Linking Habitat and Benthic Invertebrate Species Distribu8ons in Areas of Poten8al Renewable Energy Development Work presented here sponsored largely by BOEM with additional support from the U.S. Department of Energy and the Oregon Wave Energy Trust and data from the U.S. EPA and U.S. ACE Sarah K. Henkel & Chris Goldfinger Oregon State University
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Linking Habitat and Benthic Invertebrate Species Distribu8ons in Areas of Poten8al Renewable
Energy Development
Work presented here sponsored largely by BOEM with additional support from the U.S. Department of Energy and the Oregon Wave
Energy Trust and data from the U.S. EPA and U.S. ACE
Sarah K. Henkel & Chris Goldfinger Oregon State University
Potential Environmental Effects
Chemicals
Hard structures
Noise
Cables Colonization by fouling organisms
Electromagnetic Fields
Lighting
Reduction of wave energy
Attraction of rock associated
species Changes to sand transport and sedimentation
Changes to fish, crab behavior
Entanglement
Cumulative Effects of Arrays
Changes to bird behavior
Scour around anchors
Objectives for Baseline Benthic Research
1. Describe the benthic habitats and communities of organisms in areas of potential marine renewable energy development in the Pacific Northwest
2. Develop an understanding of species-‐habitat relationships
3. Determine variation in habitat characteristics and benthic species across space in the region
4. Determine variation in benthic species over time
Nehalem
Siltcoos
Coquille
Cape Perpetua ² 2010 - 2012!² Northern California to central
Washington!² Federal waters only!² Depth range of ~40 to 130 m!² All sites approximately the same
area sampled!² Sampling intensity represents
depth proportion!
v Infaunal invertebrates in sedimentary habitats and macro-inverts in rocky habitats!
Spatial (and quasi- Temporal) Study
v Compare infaunal data to 2003 EPA survey!v Compare reef data to 1990s Delta surveys!
Multi-beam sonar mapping (bathymetry) !
Acoustic backscatter (substrate type)!
High Resolution Mapping Conducted by C. Goldfinger lab (CEOAS)!
Groundtruth with Grab Samples
Goldfinger Lab, CEOAS, OSU
Water Column Sampling CTD cast at each station measures depth, temperature,
salinity, dissolved oxygen, chl fluorescence, pH!
Infauna and Sediment Sampling 0.1 m2 Grey-O’Hare box core (versus van Veen in 2003)!
Analyze sediment for grain size, total organic carbon! Identify
infauna in the lab!
Sieve through 1.0 mm mesh!
Axinopsida serricata
Infauna and Sediment Results
OR019
OR004
OR026
OR008
OR042
OR017
OR038
OR039
OR015
OR050
OR014
OR031
OR001
OR005
CA075
OR032
CA083
CA051
CA099
WA025
WA060 OR047
WA042
OR046
OR025
WA070
OR006
OR030
OR009
OR029
WA007
WA010
WA015
OR028
OR013
OR045
WA002
WA034
WA086
WA018
WA031
WA020
WA047
OR020
OR011
OR049
CA147
CA289
CA043
CA139
CA019
CA035
OR033
OR041
OR027
OR007
OR012
OR043
WA023
WA030
OR021
OR048
WA004
WA009
WA037
WA081
OR002
OR024
OR037
OR003
OR016
OR036
OR034
OR040
OR035
OR023
OR044
OR018
OR0220
12
34
Cluster Dendrogram of 2003 EPA-NCA Samples from Northern California to Washington (outside the NMS)
hclust (bray-curtis, ward)clustd
Height
Deeper, saltier, colder, siltier, higher TOC,
more taxa
Shallower, warmer, coarser, lower TOC,
fewer taxa
2003 EPA-NCA stations
z = 64.6 m ± 18.2
z = 90.7 m ± 20.0
2010 BOEM Benthic Stations Npt013
Npt062
Npt093
Npt046
Npt110
Npt058
Npt078
Npt026
Npt118
Npt030
Npt042
Npt070
GH020
Neh059
Npt057
Npt102
Npt086
Npt085
Npt014
Npt094
Npt019
Npt067
Npt003
Npt010
GH076
GH165
Neh095
NSA120
NSA024
NSA064
NSA112
NSA116
NSA080
NSA096
NSA028
NSA104
NSA048
NSA016
NSA044
NSA056
NSA088
NSA108
NSA040
NSA072
NSA032
NSA012
NSA060
Eur050
Eur098
Eur054
Eur082
Eur038
Eur114
GH004
GH122
GH103
GH149
NSA100
SC097
SC029
SC128
SC005
SC033
SC073
SC021
SC134
SC069
SC009
SC150
SC017
SC037
SC001
SC065
SC077
SC041
SC105
SC136
Eur101
Eur117
Eur034
Eur074
Eur109
Eur045
Eur061
Eur002
Eur066
Eur106
Eur022
Eur090
Eur006
Eur018
GH063
GH047
GH111
Neh035
Neh055
Neh011
Neh023
Neh099
GH119
Neh115
GH221
GH084
GH092
Neh007
Neh091
Neh107
Neh051
Neh083
Neh015
Neh087
Neh079
Neh027
Neh075
Neh071
Neh031
Neh039
Neh043
02
46
Offshore Infauna (square root transformed) Cluster Dendrogram
hclust (*, "ward")
d (Bray-Curtis)
Height
95-‐129 m
89-‐123 m 52-‐79 m
What makes Newport so different? Mollusca (Bivalves)!
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
NSAF (2010)
Eureka (2010)
Coquille (2012)
Silt Coos (2010)
Cape Perpetua (2012)
Newport (2010)
Nehalem (2010)
Grays Harbor (2010)
Percen
t of tot
al
Sample station
Proportion of major taxa
Echiura
Sipuncula
Echinodermata
Crustacean
Cnidaria
Mollusca
Annelida Percen
t of total organ
isms
H’ Diversity of Infaunal Samples (BOEM)
y = -‐0.0017x2 + 0.3218x -‐ 11.805 R² = 0.98179, p = 0.002
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
H'
Depth
Maximum Diversity log(e) should be found at ~ 95 m and 120 μm median grain size.
Shannon Diversity log(e) had a 2nd degree polynomial relationship with both depth and median grain size.
The relationship with depth was stronger than with MGS.
y = -‐8E-‐05x2 + 0.0209x + 2.049 R² = 0.75631, p 0.120
0 0.5 1
1.5 2
2.5 3
3.5 4
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
H'
MSG
H'
✓
Community Analysis (SIMPER)
NSAF: 4 groups
Siltcoos: 3 groups
Eureka: 7 groups
Newport: 8 groups
Nehalem: 5 groups
Grays: 5 groups
BEST Bio-‐Env = 0.702: lon, z, % sand, % gravel, mgs
y = 16.041e-‐0.013x R² = 0.69877
y = -‐0.0017x2 + 0.3218x -‐ 11.805 R² = 0.98179
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
H' (Diversity) / # Signific
ant G
roup
s (H
eterog
eneity)
Depth
Infaunal Patterns with Depth
#InfaunaGroups
H' Diversity
y = 0.0003x2 -‐ 0.0775x + 7.5277 R² = 0.55958
y = -‐8E-‐05x2 + 0.0209x + 2.049 R² = 0.75631
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 H' (Diversity) / # Signific
ant G
roup
s (H
eterog
eneity)
MGS
Infaunal Patterns with Median GS
#InfaunaGroups
H' Diversity
Community Trends
0
20
40
60
80
100
All CA OR WA
Percen
t of A
bund
ance
Miscellaneous
Mollusca
Crustacea
Polychaeta
EPA National Coastal Assessment 2003
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
NSAF (2010)
Eureka (2010)
Coquille (2012)
Silt Coos (2010)
Cape Perpetua (2012)
Newport (2010)
Nehalem (2010)
Grays Harbor (2010)
Percen
t of tot
al
Sample station
Proportion of major taxa
Echiura
Sipuncula
Echinodermata
Crustacean
Cnidaria
Mollusca
Annelida
BOEM Assessment 2010 -‐ 2012
Shelf Infaunal Densities over Time
Infaunal Invertebrate Summary
² Unique invertebrate assemblages were found at each site in the PNW!² There appears to be a break in the infaunal community at 70–80 m depth!² Species diversity peaked at ~95 m depth and ~120 μm median grain size!² Local spatial heterogeneity was higher at shallower sites (usually with
larger grain size)!v One site cannot necessarily serve as a proxy for distant sites (or nearby
sites in different depth range)!v If the depth and grain size of a site are measured, one may be able to
make good predictions of the species assemblage likely to be found there, within a region!
² In central Oregon state waters, infaunal invertebrate assemblages have not varied across seasons (but may have longer term variability)!
v Baseline/monitoring sampling may be conducted 1x/year!
Submersible Delta • Used for historic dives of the 1990s • Camera attached on starboard • Camera equipped with two 20 cm-
apart sizing lasers • Equipped with sensor that measured
temperature & depth every second
Remotely operated vehicle (ROV) Hammerhead
• Used for dives in 2011 • Two cameras: forward & downward • Sizing lasers • Equipped with CTD • Equipped with navigator beam
Epifaunal Sampling – Reef Surveys
Grays Harbor 1994
6 Dives
Siltcoos Reef 1995
7 Dives
Coquille Bank 1993
8 Dives
Epifaunal Sampling - Delta
Epifaunal Sampling - Hammerhead
Grays Bank Siltcoos Reef
• Grays Bank – 14 stations, Siltcoos Reef – 10 stations • Each station was composed of three transects, approximately 250 meters
long and distributed in parallel fashion, 250 meters apart
Video Analysis
Ê Each Delta dive was watched three times:!1. Substratum Identification based on grain size
class and relief!Each patch was coded with two letters – first letter indicating primary (50 – 80% of cover) and second letter indicating secondary (20 – 50% of cover)!
2. Sessile Invertebrate Identification and Count!3. Motile Invertebrate Identification and Count!
Ê Each ROV Hammerhead video was watched twice (steps 2 and 3 were combined for these videos)!
Ê All invertebrates ≥ 5 cm were counted and identified to lowest possible taxonomic classification!
Epifaunal Invertebrate Summary
² Two major substratum groups held different macroinvertebrate assemblages: moderate to high relief rocky habitats and low-relief fine sediment habitats!² The majority of macroinvertebrate taxa (highest diversity) was
associated with high-relief rocks!² These taxa were further differentiated between flat versus ridge
rocks!² Low-relief fine sediment habitat was most often associated with motile
invertebrates!² Within this habitat it appeared that fine-sediment substrata mixed
with mud, boulders, or gravel each yield unique macro-invertebrate associations versus those found on uniformly mud or sand substrata.!
² Latitude/temperature also were correlated with variation in assemblages, indicating regionally distinct macroinvertebrate communities along the continental shelf!
Acknowledgements
Collaborator: Chris Goldfinger !
Field and Lab Assistance:!
² Kristin Politano!² Tim Lee!² Nate Lewis!² Stephanie Labou!² Elizabeth Lopez!² Danny Locket!² Chris Romsos!² Bob Hairston-
Porter!² The University of ! Chicago Team!
OSU Test Platform
Resistor banks
Early stage drawing of test berth concept
Related Documents
