Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-02T20:39:11.576Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

High densities and depth-associated changes of epibenthic megafauna along the Aleutian margin from 2000–4200 m

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 July 2009

F.J. Fodrie ,
L.A. Levin  and
A.E. Rathburn
F.J. Fodrie*
Affiliation:
Integrative Oceanography Division; Scripps Institution of Oceanography, 9500 Gilman Drive, MC 0218, La Jolla, CA 92093-0218, USA
L.A. Levin
Affiliation:
Integrative Oceanography Division; Scripps Institution of Oceanography, 9500 Gilman Drive, MC 0218, La Jolla, CA 92093-0218, USA
A.E. Rathburn
Affiliation:
Department of Paleontology and Paleoceanography; Indiana State University, 159 Science Building, Terre Haute, IN 47809, USA
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: F.J. Fodrie, Department of Marine Sciences, University of South Alabama & Dauphin Island Sea Laboratory, 101 Bienville Boulevard, Dauphin Island, AL 36528, USA email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Aleutian margin is a dynamic environment underlying a productive coastal ocean and subject to frequent tectonic disturbance. In July 2004, we used over 500 individual bottom images from towed camera transects to investigate patterns of epibenthic megafaunal density and community composition on the contiguous Aleutian margin (53°N 163°W) at depths of 2000 m, 3200 m and 4200 m. We also examined the influence of vertical isolation on the megafaunal assemblage across a topographic rise at 3200 m, located 30 km from the main margin and elevated 800 m above the surrounding seafloor. In comparison to previous reports from bathyal and abyssal depths, megafaunal densities along the Aleutian margin were remarkably high, averaging 5.38±0.43 (mean±1 standard error), 0.32±0.02 to 0.43±0.03 and 0.27±0.01 individuals m−2 at 2000 m, 3200 m and 4200 m, respectively. Diversity at 2000 m was elevated by 15–30% over the deeper sites (3200–4200 m) depending on the metric, while evenness was depressed by ~10%. Levels of richness and evenness were similar among the three deeper sites. Echinoderms were the most abundant phylum at each depth; ophiuroids accounted for 89% of individuals in photographs at 2000 m, echinoids were dominant at 3200 m (39%), and holothurians dominated at 4200 m (47%). We observed a 26% reduction in megafaunal density across the summit of the topographic rise relative to that documented on the continental slope at the same depth. However, the two communities at 3200 m were very similar in composition. Together, these data support the modified ‘archibenthal zone of transition’ framework for slope community patterns with distinct communities along the middle and lower slope (the upper slope was not evaluated here). This study fills a geographical gap by providing baseline information for a relatively pristine, high-latitude, deep-sea benthic ecosystem. As pressures grow for drilling, fishing and mining on high-latitude margins, such data can serve as a reference point for much-needed studies on the ecology, long-term dynamics, and anthropogenically induced change of these habitats.

Keywords

Aleutian marginmegafaunacommunity compositiondeep-sea photographsdensitydiversityarchibenthal zone of transitionTowCamUnimakEchinodermata
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 89 , Issue 8 , December 2009 , pp. 1517 - 1527
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Brandt, A., Gooday, A.J., Brandão, S.N., Brix, S., Brökeland, W., Cedhagen, T., Choudhury, M., Cornelius, N., Danis, B., De Mesel, I., Diaz, R.J., Gillan, D.C., Ebbe, B., Howe, J.A., Janussen, D., Kaiser, S., Linse, K., Malyutina, M., Pawlowski, J., Raupach, M. and Vanreusel, A. (2007) First insights into the biodiversity and biogeography of the Southern Ocean deep sea. Nature 447, 307–311.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carney, R.S. (2005) Zonation of deep biota on continental margins. Oceanography and Marine Biology: an Annual Review 43, 211–278.Google Scholar
Clark, K.R. and Gorley, R.N. (2001) PRIMER v5: User Manual/Tutorial. Plymouth: Plymouth Marine Laboratory.Google Scholar
Dayton, P.K. and Hessler, R.R. (1972) Role of biological disturbance in maintaining diversity in the deep sea. Deep-Sea Research 19, 199–208.Google Scholar
Drazen, J.C. (2007) Depth related trends in proximate composition of demersal fishes in the eastern North Pacific. Deep-Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers 54, 203–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fornari, D.J. (2003) A new deep-sea towed digital camera and multi-rock coring system. EOS: Transactions, American Geophysical Union 84, 69–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fryer, G.J., Watts, P. and Pratson, L.F. (2004) Source of the great tsunami of 1 April 1946: a landslide in the upper Aleutian Forearc. Marine Geology 204, 201–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fujita, T. and Ohta, S. (1990) Size structure of dense populations of the brittle start Ophiura sarsii (Ophiuroidea: Echinodermata) in the bathyal zone around Japan. Marine Ecology Progress Series 64, 113–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gage, J.D. and Tyler, P.A. (1999) Deep-sea biology: a natural history of organisms at the deep-sea floor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Genin, A. (1987) Effects of seamount topography and currents on biological processes. PhD thesis. University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
Gooday, A.J. (2002) Organic-walled allogromiids: aspects of their occurrence, diversity and ecology in marine habitats. Journal of Foraminiferal Research 32, 384–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grassle, J.F. (1989) Species diversity in deep-sea communities. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 4, 12–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Helly, J.J. and Levin, L.A. (2004) Global distribution of naturally occurring marine hypoxia on continental margins. Deep-Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers 51, 1159–1168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurlbert, S.H. and Lombardi, C.M. (2003) Design and analysis: uncertain intent, uncertain result. Ecology 83, 810–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jumars, P.A. and Hessler, R.R. (1976) Hadal community structure: implications from the Aleutian Trench. Journal of Marine Research 34, 547–560.Google Scholar
Larrance, J.D. (1971) Primary production in the mid-subarctic Pacific region. Fishery Bulletin 69, 595–613.Google Scholar
Levin, L.A. (2003) Oxygen minimum zone benthos: adaptation and community response to hypoxia. Oceanography and Marine Biology: an Annual Review 41, 1–45.Google Scholar
Levin, L.A. and Gooday, A.J. (2003) The deep Atlantic Ocean. In Tyler, P.A. (ed.) Ecosystems of the world: the deep sea. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 111–178.Google Scholar
Levin, L.A. and Mendoza, G. (2007) Community structure and nutrition of deep methane seep macroinfauna from the Aleutian margin and Florida Escarpment, Gulf of Mexico. Marine Ecology 28, 131–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levin, L.A., Huggett, C.L. and Wishner, K.F. (1991) Control of deep-sea benthic community structure by oxygen and organic-matter gradients in the eastern Pacific Ocean. Journal of Marine Research 49, 763–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levin, L.A., Gooday, A.J. and James, D. (2001a) Dressing up for the deep: agglutinated protists adorn an irregular urchin. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 81, 881–882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levin, L.A., Etter, R.J., Rex, M.A., Gooday, A.J., Smith, C.R., Pineda, J., Stuart, C.T., Hessler, R.R. and Pawson, D. (2001b) Environmental influences on regional deep-sea species diversity. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics 32, 51–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacAvoy, S.E., Macko, S.A. and Carney, R.S. (2003) Links between chemosynthetic production and mobile predators on the Louisiana continental slope: stable carbon isotopes of specific fatty acids. Chemical Geology 201, 229–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menzies, R.T., George, R.Y. and Rowe, G.T. (1973) Abyssal environments and ecology of the world oceans. New York: Wiley-Interscience.Google Scholar
Micheli, F., Peterson, C.H., Mullineaux, L.S., Fisher, C.R., Mills, S.W., Sancho, G., Johnson, G.A. and Lenihan, H.S. (2002) Predation structures communities at deep-sea hydrothermal vents. Ecological Monographs 72, 365–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murty, S.J., Bett, B.J. and Gooday, A.J. (2009) Megafaunal response to strong oxygen gradients on the Pakistan Margin of the Arabian Sea. Deep-Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography 56, 472–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paulmier, A. and Ruiz-Pino, D. (2009) Oxygen minimum zones (OMZs) in the modern ocean. Progress in Oceanography 80, 113–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, M.N.A. (1966) Calcite: rates of dissolution in a vertical profile in the Central Pacific. Science 154, 1542–1544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rathburn, A.E., Levin, L.A., Tryon, M., Gieskes, J.M., Martin, J.B., Pérez, M.E., Fodrie, F.J., Neira, C., Fryer, G.J., Mendoza, G., McMillan, P.A., Kluesner, J., Adamic, J. and Ziebis, W. (2009) Geological and biological heterogeneity of the Aleutian margin (2000–4800 m). Progress in Oceanography 80, 22–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rex, M.A., Stuart, C.T., Hessler, R.R., Allen, J.A., Sanders, H.L. and Wilson, G.D.F. (1993) Global-scale latitudinal patterns of species diversity in the deep-sea benthos. Nature 365, 636–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rex, M.A., Stuart, C.T. and Coyne, G. (2000) Latitudinal gradients of species richness in the deep-sea benthos of the North Atlantic. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 97, 4082–4085.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rex, M.A., Etter, R.J., Morris, J.S., Crouse, J., McClain, C.R., Johnson, N.A., Stuart, C.T., Deming, J.W., Thies, R. and Avery, R. (2006) Global bathymetric pattern of standing stock and body size in the deep-sea benthos. Marine Ecology Progress Series 317, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rice, A.L., Aldred, R.G., Darlington, E. and Wild, R.A. (1982) The quantitative estimation of the deep-sea megabenthos: a new approach to an old problem. Oceanologica Acta 5, 63–72.Google Scholar
Rowe, G.T. (1971) Benthic biomass and surface productivity. In Costlow, J.D. Jr (ed.) Fertility of the sea. New York: Gordon and Breach, pp. 441–454.Google Scholar
Rowe, G.T. (1983) Biomass and production of the deep-sea macrobenthos. In Rowe, G.T. (ed.) The sea. New York:Wiley-Interscience, pp. 97–121.Google Scholar
Ruhl, H.A. and Smith, K.L. Jr (2004) Shifts in deep-sea community structure linked to climate and food supply. Science 305, 513–515.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ruhl, H.A., Ellena, J.A. and Smith, K.L. Jr (2008) Connections between climate, food limitation, and carbon cycling in abyssal sediment communities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 105, 17006–17011.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, C.J. and Rumohr, H. (2005) Imaging techniques. In Eleftheriou, A. and McIntyre, A.D. (eds) Methods for the study of marine benthos. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Company, pp. 87–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, C.R., Levin, L.A., Koslow, A., Tyler, P.A. and Glover, A.G. (2008a) The near future of the deep seafloor ecosystem. In Polunin, N. (ed.) Aquatic ecosystems: trends and global prospects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 334–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, C.R., De Leo, F.C., Bernardino, A.F., Sweetman, A.K. and Arbizo, P.M. (2008b) Abyssal food limitation, ecosystem structure and climate change. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 23, 518–528.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stuart, C.T., Rex, M.A. and Etter, R.J. (2003) Large-scale spatial and temporal patterns of deep-sea benthic species diversity. In Tyler, P.A. (ed.) Ecosystems of the deep oceans. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 295–311.Google Scholar
Willig, M.R., Kaufmann, D.M. and Stevens, R.D. (2003) Latitudinal gradients of biodiversity: pattern, process, scale and synthesis. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 34, 273–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar