Biomass, commonly occurring and dominant species of macrobenthos in Onega Bay (White Sea, Russia): data from three different decades

Abstract

Onega Bay is the largest bay in the White Sea, characterised by shallow depth, a range of sediment types and strong tidal currents. All these factors provide conditions for high species richness and biomass. This study reviews data from three surveys of sublittoral macrobenthos undertaken by Russian institutes: the benthic survey covering the entire Onega Bay in 1952; the survey performed in the northern part of the area in 1981/90, and a study carried out in 2006 in the eastern part of the bay. In total, data from 107 stations were analysed. The data in different surveys were collected by different grab types. The datasets of both 1981/90 and 2006 overlap the 1952 survey area. The pattern of biomass distribution was consistent between the years of survey and was characterised by the low biomass at the northern periphery of the bay and the highest biomass observed in the coastal waters of the Solovetsky Islands. Bivalves and cirripeds (mostly Modiolus modiolus, Arctica islandica, Balanus balanus and Verucca stroemia) dominated in biomass. Neither the biomass share of dominant species nor the frequency of occurrence of several common species in these groups changed markedly between 1952 and 1981/90. Although the results of the 2006 survey appear somewhat different from the patterns of previous years, this does not indicate major changes in the benthic communities, because the survey in 2006 was designed in a different way and its overlap with the 1952 survey was minimal. However, the dominant species (by biomass) –A. islandica, M. modiolus and V. stroemia– held their leading positions. Results of the multidimensional scaling analysis based on the biomass data for all taxa encountered in the 1952 survey indicate considerable mixing of the samples from all surveys. This may be interpreted as the absence of major shifts in the sublittoral communities of the macrobenthos of Onega Bay at decadal scale. This kind of stability may be explained by an oceanographical regime resilient to climate variation and a relatively low anthropogenic environmental impact when compared to other shallow European seas.

Long-term temporal and spatial variation of macrobenthos in the intertidal soft-bottom flats of two small bights (Chupa Inlet, Kandalaksha Bay, White Sea)

“…The pollutants brought by river runoff are deposited by marginal filters-narrow zones where the river and seawater mix and sedimentation of suspended particles and dissolved substances occurs (Lisitzin, 1999;Nemirovskaya, 2004), and the resulting total pollution level is relatively small (Savinov et al, 2001(Savinov et al, , 2010Naumov, 2011). On the other hand, the influence of climatic factors is mitigated due to the characteristics of water exchange between the Barents and the White Seas, and daily and seasonal temperature fluctuations affect mainly the intertidal species (Naumov et al, 2009;Solyanko et al, 2011). The data used in this paper cover a 21-year period and combine several temporal (year, season) and spatial scales (bight, station, sample).…”

Importance of oceanographical background for a conservation priority areas network planned using MARXAN decision support tool in the Russian Arctic seas

“…Physical mechanisms of resistance to changes are determined by the processes in Gorlo (area 6, Figure a), a narrow and shallow strait connecting the outer and the inner part of the sea. There tidal mixing and formation of cold, deep water takes place which buffers conditions in the water column below the seasonal thermocline in most subtidal habitats of the White Sea (Solyanko, Spiridonov, & Naumov, ; Spiridonov et al, ).…”

Review of the functional morphology, biology and perturbation impacts on the boreal, habitat-forming horse musselModiolus modiolus(Bivalvia: Mytilidae: Modiolinae)

“…Subsequently, biogenic habitats formed by M. modiolus have been recorded widely from northern Atlantic and Pacific waters. The ecological importance of M. modiolus as a habitat for a diverse associated biota has been reported upon from the North Atlantic and adjacent seas (Petersen 1918;Spärck 1929Spärck , 1935Spärck , 1937Einarsson 1941;Thorson 1950Thorson , 1957Jones 1951;Roberts 1975;Noble et al 1976;Warwick & Davies 1977;Comely 1978;Logan et al 1984;Sebens 1985;Witman 1985Witman , 1987Davoult et al 1988;Ojeda & Dearborn 1989;Brown 1990;Magorrian 1996;Dinesen 1999;Mair et al 2000;Dinesen & Bruntse 2001;Moore et al 2006;Lindenbaum et al 2008;Rees et al 2008;Sanderson et al 2008;Rees 2009;Roberts et al 2011;Solyanko et al 2011;Ragnarsson & Burgos 2012) and Northeast Pacific coastal shelf areas (Shelford 1935;Soot-Ryen 1955;Selin 2011). Modiolus modiolus aggregations include three major community components: (1) a single dense layer of living individuals residing on top of shell debris and supporting a community of sessile epifauna (and epiflora in the photic zone); (2) a mobile megafauna of suspension-feeders, grazers, predators and scavengers; and (3) an either mobile or sedentary macrofauna living in crevices and among the intertwined byssus threads.…”