Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T17:34:54.708Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Composition and Diversity of the Benthic Boundary Layer Macrofauna from the English Channel

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

Carole Vallet  and
Jean-Claude Dauvin
Carole Vallet
Affiliation:
Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Laboratoire de Biologie des Invertébrés Marins et Malacologie, CNRS URA 699, 57 rue Cuvier, 75231 Paris Cedex 05, France.
Jean-Claude Dauvin
Affiliation:
Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Laboratoire de Biologie des Invertébrés Marins et Malacologie, CNRS URA 699, 57 rue Cuvier, 75231 Paris Cedex 05, France.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The macrofauna of the benthic boundary layer (macrozooplankton and suprabenthos) was studied at six stations in May–June 1993 in the English Channel over sediments ranging from medium sand to pebble. The fauna collected consisted of 227 taxa in 30 suprabenthic sledge hauls. Numerically, the macrozooplankton was dominated by euphausids, chaetognaths, the holoplanktonic amphipod Apherusa spp. and fish larvae, and the suprabenthos by mysids (Anchialina agilis, Gastrosaccus spp.), amphipods (Stenothoe marina) and cumaceans at both medium sand stations. Suprabenthos species richness and diversity were significantly higher at western stations, in contrast to the pattern for macrozooplankton. The density of macrozooplankton was significantly higher, and suprabenthos significantly lower, at the western stations. The biomass of macrozooplankton was similar at the six stations, except in the middle of the Dover Strait which had a low biomass. The biomass of the suprabenthos was highest in the eastern part of the Channel. Two main assemblages were distinguished in relation to planktonic production and sediment composition: three western stations with two subgroups (stations 1 and 3 along the coasts of Brittany and station 2 off Plymouth); and the eastern stations also with two subgroups (station 4 in the Bay of Seine and stations 5 and 6 in the Dover Strait). For the macrozooplankton, two types of trophic structures could be distinguished: stations 1 and 4 where suspension-feeders dominated and the other stations (2, 3, 5 and 6) where carnivorous plankton feeders, omnivorous and scavengers predominate. For the suprabenthos, the plankton feeding, omnivorous and carnivorous trophic guilds dominated each station.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 78 , Issue 2 , May 1998 , pp. 387 - 409
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1998

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

Anon., , 1995. Bilan synthétique des actions de recherche en cours et des résultats acquis au 30 Septembre 1995. Rapport PNOC, thème: Grands cycles Biogéochimiques, 51 pp.Google Scholar
Benzecri, J.P., 1973. L'analyse des données. Vol. 2. L'analyse des correspondences. Paris: Dunod.Google Scholar
Brandt, A. & Piepenburg, D., 1994. Peracarid crustaceans assemblages of the Kolbeinsey Ridge, north of Iceland. Polar Biologica, 14, 97–105.Google Scholar
Brunel, P., Besner, M., Messier, D., Poirier, L., Granger, D. & Weinstein, M., 1978. Le traîneau Macer-Giroq: appareil amélioré pour l'échantillonnage quantitatif étagé de la petite faune nageuse au voisinage du fond. Internationale Revue der Gesamten Hydrobiologie, 63, 815–829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruynhooge, M., 1978. Classification ascendante hiérarchique de grands ensemble de données: un algorithme rapide fondé sur la construction de voisinages réductibles. Cahier de l'Analyse des Données, 3, 7–33.Google Scholar
Brylinsky, J.M., 1986. Méthodes de détection des gradients faunistiques: les courbes FCT. Répartition du zooplancton au large du Cap Gris-Nez (France). Oceanologica Ada, 9, 457–467.Google Scholar
Brylinsky, J.M., et al., 1991. Le ”fleuve côtier”: un phénomène hydrologique important en Manche Orientale (exemple du Pas de Calais). Oceanologica Acta, 11, 197–203.Google Scholar
Buhl-Jensen, L. & Fosså, J.H., 1991. Hyperbenthic crustacean fauna of the Gullmarfjord area (western Sweden): species richness, seasonal variation and long-term changes. Marine Biology, 109, 245–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cabioch, L., Gentil, F., Glaçon, R. & Retiére, C., 1977. Le macrobenthos des fonds meubles de la Manche: distribution générale et écologie. In Biology of benthic organisms. Proceedings of the eleventh European Marine Biology Symposium, Galway, Ireland, 1976 (ed. B.F., Keegan et al.), pp. 115–128. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Chevrier, A., Brunel, P. & Wildish, D., 1991. Structure of a suprabenthic shelf sub-community of gammaridean Amphipoda in the Bay of Fundy compared with similar sub-communities in the Gulf of St Lawrence. Hydrobiologia, 223, 81–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dauvin, J.-C., 1984. Dynamique d'écosystemes macrobenthiques des fonds sédimentaires de la Baie de Morlaix et leur perturbation par les hydrocarbures de l'Amoco Cadiz. PhD thesis, University of Paris VI, France.Google Scholar
Dauvin, J.-C., Iglesias, A. & Lorgeré, J.-C., 1994. Suprabenthic crustacean fauna of the circalitoral coarse sand community off Roscoff (English channel): composition, swimming activity and seasonal variation. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 74, 543–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dauvin, J.-C. & Lorgere, J.-C., 1989. Modifications du traîneau Macer-Giroq pour I'amélioration de l'échantillonnage quantitatif étagé de la faune suprabenthique. journal de Recherche Oceanographique, 14, 65–67.Google Scholar
Dauvin, J.-C., Sorbe, J.C. & Lorgeré, J.C., 1995. The benthic boundary layer macrofauna from the upper continental slope and the Cap-Ferret Canyon (Bay of Biscay). Oceanologica Acta, 18, 113–122.Google Scholar
Hesthagen, I.H., 1973. Diurnal and seasonal variations in the near-bottom fauna – the benthos – in one of the deeper channels of the Kieler Bucht (western Baltic). Kieler Meeresforschungen, 29, 116–140.Google Scholar
Hulbert, S.H., 1971. The non-concept of species diversity: a critique and alternative parameters. Ecology, 52, 577–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jambu, M. & Lebeaux, M.O., 1978. The bottom fauna of the English Channel. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 41, 397–461.Google Scholar
Le Borgne, R., 1975. Equivalences entre les mesures de biovolumes, poids sees, poids sec sans cendre, carbone, azote et phosphore du mésozooplancton de l'atlantique tropical. Cahiers ORSTOM, série Océanographie, 13, 179–196.Google Scholar
Mees, J., 1994. The hyperbenthos of shallow coastal waters and estuaries: community structure and biology of the dominant species. PhD thesis, University of Gent, Belgium.Google Scholar
Mees, J. & Hamerlynck, O., 1992. Spatial community structure of the winter hyperbenthos of the Schelde Estuary, The Netherlands, and the adjacent coastal waters. Netherlands journal of Sea Research, 29, 357–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Migné, A. & Davoult, D., 1995. Multi-scale heterogeneity in a macrobenthic epifauna community. Hydrobiologia, 300/301, 375–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paterson, G.L.J., Gage, J.D., Lamont, P., Bert, B.J. & Thurston, M.H., 1994. Patterns of abundance and diversity from abyss-polychaetes from northeastern Atlantic abyssal plains. Mémoire du Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, 162, 503–510.Google Scholar
Rex, M.A., Staurt, C.T., Hessler, R.R., Allen, J.A., Sanders, H.L. & Wilson, G.D.F., 1993. Global-scale latitudinal patterns of species diversity in the deep-sea benthos. Nature, London, 365, 636–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, H.L., 1968. Marine benthic diversity: a comparative study. American Naturalist, 102, 243–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shannon, C.E., 1948. A mathematical theory for communications. Bell System Technical Journal, 27, 379–423 and 623–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorbe, J.-C., 1984. Contribution à la connaissance des peuplements suprabenthiques néritiques sudgascogne. PhD Thesis, University of Bordeaux, France.Google Scholar
Thiébaut, E., 1994. Dynamique du recrutement et dispersion larvaire de deux annélides polychétes Owenia fusiformis et Pectinaria koreni en régime mégatidal (bale de Seine orientate, Manche). PhD thesis, University of Paris VI, France.Google Scholar
Vallet, C. & Dauvin, J.-C., 1995. Qualitative et quantitative composition of the suprabenthic amphipods from the English Channel. Polskie Archiwum Hydrobiologii, 42, 461–481.Google Scholar
Wang, Z. & Dauvin, J.-C., 1994. The suprabenthic crustacean fauna of the infralittoral fine sand community in the Bay of Seine (eastern English Channel): composition, swimming activity and diurnal variations. Cahiers de Biologie Marine, 35, 135–155.Google Scholar
Wang, Z., Dauvin, J.-C. & Thiébaut, E., 1994. Preliminary data of the near-bottom meso- and macrozooplanktonic fauna from the eastern Bay of Seine: faunistic composition, vertical distribution and density variation. Cahier de Biologie Marine, 35, 157–176.Google Scholar
Wildish, D.J., Wilson, A.J. & Frost, B., 1992. Benthic boundary layer macrofauna of Browns Banks, northwest Altantic, as potential prey of juvenile benthic fish. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 49, 91–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zouhiri, S. & Dauvin, J.-C., 1996. Diel changes of the benthic boundary layer macrofauna over coarse sand sediment in the western English Channel. Oceanologica Acta, 19, 141–153.Google Scholar