Advertisement

Factors Controlling Soft Bottom Macrofauna Along and Across European Continental Margins

  • E. C. FlachEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Soft bottom macrofauna (benthos) in the deep-sea is influenced by a wide variety of environmental factors. In this review I will shortly evaluate the importance of some factors on different parameters of the benthos. Studies on macrobenthic communities from the Skagerrak in the north to the Iberian continental margin in the south are compared. Not one factor can be indicated as the factor controlling the benthic fauna at the European continental margin. Nearly all factors are coupled and directly or indirectly influencing the benthic community, indicating the complexity of this ecosystem. The overall pattern in decrease in total density and biomass with increasing water depth is mainly determined by the food input, but special topographic structures can highly influence this pattern. In canyons very high densities were found, whereas on very steep slopes and on sea mounts densities were very low. Not only quantity, but also quality, reliability and source of the food are important for the benthos. High flow velocities can resuspend the organic matter again and make it more available for suspension-feeders, whereas the fauna can change the flow and actively capture food that otherwise would pass. Extreme flow conditions can periodically disturb the fauna, allowing only deep living fauna to maintain and favor rapid colonizers, whereas a stable environment allows the development of a ’climax’ community in which biotic interactions become very important. As we still know only very little about the biology of the deep-sea fauna, we also can say very little about the elasticity and carrying capacity of this remote, but probably very important ecosystem. The highly complex nature of the continental margins, with strong difference in appearance, steep slopes with rocky outcrops, smooth sedimental plateaus, bights, troughs, seamounts and canyons, results in high local variability. We need to know more about the actual life-history strategies, feeding-types and mobility of the deep-sea fauna. Long-term observations and experiments would give an idea about the reactions of the benthos on different environmental events, as changes in flow velocities, food falls, sedimentation, even pollution and disturbances, but also reactions on biological events, as predators, competitors, etc. DNA- analyses can give information about evolution and distribution of the fauna and probably allow us a better understanding of biodiversity.

Keywords

Benthic Fauna High Flow Velocity Benthic Boundary Layer Organic Carbon Flux Rockall Trough 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allen JA, Sanders HL (1966) Adaptations to abyssal life as shown by the bivalve Abra profundorum (Smith). Deep-Sea Res 13:1175–1184Google Scholar
  2. Aller JY, Aller RC (1986) Evidence for localized enhancement of biological activity associated with tube and burrow structures in deep-sea sediments at the HEBBLE site, western North Atlantic. DeepSea Res 33:755–790CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Billet DSM, Lampitt RS, Rice AL, Mantoura RF (1983) Seasonal sedimentation of phytoplankton to the DeeP-cea benthos Nature 302:520–522Google Scholar
  4. Carney RS (1989) Examining relationships between organic carbon flux and deep-sea deposit feeding. In: Lopez GR, Taghon GL, Levinton J (eds) Ecology of Marine Deposit Feeders. Springer, New York 24–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dauwe B, Middelburg JJ (1998) Amino acids and hexosamines as indicators of organic matter degradation state in North Sea sediments. Limnol Oceanol 43:782–798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dauwe B, Herman PMJ, Heip CHR (1998) Community structure and bioturbation potential of macrofauna at four North Sea stations with contrasting food supply. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 173:67–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Duineveld GCA, Lavaleye MSS, Berghuis EM, Kok A, Witbaard R (in press) Patterns of benthic megafauna on the NW Iberian Continental Margin in relation to the distribution of phytodetritus and RNA; a comparison with the Celtic continental margin. Prog Oceanog, Special Vol OMEX IIGoogle Scholar
  8. Epping E, Helder W (in press) Organic carbon mineralization in NE Atlantic margin sediments: A comparison between Goban Spur and the Iberian Margin. Prog Oceanog, Special Vol OMEX IIGoogle Scholar
  9. Flach E, Bruin W de (1999) Diversity patterns in macrobenthos across a continental slope in the NE Atlantic. J Sea Res 42:303–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Flach E, Heip C (1996a) Vertical distribution of macrozoobenthos within the sediments on the continental slope of the Goban Spur area (NE Atlantic). Mar Ecol Prog Ser 141:55–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Flach E, Heip C (1996b) Seasonal variations in faunal distribution and activity across the continental slope of the Goban Spur area (NE Atlantic). J Sea Res 36:203–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Flach E, Thomsen L (1998) Do physical and chemical factors structure the macrobenthic community at a continental slope in the NE Atlantic? Hydrobiologia 375/376:265–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Flach E, Lavaleye M, de Stigter H, Thomsen L (1998) Feeding types of the benthic community and particle transport across the continental slope of the Goban Spur. Progr Oceanog 42:209–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Flach E, Muthumbi A, Heip C (in press) Meiofauna and macrofauna community structure in relation to sediment composition at the Iberian Margin compared to the Goban spur (NE Atlantic). Progr Oceanog Special Vol OMEX IIGoogle Scholar
  15. Gage JD, Lamont PA, Tyler PA (1995) Deep-sea macrobenthic communities at contrasting sites off Portugal, preliminary results: I Introduction and diversity comparisons. Int Rev ges Hydrobiol 80:235–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Galéron J, Sibuet M, Mahaut M-L, Dinet A (2000) Variation in structure and biomass of the benthic communities at three contrasting sites in the tropical Northeast Atlantic. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 197:121–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Grassle JF, Morse-Porteous LS (1987) Macrofaunal colonization of disturbed deep-sea environments and the structure of deep-sea benthic communities. DeepSea Res 34:1911–1950CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jumars PA, Mayer LM, Deming JW, Baross JA, Wheatcroft RA (1990) Deep-sea deposit-feeding strategies suggested by environmental and feeding constraints. Phil Trans Royal Soc London A 331:85–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lamont PA, Gage JD, Tyler PA (1995) Deep-sea macrobenthic communities at contrasting sites off Portugal, preliminary results: II Spatial dispersion. Int Rev ges Hydrobiol 80:251–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lampitt RS (1985) Evidence for the seasonal deposition of detritus to the deep-sea floor and its subsequent resuspension. Deep-Sea Res 32:885–897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lampitt RS, Billett DSM, Rice AL (1986) Biomass of the invertebrate megabenthos from 500 to 4100 m in the northeast Atlantic Ocean. Mar Biol 93:69–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. López-Jamar E, Cal RM, González G, Hanson RB, Rey J, Santiago G, Tenore KR (1992) Upwelling and outwelling effects on the benthic regime of the continental shelf off Galicia, NW Spain. J Mar Res 50:465–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pfannkuche O, Soltwedel T (1998) Small benthic size classes along the NW European Continental Margin: Spatial and temporal variability in activity and biomass. Progr Oceanogr 42:189–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pfannkuche O, Boetius A, Lochte K, Lundgren U, Thiel H (1999) Responses of deep-sea benthos to sedimentation patterns in the North-East Atlantic in 1992. Deep-Sea Res 46:573–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rice DL, Rhoads DC (1989) Early diagenesis of organic matter and the nutritional value of sediment. In: Lopez GR, Taghon GL, Levinton JS (eds) Ecology of Marine Deposit Feeders. Springer, New York 59–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rosenberg R (1995) Benthic marine fauna structured by hydrodynamic processes and food availability. Neth J Sea Res 34:303–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rosenberg R, Hellman B, Lundberg A (1996) Benthic macrofaunal community structure in the Norwegian Trench, deep Skagerrak. J Sea Res 35:181–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sibuet M, Lambert CE, Chesselet R, Laubier L (1989) Density of the major size groups ofbenthic fauna and trophic input in deep basins of the Atlantic Ocean. J Mar Res 47:851–867CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tyler PA, Harvey R, Giles LA, Gage JD (1992) Reproductive strategies and diet in deep-sea nuculanid protobranchs (Bivalvia: Nuculoidea) from the Rockall Trough. Mar Biol 114: 571–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tyler PA, Gage JD, Paterson GJL, Rice AL (1993) Dietary constraints on reproductive periodicity in two sympatric deep-sea astropectinid seastars. Mar Biol 115:267–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Thomsen L, Flach E (1997) Mesocosm observations of fluxes of particulate matter within the benthic boundary layer. J Sea Res 37:67–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Thomsen L, Weering TJCE van (1998) Spatial and temporal variability of particulate matter in the benthic boundary layer at the North East Atlantic continental margin (Celtic Sea). Progr Oceanogr 42:61–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Van Weering TJCE, Hall IR, de Stigter H, McCave IN, Thomsen L (1998) Recent sediments, sediment accumulation and carbon burial at Goban Spur, NW European continental margin (47–50°N). Progr Oceanogr 42:5–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Young GM, Tyler PA, Gage JD (1996) Vertical distribution correlates with pressure tolerances of early embryos in the deep-sea asteroid Plutonaster bifrons. J Mar Biol Ass UK 76:749–757CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Systems EcologyUniversity of StockholmStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations