2000
DOI: 10.3354/meps192219
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Skimming flow induced over a simulated polychaete tube lawn at low population densities

Abstract: Polychaete tube lawns with high population densihes are frequent in marine soft-bottom environments. The influence of single tubes on near-bed flow dynamics has been q u t e well studied, but the critical population density that separates sediment destabilising effects from stabilising effects remains uncertain. This article presents results obtained with artificial tubes in a recirculating flume at a current velocity of 5 cm S-'. Four population densities were tested for their passive effects on the flow dyna… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
115
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 109 publications
(121 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
6
115
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Relationship between the total percentage of Mya arenaria and Gemma gemma eroded into traps and the total weight of sediment eroded (summed over the 4 shear velocities) in the flume experiment for cores from 4 sites in the Navesink River most likely due to armouring of the sediment surface by mats of tubes created by the amphipod Ampelisca abdita. Polychaete worm tubes have often been noted to stabilize sediment (Fager 1964, Luckenbach 1986, Thrush et al 1996, although they can also have destabilizing effects at low densities (Eckman et al 1981, Friedrichs et al 2000. A. abdita tubes are flattened and flexible and may have effects more similar to macroalgae.…”
Section: Sediment Erosionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Relationship between the total percentage of Mya arenaria and Gemma gemma eroded into traps and the total weight of sediment eroded (summed over the 4 shear velocities) in the flume experiment for cores from 4 sites in the Navesink River most likely due to armouring of the sediment surface by mats of tubes created by the amphipod Ampelisca abdita. Polychaete worm tubes have often been noted to stabilize sediment (Fager 1964, Luckenbach 1986, Thrush et al 1996, although they can also have destabilizing effects at low densities (Eckman et al 1981, Friedrichs et al 2000. A. abdita tubes are flattened and flexible and may have effects more similar to macroalgae.…”
Section: Sediment Erosionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, tubes created by polychaetes can have either a stabilizing (e.g. Luckenbach 1986, Thrush et al 1996 or destabilizing effect (Eckman et al 1981), depending on tube density (Jumars & Nowell 1984a, Friedrichs et al 2000.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A similar complex is dominated by the paddock Barnea parva and other boring bivalves. Polychaete tubes exert profound effects on near-bed flow, which above a certain threshold abundance lead to sediment stabilization where passive deposition of larvae or juveniles is enhanced (Eckman, 1983;Friedrichs et al, 2000). Piddock burrows increase habitat complexity and provide a variety of microhabitats for other species, thereby increasing local assemblage diversity (Pinn et al, 2008).…”
Section: Communities On Soft Circalittoral Rock (Eunis A423)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The modeled flow deceleration of 56% corresponds well with measured reduction of flow velocity of around 60% (Friedrichs 1997). The second case consists of a more recent flume experiment (Friedrichs et al 2000), with a free stream velocity of 0.05 m s −1 , a variation in the abundance of 490 to 3,836 individuals m −2 and a tube height of 3.5 cm. Due to the fact that the height of the bottom boundary layer (~3 cm) was comparable to the height of the tubes, Friedrichs et al (2000) discuss that the results may vary with different experimental settings, but that the results are qualitatively correct.…”
Section: Tube-building Worm-l Conchilegamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The second case consists of a more recent flume experiment (Friedrichs et al 2000), with a free stream velocity of 0.05 m s −1 , a variation in the abundance of 490 to 3,836 individuals m −2 and a tube height of 3.5 cm. Due to the fact that the height of the bottom boundary layer (~3 cm) was comparable to the height of the tubes, Friedrichs et al (2000) discuss that the results may vary with different experimental settings, but that the results are qualitatively correct. Nevertheless, the reduction in the near-bottom flow velocity modeled with a tube height of 10 cm and a free stream velocity of 0.05 m s −1 shows comparable results with the measured flow deceleration in the flume (Fig.…”
Section: Tube-building Worm-l Conchilegamentioning
confidence: 99%