Benthic Biodiversity, Carbon Storage and the Potential for Increasing Negative Feedbacks on Climate Change in Shallow Waters of the Antarctic Peninsula

Morley, Simon A.; Souster, Terri; Vause, Belinda J.; Gerrish, Laura; Peck, Lloyd S.; Barnes, David K. A.

doi:10.3390/biology11020320

Cited by 12 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 65 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the challenge remains to find a causal relationship between this aspect of biology and potential environmental drivers. The relationship between environmental variables and the zoobenthic carbon values could be masked by the fact that environmental conditions were only measured at one time point during the year and of course conditions at our sample sites will change through the seasons; however, studies in Antarctica showed no change in zoobenthic blue carbon with seasons (Morley et al, 2022). Environmental variables did not facilitate defining specific habitats from our sample sites; however, a PCA cluster did show an obvious separation of environmental variables between the Norge shelf and trough sites and also showed an expected gradual change across sites, shown by Jørgensen, Ljubin et al (2015) (Figure 3).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Quantifying zoobenthic blue carbon storage across habitats within the Arctic’s Barents Sea

Souster,

Barnes,

Primicerio

et al. 2024

Front. Mar. Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThe Arctic sea ice extent in September (when it is at its lowest) has declined 13% Q10 per decade, and the Arctic Ocean is becoming a more Atlantic-influenced system. Rapid climate-forced changes are taking place in many high-latitude marine ecosystems. The Barents Sea is one such high-latitude shelf ecosystem, between approximately 70° and 80°N in the Norwegian Arctic. The purpose of the current study was to estimate zoobenthic blue carbon across multiple habitats within the Barents Sea (trough, basin, shelf, and shallows), potentially providing values to aid ecosystem-based management of these areas under future climate change scenarios.MethodWe tested this by capture and analysis of 947 high-resolution (each 405.7 × 340.6 mm, 12 MB, 5 megapixels) seabed images at 17 sites with latitudinal cline, linked to a collection of corresponding oceanographic data. Biotas within these images were identified to one of the 14 functional groups and the density was calculated. Mean stored carbon per individual was assigned by ash mass (AM) and ash-free dry mass (AFDM) of individuals caught within Agassiz trawl deployments at the same sites.ResultsTrough sites, except for one site (B16), have a low quantity of zoobenthic blue carbon compared with the shallow, shelf, and basin habitats.DiscussionThe results of a previous study focused entirely on trough habitats and are therefore difficult to scale up as the basis for a meaningful estimate of across-habitat zoobenthic blue carbon in the Barents Sea. Compared with the trough and the basin, the shelf and shallow habitats of the Barents Sea are also subjected to more trawling events through demersal fisheries and showed higher zoobenthic blue carbon stock values.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Quantifying zoobenthic blue carbon storage across habitats within the Arctic’s Barents Sea

Souster,

Barnes,

Primicerio

et al. 2024

Front. Mar. Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ideally this information can be overlayed with VME and infaunal assemblage mapping, biogeochemistry, and population genetics to estimate blue carbon connectivity from key model sequesters (e.g., corals, sponges and echinoderms). This type of information would validate carbon storage and sequestration estimates based on functional groups at finer temporal and spatial scales (e.g., per population, per area, per year over time) both offshore (e.g., Barnes and Sands, 2017;Barnes et al, 2021) and nearshore (e.g., Morley et al, 2022). However, such estimates also rely on knowledge of a taxon's traits such as feeding strategy, mobility and lifestyle, which is lacking for most benthic taxa (www.SCAR-MarBIN.be).…”

Section: Future Seafloor Blue Carbon Priority Research Areasmentioning

confidence: 83%

“…In this manner, the inclusion of blue carbon research into MSP must also grapple with a contiguous managed area that includes ABNJ fisheries across a vast area extending into the Scotia arc in the sub-Antarctic. Given the diversity of habitats and high endemism to consider (Morley et al, 2022), a precautionary and informed management approach to conservation will be imperative.…”

Section: Forward Lookmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards Incorporation of Blue Carbon in Falkland Islands Marine Spatial Planning: A Multi-Tiered Approach

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecosystem-based conservation that includes carbon sinks, alongside a linked carbon credit system, as part of a nature-based solution to combating climate change, could help reduce greenhouse gas levels and therefore the impact of their emissions. Blue carbon habitats and pathways can also facilitate biodiversity retention, aiding sustainable fisheries and island economies. However, robust blue carbon research is often limited at the scale of regional governance and management, lacking both incentives and facilitation of policy-integration. The remote and highly biodiverse coastal ecosystems and surrounding continental shelf can be used to better inform long-term ecosystem-based management in the vast South Atlantic Ocean and sub-Antarctic, to synergistically protect both unique biodiversity and inform on the magnitude of nature-based benefits they provide. Understanding key ecosystem information such as their location, extent, and condition of habitat types, will be critical in understanding carbon pathways to sequestration, threats to this, and vulnerability. This paper considers the current status of blue carbon data and information available, and what is still required before blue carbon can be used as a conservation management tool integrated in national Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) initiatives. Our research indicates that the data and information gathered has enabled baselines for a number of different blue carbon ecosystems, and indicated potential threats and vulnerability that need to be managed. However, significant knowledge gaps remain across habitats, such as salt marsh, mudflats and the mesophotic zones, which hinders meaningful progress on the ground where it is needed most.

show abstract

“…The large hovering style AUVs; "Autonomous Benthic Explorer" and "Sentry", work in steep terrain and in tandem with manned submersibles [31] . While these large AUVs have proved valuable at collecting biological data on seamounts and mid-Atlantic ridges [32] , they require a dedicated research vessel for their operation and the associated costs are prohibitive to many research projects.…”

Section: Autonomous Underwater Vehiclesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of emerging technologies to help measure fjordic biodiversity and blue carbon: mini-manned submarines and autonomous underwater vehicle swarms

Barnes¹,

Goodall‐Copestake²,

Weller³

et al. 2023

Carbon Footprints

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Meaningful protection of global oceans lags far behind that of land and has taken little consideration of climate mitigation potential to date (such as through assessment of blue carbon stocks and change). With the new emphasis on synergistic approaches to the identification and conservation of both carbon- and species- rich habitats, we need much better knowledge of the geography and status of blue carbon habitats beyond coastal wetlands. In subpolar and polar regions, some blue carbon habitats are still emerging and work as negative (mitigating) feedback on climate change, yet remain unprotected despite strong evidence of threat overlap. Scientific research expeditions are gradually increasing our understanding, but appropriate vessels are a limiting factor due to high costs and carbon footprints. Even when available such vessels cannot access all areas (e.g. remote fjords with sills) and may struggle to measure certain aspects of habitats (e.g. steep or vertical surfaces). New technologies and opportunities have advanced to aid some of these problems, and here, two of them are considered, mini-manned submersibles and autonomous underwater vehicles. These two platforms have both become much more available and affordable (through novel partnerships) while also being much more scientifically capable. This technology has the potential to reduce the carbon footprint of science and particularly aid in assessing biology and environment status and change on steep sides, such as fjord walls.

show abstract

Benthic Biodiversity, Carbon Storage and the Potential for Increasing Negative Feedbacks on Climate Change in Shallow Waters of the Antarctic Peninsula

Cited by 12 publications

References 65 publications

Quantifying zoobenthic blue carbon storage across habitats within the Arctic’s Barents Sea

Quantifying zoobenthic blue carbon storage across habitats within the Arctic’s Barents Sea

Towards Incorporation of Blue Carbon in Falkland Islands Marine Spatial Planning: A Multi-Tiered Approach

Use of emerging technologies to help measure fjordic biodiversity and blue carbon: mini-manned submarines and autonomous underwater vehicle swarms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About