Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-r4mrb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-09T22:11:24.777Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The seaweed potential of Orkney waters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2011

C. S. Johnston
C. S. Johnston
Affiliation:
Institute of Offshore Engineering, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh EH 14 4AS
Get access

Synopsis

Marine resources, including seaweeds, have always played an important role in the history of the Orkney Islands, particularly over the period of the ‘kelp’ industry between 1719 and the 1930s. Recent studies confirm the presence of major sub-tidal seaweed forests dominated by the brown seaweed Laminaria hyperborea.

In this paper, consideration is given to the possible revitalisation of the seaweed industry in Orkney, involving major developments of both harvesting and processing technology. This is seen as a logical component of an integrated inshore marine resource management strategy for the Islands.

Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, Section B: Biological Sciences , Volume 87 , Issue 1-2: The Marine Biology of the Orkney Islands , 1985 , pp. 1 - 14
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1985

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

Bernstein, B. B., Williams, B. E. and Mann, K. H. 1981. Formation of destructive grazing fronts by the sea urchin Strongylocemrotus droebachiensis the role of predators in modifying aggregation and hiding behaviour. Mar. Biol. 63, 39–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, W. A. P. 1950. The seasonal variation in weight and chemical composition of the common British Laminariacea. J. Mar. Biol. Ass. U.K. 29, 45–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boney, A. D. 1965. Aspects of the biology of the seaweeds of economic importance. Adv. Mar. Biol. 3, 105–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, V. J. 1948. Seaweed resources along the shores of Great Britain. Econ. Bot. 2, 363–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, P. and Wolff, R. 1955. Sublittoral seaweed harvester. Research, bond. 8, 435–444.Google Scholar
Johnston, C. S. 1968. Industrial uses of algae. Process Biochem. October, 11–14.Google Scholar
Johnston, C. S. 1981. The Flotta Terminal and its effects on the marine environment. In The Marine Environment ofSullom Voe and the implication of oil developments, ed, Pearson, T. H. and Stanley, S. O. Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinb. 80B, 341–354.Google Scholar
Jones, N. S. and Kain, J. M. 1967. Subtidal algal colonisation following the removal of Echinus. Helgoländer Wiss. Meeresunters. 15, 460–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kain, J. M. 1975. Algal recolonisation of some cleared sub-tidal areas. J Ecol. 63, 739–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kain, J. M., Drew, E. A. and Jupp, B. P. 1976. Light and the ecology of Laminaria hyperborea II. In Light as an Ecological Factor, ed. Evans, G.C. et al. London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kitching, J. A. 1941. Studies in sub-littoral ecology. III. Laminaria forest on the west coast of Scotland; a study of zonation in relation to wave action and illumination. Biol. Bull. Mar. Biol. Lab., Woods Hole 80, 324–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leighton, D. L., Jones, L. G. and North, W. J. 1966. Ecological relationships between giant kelp and sea urchins in southern California. Int. Seaweed Symp. 5, 141–153.Google Scholar
Pringle, J. D., Sharp, G. J. and Caddy, J. F. 1982. Interactions in kelp bed ecosystems in the northwest Atlantic: review of a workshop. In Multispecies approaches to fisheries management advice, ed. Mercer, M. C. Can. Spec. Publ. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 59, 108–115.Google Scholar
Svendsen, P. 1972. Noen observasjoner over taretraling oggjenvekst av stortare, Laminaria hyperborea Fiskets Gang 58, 448–60.Google Scholar
Thomson, W. P. L. 1983. Kelp Making in Orkney. Kirkwall: The Orkney Press.Google Scholar
Walker, F. T. 1950. Sublittoral seaweed survey of Orkney. J. Ecol. 38, 139–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar