Benthic Habitat Mapping, Primary Productivity Measurements ... · Benthic Habitat mapping, Primary...

Damien Maher

Peter Squire

Bradley Eyre

Centre for Coastal Biogeochemistry

Southern Cross University

October 2007

Benthic Habitat Mapping, Primary Productivity Measurements and Macrofauna Surveys in the

Camden Haven and Hastings River Estuaries

Prepared for: Port Macquarie Hasting Council

Client Contact: Matt Rogers

Prepared by: Centre for Coastal Biogeochemistry

School of Environmental Science and Management

Southern Cross University

PO BOX 157

Lismore 2480

CCB Report No. 2007-05

Contact: Prof. Bradley Eyre

Telephone: (02) 66203773; 041 9622824

Fax: (02) 66212669

Email: [email protected]

Executive Summary

Benthic habitat mapping of the Hastings

River and Camden Haven Estuaries was

undertaken during February 2006. Habitat

within the Hastings River Estuary was found

to be dominated by channel sediments,

comprising of marine sands in the lower

estuary and fluvial sands and gravel in the

upper estuary. The Camden Haven Estuary

had extensive seagrass beds accounting for

nearly 40% of the total instream benthic

habitat. Three seagrass species are found

within the Camden Haven Estuary, Zostera capricorni, Halophila australis and

Ruppia megacarpa.

Benthic and pelagic productivity measurements and macrofauna surveys were

undertaken seasonally from winter 2006 to autumn 2007. Benthic productivity in both

estuaries showed distinct seasonality with the lowest productivity in winter and

highest in summer. Temperature appears to be the driving factor in this seasonality as

light and nutrient supply were generally optimal throughout all seasons. Benthic

productivity was approximately 10 times higher in seagrass communities than non-

seagrass communities and as such, these areas are extremely important in terms of

total estuarine productivity.

Pelagic productivity also showed distinct seasonality with the highest productivity

occurring during summer. Negligible winter pelagic productivity was observed in the

Hastings River estuary, suggesting that benthic productivity and terrestrial inputs is

sustaining the higher trophic levels during winter.

Macrofauna surveys showed distinct differences in community structure between

seagrass and non-seagrass areas. Highest species abundance and diversity were

generally found at seagrass and intertidal sand shoal sites, with general trend towards

lower diversity and abundance at deeper sites with muddy sediments.

In terms of benthic habitat and estuarine productivity the Camden Haven and

Hastings River Estuaries are in good health. The estuaries support extensive

commercial and recreational fisheries. To ensure the continued health of these

estuaries it is recommended that benthic habitat mapping and macrofauna surveys be

repeated at 2-3 year intervals for early detection of estuarine change. Investigations

into the impact of red weed (Polysiphonia sp) blooms on benthic and pelagic

processes in the lower estuaries are also recommended as data on these impacts is

limited.

Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................... 3

Introduction .................................................................................................................... 6

1 Benthic Habitat Mapping ........................................................................................ 7

1.1 Methods ........................................................................................................... 7

1.2 Benthic Habitats .............................................................................................. 7

1.2.1 Hastings River .......................................................................................... 8

1.2.2 Camden Haven Estuary .......................................................................... 16

2 Benthic and Pelagic Productivity ......................................................................... 25

2.1 Sample Sites .................................................................................................. 25

2.2 Methods ......................................................................................................... 29

2.2.1 Benthic Productivity .............................................................................. 29

2.2.2 Pelagic Productivity ............................................................................... 31

2.3 Results ........................................................................................................... 32

2.3.1 Benthic Productivity .............................................................................. 32

2.3.2 Pelagic Productivity ............................................................................... 36

3 Macrofauna .......................................................................................................... 38

3.1 Methods ......................................................................................................... 38

3.2 Data ............................................................................................................... 38

4 Estuarine Health ................................................................................................... 44

5 Recommendations ................................................................................................ 47

6 References ............................................................................................................ 48

7 Appendix 1 Macrofauna abundance for Camden Haven and Hastings River

Estuaries ....................................................................................................................... 49

Table of Figures Figure 1 Seagrass beds in the lower Hastings River estuary. ................................................... 9 Figure 2 Seagrass beds in the Maria River ............................................................................. 10 Figure 3 Seagrass beds in the upper Hastings River estuary. ................................................. 11 Figure 4 Habitat map of the lower Hastings River estuary. .................................................... 13 Figure 5 Habitat map of the Maria River. ............................................................................... 14 Figure 6 Habitat map of the upper Hastings River estuary. .................................................... 15 Figure 7 Seagrass distribution in Camden Inlet, Googleys Lagoon and lower Stingray Creek.

................................................................................................................................................. 17 Figure 8 Seagrass distribution in Queens Lake ...................................................................... 18 Figure 9 Seagrass Distribution in Watson‟s Taylor Lake. ...................................................... 19 Figure 10 Habitat map of Camden Inlet, Googleys Lagoon and Stingray Creek. .................. 22 Figure 11 Habitat map of Queens Lake .................................................................................. 23 Figure 12 Habitat map of Watson Taylors Lake .................................................................... 24 Figure 13 Sampling locations in the Hastings River estuary .................................................. 27 Figure 14 Sampling locations in the Camden Haven estuary ................................................. 28 Figure 15 Field core incubation setup. ................................................................................... 29 Figure 16 Benthic chamber array used for seagrass and intertidal sand shoal incubations. ... 30 Figure 17 Graph displaying typical diurnal changes in oxygen concentration ....................... 31 Figure 18 Oxygen fluxes for core incubations in the Camden Haven estuary ....................... 32 Figure 19 Oxygen fluxes for core incubations in the Hastings River estuary ........................ 33 Figure 20 Oxygen fluxes for chamber incubations in the Camden Haven and Hastings River

estuaries. .................................................................................................................................. 34 Figure 21 Gross pelagic productivity in the Camden Haven and Hastings River estuaries. .. 36 Figure 22 Underwater photograph of red weed bloom during summer field trip ................... 37 Figure 23 Winter MDS ........................................................................................................... 40 Figure 24 Spring MDS ........................................................................................................... 40 Figure 25 Summer MDS ......................................................................................................... 41 Figure 26 Autumn MDS ......................................................................................................... 41 Figure 27 LINKTREE diagram for macrofauna sites during winter. ..................................... 42 Figure 28 LINKTREE diagram for macrofauna sites during spring ...................................... 42 Figure 29 LINKTREE diagram for macrofauna sites during summer ................................... 43 Figure 30 LINKTREE diagram for macrofauna sites during autumn. ................................... 43 Figure 31 Conceptual model of carbon flow in the Hastings River Estuary .......................... 45 Figure 32 Conceptual model of carbon flow in the Camden Haven Estuary ......................... 46

List of Tables Table 1 Benthic habitats as defined in the Hastings River Estuary ........................................ 12 Table 2 Habitat areas defined in the Camden Haven estuary. ................................................ 20 Table 3 Site, location and description for each of the sampling locations in the Hastings River

estuary. .................................................................................................................................... 25 Table 4 Site, location and description for each of the sampling locations in the Camden

Haven estuary. ......................................................................................................................... 26 Table 5 Benthic productivity budget for the Hastings and Camden Haven estuaries ............. 35 Table 6 Pelagic productivity ................................................................................................... 37 Table 7 Species diversity indices for macrofauna sites. ......................................................... 39 Table 8 Macrofauna abundance for Camden Haven and Hastings during winter. ................. 49 Table 9 Spring macrofauna abundance ................................................................................... 56 Table 10 Summer macrofauna abundance .............................................................................. 63 Table 11 Autumn macrofauna abundance .............................................................................. 70

Page | 6 Centre for Coastal Biogeochemistry Report CCB 2007-05

Benthic Habitat mapping, Primary Productivity Measurements and Macrofauna Surveys in the Camden

Haven and Hastings River Estuaries

Introduction The Hastings River and Camden Haven estuaries are located on the Mid North Coast

of New South Wales, within the Port Macquarie Hastings Council municipality. The

Hastings River estuary which incorporates several large tributaries including

Limeburners Creek and Maria River has a total water area of 16.5km2. The Camden

Haven estuary has two main arms, with large shallow lakes on both tributaries, and

has a total water area of ~30km2. The Camden Haven estuary has extensive seagrass

communities with Zostera capricorni, Halophila australis and Ruppia megacarpa

present as monospecific and mixed beds.

The Camden Haven and Hastings River estuaries sustain a large Sydney Rock Oyster

(Saccostrea glomerata) industry. Total 2004/2005 oyster production of over 300 000

and 260 000 dozen oysters in the Hastings and Camden Haven estuaries respectively

which places these estuaries in the top 10 oyster producing areas in NSW.

Both the Hastings and Camden Haven estuaries are extremely popular recreational

fishing areas, with the Hastings now declared a recreational fishing haven, and

consequently professional fishing (other than oyster aquaculture) is no longer

permitted in the estuary. The Camden Haven is still fished professionally with total

fisheries production of ~54 000kg during the 2004/2005 financial year attributable to

24 license holders.

Previous studies in the Camden Haven and Hastings River estuaries have called for

improved knowledge of estuarine productivity (eg. the Hastings and Camden Haven

Estuary Processes Studies). Previous work also highlighted that little is known about

the macrobenthic communities in these two systems. Whilst periodic mapping of

seagrass areas in the Hastings River and Camden Haven Estuaries has been

undertaken, little to no work has be done on mapping other important habitat types

within these estuaries. In addition the level of detail in the historic seagrass maps was

also inadequate to determine fine scale changes in seagrass coverage and composition.

As such, Port Macquarie Hastings Council engaged the Centre for Coastal

Biogeochemistry to:

1. Undertake baseline surveys of benthic habitats, benthic productivity, seagrass

depth range and macrofauna in the Camden Haven and Hastings estuaries for

future comparison (2 to 3 years) as an indicator of the changing health of the

estuary.

2. Where previous benthic data exist (e.g. seagrass cover), compare with the

current surveys to quantify the extent of change as an indicator of current

estuarine health.

Due to the nature of the seagrass beds in both the Hastings River and Camden Haven

estuaries, no suitable locations were found to undertake seagrass depth range

monitoring. Within both estuaries the seagrass beds are located within shallow water

(generally less than 3 meters) with no beds located deep enough that light is a limiting

factor.




1 Benthic Habitat Mapping

1.1 Methods

Benthic habitat mapping was undertaken during February 2006, to coincide with the

period of maximal seagrass density and coverage. As such any future comparisons of

benthic habitat should be undertaken towards the end of summer or early autumn as

the areal extent and percentage coverage of seagrass species declined significantly

during winter, in particular the coverage of Halophila australis in Queens Lake, and

at the top end of Limeburners Creek, where H. australis appeared to die back

completely during the colder months.

A combination of aerial photograph interpretation, underwater video transects, and

visual surveys were undertaken to map benthic habitats with underwater video

transects and visual surveys being recorded in real-time to a notebook computer

which was interfaced with a depth sounder and GPS, allowing habitat type, position

and depth to be recorded simultaneously. Data was then compiled using a

combination of MapInfo v8 and ARCGIS v9.1 GIS software. Accuracy of the

seagrass boundaries as determined by GPS calibration and fixed point ground truthing

was generally within ±10 meters, which is significantly less than the observed

seasonal fluctuations in seagrass bed boundaries. All GIS data is projected in UTM

WGS84 coordinates.

1.2 Benthic Habitats

Habitats were categorized based on sediment type (coarse river sand, marine sand and

mud), tidal position (intertidal, subtidal, channel), seagrass type (Zostera capricorni,

Ruppia megacarpa and Halophila australis) and seagrass cover (<25%, 25-50%, 50-

75% and 75-100%). For ease of interpretation seagrass cover is omitted in this report,

but is available in digital format in the attached data DVD. The following habitat

types were defined:

Intertidal Sand Shoals

Intertidal Mud Shoals

Subtidal Sand Shoals

Subtidal Mud Shoals

Marine Sand Channel

Coarse River Sand Channel

Zostera

Halophila

Ruppia

Zostera/Halophila (mixed seagrass beds with Z. capricorni dominant)

Halophila/Zostera (mixed seagrass beds with H. australis dominant)

Ruppia/Zostera/Halophila (mixed seagrass beds with R. megacarpa dominant)

It must be reiterated that the boundaries of many of these seagrass beds are quite

plastic, these results represent maximal coverage, and seagrass area and percentage

cover reduce significantly during the winter months.




1.2.1 Hastings River

1.2.1.1 Seagrass

Seagrass within the Hastings River Estuary is dominated by Zostera capricorni with

one large bed of sparse (<20% cover) Halophila australis found at the top end of

Limeburners creek. This H. australis bed was found to die off significantly during the

colder winter months, and was replaced with a thick layer of filamentous benthic

microalgae. The Z. capricorni is generally restricted to the lower estuary, with only a

couple of small isolated fringing beds occurring in the Maria River and the mid to

upper Hastings River. Figures 1-3 show the distribution of seagrass with the Hastings

River Estuary.

Seagrass beds within the lower estuary were generally healthy throughout the duration

of the study (February 2006 – May 2007), however there was some accumulation of

drift algae during the summer sampling campaign (February 2007) in seagrass beds in

beds around the Settlement Point, backchannel and Big Bay areas. This coincided

with outbreaks of what is commonly referred to as “red weed”, marine Rhodophyta

algae that blooms naturally during periods of upwelling. This algae, Polysiphonia sp.

occurs off the coast generally growing on rocky substrates. The major concern

associated with the deposition of this algae within the estuaries is the deoxygenation

of the water column. Pelagic and benthic respiration rates did not show a significant

difference during periods of algal deposition. However pelagic productivity in the

lower Hastings River Estuary was considerably higher during summer when a bloom

of these algae was occurring. Therefore it is recommended that further study into the

effects of these algal blooms upon estuarine productivity and nutrient cycling are

recommended.




Figure 1 Seagrass beds in the lower Hastings River estuary.




Figure 2 Seagrass beds in the Maria River




Figure 3 Seagrass beds in the upper Hastings River estuary.




1.2.1.2 Benthic Habitats

Sediment distribution and zonation within the Hastings River was typical of mature

wave dominated barrier estuaries, with a gradient from clean quartz sand at the mouth

to organic rich mud‟s in the mid estuarine zone and fluvial sands and gravel in the

upper estuary (Roy et al, 2001). Estuarine habitat is dominated by a marine sand

channel in the lower estuary and coarse fluvial sands and gravel in the upper estuary.

Table 1 displays the area of each habitat mapped within the Hastings River Estuary.

Table 1 Benthic habitats as defined in the Hastings River Estuary

Habitat Description Area (km2) % of Total Area

Marine Sand

Channel

Clean quartz sands, high velocity

currents

5.467 29.36

Subtidal Sand

Shoals

Sand shoals deeper than the

MLWS level. Sand ranges from

clean quartz in the lower estuary

to fluvial sands and gravel in the

upper estuary

4.079 21.91

Fluvial Sands

and Gravel

Restricted to the upper estuary,

sediments are coarse sands to

fine gravels.

3.785 20.33

Subtidal Mud Depositional areas were

accumulation of fine silts and

clay occur

1.932 10.38

Intertidal Sand Sand shoals exposed at MLWS.

Extensively colonized by benthic

macrofauna such as Trypaea

australiensis (marine yabbie)

1.049 5.63

Zostera Areas of Z. capricorni

community.

1.172 6.29

Mangrove

Creek

Small tributaries dominated by

mangrove vegetation on the

littoral edge

0.574 3.09

Halophila Areas of H. australis community 0.382 2.05

Intertidal Mud

Shoals

Mud shoals exposed at MLWS 0.179 0.96

Figures 4-6 show the benthic habitats with the Hastings River estuary.




Figure 4 Habitat map of the lower Hastings River estuary.




Figure 5 Habitat map of the Maria River.




Figure 6 Habitat map of the upper Hastings River estuary.




1.2.1.3 Comparison with Existing Data

Seagrass distribution within the Hastings River estuary was mapped by West et al

(1985) as part of an estuarine inventory for NSW. This study found a total cover of

1.141 km2. This is comparable to the 1.171km

2 for combined Z. capricorni beds

found in this study. In the 1985 study and more recently a study undertaken by NSW

Fisheries and the Department of Planning's Comprehensive Coastal Assessment

Program (2006) the seagrass distribution was similar to this study, with a majority of

the seagrass being located in the lower estuary around the Big Bay and Settlement

Point backchannel area. Neither study however mapped the 0.382km2

of H. australis

found in upper Limeburners Creek. This seagrass bed is very seasonal, and access to

the area is restricted to high water only. Due to sediment resuspension aerial

photographs and satellite imagery do not clearly define these beds either. This may

explain why this seagrass coverage is not reported in these previous studies.

1.2.2 Camden Haven Estuary

1.2.2.1 Seagrass

The Camden Haven estuary has extensive seagrass coverage, with over 38% of the

estuarine benthic habitat having seagrass cover. Three species of seagrass are present

in the Camden Haven Estuary, R. megacarpa, Z. capricorni, and H. australis are

found as monoculture and mixed beds. As with the Hastings River estuary, there is

strong seasonality with seagrass coverage, in particular H. australis which in some

areas appears to die off completely during the cooler months (personal observation.).

Light and temperature data (data not shown) suggests that this is temperature related

as light remains well above the compensation point during the winter months.

Queens Lake contains over 70% of the total seagrass in the estuary and with all three

species present as monoculture and mixed beds. Extensive Z. capricorni beds are also

found in Googleys Lagoon, and Stingray Creek, with smaller isolated fringing beds

located along Camden Haven Inlet. Habitat within Watsons Taylor Lake is dominated

by subtidal mud shoals with seagrass generally limited to the northern area of the lake

where it discharges into Camden Haven Inlet. Figures 7-9 show the distribution of

seagrass within the Camden Haven.




Figure 7 Seagrass distribution in Camden Inlet, Googleys Lagoon and lower Stingray Creek.




Figure 8 Seagrass distribution in Queens Lake




Figure 9 Seagrass Distribution in Watson’s Taylor Lake.




1.2.2.2 Benthic Habitats

In contrast to the Hastings River Estuary, benthic habitats within the Camden Haven

are dominated by subtidal mud shoals rather than river channel. Table 2 displays

habitat types, area and contribution to total area within the Camden Haven.

Table 2 Habitat areas defined in the Camden Haven estuary.

Habitat Description Area (km2) % of Total

Area

Subtidal Mud

Shoals

Depositional areas were

accumulation of fine silts and clay

occur

9.591

31.91

Zostera Halophila

Mixed seagrass beds of Z.

capricorni and H. australis with Z.

capricorni dominant

2.996

9.97

Subtidal Sand

Shoals

Sand shoals deeper than the

MLWS level. Sand ranges from

clean quartz in the lower estuary to

fluvial sands and gravel in the

upper estuary

2.89

9.62

Zostera Monoculture beds of Z. capricorni 2.619 8.71

Halophila Monoculture beds of H. australis 1.986 6.61

Intertidal Sand

Shoals

Sand shoals exposed at MLWS.

Extensively colonized by benthic

macrofauna such as Trypaea

australiensis (marine yabbie)

1.966

6.54

Halophila Zostera

Mixed seagrass beds with H.

australis and Z. capricorni, with

H. australis dominant

1.944

6.47

Channel Marine

Sand

Clean quartz sands, high velocity

currents

1.56

5.19

Fluvial Sands and

Gravel

Restricted to the upper estuary,

sediments are coarse sands to fine

gravels.

1.518

5.05

Ruppia Monoculture beds of R.

megacarpa.

1.399 4.66

Intertidal Mud

Shoals

Mud shoals exposed at MLWS 0.9678

3.22

Ruppia Zostera

Mixed seagrass beds with R.

megacarpa and Z. capricorni with

R. megacarpa dominant

0.2137

0.71

Ruppia Zostera

Halophilia

Mixed seagrass beds with R.

megacarpa, Z. capricorni and H.

australis with R. megacarpa

dominant.

0.2127

0.71

Halophila Rupia Mixed seagrass beds with H.

australis and R. megacarpa, with

H. australis dominant.

0.1902

0.63




The differences between the Hastings and Camden Haven estuaries are primarily

associated to the geomorphology and evolutionary stage of the estuary. Barrier

estuaries typically start out as large lakes that gradually infill over many thousands of

years until they become river dominated. The Camden Haven is currently at an

intermediate stage and therefore remnants of the original lakes still remain (Queens

and Watson‟s Taylor Lakes) as does the evidence of the evolution towards river

domination (for example habitat distribution throughout Camden Haven Inlet).

Figures 10-12 display all in-stream habitats within the Camden Haven estuary.

1.2.2.3 Comparison with Existing Data

Seagrass area in the Camden Haven estuary has been mapped by Evans and Gibbs

(1981), West et al., (1985) and more recently by Patterson, Britton and Partners

(1999) with a large variation between each of these studies. Seagrass areas ranged

from 6.34km2

in the 1985 study to 14.15km2 in the 1999 study. It should be noted

however that authors of the 1999 study stated that the observed discrepancies may be

due to a lack of ground truthing. There was no distinction between mixed and single

species beds or seagrass percentage coverage in previous studies as there has been in

this study. During the current study a total area of 11.56km2 of seagrass cover was

mapped with over 70% of the seagrass distribution occurring in Queens Lake.

Extensive ground truthing during this study enables a greater degree of certainty in

defining seagrass areas and transitional boundaries between the different seagrass

habitat types.

By defining seagrass beds in terms of both monoculture and mixed beds subtle

changes in nutrient, sediment, light and water circulation patterns within the estuary

may be determined by changes in seagrass composition. For example R. megacarpa

can tolerate a broad range of salinities so an increased coverage of this species may

indicate a change in hydrodynamics. A shift from Z. capricorni coverage to H.

australis may indicate increased turbidity due to the lower light requirement for H.

australis.




Figure 10 Habitat map of Camden Inlet, Googleys Lagoon and Stingray Creek.




Figure 11 Habitat map of Queens Lake




Figure 12 Habitat map of Watson Taylors Lake




2 Benthic and Pelagic Productivity

2.1 Sample Sites

Sample sites for benthic productivity were chosen to adequately represent the habitat

types within each estuary. Where possible sampling of the same habitat type along the

estuarine gradient was undertaken to allow for spatial variation. Pelagic productivity

was determined at three sites in each estuary, representing the upper, middle and

lower estuary. Figures 13 and 14 display the sampling locations and sites in the

Hastings River and Camden Haven estuaries respectively and Tables 3 and 4 give a

general description of each site.

Table 3 Site, location and description for each of the sampling locations in the Hastings River

estuary.

Site Location Description

H Z/Y 152° 53' 52.46124"

31° 25' 31.115028"

Z. capricorni, intertidal sand shoal. Triplicate chambers

on Z. capricorni triplicate chambers used on intertidal

sand shoal. <1 m depth

H2 152° 54' 26.06328"

31° 24' 49.012236"

Subtidal sand shoal, clean quartz sand. 3m deep.

H1 C1 152° 53' 24.03348"

31° 22' 32.150604"

Fine mud, thick benthic microalgae mat, H. australis

colonization during summer. <1m deep

H4 152° 53' 8.65068"

31° 23' 13.323984"

Subtidal shoal varying from gravely sand to mud

depending on time of year 1.5m deep

H5 152° 51' 16.87356"

31° 23' 40.65774"

Subtidal sand shoal, heavily colonized by marine

yabbies. 1.5m deep

H6 152° 50' 13.13628"

31° 22' 9.60366"

Coarse alluvial sand/gravel. 2m deep

H7 152° 50' 6.31896"

31° 20' 52.512288"

Coarse alluvial sand/gravel. 2m deep

H8 152° 49' 12.20844"

31° 24' 40.609656"

Mud, deep depositional area on edge of channel. 4m

deep

H9 152° 46' 33.9042"

31° 24' 41.64012"

Shallow, subtidal alluvial sand. 1m deep

H10 152° 45' 58.85208"

31° 27' 26.526204"

Alluvial sand <1m deep

H M1 152° 54' 14.99076"

31° 25' 1.931664"

Macrofauna site. Intertidal sand clean quartz. <1m deep

H M2 See H1 C1 Macrofauna site, located at site H1 C1

H M3 152° 48' 52.71372"

31° 24' 49.761216"

Macrofauna site. Subtidal alluvial sand. 2m deep

H M4 See H Z/Y Macrofauna site located at H Z/Y




Table 4 Site, location and description for each of the sampling locations in the Camden Haven

estuary.

Site Location Description

CH8 152° 49' 23.646"

31° 38' 50.403048"

Intertidal sand shoal, clean quartz sand, some sparse H.

australis <1m deep.

CH7 152° 48' 25.77816"

31° 38' 52.300464"

Subtidal sand shoal. Clean marine sand, little to no organic

matter 2m deep.

CH Z1/Y 152° 48' 22.64868"

31° 38' 19.79286"

Z. capricorni, intertidal sand shoal. Triplicate chambers

used on Z. capricorni triplicate chambers used on intertidal

sand shoal. Heavily modified, receives runoff from caravan

park <1m deep.

CH9 152° 47' 45.3858"

31° 37' 57.151308"

High velocity channel. Compacted quartz sands. 2.5m

deep.

CH10 152° 47' 18.62016"

31° 37' 58.147212"

Depositional mud basin, thick layer of microalgae. 1m

deep.

CH 11 152° 46' 28.7058"

31° 37' 23.892348"

Depositional mud basin, thick layer of microalgae. 1m

deep.

CH Z/H 152° 45' 29.35584"

31° 37' 2.476812"

Z. capricorni and H. australis beds. Triplicate chambers on

Z. capricorni and triplicate chambers used on H. australis.

Sediment muddy, high organic content. 1m deep.

CH R/A 152° 45' 27.4842"

31° 36' 37.723068"

Ruppia megacarpa and thick filamentous microalgae beds.

Triplicate chambers on R. megacarpa and triplicate

chambers used on the algae. Sediment muddy, high organic

content. <1m deep.

CH12 152° 44' 37.74876"

31° 36' 44.247708"

Riverine channel, coarse alluvial sand, high detritus

content. 1.5m deep

CH6 152° 48' 6.40728"

31° 39' 49.0788"

Channel sediments quartz sand highly compacted. 2.5m

deep.

CH5 152° 47' 17.86128"

31° 40' 45.418656"

Subtidal sand shoal quartz sand highly compacted. 2m

deep.

CH3 152° 46' 20.46504"

31° 41' 19.131828"

Depositional mud, thick algae coverage. <1m deep.

CH2 152° 44' 6.73764"

31° 42' 19.318536"

Depositional mud. <1m deep

CH1 152° 44' 40.74108"

31° 41' 37.586292"

Depositional mud. <1m deep

CH4 152° 45' 15.63516"

31° 41' 29.307552"

Riverine sediments alluvial gravel with fine layer of mud

over the top. 1m deep.

CH M1 See CH Z/H Macrofauna site located at site CH Z/Y

CH M2 See CH11 Macrofauna site located at site CH 11

CH M3 152° 48' 16.18308"

31° 38' 47.056632"

Macrofauna site. Subtidal sand shoal, sparse H. australis

and Z. capricorni. <1m deep

CH M4 152° 49' 26.1264"

31° 38' 43.812996"

Macrofauna site. Intertidal sands highly productive area.

<1m deep.




Figure 13 Sampling locations in the Hastings River estuary




Figure 14 Sampling locations in the Camden Haven estuary




2.2 Methods

2.2.1 Benthic Productivity

Benthic and pelagic productivity were determined on a seasonal basis with sampling

campaigns occurring in June/July 2006 (winter), September/October 2006 (spring)

January/February 2007 (summer) and April/May 2007 (autumn). Benthic productivity

in non-seagrass areas was assessed using triplicate sediment cores collected from each

site. Cores were incubated in the field laboratory at in situ mean daily light and

temperature conditions (Figure 15). Photosythetically active radiation (PAR) was

determined via a Li-Cor 2π PAR sensor at the surface and benthos at each sample site.

Daily PAR light curves were logged for each season and mean daily light was

corrected for light attenuation in the water column at each site via an array of shading

treatments as to deliver appropriate light for each triplicate.

Figure 15 Field core incubation setup.




Benthic productivity in seagrass communities and marine yabbie dominated intertidal

flats areas was assessed using in situ benthic chambers (Figure 16). The use of benthic

chambers minimizes disturbance and containment affects that can occur when using

sediment cores in these habitat types.

Figure 16 Benthic chamber array used for seagrass and intertidal sand shoal incubations.

Diurnal incubations were undertaken for both core and chamber incubations, with

oxygen concentrations measured at regular intervals throughout the night and day.

Oxygen concentrations were determined using a HACH LDO probe with an accuracy

of +/- 1%. Benthic respiration was determined by the net decrease in oxygen

concentration during the night (corrected for surface area and volume of the

core/chamber). Gross productivity was determined by subtracting respiration from net

light oxygen flux (i.e. change in oxygen concentration during the day, corrected for

volume and surface area of the core/chamber). Figure 17 displays typical diurnal

oxygen changes in the water column.




Figure 17 Graph displaying typical diurnal changes in oxygen concentration

Benthic productivity and respiration was then scaled to an estuary wide basis based on

the proportional contribution of the different habitat areas as defined by the habitat

mapping. This data was used to construct benthic productivity budgets for both the

Camden Haven and Hastings River estuaries, based on tonnes of carbon fixed per

habitat type each season.

2.2.2 Pelagic Productivity

Pelagic productivity was determined by using the classical light dark bottle technique

modified to include filtered blanks to account for temperature dependant changes in

oxygen concentrations. Water was collected at three sites in each estuary (Queens

Lake, Watson‟s Taylor Lake and Camden Inlet in the Camden Haven estuary, Upper

Hastings, Mid Maria and Lower Hastings in the Hastings River estuary). Triplicate

BOD bottles for light, dark and blank treatments from each site were incubated in situ

from 10am to 4pm during each season. Oxygen concentrations in each bottle were

determined at the start and the end of each incubation using a HACH LDO probe.

Pelagic respiration was determined by the decrease in oxygen in the dark bottles, net

pelagic productivity by the change in the light oxygen bottle, and gross pelagic

productivity was determined by subtracting the respiration1 from the net productivity.

All values were converted to g.C m-3

d-1

using stoichiometric conversions.

1 Note respiration is expressed as a negative value




2.3 Results

2.3.1 Benthic Productivity

Benthic gross productivity was up to an order of magnitude higher in seagrass areas

compared to non-seagrass sediments so for ease of interpretation separate graphs are

presented for Camden Haven non-seagrass sites, Hastings non-seagrass sites and

Hastings and Camden Haven seagrass sites. Figure 18 shows respiration and gross

productivity for non-seagrass Camden Haven sites. Generally the highest productivity

occurs during summer for most sites while benthic respiration does not display a

distinct seasonal variation.

Figure 18 Oxygen fluxes for core incubations in the Camden Haven estuary in: A winter, B

spring, C Summer and D Autumn. Error bars ± SD (n=3)

Seasonal productivity data for non-seagrass areas in the Hastings River estuary are

shown in Figure 19. Highest productivity was observed during summer, with similar

productivity occurring throughout the other seasons. Respiration was relatively

consistent throughout the study period. Sites H10 and H9 (Upper Hastings) showed

consistently high productivity throughout the study period, and sites H7 and H6

(Upper and mid Maria) generally exhibited low productivity.




Figure 19 Oxygen fluxes for core incubations in the Hastings River estuary in: A winter, B

spring, C Summer and D Autumn. Error bars ± SD (n=3)

Seagrass communities display highest productivity throughout spring and summer

(Figure 20) and maximal respiration rates in summer. Productivity and respiration

rates are approximately 10 fold higher in the seagrass communities in the Hastings

and Camden Haven estuaries as compared to non-seagrass habitats.




Figure 20 Oxygen fluxes for chamber incubations in the Camden Haven and Hastings River

estuaries in: A winter, B spring, C Summer and D Autumn. Error bars ± SD (n=3).

2.3.1.1 Benthic Productivity Budget

By scaling gross productivity to an estuary wide basis benthic productivity budgets

have been constructed. Table 5 shows the benthic productivity budget for the Hastings

River and Camden Haven estuaries based on seasonal habitat specific gross

productivity. The Hastings River estuary seagrass communities contribute

approximately 50% of the total carbon fixation in the estuary whilst only occupying

~8% of the estuary area. In the Camden Haven estuary seagrass areas contribute

~67% of total carbon production yet only occupy approximately 30% of total area.

Intertidal sand shoals in the Hastings estuary are also highly productive as are subtidal

mud shoals in the Camden Haven.

Table 5 Benthic productivity budget for the Hastings and Camden Haven estuaries

Estuary

Habitat

Tonnes of Carbon Fixed

Winter Spring Summer Autumn Total

% of Total

Area

% of Total Yearly

Carbon Fixation

Hastings

Zostera 122 627 707 376 1831 6.29 48.08

Intertidal Sand Shoals 183 164 161 81 588 5.63 15.45

Fluvial Sands and Gravel 120 60 134 120 434 20.33 11.40

Subtidal Sand Shoals 40 156 134 97 427 21.91 11.22

Marine Sand Channel 66 54 18 15 154 29.36 4.04

Mangrove Creek 20 46 49 20 134 3.09 3.53

Subtidal Mud Shoals 30 37 38 14 119 10.38 3.11

Halophila 11 10 35 26 82 2.05 2.15

Intertidal Mud Shoals 5 5 16 12 38 0.96 1.01

Camden Haven

Zostera Halophila 245 781 661 596 2283 9.97 21.11

Zostera 214 683 577 521 1996 8.71 18.45

Subtidal Mud Shoals 148 377 697 465 1687 31.91 15.59

Ruppia 169 492 318 249 1228 4.66 11.36

Halophila 48 238 274 81 641 6.61 5.93

Halophila Zostera 47 233 268 79 627 6.47 5.80

Intertidal Mud Shoals 63 204 274 71 612 3.22 5.66

Intertidal Sand Shoals 31 110 185 245 571 6.54 5.28

Subtidal Sand Shoals 25 144 159 50 378 9.62 3.49

Ruppia Zostera 26 75 49 38 188 0.71 1.73

Fluvial Sands and Gravel 20 37 76 54 187 5.05 1.73

Ruppia Zostera Halophilia 26 75 48 38 187 0.71 1.73

Channel Marine Sand 11 42 68 48 169 5.19 1.56




2.3.2 Pelagic Productivity

With the exception of the Upper Hastings River, all sites displayed maximal gross

pelagic productivity during summer (Figure 21). The Upper Hastings site had a

slightly higher mean gross pelagic production during spring, suggesting a spring

phytoplankton bloom in the upper reaches.

Site

Queens Lake Watsons Taylor Camden Inlet Upper Hastings Maria Lower Hastings

mgC

m-3

d-1

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Winter

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Figure 21 Gross pelagic productivity in the Camden Haven and Hastings River estuaries. Error

bars ± SD (n=3)

A proportion of the pelagic productivity in Watsons Taylor and Queens Lake is likely

to be associated with resuspension of benthic microalgae due to the shallow nature of

these areas and the observed sediment resuspension during sampling periods. Pelagic

productivity in the Hastings River estuary during winter is negligible indicating that

catchment inputs and benthic productivity are sustaining the carbon supply to higher

trophic levels (including fisheries) during winter.




The high pelagic productivity

observed during summer may be

associated with a period of “red

weed” deposition in the estuary.

Figure 22 is an underwater

photograph of the Polysiphonia sp.

in the lower Hastings River Estuary

during the summer sampling

campaign.

Table 6 displays the pelagic

productivity in the Hastings River

and Camden Haven Estuaries. Note

the extremely high pelagic

productivity in the lower Hastings

River during summer. It is 4 times

higher than the productivity at this

site during any other season.

Table 6 Pelagic productivity

Estuary

Habitat

Tonnes of Carbon Fixed

Winter Spring Summer Autumn Total

% of Total Yearly

Carbon Fixation

Hastings

Upper Hastings 13 253 542 313 1474 28.76

Maria River 12 135 408 338 894 17.44

Lower Hastings -305 553 2028 481 2757 53.80

Camden Haven

Queens Lake 137 253 976 261 1627 43.09

Watson Taylors Lake 7 209 689 136 1041 27.56

Camden Haven Inlet 177 160 584 188 1108 29.35

Pelagic productivity is higher than benthic productivity in the Hastings River Estuary

(5124tC pelagic, 3807tC benthic) however results are skewed by the summer results

in the lower estuary with 40% of total annual pelagic carbon fixation occurring at this

site during this sea. The Camden Haven Estuary has a 3:1 ratio of benthic to pelagic

productivity, with 10815tC fixed in the benthos and 3776tC fixed in the water

column.

Figure 22 Underwater photograph of red weed bloom

during summer field trip




3 Macrofauna

3.1 Methods

Macrofauna samples were collected from 4 sites in each estuary during each season.

Site locations and description are provided in Tables 3 and 4 and Figures 13 and 14.

Five replicate sediment cores (95mm id, 300mm height) were collected at each site

and sieved through a 500μm sieve. Samples were preserved in a 10% buffered

formalin solution until identification. Organisms collected were identified to the

lowest taxonomic level possible (generally species level).

Multivariate statistical analysis on the data was undertaken using Primer v6 software

(Primer-E). Abundances of species rather than biomass were used in the statistical

analysis to minimize artifacts associated with the inclusion the biomass of mollusc

shells and worm tubes. A Log (X+1) transformation of abundance data was used due

to the low numbers of individuals for most species (Clarke, 1993). Resemblance

matrices were constructed based on pair-wise Bray-Curtis similarities between

samples. Data is presented as MDS plots which show similarities between samples

plotted two-dimensionally.

LINKTREE is a function in Primer v6 that can be used to differentiate sites based on

environmental conditions. LINKTREE plots were constructed for each season using

gross productivity, respiration, chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, chlorophyll c and

pheophytin concentrations as variables.

3.2 Data

Tables presenting species abundance for each season are presented in Appendix 1.

Species diversity at each site throughout the four seasons is displayed in Table 7.

Margalef's species richness for each sample is a measure of the number of species

present, making some allowance for the number of individuals. Pielou's evenness is a

measure of equitability, a measure of how evenly the individuals are distributed

among the different species. Shannon and Simpson diversity indices are an indication

of how diverse the macrofauna population is at each site factoring the number of

species present, and the number of individuals of each species. The higher the number

the more diverse the macrofauna population.

Seagrass sites (H M4, H M2, CH M3 and CH M4) displayed high species abundance

and diversity throughout all seasons, and abundance at the intertidal site H M1 was

high also, with bivalves of genus Mysella dominating at this site. This suggests that

seagrass and intertidal sand shoals are important in terms of benthic macrofauna

habitat.

An ANOVA was performed on abundance and species present throughout the seasons

with no significant difference between seasons found (p = 0.91 and 0.54 for

abundance and species numbers respectively). Further investigation into the

compositional changes of benthic macrofauna communities over time are needed to

determine the effects of acute (eg flooding, acid runoff events etc) and chronic (eg

increased sedimentation) impacts within the Camden Haven and Hastings River

estuaries.




Table 7 Species diversity indices for macrofauna sites. S is the number of species present, N the

number of individuals d is species richness (Margalef): (d = (S-1)/Log(N)) J’ is Pielous evenness,

H’ Shannon diversity index, 1-λ is the Simpson diversity index.

Season

Site

S

(Species)

N

(Number)

d

(Margalef)

J‟

(Pielou‟s)

H‟ (log e)

(Shannon)

1-λ

(Simpson)

Winter

H M1 8 80 1.597 0.7154 1.488 0.7078

H M2 15 35 3.938 0.8718 2.361 0.8604

H M3 10 21 2.956 0.9527 2.194 0.8798

H M4 32 124 6.431 0.8252 2.86 0.9095

CH M1 8 10 3.04 0.9488 1.973 0.84

CH M2 8 10 3.04 0.9488 1.973 0.84

CH M3 7 22 1.941 0.922 1.794 0.8099

CH M4 24 65 5.51 0.8842 2.81 0.9193

Spring

H M1 10 86 2.02 0.636 1.464 0.6495

H M2 10 41 2.424 0.7902 1.82 0.7876

H M3 6 11 2.085 0.9335 1.673 0.7934

H M4 19 58 4.433 0.8078 2.379 0.8549

CH M1 9 20 2.67 0.8271 1.817 0.775

CH M2 3 14 0.7578 0.7974 0.876 0.5408

CH M3 9 25 2.485 0.9283 2.04 0.8544

CH M4 15 62 3.392 0.8754 2.371 0.8855

Summer

H M1 11 66 2.387 0.6422 1.54 0.6869

H M2 12 22 3.559 0.9254 2.3 0.8802

H M3 5 7 2.056 0.963 1.55 0.7755

H M4 19 77 4.144 0.7795 2.295 0.8457

CH M1 11 23 3.189 0.7791 1.868 0.741

CH M2 3 14 0.7578 0.9032 0.9923 0.602

CH M3 19 54 4.512 0.7995 2.354 0.8491

CH M4 23 146 4.414 0.6912 2.167 0.801

Autumn

H M1 4 85 0.6753 0.5411 0.7501 0.4008

H M2 8 19 2.377 0.8983 1.868 0.8144

H M3 8 10 3.04 0.974 2.025 0.86

H M4 17 66 3.819 0.8162 2.313 0.8636

CH M1 8 19 2.377 0.8607 1.79 0.7867

CH M2 2 8 0.4809 0.5436 0.3768 0.2188

CH M3 15 36 3.907 0.8903 2.411 0.8812

CH M4 16 78 0.1742 0.8258 0.1635 0.8365




Figures 23-26 are seasonal MDS plots based on combined abundances for replicate

cores at each site. Sites H M4, CH M3 and CH M4 display greater than 20%

similarity throughout most seasons. These three sites display similar environmental

characteristics including: sandy sediment, in or near seagrass beds, depth <1m and

close to the estuary mouth. Other sites have distinct macrofaunal populations

throughout all seasons.

Figure 23 Winter MDS

Figure 24 Spring MDS

Transform: Log(X+1)

Resemblance: S17 Bray Curtis similarity

SiteH M3

H M2

H M1

H M4

CH M1

CH M2

CH M3

CH M4

Similarity25

2D Stress: 0.05

Transform: Log(X+1)


SiteH M3

H M2

H M1

H M4

CH M1

CH M2

CH M3

CH M4

Similarity25

2D Stress: 0.01




Figure 25 Summer MDS

Figure 26 Autumn MDS

Transform: Log(X+1)


SiteH M3

H M2

H M1

H M4

CH M1

CH M2

CH M3

CH M4

Similarity25

2D Stress: 0.05

Transform: Log(X+1)


SiteH M3

H M2

H M1

H M4

CH M1

CH M2

CH M3

CH M4

Similarity25

2D Stress: 0.03




Figures 27-30 are LINKTREE plots for winter, spring summer and autumn

respectively.

Figure 27 LINKTREE diagram for macrofauna sites during winter.

Figure 28 LINKTREE diagram for macrofauna sites during spring




Figure 29 LINKTREE diagram for macrofauna sites during summer

Figure 30 LINKTREE diagram for macrofauna sites during autumn.




The LINKTREE diagrams show the environmental factors that best explain the

differences in macrofauna communities between each site. During winter (Figure 26)

and autumn (Figure 29) it is combination of benthic productivity and sediment phyto-

pigment concentrations that best explain community differences. During spring and

summer (Figures 27 and 28 respectively) it is the rate of productivity that best

explains community structure. This suggests that during the cooler months it may be

food supply (algal abundance) that drives inter-site community dynamics, whilst

during the warmer months there is a link between benthic productivity and

macrofauna community composition.

4 Estuarine Health Both the Hastings River and Camden Haven Estuaries appear to be extremely healthy

in terms of benthic habitats, productivity and macrofaunal abundance and diversity.

From the results obtained during this study the Camden Haven Estuary has some of

the most extensive seagrass communities in NSW on an areal basis indicating that in

general the health of the estuarine ecosystem is excellent. The Hastings River has

considerable less seagrass coverage due to the geomorphology of the estuary;

however seagrass is present in the lower estuary where conditions allow.

Productivity in the Camden Haven Estuary is dominated by benthic primary

production with seagrass communities contributing significantly. Other important

benthic habitats are the subtidal mud shoals within Queens and Watson Taylors

Lakes. Within the Hastings River Estuary seagrass habitats are limited to the lower

estuary, and contribute to ~50% of annual benthic productivity. Due to the high

volume to surface are ratio of the Hastings River Estuary annual pelagic productivity

is ~2 times higher than benthic productivity, however some skewing of the results

may have been caused by the occurrence of a „red-weed‟ bloom during summer.

Figure 31 shows a conceptual model of benthic and pelagic processes within the

Hastings River Estuary. Figure 32 shows a conceptual model of processes within the

Camden Haven Estuary.

A key difference between the two estuarine systems is the geomorphology, this has a

direct impact upon the key habitat areas. Within the Camden Haven Estuary large

shallow lakes dominate instream habitat allowing for extensive seagrass beds to

thrive. These areas are very susceptible to changes in estuarine conditions. For

example an increase in sediment transport from the upper catchment could decrease

seagrass coverage significantly, changing the trophic structure of the estuary as a

whole, which would have implications for both commercial and recreational fisheries.

In the Hastings River Estuary seagrasses are limited to shallow areas in the lower

estuary and are more likely to be damaged by physical processes such as erosion.

Pelagic productivity is proportionally more important in the Hastings River Estuary,

consequently factors such as nutrient imports are key issues to maintain the current

balance between benthic and pelagic production.

Figure 31 Conceptual model of carbon flow in the Hastings River Estuary

Figure 32 Conceptual model of carbon flow in the Camden Haven Estuary




5 Recommendations This study has provided baseline data for benthic habitat mapping, pelagic and benthic

productivity and benthic macrofauna surveys in the Camden Haven and Hastings

River Estuaries. By repeating this same suite of sampling at regular intervals (every 3-

4 years) any shift in estuarine health can be detected. Within the Camden Haven

Estuary the key area for estuarine productivity is Queens Lake which contains a

majority of the seagrass in the system. In the Hastings River Estuary areas in the

Settlement Point backchannel and Big Bay are key areas for benthic productivity as

most of the seagrass within the estuary is located in these areas. Regular monitoring of

pelagic productivity, should be undertaken within both estuaries to ensure the balance

between pelagic and benthic productivity is maintained. Analysing seagrass

composition and coverage over set transects as a part of a routine monitoring program

is recommended on a yearly basis. All future benthic habitat mapping should be

undertaken in summer to allow comparison with the data obtained in this study.

Further investigation into the effects of „red weed‟ deposition into the Hastings River

and Camden Haven Estuaries is needed to ascertain whether or not these blooms have

an impact upon benthic and pelagic processes. Analysis of planktonic species prior to,

during and after these bloom events will give an indication of the effects upon trophic

structure.




6 References Clarke, K. R. (1993) Non-parametric multivariate analysis of changes in community

structure. Australian Journal of Ecology 18:117-143

Evans, P. Gibbs, P. J. (1981) Distribution of seagrasses in five NSW coastal lagoons.

NSW State Fisheries.

Paterson, Britton and Partners (1999) Camden Haven Estuary Processes Study.

Roy P.S, Williams R.J, Jones A.R, Yassini I, Gibbs P.J, Coats B, West R.J, Scanes

P.R, Hudson J.P and Nichol S (2001) Structure and function of south-east Australian

estuaries. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 53:351-384

Webb, McKeown and Associates (1998) Hastings River Estuary Process Study.

West, R., Thorogood, C., Walford, T. and Williams, R. (1985) Fisheries Bulletin 2:

An Estuarine Inventory for New South Wales, Australia.

7 Appendix 1 Macrofauna abundance for Camden Haven and Hastings River Estuaries

Table 8 Macrofauna abundance for Camden Haven and Hastings during winter.

Phylum Class:Order

Suborder

Family Genus Species Feeding Group H

M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4

Annelida Polychaeta Capitellidae Barantolla lepte non-selective ?

direct deposit 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 1

Annelida Polychaeta Capitellidae Leiochrides? sp non-selective ?


Annelida Polychaeta Capitellidae Mediomastus californiensis non-selective ?


Annelida Polychaeta Capitellidae Notomastus chrysosetus non-selective ?


Annelida Polychaeta Capitellidae Notomastus torquatus non-selective ?


Annelida Polychaeta Capitellidae Notomastus spp (H&M1984) non-selective ?


Annelida Polychaeta Capitellidae Scyphoproctus djiboutiensis non-selective ?


Annelida Polychaeta Cirratulidae Caulleriella cf. tricapillata surface deposit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

Annelida Polychaeta Cirratulidae Cirriformia cf. filigera surface deposit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9

Annelida Polychaeta Cirratulidae Tharyx cf multifilis (H&M

'84) surface deposit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Eunicidae Marphysa sp. carnivore/omnivore 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Lumbrineridae Lumbrineris latreilli herbivore/carnivore

/deposit 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0

Annelida Polychaeta Magelonidae Magelona dakini surface deposit 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Maldanidae Maldane sarsi? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Nephtyidae Nephtys australiensis predator/carnivore 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Nephtyidae Nephtys longipes predator/carnivore 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Nereididae Australonereis ehlersi scavenger/selective

deposit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Nereididae Ceratonereis mirabilis scavenger/selective 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 8 continued.

Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4

Annelida Polychaeta Nereididae Simplisetia aequisetis scavenger/selective

deposit

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

Annelida Polychaeta Nereididae Neanthes vaalii scavenger/selective

deposit? 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Nereididae Perinereis nun tia? scavenger/selective

deposit? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Opheliidae Armandia intermedia non-selective ?

deposit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Orbiniidae Leitoscoloplos bifurcatus deposit 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Orbiniidae Scoloplos normalis deposit 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Orbiniidae Scoloplos simplex deposit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Oweniidae Owenia fusiformis selective deposit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Annelida Polychaeta Oweniidae Owenia tubes of

fusiformis

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Annelida Polychaeta Paraonidae Aricidea fauveli direct deposit 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Phyllodocidae Phyllodoce sp. 1 carnivore 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Phyllodocidae sp 1 carnivore 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Annelida Polychaeta Pilargidae Sigambra parva carnivore/omnivore

/ predator?/

scavenger? 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Sabellidae Laonome elegans suspension 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Sabellidae Laonome triangularis suspension 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Sabellidae Laonome

juvenile?

suspension

0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0

Annelida Polychaeta Sabellidae Laonome sp. suspension 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Sabellidae Laonome tubes of L.

sp.

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Sigalionidae Sigalion bandaeensis carnivore/predator 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Spionidae Carazziella victoriensis deposit/suspension 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Spionidae Carazziella sp. deposit/suspension 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 8 continued.

Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder

Family Genus species feeding group H

M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4

Annelida Polychaeta Spionidae Dipolydora flava/tuberc

ulata

deposit/suspension

0 0 0 26 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Spionidae Dipolydora socialis deposit/suspension 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Spionidae Dipolydora sp deposit/suspension 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Spionidae Dipolydora tubes of sp 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Spionidae Polydora

(fragments)

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Spionidae Prionospio aucklandica deposit/suspension 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Spionidae Prionospio queenslandi

ca

deposit/suspension

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Spionidae Prionospio yuriel deposit/suspension 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Spionidae Prionospio wambiri deposit/suspension 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Spionidae Pseudopolydora cf.

glandulosa

deposit/suspension

0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Spionidae Pseudopolydora paucibranchi

ata

deposit/suspension

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Annelida Polychaeta Syllidae Ehlersia? sp predator/carnivore? 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Syllidae:

Syllinae

Typosyllis cf. variegata

(H&M1984)

predator/carnivore

0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0


Exogoninae

Exogone cf

heterosetosa

selective deposit

0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0


Exogoninae

sp 1 selective deposit

0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1


Exogoninae


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1


Exogoninae


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Annelida Polychaeta Terebellidae Lysilla pacifica selective surface

deposit 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 4

Annelida Polychaeta Terebellidae Lysilla sp selective surface

deposit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 8 continued.

Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4

Annelida Oligochaeta unidentified 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Arthropoda Crustacea:

Amphipoda

Corophiidae

0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda

Haustoriidae Urohaustori

us

sp1 suspension/filter

5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda

Melitidae sp 1 ?

0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda

Oedicerotidae sp 1 deposit

0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda


0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda

Phoxocephalidae sp 1 deposit/predator

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1


Amphipoda

unidentified sp 1

0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2


Amphipoda

unidentified sp 2

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Arthropoda Crustacea:Am

phipoda

unidentified sp 2A

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda

(Eusiridae?) sp. 3

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda

fragments

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda

Alpheidae Synalpheus? sp deposit

0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

Arthropoda Crustacea

:Decapoda

Palaemonidae Periclimenes sp. anenome

symbiont? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda

Penaeidae Penaeus plebejus

(juv.)

omnivore/

scavenger 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda

Callianiassidae Trypaea sp. subsurface deposit

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 8 continued.

Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4


Decapoda

Diogenidae sp

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda:

Brachyura

Myctiridae Mictyrus longicarpus omnivore/

scavenger

11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda:

Brachyura

Myctiridae Mictyrus platycheles omnivore/

scavenger

22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda:

Brachyura

Grapsidae Paragrapsus sp herbivore

0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0


Decapoda:

Brachyura

Grapsidae Paragrapsus sp. 2 herbivore

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda:

Brachyura

Grapsidae sp 1 ?

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda:

Brachyura

Hymenosomatidae Halicarcinus australis

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Isopoda

Anthuridae sp scavenger/

omnivore 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9


Tanaidacea

Leptochelidae sp 1 filter/predator

0 0 0 1 0 0 0 9


Tanaidacea

Leptochelidae tube filter/predator

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Echinodermata Ophiuroidea

(fragments)

unidentified sp 1 filter/deposit/

browse/scavenger 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Echinodermata Ophiuroidea unidentified sp 2 filter/deposit/


Ectoproctophora Smittinidae Parasmittina sp (colony) filter 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Foraminiferida Rotaliidae Ammonia beccari selective deposit 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

Table 8 continued.

Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4

Mollusca Bivalvia Arcidae Anadara trapezia suspension 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0

Mollusca Bivalvia Galeommatidae Mysella anomala suspension 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mollusca Bivalvia Galeommatidae Mysella vitrea suspension 35 0 1 6 0 0 0 2

Mollusca Bivalvia Hiatellidae Hiatella australis suspension 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

Mollusca Bivalvia Laternulidae Laternula creccina suspension 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0

Mollusca Bivalvia Laternulidae Laternula rostrata suspension 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mollusca Bivalvia Mactridae Spisula trigonella suspension 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0

Mollusca Bivalvia Mytilidae Musculus cf. nanus suspension 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

Mollusca Bivalvia Mytilidae Pinctada? sp suspension 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

Mollusca Bivalvia Psammobiidae Soletellina alba prob. deposit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mollusca Bivalvia Semelidae Theora fragilis prob. deposit 0 0 2 0 3 4 0 0

Mollusca Bivalvia Tellinidae Tellina deltoidalis deposit 0 0 11 6 0 0 3 2

Mollusca Bivalvia Tellinidae Tellina

(Pistris)

gemonia suspension/deposit

0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

Mollusca Bivalvia Veneridae Dosinia sculpta suspension 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mollusca Bivalvia Veneridae Dosinia sp 1 suspension 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0

Mollusca Bivalvia Veneridae Paphia sp suspension 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mollusca Gastropoda Batilariidae Batillaria australis microalgal detritus 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

Mollusca Gastropoda Cerithiopsidae Joculator gracilis feeds on sponge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mollusca Gastropoda Haminoidae Haminoea sp 1 herbivore 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

Mollusca Gastropoda Nassariidae Nassarius jonasii scavenger on

carrion 0 0 0 3 0 0 2 0

Mollusca Gastropoda Nassariidae Nassarius burchardi scavenger on

carrion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mollusca Gastropoda Naticidae Glossaulax didyma carnivore 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mollusca Gastropoda Philinidae Philine angasi carnivore 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mollusca Gastropoda Turbinidae Astraea stellare herbivore/algal

grazer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mollusca Gastropoda Turbinidae Turbo sp herbivore/algal

grazer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 8 continued.

Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4

Mollusca Gastropoda Vitrinellidae Pseudoliotia speciosa detritivore on

microalgae/bacteria 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0

Mollusca Nudibranchia sp. 1 grazing predator 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nematoda unidentified spp probably deposit 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0

Nemertea unidentified spp carnivore

(annelids,

crustacea) 0 3 1 0 0 0 1 0

Nemertea unidentified "brown-

striped"

carnivore

(annelids,

crustacea) 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nemertea unidentified fragments carnivore

(annelids,

crustacea) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nemertea unidentified "big green" carnivore

(annelids,

crustacea) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Phoronida unidentified filter 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Phoronida? unidentified sp filter 0 0 0 5 0 0 7 1

Platyhelminthe Turbellaria unidentified filter 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Porifera unidentified sp 1 filter 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1



Priapulida? unidentified predators

(polychaetes, soft-

bodied slow

movers) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sipuncula unidentified sp detritivore 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Sipuncula unidentified sp 2 detritivore 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Vertebrata Actinopterygii Gobiidae Istigobius? sp 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1

Vertebrata Actinopterygii Gobiidae sp 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

Table 9 Spring macrofauna abundance

Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4





Annelida Polychaeta Capitellidae Mediomastus californiensi

s

non-selective ?






Annelida Polychaeta Capitellidae Notomastus spp

(H&M1984)

non-selective ?




Annelida Polychaeta Cirratulidae Caulleriella cf.

tricapillata surface deposit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10


Annelida Polychaeta Cirratulidae Tharyx cf multifilis

(H&M '84) surface deposit 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0



/deposit 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1






deposit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Nereididae Ceratonereis mirabilis scavenger/selective

deposit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 9 continued

Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4


deposit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2


deposit? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


deposit? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


deposit 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

Annelida Polychaeta Orbiniidae Leitoscolopl

os

bifurcatus deposit

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0





fusiformis

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0





/ predator?/

scavenger? 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0




juvenile?

suspension

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0



sp.

0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0




Table 9 continued

Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4


ulata

deposit/suspension

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0





(fragments)

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0



ca

deposit/suspension

0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1



Annelida Polychaeta Spionidae Pseudopolyd

ora

cf.

glandulosa

deposit/suspension

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


ora

paucibranchi

ata

deposit/suspension

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0



Syllinae


(H&M1984)

predator/carnivore

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Exogoninae

Exogone cf

heterosetosa

selective deposit

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Exogoninae


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Exogoninae


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Exogoninae


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


deposit 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 2


deposit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 9 continued

Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4



Amphipoda

Corophiidae

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda


us


7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda

Melitidae sp 1 ?

0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda


0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda

unidentified sp 1

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda

unidentified sp 2

0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0


phipoda

unidentified sp 2A

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda

(Eusiridae?) sp. 3

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda

fragments

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


:Decapoda


symbiont? 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0


Decapoda


(juv.)

omnivore/

scavenger 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda


4 1 0 0 0 0 4 0

Table 9 continued

Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4


Decapoda

Diogenidae sp

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda:

Brachyura


scavenger

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda:

Brachyura


scavenger

17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda:

Brachyura


0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1


Decapoda:

Brachyura


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1


Decapoda:

Brachyura

Grapsidae sp 1 ?

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda:

Brachyura


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Isopoda


omnivore 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12


Tanaidacea


0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0


Tanaidacea


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


(fragments)







Table 9 continued

Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4


Mollusca Bivalvia Galeommatidae Mysella anom ala suspension 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0












(Pistris)


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0








carrion 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0


carrion 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0




grazer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


grazer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 9 continued

Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4






(annelids,

crustacea) 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 0


striped"

carnivore

(annelids,

crustacea) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


(annelids,

crustacea) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


(annelids,

crustacea) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0








(polychaetes, soft-

bodied slow

movers) 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0





Table 10 Summer macrofauna abundance

Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4






s

non-selective ?







(H&M1984)

non-selective ?











/deposit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0






deposit 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0


deposit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 10 continued.

Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4


deposit 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0


deposit? 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0


deposit? 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0


deposit 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0


os

bifurcatus deposit

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0





fusiformis

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0





/ predator?/

scavenger? 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 0




juvenile?

suspension

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0



sp.

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0




Table 10 continued.

Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4


ulata

deposit/suspension

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0





(fragments)

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0



ca

deposit/suspension

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3




ora

cf.

glandulosa

deposit/suspension

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


ora

paucibranchi

ata

deposit/suspension

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0



Syllinae


(H&M1984)

predator/carnivore

0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0


Exogoninae

Exogone cf

heterosetosa

selective deposit

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Exogoninae


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1


Exogoninae


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Exogoninae


0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0


deposit 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3


deposit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Table 10 continued.

Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4



Amphipoda

Corophiidae

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda


us


31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda

Melitidae sp 1 ?

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2


Amphipoda


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda

unidentified sp 1

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda

unidentified sp 2

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1


phipoda

unidentified sp 2A

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3


Amphipoda

(Eusiridae?) sp. 3

0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda

fragments

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1


:Decapoda


symbiont? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda


(juv.)

omnivore/

scavenger 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda


1 0 0 0 0 0 6 0

Table 10 continued.

Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4


Decapoda

Diogenidae sp

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda:

Brachyura


scavenger

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda:

Brachyura


scavenger

4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda:

Brachyura


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda:

Brachyura


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1


Decapoda:

Brachyura

Grapsidae sp 1 ?

0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0


Decapoda:

Brachyura


0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0


Isopoda


omnivore 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 53


Tanaidacea


0 0 0 0 0 0 5 6


Tanaidacea


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


(fragments)







Table 10 continued.

Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4














(Pistris)


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0








carrion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


carrion 0 0 0 10 0 0 3 4




grazer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


grazer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 10 continued.

Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4






(annelids,

crustacea) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


striped"

carnivore

(annelids,

crustacea) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


(annelids,

crustacea) 1 0 2 3 0 0 1 0


(annelids,

crustacea) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0








(polychaetes, soft-

bodied slow

movers) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0





Table 11 Autumn macrofauna abundance

Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4






s

non-selective ?







(H&M1984)

non-selective ?











/deposit 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0






deposit 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0


deposit 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0

Table 11 continued.

Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4


deposit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1


deposit? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


deposit? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


deposit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


os

bifurcatus deposit

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0





fusiformis

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0





/ predator?/

scavenger? 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0




juvenile?

suspension

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0



sp.

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0




Table 11 continued. Phylum Class:Order:

Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4


ulata

deposit/suspension

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0





(fragments)

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0



ca

deposit/suspension

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0




ora

cf.

glandulosa

deposit/suspension

0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0


ora

paucibranchi

ata

deposit/suspension

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0



Syllinae


(H&M1984)

predator/carnivore

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Exogoninae

Exogone cf

heterosetosa

selective deposit

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Exogoninae


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Exogoninae


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Exogoninae


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


deposit 0 0 0 15 0 0 2 3


deposit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4



Amphipoda

Corophiidae

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda


us


14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda

Melitidae sp 1 ?

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1


Amphipoda

unidentified sp 1

0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda

unidentified sp 2

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


phipoda

unidentified sp 2A

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2


Amphipoda

(Eusiridae?) sp. 3

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Amphipoda

fragments

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


:Decapoda


symbiont? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda


(juv.)

omnivore/

scavenger 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4


Decapoda

Diogenidae sp

0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0


Decapoda:

Brachyura


scavenger

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda:

Brachyura


scavenger

6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda:

Brachyura


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda:

Brachyura


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda:

Brachyura

Grapsidae sp 1 ?

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Decapoda:

Brachyura


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Isopoda


omnivore 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7


Tanaidacea


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3


Tanaidacea


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


(fragments)








Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

C

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4














(Pistris)


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0








carrion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


carrion 0 0 0 13 0 0 4 10




grazer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1


grazer 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0


Suborder


M1

H

M2

H

M3

H

M4

CH

M1

CH

M2

CH

M3

CH

M4






(annelids,

crustacea) 0 0 1 3 0 0 1 0


striped"

carnivore

(annelids,

crustacea) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


(annelids,

crustacea) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


(annelids,

crustacea) 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0








(polychaetes, soft-

bodied slow

movers) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0





Date post:	12-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	3 times
Download:	0 times

Benthic Habitat Mapping, Primary Productivity Measurements ... · Benthic Habitat mapping, Primary...

Documents