaudoin Y (eds) Deep sea minerals. Manganese nodules, a physical, biological, environmental and technical review, vol 1B. Secretariat of the Pacific Community, GRID-ArendalGoogle Scholar
  100. Somerfield PJ, Rees HL, Warwick RM (1995) Interrelationships in community structure between shallow-water marine meiofauna and macrofauna in relation to dredgings disposal. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 127:13–112Google Scholar
  101. Taguchi K, Nakata K, Aoki S et al (1995) Environmental study on the deep-sea mining of manganese nodules in the northeastern tropical Pacific. In: Yamazaki T, Aso K, Okano Y et al (eds) Proceedings of ISOPE—Ocean Mining Symposium, pp 167–174, Tsukuba, Japan, 21–22 Nov 1995Google Scholar
  102. Thiel H (2001) Use and protection of the deep sea–an introduction. Deep-Sea Res II 48:3427–3431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Thiel H, Foell EJ, Schriever G (1992) Potential environmental effects of deep seabed mining. Univ Hamburg, Hamburg, 26Google Scholar
  104. Thiel H, Forschungsverbund Tiefsee-Unmweltschutz (1995) The german environmental impact research for manganese nodule mining in the SE Pacific Ocean. In: Yamazaki T, Aso K, Okano Y et al (eds) Proceedings of ISOPE—Ocean Mining Symposium, pp 39–45, Tsukuba, Japan, 21–22 Nov 1995Google Scholar
  105. Thiel H, Forschungsverbund Tiefsee-Unmweltschutz (2001) Evaluation of the environmental consequences of polymetallic nodule mining based on the results of the TUSCH Research Association. Deep-Sea Res II 48:3433–3452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Thiel H, Angel MV, Foell EJ et al (1998) Environmental risks from large-scale ecological research in the deep-sea; a desk study. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  107. Thistle D (1998) Harpacticoid copepod diversity at two physically reworked sites in the deep sea. Deep-Sea Res II 45:13–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Thrush S, Dayton PK (2002) Disturbance to marine benthic habitats by trawling and dredging: implications for marine biodiversity. Ann Rev Ecology System 33:449–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Tkatchenko GG, Radziejewska T (1998) Recovery and recolonization processes in the area disturbed by a polymetallic nodule collector simulator. In: Chung JS, Olagnon M, Kim CH et al (eds) Proceedings of 8th ISOPE Conference, vol 2. Montreal, Canada, pp 282–286Google Scholar
  110. Trueblood DD, Ozturgut E (1997) The benthic impact experiment: a study of the ecological impacts of deep seabed mining on abyssal benthic communities. In: Chung JS, Das BM, Matsui T, Thiel H (eds) Proceedings of 7th (1997) ISOPE Conference, pp 481–487, Honolulu, USA, 25–30 May 1997Google Scholar
  111. Trueblood DD, Ozturgut E, Pilipchuk M et al (1997) The ecological impact of the joint U.S.–Russian benthic impact experiment. In: Proceedings of 2nd Ocean Mining Symposium, pp 139–145, Seoul, Korea, 24-26 Nov 1997Google Scholar
  112. Underwood AJ (1992) Beyond BACI: the detection of environmental impacts on populations in the real, but variable, world. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 161:145–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Underwood AJ (1996) Detection, interpretation, prediction and management of environmental disturbances: some roles for experimental marine ecology. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 200:1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Varon R, Thistle D (1988) Response of a harpacticoid copepod to a small-scale natural disturbance. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 118:245–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Veillette J, Juniper SK, Gooday AJ et al (2007a) Influence of surface texture and microhabitat heterogeneity in structuring nodule faunal communities. Deep-Sea Res I 54:1936–1943Google Scholar
  116. Veillette J, Sarrazin J, Gooday AJ et al (2007b) Ferromanganese nodule fauna in the Tropical North Pacific Ocean: species richness, faunal cover and spatial distribution. Deep-Sea Res I 54:1912–1935Google Scholar
  117. Vopel K, Thiel H (2001) Abyssal nematode assemblages in physically disturbed and adjacent sites of the eastern equatorial Pacific. Deep-Sea Res II 48:3795–3808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Warwick RM (1993) Environmental impact studies on marine communities: Pragmatical considerations. Austral J Ecol 18:63–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Warwick RM, Clarke KR (1993a) Comparing the severity of disturbance: a meta-analysis of marine macrobenthic community data. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 92:221–231Google Scholar
  120. Warwick RM, Clarke KR (1993b) Increased variability as a symptom of stress in marine communities. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 172:215–226Google Scholar
  121. Warwick RM, Clarke KR (1994) Relearning the ABC: taxonomic changes and abundance/biomass relationships in disturbed benthic communities. Mar Biol 118:739–744CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Warwick RM, Clarke KR (1995) New ‘biodiversity’ measures reveal a decrease in taxonomic distinctness with increasing stress. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 129:301–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Warwick RM, Clarke KR (2001) Practical measures of marine biodiversity based on relatedness of species. Oceanog Mar Biol Ann Rev 39:207–231Google Scholar
  124. Warwick RM, Clarke KR, Gee JM (1990) The effect of disturbance by soldier crabs Mictyris platycheles H. Milne Edwards on meiobenthic community structure. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 135:19–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Widdicombe S, Austen MC (2001) The interaction between physical disturbance and organic enrichment: An important element in structuring benthic communities. Limnol Oceanog 46:1720–1733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Wilson GDF (1987) Crustacean communities of the manganese nodule province (DOMES site A compared with DOMES site C). Report for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management (Oceans and Energy) on Contract NA-84-ABH-0030 (accessed via www.personal.usyd.edu.au/~buz/PDF/Crustacean_Communities1999ver.pdf)
  127. Yamazaki T, Kajitani J (1999) Deep-sea environment and impact experiment to It. In: Chung JS, Matsui T, Koterayama W (eds) Proceedings of 9th ISOPE Conference, vol 1. Brest, France, pp 374–381Google Scholar
  128. Yamazaki T, Sharma R (2001) Estimation of sediment properties during benthic impact experiments. Mar Geores Geotechnol 19:269–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Palaeoceanology Unit, Faculty of GeosciencesUniversity of SzczecinSzczecinPoland

Personalised recommendations