Oceanographic regime

Filatov, N. N.; Pozdnyakov, Dmitriy; Ingebeikin, Ju. I.; Zdorovenov, R. E.; Melentyev, V. V.; Tolstikov, A. V.; Pettersson, Lars-Evan

doi:10.1007/3-540-27695-5_4

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2003). As Onega Bay is open to the influence of the deep part of the White Sea, owing to tidal wave propagation and an anti‐clockwise system of permanent currents (Babkov 1998; Filatov et al. 2005a), the pattern of inter‐annual variation of thermal regime is not expected to be very different from that in the entrance of Chupa Inlet.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Deep waters of the Salmas enable large volumes of water to enter the bay, generating strong tidal currents exacerbated by the shallow depths in the Bay. The maximum speed of a spring tide is 1.5–2.0 m·s −1 in the Eastern Salma, and 1.5–1.7 m·s −1 in the Western Salma (Babkov 1998; Filatov et al. 2005a).…”

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the White Sea, the ‘youngest’ sea of Europe (existing only since the beginning of the Holocene), belonging to both the Northeast Atlantic and Arctic realms and characterised by a very peculiar oceanographical regime (Berger & Naumov 2001; Filatov et al. 2005a,b), there has been no attempt to analyse historical datasets on subtidal benthic communities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

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

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is also a combined physio-chemical and microbial index which makes it possible to compare the water quality of various water bodies (Tamasi & Cini, 2004;Prasad & Kumari, 2008). It has wide application and it is used as the indicator of the quality of sea (Filatov. et al, 2005) and river water (Amadi et al, 2013;Lylko et al, 2001;Mohan et al, 1996), as well as drinking water (Nikoladis et al, 2008;Amadi et al, 2010).…”

Section: Heavy Metal Pollution Index (Hmpi)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental Geochemistry and Heavy Metal Assessment in Soils, Surface and Groundwater from Eastern Niger-Delta, Nigeria using Multivariate Pollution Indices

Amadi

Olasehinde

Yisa

et al. 2016

IJSGS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent times, there have been increasing interests regarding heavy metal contaminations in the environments, apparently due to their toxicity and perceived persistency within the aquatic systems. Land and water are precious natural resources on which rely the sustainability of agriculture, industrialization and the civilization of mankind. They have been subjected to severe exploitation and contamination due to anthropogenic activities resulting from industrial effluent, refuse dumps, gas flaring, oil spillage and petroleum refining leading to the release of heavy metals into the environment. The results of the analyses indicate a low pH (3.84 – 7.74) and high concentrations of electrical conductivity (28.00 – 752.00), chloride (12.00 – 721.00) and heavy metals in the decreasing order of: Fe > Ni > Cu > Zn > Mn > Cd > V > Co > Pb > Cr > As > Hg. The heavy metal pollution index revealed that the metal pollution in the soil and water ranged from slightly polluted to very highly polluted. The poor sanitary condition coupled with the high degree environmental abuses in terms of oil spillage, gas flaring and industrial effluent in the area are responsible for the low pH, wide range in the concentration of EC, TDS, Chloride, E.coli, total coliform and heavy metals in the soil and water system in the area. Good sanitation, use of welllined soakaway, treatment of industrial effluent before discharge and putting an end to gas flaring and oil spills are advocated. The use of environmentally friendly techniques such as bioremediation and phytoremediation in remediating the contaminated soil and water in the area is recommended.

show abstract