Six Year Post-Construction Survey of Deep Reef …...Six Year Post-Construction Survey of Deep Reef...

Six Year Post-Construction Survey of Deep Reef Habitat at the Entrance to Port Phillip Bay

Job Number: PMSS-0136 Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation July 2015


Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno ii

Document Information

Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation

Project Name Six Year Deep Reef Habitat Survey

File Reference Deep Reef Survey REPORT 2015_DRAFT_B_V5_20150721

Job Reference PMSS-0136

Date July 2015

Contact Information

Professional Marine Science Services (PMSS)

Cardno (NSW/ACT) Pty Ltd

2 Sonia Street Level 9, The Forum

Carrum Downs 203 Pacific Highway

VIC 3201 St Leonards NSW 2065

Telephone: 03 9775 0998 Telephone: 02 9496 7700

Facsimile: 02 9775 1758 Facsimile: 02 9499 3902

International: +61 3 9775 0998 International: +61 2 9496 7700

www.profdivers.com www.cardno.com.au

Cover Image: Deep reef sessile biota at Lonsdale Wall.

Photograph by PMSS, March 2015 Citation: Zavalas R., Pritchard K., Lincoln Smith M., O’Donnell P., Nicastro A. and Blount C. (2015) Six Year Post-Construction Survey of Deep Reef Habitat at the Entrance to Port Phillip Bay. Report to Port of Melbourne Corporation. Professional Marine Science Services, Melbourne.

Document Control

Version Date Author Author Initials

Reviewer Reviewer Initials

1.0 14/07/2015 Richard Zavalas

Kate Prichard

Peggy O’Donnell

Andrea Nicastro

Craig Blount

RZ

KP

POD

AN

CB

Kate Prichard

Richard Zavalas

Marcus Lincoln Smith

Peggy O’Donnell

KP

RZ

MLS

POD

© PDS and Cardno 2015. Copyright in the whole and every part of this

document belongs to PDS and Cardno and may not be used, sold, transferred, copied or reproduced in whole or in part in any manner or form or in or on any media to any person other than by agreement with PDS and Cardno.

This document is produced by PDS and Cardno solely for the benefit and use by the client in accordance with the terms of the engagement. PDS and Cardno do not and shall not assume any responsibility or liability whatsoever to any third party arising out of any use or reliance by any third party on the content of this document.


Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno iii

Executive Summary

Background

The Channel Deepening Project (CDP) was undertaken by Port of Melbourne Corporation (PoMC)

from February 2008 to November 2009 to increase channel depths in Port Phillip Bay to

accommodate 14 m draught vessels. The CDP included the removal of rock from two areas, Rip

Bank and the western part of the Nepean Bank known as The Plateau, at the entrance to Port Phillip

Bay (‘The Entrance’) (Figure 1-1). A total of 461,000 m3 of rock was removed from these areas

from April to September 2008, comprising about 2% of the total volume of material dredged

throughout Port Phillip Bay during the CDP (22.97 million m3).

As part of the regulatory approvals for the CDP, the Supplementary Environment Effects Statement

(SEES) had predicted that loose rock and rubble would be generated from dredging activities in The

Entrance, some of which was predicted to move across the top of the reef and fall into the deep

canyon which meanders between Rip Bank and Nepean Bank at The Entrance. The Entrance

contains highly diverse assemblages of sessile benthic flora and fauna (e.g. sponges, ascidians,

kelp) along the canyon walls. These assemblages are considered to be of regional significance.

Much of the predicted impact to these assemblages was to occur within two years of dredging, with

pulses of rock fall occurring in decreasing magnitude over the following 30 years.

Recovery of marine habitats from biological and physical impacts from rock fall into the canyon

was predicted to commence immediately following stabilisation of rock fall material. To meet the

post-CDP Environmental Management Plan (EMP) requirements, PoMC monitored the impact of

rock fall and recovery of biota of the canyon walls.

In accordance with the CDP EMP and the current project brief, the objective of this study is to

document the distribution and status of any identified ongoing physical disturbance, biological

impacts and recovery in the deep reef habitat of the Entrance to Port Phillip Bay six years after the

completion of dredging.

Professional Divers Group (Trading as Professional Marine Science Services – PMSS and

Professional Diving Services - PDS) in conjunction with Cardno NSW/ACT Pty Ltd (Trading as

Cardno Ecology Lab), was engaged by PoMC to undertake the current survey (2015) and report on

the findings.


Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno iv

Methods

The survey undertaken before commencement of dredging for the CDP measured baseline

conditions. It provides a temporal control (i.e. ‘Before dredging’ treatment) to compare with the

three surveys post dredging (i.e. ‘After dredging’ treatment). Trial dredging in a relatively small

section of The Entrance in 2005 (Figure 1-1) and historical deepening activities beginning more

than a century ago occurred prior to the 2006 baseline survey and therefore also need to be

considered when interpreting potential effects of dredging for the CDP. Thus, the 2006 baseline

survey represents measures of natural variation in biota, plus potential impacts associated with

channel deepening from other activities prior to the CDP.

The physical habitat, biota and physical disturbance from rock fall were sampled on canyon walls at

depths of 27 m, 37 m, 47 m and 57 m within The Entrance. These samples were compared with

control locations within The Entrance (but away from areas that could be affected by rock fall from

dredging for the CDP) and with additional regional controls at Portsea Hole, within Port Phillip

Bay. Data for each survey were collected from video footage acquired by divers or from a

Remotely Operated Vehicle (ROV). In 2015 divers sampled the 27 m, 37 m and 47 m depth strata

and an ROV was used to sample the 57 m stratum. Multiple photographic stills (frames) were

captured from the video footage. Ecologists reviewed the diver observations, footage and frames to

make general, qualitative observations of the extent of rock fall disturbance and recolonisation and

to obtain quantitative data on the percentage cover of habitat descriptors (e.g. type of substratum),

taxa and morphotypes (i.e. different taxa inferred by shape and or colour). Three categories of

physical disturbance associated with rock fall were also assigned to every frame, ranging from

Category 1 (maximum disturbance), Category 2 (moderate disturbance), Category 3 (minimal

disturbance) and Category 4 (no evident disturbance).

A Before-After-Control-Impact (BACI) statistical design was used to investigate potential impacts

of dredging for the CDP on the benthic environment between areas adjacent to dredging (dredged

locations) and away from dredging (control locations) and among surveys. Five datasets were used

for univariate (one dependent variable) and multivariate (more than one dependent variable)

statistical analyses:

Each of the four impact categories (univariate statistics);

Habitat descriptors – abiotic features of the benthos (multivariate statistics);

Biotic (flora and fauna) assemblage (multivariate statistics);

Individual taxa and habitat descriptors of interest or that were responsible for significant

multivariate patterns (univariate statistics);


Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno v

Number and mean percentage cover of taxa found in each frame (univariate statistics).

Key Findings

1. Presence of sponge assemblages

- Sponge dominated assemblages were present at all depth strata at Rip Bank and The Plateau.

The photographic database compiled for the study provides a robust, historical record of these

assemblages;

- Biological diversity (total list of taxa) of The Entrance at the potential impact locations has

remained relatively similar over the period of the study before and after dredging for the CDP.

2. Before-After-Control-Impact Study

- Before-after changes in biota were measured at dredged and control locations within The

Entrance, and regional control site Portsea Hole;

- Data collected at The Entrance and Portsea Hole were not compared statistically due to the

differences in habitat characteristics, such as the restricted depth range present at Portsea Hole

and different survey times for the baseline surveys. Notwithstanding this, spatial and

temporal changes were evident at the regional control location Portsea Hole as well as at The

Entrance locations, indicating the occurrence of a similar natural and region wide variability

that cannot be attributable to the CDP.

3. Physical disturbance at The Entrance

- Overall, a large decrease in physical disturbance was observed in 2015 compared with 2011.

- Diver or ROV observations of cleared reef surfaces or the presence of rubble covering reef

surfaces were interpreted as physical disturbances. The recovery is shown by a reduced

frequency of frames showing impact categories within both Rip Bank and The Plateau;

- There was evidence of some further rock fall at Rip Bank and The Plateau since the previous

survey in 2011, but at a reduced rate;

- Prior to the 2015 survey, there was evidence of a small amount of rock fall occurring at the

control locations but no evidence of natural rock fall was recorded at the control locations in

2015;

- The pre-dredging baseline survey in 2006 shows the presence of physical disturbance prior to

the CDP. This is most evident within Rip Bank West and may have resulted from the Trial


Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno vi

Dredge Program, historical deepening activities, natural processes, or a combination of these

three processes;

- Statistical analysis of impact categories confirmed a recovery from 2009 to 2015 at Rip Bank

and Nepean Bank Plateau D, E and F location group;

- There is evidence of disturbance prior to dredging for the CDP at Rip Bank at 27 m. There is

also evidence of a decrease in physical disturbance at 27 m, 37 m and 47 m from 2009 to

2015, with minimal physical disturbance at 27 m in 2015;

- No statistically significant differences in the proportion of frames classified as ‘no visible

disturbance’ were detected between the before and after dredging periods for either the

control or dredged location groups.

4. Evidence of before-after changes in assemblage structure of biota

- Statistical analysis indicated some changes in assemblage structure from before to after the

CDP. In many cases these changes occurred at both impact (dredging) and control locations

but without any evident pattern, indicating variations are due to natural processes rather than

from the CDP.

5. Statistically significant changes in the cover of some taxa were detected at the

smaller spatial scale at all location groups

- The majority of taxa showed no changes in cover consistent over time and there were no

patterns that may support the hypothesis of a CDP impact at dredged locations;

- The patterns of change for individual taxa were highly variable with no clear temporal or

spatial patterns. For example, the sponge Nemertesia procumbens decreased in cover at all

locations from 2006 to 2011 and increased from 2011 to 2015. The bryozoan Orthoscuticella

ventricosa showed exactly the opposite trend. This may suggest that there are other regional

processes within The Entrance that are independent of the CDP;

- Changes in the cover of taxa among location groups occurred generally at the smallest spatial

scale and were unrelated to grouping of locations into dredged or control groups. The few

statistically significant changes occurring at larger-spatial scales (i.e. between impact and

control treatments or among location groups) are not attributable to the CDP because the

patterns were consistent across the baseline and post-construction periods.


Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno vii

6. Rock fall impacts at Rip Bank showed further recovery and were broadly within

expectations

- Rock fall disturbances were observed to further decrease between 2011 and 2015 which is

consistent with the SEES predictions;

- Although rock fall originally observed in 2009 and 2011 at some locations was still observed

in 2015, a reduction in rock fall disturbance was apparent in the 2015 survey;

- Small patches of angular rubble pieces at the base of scree slopes especially at Rip Bank East

and Great Ship Channel indicates some continued physical disturbance in the canyon adjacent

to Rip Bank;

- Qualitative surveys in 2009 showed the reef habitat of Rip Bank West having the greatest

degree of disturbance post-CDP. Fresh rock fall material was observed by divers on scree

slopes in 2011, indicating some ongoing disturbance. In contrast, the 2015 survey observed

the most recent physical disturbance at Rip Bank East and to a lesser degree at Rip Bank

West. Some patches of relatively fresh rubble were observed at the base of scree slopes and

fresh scour marks at both sites were also observed. However, most rubble observed at Rip

Bank remained stabilised with recolonisation growth including encrusting sponges.

7. Further recovery at Nepean Bank (The Plateau) was evident in 2015

- At the 27 m and in the majority of the 37 m depth contour at Nepean Bank the seafloor

substratum mainly consisted of vertical canyon wall and step downs with varying degrees of

shelving ledges. For these habitats there was no visual evidence of physical impacts that could

be attributable to CDP. As with 2011 some large boulders (5-6m) were observed at the base of

vertical walls with advanced recolonisation including sponge and soft coral growth;

- For the 47 m and 57 m depth contours at Nepean Bank, there was less physical disturbance

observed in 2015 when compared to the 2011 survey. There were some areas of rubble

accumulation however, within these areas, there was little evidence suggesting new or recent

rock fall. Existing rubble patches were again observed in 2015 to be predominantly within

gullies or at the foot of reef slopes at Plateau D and Plateau E. To a lesser degree minor

patches of rubble accumulation were observed at Plateau A, B, C and F;

- The deeper reefs of Nepean Bank showed varying levels of biota disturbance attributed to

rock fall where impacts were observed. For the 2015 survey this was mostly evident with the

presence of advanced recolonising biota such as encrusting form sponges and small hydroid

species interspersed with occasional erect form sponges.


Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno viii

8. Overall conclusions

- Further recovery of the deep reefs since the 2011 survey was evident in 2015 which continues

the trajectory of observations from the 2009 survey, which is consistent with the SEES

predictions;

- Although some new rockfall was observed in 2015, overall there was less rockfall than in

2011 which continues the trajectory of observations from the 2009 survey. This is also


- As was the case in 2011 the assemblages and individual taxa varied in space and time at

impact (dredged) and control locations within The Entrance in the 2015 survey. Changes to

biota assemblages occurred predominantly at small spatial and/or temporal scales with

statistical analysis showing little or no evidence of these changes being directly attributable to

the CDP;

- The findings from the 2015 survey have been shown to be consistent with the SEES

predictions and the conclusions from the Minister for Planning’s Assessment of the Project in

2007 under the Environment Effects Act 1978, as the evidence shows:

> Controls placed on the CDP have minimised short-term impacts on deep reef communities.

Short term impacts with progressive habitat recovery have been observed

> Habitat recovery at impact locations was observed soon after dredging was completed and

is well advanced as evidenced in the post-CDP surveys

> Full habitat recovery would take place over a period in excess of 5 years.


Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno ix

Glossary

Term or Acronym Definition

AME Australian Marine Ecology

Ascidians Sessile invertebrate filter feeders, also known as sea squirts

Assemblage The group of organisms found together at any one location

BACI Before-After-Control-Impact experimental design

Benthic – Bottom dwelling Organisms living on or within hard surface or soft sediment

Biological parameters Measurable and quantifiable components of the living system

Biota All living components (typically flora and fauna combined)

Bray-Curtis dissimilarity A measure of the dissimilarity of assemblages between any given pair of samples

Bryozoan Small moss like sessile animals that form flat or erect colonies

Community Association of two or more species occupying the same geographical area in a particular time

Contiguous Spatially connected without a break

CDP Channel Deepening Project

Czekanowski dissimilarity A measure of the dissimilarity of assemblages between any given pair of samples. Used typically in preference to Bray-Curtis when there are many zeroes (i.e. not present) in a list of taxa

Deep reef Marine reef habitat at depths beyond the zone that receives sufficient light to sustain the growth of large macrophytes (e.g. kelp forests)

Dispersion A statistical term referring to the amount of variability among samples: small dispersion values indicate that samples are very similar to each other

EMP Environmental Management Plan

Euclidean distances The ordinary (measured) distances between points in a n-dimensional space

Hydroid Small sessile animals with stinging cells, related to jelly fish

Location Area within a location group nested in either a control or dredged Treatment

Macroalgae Large marine plants that can been seen without the aid of a microscope, e.g. Kelp

Microhabitat A very small, specialised habitat, such as a clump of algae within a larger habitat, such as rocky reef

Morphotype A group of organisms with similar physical characteristics (e.g. shape, colour)

Multivariate analysis Analysis of the relationship between two or more response variables and one or more predictor variables or factors

Neap tide When tidal range is at its minimum (typically occurs every fortnight)

Photoquadrat A photograph of a known area for later analysis or permanent record

nMDS Non-metric multidimensional scaling ordination. A two or three dimensional representation of a multidimensional data set

nMDS stress value An indicator of how well the multidimensional data plotted in an nMDS fit into two or three dimensions. Values of 0.2 or less indicate that the plot gives a good representation of the data

Patch Continuous portion of a linear transect within a location

PERMANOVA A statistical procedure using permutational methods for Analysis of Variance

PoMC Port of Melbourne Corporation


Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno x

Term or Acronym Definition

Regional Control Control sites outside the locality referred to as The Entrance

Qualitative Descriptions or distinctions based on some quality or characteristic rather than on some quantity or measured value

Quantitative Information based on quantities (measured) or quantifiable data

Reef scouring Disturbance to reef habitat from the movement of rubble and rock

ROV Remotely Operated Vehicle

SEES Supplementary Environmental Effects Statement

Sessile Used to describe animals that live attached to the substratum such as sponges, ascidians, barnacles and bryozoans

SIMPER Similarity Percentage analysis. A numerical procedure for determining the relative contributions of each taxa to differences between groups of samples

The Entrance The area at the entrance to Port Phillip Bay that occurs between Point Nepean and Point Lonsdale

Taxon A group of any taxonomic organisation: a species, genus, family, etc. Plural: taxa

Trial Dredge Program Program that aimed at assessing the impact and recovery rate of Deep Reef organisms after rock fall at Rip Bank. Impacts were surveyed after rock fall from December 2005 to January 2006 and hence prior to the main dredging for the CDP

TSHD Trailing Suction Hopper Dredge

Univariate analysis Analysis of the relationship between one response variable and one or more predictor variables or factors


Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno xi

Table of Contents

Glossary ix

1 Introduction 1 1.1 Objectives 1 1.2 CDP Construction Activities 2 1.3 Background Information on The Entrance 2 1.4 Previous Studies 4

1.4.1 Trial Dredge Assessment 5 1.4.2 CDP First Post-construction Investigation (2009) 6 1.4.3 CDP Second Post-construction Investigation (2011) 7 1.4.4 Summary of Previous Studies 8

2 Methods 9 2.1 Survey Design 9

2.1.1 Overview 9 2.1.2 Locations 10

2.2 Field Methods 12 2.2.1 Divers 13 2.2.2 ROV 14

2.3 Image Processing and Analysis 14 2.3.1 Extraction of Still Frames from Video 14 2.3.2 Composition of Biota and Habitat Descriptors in Still Frames 15 2.3.3 Impact Categories 17

2.4 Data Analysis 18 2.4.1 Grouping of Data 18 2.4.2 Experimental Design and Statistical Methods 20 2.4.3 Non-metric Multidimensional Scaling (nMDS) Plots 22 2.4.4 Impact Categories Analysis 23 2.4.5 Limitations and Key Assumptions of the Study 23

3 Results 25 3.1 General Observations in 2015 25

3.1.1 Dredged Locations 25 3.1.2 Control Locations 30

3.2 Extent of Physical Disturbance of Habitat 31 3.2.1 Baseline Conditions 31 3.2.2 First Post-Construction Survey (2009) 32 3.2.3 Second Post-Construction Survey (2011) 34 3.2.4 Third Post- Construction Survey (2015) 36

3.3 Statistical Analyses 40 3.3.1 Impact Categories 40 3.3.2 Habitat Descriptors 48 3.3.3 Biota 68 3.3.4 Total Number of Taxa 83 3.3.5 Total Percent Cover of Biota 83 3.3.6 Portsea Hole 87

4 Discussion 89

5 Summary of Key Findings 93


Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno xii

6 References 97

Tables

Table 1-1 Summary of previous CDP studies of deep reefs in Port Philip Bay 4

Table 2-1 Sampling periods of all surveys used in the current report 10

Table 2-2 PERMANOVA main effects and interaction terms. * indicates terms that, if significant, could potentially indicate an effect of CDP dredging 21

Table 3-1 Results of univariate statistical analyses using PERMANOVA for impact categories at 27 m depth. Results show probability values (p-values) for each of the variables (rows) against terms included in the analysis (columns). Significant (α = 0.05) p-values in bold. RED = redundant term due to significant interaction 41

Table 3-2 Results of univariate statistical analyses using PERMANOVA for impact categories at 37 m depth. Results show probability values (p-values) for each of the variables (rows) against terms included in the analysis (columns). Significant (at α = 0.05) p-values in bold. RED = redundant term due to significant interaction 42

Table 3-3 Results of univariate statistical analyses using PERMANOVA for impact categories at 47 m depth. Results show probability values (p-values) for each of the variables (rows) against terms included in the analysis (columns). Significant (at α = 0.05) p-values in bold. RED = redundant term due to significant interaction 44

Table 3-4 Results of univariate statistical analyses using PERMANOVA for impact categories at 57 m depth. Results show probability values (p-values) for each of the variables (rows) against terms included in the analysis (columns). Significant (α = 0.05) p-values in bold. RED = redundant term due to significant interaction 46

Table 3-5 Results of multivariate statistical analyses for habitat descriptors at each depth using PERMANOVA. Results show probability values (p-values) for each of the variables (rows) against terms included in the analysis (columns). Significant (α = 0.05) p-values in bold. RED = redundant term due to significant interaction 50

Table 3-6 Summary of PERMDISP analysis (with pair-wise permutational t-test) of multivariate dispersion for habitat descriptors data. Significant results at α = 0.05 are in bold. 52

Table 3-7 Results of univariate statistical analyses for habitat descriptors using PERMANOVA. Results show probability values (p-values) for each of the variables (rows) against terms included in the analysis (columns). Significant (α = 0.05) p-values in bold. RED = redundant term due to significant interaction 53

Table 3-8 Results of multivariate statistical analyses using PERMANOVA for biota assemblage at each depth. Results show probability values (p-values) for each of the variables (rows) against terms included in the analysis (columns). Significant (α = 0.05) p-values in bold. Neg. = Negative pseudo-F ratio; RED = redundant term due to significant interaction 69

Table 3-9 Summary of PERMDISP analysis (with pair-wise permutational t-test) of multivariate dispersion for the biotic assemblage. Significant results at α = 0.05 are in bold 69

Table 3-10 Results of univariate statistical analyses for the biotic assemblage using PERMANOVA. Results show probability values (p-values) for each of the variables (rows) against terms included in the analysis (columns). Significant (α = 0.05) p-values in bold. RED = redundant term due to significant interaction 70

Table 3-11 Results of univariate statistical analyses using PERMANOVA for the number of taxa per frame and total cover of biota at each depth. Results show probability values (p-values) for each of the variables (rows) against terms included in the analysis (columns). Significant (α = 0.05) p-values in bold. Neg. = Negative pseudo-F ratio; RED = redundant term due to significant interaction 84


Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno xiii

Figures

Figure 1-1 Deep reef locations sampled at The Entrance including depth categories, study areas and the Trial Dredge Area. Solid lines indicate the border of the shipping channels. Dashed lines indicate the Trial Dredge Area (Source: Edmunds et al. 2009). 7

Figure 2-1 Maps showing the study area and survey locations at (A) The Entrance and (B) Portsea Hole regional control. 2015 transect start and end points for each depth stratum are also shown. 12

Figure 2-2 Diver taking video along a transect 13

Figure 2-3 Schematic display positioning system used to locate ROV on the seafloor (left) and remotely operated vehicle (ROV) used to survey deep reefs (right) 14

Figure 2-4 Screenshots from the TransectMeasure software used for the analysis of frames and their position on the bathymetry map of sampling locations 16

Figure 2-5 Standardised sponge morphological types used in lieu of taxonomic classification, after Bell and Barnes (2001). Characteristic taxa are given where possible (Source: Edmunds et al. 2009). 17

Figure 2-6 Examples of different impact categories photographed at Plateau D & E in the 37 m depth stratum. (A) Impact category 1, (B) Impact category 2, (C) Impact category 3, (D) Impact category 4 18

Figure 2-7 Map of sampling Locations and Location Groups used in the statistical analysis design 19

Figure 3-1 Example of benthic cover taken at dredged locations. (a) Plateau E 27 m, corals and colonial ascidians; (b) Plateau F 19 m, rubble accumulation amongst kelp canopies; (c) Plateau D 57 m, old rubble accumulation; (d) Rip Bank West 27 – 37 m, scour marks from physical disturbance; (e) Rip Bank West 37 m, old rubble with recolonising biota; (f) Plateau F 27 m, vertical wall biota with soft corals and sponges; (g) Rip Bank Great Ship Channel 27 m, Ecklonia radiata with understorey red algae; and (h) Rip Bank East 57 m, rubble at the base of a scree slope 29

Figure 3-2 Example of benthic cover taken at control locations. (a) Lonsdale Wall south 37 m, hydroids and bryozoans on reef slope; (b) Rip Bank Ref C 47 m, sponge garden habitat with migrating spider crabs; (c) Portsea Hole 24 m, diverse colonial ascidians and reef biota; and (d) Nepean Bank Ref A 37 m, branching and encrusting form sponges. 31

Figure 3-3 Frequency of frames (%) classified as impact category 1, 2 or 3 within each patch in 2006. Lines indicate shipping channel. 32

Figure 3-4 Frequency of frames (%) classified as impact category 1, 2 or 3 within each patch in 2009. Lines indicate shipping channel. 33

Figure 3-5 Frequency of frames (%) classified as impact category 1, 2 or 3 within each patch in 2011. Lines indicate shipping channel. Lines indicate shipping channel. 35

Figure 3-6 Change in the frequency of frames (%) classified as impact category 1, 2 or 3 within each location between 2009 and 2011. Lines indicate shipping channel. 36

Figure 3-7 Frequency of frames (%) classified as impact category 1, 2 or 3 within each patch in 2015. Lines indicate shipping channel 38

Figure 3-8 Change in the frequency of frames (%) classified as impact category 1, 2 or 3 within each location between 2015 and 2011. Lines indicate shipping channel 39

Figure 3-9 Average (±SE) percent occurrence of impact categories at 27 m for the significant terms found with PERMANOVA. Number above each bar indicates the number of patches available. Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC. See Section 2.3.3 for definition of impact categories. 41




Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno xiv


Figure 3-13 nMDS ordination for habitat descriptors at Control and Dredged locations during each sampling year at 27 m using frame data (top) and Year x Location Group centroids (bottom). Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC 51

Figure 3-14 Average (±SE) mean cover of habitat descriptors at 27 m depth for the significant terms found with PERMANOVA. Number above each bar indicate the number of samples available. Impact: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control: LON NS, REF AC. Note different vertical scales for each category graph 55

Figure 3-15 nMDS ordination for habitat descriptors at Control and Dredged locations during each sampling year at 37 m using frame data (top) and Year x Location Group centroids (bottom). Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC. 58

Figure 3-16 Average (±SE) mean cover of habitat descriptors at 37 m for the significant terms found with PERMANOVA. Number above each bar indicate the number of samples available. Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC. 59


Figure 3-18 Average (±SE) mean cover of habitat descriptors at 47 m for the significant terms found with PERMANOVA. Number above each bar indicates the number of samples available for analysis. Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC63


Figure 3-20 Average (±SE) mean cover of habitat descriptors at 57 m for the significant terms found with PERMANOVA. Number above each bar indicates the number of samples available. Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC 67

Figure 3-21 nMDS ordination for the biotic assemblage at Control and Dredged locations during each sampling year at 27 m using frame data (top) and Year x Location Group centroids (bottom). Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC71

Figure 3-22 Average (±SE) mean cover of taxa at 27 m for the significant terms found with PERMANOVA. Number above each bar indicates the number of samples available. Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC 72








Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno xv

Figure 3-29 Average (±SE) mean number of taxa at the four depths considered for the significant terms found with PERMANOVA. Number above each bar indicates the number of samples available. Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC85

Figure 3-30 Average (±SE) mean cover at the four depths considered for the significant terms found with PERMANOVA. Number above each bar indicate the number of samples available. Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC. 86

Figure 3-31 Average (±SE) mean cover at 37 m depth for the significant Period term found with PERMANOVA. Number above each bar indicates the number of samples available 86

Figure 3-32 nMDS ordination for the biotic assemblage at Portsea Hole using frame data (top) and Year centroids (bottom). 2005a (May 2005), 2005b (December 2005), other years as per Table 2-188

Appendices

Appendix A Futher Details of Statistical Analyses

Appendix B PERMANOVA Analyses for Impact Categories

Appendix C PERMANOVA and Post-hoc Analyses of Habitat Descriptors

Appendix D PERMANOVA and Post-hoc Analyses of Biotic Assemblages – Frame Data

Appendix E PERMANOVA and Post-hoc Analyses of Biotic Assemblages – Patch Data

Appendix F PERMANOVA and and Post-hoc Analyses of Biotic Assemblages – Presence/Absence Data

Appendix G PERMANOVA and Post-hoc Analyses of Biotic Assemblage – 2015 Data

Appendix H PERMANOVA and Post-hoc Analyses of Number of Taxa

Appendix I PERMANOVA and Post-hoc Analyses of Total Cover of Biota

Appendix J SIMPER Analyses of Habitat Descriptors

Appendix K SIMPER Analyses of Biotic Assemblages

Appendix L List of Taxa and Percent Cover per Frame


Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno 1

1 Introduction

1.1 Objectives

As part of the Channel Deepening Project (CDP), Port of Melbourne Corporation (PoMC) was

required to undertake monitoring programs to comply with the Environmental Management Plan

(EMP) including a number of Project Delivery Standards (PDS).

The EMP specified a requirement for monitoring the potential effects of rock fall from the CDP on

the deep reef habitats and biota of the canyon walls at the entrance to Port Phillip Bay; subsequently

referred to as ‘The Entrance’. The Entrance contains highly diverse assemblages of sessile benthic

flora and fauna (e.g. sponges, ascidians, kelp) considered to be of regional significance.

Within The Entrance, two areas were dredged during the CDP; including Rip Bank and the Plateau

(otherwise known as the western edge of Nepean Bank) (see Figure 1-1 for dredged area). As a

consequence of the dredging, canyon biota was considered to be potentially at risk from

mobilisation of dislodged, fractured rock by currents and ocean swells, which could subsequently

tumble down the canyon walls causing burial or physical disturbance to biota (see below). Thus,

the environmental concern in this instance was not specifically the area dredged, but the canyon

walls adjacent to the dredge footprint, which could be impacted by rock fall from the dredged areas.

Deep reef surveys to date to meet the requirements of the EMP have included:

one survey prior to dredging for the CDP in 2006; and

three surveys following completion of CDP dredging in the Entrance, in

> 2008/2009 (three to five months after CDP dredging),

> 2011 (two years after CDP dredging), and

> 2015 (six years after CDP dredging).

The 2015 survey (the subject of this report) is the third and final post-construction survey

commissioned. This report also considers the results of all four surveys completed to date.

In accordance with the EMP obligations and the current project brief, the objective of this study was

to document the distribution and status of any identified ongoing physical disturbance, biological

impacts and recovery in the deep reef habitat of the Entrance to Port Phillip Bay, six years after the

completion of dredging.



Professional Divers Group (Trading as Professional Marine Science Services – PMSS and

Professional Diving Services - PDS) in conjunction with Cardno NSW/ACT Pty Ltd (Trading as

Cardno Ecology Lab), were engaged by PoMC to undertake the current survey (2015) and report on

the findings.

1.2 CDP Construction Activities

The CDP construction phase occurred from February 2008 to November 2009, where a total of

22.97 million m3 of material was dredged from within, and at the entrance to, Port Philip Bay.

Dredging in The Entrance as part of the CDP occurred from April 2008 to September 2008.

The CDP dredging at The Entrance removed 460,000 m3 of rock from Rip Bank and the end of

Nepean Bank (Cardno Ecology Lab 2011). Rock was removed using a trailer suction hopper

dredge (TSHD) with a modified drag head that included tines to break up the substratum and water

jets to assist in the vacuuming of rubble. The risk to deep reef biota of spillage of rubble over the

canyon edge was recognised in the approvals process (PoMC and Boskalis 2008: Supplementary

Environmental Effects Statement: SEES).

Environmental controls used within the dredging works to minimise potential impacts included:

Modifications to the drag head design to minimise rubble spillage;

Periodic clean-up of residual rubble using a guard over the ripper teeth of the drag head;

Maintaining a bund around the edge of The Plateau (Nepean Bank) until design depth was

reached; and

Dredging in a direction away from the canyon edge to limit potential dispersal of rubble over the

canyon edge (PoMC and Boskalis 2008).

1.3 Background Information on The Entrance

The deep reef habitat associated with temperate marine canyons is a topographically complex

environment that supports diverse marine ecosystems (Schlacher et al. 2010, Currie et al. 2012).

These ecosystems harbour diverse assemblages of sessile biota that are, in turn, important for other

mobile invertebrate and fish assemblages (Currie et al. 2012, Marliave et al. 2009).

In south-eastern Australia, deep reef sessile biota are often dominated by a dense coverage and

abundance of sponges and these form a large component of the marine benthos of canyon habitats

(Schlacher et al. 2010). Such benthic assemblages, termed ’sponge gardens’ often harbour a range

of filter feeding invertebrates (e.g. hydroids, bryozoans, ascidians and soft corals) (Edmunds et al.

2009). The Entrance at Port Phillip Heads is a significant area of sponge garden habitat,



representing a unique zone in the region that has been recognised for its relatively high biodiversity

(Ponder et al. 2002; Edmunds et al. 2006a; Chidgey et al. 2007, Barton et al. 2012).

Port Phillip Heads is one of the most turbulent stretches of water in the Bass Strait region, due to the

combined effects of exposure to south-westerly weather and ocean swells and the strong tidal flow

through the heads and the relatively shallow reef across the entrance to Port Phillip Bay (Edmunds

et al. 2009). Resulting turbulent flows have been measured in excess of 3.5 m/s over the Nepean

Bank (Cardno Lawson Treloar 2007). Strong tidal flows in conjunction with steep canyon walls

within The Entrance can potentially dislodge rocks creating natural rock falls. However, surveys to

date during the pre-capital dredging period and at the control sites indicated natural rock fall events

were not an ecologically significant disturbance to the canyon (Edmunds et al. 2007b, 2009).

There has been a variety of disturbances at The Entrance in the decades prior to CDP that would

have potentially affected deep reef habitat and assemblages of biota at the time of each disturbance

and potentially through time after each disturbance. These include blasting of isolated navigational

hazards on Nepean Bank and Rip Bank which commenced circa 1864 (Edmunds et al. 2009).

Blasting activities intensified on the Nepean Bank in the 1980’s and occurred up until 1986.

Blasting on Rip Bank occurred between 1901 and 1931 and was concentrated in the present

Western, Eastern and Great Ship Channels, near the southern crest of the canyon (Raisbeck 2007).

Approximately 1,370,000 m3 of rock-rubble has been created by blasting over a one hundred year

period (Raisbeck 2007). At the time of blasting, this rubble was not removed and Raisbeck (2007)

suggests that hydrodynamic processes have probably dispersed it into the canyon at The Entrance

and to the south of Rip Bank. Residual rubble from the blasting is a likely cause of scour holes and

rubble beds on top of the reefs in the Great Ship Channel (Raisbeck 2007). Blasting may also have

caused the collapse of the canyon rampart on Rip Bank in the Great Ship Channel, resulting in the

present day ‘funnel’ bathymetry between the ramparts of the eastern and western shipping channels

on Rip Bank.

Pre-CDP surveys during the EES and SEES investigations (2003 to 2006) identified considerable

areas of mobile rubble and scour holes in the Great Ship Channel on Rip Bank and smaller patches

on The Plateau (Elias et al. 2004; Edmunds et al. 2007a; Raisbeck 2007). These areas were largely

attributable to blasting activities (Raisbeck 2007). Baseline surveys for the CDP on the canyon

walls indicated there was very little ongoing impact from extant mobile rubble, apart from that

generated by the Trial Dredge Program in 2005 (See Section 1.4.1). Two small scree slopes with

active rubble movements were observed on the western side of The Plateau (Edmunds et al. 2007a).

Surveys at the toe of the canyon slopes revealed considerable accumulations of rubble. These



accumulations were predominantly in Bombie Basin and Dune Basin (in between Rip Bank and The

Plateau), on Mordor Plain (the southern area between The Plateau and Catacombs Ridge) and

Plateau Well (north-eastern toe of The Plateau; Edmunds et al. 2007a). Smaller rubble

accumulations were present in some areas relatively isolated from potential dredge-rubble

movements, such as at the toe of Lonsdale Wall (Edmunds et al. 2007a). This finding indicated the

presence of some natural rubble generation processes, but at very low rates and/or volumes.

During 2005, the Trial Dredge Program in the Western Ship Channel on Rip Bank created rubble

and rock fall impacts (Edmunds et al. 2006a). Rubble and rock fall were largely confined to the

Western Ship Channel region, but there was some movement into and down the slopes of the Great

Ship Channel and Rip Bank East (Edmunds et al. 2006a; Edmunds et al. 2008; Edmunds 2008).

Monitoring in 2006 and 2008 indicated that episodic rubble movement, scouring and rock fall

events were ongoing in the Western Ship and Great Ship Channel areas of Rip Bank (Edmunds et

al. 2008; Edmunds 2008).

1.4 Previous Studies

Previous studies of the deep reef biota of Port Philip Bay as part of the CDP are listed in Table 1-1.

Prior to commencement of the CDP, deep reef habitats and assemblages in the Port Phillip Heads

region were surveyed in 2003 and early 2005 by Australian Marine ecology (AME). The surveys

incorporated qualitative and quantitative investigations by divers and by Remotely Operated

Vehicle (ROV) (Elias et al. 2004; Edmunds et al. 2006b) to acquire information on patterns in

abundances of individuals and the composition of assemblages. An extensive deep reef habitat

assemblage was identified at The Entrance, with kelp beds and sessile invertebrates described as

being at risk from potential impacts from rock fall caused by CDP activities.

Table 1-1 Summary of previous CDP studies of deep reefs in Port Philip Bay

Author Year Title Summary

Elias et al. 2004 Port Phillip Bay Channel Deepening Environment Effects Statement

Described existing condition of deep reef habitats in Port Philip Bay

Edmunds et al.

2006a Port Phillip Bay Channel Deepening Project. Deep Reef Baseline Surveys.

Described deep reef assemblages at three sites in The Entrance. This information was superseded by the 2007 existing conditions survey

Edmunds et al.

2006b Port Phillip Bay Channel Deepening Project. Trial Dredging Program: Deep Reef Impact Assessment.

Described deep reef assemblages at three sites in The Entrance after the Trial Dredging Program. This information was superseded by the 2007 existing conditions survey

Edmunds et al.

2007b Port Phillip Bay Channel Deepening Project. Supplementary Environment Effects Statement – Marine Ecology Specialist

Described existing condition of deep reef habitats in Port Philip Bay for impact assessment and environmental



Author Year Title Summary

Studies. components of the SEES

Edmunds et al.

2007c Port Phillip Bay Channel Deepening Project Supplementary Environment Effects Statement – Rock Fall Impact Assessment

Modelled rock fall impacts and provided recommendations for the proposed CDP

Edmunds et al.

2007a Port Phillip Bay Channel Deepening Project. Supplementary Environment Effects Statement – Revised Rock Fall Impact Assessment

SEES provided conclusions and recommendations based on a rock fall impact assessment.

Edmunds 2008 Port Phillip Bay Channel Deepening Project. Trial Dredging Program: Rip Bank Monitoring, January 2008.

Described the findings from the monitoring for the trial dredge program at Rip Bank.

Edmunds et al.

2009 Port Phillip Bay Channel Deepening Project. Deep Reef Impact and Recovery Assessment

This assessment provided the first post-construction (recovery) survey after the completion of the CDP. Sites sampled in the original SEES surveys were re- surveyed.

Cardno Ecology Lab

2011 Two Year Post Construction Survey of the Deep Reef Habitat at the Entrance to Port Phillip Bay

The two year post-construction survey provided the second recovery survey after the completion of the CDP. Sites sampled in the original SEES surveys were re- surveyed.

1.4.1 Trial Dredge Assessment

The Trial Dredge Program assisted in the development of dredging technology to be used in the

CDP and in predicting and managing the impacts of rock removal. Quantitative methods for

sampling deep reef biota and habitats were also refined as part of the impact assessment surveys for

the Trial Dredge area (see Figure 1-1). For the Trial Dredge Program, rock fall impacts were

surveyed in detail from December 2005 to January 2006, with sampling occurring predominantly

along the Rip Bank Wall (17- 57 m depth) in the Western and Great Ship Channels (Edmunds et al.

2006b). In addition to assessing the impacts of rock fall, the sampling documented considerable

natural variation in assemblage structure with depth and across the slope.

As part of the CDP SEES investigations, the bathymetry of the whole canyon system at The

Entrance was mapped to a fine resolution, revealing a complex habitat created by the physical

structure of the canyons. Benthic assemblages in areas representative of different canyon habitats

were surveyed in April and May 2006 (Edmunds et al. 2007b). Considerable spatial variation in

assemblage structure was observed to be closely related to variations in physical habitat at the

scales of microhabitats (metres), patches (10’s of metres) and areas (100’s of metres) (Edmunds et

al. 2007c).

To assess the potential for ongoing impacts and recovery, three surveys were done in the Trial

Dredge area at approximately six-monthly intervals between 2007 and 2008, using qualitative and

quantitative methods (Edmunds 2008; Edmunds et al. 2008). Key findings were that generally bare

rock surfaces were colonised rapidly by seaweeds and invertebrates. On reefs at intermediate



depths there was a rapid succession toward a kelp-dominated assemblage where rock fall had

stabilised. Deep reefs were also colonised rapidly, but the rate of recovery was related to the

proximity of undisturbed patches. Colonisation was more rapid at the edges of rock fall where

existing sponge colonies could grow into the bare area. At the 27 m depth, there was rapid

succession to a kelp-dominated community, which differed from the previous community of sessile

invertebrates. The Trial Dredge Program monitoring also revealed that reef scouring, accumulation

of rubble and subsequent rock falls continued to occur sporadically for at least 27 months after

dredging ended.

1.4.2 CDP First Post-construction Investigation (2009)

In 2009, as part of the CDP EMP, (i.e. at approximately three months following completion of

dredging), qualitative towed video observations reported some loose rock at the Rip Bank and The

Plateau (Chidgey and Crockett 2009). Edmunds et al. (2009) then re-sampled reef patches that had

been surveyed during 2006 for the SEES, to investigate the effects of this loose rock on biota (see

Figure 1-1). The objectives of this survey were to: (1) describe the nature and distribution of

physical disturbance of impacts on the deep reef habitats; and, (2) document the status of any

ongoing physical disturbance, biological impacts and recovery, by comparing physical and

biological indicators with data from previous surveys.

Key findings made by Edmunds et al. (2009) included the following:

Physical impacts from rubble scouring the reef surface were present, but ongoing rock falls were

limited to a few areas;

Before - After changes in assemblage structure were observed at all sites within The Entrance,

but not at distant control locations (i.e. outside The Entrance). Changes were due to decreases in

the abundance of encrusting ruffled grey sponges;

Significant biological impacts, representing 10% of patches, were detected among small patches

of reef;

Rock fall impacts were observed to be greater at Rip Bank than The Plateau. Impacts at Rip

Bank were greater than predicted levels in the SEES assessment, while impacts at Nepean Bank

were less than predicted; and

Recovery was observed to be more advanced at The Plateau compared with Rip Bank where

recovery was highly variable.



Figure 1-1 Deep reef locations sampled at The Entrance including depth categories, study areas and the Trial Dredge Area. Solid lines indicate the border of the shipping channels. Dashed lines indicate the Trial Dredge Area (Source: Edmunds et al. 2009).

1.4.3 CDP Second Post-construction Investigation (2011)

In 2011, the two year post-construction survey sampled all deep reef sites (sampled in 2009) within

The Entrance (see Figure 1-1) and regional controls in Portsea Hole and Wilsons Promontory. The

objectives of the 2011 study were to: (1) determine the extent that rock fall generated by dredging

associated with the CDP affected the biota of the walls of the canyon; and, (2) determine whether

there was evidence of recovery from impacts where biota had been affected by rock fall.

Key findings determined from the survey included:

Although some new rock fall was observed, overall, there was less rock fall in 2011 than 2009,

which is consistent with the SEES predictions;

Further recovery of the deep reefs since 2009 was evident in 2011, which is also consistent with

the SEES predictions; and



Assemblages and individual taxa varied in space and time at dredged and control locations

within The Entrance; little evidence of impact to biota that could be directly attributable to the

CDP was detected by the statistical analysis of data.

1.4.4 Summary of Previous Studies

In summary, previous studies have indicated that the deep reefs at The Entrance have attributes that

are considered to have regional ecological significance. The extensive sponge gardens and steep

canyon walls, which include ledges and caves, provide a complex habitat supporting diverse

assemblages that are at their most extensive in the Rip region (Edmunds et al. 2007a).

There have been extensive surveys to characterise the benthic assemblages in deep reefs and

identify potential rock fall impacts before and after the CDP. The Trial Dredging Program at Rip

Bank, in particular, requires careful consideration in the analysis and detection of any impacts in

this study. Monitoring of the associated rock fall impacts indicated a succession toward a natural

state within impacted areas (Edmunds et al. 2008). The 3 – 5 month post - construction survey by

Edmunds et al. (2009) identified variable recovery across the study area with evidence of ongoing

physical impacts from scouring in some areas and advanced recovery of biota in other areas. The

second post - construction survey done 2 years after dredging for the CDP (Cardno Ecology Lab

2011) identified some new rock falls that were not present in 2009. Generally, however, less rock

fall disturbance was observed in 2011 compared to 2009. Furthermore, statistical analyses

including the 2011 survey data concluded that there was little evidence supporting the hypothesis of

an impact directly attributable to CDP activities, and that biotic assemblages were characterised by

a large variability at both impact and control locations.



2 Methods

2.1 Survey Design

2.1.1 Overview

To achieve the objectives (see Section 1.1), the methodology used in 2015 repeated, as closely as

possible, what had been done in previous quantitative deep reef surveys in 2006, 2009 and 2011.

Sampling was repeated within the same impact (i.e. dredge) locations and control locations as

sampled previously (Section 2.1.2) to allow implementation of a Before-After-Control-Impact

(BACI) design (Underwood 1994). The BACI design allows potential effects on deep reef

assemblages attributed to dredging activities (at the impact locations) to be distinguished from

effects that could be attributed to natural disturbances or changes in assemblages, as informed by

the control locations.

The previous (baseline) survey of The Entrance (2006) was used as ‘Before’ data in the BACI

design. This included information from the SEES Existing Conditions survey obtained from The

Entrance (see Table 2-1). Regional control information was acquired from this survey providing

data at Portsea Hole (Edmunds et al. 2009).

Following completion of dredging for the CDP, the first ‘After’ (post-construction) survey at The

Entrance and Portsea Hole occurred from December 2008 to February 2009 (Edmunds et al. 2009).

The second ‘After’ survey for The Entrance and Portsea Hole occurred from January to June 2011,

two years after completion of dredging for the CDP (Cardno Ecology Lab 2011). The extended

survey period for the 2011 study was attributed to extended periods of poor weather and reduced

water clarity. The third and final ‘After’ survey at The Entrance and Portsea Hole occurred from

February to March 2015, six years after completion of dredging for the CDP (Table 2-1).

The SEES Existing Conditions survey also provided data from regional control locations at Wilsons

Promontory and these sites were re-sampled in 2009 and 2011 (Table 2-1). Wilsons Promontory

was not sampled in 2015 because there are intrinsic environmental differences between Wilson

Promontory and The Entrance due to large internal variation between these regions (Cardno

Ecology Lab 2011) that therefore limit its use as an appropriate control location.



Table 2-1 Sampling periods of all surveys used in the current report

Sampling Area Sampling Period

Before Dredging for the CDP

After Dredging for the CDP

(3 – 5 months)


(2 years)


(6 years)

The Entrance (impact and controls)

15 March – 13 May 2006

December 2008 –

February 2009

January – June 2011 February – March 2015

Portsea Hole (regional control)

28 December 2005

December 2008 –

February 2009

June 2011 March 2015

2.1.2 Locations

Nine impact and five control locations were sampled at the Entrance in 2015 (Figure 2-1). These

locations selected were also sampled in 2006, 2009 and 2011 to provide adequate representation of

the spatial variability in benthic assemblage structure for deep reef habitat within The Entrance.

Impact (Dredged) Locations

Impact locations (termed ‘dredged’ locations in the statistical analysis) on canyon walls within The

Entrance were within the shipping channel and adjacent to where dredging actually occurred.

Whilst not dredged directly, they were on the canyon walls near dredging for the CDP and as such

were susceptible to potential rock fall impacts.

Three locations were on the southern edge of the Plateau of The Nepean Bank (Dredge group 1),

three were on the northern edge of the Plateau of The Nepean Bank (Dredge group 2) and three

were on the edge of the Rip Bank (Dredge group 3) (Figure 2-1). These formed three ‘location

groups’ within the following statistical design:

Dredge group 1 (denoted “PL ABC”)

- Plateau A;

- Plateau B; and

- Plateau C.

Dredge group 2 (“PL DEF”)

- Plateau D;

- Plateau E; and

- Plateau F.



Dredge group 2 (“RB WE”)

- Rip Bank West;

- Rip Bank GSC (Great Ship Channel); and

- Rip Bank East.

Control Locations

There were four control locations within The Entrance that had similar habitat to the deep reef

impact locations. These sites were established in 2006 as they were not adjacent to the Trial Dredge

area or dredging for the CDP, and were located a considerable distance from planned CDP dredging

areas. As it was assumed that control locations were in areas not subject to rock fall due to

dredging, it was also assumed that benthic biota in these locations would remain unaffected by

dredging (Edmunds et al. 2007b & c, 2009). These control locations were therefore selected on

canyon walls where benthic assemblages were similar to those in the impact areas, and these formed

the following two ‘location groups’ for statistical analysis:

Control group 1 (located to the south east of Rip Bank) (denoted “REF AC”)

- Rip Bank East Ref C;

- Nepean Bank Ref A.

Control group 2 (located to the north west of Rip Bank) (“LN NS”)

- Lonsdale Wall North (site within Marine Protected Area);

- Lonsdale Wall South (site within Marine Protected Area).

Regional control

Portsea Hole (24 m transect only, site within Marine Protected Area).

Portsea Hole represented the only ‘regional control location’ used for the analysis of dredging

effects. This location was considered to have similar reef habitat and sessile biota while remaining

spatially separate from The Entrance. Portsea Hole is relatively close to The Entrance (~6.1 km)

and shares many taxa with benthic assemblages located at The Entrance. Compared with locations

sampled at The Entrance, Portsea Hole is significantly shallower (~25m max depth) and is less

exposed to strong tidal currents.



Figure 2-1 Maps showing the study area and survey locations at (A) The Entrance and (B) Portsea Hole regional control. 2015 transect start and end points for each depth stratum are also shown.

2.2 Field Methods

To facilitate comparison among all surveys, sampling protocols used in the field in 2015 were in

accordance with the standard operating procedure (SOP) developed for quantitative deep reef video

surveys for the CDP (e.g. Edmunds et al. 2007a).

Deep reef habitat within The Entrance to Port Phillip Bay is characterised by complex, fast flowing

(~7 knots) tidal currents within deep water (up to ~80 m) environments. Consequently there are

important considerations for safe and effective sampling of benthic assemblages in this area.

Survey times were carefully selected within suitable weather windows at neap slack water intervals

between tides. This provided periods of up to 30 minutes for diver or ROV deployment and

retrieval, depending on depth, tides and location.

Four transects were sampled at each of the 14 sampling locations at The Entrance at each of four

depths: 27 m, 37 m, 47 m and 57 m. At Portsea Hole only one 24 m transect was sampled due to



the shallow water depth at this location. At each depth stratum, video was recorded by divers or

ROV (see below) along the depth contour between two markers 100 m apart, defining a transect

(Figure 2-1). Divers swam or the ROV was “flown” at a consistent orientation (i.e. with focal

plane parallel to the reef surface) measuring a standardised field of view (0.34 m2) calibrated using

lasers mounted to camera housings for still frame captures, as was done in previous post CDP

surveys.

2.2.1 Divers

In 2015, divers collected video at the 27 m, 37 m, 47 m depth strata at The Entrance and at 24 m

depth stratum at Portsea Hole, whilst ROV was used to sample the 57 m stratum. Previously, divers

collected video only in the 27 m strata at The Entrance and the ROV was used at 37 m, 47 m and 57

m strata. Divers sampled the 27 m, 37 m, 47 m strata in 2015 because they were able to have better

control over the quality and consistency of the video collected and overall they were more efficient

than using the ROV in the conditions at The Entrance.

Underwater video footage was captured using a Sony Cybershot digital camera (model: DSC-

RX100) in a Nauticam (model: NA-RX100) underwater housing (Figure 2-2). Camera housings

were coupled with a pair of 2000 lumen LED lights (model: FixNeo 2000DX). Marker buoys were

placed at the beginning and end of one, 100 m transect prior to each dive. Divers filmed the

substratum along each transect at a fixed swimming speed (0.5 – 1 minute per 10 m). Divers also

recorded qualitative site notes on transect geomorphology and biological characteristics for each

transect at each depth strata as well as at 19 m depth. For detailed methodology see Appendix A.

Figure 2-2 Diver taking video along a transect



2.2.2 ROV

A Seabotix LBV150-4 four thruster ROV with scanning sonar (Tritech Micron Sonar) and Ultra

Short Baseline (USBL) tracking system (Tritech Micron Nav) and a built in 520 line colour - 0.1

Lux camera was used to collect video in transects along the 57 m depth strata. An additional dive

camera and housing (as used for shallower transects described above) was attached to the ROV for

secondary recording of 57 m transects. Differential-GPS was integrated with the vessel’s navigation

system to co-locate and record the ROV position on the seafloor (Figure 2-3). Camera distance

from substratum was standardised using calibrated lasers to capture a consistent field of view. The

same sampling protocols were used as per diver transects described in Section 2.2.1.

Figure 2-3 Schematic display positioning system used to locate ROV on the seafloor (left) and remotely operated vehicle (ROV) used to survey deep reefs (right)

2.3 Image Processing and Analysis

2.3.1 Extraction of Still Frames from Video

Using SeaGIS software, still frames were extracted from video transects for acquisition of data. In

2015, each frame covered an area of seabed of 0.34 m2, consistent with previous surveys. For 2015,

40 frames were obtained from each transect. The 40 frames were separated into two patches (i.e.

portions of transect) of 20 frames for analysis to match the spatial distribution and the number of

frames collected per patch in previous surveys (average (±SE): 17.9 ± 0.9, median: 13.0 frames per

patch). At location Plateau F, 57 m stratum, due to limited occurrence of reef habitat only 28

frames could be extracted from the video and these were analysed as two patches of 14 frames.



Frames that did not meet the criteria outlined in Edmunds et al. (2009) were not included for

analysis. This included frames overlapping with adjacent frames and/or where the clarity of the

image was poor.

2.3.2 Composition of Biota and Habitat Descriptors in Still Frames

The percentage cover of biota and habitat descriptors were quantified based on 50 haphazardly

positioned points overlaid on each still frame using TransectMeasure software (Figure 2-4). For

previous surveys the image analysis was done using BioPoints software. Biota identified under

each point were identified to the lowest possible taxonomic level along with the species

morphology. Count data for each category (biotic and physical categories) were then converted to

percentages for statistical analysis.

Due to the intrinsic limitations of photographic identification, many organisms could not be

identified to the species level. Furthermore, many species, sponges in particular, remain

taxonomically undescribed (Bickford et al. 2007). Consequently, morphological classification was

also used to describe biota (Figure 2-5). A hierarchical classification scheme was used when an

organism could be identified according to both morphological and taxonomical classification (see

Appendix L for the complete list of species).

The habitat descriptors included five categories of substratum and one that described a habitat with

a recognisable assemblage of macrobiota (colonising biota with recognisable diversity). The habitat

descriptors were:

Sand;

Shell grit;

Exposed rock – bare;

Colonising biota with recognisable diversity; and

Exposed rock – microbiota.



Rubble – natural.

Figure 2-4 Screenshots from the TransectMeasure software used for the analysis of frames and their position on the bathymetry map of sampling locations



Figure 2-5 Standardised sponge morphological types used in lieu of taxonomic classification, after Bell and Barnes (2001). Characteristic taxa are given where possible (Source: Edmunds et al. 2009).

2.3.3 Impact Categories

Observations on the level of impact and the stage of recolonisation were used to categorise the

status of the deep reef assemblage within each frame in its entirety. In 2006 and 2009, a large

number of categories was used (Edmunds et al. 2009) but since the 2011 survey, there have only

been four types of categories used (see below). For analysis that enabled temporal comparisons

with 2011 and 2015 data, all data collected in 2006 and 2009 were reclassified and consolidated

into the four categories. The four classification levels used to categorise impact or recovery in the

frames were:



1. Bare rock, microbiotic recolonization (considered to represent maximum disturbance);

2. Early colonisers, encrusting forms and/or fine algae (moderate disturbance);

3. Late recolonisation, including erect forms, and/or presence of damaged biota (minimal

disturbance);

4. No visually discernible impact or no impact (i.e. either completely recovered or not disturbed

by dredging for the CDP).

Example frames for the four impact categories are shown in (Figure 2-6).

Figure 2-6 Examples of different impact categories photographed at Plateau D & E in the 37 m depth stratum. (A) Impact category 1, (B) Impact category 2, (C) Impact category 3, (D) Impact category 4

2.4 Data Analysis

2.4.1 Grouping of Data

Five datasets were used for univariate and multivariate statistical analyses:

1. Each of the four impact categories (see Section 2.3.3) (univariate statistics);

2. Habitat descriptors – abiotic features of the benthos (multivariate statistics);

3. Biotic (flora and fauna) assemblage (multivariate statistics);



4. Individual taxa and habitat descriptors of interest or that were responsible for significant

multivariate patterns (univariate statistics); and

5. Number and percentage cover of taxa found in each frame (univariate statistics).

As commonly observed in ecological studies, many of the taxa sampled had a very patchy

distribution, often with a small subset of species being dominant and the remainder being rare (see

also Cardno Ecology Lab 2011). Consequently, many taxa occurred only in very few frames across

all locations sampled and were absent from most of the frames, while a small subset of taxa were

ubiquitous and abundant.

To reduce the variability and to reduce the possible masking effect of these rare species onto real

spatio-temporal patterns, taxa with an average cover smaller than 0.001% (equivalent to less than 5

occurrences for a given taxon across all years and frames) were excluded from the multivariate

analyses. Moreover, to obtain a multivariate dataset with a greater number of species occurrences

(i.e. to reduce the number of zeros in the dataset) sample locations were grouped into ‘Location

Groups’ as per Section 2.1.2, consistent with methods undertaken for the analysis of data from

2006, 2009 and 2011 (Figure 2-7).

In addition, supplementary multivariate analyses (to item 3 above) were done where the percent cover of each benthic taxon within frames was averaged at the patch level so that patches (rather than frames) were used as “sample” for the purpose of analysis. These analyses were used to compare results when the spatial variability (i.e. noise) at the frame level was minimised (which may otherwise mask significant effects (Roberts et al. 2006)) to potentially improve the representativeness of the sampling units by including more taxa than would occur if individual frames had been used. Two sets of analyses were therefore run for the biotic assemblage (item 3 above): one using frames and one using patches as replicates.

A further strategy used to deal with the dominance of few abundant and common taxa and potentially reduce their influence on the multivariate patterns was to run the multivariate statistical analysis (to item 3 above) on presence/absence data instead of percent cover data (Clarke and Gorley 2006).

For brevity, results of the analyses using patch data and presence/absence data are not included in the main body of this report, but are presented in Appendix B, together with a brief comparison of the results based on individual frames. A summary of data available for the frame and patch analyses is given in Appendix A.

Figure 2-7 Map of sampling Locations and Location Groups used in the statistical analysis design



2.4.2 Experimental Design and Statistical Methods

PERMANOVA (a permutational version of multivariate analysis of variance) was used for

statistical testing of data in the BACI design framework, with the following factors:

Period (Fixed) – Before dredging (2006) vs. After dredging (2009, 2011 and 2015 post-

construction surveys);

Time (Random) – Year 2006 nested within the Before Period, and Years 2009, 2011 and 2015

nested within the After Period;

Treatment (Fixed) – dredged (impact) locations vs. control locations;

Location Group (Random) – dredged and control location groups nested within each Treatment.

Specifically, PERMANOVA was used to test the null hypothesis that there were no differences in

the percent cover of biotic assemblage, habitat descriptors or impact categories among dredged and

control location groups between Periods (Before and After dredging) or among Times within the

post-dredging Period. The main terms of interest in the PERMANOVA analyses were those that

could potentially indicate a difference over time among individual Location groups or the whole

Dredged location Treatment (Table 2-2).



Table 2-2 PERMANOVA main effects and interaction terms. * indicates terms that, if significant, could potentially indicate an effect of CDP dredging

PERMANOVA Main Effect or Interaction

Description of Term

Period Differences between Before and After dredging occur independently of Treatment, Year or Location Group

Treatment Differences between dredged and control location groups occurs independently of Period, Year or Location Group

Year (Period) Differences between survey years (after dredging) occurs independently of Period, Treatment or Location Group

Location Group (Treatment) Differences between Dredged or Control location Groups occurs independently of Period, Treatment or Time

Period x Treatment * Variation between Period is dependent on the Treatment and vice versa

Period x Location Group (Treatment) * Variation between Period is dependent on the Location Group and vice versa

Year (Period) x Treatment * Variation among Years is dependent on the Treatment and vice versa

Year (Period) x Location Group (Treatment) *

Variation among Years is dependent on the Location Group and vice versa

Technical details of the statistical analysis are described in Appendix A. In summary, the

following framework was followed for both univariate and multivariate statistical analyses:

Sample independence between replicate frames could not be assumed due to effects of spatial

autocorrelation expected when extracting still frames from video footage (Andrew and Mapstone

1987, Legendre and Legendre 1998, Edmunds et al. 2007a, 2007b). To reduce potential spatial

autocorrelation, every second frame was selected for the analysis, therefore eliminating the

possibility of overlapping frames and to reduce the risk of violating the assumption of

independence required by PERMANOVA. This process reduces the likelihood that the variables

measured in any given frame may be similar to the adjoining/overlapping frames by virtue of

their close proximity. Sub-sampling in this way produced two sets of data which were

independently analysed and evaluated in the light of a possible impact due to the CDP dredging.

Results of the analysis for both sets of data were presented when results differed in the number

and type of significant terms in the two sets that could potentially indicate an effect of the CDP

dredging (see Table 2-2). Sub-sampling was not required for 2015 data because non-

overlapping frames were selected prior to image analysis;

The analyses included ‘main terms’, such as Surveys (within Periods) and Group Locations

(within Treatments) as well as ‘interaction terms’ which represent a contribution to the total

variation in the data from combined terms. If PERMANOVA identified any of these terms as

statistically significant, it was concluded that there was significant variation at the spatial and/or



temporal scale that they represented. Pair-wise, post-hoc tests were then used to determine

which pairs of the levels of the significant terms were statistically different (note that because the

factor Time was nested within the factor Period, it was not possible to compare year 2006 and

each of the other years in case of a significant Year term or any interaction involving the factor

Year); and

If significant differences were found by PERMANOVA multivariate analyses, taxa or habitat

descriptors that mostly contributed to those differences were identified using the SIMPER

routine (PRIMER software). Taxa and habitat descriptors with a Bray-Curtis dissimilarity to

standard deviation ratio ≥ 1 were considered discriminating (Clarke and Gorley 2006). The

percent cover of discriminating taxa and habitat descriptors was further analysed as described

above for univariate analysis with PERMANOVA (Anderson et al. 2008).

2.4.3 Non-metric Multidimensional Scaling (nMDS) Plots

The same dissimilarity matrices used for the PERMANOVA multivariate analyses were used to

draw 2 - and 3 - dimensional plots (known as nMDS plots) that provide a graphical aid to visualise

patterns and differences in the multivariate datasets (e.g. biotic assemblage). Points represented

individual replicates (e.g. frames), and were colour-coded according to the location group and year,

allowing a visual comparison of data from a given year and location with those from other years

and locations.

In the nMDS plots, symbols clustered together represent samples with similar fauna and flora or

habitat descriptors, while those far apart are more different. Groups of symbols far apart are

therefore more likely to be statistically different than those close together. Importantly, nMDS plots

are not statistical tests in themselves and therefore they should not be interpreted independently of

PERMANOVA results. The ‘stress’ value shown for each plot describes how well the plot

represents the actual distance in the multivariate space among each point. Stress values smaller

than 0.2 give a useful representation of the sample relationships, while nMDS plots with stress

value higher than 0.2 should be treated with caution as they may lead to misinterpretation (Clarke

and Gorley 2006). To give a more interpretable representation of the multivariate dataset,

additional nMDS plots were created on Year x Location Group centroids where the stress was

greater than 0.2 (Anderson et al. 2008). Note that ‘stress’ in this context does not refer to any

environmental impact, but to the way in which the data are constrained within the 2- or 3-

dimensional plots.



2.4.4 Impact Categories Analysis

For each of the four impact categories defined in Section 2.3.3., the occurrence (percentage) of each

category in photoquadrat frames was calculated for every patch. Each frame had only one of the

categories assigned to it (note: categories were assigned by scientists who did not do the subsequent

statistical analyses). A single percent value was obtained for each of the four categories in every

patch and these percentages summed to 100% for each patch. Thus, as a hypothetical example, a

patch in a location at 37 m depth with 50 available frames may have percent disturbances of 30%

(15 frames), 25% (13 frames), 10% (5 frames) and 35% (17 frames) for categories 1, 2, 3 and 4,

respectively. Each category was analysed separately (univariate PERMANOVA) using the design

given in Section 2.4.2, with patches as replicates.

2.4.5 Limitations and Key Assumptions of the Study

The deep reef habitats of The Entrance are a very challenging environment in which to collect

quantitative information due to their depth, dynamic nature, structural complexity, strong tidal

regimes and, at times, movements of commercial ships (which were managed by communications

between PoMC and the PDS field team). Access to the study area is therefore limited to relatively

few and short periods of time. As a consequence, the amount of data that can be collected within a

relatively narrow period of time during each survey is limited.

Another limitation was the availability of baseline data for the BACI analysis. At The Entrance,

baseline sampling was done in 2006, which although prior to the CDP dredging, occurred after the

trial dredging. Ideally, there should be at least two baseline surveys available for statistical

comparisons with the surveys completed after the CDP (Underwood 1994). This limitation is

addressed by the use of multiple control locations which generally have been sampled during each

period of the study (Glasby 1997).

For baseline data, a key assumption is that the baseline represents natural variability and perhaps

historical effects of human activities, so that a disturbance of interest can be measured against

background conditions. The Trial Dredge Program occurred adjacent to several locations on Rip

Bank that were subsequently subject to impacts from the CDP dredging. Hence, the potential

influence of the Trial Dredge Program was considered very carefully during interpretation of the

results of the effects of the CDP dredging.

Another limitation arose from the technologically improved equipment and software used for the

latest survey (2015). The better video and stills quality in the 2015 data may have resulted in an

increase (compared with previous surveys) in the ability of observers to identify benthic organisms

in frames to a finer taxonomic level. Furthermore, standardisation of observers, both between



surveys and over time, is an inherent issue when extracting biological data from benthic video

surveys (Rattray et al. 2014).

It was also assumed that the controls selected within The Entrance were not affected by the CDP

dredging. Under this assumption, broad-scale change through time that occurred within impact and

control locations was interpreted as natural variability and not as a broad-scale impact of the CDP

dredging. It is considered that this assumption was reasonable for three reasons: 1) the physical

nature of disturbance from dredging for the CDP was likely to be confined spatially to the rock fall

pathways and their immediate vicinity; 2) the modelling of predicted rock fall pathways showed

none occurring at the control locations as a result of CDP dredging (Edmunds 2008, Edmunds et al.

2008); and 3) this assumption has held for the first two post-CDP surveys (Edmunds et al. 2009,

Cardno Ecology Lab 2011). Notwithstanding this, it was important that the assumption of

independence of the controls was evaluated when interpreting the statistical analysis following any

of the post-CDP surveys.



3 Results

3.1 General Observations in 2015

General observations of habitat and biota presented in this section were drawn from underwater

video observations and diver summary notes for the 27 m, 37 m and 47 m transects and from the

ROV video footage for the 57 m transects. In addition, divers recorded qualitative notes at 19 m for

each location.

3.1.1 Dredged Locations

3.1.1.1 Nepean Bank - Plateau A

Previous qualitative surveys of Plateau A in 2009 showed considerable disturbance with little

regrowth of kelp (Ecklonia radiata) at the 19 m depth contour. In 2011, some sections of kelp

canopy showed thinning and disturbance consistent with light scouring. In the 2015 survey, kelp

canopy showed minor scouring effects and patches of thinning from rubble accumulation.

In 2015, no considerable scouring or accumulated rubble beds were observed at the 27 m, 37 m or

47 m strata, however, slight evidence of physical disturbance was observed at the 57 m stratum

where small patches of old rubble had accumulated. Given the advanced colonisation of encrusting

and erect form sponges on the rubble it was considered that the rubble had not accumulated in

recent months. The 27 m stratum was dominated by ledge overhangs and vertical reef walls with no

obvious evidence of scouring or disturbance. Biota at the 27 m stratum consisted of tufting red

algae plants interspersed with encrusting sponges and often solitary or small kelp plants.

The deeper strata at Plateau A predominantly consisted of slopes with a series of small ridges with

hollows where sediment had accumulated. Deeper strata biota predominantly included encrusting

sponges interspersed with irregular erect form sponges and bryozoans. A dominance of encrusting

form sponges at 47 m and 57 m strata suggested previous scour patches as detected in 2009,

however no recent disturbance was observed.

3.1.1.2 Nepean Bank - Plateau B

Previous qualitative surveys of Plateau B in 2009 detected only sparse kelp cover interspersed with

scoured bedrock at the 19 m depth stratum. At deeper strata no freshly fallen rock material was

observed in 2011, which was in contrast to 2009. In 2015, observations showed minor patches of

old rubble beds and recolonising biota related to rock disturbance at all depth strata.

At 27 m, the canyon wall consisted of heterogeneous vertical relief reef with undercuts and ledges

and this transitioned into the vertical step-downs and slopes of the deeper strata. Biota at the 27 m



and 37 m depth strata consisted of many erect form sponges and branching bryozoans. Reef biota

found at the 47 m and 57 m strata consisted predominantly of encrusting sponges interspersed with

jewel anemones and soft corals (e.g. Culicia spp.), with patches indicating previous scour with

recolonising biota forms.

3.1.1.3 Nepean Bank - Plateau C

Previous qualitative surveys of Plateau C in 2011 showed a well developed kelp canopy at the 19 m

stratum with some scouring and rubble present at the eastern end of the survey area. Disturbance

was not detected in 2011 at the 27 m stratum where there was sharp vertical relief and overhangs.

Some old bare rubble and scoured boulders were present at the 47 m and 57 m strata.

The 2015 survey did not detect any physical disturbances to biota at the 27 m and 37 m depth strata,

but some small hollows containing sediment and rubble were observed at the 47 m and 57 m strata.

Deep shelving ledges and steep drop offs characterised much of the canyon wall reefs for Plateau C.

Biota was predominantly tufting red algae and soft corals in the shallower strata which transitioned

into encrusting form sponges and ascidians at greater depths. Similar to the 2011 survey, the

common yellow soft coral Parazoanthus sp. (normally only existing under ledges on canyon walls)

was observed on open rock at the 47 m depth stratum in 2015.

3.1.1.4 Nepean Bank - Plateau D

Previous qualitative surveys detected indicated there was scattered rubble and patches of scouring

and scattered rubble at the 19 m depth contour. In 2009 gullies and ledges in the reef showed

accumulated rubble, however this was not observed in 2011.

In 2015, minor patches of recolonising biota associated with physical disturbances were observed at

the 27 m and 37 m strata, however none were observed at the 47 m stratum. Considerable patches

of rubble accumulation in sediment hollows was detected at the 57 m stratum, with evidence of

some scour areas and old rubble.

Most of the 27 m depth stratum was characterised by vertical canyon walls. Steep slopes and

shelving continued down to the 47 m depth stratum but at 57 m stratum the habitat had transitioned

into predominantly medium profile ridges and gullies that contained sediment and old rubble

accumulations (Figure 3-1). In 2015, biota at the 57 m depth stratum was observed to consist

mostly of advanced recolonising forms that typically included encrusting form grey sponges and

bryozoans.



3.1.1.5 Nepean Bank - Plateau E

In 2009 and 2011 there was evidence of scouring at the 27 m stratum at Plateau E and there was a

large accumulation of rubble at the 37 m depth stratum. In these surveys, some small patches where

rubble had accumulated with sponge regrowth were observed at the 47 m depth stratum but no

disturbances were observed at the 57 m depth stratum.

In 2015, the 27 m depth stratum was dominated by rocky outcrops and vertical walls, and there

were small patches where recolonising biota were growing on areas of previous physical

disturbance. A large patch of rubble was again observed at the 37 m depth stratum with fine red

algae and encrusting sponges appearing to be the most common biota present. There were no signs

of physical disturbances or unstable reef observed at the 47 m and 57 m depth strata with the most

common biota including erect and branching form sponges, hydroids and bryozoans.

3.1.1.6 Nepean Bank - Plateau F

In 2009 and 2011, a dense kelp canopy cover was observed at 19 m at Plateau F along with narrow

channels that were probably the result of scouring. At this depth in 2015, some gullies were

observed which had accumulated rubble and these were surrounded by patches of kelp canopy on

reef ridges (Figure 3-1). Past surveys also identified pebble and cobble patches and biota forms

indicative of recent recolonisation at the 27 m depth stratum.

In 2015, some minor patches of recolonising biota and rubble were observed at the 27 m depth

stratum, but no other notable physical disturbances were observed at the 37 m, 47 m and 57 m depth

strata (Figure 3-1). A vertical wall characterised the reef at 27 m and 37 m depth strata, while

ledges and medium relief boulders typified the 47 m and 57 m depth strata along with encrusting

and repent form sponges.

3.1.1.7 Rip Bank West

In 2009 at the 19 m depth stratum, much of the top of the reef at Rip Bank West was observed to be

fractured and mobile rubble was present. In 2011, scree slopes were evident at the western end,

causing disintegration of bed rock and damage to vertical rock faces. In 2015 at 19 m, unstable rock

was observed and the kelp canopy showed some signs of thinning from the effects of scour.

In 2015, as with previous surveys, the most amount of physical disturbance at Rip Bank West was

observed to be at the 37 m depth stratum, where there were many areas in which rubble and

medium-sized boulders had accumulated. At this stratum there were many patches with

recolonising biota (especially fine red algae and encrusting grey sponges). Slight disturbances were

also observed at the 27 m, 47 m and 57 m depth strata, where recolonising biota indicative of

physical disturbance were also noted (Figure 3-1). The 47 m and 57 m depth strata were typified



by boulders and rocky outcrops with sandy hollows and common biota consisted of branching and

erect sponges and hydroids.

3.1.1.8 Rip Bank Great Ship Channel

Previous observations in 2009 and 2011 made at a depth of 19 m at the Great Ship Channel showed

evidence of ongoing scour, scree slopes and larger reef slabs and boulders in various stages of

recolonisation. In 2015, old rubble with rounded edges and no recolonisation was observed in reef

hollows and kelp canopy had thinner vegetation cover than observed at other Rip Bank qualitative

sites at the 19 m depth stratum.

No freshly accumulated rubble was observed in 2015 in any strata. However moderate-sized

patches of recolonising form sponges and algae were present at the 27 m, 47 m and 57 m depth

strata with the largest areas of recolonisation observed at the 47 m depth stratum. The 27 m depth

stratum consisted mainly of vertical faces and ledges with significant thallouse red algae growth

interspersed with irregular patches of kelp. The most common biota at the 37 m and 47 m depth

strata were encrusting form sponges, soft corals (Culicia spp and Corynactis australis) and very

fine tufting red algae (37 m depth stratum only). At these strata, many boulders were observed to

have recolonising biota that indicated substantial movement. The 57 m depth stratum was mostly

populated with grey and cream encrusting sponges interspersed with erect form sponges and rare

occurrences of small boulders that appeared to be unstable and indicative of physical disturbance.

3.1.1.9 Rip Bank East

In 2009 at a depth of 19 m at Rip Bank East, considerable areas of rubble were observed where

there appeared to have been rock fall and there was only a small amount of kelp cover in the

western section of this location. In the 2011 survey, kelp appeared to have recolonised in the

eastern section of the location and a large area of accumulated rubble was observed to be feeding a

scree slope. In 2015 at a depth of 19 m, although there was reduced visibility, divers observed a

dense kelp canopy was observed on reef ridges with very little rubble accumulation in reef gullies

and cracks.

In 2015, Rip Bank East was the only location where extended areas of rubble and cobble

accumulations and biota indicative of recent physical disturbance were found. The 27 m depth

stratum consisted of steep slopes and vertical walls and far less disturbance was observed at this

depth than other depth strata. In comparison, considerable patches of large rubble and medium-

sized boulders with early and late stage recolonising biota were present at both the 37 m and 57 m

depth strata. The 57 m depth stratum, in particular, had large areas of old rubble and some areas

that indicated relatively recent disturbance (Figure 3-1). Biota at this depth predominantly



consisted of encrusting form sponges, fine colonising biota and there were only rare occurrences of

erect form sponges.

Figure 3-1 Example of benthic cover taken at dredged locations. (a) Plateau E 27 m, corals and colonial ascidians; (b) Plateau F 19 m, rubble accumulation amongst kelp canopies; (c) Plateau D 57 m, old rubble accumulation; (d) Rip Bank West 27 – 37 m, scour marks from physical disturbance; (e) Rip Bank West 37 m, old rubble with recolonising biota; (f) Plateau F 27 m, vertical wall biota with soft corals and sponges; (g) Rip Bank Great Ship Channel 27 m, Ecklonia radiata with understorey red algae; and (h) Rip Bank East 57 m, rubble at the base of a scree slope



3.1.2 Control Locations

3.1.2.1 Rip Bank Ref C

Similar to other locations within the Rip Bank, Ref C predominantly consisted of vertical walls and

drops offs between the 27 m and 37 m depth strata. No exposed rock or scree slopes were observed

at the 57 m depth stratum where there were some small patches of old rubble, assumed to be

derived from natural processes, populated with advanced colonisation. Deeper strata at Ref C

consisted of sloped reef at 47 m transitioning to lower profile ridges with sandy hollows at 57 m.

Deep reef biota at this site was ‘sponge garden’ habitat populated with erect and repent form

sponges and colonial ascidians (Figure 3-2).

3.1.2.2 Nepean Bank Ref A

Qualitative survey of Nepean Bank Ref A showed biota communities consisting of tufting red algae

and encrusting form sponges at the 27 m depth stratum. Vertical canyon walls typified the shallow

depth contour reef, while at the 47 m and 57 m depth strata the reef consisted of ridges and ledges

with some sand accumulated in hollows. At the 37 m depth stratum biota were commonly erect

form sponges (Figure 3-2). The yellow soft coral Parazoanthus sp. was observed on open rock at

the 57 m depth stratum.

3.1.2.3 Lonsdale Wall – North and South

Both Lonsdale North and South had an irregular sloping reef with drop off points and step downs

along the wall between 27 m and 37 m depth strata. Habitat at the 47 m and 57 m depth strata

consisted of ledges and rocky outcrops interspersed with sand. Grey and cream dense encrusting

and repent form sponges dominated deep reef biota on Lonsdale Wall. These communities also

contained common branching sponges and irregular occurrences of sea fans (Figure 3-2) such as

Mopsella spp.

3.1.2.4 Portsea Hole

The Portsea Hole control location consisted of rocky slopes and step downs along a reef ridge that

descended into a sandy bowl where the maximum depth was 27 m. Most vertical reef wall was

located at the 22 – 24 m depth contour. Reef biota consisted of sessile invertebrates including erect

and massive form sponges and diverse colonial ascidians (Figure 3-2).



Figure 3-2 Example of benthic cover taken at control locations. (a) Lonsdale Wall south 37 m, hydroids and bryozoans on reef slope; (b) Rip Bank Ref C 47 m, sponge garden habitat with migrating spider crabs; (c) Portsea Hole 24 m, diverse colonial ascidians and reef biota; and (d) Nepean Bank Ref A 37 m, branching and encrusting form sponges.

3.2 Extent of Physical Disturbance of Habitat

3.2.1 Baseline Conditions

As described in Section 1.3 there has been a variety of disturbances at The Entrance in the decades

prior to CDP that would have potentially affected deep reef habitat and assemblages of biota prior

to this monitoring program.

In 2006, the distribution of patches with frames showing evidence of disturbance (i.e. where the

frequency of frames (%) in the patch was classified as either impact category 1, 2 or 3) is shown in

Figure 3-3. This distribution, which excludes the ‘natural’ rubble accumulations at the toe of

Lonsdale Wall, indicates that there was rock fall along Rip Bank, with the impact frequency of

frames in patches ranging from 5 – 64%. This is likely to be due to the Trial Dredge Program that

pre-existed the CDP dredging. There were also a few patches scattered around The Plateau with

some frames showing evidence of disturbance, although the magnitude of disturbance was smaller

than at Rip Bank. These were probably derived either naturally or represented residual disturbances

from past channel deepening activities. In conclusion, the baseline survey demonstrates the

presence of disturbance that pre-dates the CDP dredging.



Figure 3-3 Frequency of frames (%) classified as impact category 1, 2 or 3 within each patch in 2006. Lines indicate shipping channel.

3.2.2 First Post-Construction Survey (2009)

In 2009, considerable disturbance to the seabed was identified along Rip Bank West, Great Ship

Channel and Rip Bank East with the impact frequency of frames being greater than 50% in many

patches (Figure 3-4). Disturbance around The Plateau was generally much less than at Rip Bank,

with principal areas of rock fall being to the southwest, west and north (Plateau C, D and E) and the

impact frequency of frames being less than 50% in many patches. In 2009, relatively minor



disturbances observed in the control areas of Lonsdale Wall South and Nepean Bank were assumed

to be derived from natural processes.

Figure 3-4 Frequency of frames (%) classified as impact category 1, 2 or 3 within each patch in 2009. Lines indicate shipping channel.



3.2.3 Second Post-Construction Survey (2011)

In 2011, the principal region of disturbance was Rip Bank as in the previous survey, but impacts

were of generally lesser magnitude than 2009 (Figure 3-5, Figure 3-6). Some disturbance to the

seabed was identified along Rip Bank West, Great Ship Channel and Rip Bank East with the impact

frequency of frames being generally smaller than 50% (Figure 3-5). Disturbance around The

Plateau was generally much less than at Rip Bank, with principal areas of rock fall being to the

southwest, west and north (Plateau B, D and E). Minor disturbance was observed in the control

areas of Lonsdale Wall South and Nepean Bank and it was assumed to be derived from natural

processes. In 2011 there was a reduction in the impact frequency compared with 2009 which was

particularly evident at Rip Bank but also around the Plateau (Figure 3-6). Specifically, there was a

shift in the location of disturbance along Rip Bank, with reduction in the impact frequency of

frames in patches being greater at Rip Bank West than in the Great Ship Channel (Figure 3-6).

There was also further rock fall activity at Rip Bank East with the impact frequency of frames in

patches increasing since 2009 (Figure 3-5, Figure 3-6). Comparatively minor levels of disturbance

were detected around The Plateau from the toe of Plateau E, in the hole to the northwest and in the

channel between Plateau C and Lonsdale South (Figure 3-5, Figure 3-6).



Figure 3-5 Frequency of frames (%) classified as impact category 1, 2 or 3 within each patch in 2011. Lines indicate shipping channel. Lines indicate shipping channel.



Figure 3-6 Change in the frequency of frames (%) classified as impact category 1, 2 or 3 within each location between 2009 and 2011. Lines indicate shipping channel.

3.2.4 Third Post- Construction Survey (2015)

In 2015, the principal region of disturbance was Rip Bank as in previous surveys, but impacts were

of generally lesser magnitude compared with 2011 (Figure 3-7) and similar in magnitude to the

2006 baseline (Figure 3-3). The most disturbed area in 2015 was Rip Bank West where the impact

frequency of frames in two patches was ≥ 50%. The main disturbances around The Plateau in 2015



were at Plateau B, C, D and E (Figure 3-7). The impact frequency at the rest of the locations was

zero in most instances or ≤ 25% (Figure 3-7).

The main reductions in impact frequency between 2015 and the previous survey in 2011 were

recorded at Rip Bank West, Great Ship Channel and Rip Bank East. A reduction of impact

frequencies at the location level was shown at all depth strata apart from 57 m at Rip Bank East

(Figure 3-8). In many locations the frequency of impacted frames had reduced by 50% or more.

The greatest frequency of impact increases since 2011 occurred at Plateau B and Plateau D for

many of the depth strata (Figure 3-8).

Overall, there was a consistent decrease in impact frequency from 2009 to 2015 at all locations,

with impact frequency levels recorded in 2015 similar to the 2006 baseline which indicated that

most of the recovery has been occurred within the timeframe considered in this study (Figure 3-6,

Figure 3-7, Figure 3-8). These observed recovery patterns are considered in more detailed using

univariate analysis (Section 3.3.1).



Figure 3-7 Frequency of frames (%) classified as impact category 1, 2 or 3 within each patch in 2015. Lines indicate shipping channel



Figure 3-8 Change in the frequency of frames (%) classified as impact category 1, 2 or 3 within each location between 2015 and 2011. Lines indicate shipping channel



3.3 Statistical Analyses

3.3.1 Impact Categories

This section presents the results of statistical analyses comparing the frequency of occurrence (as

percentage of the total) of the four impact categories defined in Section 2.3.3. Broadly, results were

highly variable, with most of the statistically significant results reflecting different responses to the

CDP dredging that depended on location, depth stratum, time and the nature of disturbance. Thus,

any inferred effects of the CDP dredging were not reflected broadly across The Entrance. Where

effects had been identified soon after the completion of dredging for the CDP (i.e. within the 2009

survey), there was strong evidence of recovery in the 2015 survey.

Throughout the statistical analyses results, impact locations are referred to as the following

abbreviations: Plateau A, B and C = PL ABC; Plateau D, E and F = PL DEF; and Rip Bank West,

Great Ship Channel and East = RB WE. Where the words Year, Period, Location, Location Group

and Treatment begin with upper case letters they refer to the statistical factor of the same name.

3.3.1.1 27 m Depth

A statistically significant interaction between Year and Location Group was detected at 27 m for

Categories 3 (later stage of recolonization) and 4 (either completely recovered or not disturbed by

the CDP dredging) (Table 3-1).

Results of pair-wise comparisons are presented in Appendix B and in Figure 3-9. Results can be

summarised as follows:

1. Controls showed very little change in percent impact through time;

2. Test did not discriminate variation in Categories 1 and 2;

3. Category 3 showed a significant reduction at RB WE between 2009 and 2015, with a

downward trend from 2009 to 2011 to 2015;

4. Category 4 increased at PL DEF from 2009 to 2011 indicating recovery from disturbance

from the CDP;

5. Category 4 also showed a significant increase from 2009 to 2015 and a non-significant trend

of increase from 2011 to 2015, indicating recovery from the CDP dredging at Rip Bank; and

6. The PERMANOVA did not give a statistical comparison between 2006 and any of the CDP

post-construction surveys , however graphical inspection (Figure 3-9) indicates similar levels

of disturbance prior to dredging for the CDP at PL ABC and PL DEF compared to the

controls; and considerable more disturbance at Rip Bank than the Plateau groups and Controls

in 2006 that are likely to reflect impacts from the Trial Dredge program.



Table 3-1 Results of univariate statistical analyses using PERMANOVA for impact categories at 27 m depth. Results show probability values (p-values) for each of the variables (rows) against terms included in the analysis (columns). Significant (α = 0.05) p-values in bold. RED = redundant term due to significant interaction

Impact Category

Period Treatment Year

(Period)

Location Group

(Treatment)

Period x Treatment

Period x Location Group

(Treatment)

Year (Period) x Treatment

Year(Period) x Location Group

(Treatment)

1 0.667 0.395 0.732 0.199 0.668 0.389 0.708 0.220

2 0.230 0.367 0.717 0.324 0.191 0.923 0.751 0.307

3 0.148 0.262 RED RED 0.370 0.942 0.561 0.046

4 0.451 0.366 RED RED 0.490 0.854 0.509 0.008

Figure 3-9 Average (±SE) percent occurrence of impact categories at 27 m for the significant terms found with PERMANOVA. Number above each bar indicates the number of patches available. Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC. See Section 2.3.3 for definition of impact categories.

3.3.1.2 37 m Depth

A statistically significant interaction between Period and Location Group was found at 37 m for

Category 1 (bare rock) (Table 3-2). Pair-wise comparisons did not indicate the occurrence of an

impact due to CDP dredging at any of the location groups (Figure 3-10, Appendix B).

Results of pair-wise comparisons are presented in Appendix B and in Figure 3-10. The results can

be summarised as follows:

1. Occurrence of Category 1 disturbance was small (< 10% on average) throughout the study;

2. Comparisons of Category 1 between Before and After the CDP dredging were not statistically

significant at any of the location groups, however there was a trend towards a slight increase

in disturbance after the CDP dredging at PL DEF and slight decrease at RB WE. No

Category 1 disturbance was identified at either Control groups;

2

4 4

6 49

7

9

3 57 6

6

5

2

66

6 4 40

20

40

60

80

100

PL ABC PL DEF RB WE LON NS REF AC

Category 3

2006200920112015

24

4

6 49

7

9

3 57 6

6

5 26

6

6 4 4

0

20

40

60

80

100


Category 4

Me

an

oc

cu

rre

nc

e (

%)

Location Group



3. Category 2 (early colonisers):

- At PL ABC there was a (non-significant) trend for a decline in percent contribution from 2009

to 2015;

- At RB WE there was a significant greater occurrence of Category 2 in 2009 than in 2011 or

2015;

4. Category 3:

- At PL ABC there was a small but statistically significant reduction in occurrence between

2009 and 2011 and 2009 and 2015, indicating a recovery.

- At RB WE there was a significant reduction in occurrence between 2011 and 2015

5. Category 4:

- There was no change in the occurrence of undisturbed or recolonised habitat at either Control

groups through time;

- At PL ABC there was a trend to reduced occurrence of Category 4 in 2009, with increased

occurrence thereafter, however this was not statistically significant;

- At PL DEF there was a (non-significant) trend for a decline in percent contribution from 2006

to 2015; and

- At RB WE the occurrence of undisturbed (or recolonised) habitat appeared to decrease

markedly from 2006 to 2009, and then showed significant increases from 2009 to 2011 and

2015. By 2015 the occurrence of undisturbed habitat had increased to that observed in 2006.

Table 3-2 Results of univariate statistical analyses using PERMANOVA for impact categories at 37 m depth. Results show probability values (p-values) for each of the variables (rows) against terms included in the analysis (columns). Significant (at α = 0.05) p-values in bold. RED = redundant term due to significant interaction

Impact Category


(Period)

Location Group

(Treatment)

Period x Treatment


(Treatment)



(Treatment)

1 RED 0.459 0.165 RED 0.994 0.020 0.164 0.959

2 0.184 0.273 RED RED 0.188 0.896 0.719 0.004

3 0.444 0.480 RED RED 0.438 0.214 0.883 0.039

4 0.222 0.395 RED RED 0.240 0.770 0.590 0.000




3.3.1.3 47 m Depth

A statistically significant interaction between Year and Location Group was detected at 47 m for

Categories 3 and 4 (Table 3-3).

Results of pair-wise comparisons are presented in Appendix B and in Figure 3-11. The results can

be summarised as follows:

1. Category 3:

- Very little change at the Control location groups

- There was a significant increase from 2009 to 2011 at PL ABC with a trend for a slight, non-

significant decrease from 2011 to 2015. The increase from 2009 to 2011 may signify

migration of rubble down the wall of the Canyon, with ongoing disturbance;

- There was no change at PL DEF; and

12 24 10 8 34

9

8

5 325

8

3 26

6

6

4 40

20

40

60

80

100


Category 3

2006200920112015

12 24

10

8 312

2022

12 90

20

40

60

80

100


Category 1

Before

After

12 24

10

8 3

4

9

8

5 32

5

8

3 26

66

4 4

0

20

40

60

80

100


Category 4

12 24

10

8 3

4

9

8

5 32

5

8

3 26

6

6 4 40

20

40

60

80

100


Category 2

Me

an

oc

cu

rre

nc

e (

%)

Location Group



- At RB WE there was much greater occurrence of Category 3 in 2009 than prior to dredging

for the CDP, with significant declines in occurrence from 2009 to 2011 and from 2011 to

2015.

2. Category 4:

- Within control location groups there was nearly no change at LON NS; however there was a

small but non-significant reduction in undisturbed habitat at REF AC in 2009 (Figure 3-11);

- PL ABC showed a small but statistically significant reduction in occurrence between 2009

and 2011, which may indicate a delayed damage due to rock fall deeper into the canyon. By

2015 there was a slight but non-significant increase, perhaps indicating same recovery; and

- At both PL DEF and RB WE there was a trend towards a large reduction in undisturbed

habitat between 2006 and 2009, which was statistically equivalent to 2011. By 2015,

however, occurrence had increased significantly and was similar to 2006.

Table 3-3 Results of univariate statistical analyses using PERMANOVA for impact categories at 47 m depth. Results show probability values (p-values) for each of the variables (rows) against terms included in the analysis (columns). Significant (at α = 0.05) p-values in bold. RED = redundant term due to significant interaction

Impact Category


(Period)

Location Group

(Treatment)

Period x Treatment


(Treatment)



(Treatment)

1 0.614 0.538 0.454 0.362 0.606 0.351 0.603 0.125

2 0.377 0.396 0.525 0.268 0.375 0.316 0.517 0.445

3 0.330 0.308 RED RED 0.280 0.430 0.752 0.007

4 0.324 0.247 RED RED 0.232 0.598 0.408 0.008


14 18 11 5 697

10

7 4

3

6

8

6 2

6

6

6

4 40

20

40

60

80

100


Category 3

2006

2009

2011

2015

14 1811

5 69

7

10

7 4

3 6

8

6 2

6

6

6

4 4

0

20

40

60

80

100


Category 4

Me

an

oc

cu

rre

nc

e (

%)

Location Group



3.3.1.4 57 m Depth

There was a significant difference between Periods for Category 2 indicating a significant

difference across all location groups (Table 3-4). There was a greater occurrence of Category 2

after dredging for the CDP (< 4% difference) than before (Figure 3-12). This was not due to the

CDP dredging as it occurred across all Impact and Control location groups.

A statistically significant interaction between Period and Treatment was detected at 57 m for

Category 3. This significant interaction was caused by an increase in the occurrence of Category 3

at impact (dredged) location groups after dredging for the CDP from < 1% to 20% (Table 3-4;

Figure 3-12; Appendix B). A statistically significant interaction between Year and Location

Group was detected for all the four Categories (Table 3-4). Results of pair-wise comparisons for

2015 data did not indicate the occurrence of an impact due to CDP dredging at any of the location

groups (Figure 3-12, Appendix B).

The occurrence of Category 4 at RB WE in 2009 was less than the other years but in 2011 and 2015

it had increased to levels prior to dredging for the CDP. The pattern for Category 3 appeared

opposite to Category 4 (Figure 3-12). The occurrence of Category 4 at PL DEF in 2009 appeared

greater than for other years but in 2015 it had decreased to levels prior to dredging for the CDP

(Figure 3-12). There was also a significant increase in the occurrence of Category 2 between the

before and after dredging periods for the CDP, but this increase was consistent across all location

groups (Table 3-4; Figure 3-12). In fact, the frequency of Category 4 at PL DEF and RB WE in

2015 was close to levels observed prior to dredging for the CDP, increasing from 2009 and 2011

levels. The frequency of Category 3 in 2009 increased compared to 2006 but then decreased in

2011 and even further in 2015 close to the baseline level (Figure 3-12).

The results of pair-wise comparisons are presented in Appendix B and in Figure 3-11. The results

can be summarised as follows:

1. Category 1 showed little variation through time at all location groups except PL DEF, where

there was a more frequent occurrence in 2009 relative to all other times; the only statistically

significant result occurred between 2009 and 2015;

2. Category 2

- There was a broad-scale difference between before the CDP dredging, which was less than

after. Note that this difference is only a few percent and it is not related to the CDP dredging

as it occurred across all locations;



- Category 2 also showed small-scale variability with location groups over time. The changes

observed were relatively small and not statistically significant;

3. Category 3 showed both small-scale and large-scale variability. Specifically:

- At the large scale, there was a greater cover of Category 3 at the Impact treatment after the

CDP than at the Controls but no difference before.

4. Category 4

- The occurrence of undisturbed or recolonised habitat showed no statistically significant

variation through time at PL ABC, PL DEF or the Controls. At PL DEF there was a trend

(non-significant) for a decline in Category 4 in 2009 with an increase in 2011 followed by a

small decrease in 2015;

- At RB WE there was statistically less occurrence of Category 4 in 2009 than in 2015,

indicating recovery.

Table 3-4 Results of univariate statistical analyses using PERMANOVA for impact categories at 57 m depth. Results show probability values (p-values) for each of the variables (rows) against terms included in the analysis (columns). Significant (α = 0.05) p-values in bold. RED = redundant term due to significant interaction

Impact Category


(Period)

Location Group

(Treatment)

Period x Treatment


(Treatment)



(Treatment)

1 0.466 0.388 RED RED 0.410 0.264 0.636 0.001

2 0.018 0.173 RED RED 0.161 0.876 0.706 0.022

3 RED RED RED RED 0.047 0.601 0.960 0.000

4 0.142 0.202 RED RED 0.202 0.639 0.331 0.036




3.3.1.5 Summary of Results

A summary of the above results is as follows:

- Disturbance was evident at RB WE at the 27 m depth stratum in the 2009 survey which

persisted until 2011. In 2015, there was almost a total recovery at this depth stratum;

43

63

0

2

4

6

8

10

Before After

Category 2

9 11 9 9 54 3

6

5 3

3

2

5

4 2

6 6

6

4 40

20

40

60

80

100


Category 3

9 11 9 9 54

3

6 5 33 2 5 4 26

6

6 4 40

20

40

60

80

100


Category 1

2006200920112015

9 11 9 9 5

4

3 6 5

3

3 2

54

26 66

4 40

20

40

60

80

100


Category 2

9 11 9 9 5

4

3

6

533 2

5

42

6 6

6

4 4

0

20

40

60

80

100


Category 4

Me

an o

ccu

rre

nc

e (

%)

Period

Location Group

14

2229

41

0

5

10

15

20

25

Before After

Category 3

Control

Dredged



- Disturbance was observed in the Rip Bank Area in 2009 at all the other depth strata with some

signs of continuing recovery evident in 2015;

- By 2015 disturbance was very low at all locations indicating recovery or absence of

disturbance attributable to the CDP dredging at any of the depth strata;

- There were some signs of ongoing recovery in 2015 indicated by minimal disturbance

(Category 3) at RB WE at all depth strata, at PL ABC at 47 m and 57 m strata and at PL DEF

at the 27 m and the 57 m strata.

3.3.2 Habitat Descriptors

This section presents the results of statistical analyses comparing the cover of habitat descriptors.

Broadly, results were highly variable, with most of the statistically significant results reflecting

different responses to the CDP dredging that depended on location, depth stratum, time and the

nature of disturbance. Thus, any changes in the cover of habitat descriptors were not reflected

broadly across The Entrance.

3.3.2.1 27 m Depth

A significant interaction between Year x Location Group indicated that there were differences in the

entire suite of habitat descriptors (see Section 2.3.2) at the 27 m depth stratum, meaning that the

cover of the entire suite of habitat descriptors was different between dredged and control location

groups in some years, and/or that the entire suite was different between years for one or more of the

location groups in one or both of the treatments (Table 3-5). These differences, however, were not

suggestive of an impact of CDP dredging as the variability among the control location groups over

time was similar to the variability among impact (dredged) location groups (Figure 3-13, Appendix

C).

The nMDS plot and multivariate pair-wise analyses suggest that LON NS (Control) and PL DEF

(Impact) differed from the other location groups in 2006 and that RB WE differed from the other

dredged location groups in 2006 and 2011 (Figure 3-13, Appendix C). This pattern also matched

some of the differences in dispersion between control and dredged location groups (Table 3-6,

Appendix C). Moreover, dispersion decreased significantly between 2011 and 2015 within

dredged location groups but not within control location groups (Table 3-6, Appendix C).

Dispersion decreased significantly between Baseline (2006) and 2015 within both dredged and

control location groups (Table 3-6, Appendix C). Many of the dissimilarities among years and

location groups could be attributed to sand, exposed bare rock, colonising biota with recognisable

biodiversity, exposed rock with microbiota and natural rubble (Appendix C).



Univariate analysis of the cover of the six habitat descriptors identified by the analysis of

similarities (SIMPER; Appendix J) did not suggest the occurrence of an impact due to CDP

dredging at any of the location groups (Table 3-7, Figure 3-14; Appendix C). Sand had a greater

cover at control location groups compared with dredged location groups while no exposed bare rock

habitat was found, consistently through survey years, at control location groups compared with

dredged location groups (Figure 3-14). Note that the value of percent cover for each of these

descriptors was very small (sand: < 5%; exposed bare rock: < 1.5%) (Figure 3-14).

All other significant results within the analyses arose from smaller-scale spatial and temporal

differences (Table 3-7). Habitat descriptors that displayed this smaller-scale variability in their

percentage covers included sand, exposed bare rock, colonising biota with recognisable biodiversity

and exposed rock with microbiota (Table 3-7, Appendix C).

Pair-wise tests indicated that differences in sand cover occurred among the years 2009, 2011 and

2015 within the control location groups, REF AC and LON NS (Appendix C). Moreover, sand

cover in 2015 was similar to 2006 at REF AC and less than in 2006 at LON NS (Figure 3-14).

Greater cover of exposed bare rock was found in 2015 at PL DEF compared to 2011, and greater

cover was found in RB WE in 2009 and 2011 compared with 2015, when exposed bare rock was

not found (Figure 3-14; Appendix C). No exposed bare rock was found at any of the control

location groups (Figure 3-14).

Pair-wise tests indicated that cover of colonising biota with recognisable biodiversity and exposed

rock with microbiota habitats were greater in 2006, 2009 and 2011 at RB WE than in 2015 when

neither of the habitat descriptors were found (Figure 3-14, Appendix C). No colonising biota with

recognisable biodiversity or exposed rock with microbiota habitats were found at the controls

(Figure 3-14).

Small-scale variability of natural rubble cover was mainly due to a greater cover at PL DEF and RB

WE in 2009, while all the other location groups had zero or very little cover during most of the

years (Figure 3-14; Appendix C). Similarly, exposed rock with microbiota cover was greater at

PL DEF and RB WE in 2011 compared to the rest of the other location groups which had zero or

very little cover during most of the years (Figure 3-14; Appendix C).



Table 3-5 Results of multivariate statistical analyses for habitat descriptors at each depth using PERMANOVA. Results show probability values (p-values) for each of the variables (rows) against terms included in the analysis (columns). Significant (α = 0.05) p-values in bold. RED = redundant term due to significant interaction

Depth Period Treatment Year

(Period)

Location Group

(Treatment)

Period x Treatment


(Treatment)



(Treatment)

27 m 0.054 0.336 RED RED 0.276 0.327 0.602 0.001

37 m 0.576 0.656 RED RED 0.638 0.215 0.083 0.001

47 m 0.416 0.874 RED RED 0.777 0.379 0.177 0.001

57 m 0.868 0.769 RED RED 0.472 0.592 0.453 0.001



Figure 3-13 nMDS ordination for habitat descriptors at Control and Dredged locations during each sampling year at 27 m using frame data (top) and Year x Location Group centroids (bottom). Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC

Year / Treatment2006 Control2006 Dredged2009 Control2009 Dredged2011 Control2011 Dredged2015 Control2015 Dredged

2D Stress: 0.08

Location GroupLON NSREF ACPL ABCPL DEFRB WE

20062006 2006

2006

2006

2009

20092009

2009

2009

2011

20112011

2011

2011

2015

2015

2015

2015

2015

2D Stress: 0.07



Table 3-6 Summary of PERMDISP analysis (with pair-wise permutational t-test) of multivariate dispersion for habitat descriptors data. Significant results at α = 0.05 are in bold.

Comparison 27 m 37 m 47 m 57 m

t P(perm) t P(perm) t P(perm) t P(perm)

2006 - Control vs. Dredged 0.19 0.887 1.95 0.249 0.30 0.859 1.16 0.415




Control - 2006 vs 2009 7.97 <0.0005 5.46 0.001 0.92 0.503 0.37 0.775

Control - 2006 vs 2011 5.26 0.002 2.85 0.031 6.54 0.001 0.38 0.775

Control - 2006 vs 2015 8.65 <0.0005 2.85 0.015 5.72 0.001 7.43 0.001

Control - 2009 vs 2011 4.11 0.016 3.07 0.016 5.75 0.001 0.69 0.562

Control - 2009 vs 2015 3.06 0.060 11.19 0.001 8.67 0.001 7.30 0.001

Control - 2011 vs 2015 1.70 0.323 7.27 0.001 14.90 0.001 7.05 0.001

Dredged - 2006 vs. 2009 4.50 0.006 5.30 0.002 7.96 0.001 1.40 0.374

Dredged - 2006 vs. 2011 4.15 0.013 1.88 0.229 7.21 0.001 4.15 0.008

Dredged - 2006 vs. 2015 13.84 <0.0005 6.97 0.001 2.77 0.090 5.64 0.001

Dredged - 2009 vs. 2011 0.61 0.712 3.32 0.024 1.69 0.187 2.44 0.111

Dredged - 2009 vs. 2015 7.59 <0.0005 11.23 0.001 12.16 0.001 2.75 0.055

Dredged - 2011 vs. 2015 8.40 <0.0005 8.83 0.001 11.40 0.001 0.35 0.824



Table 3-7 Results of univariate statistical analyses for habitat descriptors using PERMANOVA. Results show probability values (p-values) for each of the variables (rows) against terms included in the analysis (columns). Significant (α = 0.05) p-values in bold. RED = redundant term due to significant interaction

Impact Category Period TreatmentYear

(Period)Location Group

(Treatment) Period x

TreatmentPeriod x Location

Group (Treatment)Year (Period)

x Treatment


(Treatment)

Depth = 27 m

Sand 0.125 0.040 RED RED 0.108 0.234 0.417 0.006

Shell Grit 0.601 0.668 0.910 0.251 0.664 0.256 0.623 0.992

Exposed Rock - Bare 0.256 0.043 RED RED 0.237 0.641 0.903 0.001

Colonising biota with recognisable diversity 0.160 0.505 RED RED 0.179 0.778 0.877 0.001

Exposed Rock - Microbiota 0.615 0.691 RED RED 0.573 0.420 0.643 0.000

Rubble - Natural 0.642 0.503 0.384 0.862 0.589 0.821 0.413 0.003

Depth = 37 m

Sand 0.517 RED RED RED 0.419 0.272 0.017 0.001

Shell grit 0.179 0.814 RED RED 0.180 0.166 0.274 0.018

Exposed rock - bare 0.887 0.233 RED RED 0.895 0.138 0.890 0.038


Exposed rock - microbiota 0.737 0.672 0.059 0.296 0.728 0.469 0.056 0.070

Colonising biota with distinct colonies 0.257 0.362 RED RED 0.200 0.571 0.800 <0.0005

Rubble - Natural 0.302 0.208 0.484 0.161 0.308 0.371 0.334 0.788

Depth = 47 m

Sand 0.645 0.293 RED RED 0.727 0.437 0.408 0.001

Shell Grit 0.838 0.733 RED RED 0.936 0.154 0.240 0.019

Exposed Rock - Bare 0.326 0.149 RED RED 0.360 0.393 0.812 0.001

Colonising biota with recognisable diversity 0.537 0.564 0.109 0.042 0.557 0.057 0.239 0.515


Colonising biota with distinct colonies 0.411 0.418 RED RED 0.400 0.269 0.552 0.001





(Treatment) Period x


Group (Treatment)Year (Period)

x Treatment


(Treatment)

Rubble - Natural 0.291 0.542 RED RED 0.349 0.939 0.560 0.001

Depth = 57 m

Sand 0.560 0.143 RED RED 0.606 0.359 0.503 0.000

Shell Grit 0.867 0.783 RED RED 0.512 0.582 0.625 0.001

Exposed Rock - Bare 0.804 0.700 0.338 0.065 0.843 0.171 0.362 0.102



Colonising biota with distinct colonies 0.328 0.647 0.232 0.365 0.646 0.395 0.210 0.258

Rubble - Natural 0.774 0.753 RED RED 0.218 0.906 0.666 0.001

Stiff sediment 0.055 0.137 0.367 0.118 0.153 0.161 0.393 0.990



Figure 3-14 Average (±SE) mean cover of habitat descriptors at 27 m depth for the significant terms found with PERMANOVA. Number above each bar indicate the number of samples

Me

an

co

ver

(%)

Location Group

7 10 69

72

12

55 62 69 27 18

68 87 113

51

20

120 120 120 80

80

0

5

10

15

20


Sand2006

2009

2011

2015

7

10

69

72 1255 62

69

27 18

6887

113

5120

120120

120

8080

0

2

4

6

8


Exposed Rock - Bare

7 10

69

72 1255

62

69

27 1868

87

113

51 20120

120

120

80 80

0

2

4

6

8


Colonising Biota with Recognisable Biodiversity

Treatment

Location Group

7 10

69

72 1255 62

69

27 186887

113

51 20120

120 120

80 80

0

5

10

15


Exposed Rock - Microbiota

Location Group

7

1069

72 1255

62

69

27 1868

87 11351 20

120

120 120

80 80

0

2

4

6

8


Rubble

400

900

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Control Dredged

Sand

400

900

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

Control Dredged

Exposed Bare Rock



available. Impact: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control: LON NS, REF AC. Note different vertical scales for each category graph

3.3.2.2 37 m Depth

Habitat descriptors at the 37 m depth stratum varied inconsistently among years and location groups

(Table 3-5). These differences were not suggestive of an impact due to dredging for the CDP as the

variability among the control location groups over time was similar to that among dredged location

groups (Appendix C).

The nMDS plot and the results of pair-wise comparisons did not indicate any clear groupings

among Years and/or Treatments with the exception of differences between LON NS and RB WE

and the rest of the location groups in 2009 (Figure 3-15, Appendix C). Differences in dispersion

within treatment between years were significant, but these patterns were shown to be similar for

both impact and control location groups (Table 3-6; Appendix C). There were no differences in

dispersion between control and dredged location groups (Table 3-6). Most of the dissimilarities

among years and location groups could be attributed to sand, shell grit, exposed bare rock,

colonising biota with recognisable biodiversity and with distinct colonies habitats (Appendix C).

Analysis of the cover of the seven habitat descriptors identified by SIMPER (Appendix J) did not

suggest any impact due to CDP dredging at any of the location groups (Table 3-7, Figure 3-16;

Appendix C). Furthermore, despite a significant Year x Treatment interaction (Table 3-7), there

were no differences in the cover of sand indicative of an impact as differences in the cover of sand

were mainly due to an increase in sand in 2009 at control location groups (Figure 3-16; Appendix

C).

All other significant results within the analyses concerned smaller-scale spatial and temporal


percentage covers included sand, shell grit, exposed bare rock, colonising biota with recognisable

biodiversity and with distinct colonies (Table 3-7, Appendix C). No differences were found in the

cover of exposed rock with microbiota or rubble (Table 3-7).

Pair-wise tests indicated that sand cover was greater in 2009 compared with 2011 and 2015 at LON

NS, REF AC and PL DEF, with all the other comparisons being non-significant (Figure 3-16;

Appendix C). Similarly, more shell grit was found in 2009 compared with 2011 and 2015 at PL

ABC and PL DEF, with all other comparisons being non-significant (Figure 3-16; Appendix C).

More exposed bare rock was found in 2015 and 2011 than in 2009 at PL DEF, and at RB WE in

2015 than in 2011 (Figure 3-16; Appendix C).



At PL ABC and LON NS the cover of colonising biota with recognisable biodiversity was greater in

2009 than in 2015 when this habitat descriptor was not recorded (Figure 3-16; Appendix C).

Conversely, a greater cover of colonising biota with recognisable biodiversity was found in 2015

compared with 2009 at PL DEF (Figure 3-16; Appendix C).

Small-scale variability of colonising biota with distinct colonies was mainly due to a greater cover

of colonising biota in 2009 than in 2011 or 2015 at RB WE, while all the other location groups had

little or no cover of colonising biota during most years (Figure 3-16; Appendix C). The

comparatively large cover of this habitat is consistent with increased amounts of impacted habitat at

the RIP Bank following the CDP dredging (see Section 3.3.1.2).



Figure 3-15 nMDS ordination for habitat descriptors at Control and Dredged locations during each sampling year at 37 m using frame data (top) and Year x Location Group centroids (bottom). Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC.


2D Stress: 0.12


2006

2006

2006

2006

2006

2009

2009

20092009

2009

20112011

2011

2011

2011

2015

2015

2015

2015

2015

2D Stress: 0.11



Figure 3-16 Average (±SE) mean cover of habitat descriptors at 37 m for the significant terms found with PERMANOVA. Number above each bar indicate the number of samples available. Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC.

3.3.2.3 47 m Depth

A significant Year x Location group interaction indicated that there were differences in habitat

descriptors at the 47 m depth stratum (Table 3-5). These differences, however, did not suggest an

impact of CDP dredging as the variability among the control location groups over time was similar

to that among dredged location groups (Appendix C).

91

171

215

43

63

34

41

5636 2611 108

9069

25120120 120

8080

0

2

4

6

8

10

12


Shell Piece/Grit

Me

an

co

ver

(%)

Location Group

Location Group

91171

215

43

6334

41

56

36 2611

108

9069

25

120

120

120

80

80

0

2

4

6

8

10


Exposed Rock - Bare

7 10

69

7212

55

62

69

27

1868

87

113

5120

120

120

12080

80

0

2

4

6

8

10

12



Treatment Location Group

91 171215

43 633441

56

36 2611108

90 69 25

120

120 120 80 800

5

10

15

20

25


Colonising Biota with Distinct Colonies

91

171

34

41

11

108

120

120

0

5

10

15

20

25

Control Dredged

Sand2006

2009

2011

2015

91171

215

43 63

34

41

56

36

26

11

10890

69

25

120120

120

80

80

0

5

10

15

20

25

30


Sand



The nMDS plot and multivariate pair-wise analyses indicated that the composition of habitat

descriptors at LON NS, PL DEF and RB WE in 2009 and 2011 differed from all other location

groups and years (Figure 3-17). Importantly, all location groups returned to the large cluster (in the

nMDS plot) of times and location groups in 2015, indicating that, even if an impact had occurred,

composition had returned to that which may be considered typical of The Entrance by 2015 (Figure

3-17). This pattern was also confirmed by significant higher dispersion within each treatment in

2009 and 2011 compared to 2006 and 2015 (PERMDISP; Table 3-6; Appendix C). Most of the

dissimilarities among years and location groups could be attributed to sand, shell grit, exposed bare

rock, exposed rock with microbiota, colonising biota with distinct colonies and natural rubble

(Appendix C).

Analysis of the cover of each of the seven habitat descriptors identified by the analysis of

similarities (SIMPER; Appendix J) did not suggest any impact due to the CDP dredging at any of

the location groups (Table 3-7; Figure 3-18; Appendix C). Colonising biota with recognisable

biodiversity habitat had, consistently across Years, a greater cover at RB WE compared with all the

other location groups (Figure 3-18; Appendix C).

All other significant results of the univariate analyses were due to smaller-scale spatial and temporal


percentage covers included sand, shell grit, exposed bare rock and exposed microbiota, colonising

biota with distinct colonies and rubble (Table 3-7, Appendix C). There were no low level (i.e.

Year x Location Group interaction) significant differences in the cover of colonising biota with

recognisable biodiversity (Table 3-7).

Sand cover was highly variable, contributing between 0% and 15% of cover at any one of the

location groups and over time, with greatest variability observed at LON NS (a control group).

Pair-wise tests indicated that sand cover was higher in 2011 compared to 2006 and 2015 at RB WE

and LON NS (Figure 3-18; Appendix C). All other control location groups had a similar sand

cover across years with the exception of PL DEF where sand cover was smaller in 2006 compared

to the other years (Figure 3-18).

Shell grit had relatively large cover in 2009 at PL ABC and PL DEF and less so at LON NS in that

year (Figure 3-18; Appendix C). The large average cover at PL ABC in 2009 may have been

indicative of an effect due to the CDP dredging, however cover was not recorded in 2011 and

remained small in 2015. Similarly, cover of PL DEF was large in 2009 relative to 2011 and 2015.

In this case, however, the cover of this descriptor in 2006 tended to be much greater than in 2009

(Figure 3-18).



Small-scale variability of exposed bare rock cover was mainly due to greater cover at PL DEF in

2011, while all the other location groups had zero or very little cover during most of the years

(Figure 3-18; Appendix C). Similarly, small-scale differences in the cover of exposed rock with

microbiota were mainly due to greater cover at PL DEF in 2011 and RB WE in 2006 and 2011,

while all the other Location Groups had zero or very little cover during most of the years (Figure 3-

18; Appendix C).

The greater cover of colonising biota with distinct colonies and natural rubble in 2009 at RB WE

and PL DEF, respectively, was almost entirely the source of significant small-scale variability

(Figure 3-18; Appendix C).


2D Stress: 0.12





2006

2006

2006

2006

2006

2009

2009

2009

2009

2009

2011

20112011

2011

2011

2015

2015

2015

20152015

2D Stress: 0.11



Figure 3-18 Average (±SE) mean cover of habitat descriptors at 47 m for the significant terms found with PERMANOVA. Number above each bar indicates the number of samples available for analysis. Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC

291 350

407

270169

0

2

4

6



94 127

134 5239

37

44

46

50

26

40

59107

88

24

120

120

12080

80

0

5

10

15

20

25

30


Sand2006

2009

2011

2015

94

127

134 52

39

37 44

4650

2640 59

107

88 24120

120120

80 80

0

3

6

9

12


Shell Piece/Grit

94 127

134

52 3937

44

46

50 2640

59

107 88 24120

120 120

80 80

0

5

10

15

20

25


Exposed Rock - Bare

Mea

n c

ove

r (%

)

Location Group

94 127 13452 39

37

44

46

50 26

40

59

107

88 24120

120 120 80

80

0

2

4

6

8

10


Exposed Rock - MicrobiotaLocation Group

94 127 134 52 3937

44

46

50 26

40

59

10788 24

120120

12080 80

0

2

4

6

8

10

12


Colonising Biota with Distinct Colonies

Location Group

94

127

134 52 39

37

44

46 50 26

40

59 107

8824

120

120120

8080

0

2

4

6

8

10


Rubble



3.3.2.4 57 m Depth

A significant Year x Location group interaction indicated that there were differences in habitat

descriptors at the 57 m depth stratum among some control location groups in some years, and/or

that the entire suite was different between years for one or more of the location groups in one or

both of the treatments (Table 3-5). These differences were not suggestive of an impact of CDP

dredging as the variability among the control location groups over time was similar to the

variability among location groups within the dredged area (Figure 3-19; Appendix C).

The nMDS plot and multivariate pair-wise analyses indicated that the composition of habitat

descriptors at LON NS in 2006 and PL DEF in 2006 and 2009 differed from the composition in all

other years and location groups (Figure 3-17, Appendix C). This pattern was also confirmed by

significantly higher dispersion within each treatment in 2009 and 2011 compared with 2006 and

2015 (PERMDISP; Table 3-6; Appendix C). At these smaller-scales, much of the dissimilarities

among years and location groups could be attributed to sand, shell grit, colonising biota with

recognisable biodiversity, exposed rock with microbiota and natural rubble (Table 3-7; Appendix

C).

Analysis of the cover of the eight habitat descriptors identified by the analysis of similarities

(SIMPER; Appendix J) did not suggest the occurrence of an impact due to the CDP dredging at

any location group (Table 3-7; Figure 3-20; Appendix C).

All the significant results within the analyses arose from smaller-scale spatial and temporal

variability (Table 3-7). Habitat descriptors that displayed this smaller-scale variability in their

percentage covers included sand, shell grit, colonising biota with recognisable biodiversity, exposed

rock with microbiota and natural rubble (Table 3-7, Appendix C). No differences were found in

the cover of exposed bare rock, colonising biota with distinct colonies or stiff sediment (Table 3-7).

Pair-wise tests indicated that sand cover was significantly different among the years 2009, 2011 and

2015 at both control location groups REF AC and LON NS and there was no evidence of any

common temporal pattern between the two location groups (Appendix C). In contrast, sand cover

was similar across years within dredged location groups (Figure 3-20).

Shell piece cover was greater at PL ABC and LON NS in 2009 compared with 2011 and 2015

(Figure 3-20; Appendix C). There were no other significant pair-wise comparisons (Appendix

C).

In 2015, colonising biota with recognisable biodiversity had a smaller cover at PL ABC and RB

WE compared with 2009 and 2011 respectively (Figure 3-20; Appendix C). Furthermore,



colonising biota with recognisable biodiversity were not found in 2015 at LON NS, despite being

present in 2009 and 2011 (Figure 3-20; Appendix C).

The only notable comparison for the cover of exposed rock with microbiota is that one concerning

LON NS where exposed rock with microbiota was not found in 2015 despite being present in 2009

and 2011 (Figure 3-20; Appendix C).

Small-scale variability of natural rubble cover was mainly due to a greater cover at PL DEF in 2009

and LON NS in 2011 and 2015, while all the other location groups had little or no cover during

most of the years (Figure 3-20; Appendix C). At PL DEF cover of rubble was approximately

twice as much in 2009 or in 2006 (not tested) and showed a marked decrease in the two surveys

thereafter. Whilst this may be due to an impact of the CDP dredging, a similar pattern was also

noted at LON NS.




Transform: NoneResemblance: D8 (exc 0-0) Czekanowski (+d)


2D Stress: 0.14


2006

2006

200620062006

20062006

2006

2006

2006

20062006

2006

2009

2009

200920092009

2009

2009

2009

2009

20092009

2011

2011

20112011

2011

2011

2011

2011

2011 20112015

2015

2015

20152015

2015

2015

2015

2015

2015

2015

20152015

2D Stress: 0.08



Figure 3-20 Average (±SE) mean cover of habitat descriptors at 57 m for the significant terms found with PERMANOVA. Number above each bar indicates the number of samples available. Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC


A summary of the habitat descriptors analysis is as follows:

- There was no evidence of an impact of dredging for the CDP on the dredged locations at any of the depth strata;

- There were some significant differences between periods or treatments which indicated that there were some large-scale patterns that were not related to impact of the CDP dredging but were the result of natural variability;

- Small-scale differences were found for most of the habitat descriptors indicating a high variability among surveys and location groups; and

35 72 51 97 23

18

16

46

27

2018

34

63

72

27

120

108

120

8080

0

2

4

6

8



Mea

n c

ove

r (%

)

Location Group

35

72

51

97

23

18

1646

27

2018 34 63 72 27

120

108

12080 80

0

5

10

15

20

25

30


Shell Piece/Grit

Location Group

35

72

51

97

23

18

16

46

27

2018 34

63

72

27120 108120

80

80

0

5

10

15

20

25


Rubble

35

72

51 97

23

1816

46

27

20

18

34

63

72

27120

108

12080

80

0

5

10

15

20

25

30


Sand2006

2009

2011

2015

35 72

5197

2318 16 46

27

2018

34

63

72

27120 108

12080

80

0

3

6

9

12

15


Exposed Rock - Microbiota



- There was only one area (RB WE) where a lower cover of colonising biota was observed with recognisable biodiversity at the 27 m and 37 m strata at RB WE in 2015 compared with 2006, 2009 and 2011.

3.3.3 Biota

3.3.3.1 27 m Depth

A significant Year x Location Group interaction indicated that there were differences in the biotic

assemblage in the 27 m depth stratum between dredged and control location groups in some years,

and/or that the biota were different between years for one or more of the location groups in one or

both of the treatments (Table 3-8). These differences do not suggest an impact of the CDP

dredging, as the variability among the control location groups over time was similar to that among

location groups within the dredged area (Figure 3-21, Appendix D).

LON NS, PL DEF and RB WE in 2015 were similar to 2009 but significantly different from 2011

(Appendix D). Conversely, there were no differences between PL ABC and PL DEF in 2015 and

2011 and 2009 (Appendix D). The nMDS plots partially captured these differences but did allow

to capture any further insight into the multivariate space (Figure 3-21).

Significant differences in dispersion between Treatments during each Year were found: dredged

location groups had greater dispersion in 2009 and 2011 and smaller in 2015 when compared with

control location groups (Table 3-9, Appendix D). There were also significant differences in

dispersion between Years within each Treatment (Table 3-9). Notably, in 2015 dispersion at both

control and dredged location groups was smaller than in all previous years (Table 3-9, Appendix

D).

Differences in the biotic assemblage among years and location groups could be attributed to

encrusting ruffled cream and grey sponges, Nemertesia procumbens, Rhodophyta, Ritterella

peduncolata and unidentified sponge/colonial ascidian (Table 3-10, Appendix K).

Univariate analysis of the cover of the six taxa of interest did not suggest an impact due to CDP at

any location group (Table 3-10, Figure 3-22; Appendix D). Most of the significant results of the

univariate analyses arose from smaller-scale spatial and temporal variability with six taxa yielding a

significant Year x Location Group interaction (Table 3-10). No patterns indicative of an impact of

CDP were evident from the pair-wise comparisons (Figure 3-22). In addition to smaller-scale

spatial and temporal variability, encrusting ruffled grey sponge was more abundant before the CDP

dredging than after, and R. peduncolata was more abundant in control than dredged location groups

(Figure 3-22; Appendix D). In 2006 R. peduncolata was not found and there were no significant

pair-wise comparisons indicating specific differences between treatments or among years (Figure

3-22; Appendix D).



There was also an overall trend for a large increase in cover of encrusting ruffled cream sponges

across all location groups in 2015, and an overall trend for decrease in encrusting ruffled grey

sponge from 2006 onwards (not tested) (Figure 3-22; Appendix D).

Table 3-8 Results of multivariate statistical analyses using PERMANOVA for biota assemblage at each depth. Results show probability values (p-values) for each of the variables (rows) against terms included in the analysis (columns). Significant (α = 0.05) p-values in bold. Neg. = Negative pseudo-F ratio; RED = redundant term due to significant interaction


(Period)

Location Group

(Treatment)

Period x Treatment


(Treatment)



(Treatment)

27 m Neg. 0.065 RED RED 0.777 0.359 0.134 0.000

37 m Neg. RED RED RED 0.710 0.688 0.047 0.004

47 m Neg. 0.380 RED RED 0.506 0.616 0.203 0.000

57 m 0.516 0.909 RED RED 0.666 0.295 0.314 0.003

Table 3-9 Summary of PERMDISP analysis (with pair-wise permutational t-test) of multivariate dispersion for the biotic assemblage. Significant results at α = 0.05 are in bold

Comparison 27 m 37 m 47 m 57 m

t P(perm) t P(perm) t P(perm) t P(perm)





Control - 2006 vs 2009 0.28 0.746 2.18 0.014 2.29 0.018 2.55 0.008

Control - 2006 vs 2011 1.44 0.124 1.11 0.169 1.35 0.114 1.51 0.075

Control - 2006 vs 2015 7.34 0.000 11.74 0.000 11.96 0.001 10.55 0.001

Control - 2009 vs 2011 1.58 0.067 1.02 0.206 0.73 0.364 1.27 0.121

Control - 2009 vs 2015 7.17 0.000 10.89 0.000 10.33 0.001 7.31 0.001

Control - 2011 vs 2015 6.02 0.000 9.60 0.000 8.60 0.001 8.29 0.001

Dredged - 2006 vs. 2009 1.40 0.095 2.38 0.004 3.82 0.001 0.75 0.409

Dredged - 2006 vs. 2011 1.01 0.228 2.93 0.001 2.91 0.002 0.78 0.346

Dredged - 2006 vs. 2015 4.42 0.000 14.38 0.000 16.26 0.001 12.79 0.001

Dredged - 2009 vs. 2011 0.67 0.434 0.10 0.896 1.32 0.098 0.04 0.965

Dredged - 2009 vs. 2015 7.39 0.000 8.63 0.000 10.30 0.001 11.54 0.001

Dredged - 2011 vs. 2015 7.43 0.000 11.40 0.000 12.37 0.001 11.82 0.001



Table 3-10 Results of univariate statistical analyses for the biotic assemblage using PERMANOVA. Results show probability values (p-values) for each of the variables (rows) against terms included in the analysis (columns). Significant (α = 0.05) p-values in bold. RED = redundant term due to significant interaction



(Treatment)Period x


Group (Treatment)Year (Period) x

TreatmentYear(Period) x Location

Group (Treatment)

Depth = 27 m

Encrusting ruffled cream sponge 0.355 0.556 RED RED 0.573 0.720 0.309 0.000

Encrusting ruffled grey sponge 0.007 0.197 RED RED 0.245 0.801 0.111 0.000

Nemertesia procumbens 0.463 0.959 RED RED 0.347 0.167 0.321 0.000

Rhodophyta 0.121 0.361 RED RED 0.383 0.842 0.530 0.000

Ritterella peduncolata 0.558 RED RED RED 0.632 0.231 0.029 0.000

Unidentified sponge/colonial ascidian 0.834 0.399 RED RED 0.480 0.947 0.455 0.000

Depth = 37 m



Halopteris glutinosa 0.893 0.752 RED RED 0.304 0.925 0.554 0.000

Nemertesia procumbens 0.070 0.972 0.013 0.034 0.281 0.144 0.170 0.612

Orthoscuticella ventricosa 0.659 0.921 0.001 0.187 0.854 0.660 0.143 0.340

Depth = 47 m


Halicornopsis elegans 0.793 0.535 RED RED 0.523 0.511 0.571 0.001


Hyphae sponge 0.632 0.618 0.433 0.443 0.575 0.457 0.409 0.340

Nemertesia procumbens 0.048 0.961 0.071 0.033 0.681 0.066 0.581 0.068

Depth = 57 m


Encrusting ruffled grey sponge 0.033 0.975 0.431 0.041 0.871 0.141 0.105 0.089


Nemertesia procumbens RED 0.253 0.004 RED 0.066 0.016 0.501 0.590

Textured yellow sponge 0.679 RED RED 0.838 0.515 0.882 0.044 0.307



Figure 3-21 nMDS ordination for the biotic assemblage at Control and Dredged locations during each sampling year at 27 m using frame data (top) and Year x Location Group centroids (bottom). Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC

Year2006200920112015

2D Stress: 0.24

Year2006200920112015

LON NS

REF AC

PL ABC

PL DEF

RB WE

LON NS

REF AC

PL ABC

PL DEF

RB WE

LON NS

REF AC

PL ABC

PL DEF

RB WE

PL DEF

LON NS

PL ABC

RB WE

REF AC

2D Stress: 0.18



Figure 3-22 Average (±SE) mean cover of taxa at 27 m for the significant terms found with PERMANOVA. Number above each bar indicates the number of samples available. Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC

Mea

n c

ove

r (%

)

Location Group

Location Group

172

1129

0

10

20

30

40

50

Before After

Encrusting ruffled grey sponge

85

45

71

200

87185 268 360

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2006 2009 2011 2015

Ritterella peduncolata

Control

Dredged

7

11

6973

12

54

62

69

27

18

68

86114 50

21

120

120

120

80

80

0

3

6

9

12


Encrusting ruffle cream sponge2006

2009

2011

2015

711

69

73

12

5462

6927

18

68

86 11450

21

120120 120

8080

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70


Encrusting ruffle grey sponge

7

11

69

73

12

54

6269 27

18

6886

114

50 21120

120120 80

80

0

10

20

30


Nemertesia procumbens

7

11

69

73

12

54

62

69

27

186886

114

50

21

120 120

120

80

80

0

5

10

15

20

25


Rhodophyta

7 11 69 7312

5462 69 27

18

6886 114

50

21

120 120 120

80

80

0

4

8

12

16


Ritterella peduncolata

7

11 69

73 1254 62 69 27 1868

86 114

50 21

120

120

120

80

80

0

1

2

3

4

5

6


Unidentified sponge/colonial ascidian

YearPeriod



3.3.3.2 37 m Depth

A significant Year x Treatment interaction indicated differences in the biotic assemblage at the 37

m stratum between dredged and control treatments in some years, or alternatively, that the biota was

different between years for one of the treatments (Table 3-8). Multivariate pair-wise analyses for

the Year x Treatment term suggested that there were significant differences in the biotic assemblage

between 2009 and 2011 in the dredged location groups, and the control and dredged location groups

differed significantly in 2011 (Appendix D). The nMDS plots partially capture these differences

and they also suggested the presence of some differences in the biotic assemblage between 2006

and 2009 within the Control location groups (Figure 3-23).

The significant Year x Location Group interaction indicated that there were smaller-scale

differences in biota among years. These differences do not suggest an impact of the CDP dredging

as the variability among the control location groups over time was similar to the variability among

location groups within the dredged area (Figure 3-23, Appendix D). Multivariate pair-wise

analyses for the Year x Group Location term found significant differences in the biotic assemblage

between 2009 and 2011 at all location groups, with all the other comparisons within each location

groups being not significant, except for LON NS where the biotic assemblage differed in 2009

when compared to 2015 (Figure 3-23). The nMDS plots partially captured these differences but no

other clustering was evident; only some partial grouping of 2006 centroids was discernible (Figure

3-23).

Multivariate dispersion was greater in Dredged than Control location groups in 2015 whereas there

were no differences in previous years (Table 3-9, Appendix D). Comparisons between years

within each treatment indicated that dispersion in 2015 at both the Control and Dredged location

groups was smaller compared to all previous years, and that dispersion in 2006 was greater than

some of the following years (Table 3-9, Appendix D).


encrusting ruffled cream and grey sponges, Halopteris glutinosa, Nemertesia procumbens and

Orthoscuticella verntricosa (Table 3-10, Appendix K). Analysis of the cover of the five taxa of

interest did not suggest the occurrence of an impact due to CDP dredging at any of the location

groups (Table 3-10, Figure 3-24; Appendix D). Most of the significant results of the univariate

analyses were related to differences at the small spatial scale and natural spatial and/or temporal

variability (Table 3-10). Encrusting ruffled grey sponge was more abundant before than after CDP

dredging consistently at all location groups (Figure 3-24; Appendix D). Nemertesia procumbens

was more abundant in 2009 compared to 2011 and 2015, and there were also differences among

location groups that, however, could not be ascribed to any particular pair-wise comparison (Figure



3-24; Appendix D). Orthoscuticella. ventricosa was more abundant in 2011 than in 2009 and 2015

(Figure 3-24; Appendix D). As indicated by the significant Year x Location Group interaction,

encrusting ruffled cream and grey sponges and H. glutinosa showed smaller-scale spatial and

temporal variability but no patterns indicative of an impact of CDP dredging were evident from the

pair-wise comparisons (Figure 3-24; Appendix D).




Year2006200920112015

2D Stress: 0.25

Year2006200920112015

LON NSREF ACPL ABC

PL DEF

RB WE

LON NS

REF ACPL ABC

PL DEF

RB WE

LON NS

REF AC

PL ABC

PL DEF

RB WE

LON NS

PL ABC

PL DEF

RB WE

REF AC

2D Stress: 0.19

TreatmentControlDredged

2006

2006

2009

2009

2011

2011

2015

2015

2D Stress: 0.13




Me

an

co

ver

(%)

Location Group

582

1016

0

15

30

45

Before After


582

193

303

520

0

2

4

6

8

2006 2009 2011 2015


Period

582

193

303

520

0

2

4

6

8

2006 2009 2011 2015

Orthoscuticella ventricosa

Year

Year

257

440 481

227

193

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7



91

172214 42

633441

5636

26

12

107

91

69

24

120

120

120

8080

0

3

6

9

12

15

18


Encrusting ruffled cream sponge2006

2009

2011

2015

91

172214

4263

34

4156

36

2612

107 91

69

24

120 120 12080 80

0

10

20

30

40

50



91172

214

42

63

34

41

5636

26

12 107 9169

24

120 120 120 8080

0

5

10

15

20


Halopteris glutinosaLocation Group

Location Group



3.3.3.3 47 m Depth

A significant Year x Location Group interaction indicated that there were small-scale differences in

the biotic assemblage at the 47 m depth stratum (Table 3-8). These differences did not suggest an

impact of dredging for the CDP as the variability among the control location groups over time was

similar to that among location groups within the dredged area (Figure 3-25, Appendix D).

Multivariate pair-wise analyses for the Year x Group Location term suggested that there were no

significant differences in the biotic assemblage between 2015, 2009 and 2011 at all location groups,

and that the dredged locations in 2015 were all significantly different, while LON NS and REF AC

had a similar assemblage (Figure 3-25). The nMDS plots partially captured these differences but it

was not possible to discern any other multivariate pattern; only some partial grouping of 2006

centroids was discernible, with the 2015 centroids closer to 2006 when compared to the 2011

centroids (Figure 3-25).

Multivariate dispersion was similar at dredged and control location groups during each year (Table

3-9, Appendix D). Comparisons between years within each treatment indicated that dispersion in

2015 at both control and dredged location groups was smaller compared to all previous years and

that dispersion in 2006 was greater than some of the following years (Table 3-9, Appendix D).


encrusting ruffled grey sponge, Halicornis elegans, Halopteris glutinosa, Hyphae sponge and

Nemertesia procumbens (Table 3-10, Appendix K). Analysis of the cover of the five taxa of

interest did not suggest the occurrence of an impact due to the CDP dredging at any location group

(Table 3-10, Figure 3-26; Appendix D).

Similarly to what was found at 37 m, encrusting ruffled grey sponge was more abundant before than

after the CDP dredging, consistently at all location groups (Figure 3-26; Appendix D). As

indicated by the significant Year x Location Group interaction, the rest of the significant results of

the univariate analyses were related to differences at the small spatial scale and natural spatial

and/or temporal variability (Table 3-10). Encrusting ruffled grey sponges, H. elegans and H.

glutinosa were the taxa that shown this small-scale variability. No pattern indicative of an impact

of the CDP dredging was evident from the pair-wise comparisons (Figure 3-26; Appendix D).




Year2006200920112015

2D Stress: 0.25

Year2006200920112015

LON NSREF AC

PL ABC

PL DEFRB WE

LON NS

REF AC

PL ABC

PL DEF

RB WELON NS

REF AC

PL ABC

PL DEFRB WE

LON NS

PL ABC

PL DEF

RB WE

REF AC

2D Stress: 0.21




3.3.3.4 57 m Depth

A significant Year x Location Group interaction indicated that there were small-scale differences in

the biotic assemblage at the 57 m depth stratum (Table 3-8). These differences did not suggest any

impact of dredging for the CDP as the variability among the control location groups over time was

similar to that among location groups within the dredged area (Figure 3-27, Appendix 3A).

Multivariate pair-wise analyses for the Year x Group Location term suggested that there were no

significant differences in the biotic assemblage between 2015, 2009 and 2011 at all location groups,

and that control and dredged location groups in 2015 were all significantly different, with the

exception of PL ABC and PL DEF which had a similar assemblage (Figure 3-27). The nMDS plots

partially captured these differences but no other multivariate patterns were evident (Figure 3-27).

Multivariate dispersion was similar at dredged and control location groups during each year with

the exception of 2009 when the dredged locations groups had a greater dispersion than control

locations groups (Table 3-9, Appendix D). Comparisons between years within each treatment

indicated that dispersion in 2015 at both Control and Dredged location groups was smaller

Mea

n c

ove

r (%

)

Period Location Group

Location Group

443

1045

0

15

30

45

Before After


93 126 134

51

39

38

44

4751

26

40

60 10688

25

120 120 120

8080

0

10

20

30

40

50

60


Encrusting ruffled grey sponge2006200920112015

93126

13451

39

38

44

47

51

26

40

60

106

88 25

120

120

120 80

80

0

2

4

6

8


Halicornopsis elegans

93

126134

51

39

38

44

47

51

26

4060

106 88

25

120 120 120 80 80

0

5

10

15

20

25


Halopteris glutinosa



compared to all previous years and that dispersion in 2006 was greater than in 2009 at control

location groups (Table 3-9, Appendix D).


encrusting ruffled cream and grey sponge, Halopteris glutinosa, Nemertesia procumbens and

textured yellow sponge (Table 3-10, Appendix K). Analysis of the cover of the five taxa of

interest did not suggest the occurrence of an impact due to the CDP dredging at any location group

(Table 3-10, Figure 3-28; Appendix D).

Similarly to what was found at 37 m and 47 m, encrusting ruffled grey sponge was more abundant

before than after the CDP dredging, consistently at all location groups (Figure 3-28; Appendix D).

This taxon had also a significant variability among location groups, with REF AC having greater

abundance of this taxa compared to PL ABC and PL DEF (Figure 3-28; Appendix D). Nemertesia

procumbens was more abundant in 2009 compared to 2011 and 2015, and there were also

differences between periods within each location group and vice versa (Figure 3-28, Figure 3-14;

Appendix D).

Pair-wise comparisons indicated that at PL ABC and RB WE, N. procumberns was more abundant

before than after the CDP (Appendix D), however, the cover of this species after the CDP at

control and dredged treatments was similar (Figure 3-28). In 2011, texture yellow sponge cover

was greater at Impact locations compared to 2015 when it was not found at either the control or

impact location groups (Figure 3-28; Appendix D).

As indicated by the significant Year x Location Group interaction, encrusting ruffled cream sponge

and H. glutinosa had a significant smaller-scale spatial and temporal variability but no patterns

indicative of an impact of the CDP dredging were evident from the pair-wise comparisons (Figure

3-28; Appendix D).


A summary of the analysis of the biota is as follows:

- There was no evidence of an impact of dredging for the CDP on the dredged locations at any of the depth strata;

- There were some significant differences between periods or treatments which indicated that there were some large-scale patterns that were not related to impact of the CDP dredging but were the result of natural variability;

- Small-scale differences were found for some of the taxa indicating that there was a high variability among surveys and location groups; and

- There was only one area (PL ABC) where a lower cover of Nemertesia procumbens was observed at the 27 m strata in 2015 compared with 2006, 2009 and 2011.



Figure 3-27 nMDS ordination for the biotic assemblage at Control and Dredged locations during each

sampling year at 57 m using frame data (top) and Year x Location Group centroids (bottom). Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC

Year2006200920112015

2D Stress: 0.24

Year2006200920112015

LON NS

REF AC

PL ABC

PL DEF

RB WE

LON NS

REF AC

PL ABC

PL DEF

RB WE

LON NS

REF AC

PL ABCPL DEF

RB WE

LON NS

PL DEF

PL ABC

RB WE

REF AC

2D Stress: 0.19




12047

99

160157

81

115

348

0

1

2

3

2006 2009 2011 2015

Texture yellow spongeControlImpactM

ean

co

ver

(%)

Location Group

Period

Location Group

277

850

0

15

30

45

Before After


277

128

214

508

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

2006 2009 2011 2015


191229

281

277

149

0

10

20

30

40



34

72

51

9723

157

157

230180 126

0

3

6

9

12


Nemertesia procumbensBefore

After

34

72 51 9723

18

1647 28

19

19

33

63

72

27

120

108 120

80

80

0

3

6

9

12


Encrusting ruffled cream sponge

34

72

51

97

23

18

16

47

28

1919

33

63

72

27

120108

12080 80

0

10

20

30

40

50

60



Treatment

Location Group

Year



3.3.4 Total Number of Taxa

A significant Year x Location Group interaction indicated that there were differences in the number

of taxa in all depth strata between dredged and control location groups in some years, and/or that

the number of taxa was different between years for one or more of the location groups in one or

both of the treatments (Table 3-11, Appendix H). These differences were due to consistently more

taxa occurring in 2015 than in 2009 and 2011 at both control and dredged location groups, as

indicated by pair-wise comparisons (Figure 3-29; Appendix H).

There were also differences in the number of taxa between 2009 and 2011 but no temporal pattern

was evident (Figure 3-29; Appendix H). The average number of taxa per frame in 2015 was 71%,

113%, 106% and 105% greater than in the past years (i.e. average of 2006, 2009 and 2011 at all

location groups combined) at 27 m, 37 m, 47 m and 57 m strata respectively. In addition, pair-wise

comparisons indicated that all location groups had a similar number of taxa in 2015 (Figure 3-29;

Appendix D).

Consequently, these differences are not suggestive of any impact of dredging for the CDP as

changes among the control location groups over time were similar to variability within dredged

location groups.


A summary of the analysis of the number of taxa is as follows:

- There was no evidence of an impact of dredging for the CDP on the dredged locations at any

of the depth strata; and

- There was a general increase in the mean number of taxa per frame at all depth strata and at

both control and dredged locations in 2015 compared to all previous surveys. This is

attributable to a methodological artefact of the 2015 survey and not an impact of dredging for

the CDP.

3.3.5 Total Percent Cover of Biota

There was less cover of biota at the 37 m depth stratum after the CDP dredging than before, and this

was consistent across both treatments (Table 3-11, Figure 3-31, Appendix I). This difference does

not suggest an impact from CDP dredging because it occurred for both dredge and control

treatments.

The significant Year x Location group interaction indicated that there were also small-scale

temporal and spatial differences at all depth strata. Again, these differences do not suggest an

impact from CDP dredging because the variability among the control location groups over time was



similar to that among dredged location groups (Figure 3-30; Appendix I). Moreover, there was no

discernible temporal or spatial pattern in the cover of biota among years after 2006 within each

location group (Figure 3-30; Appendix I).

The cover of biota before dredging for the CDP (i.e. 2006) was similar to the cover measured after

CDP dredging at all location groups (Figure 3-30). Specifically, the average change in cover

between surveys done after (2009, 2011 and 2015) and before CDP dredging (2006) at all location

groups combined was 7%, -5%, -12% and 0% at 27 m, 37 m, 47 m and 57 m depth strata

respectively (note that a positive change indicates an increase in cover after the CDP dredging and a

negative change indicates a decrease).


A summary of the analysis of the number of taxa and percent cover of biota is as follows:

- There was no evidence of an impact of dredging for the CDP on the dredged locations at any of the depth strata; and

- There was a significant small-scale variability in the cover of biota at all depth strata which was not indicative of a possible impact of the CDP because the cover of biota before the CDP dredging (i.e. 2006) was similar to the cover measured after CDP dredging at all location groups.

Table 3-11 Results of univariate statistical analyses using PERMANOVA for the number of taxa per frame and total cover of biota at each depth. Results show probability values (p-values) for each of the variables (rows) against terms included in the analysis (columns). Significant (α = 0.05) p-values in bold. Neg. = Negative pseudo-F ratio; RED = redundant term due to significant interaction


(Period)

Location Group

(Treatment)

Period x Treatment


(Treatment)



(Treatment)

Total Number of Taxa per Frame

27 m 0.174 0.582 RED RED 0.258 0.124 0.240 0.005

37 m 0.500 0.757 RED RED 0.689 0.918 0.269 0.000

47 m 0.580 0.129 RED RED 0.341 0.470 0.933 0.001

57 m 0.611 0.387 RED RED 0.404 0.759 0.534 0.000

Total % Cover of Biota

27 m 0.868 0.818 RED RED 0.338 0.239 0.988 0.000

37 m 0.027 0.917 RED RED 0.794 0.834 0.161 0.000

47 m 0.058 0.182 RED RED 0.087 0.893 0.725 0.000

57 m 0.461 0.906 RED RED 0.662 0.494 0.197 0.000



Figure 3-29 Average (±SE) mean number of taxa at the four depths considered for the significant terms found with PERMANOVA. Number above each bar indicates the number of samples available. Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC

7

11

69

73 12

5462 69

27 18

68

86

114

50

21120 120120

8080

0

2

4

6

8

10


27 m2006 2009 2011 2015

91172 214

42

63

34 41

56

36 26

12 107 9169

24

120120

120

80

80

0

2

4

6

8

10


37 m

93126 134

51

39

38

4447

5126

40

60106

8825

120120 120

80

80

0

2

4

6

8

10


47 m

34 7251

97

2318

16 4728

1919 33

6372

27

120

108

120

80

80

0

2

4

6

8

10


57 m

Location Group

Nu

mb

er

of

tax

a p

er

fra

me

7

11

69

73

12

5462

69

27

18

68

86

11450

21120 120

120

80

80

0

15

30

45

60

75

90


27 m2006 2009 2011 2015

91

172

214 42

63

34

41

56

36

26

12

10791

69

24

120120

120

80

80

0

15

30

45

60

75

90


37 m

93126 134 51

39

38

44

47 51

26

40

60

106 88

25

120

120120 80 80

0

15

30

45

60

75

90


47 m

3472

51

97

23

18 16 47

28

19

19

33 63

72

27

120108

120

8080

0

15

30

45

60

75

90


57 m

Location Group

Co

ver

(%)



Figure 3-30 Average (±SE) mean cover at the four depths considered for the significant terms found with PERMANOVA. Number above each bar indicate the number of samples available. Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC.

Figure 3-31 Average (±SE) mean cover at 37 m depth for the significant Period term found with PERMANOVA. Number above each bar indicates the number of samples available

5821016

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Before After

37 m

Period

Co

ver

(%)



3.3.6 Portsea Hole

The deep reef habitat at Portsea Hole consisted of rocky ledges and outcrops on the western side of

a sandy bowl. The reef patches were interspersed with sand and a small area of rocky outcrops was

present at the 27 m depth stratum. There was a narrow strip of vertical reef and ledges at the 22 m

depth stratum, approximately 2 m high and 20 m long, and numerically dominated by sessile

invertebrates. These included encrusting and massive ruffled sponges, arborescent sponges

(including Iototrochotids), a reticulated grey sponge (Holopsamma laminaefavosa) and a colonial

ascidian (Ritterella pedunculata).

Portsea Hole was surveyed twice in 2005 and once each in 2009, June 2011 and 2015 (Table 2-1).

A comparatively rapid change in the assemblages occurred between the two surveys in 2005,

largely because of an increase in massive ruffled sponges and red seaweeds. There were also

differences between 2005 and 2009 attributable to a decrease in arborescent and massive ruffled

sponges and to an increase in flabellate sponges. In 2015, the assemblage was more similar to 2009

compared to other years (Figure 3-32). Further, there was an increase in encrusting ruffled sponges

and alga of the group Rhodopyta in 2015 compared with all the previous surveys, and a decrease in

the cover of Halopsamma laminaefavosa in 2015 compared with the surveys done in May 2005 and

December 2005b

The deep reef habitat at Portsea Hole in 2015 was characterised by a similar multivariate dispersion

compared with previous years, except for 2009 when dispersion was at its maximum (Figure 3-32).

A greater number of taxa and cover of biota was recorded in 2015 compared to all previous years.

The average number of taxa in 2015 was 5.9 ± 1.6 which was greater than the combined average of

2.4 ± 0.1 for all previous years. These increases are most likely due to a methodological artefact of

the 2015 survey and are similar to increases in the number of taxa observed in all other study

locations. The average percent cover of biota in 2015 (44.6 ± 2.4) was greater than in in all

previous years combined (i.e. 21.3 ± 1.2). This is in contrast with what was found for all other

locations where the cover of biota observed in 2015 was similar to all previous years. Thus, it is

possible that the increase in the cover of biota at Portsea Hole in 2015 was not only the result of a

methodological artefact, but also the result of natural variability in the cover of biota.



Figure 3-32 nMDS ordination for the biotic assemblage at Portsea Hole using frame data (top) and Year centroids (bottom). 2005a (May 2005), 2005b (December 2005), other years as per Table 2-1

Year2005a2005b200920112015

2D Stress: 0.24

Year2005a2005b200920112015

2D Stress: 0



4 Discussion

The 2015 survey was the final of three post-construction surveys designed to investigate the

potential impacts of dredging for the CDP on deep reef biota living on the canyon walls at The

Entrance, as required under the conditions of approval for the CDP. The monitoring program

considered potential impacts from mobilised dredged material (e.g. fractured rock and rubble) from

the Rip Bank and Nepean Bank (the Plateau) that may have tumbled down the canyon walls and

smothered or damaged biota.

The results of the program have indicated that measurements of the occurrence of physical

disturbance (assumed to be caused by rock fall) and the taxon richness, cover and composition of

biota, as measured at potential impact and control locations, were suitable indicators for

determining the extent and magnitude of potential dredge-related impacts. In addition, where

disturbance to canyon wall habitat or impacts to assemblages were identified as a potential a

consequence of the CDP, the period of post-construction monitoring (6 years after the completion

of dredging for the CDP) has been adequate for making an informed assessment of ongoing

recovery.

The 2006 baseline survey was important to the assessment of impacts to assemblages in areas

potentially affected by dredging for the CDP. The 2006 baseline survey indicated natural rockfall

occurrences at The Entrance. As much as 18% of frames in the 2006 baseline showed some level of

disturbance consistent with rock fall, in some depth strata in the controls or the Plateau area of

Nepean Bank. These areas were located too far away from the Trial Dredge area to have been

affected by material from that program. Notably, some forms of disturbance were observed in the

control locations, but no exposed bare rock was found in any of the surveys at the controls.

Responses of marine biota to physical disturbance are highly variable and differ among habitat

types. Some assemblages are adapted to conditions where physical disturbance is common. Some

sessile plants and animals (including those attached to hard substrata) are known to display a variety

of morphological adaptations to withstand physical disturbance (Teixido et al. 2004). In the case of

the deep reef biota on the canyon walls, the resilience to physical disturbance of the benthic

assemblage had not been documented before, and only a small number of studies have documented

adaptation mechanisms of benthic assemblages to naturally occurring physical disturbance (i.e. ice

scouring in the Antarctic, Teixido et al. 2004).

The levels of disturbance (as measured as the presence of impact Categories 1 to 3), of up to 100%

of frames early on in post-construction surveys in many locations at Rip Bank and The Plateau,



clearly indicate disturbance (from dredge-related material) in these areas. Most of the disturbance

was measured in the first two post-construction surveys (2009 and 2011). It also varied among

locations, and was more common on different areas of the Rip Bank and The Plateau in 2006 and

2009. This is not surprising given that local differences in topography on the plateau would

presumably determine how quickly dredged material was moved via hydrodynamic processes

towards the edge of each plateau. Although higher than natural levels of disturbance were still

being measured in 2015 at potential impact locations, these were reported at only a few locations

(i.e. Rip Bank East and Plateau B on the Nepean Bank and parts of Plateaus D and E) and only at

some of the four depth strata. This indicates that although ongoing rock fall was still occurring in

2015, it was occurring at a reduced magnitude.

Sponges were the most common taxa in the deep reef assemblages at The Entrance. Generally,

sponges can recover rapidly from declines (Bell et al. 2006a and 2006b), and their capacity to

recover increases with body size and disturbance is known to promote diversity among sponges

(Bell 2007). Thus, it was expected that many benthic species living on the canyon walls,

particularly colonial organisms, would have been able to recover from damage due to rock fall.

While it is inevitable that loss of some individuals and colonies occurred immediately after

dredging for the CDP, it was predicted that disturbed areas would recolonise over time without an

overall loss of biodiversity and recovery would be rapid.

Ecological recovery can be classified in at least two ways: 1) when the assemblage of biota in a

disturbed area becomes indistinguishable from that in undisturbed areas; or 2) when ecosystem

functions in a disturbed area re-establish. In the latter case, recolonisation by an identical biotic

assemblage to the one present prior to the disturbance event is not necessary. As it is very difficult

to directly measure differences in ecological functioning of an assemblage, only the recovery of

assemblage composition has been assessed in this study.

Rock fall exposes new rock surfaces and creates rubble with a large surface area which attracts

microbes, plants and eventually animals. In areas that experience continued disturbance (i.e. from

ongoing rock fall), the process of recovery is periodically reset and full recovery will not occur

unless the disturbances cease. Such disturbances have the potential to reduce recoverability over

time as recruitment sources and dynamics may be altered. Given the level of rock fall as a

consequence of dredging for the CDP appeared greatly reduced by 2015, it is apparent that there

would be strong opportunity for assemblages to recover.

The post-construction surveys provide many indications that ongoing recovery of deep reef habitat

and its assemblages has occurred since dredging ended for the CDP. An important piece of



evidence is that no statistically significant differences in the proportion of frames classified as

Category 4 (‘No visible disturbance’) were detected between the before and after dredging periods

for control or dredged location groups. Additionally, the large proportion of the disturbance in 2009

at potentially affected areas on the Rip Bank was rated as Category 3 (‘Late recolonisation,

including erect forms, and/or presence of damaged biota’). This indicates assemblages that had

been disturbed by rock fall caused by the CDP had already recovered to an extent, in the few short

months following the end of dredging. Further, the reduced occurrence of this Category in 2011

and 2015 indicates that most of the assemblages observed at a late stage recovery in 2009 had likely

fully recovered by 2011 and 2015.

Analyses focusing on the composition of the assemblages (in terms of the taxa and substratum)

provide the most direct evidence of no lasting impacts of dredging for the CDP on deep reef biota.

While there was much small-scale natural variation among assemblages and physical components

of the habitat, there were few statistically significant results that indicated a potential effect of the

CDP. Any small-scale impacts that would have occurred as a mosaic of small-scale patches of

disturbance and associated rock fall pathways interspersed with and surrounded by larger areas of

undisturbed habitat were not dissimilar to disturbance as measured at the controls treatment. Most

of the small-scale changes to the composition of the assemblage, key taxa or physical components

of the habitat were as equally likely to have occurred among controls as potential impact locations

and any broad temporal changes were observed across both treatments.

Along with the composition of assemblages, it is important to understand whether the diversity

(measured as the number of taxa) and percentage cover of biota had changed compared with the

baseline. The number of taxa per frame was generally less in the baseline and considerably greater

in 2015. A methodological artefact of the 2015 survey was that the number of taxa was probably

greater due to an upgrade in 2015 of video equipment, with higher resolution. However, given the

total list of taxa counted has been similar for all surveys and this increase in the number of taxa per

frame was observed in the control and impact treatments, it was unlikely indicative of CDP effects.

It is also noteworthy that the percentage cover of biota in frames was consistent throughout the

study.

While the focus of this study was on the local effects of rock fall in close proximity to dredging

areas, canyon-wide effects compromising the integrity of locations used as controls are theoretically

possible via indirect effects. One mechanism through which this may occur is that organisms

damaged by rock fall may be more susceptible to diseases (Wulff 2006a and 2006b, Webster 2007)

which could, in theory, spread from disturbed to undisturbed areas used as controls. In 2015, there



was no evidence of either a circumscribed or widespread disease outbreak in damaged or

undamaged benthic biota in the areas of rock fall resulting from dredging for the CDP or control

areas. This supports the assumption that the control areas used to test the hypothesis of no impact

of CDP dredging within dredged areas would not be affected by the CDP dredging and, therefore,

were suitable control locations.

In conclusion, although disturbance to habitat was apparent in the early stages of post-construction

monitoring, it does not appear to have affected the assemblages of deep reef biota on the canyon

walls to the degree that their integrity as an area of regional significance has been compromised.

Furthermore, given that disturbance from ongoing rockfall has reduced substantially since 2009, it

is likely that any small, ongoing impacts of rock falls will continue to diminish.



5 Summary of Key Findings

Key Findings

1. Presence of sponge assemblages

- Sponge dominated assemblages were present at all depth strata at Rip Bank and The Plateau.

The photographic database compiled for the study provides a robust, historical record of these

assemblages;

- Biological diversity (total list of taxa) of The Entrance at the potential impact locations has

remained relatively similar over the period of the study before and after dredging for the CDP.

2. Before-After-Control-Impact Study

- Before-after changes in biota were measured at dredged and control locations within The

Entrance, and regional control site Portsea Hole;

- Data collected at The Entrance and Portsea Hole were not compared statistically due to the

differences in habitat characteristics, such as the restricted depth range present at Portsea Hole

and different survey times for the baseline surveys. Notwithstanding this, spatial and

temporal changes were evident at the regional control location Portsea Hole as well as at The

Entrance locations, indicating the occurrence of a similar natural and region wide variability

that cannot be attributable to the CDP.

3. Physical disturbance at The Entrance

- Overall, a large decrease in physical disturbance was observed in 2015 compared with 2011.

- Diver or ROV observations of cleared reef surfaces or the presence of rubble covering reef

surfaces were interpreted as physical disturbances. The recovery is shown by a reduced

frequency of frames showing impact categories within both Rip Bank and The Plateau;

- There was evidence of some further rock fall at Rip Bank and The Plateau since the previous

survey in 2011, but at a reduced rate;

- Prior to the 2015 survey, there was evidence of a small amount of rock fall occurring at the

control locations but no evidence of natural rock fall was recorded at the control locations in

2015;

- The pre-dredging baseline survey in 2006 shows the presence of physical disturbance prior to

the CDP. This is most evident within Rip Bank West and may have resulted from the Trial



Dredge Program, historical deepening activities, natural processes, or a combination of these

three processes;

- Statistical analysis of impact categories confirmed a recovery from 2009 to 2015 at Rip Bank

and Nepean Bank Plateau D, E and F location group;

- There is evidence of disturbance prior to dredging for the CDP at Rip Bank at 27 m. There is

also evidence of a decrease in physical disturbance at 27 m, 37 m and 47 m from 2009 to

2015, with minimal physical disturbance at 27 m in 2015;

- No statistically significant differences in the proportion of frames classified as ‘no visible

disturbance’ were detected between the before and after dredging periods for either the

control or dredged location groups.

4. Evidence of before-after changes in assemblage structure of biota

- Statistical analysis indicated some changes in assemblage structure from before to after the

CDP. In many cases these changes occurred at both impact (dredging) and control locations

but without any evident pattern, indicating variations are due to natural processes rather than

from the CDP.

5. Statistically significant changes in the cover of some taxa were detected at the

smaller spatial scale at all location groups

- The majority of taxa showed no changes in cover consistent over time and there were no

patterns that may support the hypothesis of a CDP impact at dredged locations;

- The patterns of change for individual taxa were highly variable with no clear temporal or

spatial patterns. For example, the sponge Nemertesia procumbens decreased in cover at all

locations from 2006 to 2011 and increased from 2011 to 2015. The bryozoan Orthoscuticella

ventricosa showed exactly the opposite trend. This may suggest that there are other regional

processes within The Entrance that are independent of the CDP;

- Changes in the cover of taxa among location groups occurred generally at the smallest spatial

scale and were unrelated to grouping of locations into dredged or control groups. The few

statistically significant changes occurring at larger-spatial scales (i.e. between impact and

control treatments or among location groups) are not attributable to the CDP because the

patterns were consistent across the baseline and post-construction periods.



6. Rock fall impacts at Rip Bank showed further recovery and were broadly within

expectations

- Rock fall disturbances were observed to further decrease between 2011 and 2015 which is


- Although rock fall originally observed in 2009 and 2011 at some locations was still observed

in 2015, a reduction in rock fall disturbance was apparent in the 2015 survey;

- Small patches of angular rubble pieces at the base of scree slopes especially at Rip Bank East

and Great Ship Channel indicates some continued physical disturbance in the canyon adjacent

to Rip Bank;

- Qualitative surveys in 2009 showed the reef habitat of Rip Bank West having the greatest

degree of disturbance post-CDP. Fresh rock fall material was observed by divers on scree

slopes in 2011, indicating some ongoing disturbance. In contrast, the 2015 survey observed

the most recent physical disturbance at Rip Bank East and to a lesser degree at Rip Bank

West. Some patches of relatively fresh rubble were observed at the base of scree slopes and

fresh scour marks at both sites were also observed. However, most rubble observed at Rip

Bank remained stabilised with recolonisation growth including encrusting sponges.

7. Further recovery at Nepean Bank (The Plateau) was evident in 2015

- At the 27 m and in the majority of the 37 m depth contour at Nepean Bank the seafloor

substratum mainly consisted of vertical canyon wall and step downs with varying degrees of

shelving ledges. For these habitats there was no visual evidence of physical impacts that could

be attributable to CDP. As with 2011 some large boulders (5-6m) were observed at the base of

vertical walls with advanced recolonisation including sponge and soft coral growth;

- For the 47 m and 57 m depth contours at Nepean Bank, there was less physical disturbance

observed in 2015 when compared to the 2011 survey. There were some areas of rubble

accumulation however, within these areas, there was little evidence suggesting new or recent

rock fall. Existing rubble patches were again observed in 2015 to be predominantly within

gullies or at the foot of reef slopes at Plateau D and Plateau E. To a lesser degree minor

patches of rubble accumulation were observed at Plateau A, B, C and F;

- The deeper reefs of Nepean Bank showed varying levels of biota disturbance attributed to

rock fall where impacts were observed. For the 2015 survey this was mostly evident with the

presence of advanced recolonising biota such as encrusting form sponges and small hydroid

species interspersed with occasional erect form sponges.



8. Overall conclusions

- Further recovery of the deep reefs since the 2011 survey was evident in 2015 which continues

the trajectory of observations from the 2009 survey, which is consistent with the SEES

predictions;

- Although some new rockfall was observed in 2015, overall there was less rockfall than in

2011 which continues the trajectory of observations from the 2009 survey. This is also


- As was the case in 2011 the assemblages and individual taxa varied in space and time at

impact (dredged) and control locations within The Entrance in the 2015 survey. Changes to

biota assemblages occurred predominantly at small spatial and/or temporal scales with

statistical analysis showing little or no evidence of these changes being directly attributable to

the CDP;

- The findings from the 2015 survey have been shown to be consistent with the SEES

predictions and the conclusions from the Minister for Planning’s Assessment of the Project in

2007 under the Environment Effects Act 1978, as the evidence shows:

> Controls placed on the CDP have minimised short-term impacts on deep reef communities.

Short term impacts with progressive habitat recovery have been observed

> Habitat recovery at impact locations was observed soon after dredging was completed and

is well advanced as evidenced in the post-CDP surveys

> Full habitat recovery would take place over a period in excess of 5 years.



6 References

Anderson, M.J., Gorley, R.N. and Clarke, K.R. (2008). PERMANOVA+ for PRIMER: Guide to Software and Statistical Methods. Primer-E, Plymouth.

Andrew, N.L. and Mapstone B.D. (1987). Sampling and the description of spatial pattern in marine ecology. Oceanography and Marine Biology 25, pp. 39 – 90.

Barton, J., Pope, A., & Howe, S. (2012). Marine protected areas of the Victorian embayments bioregion part 1: Port Phillip Bay.

Bell, J.J. (2007). The ecology of sponges in Lough Hyne Marine Nature Reserve (south-west Ireland): past, present and future perspectives. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the UK 87, 1655 – 1668.

Bell, J.J. and Barnes, D.K.A. (2001). Sponge morphological diversity: A qualitative predictor of species diversity? Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 11, pp. 109 – 121.

Bell, J.J., Burton, M., Bullimore, B., Newman, P.B. and Lock, K. (2006a). Morphological monitoring of poriferan assemblages: a potential solution for monitoring large scale Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) or Special Areas of Conservation (SAC). Marine Ecology Progress Series 311, pp. 79 – 91.

Bell, J.J., Burton, M., Bullimore, B., Newman, P.B. and Lock, K. (2006b). Morphological monitoring of subtidal sponge assemblages. Marine Ecology Progress Series 311, 79 – 91.

Bickford, D., Lohman, D. J., Sodhi, N. S., Ng, P. K., Meier, R., Winker, K., & Das, I. (2007). Cryptic species as a window on diversity and conservation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 22(3), 148-155.

Cardno Ecology Lab (2011). Two Year Post-Construction Survey of the Deep Reef Habitat at the Entrance to Port Phillip Bay. Report to Port of Melbourne Corporation. Cardno Ecology Lab Report EL1011047. Melbourne.

Cardno Lawson Treloar (2007). Hydrodynamics and Coastal Processes, Head Technical Report. Prepared for Maunsell Australia Pty Ltd. on behalf of the Port of Melbourne Corporation Channel Deepening Project. Technical Appendix 45 to the SEES for the Channel Deepening Project.

Chidgey, S.S., Edmunds, M. and Lincoln-Smith, M. (2007) Joint Experts’ Statement on Canyon Assemblages. Channel Deepening Project SEES Panel Hearing, Melbourne.

Chidgey, S.S. and Crockett, P. (2009). exHMS Canberra Dive Site – Marine Environmental Considerations. Report to Department of Sustainability and Environment, Victoria.

Clarke, K.R. and Gorley, R.N. (2006). PRIMER v6 User Manual. PRIMER-E Ltd., Plymouth, UK.

Currie, D. R., McClatchie, S., Middleton, J. F., & Nayar, S. (2012). Biophysical factors affecting the distribution of demersal fish around the head of a submarine canyon off the Bonney Coast, South Australia. PloS one, 7(1), e30138.

Edmunds, M. (2008). Port Phillip Bay Channel Deepening Project. Trial Dredging Program: Rip Bank Monitoring, January 2008. Report to Boskalis Australia and Port of Melbourne Corporation. Australian Marine Ecology Report 397, Melbourne.

Edmunds, M., Williams, J. and Crozier, J. (2006a). Port Phillip Bay Channel Deepening Project. Deep Reef Baseline Surveys. Report to Port of Melbourne Corporation. Australian Marine Ecology Report 330, Melbourne.



Edmunds, M., Bryant, C., Crozier, J., Gilmour, P., Pickett, P., Stewart, K. and Williams, J. (2006b). Port Phillip Bay Channel Deepening Project. Trial Dredging Program: Deep Reef Impact Assessment. Report to Port of Melbourne Corporation. Australian Marine Ecology Report 334, Melbourne.

Edmunds, M. and Judd, A. (2007a). Port Phillip Bay Channel Deepening Project. Supplementary Environment Effects Statement – Revised Rock Fall Impact Assessment. Report to Port of Melbourne Corporation and Maunsell for the Channel Deepening Project Panel Inquiry Hearing. Australian Marine Ecology Report 389, Melbourne.

Edmunds, M., Gilmour, P., Power, B., Shimeta, J., Pickett, P., Judd, A., Baker, K., Sams, M., Wassnig, M., Williams, J., Crozier, J., Stewart, K. and Monk, J. (2007b) Port Phillip Bay Channel Deepening Project. Supplementary Environment Effects Statement – Marine Ecology Specialist Studies. Volume 8: Deep Reef Biota. Channel Deepening Project Supplementary Environment Effects Statement, Technical Appendix 47, Port of Melbourne Corporation, Melbourne. 235 pp.

Edmunds, M., Shimeta, J., Judd, A., Baker, K. and Gilmour, P. (2007c). Port Phillip Bay Channel Deepening Project Supplementary Environment Effects Statement – Rock Fall Impact Assessment. Channel Deepening Project Supplementary Environment Effects Statement, Technical Appendix 54, Port of Melbourne Corporation, Melbourne, 200 pp.

Edmunds, M., Judd, A., Sheedy, E. and Ong, J. (2008). Port Phillip Bay Channel Deepening Project. Trial Dredging Program: Deep Reef Monitoring, January 2008. Report to Boskalis Australia and Port of Melbourne Corporation. Australian Marine Ecology Report 396, Melbourne.

Edmunds, M., Stewart, K., Pritchard, K., Cutajar, J., Zavalas, R., Sheedy, B., Ong, J., Kerrigan, J. and Lewis,Z. (2009). Port Phillip Bay Channel Deepening Project. Deep Reef Impact and Recovery Assessment. Report to Port of Melbourne Corporation. Australian Marine Ecology Report 410. Melbourne.

Elias, J., Edmunds, M. and Hart, S. (2004). Port Phillip Bay Channel Deepening Environment Effects Statement – Marine Ecology Specialist Studies. Volume 7: Deep Reef Habitat Study. Channel Deepening EES Volume 3 A1. Port of Melbourne Corporation. Melbourne, 48 pp.

Glasby, T. M. (1997). Analysing data from post-impact studies using asymmetrical analysis of variance: a case study of epibiota on marinas. Australian Journal of Ecology 22, 448 – 459.

Legendre, P. and Legendre L. (1998). Numerical Ecology. Second English Edition. Elsevier Amsterdam.

Marliave, J.B., Conway, K.W., Gibbs, D.M., Lamb A. and Gibbs, C. (2009). Biodiversity and rockfish recruitment in sponge gardens and bioherns of southern British Columbia, Canada. Marine Biology 156, pp. 2247 – 2254.

PoMC and Boskalis (2008). Channel Deepening Project. RC 127; Dredging and Services Protection. Method Statement EMP. Dredging Works South-Entrance. Alliance Document No. CDP_All_MS_409. Port of Melbourne Corporation and Boskalis Australia.

Ponder, W., Hutchings, P. and Chapman, R. (2002). Overview of the Conservation of Australian Marine Invertebrates. Report to Environment Australia. Australian Museum, Sydney.

Raisbeck, D. (2007). Port of Melbourne Corporations Channel Deepening Project. The Entrance – Scour Assessment Report. Report to Port of Melbourne Corporation. Sinclair Knight Merz, Melbourne.

Rattray, A., Ierodiaconou, D., Monk, J., Laurenson, L. J. B., & Kennedy, P. (2014). Quantification of spatial and thematic uncertainty in the application of underwater video for benthic habitat mapping. Marine Geodesy, 37(3), 315-336.



Roberts, D.E., Cummins, S.P., Davis, A.R. and Chapman, M.G. (2006). Structure and dynamics of sponge-dominated assemblages on exposed and sheltered temperate reefs. Marine Ecology Progress Series 321, 19 – 30.

Schlacher, T.A. Williams, A., Althaus, F. and Schlacher-Hoenlinger, M.A. (2010). High-resolution seabed imagery as a tool for biodiversity conservation planning on continental margins. Marine Ecology 31, pp 200 – 221.

Teixido, N., Garrahou, J. and Arntyx, W. E. (2004). Recovery in Antarctic benthos after iceberg disturbance: trends in benthic composition, abundance and growing forms. Marine Ecology Progress Series 278, 1 – 16.

Underwood, A.J. (1994). On beyond BACI - sampling designs that might reliably detect environmental disturbances. Ecological Applications 4: pp. 3 – 15.

Webster, N.S. (2007). Sponge disease: a global threat? Environmental Microbiology 9(6), 1363 – 1375.

Wulff, J.L. (2006a). A simple model of growth form-dependent recovery from disease in coral reef sponges and implications for monitoring. Coral Reefs 25, 419 – 426.

Wulff, J.L. (2006b). Resistance vs recovery: morphological strategies of coral reef sponges. Functional Ecology 20, 699 – 708.

Six Year Post-Construction Survey of Deep reef Habitat at the Entrance to Port Phillip Bay

Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno A-1

Six Year Deep Reef Habitat Survey

APPENDIX A FURTHER DETAILS OF STATISTISTICAL ANALYSES



Video and Frame Analysis A.1

A.1.1 Video Processing and Frame Capture

For each video and transect, as many still frames were captured as possible, in accordance with the following criteria:

> The substratum was mostly in one plane and filled most of the frame;

> The frame size was correct – the ROV or Dive camera laser spots at the correct distance;

> The camera lamp illuminated the frame sufficiently to the edges;

> The field of view did not overlap with a previously captured frame; and

> The frame was of adequate quality to identify the biota present, including lighting quality, colour, focus and movement blur caused by the moving video or swell surge moving the biota.

The sampling strategy was opportunistic (i.e. essentially haphazard) rather than statistically random or following regular intervals. The frames consequently varied in terms of separation distance, type of substratum and biota, and orientation of substratum. Some types of microhabitats were unavoidably under-represented in the frames, specifically those where the ROV could not be manoeuvred safely, such as underneath overhangs and in crevices. The frames were then used to quantify the percentage cover and spatial distribution of sessile plants and animals, as well as other substratum features.

A.1.2 Points-Cover Estimation

The percent cover of each identifiable component was determined using a points-cover method, following Barrett et al. (2002). The points-assessment and data recording were facilitated by the software BioPoints (Australian Marine Ecology proprietary software). This software is similar to Coral PointCount, used for the Florida Keys Coral Reef Monitoring Project (Eaken et al. 2002) and AVTAS, used for Great Barrier Reef Long-Term Monitoring Program (Page et al. 2001).

A video frame is displayed on the screen with 50 randomly positioned dots on the image. The species or morphotype under each of the dots was identified and entered with the assistance of the BioPoints software. The points-data for each frame included the pixel coordinates of every point and its identification. Once all points were classified, BioPoints compiled and formatted the data, producing abundance data tables (percent cover by frame, transect and site) for statistical analysis and reporting. Once data were entered, the points-classifications were checked by an experienced observer. The point determinations were saved for both the entry and checking Periods. The selection of pre-defined categories of organisms, including species and morphotypes (Appendix L), also assisted in reducing observer error in the points-classification.

A.1.3 Taxon/Morphotype Classification

A standardised scheme of identifying organisms was used with BioPoints. Organisms were identified to the lowest taxon possible however, there were many species that cannot be identified visually from a video frame and many others that are undescribed (particularly sponges). A hierarchical classification scheme was applied where an organism can be identified according to both taxonomic and morphological features. Identifications were cross-referenced with the in-house Australian Marine Ecology database, photographic records and identification guides, which includes descriptions and photographs of each ‘taxon’.

Generally, sponges cannot be identified visually beyond morphotype, in these cases a scheme established by Bell and Barnes (2001) was used, which is based on the growth form, texture and colour of the colony (Figure 4). Furthermore, many Victorian sponge species have not been formally described. Sponge morphotypes were assumed to be of relevance to ecological functioning, with different forms providing vastly different biogenic microhabitat structure for epibiota and mobile reef animals. Although external characters of sponges, such as growth form and colour can be affected by local conditions, morphology is considered a sufficient character for describing sponge taxa and biodiversity (Hooper and Weidenmayer 1994; Bell and Barnes 2001, Bell et al. 2006). The consulting services of a sponge taxonomist (Dr Lisa Goudie) were employed to provide tentative identifications of some of the sponges, at least to the taxonomic level of Order or Family, but definitive identification to species level requires physical samples for microscopic examination.

Standardised methods were applied to deal with unusual or ambiguous cases as per Edmunds et al. (2009):

> Where one organism had overgrown another, the uppermost organism was identified, e.g. a sponge on top of a sea squirt;



> When the point fell on a fish or a piece of drifting seaweed, the point was classified as “unknown” because the substratum was obscured from view;

> If the location was not illuminated sufficiently (e.g. occasionally at the margin of a frame), the point was classified as “unknown”;

> If the area was out of scale (e.g. substratum visible in the distance beyond a ledge), the point was classified as “unknown”; and

> If the area overlapped partially with a known previous frame, the point was classified as “unknown”.

Quality control and quality assurance procedures were implemented as part of the standard operation procedures (Edmunds et al. 2007c). Following entry of data for each frame in BioPoints, the points classification was checked by a different, experienced observer. Data entry occurred in a group environment, with observers conferring with each other over identifications to ensure they were standardised among observers and times.



Statistical Analysis A.2

A.2.1 The Entrance Canyon

One of the main assumptions of the statistical techniques used in this report is that samples have to be independent from each other, i.e. their label can be exchanged. If this assumption is violated, results of the analysis may lead to erroneous conclusions about the significance of factors used in the experimental design. Video photoquadrats were collected continuously along transects during the 2006, 2009 and 2011 surveys and therefore the risk of non-independence between consecutive frames is high, despite a frame culling procedure that rejected contiguous frames.

The potential errors due to the non-independence of data can be overcome by randomly subsetting the data before the analysis to examine differences between dredged and control locations and between before and after the CDP (Cardno Ecology Lab 2010). In this study, alternate video frames collected in 2006, 2009 and 2011 were used to achieve independence among replicate frames, therefore obtaining two datasets with roughly half of the samples collected in those three surveys. All frames collected in 2015 were included in the analysis because this problem was corrected by verifying that the selected frames were not overlapping or close to each other. While this approach reduced the number of frames in each analysis, it overcame the problem of statistical non-independence at the smallest spatial scale (frames within transects). This procedure had the added advantage of reducing to some extent (not totally) the possibility of spatial autocorrelation between video frames located in close proximity to each other. Furthermore, grouping the data into the Dredged and Control locations using the Treatment factor in the experimental deisgn ensured that a large number of replicates were available to provide robust analyses after sub-sampling. Thus, this analysis provides a powerful tool in assessing rockfall effects associated with the CDP and recovery. The tests described below are aimed at detecting broad differences between control and dredged locations.

Data on percentage cover and composition of benthos in dredged and control areas were analysed using permutational analyses of variance (PERMANOVA+ in PRIMER v6). This approach is superior to traditional ANOVA in that it does not assume that the data are normally distributed (rarely the case with environmental data) and it can be used with unbalanced designs (i.e. different numbers of sites/replicates in different factors of the design). In contrast to parametric approaches, PERMANOVA is also robust to differences in the variability of data (heterogeneity of variances or dispersion) which can be very pronounced in ecological systems (Anderson et al. 2008). This is important because large differences within a set of data can mask real differences between factors (such as comparison between control and dredge areas). Furthermore, PERMANOVA analyses provide exact tests (i.e. the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis is the same as the value for alpha which is conventionally 0.05) for each level in an experimental design and do not rely on interpolations from tabled values of F. The only assumptions are that samples are independent (hence the random selection mentioned above) and therefore are permutable under the null hypothesis (i.e. no difference between dredged and control locations). PERMANOVA was also used to test for differences between pair of levels of significant factors or interactions by means of post hoc permutational t-tests, therefore helping to identify which levels (e.g. group location, year) contributed to any significant difference identified in the main PERMANOVA tests.

Percentage data are traditionally converted to arcsin prior to analysis. However, recent published work shows that is both unnecessary and misleading (Warton and Hui 2011). Furthermore, since permutational analysis, as used here, does not assume a particular distribution of data, it was decided not to apply a transformation and all analyses are based on the raw data, except where data have been transformed to presence/absence data.

PERMANOVA may be used for both multivariate (based on, for example, Bray-Curtis similarity) and univariate analyses (using Euclidean distance), with the same experimental design. When datasets contain a large number of zeros and joint absences, the use of conventional Bray-Curtis similarity is inappropriate (it is undefined for two samples containing no species). Instead, it is more appropriate to use a zero-adjusted similarity index like Czekanowski that is better able to deal with sparse datasets with a high occurrence of zeros (Clarke et al. 2006). As a results, the Czekanowski similarity index was used for all the multivariate analyses in this report with exception of patch data analyses.

In addition, data were grouped into four depth categories (analysed separately), viz. 27 m, 37 m, 47 m and 57 m. Note that not all of the above location groups were represented in all depths. Far control locations (Wilsons Promontory and Portsea Hole) were not included in statistical analysis because depths at these locations were not comparable to the categories listed above.

The multivariate dispersion of the samples grouped by location group and year was analysed using PERMDISP which provides a statistical test of dispersion. A summary of the number of useable frames for each location, and for each location group used in the analyses of assemblages and habitat descriptors is presented in Table A-1 and Table A-2



respectively. The number of usable patches for each location and for each location group used in the supplementary analysis of assemblages using patches as replicates is presented in Table A-3 and Table A-4 and respectively.



Useable frames per location Table A-1

Location Baseline - 2006 After 1 - 2009 After 2 - 2011 After 3 - 2015 Grand Total

Depth (m) 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57

Dredged

Plateau A 0 48 33 7 35 36 26 0 44 8 19 3 40 40 40 40 419

Plateau B 6 44 35 33 45 0 5 14 39 0 25 0 40 40 40 40 406

Plateau C 7 90 120 30 29 32 44 22 53 15 35 34 40 40 40 40 671

Plateau D 14 80 98 112 47 22 46 0 63 60 60 22 40 40 40 40 784

Plateau E 0 102 117 29 34 17 41 24 43 68 26 45 40 40 40 40 706

Plateau F 7 161 39 2 44 44 0 8 67 87 33 0 40 40 40 28 640

Rip Bank West 138 273 88 44 33 62 55 22 73 106 119 47 40 40 40 40 1220

Rip Bank GSC 0 63 72 32 49 41 21 69 48 42 53 79 40 40 40 40 729

Rip Bank East A 0 93 108 26 56 9 17 2 106 33 42 0 40 40 40 40 652

Dredged Total 172 954 710 315 372 263 255 161 536 419 412 230 360 360 360 348 6227

Depth (m) 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57

Control

Lonsdale North 63 15 12 28 0 23 43 50 45 82 56 78 40 40 40 40 655

Lonsdale South 81 71 91 166 54 48 57 5 56 56 120 66 40 40 40 40 1031

Nepean Ref A 0 69 37 18 0 26 22 25 0 15 11 19 40 40 40 40 402

Rip Bank Ref C 25 56 42 28 36 25 30 14 41 35 38 34 40 40 40 40 564

Control Total 169 211 182 240 90 122 152 94 142 188 225 197 160 160 160 160 2652

Grand Total 341 1165 892 555 462 385 407 255 678 607 637 427 520 520 520 508 8879



Useable frames per location group Table A-2

Location Group Baseline - 2006 After 1 - 2009 After 2 - 2011 After 3 - 2015 Grand Total

Depth (m) 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57

Dredged

PL ABC 13 182 188 70 109 68 75 36 136 23 79 37 120 120 120 120 1496

PL DEF 21 343 254 143 125 83 87 32 173 215 119 67 120 120 120 108 2130

RB WE 138 429 268 102 138 112 93 93 227 181 214 126 120 120 120 120 2601

Dredged Total 172 954 710 315 372 263 255 161 536 419 412 230 360 360 360 348 6227

Depth (m) 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57

Control LON NS 144 86 103 194 54 71 100 55 101 138 176 144 80 80 80 80 1686

REF AC 25 125 79 46 36 51 52 39 41 50 49 53 80 80 80 80 966

Control Total 169 211 182 240 90 122 152 94 142 188 225 197 160 160 160 160 2652

Grand Total 341 1165 892 555 462 385 407 255 678 607 637 427 520 520 520 508 8879



Useable patches per location Table A-3

Location Baseline 2006 Post 1 2009 Post 2 2011 Post 3 2015 Grand Total

Dredged Depth (m) 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57

Plateau A 0 2 2 1 2 2 3 0 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 25

Plateau B 1 4 2 2 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 0 2 2 2 2 24

Plateau C 1 5 7 5 4 2 4 2 3 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 45

Plateau D 2 6 8 5 3 3 2 0 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 44

Plateau E 0 6 8 4 1 2 3 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 39

Plateau F 1 9 3 0 3 3 0 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 2 2 35

Rip Bank West 4 6 4 4 2 4 3 2 2 4 3 2 2 2 2 2 48

Rip Bank GSC 0 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 38

Rip Bank East 0 3 2 3 3 2 2 1 2 1 2 0 2 2 2 2 29

Dredged Total 9 44 39 27 22 20 21 12 19 15 17 10 18 18 18 18 327

Control Depth (m) 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57

Lonsdale Wall N 2 3 1 3 0 3 3 4 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 36

Lonsdale Wall S 4 5 4 5 3 2 4 1 3 1 3 2 2 2 2 2 45

Nepean Ref A 0 1 3 3 0 2 2 2 0 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 24

Rip Bank Ref C 2 2 3 2 4 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 29

Control Total 8 11 11 13 7 8 10 8 7 5 8 6 8 8 8 8 134

Grand Total 34 110 100 80 58 56 62 40 52 40 50 32 52 52 52 52 922



Useable patches per location group Table A-4

Group Baseline - 2006 After 1 - 2009 After 2 - 2011 After 3 - 2015 Grand Total

Dredged Depth (m) 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57

IMP 1 (Plateau A + B + C) 2 11 11 8 8 4 8 3 7 2 3 3 6 6 6 6 94

IMP 2 (Plateau D + E + F) 3 21 19 9 7 8 5 3 6 5 6 2 6 6 6 6 118

IMP 3 (RBW + RBE + RB GSC) 4 12 9 10 7 8 8 6 6 8 8 5 6 6 6 6 115

Total available frames 9 44 39 27 22 20 21 12 19 15 17 10 18 18 18 18 327

Control Depth (m) 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57 27 37 47 57

CON 1 (Lonsdale Wall N + S) 2 3 1 3 0 3 3 4 2 2 3 2 4 4 4 4 44

CON 2 (Ref A + Ref C) 4 6 7 8 3 4 6 3 3 2 4 3 4 4 4 4 69

Total available frames 6 9 8 11 3 7 9 7 5 4 7 5 8 8 8 8 113



Supplementary Multivariate Analyses of Biota assemblage A.3

A.3.1 Analysis of Patch Data

An alternative approach to the multivariate analyses used in this report is to calculate the mean abundance of each taxa per patch and use these as replicates instead of individual frames. This may improve the representativeness of the sampling units (i.e. by including more taxa than individual frames) and reduces noise in the data (patchiness), which may otherwise mask significant effects (Roberts et al. 2006). There are, however, potential disadvantages to this approach, including:

> It prevents an assessment of impacts at small spatial scales (i.e. within patches).

> It reduced the number of degrees of freedom in the analysis (by reducing replication) and hence potentially reduces statistical sensitivity.

> It may increase the risk of pseudoreplication where there are relatively few patches within a location.

These alternative analyses were done for each depth using the same design as in the report and the results (PERMANOVA and MDS) are presented below. Since the consolidation of the data resulted in fewer zeros, the analyses were based on Bray-Curtis dissimilarity with the addition of a dummy variable (Clarke and Gorley 2006) instead of Czekanowski index.

A.3.1.1 Results and Conclusions

No significant differences in the biotic assemblage were detected between Periods or Treatments at any of the four depths considered using patch data (Table A-5). There were, however, significant differences among Years within Periods indicating a significant temporal variability which was consistent between control and dredged treatments and across location groups (Table A-5). Pair-wise comparisons comparing years within the After period indicated that the biotic assemblage in 2015 was significantly different compared to 2009 and 2011, with 2009 being similar to 2011 (Appendix E). The nMDS plots did not clearly show this temporal pattern but revealed differences in the dispersion of data points between the 2006 and 2015 group and the 2009 and 2011 group (Figure A-1). These differences in dispersion are further supported by results of PERMDISP analysis (Table A-6). There were no other evident patterns distinguishable in the MDSs (Figure A-1).

The significant temporal variability found using patch data was consistent across all the location groups and treatments. These results are in contrast with the frame analysis that found inconsistent temporal variability that was dependent on the location group considered. Both analyses, however, did not support the hypothesis of an impact due to the CDP on the biotic assemblage. Moreover, similarities between the biotic assemblage in 2006 and 2015 and significant differences between 2015 and 2009 and 2011 may be the result of a recovery processed that has occurred in the past four years.



Results of multivariate statistical analyses for biota assemblage averaged by patch at Table A-5each depth stratum using PERMANOVA. Results show probability values (p-values) for each of the variables (rows) against terms included in the analysis (columns). Significant (at α = 0.05) p-values in bold


(Period)

Location Group

(Treatment)

Period x Treatment


(Treatment)



(Treatment)

27 m 0.060 0.366 0.003 0.099 0.443 0.484 0.085 0.196

37 m 0.292 0.611 0.001 0.237 0.589 0.579 0.195 0.537

47 m 0.419 0.290 0.002 0.398 0.139 0.774 0.853 0.112

57 m 0.460 0.754 0.003 0.122 0.388 0.294 0.464 0.612

Figure A-1 nMDS ordination for the biotic assemblage at control and dredged locations during each sampling year at the four depths sampled using patch data

2D Stress: 0.16

2D Stress: 0.18

Year2006200920112015

27 m 2D Stress: 0.1937 m

47 m2D Stress: 0.13

57 m



Results of PERMDISP analysis on patch data for the biota assemblage Table A-6

PERMDISP 27 m DEVIATIONS FROM CENTROID F: 22.815 df1: 3 df2: 82 P(perm): 0.001

PAIRWISE COMPARISONS Groups t P(perm) 2006 vs 2009 6.05 0.001 2006 vs2011 5.84 0.001 2006 vs 2015 0.21 0.870 2009 vs 2011 1.23 0.282 2009 vs 2015 5.35 0.001 2011 vs 2015 5.95 0.001

MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS Group Size Average SE 2006 19 25.68 2.47 2009 31 45.52 2.07 2011 26 42.19 1.62 2015 10 24.91 2.05

37 m DEVIATIONS FROM CENTROID F: 10.172 df1: 3 df2: 107 P(perm): 0.001



PERMDISP 47 m DEVIATIONS FROM CENTROID F: 10.744 df1: 3 df2: 115 P(perm): 0.001



57 m DEVIATIONS FROM CENTROID F: 3.5265 df1: 3 df2: 81 P(perm): 0.078

PAIRWISE COMPARISONS

Groups

t P(perm)

2006 vs 2009 0.46 0.716 2006 vs2011 0.03 0.983 2006 vs 2015 2.81 0.028 2009 vs 2011 0.48 0.678 2009 vs 2015 3.72 0.008 2011 vs 2015 3.68 0.001


A.3.2 Analysis of Presence/Absence Transformed Data

A.3.2.1 Results and Conclusions

No significant difference in the biotic assemblage was detected between periods or treatments at any of the depths surveyed (Table A-7). A significant Year x Location group interaction indicated that there were small scale differences at all depths (Table A-7). These differences, however, were not suggestive of an impact of CDP as there appeared to be as much variability among the control location groups over time as was detected for location groups within the dredged area (Appendix F). The nMDS plots showed a clear distinction among years at all depths, indicating that temporal variability was greater than spatial variability (Figure A-2, Figure A-3, Figure A-4, Figure A-5). Three clusters were distinguishable at 27 m depth stratum representing 2006, 2009 and 2011 combined and 2015 location group centroids with the 2015 cluster being further away from the 2006 cluster (Figure A-2). At 37 m, 47 m and 57 m depth centroids



representing all location groups in 2015 were clearly clustered and separated from the centroids representing all the previous years (Figure A-3, Figure A-4, Figure A-5).

The observed differences among years using presence/absence data may reflect the higher mean number of taxa per frame found in 2015. This transformation drastically reduces the weight of abundant species while increasing the weight of rare and very rare taxa in the calculation of the dissimilarity between samples (). These rare taxa with low cover may have been too small to be recognised and scored in the years previous to 2015 when lower definition photos were taken. Much greater temporal variability and a comparably smaller spatial grouping further support the hypothesis of no impact of CDP works.

Results of multivariate statistical analyses for biota assemblage at each depth stratum Table A-7using PERMANOVA on presence-absence transformed data. Results show probability values (p-values) for each of the variables (rows) against terms included in the analysis (columns). RED = redundant term due to significant interaction. Significant (at α = 0.05) p-values in bold


(Period)

Location Group

(Treatment)

Period x Treatment


(Treatment)



(Treatment)

27 m 0.218 0.725 RED RED 0.407 0.184 0.216 0.001

37 m 0.638 0.752 RED RED 0.502 0.763 0.267 0.000

47 m 0.614 0.610 RED RED 0.614 0.586 0.503 0.000

57 m 0.671 0.554 RED RED 0.351 0.524 0.271 0.000



Figure A-2 nMDS ordination for the biotic assemblage at Control and Dredged locations during each sampling year at 27 m using presence/absence transformed frame data (top) and Year x Location Group centroids (bottom). Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC

Year2006200920112015

LON NS

REF AC

PL ABC

PL DEF

RB WE

LON NS

REF AC

PL ABC

PL DEFRB WE

LON NS

REF AC

PL ABC

PL DEF

RB WE

PL DEFLON NS

PL ABC

RB WE

REF AC

2D Stress: 0.1

Year2006200920112015

2D Stress: 0.27




Year2006200920112015

LON NS

REF AC

PL ABC

PL DEFRB WE

LON NS

REF AC

PL ABCPL DEF

RB WE

LON NS

REF AC

PL ABC

PL DEFRB WE

LON NS

PL ABCPL DEF

RB WEREF AC

2D Stress: 0.11

Year2006200920112015

2D Stress: 0.24




Year2006200920112015

LON NS

REF AC

PL ABC

PL DEF

RB WE

LON NS

REF AC

PL ABC

PL DEF

RB WE

LON NS

REF AC

PL ABC

PL DEF

RB WE

LON NS

PL ABC

PL DEF

RB WE

REF AC

2D Stress: 0.08

Year2006200920112015

2D Stress: 0.25




A.3.3 Analysis of Biotic Assemblage in 2015

Significant differences in the biotic assemblage were detected among Location Groups in 2015 using frame, untransformed data. Pair-wise comparisons for the factor Location Group indicated that the biotic assemblage was highly variable and, with only three exceptions, all location groups were different from each other (Appendix G). The nMDS plots did not show any clustering of location groups that could suggest an impact at dredged locations

Year2006200920112015

LON NS

REF AC

PL ABC

PL DEF

RB WE

LON NS

REF AC

PL ABC

PL DEF

RB WE

LON NS

REF AC

PL ABC

PL DEF

RB WE LON NS

PL DEF

PL ABC

RB WE

REF AC

2D Stress: 0.09

Year2006200920112015

2D Stress: 0.25



collectively, however RB WE was, consistently across all depths, the location group that showed the highest degree of separation from the other location groups (Figure A-6, Figure A-7, Figure A-8 and Figure A-9).

Figure A-6 nMDS ordination for the biotic assemblage at Control and Dredged locations in 2015 at 27 m using presence/absence transformed frame data (top) and patch centroids (bottom). Dredging location groups: PL ABC, PL DEF, RB WE; Control location groups: LON NS, REF AC

Loc GroupLON NSREF ACPL ABCPL DEFRB WE

2D Stress: 0.21


2D Stress: 0.04





2D Stress: 0.23


2D Stress: 0.07





2D Stress: 0.23


2D Stress: 0.06





2D Stress: 0.21


2D Stress: 0.11




APPENDIX B PERMANOVA ANALYSES FOR DREDGED CATEGORIES


Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno B-2

Dredged categories B.1

Results of univariate statistical analyses using PERMANOVA for impact categories at 27 Table B-1m depth stratum. Significant (at α < 0.05) p-values in bold. RED = redundant term due to significant interaction

27 m Depth

Category 1 Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 14.1 14.1 0.66 0.667 Treatment 1 255.6 255.6 1.24 0.395 Year(Period) 2 73.2 36.6 0.42 0.732 Loc Group(Treatment) 3 701.6 233.9 2.74 0.199 PeriodxTreatment 1 14.1 14.1 0.66 0.668 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 327.6 109.2 1.28 0.389 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 73.2 36.6 0.42 0.708 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 560.7 93.4 1.38 0.220 Res 85 5747.1 67.6 Total 104 7614.5

Category 2

Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 2.8 2.8 1.87 0.230 Treatment 1 189.6 189.6 1.30 0.367 Year(Period) 2 123.8 61.9 0.46 0.717 Loc Group(Treatment) 3 578.8 192.9 1.44 0.324 PeriodxTreatment 1 0.4 0.4 2.18 0.191 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 36.8 12.3 0.09 0.923 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 99.8 49.9 0.37 0.751 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 843.0 140.5 1.18 0.307 Res 85 10079.0 118.6 Total 104 13026.0

Category 3 Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 53.8 53.8 2.45 0.148 Treatment 1 319.6 319.6 1.69 0.262 Year(Period) 2 242.7 121.4 0.42 RED Loc Group(Treatment) 3 466.4 155.5 0.57 RED PeriodxTreatment 1 7.9 7.9 1.32 0.370 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 56.4 18.8 0.07 0.942 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 410.8 205.4 0.72 0.561 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 1998.4 333.1 2.38 0.046 Res 85 11871.0 139.7 Total 104 18163.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS

Term 'Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment)' for pairs of levels of factor 'Year'

Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment' Within level 'LON NS' of factor 'Loc Group'

Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 0.75 1.000 2 0.483 2009, 2015 Denominator is 0



27 m Depth

2011, 2015 0.88 1.000 2 0.407

Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment' Within level 'REF AC' of factor 'Loc Group'

Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 1.19 0.279 4 0.286 2009, 2015 0.88 1.000 2 0.395 2011, 2015 1.63 0.327 2 0.173

Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment' Within level 'PL ABC' of factor 'Loc Group'


Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment' Within level 'PL DEF' of factor 'Loc Group'


Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment' Within level 'RB WE' of factor 'Loc Group'


PAIR-WISE TESTS

Term 'Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment)' for pairs of levels of factor 'Loc Group'

Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level '2009' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment'

Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) LON NS, REF AC 0.75 1.000 2 0.489

Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level '2009' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment'

Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 0.65 0.567 64 0.526 PL ABC, RB WE 2.16 0.016 282 0.048



27 m Depth

PL DEF, RB WE 1.60 0.127 690 0.134




Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF Denominator is 0 PL ABC, RB WE 2.28 0.021 16 0.048 PL DEF, RB WE 2.09 0.058 8 0.063


Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) LON NS, REF AC Denominator is 0


Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 1.18 0.394 8 0.267 PL ABC, RB WE 0.99 0.727 3 0.349 PL DEF, RB WE 2.94 0.041 7 0.014

Within level 'Before' of factor 'Period' Within level '2006' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment'


Within level 'Before' of factor 'Period' Within level '2006' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment'


PL DEF, RB WE 0.64 0.570 15 0.536

Category 4

Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 27.7 27.7 1.06 0.451 Treatment 1 2269.0 2269.0 1.31 0.366



27 m Depth

Year(Period) 2 1170.8 585.4 0.80 RED Loc Group(Treatment) 3 5051.8 1683.9 2.47 RED PeriodxTreatment 1 0.1 0.1 1.02 0.490 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 359.5 119.8 0.18 0.854 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 1166.9 583.4 0.80 0.509 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 5244.3 874.0 3.34 0.008

Res 85 22257.0 261.8 Total 104 46207.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS



Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 0.75 1.000 2 0.486 2009, 2015 Denominator is 0 2011, 2015 0.88 1.000 2 0.403










27 m Depth


PAIR-WISE TESTS










PL DEF, RB WE 2.11 0.059 32 0.058




Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC)



27 m Depth

PL ABC, PL DEF 0.58 0.615 11 0.587 PL ABC, RB WE 1.15 0.453 4 0.283 PL DEF, RB WE 2.41 0.042 8 0.034

Within level '2006' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment'







37 m depth

Category 1

Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm)

Period 1 3.3 3.3 0.08 RED

Treatment 1 250.2 250.2 1.10 0.459

Year(Period) 2 210.7 105.3 2.40 0.165

Loc Group(Treatment) 3 386.9 129.0 10.56 RED

PeriodxTreatment 1 3.3 3.3 0.08 0.994

PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 384.6 128.2 10.53 0.020

Year(Period)xTreatment 2 210.7 105.3 2.40 0.164

Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 82.2 13.7 0.08 0.959

Res 112 18989.0 169.5

Total 131 21242.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS

Term 'Loc Group(Treatment)'

Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment'

Unique

Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC)

LON NS, REF AC Denominator is 0

Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment'

Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.39 0.218 3153 0.166

PL ABC, RB WE 3.11 0.055 3152 0.093

PL DEF, RB WE 3.93 0.074 6227 0.064

PAIR-WISE TESTS

Term 'PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment)' for pairs of levels of factor 'Period'


Within level 'LON NS' of factor 'Loc Group'

Unique


After, Before Denominator is 0


Within level 'REF AC' of factor 'Loc Group'

Unique



37 m depth


After, Before Denominator is 0


Within level 'PL ABC' of factor 'Loc Group'

Unique


After, Before 0.56 0.751 12 0.938


Within level 'PL DEF' of factor 'Loc Group'

Unique


After, Before 1.15 0.251 24 0.458


Within level 'RB WE' of factor 'Loc Group'

Unique


After, Before 0.78 0.514 12 0.686

PAIR-WISE TESTS

Term 'PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment)' for pairs of levels of factor 'Loc Group'

Within level 'After' of factor 'Period'


Unique





Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.73 0.166 180 0.110

PL ABC, RB WE 1.37 0.300 60 0.246

PL DEF, RB WE 0.66 0.536 359 0.554

Within level 'Before' of factor 'Period'


Unique





37 m depth



Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.44 0.338 2 0.163

PL ABC, RB WE 1.38 0.271 16 0.183

PL DEF, RB WE 2.39 0.022 8 0.023

Category 2


Period 1 90.4 90.4 2.19 0.184

Treatment 1 937.8 937.8 1.66 0.273

Year(Period) 2 578.8 289.4 0.45 RED






Res 112 17371.0 155.1

Total 131 30234.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 Denominator is 0






Unique









37 m depth


Unique


2009, 2011 1.47 0.338 7 0.214

2009, 2015 1.58 0.157 16 0.155

2011, 2015 0.55 1.000 2 0.605




Unique


2009, 2011 1.24 0.360 4 0.241

2009, 2015 1.86 0.079 16 0.090

2011, 2015 0.22 0.878 16 0.836




Unique


2009, 2011 2.69 0.012 1036 0.018

2009, 2015 2.83 0.012 151 0.015

2011, 2015 1.47 0.214 64 0.170

PAIR-WISE TESTS



Within level '2009' of factor 'Year'


Unique






Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 3.09 0.017 16 0.010

PL ABC, RB WE 1.54 0.162 185 0.157

PL DEF, RB WE 3.59 <0.001 158 0.002



37 m depth




Unique






Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.60 1.000 2 0.580

PL ABC, RB WE 1.12 0.465 16 0.289

PL DEF, RB WE 0.24 0.914 63 0.817




Unique






Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.77 0.574 6 0.460

PL ABC, RB WE 0.45 1.000 2 0.667

PL DEF, RB WE 1.28 0.307 6 0.226




Unique






Unique




37 m depth

PL ABC, PL DEF Denominator is 0

PL ABC, RB WE 1.94 0.079 8 0.070

PL DEF, RB WE 2.80 0.021 8 0.010

Category 3


Period 1 761.0 761.0 1.18 0.444

Treatment 1 929.3 929.3 1.06 0.480

Year(Period) 2 88.8 44.4 0.16 RED






Res 112 13373.0 119.4

Total 131 37117.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique








Unique


2009, 2011 1.34 0.391 2 0.265


2011, 2015 1.63 0.330 2 0.186




Unique


2009, 2011 0.67 1.000 2 0.535



37 m depth

2009, 2015 0.25 1.000 4 0.807

2011, 2015 0.55 1.000 2 0.601




Unique


2009, 2011 2.74 0.013 32 0.018

2009, 2015 2.12 0.039 14 0.053

2011, 2015 0.86 0.441 104 0.407




Unique


2009, 2011 0.23 0.829 2938 0.821

2009, 2015 1.36 0.195 922 0.200

2011, 2015 2.28 0.045 956 0.045

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique






Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.33 0.299 4 0.212

PL ABC, RB WE 2.09 0.078 96 0.066

PL DEF, RB WE 3.51 <0.001 223 0.005




Unique



37 m depth


LON NS, REF AC 1.34 0.397 2 0.276




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.54 0.190 11 0.184

PL ABC, RB WE 5.20 0.024 30 0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 7.43 0.001 957 <0.001




Unique






Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.12 0.303 6 0.290

PL ABC, RB WE 1.92 0.109 11 0.084

PL DEF, RB WE 1.18 0.314 14 0.266




Unique






Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.92 0.776 4 0.358

PL ABC, RB WE 2.23 0.030 16 0.037

PL DEF, RB WE 2.27 0.026 64 0.030

Category 4




37 m depth

Period 1 1512.8 1512.8 2.02 0.222

Treatment 1 5917.5 5917.5 1.30 0.395

Year(Period) 2 2102.3 1051.2 0.66 RED





Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 11467.0 1911.1 7.33 <0.001

Res 112 29200.0 260.7

Total 131 105400.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique








Unique


2009, 2011 1.34 0.399 2 0.273


2011, 2015 1.63 0.335 2 0.182




Unique


2009, 2011 1.49 0.264 7 0.205

2009, 2015 1.50 0.164 16 0.170

2011, 2015 0.55 1.000 2 0.610






37 m depth

Unique


2009, 2011 0.13 0.909 63 0.896

2009, 2015 0.37 0.751 32 0.718

2011, 2015 0.24 0.789 119 0.820




Unique


2009, 2011 5.78 <0.001 492 <0.001

2009, 2015 8.11 <0.001 128 <0.001

2011, 2015 2.93 0.015 1270 0.012

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique






Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.46 0.703 31 0.659

PL ABC, RB WE 7.80 0.002 57 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 6.39 <0.001 56 <0.001




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.34 0.408 2 0.276






37 m depth

Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.83 0.428 11 0.447

PL ABC, RB WE 4.13 0.024 37 0.003

PL DEF, RB WE 3.05 0.016 1285 0.011




Unique






Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.16 0.427 7 0.263

PL ABC, RB WE 1.56 0.155 11 0.150

PL DEF, RB WE 0.19 0.931 20 0.854




Unique






Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.87 0.612 8 0.390

PL ABC, RB WE 2.91 0.008 64 0.009

PL DEF, RB WE 4.37 0.001 126 <0.001




47 m Depth

Category 1


Period 1 365.8 365.8 0.82 0.614

Treatment 1 266.8 266.8 0.91 0.538

Year(Period) 2 657.3 328.7 0.99 0.454

Loc Group(Treatment) 3 1821.2 607.1 1.27 0.362





Res 122 23688 194.2

Total 141 33876

Category 2


Period 1 134.5 134.5 1.33 0.377

Treatment 1 202.6 202.6 1.25 0.396

Year(Period) 2 166.4 83.2 0.84 0.525

Loc Group(Treatment) 3 529 176.4 1.58 0.268


PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 268 89.3 1 0.316



Res 122 13249 108.6

Total 141 17316

Category 3


Period 1 935.8 935.8 1.55 0.330

Treatment 1 951.1 951.1 1.65 0.308

Year(Period) 2 708.5 354.2 0.5 0.699





Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 4845 807.5 3.95 0.007

Res 122 24917 204.2

Total 141 51226

PAIR-WISE TESTS




47 m Depth




Unique


2009, 2011 0.56 1 4 0.588

2009, 2015 0.74 1 2 0.486

2011, 2015 0.8 1 2 0.445




Unique


2009, 2011 0.67 1 2 0.536

2009, 2015 1 1 1 0.355





Unique


2009, 2011 2.75 0.021 19 0.020

2009, 2015 1.13 0.422 12 0.284

2011, 2015 0.61 0.596 19 0.560




Unique


2009, 2011 0.76 0.727 32 0.463

2009, 2015 1.14 0.471 4 0.282

2011, 2015 2.16 0.178 4 0.059




Unique


2009, 2011 0.97 0.341 1304 0.354

2009, 2015 2.32 0.030 225 0.034

2011, 2015 2.2 0.058 216 0.047



47 m Depth

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 0.21 1 4 0.844




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.61 0.590 16 0.544

PL ABC, RB WE 3.11 0.008 191 0.006

PL DEF, RB WE 2.51 0.027 178 0.025




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 0.55 1 2 0.606




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 5.1 0.012 42 0.002

PL ABC, RB WE 1.03 0.320 129 0.332

PL DEF, RB WE 2.65 0.025 403 0.021




Unique






47 m Depth



Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.5 0.448 2 0.163

PL ABC, RB WE 0.39 0.820 9 0.716

PL DEF, RB WE 3.16 0.016 5 0.009




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 0.9 1 2 0.389




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.69 0.744 4 0.507

PL ABC, RB WE 0.22 0.741 4 0.827

PL DEF, RB WE 0.9 0.753 4 0.385

Category 4


Period 1 3759.4 3759.4 1.53 0.324

Treatment 1 3770.8 3770.8 1.91 0.247

Year(Period) 2 4039.1 2019.5 1.72 RED






Res 122 48100 394.3

Total 141 109290

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique



47 m Depth


2009, 2011 0.22 1 4 0.828

2009, 2015 0.74 1 2 0.474

2011, 2015 0.80 1 2 0.442




Unique


2009, 2011 0.76 0.734 4 0.486

2009, 2015 1.13 0.417 2 0.293





Unique


2009, 2011 2.3 0.043 42 0.050

2009, 2015 0.75 0.551 32 0.466

2011, 2015 0.83 0.394 26 0.427




Unique


2009, 2011 0.01 0.985 370 0.993

2009, 2015 2.3549 0.038 32 0.039

2011, 2015 1.944 0.016 12 0.079




Unique


2009, 2011 1.27 0.215 1205 0.227

2009, 2015 3.17 0.012 287 0.008

2011, 2015 2.47 0.034 439 0.033

PAIR-WISE TESTS





47 m Depth



Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.31 0.207 8 0.229




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.45 0.018 249 0.033

PL ABC, RB WE 4.44 0.001 312 0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 1.54 0.144 422 0.147




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 0.55 1 2 0.601




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.7 0.547 63 0.502

PL ABC, RB WE 1.5 0.17 129 0.164

PL DEF, RB WE 0.38 0.71 644 0.712




Unique






Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.55 0.452 2 0.157

PL ABC, RB WE 0.31 0.771 13 0.769



47 m Depth

PL DEF, RB WE 2.52 0.017 8 0.031




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 0.9 1 2 0.393




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.31 0.894 8 0.769

PL ABC, RB WE 1.67 0.093 32 0.106

PL DEF, RB WE 2.13 0.031 64 0.041




57 m Depth

Category 1 PERMANOVA table of results Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 327.2 327.2 1.12 0.466 Treatment 1 298.8 298.8 1.24 0.388 Year(Period) 2 1067.9 534.0 0.73 RED Loc Group(Treatment) 3 1532.8 510.9 0.44 RED PeriodxTreatment 1 282.8 282.8 1.21 0.410 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 1576.6 525.5 0.45 0.264 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 888.7 444.4 0.61 0.636 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 4691.3 781.9 10.76 0.001

Res 86 6252.2 72.7 Total 105 16265.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS



Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 Denominator is 0 2009, 2015 Denominator is 0 2011, 2015 Denominator is 0


Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 0.77 1.000 2 0.497 2009, 2015 1.20 0.431 2 0.278 2011, 2015 Denominator is 0




Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 1.50 0.404 4 0.237 2009, 2015 2.43 0.081 13 0.046



57 m Depth

2011, 2015 0.86 0.786 4 0.426



PAIR-WISE TESTS









Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF Denominator is 0 PL ABC, RB WE Denominator is 0 PL DEF, RB WE Denominator is 0



Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level '2015' of factor 'Year'



57 m Depth

Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment' Unique

Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 1.57 0.458 2 0.146 PL ABC, RB WE 1.46 0.451 2 0.172 PL DEF, RB WE 0.98 0.454 7 0.350





Category 2

Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 241.8 241.8 10.66 0.018 Treatment 1 26.5 26.5 2.51 0.173 Year(Period) 2 37.8 18.9 0.15 RED Loc Group(Treatment) 3 56.6 18.9 0.21 RED PeriodxTreatment 1 17.7 17.7 2.59 0.161 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 36.0 12.0 0.18 0.876 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 89.3 44.6 0.36 0.706 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 788.9 131.5 3.14 0.022

Res 86 3598.5 41.8 Total 105 5073.1

PAIR-WISE TESTS








57 m Depth








PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 1.02 0.632 15 0.359 PL ABC, RB WE 1.78 0.033 16 0.112 PL DEF, RB WE 0.68 0.760 4 0.518 Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level '2011' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment'





57 m Depth

Within level '2011' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment'










Category 3 Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 1543.1 1543.1 4.16 RED Treatment 1 1518.4 1518.4 3.93 RED Year(Period) 2 203.6 101.8 0.08 RED Loc Group(Treatment) 3 2478.6 826.2 0.41 RED PeriodxTreatment 1 1481.9 1481.9 4.04 0.047 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 2364.7 788.2 0.39 0.601 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 216.0 108.0 0.08 0.960 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 8500.3 1416.7 8.02 <0.001 Res 86 15185.0 176.6 Total 105 41679.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS




57 m Depth











PAIR-WISE TESTS Term 'Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment)' for pairs of levels of factor 'Loc Group'





57 m Depth

















57 m Depth

PAIR-WISE TESTS Term 'PeriodxTreatment' for pairs of levels of factor 'Period' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) After, Before 1.00 1.000 1 0.504 Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) After, Before 2.20 0.018 4990 0.106 PAIR-WISE TESTS Term 'PeriodxTreatment' for pairs of levels of factor 'Treatment' Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) Control, Dredged 1.61 0.091 4986 0.215 Within level 'Before' of factor 'Period' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) Control, Dredged 0.69 1.000 3 0.526 Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) Control, Dredged 1.61 0.091 4986 0.215 Category 4

Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 5318 5317.5 2.74 0.142 Treatment 1 3770 3770.1 2.21 0.202 Year(Period) 2 2516 1257.8 1.52 RED Loc Group(Treatment) 3 1674 558.0 0.55 RED PeriodxTreatment 1 3542 3541.9 2.21 0.202 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 1352 450.7 0.47 0.639 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 2232 1116.2 1.35 0.331 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 5209 868.1 2.49 0.036

Res 86 30009 348.9 Total 105 68547

PAIR-WISE TESTS



Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 1.4 0.049 8 0.209 2009, 2015 Denominator is 0



57 m Depth

2011, 2015 1.23 0.141 4 0.262


Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 0.78 1 2 0.497 2009, 2015 1.20 0.429 2 0.284 2011, 2015 Denominator is 0







2011, 2015 0.09 0.911 102 0.928

PAIR-WISE TESTS








57 m Depth

PL DEF, RB WE 0.19 0.872 42 0.853














Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno C-1


APPENDIX C PERMANOVA AND POST-HOC ANALYSES OF HABITAT DESCRIPTORS



Results of univariate statistical analyses using PERMANOVA for habitat descriptors at 27 Table C-1m depth stratum. Significant (at α < 0.05) p-values in bold. RED = redundant term due to significant interaction

Habitat descriptor - 27 m Depth

Multivariate analysis Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 271.2 271.2 3.52 0.054 Treatment 1 273.7 273.7 1.32 0.336 Year(Period) 2 -2.1 -1.0 Negative RED Loc Group(Treatment) 3 653.1 217.7 2.93 RED PeriodxTreatment 1 136.5 136.5 1.44 0.276 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 290.9 97.0 1.31 0.327 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 192.7 96.4 0.72 0.602 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 1114.2 185.7 6.10 0.001 Res 1240 37725.0 30.4 Total 1259 42913.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS







Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 Denominator is 0 2009, 2015 1.65 0.050 1419 0.065 2011, 2015 1.84 0.021 1609 0.042


Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 3.02 0.001 1972 0.004

2009, 2015 1.99 0.054 1999 0.050 2011, 2015 1.67 0.062 1996 0.096






PAIR-WISE TESTS


Within level 'Baseline' of factor 'Period' Within level '2006' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment'


Within level 'Baseline' of factor 'Period' Within level '2006' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment'












Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 1.32 0.349 8 0.181 PL ABC, RB WE 3.43 <0.001 1997 0.001 PL DEF, RB WE 3.51 <0.001 1996 0.001




Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 1.37 0.179 1998 0.173 PL ABC, RB WE 2.31 0.002 1890 0.011 PL DEF, RB WE 2.97 <0.001 1989 0.005

Sand Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 628.3 628.3 2.72 0.125 Treatment 1 1638.9 1638.9 5.03 0.040 Year(Period) 2 229.7 114.9 1.37 0.364 Loc Group(Treatment) 3 922.2 307.4 5.63 0.210 PeriodxTreatment 1 664.7 664.7 2.95 0.108 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 619.2 206.4 3.78 0.234 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 194.0 97.0 1.15 0.417 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 655.9 109.3 3.30 0.006 Res 1240 41057.0 33.1 Total 1259 53536.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS




2009, 2015 2.15 0.031 73 0.029 2011, 2015 2.73 0.003 1839 0.010












PAIR-WISE TESTS













Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 1.24 0.498 4 0.216 PL ABC, RB WE Denominator is 0 PL DEF, RB WE 1.39 0.225 4 0.180









Shell grit Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 76.6 76.6 0.83 0.601 Treatment 1 50.8 50.8 0.54 0.668 Year(Period) 2 0.3 0.2 0.39 0.910 Loc Group(Treatment) 3 295.4 98.5 116.16 0.251 PeriodxTreatment 1 55.0 55.0 0.59 0.664 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 292.1 97.4 114.88 0.256 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 0.5 0.2 0.51 0.623 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 0.5 0.1 0.08 0.992 Res 1240 1419.8 1.1 Total 1259 1776.4

Exposed Rock - Bare

Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 17.2 17.2 1.87 0.256




Treatment 1 125.7 125.7 5.80 0.043 Year(Period) 2 32.1 16.1 0.12 RED Loc Group(Treatment) 3 76.6 25.5 0.35 RED PeriodxTreatment 1 17.2 17.2 1.87 0.237 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 97.8 32.6 0.44 0.641 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 32.1 16.1 0.12 0.903 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 1128.0 188.0 6.62 0.001 Res 1240 35205.0 28.4 Total 1259 37462.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS















2009, 2015 2.56 0.021 7 0.010 2011, 2015 3.37 <0.001 981 0.002

PAIR-WISE TESTS






















Colonising biota with recognisable biodiversity Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 1.9 1.9 2.38 0.160 Treatment 1 93.2 93.2 0.98 0.505 Year(Period) 2 46.6 23.3 0.15 RED Loc Group(Treatment) 3 462.5 154.2 1.82 RED PeriodxTreatment 1 1.9 1.9 2.38 0.179 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 53.4 17.8 0.21 0.778 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 46.6 23.3 0.15 0.877 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 1291.8 215.3 6.42 0.001 Res 1240 41554.0 33.5 Total 1259 44982.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS







Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 Denominator is 0




2009, 2015 0.90 0.781 4 0.354 2011, 2015 1.00 0.532 4 0.332





PAIR-WISE TESTS
















Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF Denominator is 0 PL ABC, RB WE 3.27 0.002 1803 0.003

PL DEF, RB WE 3.7 0.001 1841 0.001





Exposed rock - Microbiota Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 67.5 67.5 0.79 0.615 Treatment 1 359.2 359.2 0.61 0.691 Year(Period) 2 294.8 147.4 0.51 RED Loc Group(Treatment) 3 2264.9 755.0 4.78 RED PeriodxTreatment 1 67.5 67.5 0.79 0.573 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 534.2 178.1 1.13 0.420 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 294.8 147.4 0.51 0.643 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 2414.9 402.5 6.51 <0.001 Res 1240 76706.0 61.9 Total 1259 89142.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS



Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 Denominator is 0




2009, 2015 Denominator is 0 2011, 2015 Denominator is 0









2009, 2015 3 <0.001 145 0.003 2011, 2015 4.94 <0.001 4615 <0.001

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF Denominator is 0




PL ABC, RB WE 1.23 0.250 1066 0.217 PL DEF, RB WE 1.48 0.143 1660 0.136








Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 1.25 0.505 4 0.213 PL ABC, RB WE 3.72 <0.001 4583 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 3.75 <0.001 4664 <0.001





Rubble - natural Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 8.3 8.3 0.77 0.646 Treatment 1 19.3 19.3 1.05 0.491 Year(Period) 2 186.1 93.1 1.43 RED




Loc Group(Treatment) 3 16.0 5.3 0.14 RED PeriodxTreatment 1 8.3 8.3 0.77 0.599 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 18.6 6.2 0.16 0.817 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 186.1 93.1 1.43 0.404 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 525.3 87.5 4.51 0.003 Res 1240 24044.0 19.4 Total 1259 25921.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS










2009, 2015 2.55 0.008 128 0.012 2011, 2015 1.00 0.511 4 0.323


Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 3.51 <0.001 494 0.001

2009, 2015 3.57 <0.001 913 0.001 2011, 2015 0.97 1.000 2 0.326




PAIR-WISE TESTS













Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF Denominator is 0 PL ABC, RB WE Denominator is 0

PL DEF, RB WE Denominator is 0







Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 0.54 0.876 5 0.592 PL ABC, RB WE Negative PL DEF, RB WE 0.51 0.759 4 0.611




Habitat descriptor - 37 m

Multivariate Analysis

Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 1042.4 1042.4 0.75 0.576 Treatment 1 887.7 887.7 0.72 0.656 Year(Period) 2 2036.7 1018.4 5.29 RED Loc Group(Treatment) 3 3195.8 1065.3 3.27 RED PeriodxTreatment 1 648.5 648.5 0.75 0.638 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 1582.9 527.6 1.67 0.215 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 1229.6 614.8 3.19 0.083 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 1334.2 222.4 3.45 0.001 Res 1579 101850.0 64.5 Total 1598 115210.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS




2009, 2015 6.62 <0.001 1997 0.001 2011, 2015 2.22 0.026 1997 0.027












PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 2.00 0.012 1999 0.021

















Sand Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 4192.2 4192.2 0.92 0.517 Treatment 1 6488.8 6488.8 2.20 RED Year(Period) 2 6589.3 3294.6 16.45 RED Loc Group(Treatment) 3 2622.4 874.2 2.53 RED PeriodxTreatment 1 3262.3 3262.3 1.18 0.419 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 2224.2 741.4 2.16 0.272 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 3752.5 1876.3 9.37 0.017 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 1412.4 235.4 4.80 0.001 Res 1579 77436.0 49.0 Total 1598 113720.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS

Term 'Year(Period)xTreatment' for pairs of levels of factor 'Treatment'

Within level 'Baseline' of factor 'Period' Within level '2006' of factor 'Year'

Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) Control, Dredged 3.21 0.106 60 0.007










PAIR-WISE TESTS

Term 'Year(Period)xTreatment' for pairs of levels of factor 'Year'

Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment'


Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment'


PAIR-WISE TESTS



Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 3.68 0.001 4555 <0.001 2009, 2015 7.01 <0.001 4475 <0.001 2011, 2015 2.28 0.023 4586 0.026


Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 1.66 0.114 4303 0.099 2009, 2015 4.11 <0.001 2411 <0.001 2011, 2015 1.58 0.110 588 0.114






2011, 2015 0.69 0.835 8 0.489


Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 2.54 0.012 4247 0.011 2009, 2015 3.46 0.001 3864 <0.001

2011, 2015 1.50 0.134 4045 0.134



PAIR-WISE TESTS


















Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) LON NS, REF AC 5.45 <0.001 80 <0.001



PL DEF, RB WE 3.16 <0.001 30 0.002

Shell grit


Res 1579 33282.0 21.1 Total 1598 37422.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS



Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 Denominator is 0 2009, 2015 0.67 1 2 0.514




2011, 2015 0.93 1 2 0.353




Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 1.17 0.292 63 0.240 2009, 2015 3.89 <0.001 115 0.001

2011, 2015 0.30 1.000 2 0.755


Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 4.35 <0.001 2618 <0.001 2009, 2015 3.80 <0.001 2682 <0.001

2011, 2015 1.88 0.070 148 0.061


Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 Denominator is 0 2009, 2015 Denominator is 0


PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 2.96 0.002 4463 0.003 PL ABC, RB WE Denominator is 0




PL DEF, RB WE 4.56 <0.001 4481 <0.001













Exposed rock - bare

Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 16.4 16.4 0.30 0.887 Treatment 1 797.3 797.3 2.09 0.233 Year(Period) 2 47.4 23.7 0.10 RED Loc Group(Treatment) 3 2026.2 675.4 1.80 RED




PeriodxTreatment 1 0.1 0.1 0.28 0.895 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 4197.9 1399.3 3.59 0.138 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 59.1 29.6 0.12 0.890 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 1614.5 269.1 2.41 0.038 Res 1579 176070.0 111.5 Total 1598 188020.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS










2011, 2015 0.80 0.431 4728 0.423






PAIR-WISE TESTS






PL DEF, RB WE 4.11 <0.001 4758 <0.001










Unique




Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) LON NS, REF AC Denominator is 0




Colonising biota with recognisable biodiveristy Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 0.039041 0.039041 0.52749 0.7355 Treatment 1 1075.6 1075.6 0.84 0.560 Year(Period) 2 266.3 133.2 0.49 0.665 Loc Group(Treatment) 3 7070.5 2356.8 5.05 0.073 PeriodxTreatment 1 45.3 45.3 0.79 0.603 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 1942.0 647.3 1.46 0.350 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 33.8 16.9 0.06 0.931 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 1891.2 315.2 3.55 0.011 Res 1579 140290.0 88.8 Total 1598 153950.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS




2011, 2015 1.86 0.009 64 0.063




Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 1.06 0.373 32 0.285 2009, 2015 3.57 <0.001 32 <0.001








Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 0.51 0.619 4639 0.602 2009, 2015 3.46 0.001 2401 0.001 2011, 2015 3.37 <0.001 4516 0.001

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF Denominator is 0 PL ABC, RB WE 4.06 <0.001 4733 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 5.57 <0.001 4737 <0.001









Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment' Unique

Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) LON NS, REF AC 1.04 0.369 64 0.295






Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 3.49 <0.001 87 0.001


Exposed rock - microbiota Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 132.38 132.38 0.55545 0.7374 Treatment 1 236.6 236.6 0.65 0.672 Year(Period) 2 543.8 271.9 3.37 0.059 Loc Group(Treatment) 3 648.0 216.0 1.76 0.296 PeriodxTreatment 1 132.4 132.4 0.56 0.728 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 222.1 74.0 0.71 0.469 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 543.8 271.9 3.37 0.056 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 536.2 89.4 2.09 0.070 Res 1579 67593.0 42.8 Total 1598 75265.0

Colonising biota with distinct colonies Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 182.12 182.12 1.5365 0.257 Treatment 1 313.6 313.6 1.31 0.362 Year(Period) 2 1007.2 503.6 0.50 RED Loc Group(Treatment) 3 2850.8 950.3 0.52 RED PeriodxTreatment 1 156.4 156.4 1.65 0.200 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 1340.0 446.7 0.25 0.571 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 882.1 441.1 0.43 0.800 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 7437.0 1239.5 27.35 <0.001 Res 1579 71554.0 45.3 Total 1598 86910.0




PAIR-WISE TESTS









Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 1.31 0.207 235 0.185 2009, 2015 Denominator is 0 2011, 2015 2.25 <0.001 256 0.024


Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 4.56 <0.001 4480 <0.001 2009, 2015 5.52 <0.001 3892 <0.001 2011, 2015 1.00 0.417 64 0.309

PAIR-WISE TESTS
























Rubble - natural Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 5.8298 5.8298 1.6324 0.302 Treatment 1 23.6 23.6 2.21 0.208 Year(Period) 2 6.7 3.4 0.87 0.484 Loc Group(Treatment) 3 19.3 6.4 2.81 0.161 PeriodxTreatment 1 10.1 10.1 1.64 0.308 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 1.8 0.6 1.33 0.371 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 10.7 5.3 1.39 0.334 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 15.7 2.6 0.29 0.788 Res 1579 14416.0 9.1 Total 1598 14532.0







Period 1 989.29 989.29 1.19 0.416

Treatment 1 216.4 216.4 0.41 0.874

Year(Period) 2 1338.5 669.3 2.09 0.146






Res 1467 92371.0 63.0

Total 1486 106070.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 2.28 0.022 1996 0.027

2009, 2015 5.73 0.001 1995 0.001

2011, 2015 6.54 0.001 1995 0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 0.73 0.588 665 0.503

2009, 2015 Negative

2011, 2015 0.66 0.596 1990 0.577




Unique


2009, 2011 1.44 0.058 1994 0.105

2009, 2015 3.68 0.001 1998 0.001




2011, 2015 Negative




Unique


2009, 2011 2.05 0.006 1996 0.007

2009, 2015 4.12 0.001 1999 0.001

2011, 2015 3.04 0.001 1996 0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 1.37 0.128 1997 0.148

2009, 2015 3.25 0.001 1996 0.001

2011, 2015 3.16 0.001 1999 0.001

PAIR-WISE TESTS


Within level 'Baseline' of factor 'Period'



Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.12 0.313 1995 0.316




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 3.44 0.002 1996 0.001

PL ABC, RB WE 2.55 0.001 1998 0.003

PL DEF, RB WE 3.12 0.001 1998 0.001




Unique





LON NS, REF AC 3.14 0.001 1999 0.003




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.83 0.001 1996 0.001

PL ABC, RB WE 1.96 0.014 1996 0.022

PL DEF, RB WE 1.75 0.009 1999 0.019




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 3.44 0.003 1999 0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 3.16 0.001 1997 0.001

PL ABC, RB WE 2.52 0.001 1997 0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 2.79 0.001 1995 0.001




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.59 0.113 1991 0.107




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 4.08 0.001 1999 0.001

PL ABC, RB WE 2.28 0.013 1995 0.019

PL DEF, RB WE Negative

Sand





Pe 1 1315 1315 0.72165 0.645

Tr 1 1488.5 1488.5 1.54 0.293

Ye(Pe) 2 4192.6 2096.3 2.94 0.108

Lo(Tr) 3 2280.7 760.2 0.75 0.437

PexTr 1 98.6 98.6 0.56 0.727

PexLo(Tr) 3 2516.8 838.9 0.83 0.437

Ye(Pe)xTr 2 1666.9 833.4 1.17 0.408

Ye(Pe)xLo(Tr) 6 4832.6 805.4 8.70 0.001

Res 1467 135840.0 92.6

Total 1486 166360.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 2.42 0.013 1949 0.014

2009, 2015 6.23 0.001 1878 0.001

2011, 2015 6.98 0.001 1940 0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 0.25 0.821 365 0.792

2009, 2015 0.47 0.655 370 0.621

2011, 2015 0.05 0.950 498 0.953




Unique


2009, 2011 1.86 0.040 16 0.073

2009, 2015 1.56 0.066 129 0.111

2011, 2015 0.82 0.486 11 0.436







Unique


2009, 2011 0.48 0.647 1911 0.631

2009, 2015 0.34 0.747 1104 0.745

2011, 2015 1.13 0.252 1795 0.279




Unique


2009, 2011 2.67 0.010 1903 0.007

2009, 2015 0.60 0.585 1009 0.570

2011, 2015 3.34 0.001 1929 0.002

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 0.31 0.760 1775 0.759




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.10 1.000 4 0.930

PL ABC, RB WE 2.87 0.003 1600 0.004

PL DEF, RB WE 3.34 0.001 1594 0.001




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 3.20 0.003 1876 0.003







Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.77 0.061 1454 0.083

PL ABC, RB WE 0.31 0.789 422 0.754

PL DEF, RB WE 1.74 0.079 1647 0.088




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 3.50 0.002 1942 0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.93 0.002 1842 0.006

PL ABC, RB WE 3.20 0.002 1905 0.002

PL DEF, RB WE 0.06 0.957 1909 0.949




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.95 0.059 42 0.062




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 4.92 0.001 79 0.001

PL ABC, RB WE 2.50 0.007 59 0.009

PL DEF, RB WE 2.34 0.019 92 0.020

Shell grit


Period 1 202.66 202.66 0.37096 0.838

Treatment 1 731.6 731.6 0.53 0.733

Year(Period) 2 768.0 384.0 2.33 0.149









Res 1467 94769.0 64.6

Total 1486 106180.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 2.36 0.005 32.00 0.022

2009, 2015 1.69 0.077 252.00 0.088

2011, 2015 1.62 0.113 8.00 0.107




Unique



2009, 2015 1.62 0.105 20.00 0.111

2011, 2015 1.55 0.147 19.00 0.118




Unique


2009, 2011 3.26 0.001 843.00 0.003

2009, 2015 5.50 0.001 1045.00 0.001

2011, 2015 1.59 0.183 7.00 0.123




Unique


2009, 2011 2.74 0.001 1468.00 0.009

2009, 2015 2.81 0.008 1754.00 0.010

2011, 2015 3.46 0.001 61.00 0.001







Unique


2009, 2011 2.15 0.093 4.00 0.030

2009, 2015 2.27 0.076 4.00 0.024


PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.48 0.186 4.00 0.159




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 3.51 0.001 1956.00 0.001

PL ABC, RB WE 1.64 0.082 32 0.105

PL DEF, RB WE 4.49 0.001 1955 0.001




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.27 0.273 32.00 0.199




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.10 0.936 1930.00 0.924

PL ABC, RB WE 3.38 0.001 1389 0.002

PL DEF, RB WE 2.33 0.003 1720 0.022







Unique






Unique



PL ABC, RB WE Denominator is 0





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.73 0.109 15.00 0.105




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 4.27 0.001 35.00 0.001

PL ABC, RB WE 2.76 0.003 7 0.008

PL DEF, RB WE 4.94 0.001 34 0.001

Exposed rock - Bare


Period 1 196.94 196.94 1.3524 0.326

Treatment 1 737.2 737.2 2.20 0.149

Year(Period) 2 983.7 491.8 0.39 0.828






Res 1467 106240.0 72.4

Total 1486 122880.0




PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique








Unique








Unique



2009, 2015 1.59 0.133 71.00 0.115

2011, 2015 1.65 0.111 52.00 0.105




Unique


2009, 2011 2.40 0.019 3545.00 0.017

2009, 2015 2.63 0.003 16.00 0.014

2011, 2015 5.97 <0.001 1540.00 <0.001




Unique





2009, 2011 0.57 0.704 44.00 0.560

2009, 2015 0.77 0.554 67.00 0.440

2011, 2015 0.24 0.829 136.00 0.811

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique






Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.79 0.466 1624.00 0.425

PL ABC, RB WE 1.29 0.243 64 0.199

PL DEF, RB WE 1.23 0.241 3279 0.214




Unique






Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.45 0.225 16.00 0.154

PL ABC, RB WE 0.90 1.000 2 0.381

PL DEF, RB WE 0.96 0.264 32 0.338




Unique









Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 3.43 0.001 1729.00 0.002

PL ABC, RB WE 1.21 0.377 22 0.216

PL DEF, RB WE 5.29 <0.001 2263 <0.001




Unique






Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.87 0.001 45.00 0.003

PL ABC, RB WE 1.50 0.147 60.00 0.137

PL DEF, RB WE 2.76 0.001 21.00 0.006

Colonising biota with recognisable biodiveristy


Period 1 264.99 264.99 0.93266 0.537

Treatment 1 227.4 227.4 0.82 0.564

Year(Period) 2 194.9 97.5 2.92 0.109






Res 1467 56263.0 38.4

Total 1486 61424.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS






Unique


LON NS, REF AC 0.74 0.525 27.00 0.531


Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.33 0.780 836.00 1.000

PL ABC, RB WE 3.22 0.058 3936 0.088

PL DEF, RB WE 3.21 0.066 3924 0.080

Exposed rock - Microbiota


Period 1 212.69 212.69 0.73389 0.632

Treatment 1 177.8 177.8 0.77 0.593

Year(Period) 2 684.7 342.4 3.53 0.060






Res 1467 49930.0 34.0

Total 1486 54936.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 0.88 0.438 32.00 0.385

2009, 2015 1.27 0.389 2.00 0.197

2011, 2015 1.66 0.129 16.00 0.104




Unique











Unique


2009, 2011 1.09 0.487 4.00 0.270

2009, 2015 1.33 0.230 15.00 0.191

2011, 2015 1.38 0.185 58.00 0.176




Unique


2009, 2011 1.99 0.034 3984.00 0.049

2009, 2015 3.26 0.006 16.00 0.001

2011, 2015 4.76 <0.001 1636.00 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 1.10 0.293 3960.00 0.285

2009, 2015 2.24 0.023 63.00 0.025

2011, 2015 3.60 <0.001 4192.00 0.001

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique






Unique











Unique


LON NS, REF AC 0.72 1.000 2.00 0.474




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.80 0.115 16.00 0.079

PL ABC, RB WE 1.32 0.259 8.00 0.192

PL DEF, RB WE 0.42 0.780 128.00 0.687




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 0.90 0.614 16.00 0.374




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.19 0.025 3375.00 0.033

PL ABC, RB WE 1.69 0.089 3837.00 0.094

PL DEF, RB WE 0.40 0.697 4608.00 0.674




Unique









Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.41 0.004 9.00 0.016

PL ABC, RB WE 0.84 0.485 13.00 0.388

PL DEF, RB WE 1.82 0.129 5.00 0.069

Colonising biota with distinct colonies


Period 1 71.752 71.752 1.1763 0.411

Treatment 1 70.6 70.6 1.17 0.418

Year(Period) 2 150.4 75.2 0.70 RED






Res 1467 26365.0 18.0

Total 1486 28335.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 0.75 1.000 2 0.473


2011, 2015 0.95 1.000 2 0.350




Unique











Unique


2009, 2011 0.67 1.000 8 0.520

2009, 2015 0.00 1.000 16 0.998

2011, 2015 1.06 0.252 8 0.281




Unique


2009, 2011 1.57 0.179 8 0.128

2009, 2015 2.37 0.074 4 0.018

2011, 2015 1.43 0.325 2 0.160




Unique


2009, 2011 2.56 0.008 2431 0.012

2009, 2015 2.91 0.003 1302 0.004

2011, 2015 0.61 0.547 763 0.554

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique






Unique











Unique






Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.72 0.496 16 0.491

PL ABC, RB WE 1.80 0.071 256 0.078

PL DEF, RB WE 1.81 0.073 252 0.073




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 0.52 1.000 2 0.612




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.17 0.403 4 0.254

PL ABC, RB WE 0.08 0.926 341 0.937

PL DEF, RB WE 1.80 0.086 321 0.073




Unique






Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.36 0.489 2 0.176

PL ABC, RB WE 1.21 0.254 31 0.222




PL DEF, RB WE 2.32 0.015 22 0.022

Rubble natural


Period 1 6.9863 6.9863 1.4907 0.291

Treatment 1 55.6 55.6 0.98 0.542

Year(Period) 2 141.1 70.5 0.58 0.603






Res 1467 10676.0 7.3

Total 1486 12316.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique



2009, 2015 1.81 0.107 11 0.074

2011, 2015 2.41 0.011 11 0.019




Unique








Unique


2009, 2011 1.04 0.493 2 0.304

2009, 2015 1.40 0.228 4 0.164

2011, 2015 0.58 1.000 2 0.570







Unique


2009, 2011 3.75 <0.001 1665 0.001

2009, 2015 5.31 <0.001 1384 <0.001

2011, 2015 0.70 1.000 2 0.479




Unique


2009, 2011 1.53 0.296 2 0.133

2009, 2015 1.62 0.264 2 0.115


PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique






Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.85 0.067 64 0.058

PL ABC, RB WE 0.84 1.000 2 0.402

PL DEF, RB WE 1.77 0.079 128 0.077




Unique









Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.90 0.003 2627.00 0.005

PL ABC, RB WE 0.18 0.750 4.00 0.846

PL DEF, RB WE 3.25 <0.001 2758.00 0.002




Unique






Unique








Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.29 0.029 6.00 0.021




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.63 1.000 2.00 0.537

PL ABC, RB WE 1.00 1.000 1.00 0.320

PL DEF, RB WE 1.00 1.000 1.00 0.321




Habitat descriptor 57 m

Multivariate analysis

Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 -214.96 -214.96 0.29047 0.868 Treatment 1 436.2 436.2 0.61 0.769 Year(Period) 2 1078.2 539.1 1.10 RED Loc Group(Treatment) 3 3328.2 1109.4 2.17 RED PeriodxTreatment 1 385.7 385.7 1.02 0.472 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 1197.0 399.0 0.78 0.592 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 966.1 483.1 0.98 0.453 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 3032.2 505.4 5.48 0.001 Res 1107 102120.0 92.2 Total 1126 111790.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS






2009, 2015 3.13 0.004 1999 0.004 2011, 2015 2.77 0.010 1996 0.010



2009, 2015 1.74 0.045 1998 0.055 2011, 2015 1.76 0.047 1997 0.056







Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 0.96 0.453 1998 0.409 2009, 2015 Negative 2011, 2015 Negative

PAIR-WISE TESTS






















Sand Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 72.267 72.267 0.87098 0.560 Treatment 1 1495.9 1495.9 2.28 0.143 Year(Period) 2 689.0 344.5 0.35 0.792 Loc Group(Treatment) 3 813.1 271.0 0.26 0.733 PeriodxTreatment 1 379.3 379.3 0.80 0.606 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 2739.4 913.1 0.88 0.359 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 1681.7 840.8 0.85 0.503 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 6129.7 1021.6 8.68 <0.001 Res 1107 130250.0 117.7 Total 1126 144370.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 2.51 0.033 16 0.013 PL ABC, RB WE 1.17 0.242 4065 0.239 PL DEF, RB WE 4.04 <0.001 3142 <0.001

















PAIR-WISE TESTS







2009, 2011 2.68 0.008 4280 0.010 2009, 2015 1.24 0.225 394 0.218 2011, 2015 3.18 0.001 4412 0.002


Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 6.25 <0.001 4362 <0.001 2009, 2015 3.45 0.001 3752 0.001 2011, 2015 2.61 0.013 335 0.010







Shell grit PERMANOVA table of results

Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 5.4546 5.4546 0.37179 0.867 Treatment 1 0.2 0.2 0.46 0.783 Year(Period) 2 1114.2 557.1 2.19 0.167 Loc Group(Treatment) 3 1227.4 409.2 1.54 0.332 PeriodxTreatment 1 21.0 21.0 0.94 0.512 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 427.8 142.6 0.54 0.582 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 307.4 153.7 0.60 0.625 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 1570.0 261.7 5.73 0.001 Res 1107 50547.0 45.7 Total 1126 55511.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS






Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 4.53 <0.001 960 <0.001

2009, 2015 5.05 <0.001 1409 <0.001 2011, 2015 0.73 0.947 10 0.467





2009, 2015 3.81 0.001 883 <0.001 2011, 2015 1.10 0.229 52 0.271





PAIR-WISE TESTS



Unique










Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 1.99 0.054 224 0.057 PL ABC, RB WE 4.25 <0.001 356 <0.001 PL DEF, RB WE 1.19 0.255 8 0.235












PL ABC, PL DEF 1.64 0.108 176 0.107 PL ABC, RB WE 2.46 0.004 38 0.014 PL DEF, RB WE 2.97 <0.001 150 0.004

Exposed rock - bare Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 293.65 293.65 0.47209 0.804 Treatment 1 1089.8 1089.8 0.62 0.700 Year(Period) 2 560.8 280.4 1.41 0.338 Loc Group(Treatment) 3 5789.1 1929.7 9.44 0.065 PeriodxTreatment 1 293.7 293.7 0.47 0.843 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 2411.9 804.0 3.94 0.171 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 560.8 280.4 1.41 0.362 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 1209.4 201.6 1.91 0.102 Res 1107 116920.0 105.6 Total 1126 132950.0

Colonising biota with recognisable biodiveristy Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 238.9 238.9 1.8746 0.257 Treatment 1 33.3 33.3 1.73 0.285 Year(Period) 2 246.2 123.1 1.44 RED Loc Group(Treatment) 3 162.5 54.2 0.61 RED PeriodxTreatment 1 33.3 33.3 1.73 0.279 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 162.5 54.2 0.61 0.605 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 32.7 16.3 0.19 0.830 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 526.3 87.7 3.24 0.012 Res 1107 29932.0 27.0 Total 1126 32169.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS



Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 1.24 0.211 2281 0.207 2009, 2015 2.44 0.069 4 0.019 2011, 2015 3.50 <0.001 2877 0.001




Unique




Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 1.52 0.234 8 0.127 2009, 2015 2.44 0.024 109 0.019

2011, 2015 0.25 0.979 41 0.798





PAIR-WISE TESTS















Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) LON NS, REF AC 2.02 0.043 1522.00 0.041






Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 1.50 0.177 44 0.141 PL ABC, RB WE 1.58 0.124 64 0.128 PL DEF, RB WE 3.53 <0.001 93 <0.001

Exposed rock - Microbiota

PERMANOVA table of results

Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 312.35 312.35 0.78591 0.613 Treatment 1 52.9 52.9 0.83 0.587 Year(Period) 2 1167.3 583.6 2.60 RED Loc Group(Treatment) 3 321.0 107.0 0.46 RED PeriodxTreatment 1 83.4 83.4 0.92 0.544 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 329.0 109.7 0.47 0.539 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 456.3 228.1 1.02 0.446 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 1382.2 230.4 4.60 0.005 Res 1107 55465.0 50.1 Total 1126 62238.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS


Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment'




Within level 'LON NS' of factor 'Loc Group' Unique

Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 1.30 0.207 3688 0.201 2009, 2015 2.43 0.064 4 0.017 2011, 2015 3.77 <0.001 4450 0.001









PAIR-WISE TESTS

























Colonising biota with distinct colonies Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 37.865 37.865 1.4188 0.328 Treatment 1 14.6 14.6 0.72 0.647 Year(Period) 2 47.1 23.6 1.69 0.232 Loc Group(Treatment) 3 40.7 13.6 0.96 0.365 PeriodxTreatment 1 14.6 14.6 0.72 0.646 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 40.7 13.6 0.96 0.395 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 52.1 26.1 1.87 0.210 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 84.3 14.0 1.29 0.258 Res 1107 12094.0 10.9 Total 1126 12602.0

Rubble - Natural Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 113.92 113.92 0.46164 0.774 Treatment 1 240.6 240.6 0.50 0.753 Year(Period) 2 3713.8 1856.9 2.36 RED Loc Group(Treatment) 3 5318.0 1772.7 2.16 RED PeriodxTreatment 1 199.6 199.6 2.09 0.218 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 275.0 91.7 0.11 0.906 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 762.8 381.4 0.48 0.666 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 4866.0 811.0 6.86 0.001 Res 1107 130880.0 118.2 Total 1126 147570.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS



Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 1.17 0.231 4653 0.238 2009, 2015 5.37 <0.001 2413 <0.001 2011, 2015 3.75 <0.001 4471 <0.001









Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 2.62 0.031 8 0.011 2009, 2015 4.45 0.002 83 <0.001 2011, 2015 0.82 0.492 18 0.409



PAIR-WISE TESTS





















Stiff sediment Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 419.19 419.19 2.1749 0.055 Treatment 1 480.4 480.4 1.83 0.137 Year(Period) 2 10.5 5.3 1.32 0.367 Loc Group(Treatment) 3 833.2 277.7 92.41 0.118 PeriodxTreatment 1 347.8 347.8 1.81 0.153 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 606.0 202.0 67.27 0.161 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 10.1 5.0 1.26 0.393 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 17.8 3.0 0.09 0.990 Res 1107 36355.0 32.8 Total 1126 40821.0



Average multivariate dispersion calculated using PERMDISP for habitat descriptor analysis Table C-5

27 m - Habitat descriptor 37 m - Habitat descriptor 47 m - Habitat descriptor 57 m - Habitat descriptor

Group Number of frames

Average SE Number of frames



Average SE

2006 Control

85 6.17 0.38 105 7.52 0.41 90 8.21 0.46 120 8.26 0.45

2006 Dredged

87 7.03 0.41 477 8.12 0.22 353 8.33 0.25 157 8.06 0.40

2009 Control

45 6.35 0.54 62 6.23 0.33 77 6.85 0.36 47 6.29 0.42

2009 Dredged

185 7.87 0.36 131 7.01 0.42 129 6.57 0.32 81 7.58 0.41

2011 Control

71 5.44 0.31 93 6.85 0.45 113 7.31 0.47 99 7.26 0.48

2011 Dredged

268 7.57 0.27 210 7.06 0.25 206 7.17 0.30 115 7.60 0.40

2015 Control

360 5.33 0.16 160 3.31 0.11 160 3.73 0.12 160 3.80 0.14

2015 Dredged

160 3.85 0.11 360 4.25 0.12 360 3.98 0.10 348 3.93 0.12

Results of dispersion analysis using PERMDISP for habitat descriptor anlaysis. Significant (at α < 0.05) p-values in bold Table C-6

27 m - Habitat descriptor 37 m - Habitat descriptor 47 m - Habitat descriptor 57 m - Habitat descriptor Group Number

of frames Average SE Number of

frames Average SE Number

of frames Average SE Number

of frames Average SE

2006 Control

85 6.17 0.38 105 7.52 0.41 90 8.21 0.46 120 8.26 0.45

2006 Dredged

87 7.03 0.41 477 8.12 0.22 353 8.33 0.25 157 8.06 0.40

2009 Control

45 6.35 0.54 62 6.23 0.33 77 6.85 0.36 47 6.29 0.42

2009 Dredged

185 7.87 0.36 131 7.01 0.42 129 6.57 0.32 81 7.58 0.41

2011 Control

71 5.44 0.31 93 6.85 0.45 113 7.31 0.47 99 7.26 0.48

2011 Dredged

268 7.57 0.27 210 7.06 0.25 206 7.17 0.30 115 7.60 0.40

2015 Control

360 5.33 0.16 160 3.31 0.11 160 3.73 0.12 160 3.80 0.14

2015 Dredged

160 3.85 0.11 360 4.25 0.12 360 3.98 0.10 348 3.93 0.12


Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno D-1


APPENDIX D PERMANOVA AND POST-HOC ANALYSES OF BIOTIC ASSEMBLAGE- FRAME DATA



Results of univariate statistical analyses using PERMANOVA for biotic assemblage at 27 Table D-1m depth stratum. Significant (at α < 0.05) p-values in bold. RED = redundant term due to significant interaction

Assemblage analyses 27 m



Period 1 2473.3 2473.3 Negative

Treatment 1 1183.0 1183.0 3.16 0.065

Year(Period) 2 -1182.0 -591.0 Negative RED






Res 1241 63571.0 51.2

Total 1260 71216.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 1.41 0.046 4972 0.055

2009, 2015 Negative

2011, 2015 1.54 0.011 4977 0.015




Unique


2009, 2011 2.76 <0.001 4982 <0.001

2009, 2015 0.63 0.866 4984 0.866

2011, 2015 3.53 <0.001 4979 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 2.11 0.006 4988 0.009

2009, 2015 Negative




2011, 2015 Negative




Unique


2009, 2011 2.63 <0.001 4988 0.001

2009, 2015 Negative

2011, 2015 Negative




Unique


2009, 2011 2.14 0.003 4987 0.002

2009, 2015 Negative

2011, 2015 2.04 0.003 4988 0.004

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.14 0.014 4987 0.010




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.67 0.075 4629 0.084

PL ABC, RB WE 1.95 0.011 4990 0.013

PL DEF, RB WE 1.20 0.232 4987 0.235




Unique





LON NS, REF AC 2.18 0.001 4983 0.002




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.68 0.027 4986 0.030

PL ABC, RB WE 0.93 0.547 4991 0.530

PL DEF, RB WE 1.62 0.028 4990 0.037




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.31 <0.001 4980 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.46 0.099 4987 0.091

PL ABC, RB WE 4.42 <0.001 4991 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 2.55 <0.001 4992 <0.001




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.42 <0.001 4980 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.14 0.001 4984 0.004

PL ABC, RB WE 2.67 <0.001 4989 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 3.22 <0.001 4990 <0.001






Period 1 62.0 62.0 1.39 0.355

Treatment 1 19.7 19.7 0.86 0.556

Year(Period) 2 251.9 126.0 2.04 0.262






Res 1241 15291.0 12.3

Total 1260 16210

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 2.07 0.043 63 0.047

2009, 2015 0.88 0.444 89 0.383

2011, 2015 0.87 0.555 35 0.396




Unique


2009, 2011 2.11 0.040 64 0.040

2009, 2015 1.63 0.097 29 0.099

2011, 2015 3.37 0.004 233 0.002




Unique


2009, 2011 1.92 0.056 32 0.054

2009, 2015 1.07 0.296 264 0.288

2011, 2015 1.62 0.113 59 0.107







Unique


2009, 2011 1.26 0.261 32 0.216

2009, 2015 2.41 0.019 21 0.017

2011, 2015 0.80 0.466 299 0.427




Unique


2009, 2011 1.12 0.352 32 0.257

2009, 2015 0.88 0.555 28 0.376

2011, 2015 1.27 0.337 217 0.199

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 0.40 1.000 2 0.692




Unique








Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.53 0.184 24 0.133







Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.90 0.045 32 0.059

PL ABC, RB WE 1.92 0.055 32 0.061

PL DEF, RB WE 0.45 1.000 4 0.648




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 3.47 0.001 242 0.002




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.11 0.349 32 0.273

PL ABC, RB WE 1.11 0.285 32 0.261

PL DEF, RB WE 1.03 0.457 239 0.311




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.57 0.141 27 0.122




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.42 0.743 22 0.678

PL ABC, RB WE 1.24 0.265 21 0.205

PL DEF, RB WE 1.20 0.294 17 0.232



Period 1 41084 41084 22.546 0.007

Treatment 1 5753.8 5753.8 2.32 0.197

Year(Period) 2 8261.2 4130.6 4.09 0.073









Res 1241 240420.0 193.7

Total 1260 352060.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 1.98 0.051 4350 0.047

2009, 2015 1.48 0.146 4328 0.141

2011, 2015 4.82 <0.001 4467 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 6.29 <0.001 4505 <0.001

2009, 2015 4.81 <0.001 3638 <0.001

2011, 2015 6.17 <0.001 2308 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 1.60 0.107 4634 0.119

2009, 2015 0.14 0.898 4613 0.893

2011, 2015 2.47 0.016 4634 0.013




Unique


2009, 2011 1.17 0.244 4500 0.242

2009, 2015 0.11 0.909 4605 0.912




2011, 2015 1.53 0.124 4615 0.119




Unique


2009, 2011 3.92 <0.001 4617 0.001

2009, 2015 3.91 <0.001 4600 <0.001

2011, 2015 0.72 0.469 4625 0.471

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.44 0.017 4384 0.017




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.43 0.669 3796 0.673

PL ABC, RB WE 0.25 0.804 4406 0.805

PL DEF, RB WE 0.21 0.826 4470 0.828




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 4.30 <0.001 4472 0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.14 0.255 4587 0.247




PL ABC, RB WE 0.58 0.565 4604 0.554

PL DEF, RB WE 1.91 0.059 4597 0.057




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.37 0.179 4170 0.171




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 4.58 <0.001 4605 <0.001

PL ABC, RB WE 5.19 <0.001 4639 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 0.58 0.563 4614 0.564




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.30 0.196 104 0.189




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.70 0.095 152 0.090

PL ABC, RB WE 3.70 <0.001 140 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 1.75 0.087 135 0.082



Period 1 866.0 866.0 1.05 0.463

Treatment 1 134.6 134.6 0.17 0.959

Year(Period) 2 631.5 315.8 4.36 0.078









Res 1241 16559.0 13.3

Total 1260 21738

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 0.09 0.936 3486 0.927

2009, 2015 0.49 0.659 1389 0.627

2011, 2015 0.71 0.481 2940 0.484




Unique


2009, 2011 2.55 0.010 3752 0.012

2009, 2015 4.06 0.001 1656 <0.001

2011, 2015 0.35 0.734 323 0.742




Unique


2009, 2011 3.76 <0.001 3637 <0.001

2009, 2015 2.24 0.029 3820 0.029

2011, 2015 2.62 0.005 107 0.011




Unique


2009, 2011 0.78 0.448 2709 0.443

2009, 2015 0.34 0.732 47 0.726

2011, 2015 1.52 0.146 2788 0.121







Unique


2009, 2011 2.55 0.001 407 0.012

2009, 2015 2.70 <0.001 402 0.011

2011, 2015 0.49 0.760 4 0.623

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 0.43 0.676 2570 0.661




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 3.03 0.007 2576 0.008

PL ABC, RB WE 10.59 <0.001 129 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 6.76 <0.001 268 <0.001




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.85 0.004 3272 0.006




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 3.04 0.002 3843 0.002

PL ABC, RB WE 2.34 0.019 3874 0.025

PL DEF, RB WE 0.92 0.403 504 0.353







Unique


LON NS, REF AC 0.08 0.946 2629 0.931




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.47 0.012 1847 0.015

PL ABC, RB WE 0.68 0.763 4 0.498

PL DEF, RB WE 3.70 <0.001 1572 0.001




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.64 0.119 40 0.101




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.67 0.007 35 0.008

PL ABC, RB WE 3.77 <0.001 32 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 2.46 0.011 11 0.013

Rhodophyta


Period 1 2603.5 2603.5 3.30 0.121

Treatment 1 1393.8 1393.8 1.33 0.361

Year(Period) 2 3852.2 1926.1 2.33 0.178






Res 1241 262380.0 211.4

Total 1260 302880




PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 0.99 0.336 4332 0.331

2009, 2015 0.14 0.886 3936 0.888

2011, 2015 1.76 0.083 4354 0.077




Unique


2009, 2011 0.87 0.408 2873 0.400

2009, 2015 1.29 0.203 1008 0.198

2011, 2015 2.21 0.025 1148 0.025




Unique


2009, 2011 2.21 0.024 4573 0.027

2009, 2015 0.72 0.475 4618 0.464

2011, 2015 2.35 0.020 4469 0.022




Unique


2009, 2011 5.93 <0.001 4648 <0.001

2009, 2015 4.70 <0.001 4695 <0.001

2011, 2015 1.65 0.102 4640 0.103




Unique





2009, 2011 2.85 0.005 4611 0.005

2009, 2015 1.34 0.186 4744 0.192

2011, 2015 4.66 <0.001 4774 <0.001

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.32 0.245 435 0.184




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.12 0.502 4 0.272

PL ABC, RB WE 1.88 0.053 3934 0.067

PL DEF, RB WE 2.11 0.032 4275 0.034




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.40 0.179 3422 0.166




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.69 0.008 4682 0.010

PL ABC, RB WE 1.58 0.115 4691 0.127

PL DEF, RB WE 1.15 0.265 4699 0.253







Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.38 0.179 4094 0.176




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.76 0.446 4501 0.443

PL ABC, RB WE 2.37 0.021 4582 0.020

PL DEF, RB WE 1.87 0.064 4593 0.060




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.59 0.119 86 0.109




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.07 0.955 158 0.948

PL ABC, RB WE 4.97 <0.001 236 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 4.93 <0.001 235 <0.001

Riterella peduncolata


Period 1 269.5 269.5 0.85 0.558

Treatment 1 223.3 223.3 0.71 0.618

Year(Period) 2 1308.8 654.4 6.66 RED






Res 1241 9305.5 7.5

Total 1260 13138

PAIR-WISE TESTS







Unique


Control, Dredged Denominator is 0



Unique


Control, Dredged 1.80 0.404 60 0.164



Unique


Control, Dredged 2.92 0.102 60 0.056



Unique


Control, Dredged 1.31 0.416 10 0.279

PAIR-WISE TESTS




Unique


2009, 2011 3.26 0.335 6 0.193

2009, 2015 0.98 0.660 6 0.507

2011, 2015 1.53 0.169 6 0.367



Unique


2009, 2011 0.97 0.547 360 0.427

2009, 2015 0.52 0.871 360 0.656

2011, 2015 1.22 0.365 360 0.355




PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 2.53 0.008 2903 0.012

2009, 2015 0.58 1.000 2 0.564

2011, 2015 4.16 <0.001 3291 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 0.96 0.343 4270 0.347

2009, 2015 3.71 0.003 1288 0.001

2011, 2015 6.20 <0.001 1669 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 1.98 0.037 373 0.051

2009, 2015 2.23 0.019 343 0.024

2011, 2015 0.20 0.854 80 0.838




Unique


2009, 2011 0.19 0.903 24 0.847

2009, 2015 0.73 0.464 32 0.466

2011, 2015 1.09 0.345 70 0.274




Unique





2009, 2011 0.50 0.582 24 0.617

2009, 2015 0.51 0.831 9 0.614

2011, 2015 0.01 1.000 56 0.993

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique






Unique








Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.87 <0.001 502 0.005




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.82 0.074 192 0.072

PL ABC, RB WE 2.39 0.005 264 0.015

PL DEF, RB WE 0.50 0.877 6 0.631







Unique


LON NS, REF AC 4.29 <0.001 4113 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.35 0.719 82 0.722

PL ABC, RB WE 0.28 0.777 60 0.772

PL DEF, RB WE 0.04 0.924 96 0.965




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 4.01 <0.001 23 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.73 0.560 13 0.478

PL ABC, RB WE 0.53 0.733 8 0.601

PL DEF, RB WE 1.17 0.326 11 0.254

Unidentified sponge colonial ascidian


Period 1 55.1 55.1 0.38 0.834

Treatment 1 8.4 8.4 1.22 0.399

Year(Period) 2 1031.3 515.6 7.75 RED






Res 1241 15794.0 12.7

Total 1260 18092

PAIR-WISE TESTS








Unique



2009, 2015 6.18 <0.001 59 <0.001

2011, 2015 8.42 <0.001 70 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 0.08 1.000 4 0.932

2009, 2015 2.02 0.042 33 0.048

2011, 2015 2.21 0.027 63 0.031




Unique



2009, 2015 4.75 <0.001 90 <0.001

2011, 2015 5.33 <0.001 93 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 2.72 0.004 3339 0.006

2009, 2015 4.88 <0.001 111 <0.001

2011, 2015 0.08 0.942 4044 0.938




Unique


2009, 2011 2.09 0.020 4076 0.037

2009, 2015 5.09 <0.001 87 <0.001




2011, 2015 0.34 0.770 4156 0.733

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique






Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.79 1.000 2 0.437

PL ABC, RB WE 0.99 0.453 267 0.335

PL DEF, RB WE 0.39 0.741 512 0.702




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.23 0.412 2 0.227




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.93 1.000 2 0.364

PL ABC, RB WE 0.88 1.000 2 0.390

PL DEF, RB WE 0.09 1.000 4 0.929




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.56 0.291 2 0.133







Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.99 0.001 3075 0.003

PL ABC, RB WE 2.20 0.012 3946 0.033

PL DEF, RB WE 0.21 0.840 4302 0.831




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 5.57 <0.001 40 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.41 0.019 56 0.014

PL ABC, RB WE 3.43 0.001 56 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 1.28 0.228 38 0.196

Presence Absence Data


Period 1 6.1 6.1 1.64 0.234

Treatment 1 1.0 1.0 0.78 0.728

Year(Period) 2 14.8 7.4 7.68 RED






Res 1241 277.9 0.2

Total 1260 338.68

PAIR-WISE TESTS








Unique


2009, 2011 2.43 <0.001 4979 <0.001

2009, 2015 3.83 <0.001 4975 <0.001

2011, 2015 4.18 <0.001 4980 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 2.16 <0.001 4979 <0.001

2009, 2015 3.12 <0.001 4973 <0.001

2011, 2015 3.16 <0.001 4970 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 3.75 <0.001 4987 <0.001

2009, 2015 3.76 <0.001 4975 <0.001

2011, 2015 4.83 <0.001 4977 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 2.36 <0.001 4987 <0.001

2009, 2015 3.50 <0.001 4979 <0.001

2011, 2015 3.52 <0.001 4975 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 2.47 <0.001 4987 <0.001

2009, 2015 3.98 <0.001 4984 <0.001

2011, 2015 3.93 <0.001 4975 <0.001

PAIR-WISE TESTS








Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.63 0.008 4984 0.010




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.54 0.063 764 0.079

PL ABC, RB WE 2.69 <0.001 4987 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 2.80 <0.001 4988 <0.001




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.23 <0.001 4977 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.94 <0.001 4983 <0.001

PL ABC, RB WE 2.80 <0.001 4979 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 2.16 <0.001 4975 <0.001




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.38 <0.001 4978 <0.001




Unique





PL ABC, PL DEF 2.48 <0.001 4983 <0.001

PL ABC, RB WE 3.42 <0.001 4991 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 2.55 <0.001 4975 <0.001




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 3.44 <0.001 4981 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.11 <0.001 4963 <0.001

PL ABC, RB WE 3.68 <0.001 4978 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 3.88 <0.001 4981 <0.001





Multivariate analysis


Period 1 1413.6 1413.6 Negative RED

Treatment 1 811.0 811.0 1.37 RED

Year(Period) 2 -2754.1 -1377.1 Negative RED






Res 1578 88590.0 56.1

Total 1597 88694.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 2.26 0.003 4991 0.007

2009, 2015 1.64 0.017 4979 0.020

2011, 2015 Negative




Unique


2009, 2011 2.23 0.002 4992 0.007

2009, 2015 Negative

2011, 2015 Negative




Unique


2009, 2011 1.70 0.045 4992 0.059

2009, 2015 Negative




2011, 2015 Negative




Unique


2009, 2011 2.38 <0.001 4996 <0.001

2009, 2015 Negative

2011, 2015 Negative




Unique


2009, 2011 1.70 0.035 4986 0.036

2009, 2015 Negative

2011, 2015 Negative

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


LON NS, REF AC Negative




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.82 0.619 4994 0.608

PL ABC, RB WE 2.33 0.004 4991 0.003

PL DEF, RB WE 2.31 0.005 4995 0.006




Unique





LON NS, REF AC 3.27 <0.001 4984 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.51 0.092 4986 0.096

PL ABC, RB WE 1.79 0.083 4993 0.077





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.64 0.060 4995 0.068




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.60 0.042 4994 0.037

PL ABC, RB WE 1.45 0.044 4980 0.045

PL DEF, RB WE 0.87 0.648 4987 0.629




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.21 <0.001 4989 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.55 0.040 4986 0.043

PL ABC, RB WE 3.05 <0.001 4985 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 2.93 <0.001 4985 <0.001

PAIR-WISE TESTS







Unique


2009, 2011 1.30 0.497 6 0.266

2009, 2015 Negative

2011, 2015 Negative



Unique


2009, 2011 2.62 0.072 360 0.027

2009, 2015 Negative

2011, 2015 Negative

PAIR-WISE TESTS




Unique


Control, Dredged 1.95 0.199 59 0.060



Unique


Control, Dredged 0.82 0.560 60 0.598



Unique


Control, Dredged 2.39 0.069 60 0.025



Unique


Control, Dredged 1.51 0.097 10 0.091







Period 1 1051.3 1051.3 0.98737 0.492

Treatment 1 33.2 33.2 0.54 0.726

Year(Period) 2 1994.4 997.2 3.86 0.082






Res 1578 56077.0 35.5

Total 1597 65439.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 0.38 0.715 1840 0.715

2009, 2015 1.71 0.085 251 0.096

2011, 2015 3.11 0.001 1816 0.002




Unique


2009, 2011 2.90 <0.001 2778 0.004

2009, 2015 4.37 <0.001 55 <0.001

2011, 2015 3.36 0.002 3298 0.002




Unique


2009, 2011 2.36 0.019 375 0.024

2009, 2015 3.80 0.001 738 <0.001




2011, 2015 0.23 0.828 464 0.816




Unique


2009, 2011 1.35 0.181 3952 0.176

2009, 2015 4.02 <0.001 607 <0.001

2011, 2015 3.56 0.001 4295 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 3.57 <0.001 4251 0.001

2009, 2015 6.54 <0.001 2717 <0.001

2011, 2015 2.78 0.004 4535 0.007

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 0.60 0.578 367 0.539




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.21 0.023 4113 0.028

PL ABC, RB WE 1.02 0.325 4331 0.312

PL DEF, RB WE 0.96 0.385 4425 0.333




Unique





LON NS, REF AC 1.30 0.360 8 0.196




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.76 0.480 256 0.445

PL ABC, RB WE 0.09 0.947 1104 0.926

PL DEF, RB WE 0.87 0.405 952 0.382




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 4.30 <0.001 4092 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.98 0.342 2137 0.321

PL ABC, RB WE 0.13 0.898 3861 0.889

PL DEF, RB WE 2.15 0.031 4312 0.032




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.52 0.012 39 0.011




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.92 0.054 76 0.058

PL ABC, RB WE 4.45 <0.001 89 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 2.64 0.012 101 0.007







Period 1 51698 51698 67.921 0.001

Treatment 1 7073.0 7073.0 2.15 0.213

Year(Period) 2 857.6 428.8 0.61 0.623






Res 1578 475990.0 301.6

Total 1597 581510.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 3.80 0.001 4619 <0.001

2009, 2015 5.36 <0.001 4404 <0.001

2011, 2015 1.08 0.278 4635 0.279




Unique


2009, 2011 0.78 0.425 4555 0.416

2009, 2015 1.44 0.151 4402 0.151

2011, 2015 2.65 0.009 4528 0.010




Unique


2009, 2011 0.63 0.536 4497 0.536

2009, 2015 1.08 0.292 4530 0.284

2011, 2015 2.40 0.018 1317 0.018







Unique


2009, 2011 4.28 0.001 4579 <0.001

2009, 2015 2.88 0.004 4575 0.006

2011, 2015 2.76 0.006 4605 0.008




Unique


2009, 2011 2.59 0.010 4358 0.011

2009, 2015 1.09 0.280 4618 0.275

2011, 2015 2.89 0.005 4614 0.005

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 0.88 0.380 4638 0.378




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.32 0.188 4768 0.190

PL ABC, RB WE 2.30 0.022 4751 0.021

PL DEF, RB WE 1.26 0.213 4826 0.203




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 4.06 <0.001 4523 <0.001







Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.80 0.421 4615 0.431

PL ABC, RB WE 0.19 0.859 4661 0.853

PL DEF, RB WE 0.76 0.445 4647 0.452




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.43 0.166 4630 0.150




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 3.02 0.004 4314 0.004

PL ABC, RB WE 2.44 0.015 4357 0.017

PL DEF, RB WE 0.52 0.601 4635 0.615




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 0.26 0.799 112 0.794




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.18 0.869 129 0.853

PL ABC, RB WE 1.01 0.314 123 0.315

PL DEF, RB WE 1.11 0.274 131 0.259




Period 1 456.14 456.14 0.27809 0.893




Treatment 1 354.6 354.6 0.53 0.752

Year(Period) 2 5053.4 2526.7 6.91 0.019






Res 1578 64508.0 40.9

Total 1597 79143.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 0.02 0.979 3717 0.983

2009, 2015 3.32 <0.001 1019 0.001

2011, 2015 2.96 <0.001 3377 0.005




Unique


2009, 2011 4.19 <0.001 4274 0.001

2009, 2015 11.07 <0.001 4054 <0.001

2011, 2015 4.05 <0.001 2160 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 1.61 0.109 2154 0.120

2009, 2015 5.81 <0.001 2051 <0.001

2011, 2015 1.64 0.071 29 0.096




Unique





2009, 2011 5.04 <0.001 4159 <0.001

2009, 2015 7.55 <0.001 3931 <0.001

2011, 2015 4.10 <0.001 3544 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 3.09 0.002 3856 0.002

2009, 2015 4.87 <0.001 3608 <0.001

2011, 2015 1.62 0.096 2133 0.102

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 5.87 <0.001 4286 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.51 0.137 4582 0.125

PL ABC, RB WE 0.27 0.787 4534 0.784

PL DEF, RB WE 2.49 0.012 4616 0.011




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 6.75 <0.001 4258 <0.001




Unique





PL ABC, PL DEF 1.79 0.079 4192 0.082

PL ABC, RB WE 0.45 0.665 3251 0.657

PL DEF, RB WE 2.55 0.009 4195 0.015




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.17 0.026 3789 0.031




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.87 0.416 1713 0.389

PL ABC, RB WE 0.17 0.912 453 0.867

PL DEF, RB WE 1.64 0.104 3724 0.106




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 4.09 <0.001 15 0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.00 1.000 9 1.000

PL ABC, RB WE 1.14 0.324 13 0.252

PL DEF, RB WE 1.28 0.280 12 0.207




Period 1 2645.2 2645.2 4.5176 0.070

Treatment 1 14.2 14.2 0.15 0.972

Year(Period) 2 775.8 387.9 9.94 0.013









Res 1578 76804.0 48.7

Total 1597 85875.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS

Term 'Year(Period)'


Unique


2009, 2011 4.71 0.009 4950 0.012

2009, 2015 3.68 0.023 4953 0.026

2011, 2015 2.46 0.051 4966 0.070

PAIR-WISE TESTS



Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.88 0.205 4394 0.196


Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 3.43 0.076 4406 0.074

PL ABC, RB WE 4.09 0.064 4361 0.055

PL DEF, RB WE 0.78 0.590 4429 0.775

Orthoscuticella ventricosa


Period 1 1026.9 1026.9 0.6306 0.659

Treatment 1 9.7 9.7 0.23 0.921

Year(Period) 2 2593.2 1296.6 41.10 0.001






Res 1578 44940.0 28.5

Total 1597 51712.0




PAIR-WISE TESTS

Term 'Year(Period)'


Unique


2009, 2011 5.64 0.015 4939 0.002

2009, 2015 1.13 0.346 4955 0.338

2011, 2015 10.93 0.006 4951 <0.001

Presence Absence data


Period 1 9.9176 9.9176 0.80034 0.638

Treatment 1 1.2 1.2 0.77 0.752

Year(Period) 2 20.1 10.1 13.42 <0.001






Res 1578 333.2 0.2

Total 1597 405.6

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 1.90 <0.001 4978 <0.001

2009, 2015 3.71 <0.001 4977 <0.001

2011, 2015 4.74 <0.001 4981 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 2.46 <0.001 4984 <0.001

2009, 2015 3.89 <0.001 4976 <0.001

2011, 2015 2.89 <0.001 4980 <0.001







Unique


2009, 2011 1.79 0.002 4979 0.003

2009, 2015 3.79 <0.001 4969 <0.001

2011, 2015 2.55 <0.001 4983 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 2.51 <0.001 4977 <0.001

2009, 2015 4.40 <0.001 4975 <0.001

2011, 2015 5.04 <0.001 4972 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 2.57 <0.001 4985 <0.001

2009, 2015 4.68 <0.001 4987 <0.001

2011, 2015 4.70 <0.001 4980 <0.001

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 3.85 <0.001 4979 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.68 <0.001 4981 <0.001

PL ABC, RB WE 2.97 <0.001 4991 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 2.64 <0.001 4981 <0.001







Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.59 <0.001 4975 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.71 <0.001 4985 0.002

PL ABC, RB WE 2.04 <0.001 4978 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 2.43 <0.001 4986 <0.001




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.12 <0.001 4972 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.25 0.094 4978 0.111

PL ABC, RB WE 1.13 0.208 4976 0.240

PL DEF, RB WE 1.73 0.001 4979 0.002




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 3.35 <0.001 4976 <0.001




Unique





PL ABC, PL DEF 1.69 <0.001 4978 0.001

PL ABC, RB WE 3.02 <0.001 4974 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 3.07 <0.001 4975 <0.001







Period 1 1253.7 1253.7 Negative

Treatment 1.0 562.4 562.36 1.211 0.380

Year(Period) 2.0 -4916.2 -2458.10 Negative

Loc Group(Treatment) 3.0 1001.8 333.95 1.185 0.396

PeriodxTreatment 1.0 296.1 296.08 0.983 0.506

PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3.0 486.5 162.18 0.603 0.616

Year(Period)xTreatment 2.0 740.7 370.35 1.790 0.203

Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6.0 1373.0 228.83 4.153 <0.001

Res 1468.0 80887.0 55.10

Total 1487.0 80883.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 1.94 0.005 4978 0.005

2009, 2015 Negative

2011, 2015 Negative




Unique


2009, 2011 2.12 0.011 4989 0.012

2009, 2015 Negative

2011, 2015 Negative




Unique


2009, 2011 Negative

2009, 2015 Negative

2011, 2015 Negative







Unique


2009, 2011 1.39 0.114 4992 0.125

2009, 2015 Negative

2011, 2015 Negative




Unique


2009, 2011 2.23 0.001 4983 0.001

2009, 2015 Negative

2011, 2015 Negative

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.15 0.004 4989 0.006




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.98 0.021 4991 0.017

PL ABC, RB WE 1.64 0.048 4986 0.049





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.89 0.004 4986 0.006







Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.80 0.016 4981 0.020

PL ABC, RB WE Negative

PL DEF, RB WE 1.65 0.046 4990 0.049




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.87 <0.001 4993 0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.57 <0.001 4991 0.001

PL ABC, RB WE 2.19 0.001 4985 0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 1.65 0.024 4989 0.028




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.16 0.215 4980 0.211




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.65 0.009 4984 0.013

PL ABC, RB WE 2.59 <0.001 4983 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 2.43 <0.001 4982 <0.001



Period 1 468.28 468.28 0.37046 0.848




Treatment 1.0 0.1 0.12 0.855 0.540

Year(Period) 2.0 3054.8 1527.40 9.945 RED

Loc Group(Treatment) 3.0 304.8 101.58 0.502 RED





Res 1468.0 47302.0 32.22

Total 1487.0 54007.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 1.82 0.072 3703 0.072

2009, 2015 6.92 <0.001 1596 <0.001

2011, 2015 5.23 <0.001 4068 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 2.95 0.001 384 0.005

2009, 2015 3.67 0.001 82 <0.001

2011, 2015 1.74 0.082 2263 0.082




Unique


2009, 2011 2.29 0.009 3783 0.024

2009, 2015 4.03 <0.001 1215 <0.001

2011, 2015 0.92 0.355 3922 0.356




Unique





2009, 2011 2.23 0.021 3702 0.028

2009, 2015 5.19 <0.001 312 <0.001

2011, 2015 3.04 0.002 3427 0.003




Unique


2009, 2011 2.70 0.007 4119 0.008

2009, 2015 7.07 <0.001 676 <0.001

2011, 2015 4.42 <0.001 4383 <0.001

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.65 0.001 382 0.010




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.34 0.740 4231 0.743

PL ABC, RB WE 1.47 0.148 4246 0.141

PL DEF, RB WE 1.69 0.098 4421 0.094




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.38 0.242 32 0.165




Unique





PL ABC, PL DEF 0.96 0.360 144 0.340

PL ABC, RB WE 0.98 0.330 288 0.324

PL DEF, RB WE 0.09 0.965 32 0.929




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 3.64 0.001 4056 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.01 0.341 4017 0.306

PL ABC, RB WE 0.14 0.893 4231 0.889

PL DEF, RB WE 1.00 0.330 4260 0.323




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.22 0.235 67 0.223




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.54 0.617 73 0.593

PL ABC, RB WE 3.64 0.001 80 0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 3.15 0.002 78 0.001



Period 1 40287 40287 20.205 0.003

Treatment 1.0 3142.2 3142.20 3.727 0.090

Year(Period) 2.0 564.9 282.46 0.174 RED









Res 1468.0 461400.0 314.30

Total 1487.0 583090.0





Unique


2009, 2011 1.70 0.095 4639 0.089

2009, 2015 1.02 0.295 4507 0.309

2011, 2015 3.63 0.001 4624 0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 1.22 0.229 4364 0.240

2009, 2015 1.11 0.285 4450 0.266

2011, 2015 2.90 0.005 4607 0.006




Unique


2009, 2011 0.73 0.456 4593 0.464

2009, 2015 3.35 0.001 4511 0.001

2011, 2015 2.04 0.047 4557 0.038




Unique


2009, 2011 0.69 0.494 4617 0.489

2009, 2015 2.02 0.048 4532 0.046

2011, 2015 3.25 0.001 4584 0.002







Unique


2009, 2011 4.02 <0.001 4588 <0.001

2009, 2015 2.82 0.007 4604 0.004

2011, 2015 2.80 0.004 4672 0.004

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.63 0.106 4652 0.113




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.13 0.887 4768 0.892

PL ABC, RB WE 0.11 0.913 4744 0.904

PL DEF, RB WE 0.25 0.806 4818 0.792




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.83 0.074 4563 0.064




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.86 0.006 4594 0.005

PL ABC, RB WE 0.09 0.927 4632 0.923

PL DEF, RB WE 2.49 0.016 4614 0.014







Unique


LON NS, REF AC 4.72 <0.001 4646 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.79 0.005 4603 0.006

PL ABC, RB WE 3.30 0.003 4613 0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 0.02 0.987 4634 0.986




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.25 0.222 113 0.219




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.02 0.316 127 0.306

PL ABC, RB WE 0.11 0.930 133 0.918

PL DEF, RB WE 1.05 0.294 133 0.292

Halicornopsis elegans


Period 1 70.7 70.7 0.44187 0.793

Treatment 1.0 48.2 48.23 0.892 0.535

Year(Period) 2.0 515.0 257.52 3.637 RED






Res 1468.0 24165.0 16.46

Total 1487.0 26038.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS








Unique


2009, 2011 1.74 0.078 2325 0.084

2009, 2015 2.84 0.003 1285 0.005

2011, 2015 1.18 0.267 128 0.242




Unique


2009, 2011 2.02 0.036 1404 0.050

2009, 2015 2.77 0.007 978 0.006

2011, 2015 0.66 0.535 89 0.511




Unique


2009, 2011 1.93 0.053 3812 0.065

2009, 2015 5.46 <0.001 1790 <0.001

2011, 2015 2.66 0.003 32 0.009




Unique


2009, 2011 1.45 0.155 4344 0.149

2009, 2015 3.62 0.001 3940 0.001

2011, 2015 1.99 0.040 3741 0.038




Unique


2009, 2011 1.72 0.067 2326 0.094

2009, 2015 0.95 0.656 6 0.341

2011, 2015 2.62 0.001 3438 0.007




PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.57 0.129 128 0.114




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.09 0.272 3898 0.276

PL ABC, RB WE 2.15 0.024 3723 0.034

PL DEF, RB WE 1.13 0.266 3556 0.254




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.96 0.049 3196 0.062




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.84 0.437 4335 0.394

PL ABC, RB WE 3.42 <0.001 2965 0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 3.07 <0.001 4140 0.003




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 0.31 0.788 159 0.754







Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.28 0.220 3285 0.209

PL ABC, RB WE 0.69 0.536 3464 0.495

PL DEF, RB WE 0.64 0.539 4295 0.524




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.67 0.008 17 0.006




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 4.12 <0.001 25 <0.001

PL ABC, RB WE 1.16 0.505 4 0.252

PL DEF, RB WE 3.80 <0.001 27 <0.001



Period 1 194.52 194.52 0.091586 0.990

Treatment 1.0 1135.5 1135.50 0.728 0.632

Year(Period) 2.0 10546.0 5273.20 16.559 RED






Res 1468.0 63087.0 42.98

Total 1487.0 81911.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 4.25 <0.001 4185 <0.001




2009, 2015 6.37 <0.001 4101 <0.001

2011, 2015 3.16 0.002 3654 0.003




Unique


2009, 2011 3.01 0.005 4471 0.004

2009, 2015 9.35 <0.001 4372 <0.001

2011, 2015 4.00 <0.001 2299 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 2.23 0.014 4039 0.031

2009, 2015 6.03 <0.001 3323 <0.001

2011, 2015 4.52 <0.001 966 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 2.98 0.003 4280 0.003

2009, 2015 8.00 <0.001 4145 <0.001

2011, 2015 4.14 <0.001 3083 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 3.82 <0.001 4059 <0.001

2009, 2015 6.35 <0.001 3840 <0.001

2011, 2015 3.56 <0.001 3546 0.001

PAIR-WISE TESTS








Unique


LON NS, REF AC 5.71 <0.001 4302 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.94 0.002 4439 0.004

PL ABC, RB WE 2.92 0.002 4479 0.005

PL DEF, RB WE 0.02 0.984 4547 0.985







Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.24 0.219 4327 0.216

PL ABC, RB WE 0.08 0.936 4205 0.935

PL DEF, RB WE 1.46 0.151 4283 0.151




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 3.17 0.002 4002 0.002







Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.02 0.050 22 0.048







Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.15 0.344 11 0.244

PL ABC, RB WE 0.70 0.619 10 0.484

PL DEF, RB WE 0.47 0.760 12 0.637

Hyphae sponge


Period 1 0.13359 0.13359 0.74683 0.632

Treatment 1.0 0.1 0.13 0.747 0.618

Year(Period) 2.0 1.0 0.48 1.253 0.433





Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6.0 2.3 0.38 1.042 0.340

Res 1468.0 537.8 0.37

Total 1487.0 547.2



Period 1 4939.3 4939.3 5.2607 0.048

Treatment 1.0 27.2 27.20 0.182 0.961

Year(Period) 2.0 867.0 433.50 4.143 0.071






Res 1468.0 83581.0 56.94

Total 1487.0 98987.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 4.25 <0.001 4185 <0.001




2009, 2015 6.37 <0.001 4101 <0.001

2011, 2015 3.16 0.002 3654 0.003




Unique


2009, 2011 3.01 0.005 4471 0.004

2009, 2015 9.35 <0.001 4372 <0.001

2011, 2015 4.00 <0.001 2299 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 2.23 0.014 4039 0.031

2009, 2015 6.03 <0.001 3323 <0.001

2011, 2015 4.52 <0.001 966 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 2.98 0.003 4280 0.003

2009, 2015 8.00 <0.001 4145 <0.001

2011, 2015 4.14 <0.001 3083 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 3.82 <0.001 4059 <0.001

2009, 2015 6.35 <0.001 3840 <0.001

2011, 2015 3.56 <0.001 3546 <0.001

PAIR-WISE TESTS








Unique


LON NS, REF AC 5.71 <0.001 4302 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.94 0.002 4439 0.004

PL ABC, RB WE 2.92 0.002 4479 0.005

PL DEF, RB WE 0.02 0.984 4547 0.985




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 4.54 <0.001 4410 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.24 0.219 4327 0.216

PL ABC, RB WE 0.08 0.936 4205 0.935

PL DEF, RB WE 1.46 0.151 4283 0.151




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 3.17 0.002 4002 0.002




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.99 0.337 3961 0.330

PL ABC, RB WE 0.48 0.650 3579 0.628

PL DEF, RB WE 1.84 0.063 4060 0.066







Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.02 0.050 22 0.048




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.15 0.344 11 0.244

PL ABC, RB WE 0.70 0.619 10 0.484

PL DEF, RB WE 0.47 0.760 12 0.637







Period 1 -278.38 -278.38 0.1358 0.516

Treatment 1.0 134.0 133.98 0.459 0.909

Year(Period) 2.0 -2761.2 -1380.60 Negative RED






Res 1107.0 56027.0 50.61

Total 1126.0 53386.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 Negative

2009, 2015 1.08 0.326 4987 0.328

2011, 2015 Negative




Unique


2009, 2011 1.75 0.029 4994 0.034

2009, 2015 0.97 0.495 4986 0.489

2011, 2015 Negative




Unique


2009, 2011 1.08 0.282 4988 0.302

2009, 2015 Negative

2011, 2015 Negative







Unique


2009, 2011 0.67 0.809 4986 0.789

2009, 2015 Negative

2011, 2015 1.30 0.162 4989 0.163




Unique


2009, 2011 1.41 0.105 4989 0.107

2009, 2015 Negative

2011, 2015 Negative

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 0.41 0.842 4993 0.841




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.15 0.018 4987 0.019

PL ABC, RB WE 2.81 0.001 4984 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 1.92 0.034 4988 0.031




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.64 0.044 4984 0.053







Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.17 0.215 4985 0.227

PL ABC, RB WE 1.11 0.287 4988 0.293

PL DEF, RB WE 1.25 0.178 4980 0.181




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 3.33 0.001 4995 0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.17 0.213 4987 0.244

PL ABC, RB WE 1.10 0.303 4988 0.306

PL DEF, RB WE 1.48 0.100 4986 0.101




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.68 0.016 4988 0.017




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.01 0.425 4989 0.429

PL ABC, RB WE 2.13 0.003 4986 0.002

PL DEF, RB WE 4.06 <0.001 4992 <0.001



Period 1 1114.9 1114.9 0.76467 0.600




Treatment 1.0 24.3 24.26 0.356 0.888

Year(Period) 2.0 3214.3 1607.10 16.477 0.005






Res 1107.0 25089.0 22.66

Total 1126.0 33185.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 0.22 0.883 482 0.833

2009, 2015 5.72 <0.001 1507 <0.001

2011, 2015 8.42 <0.001 1466 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 2.79 0.005 1217 0.009

2009, 2015 5.57 <0.001 68 <0.001

2011, 2015 1.69 0.102 2694 0.093




Unique


2009, 2011 1.03 0.326 128 0.306

2009, 2015 2.12 0.031 198 0.037

2011, 2015 1.35 0.161 654 0.189




Unique





2009, 2011 1.39 0.168 1907 0.166

2009, 2015 2.48 0.014 339 0.013

2011, 2015 0.80 0.431 2848 0.428




Unique


2009, 2011 1.48 0.156 3896 0.138

2009, 2015 4.05 <0.001 1178 <0.001

2011, 2015 2.38 0.019 4147 0.021

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.91 0.190 4 0.065




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.35 0.207 270 0.181

PL ABC, RB WE 1.87 0.036 32 0.068

PL DEF, RB WE 1.31 0.238 48 0.196




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.74 0.112 32 0.089




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.47 0.680 48 0.637




PL ABC, RB WE 0.17 0.884 218 0.861

PL DEF, RB WE 0.38 0.685 418 0.707




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 3.00 0.004 2724 0.002




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.14 0.260 2901 0.258

PL ABC, RB WE 0.34 0.756 3288 0.740

PL DEF, RB WE 1.00 0.321 3242 0.328




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.97 0.005 71 0.004




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.18 0.243 122 0.242

PL ABC, RB WE 1.14 0.258 70 0.263




Period 1 17537 17537 6.5696 0.033

Treatment 1.0 194.5 194.48 0.145 0.975

Year(Period) 2.0 1334.7 667.35 1.006 0.431









Res 1107.0 405740.0 366.53

Total 1126.0 465180.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS



Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.48 0.284 4380 0.270


Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.11 0.177 4370 0.184

PL ABC, RB WE 4.86 0.048 4379 0.030

PL DEF, RB WE 6.05 0.031 4444 0.025



Period 1 144.51 144.51 0.11404 0.988

Treatment 1.0 1303.3 1303.30 1.345 0.378

Year(Period) 2.0 6306.6 3153.30 13.900 RED






Res 1107.0 36286.0 32.78

Total 1126.0 47964.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 4.63 <0.001 3941 <0.001

2009, 2015 7.88 <0.001 3357 <0.001

2011, 2015 3.27 <0.001 3575 0.002







Unique


2009, 2011 2.14 0.035 4179 0.037

2009, 2015 9.81 <0.001 2229 <0.001

2011, 2015 7.74 <0.001 3457 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 0.97 0.350 256 0.340

2009, 2015 4.82 <0.001 236 <0.001

2011, 2015 2.42 0.040 37 0.018




Unique


2009, 2011 1.80 0.078 3070 0.077

2009, 2015 8.18 <0.001 583 <0.001

2011, 2015 4.95 <0.001 1566 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 5.43 <0.001 4338 <0.001

2009, 2015 7.86 <0.001 4290 <0.001

2011, 2015 1.11 0.284 1564 0.271

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 4.24 <0.001 4222 <0.001







Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 0.34 0.763 3987 0.741

PL ABC, RB WE 1.22 0.237 4307 0.227

PL DEF, RB WE 2.35 0.017 4182 0.019




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.27 0.027 4106 0.029




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.11 0.027 3477 0.045

PL ABC, RB WE 2.46 0.014 4207 0.017

PL DEF, RB WE 0.65 0.532 4223 0.507




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 4.67 <0.001 4002 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.33 0.197 2828 0.191

PL ABC, RB WE 0.31 0.775 449 0.757

PL DEF, RB WE 2.50 0.009 3635 0.012




Unique





LON NS, REF AC 0.66 0.676 8 0.512




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.45 0.178 15 0.152

PL ABC, RB WE 1.41 0.208 16 0.159

PL DEF, RB WE 2.22 0.008 25 0.027



Period 1 842.26 842.26 1.9676 0.236

Treatment 1.0 526.9 526.87 1.877 0.253

Year(Period) 2.0 573.0 286.52 13.533 0.004






Res 1107.0 30666.0 27.70

Total 1126.0 35086.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS

Term 'PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment)' for pairs of levels of factor 'Period'



Unique


Before, After 0.35 0.498 24 0.992



Unique


Before, After 0.19 0.799 24 0.862



Unique





Before, After 7.40 <0.001 24 0.019



Unique


Before, After 1.41 0.130 24 0.303



Unique


Before, After 4.35 0.077 24 0.024

PAIR-WISE TESTS

Term 'PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment)' for pairs of levels of factor 'Loc Group'



Unique


LON NS, REF AC 0.84 0.406 3731 0.402



Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 3.26 0.001 4252 0.002

PL ABC, RB WE 0.36 0.720 4337 0.703

PL DEF, RB WE 3.18 0.002 4305 0.002



Unique


LON NS, REF AC 0.31 0.718 360 0.770



Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.40 0.386 332 0.214

PL ABC, RB WE 1.80 0.290 356 0.078

PL DEF, RB WE 2.78 0.156 358 0.026




PAIR-WISE TESTS

Term 'Year(Period)'


Unique


2009, 2011 6.18 0.011 4939 0.008

2009, 2015 3.46 0.042 4942 0.039

2011, 2015 1.78 0.175 4932 0.162

Texture yellow sponge


Period 1 21.312 21.312 0.59924 0.679

Treatment 1.0 15.3 15.28 0.596 RED

Year(Period) 2.0 91.5 45.73 7.149 RED






Res 1107.0 6815.8 6.16

Total 1126.0 7169.4

PAIR-WISE TESTS




Unique


Control, Dredged 1.28 0.396 4 0.245



Unique


Control, Dredged 1.43 0.314 60 0.249



Unique


Control, Dredged 4.04 0.087 60 0.018






Unique


Control, Dredged Denominator is 0

PAIR-WISE TESTS




Unique


2009, 2011 1.00 0.666 3 0.495

2009, 2015 1.00 1.000 1 0.495

2011, 2015 1.00 1.000 1 0.506



Unique


2009, 2011 1.02 0.392 360 0.386

2009, 2015 2.10 0.195 60 0.162

2011, 2015 5.19 0.032 60 0.019



Average multivariate dispersion calculated using PERMDISP for the biotic assemblage analysis Table D-5

27 m - Assemblage 37 m - Assemblage 47 m - Assemblage 57 m - Assemblage

Group Number of frames




Average SE

2006 Control

85 6.17 0.38 105 7.52 0.41 90 8.21 0.46 120 8.26 0.45

2006 Dredged

87 7.03 0.41 477 8.12 0.22 353 8.33 0.25 157 8.06 0.40

2009 Control

45 6.35 0.54 62 6.23 0.33 77 6.85 0.36 47 6.29 0.42

2009 Dredged

185 7.87 0.36 131 7.01 0.42 129 6.57 0.32 81 7.58 0.41

2011 Control

71 5.44 0.31 93 6.85 0.45 113 7.31 0.47 99 7.26 0.48

2011 Dredged

268 7.57 0.27 210 7.06 0.25 206 7.17 0.30 115 7.60 0.40

2015 Control

360 5.33 0.16 160 3.31 0.11 160 3.73 0.12 160 3.80 0.14

2015 Dredged

160 3.85 0.11 360 4.25 0.12 360 3.98 0.10 348 3.93 0.12

Results of dispersion analysis using PERMDISP for the biotic assemblage. Significant (at α < 0.05) p-values in bold Table D-6

27 m - Assemblage 37 m - Assemblage 47 m - Assemblage 57 m - Assemblage Group Number

of frames Average SE Number of

frames Average SE Number

of frames Average SE Number

of frames Average SE

2006 Control

85 6.17 0.38 105 7.52 0.41 90 8.21 0.46 120 8.26 0.45

2006 Dredged

87 7.03 0.41 477 8.12 0.22 353 8.33 0.25 157 8.06 0.40

2009 Control

45 6.35 0.54 62 6.23 0.33 77 6.85 0.36 47 6.29 0.42

2009 Dredged

185 7.87 0.36 131 7.01 0.42 129 6.57 0.32 81 7.58 0.41

2011 Control

71 5.44 0.31 93 6.85 0.45 113 7.31 0.47 99 7.26 0.48

2011 Dredged

268 7.57 0.27 210 7.06 0.25 206 7.17 0.30 115 7.60 0.40

2015 Control

360 5.33 0.16 160 3.31 0.11 160 3.73 0.12 160 3.80 0.14

2015 Dredged

160 3.85 0.11 360 4.25 0.12 360 3.98 0.10 348 3.93 0.12


Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno E-1


APPENDIX E PERMANOVA AND POST-HOC ANALYSES OF BIOTIC ASSEMBLAGE – PATCH DATA



Results of multivariate statistical analyses using PERMANOVA for biotic assemblage Table E-1using patch data. Significant (at α < 0.05) p-values in bold. RED = redundant term due to significant interaction

Patch Analyses Depth 27 m Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 23082 23082 3.08 0.060 Treatment 1 4957 4957 1.13 0.366 Year(Period) 2 12233 6116 3.95 0.003

Loc Group(Treatment) 3 8847 2949 1.89 0.099 PeriodxTreatment 1 3021 3020 1.05 0.443 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 4731 1577 1.01 0.484 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 5437 2718 1.76 0.085 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 9603 1600 1.18 0.196 Res 66 89807 1360 Total 85 178800 PAIR-WISE TESTS Term 'Year(Period)' Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 1.80 0.074 4976 0.005 2009, 2015 2.08 0.031 4980 0.004 2011, 2015 2.35 0.021 4959 <0.001 Depth 37 m Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 14922 14922 1.3556 0.292 Treatment 1.0 2158.1 2158.10 0.891 0.611 Year(Period) 2.0 14802.0 7401.10 5.633 0.001Loc Group(Treatment) 3.0 5963.2 1987.70 1.311 0.237 PeriodxTreatment 1.0 1555.0 1555.00 0.910 0.589 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3.0 2891.4 963.81 0.872 0.579 Year(Period)xTreatment 2.0 3668.6 1834.30 1.396 0.195 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6.0 7832.5 1305.40 0.960 0.537 Res 91.0 123710.0 1359.50 Total 110.0 191560.0 PAIR-WISE TESTS Term 'Year(Period)' Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 1.83 0.073 4969 0.002 2009, 2015 2.87 0.017 4949 <0.001 2011, 2015 2.82 0.018 4980 <0.001 Depth 47 m Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 12520 12520 1.0854 0.419 Treatment 1.0 1971.4 1971.40 1.229 0.290 Year(Period) 2.0 16723.0 8361.60 4.685 0.002



Patch Analyses Loc Group(Treatment) 3.0 7087.3 2362.40 1.087 0.398 PeriodxTreatment 1.0 1343.1 1343.10 1.477 0.139 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3.0 3274.3 1091.40 0.672 0.774 Year(Period)xTreatment 2.0 2210.5 1105.30 0.619 0.853 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6.0 10996.0 1832.70 1.274 0.112 Res 99.0 142430.0 1438.70 Total 118.0 211410.0 PAIR-WISE TESTS Term 'Year(Period)' Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 1.64 0.085 4972 0.019 2009, 2015 3.09 0.011 4975 <0.001 2011, 2015 2.52 0.020 4981 0.001 Depth 57 m Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 10677 10677 1.03 0.460 Treatment 1 1601 1601 0.73 0.754 Year(Period) 2 12029 6014 4.91 0.003

Loc Group(Treatment) 3 9064 3021 1.85 0.122 PeriodxTreatment 1 2178 2178 1.13 0.388 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 5013 1671 1.26 0.294 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 2483 1241 1.01 0.464 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 7330 1221 0.90 0.612 Res 65 89199 1372 Total 84 142210 PAIR-WISE TESTS Term 'Year(Period)' Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 1.57 0.132 4975 0.049 2009, 2015 3.28 0.012 4978 <0.001 2011, 2015 2.09 0.030 4971 0.010


Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno F-1


APPENDIX F PERMANOVA AND POST-HOC ANALYSES OF BIOTIC ASSEMBLAGE – PRESENCE/ABSENCE TRANSFORMED DATA



Results of multivariate statistical analyses using PERMANOVA for biotic assemblage at Table F-127 m depth stratum transformed to presence/absence data. Significant (at α < 0.05) p-values in bold. RED = redundant term due to significant interaction

Presence/Absence data 27 m depth


Res 1241 277.9 0.22 Total 1260 338.7

PAIR-WISE TESTS



Unique Groups t P(perm) perms 2009, 2011 2.43 <0.001 4988 2009, 2015 3.83 <0.001 4986 2011, 2015 4.18 <0.001 4973












PAIR-WISE TESTS



Unique Groups t P(perm) perms LON NS, REF AC 1.63 0.006 4980


Unique Groups t P(perm) perms PL ABC, PL DEF 1.54 0.056 768 PL ABC, RB WE 2.69 <0.001 4987 PL DEF, RB WE 2.80 <0.001 4988


Unique Groups t P(perm) perms LON NS, REF AC 2.23 <0.001 4975


Unique Groups t P(perm) perms PL ABC, PL DEF 2.94 <0.001 4971 PL ABC, RB WE 2.80 <0.001 4982 PL DEF, RB WE 2.16 <0.001 4978















Presence/Absence data 37 m

Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 9.9176 9.9176 0.80034 0.638 Treatment 1.0 1.2 1.22 0.770 0.752 Year(Period) 2.0 20.1 10.05 13.418 RED Loc Group(Treatment) 3.0 6.7 2.25 1.787 RED PeriodxTreatment 1.0 0.8 0.84 0.991 0.502 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3.0 2.4 0.81 0.696 0.763 Year(Period)xTreatment 2.0 1.9 0.93 1.239 0.267 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6.0 5.2 0.87 4.127 <0.001

Res 1578.0 333.2 0.21 Total 1597.0 405.6

PAIR-WISE TESTS Term 'Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment)' for pairs of levels of factor 'Year'



2009, 2015 3.71 <0.001 4977 <0.001 2011, 2015 4.74 <0.001 4981 <0.001



2009, 2015 3.89 <0.001 4976 <0.001 2011, 2015 2.89 <0.001 4980 <0.001



2009, 2015 3.79 <0.001 4969 <0.001 2011, 2015 2.55 <0.001 4983 <0.001



2009, 2015 4.40 <0.001 4975 <0.001 2011, 2015 5.04 <0.001 4972 <0.001






2009, 2015 4.68 <0.001 4987 <0.001 2011, 2015 4.70 <0.001 4980 <0.001





Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 2.68 <0.001 4981 <0.001 PL ABC, RB WE 2.97 <0.001 4991 <0.001 PL DEF, RB WE 2.64 <0.001 4981 <0.001




Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 1.71 <0.001 4985 0.002 PL ABC, RB WE 2.04 <0.001 4978 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 2.43 <0.001 4986 <0.001








PL ABC, PL DEF 1.25 0.094 4978 0.111 PL ABC, RB WE 1.13 0.208 4976 0.240 PL DEF, RB WE 1.73 0.001 4979 0.002




Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 1.69 <0.001 4978 0.001 PL ABC, RB WE 3.02 <0.001 4974 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 3.07 <0.001 4975 <0.001






Period 1 9.3 9.30 0.82 0.614

Treatment 1 1.0 1.03 0.89 0.610

Year(Period) 2 22.1 11.04 13.47 RED






Res 1468 312.1 0.21

Total 1487 379.7

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


2009, 2011 2.54 <0.001 4976 <0.001

2009, 2015 4.34 <0.001 4974 <0.001

2011, 2015 4.48 <0.001 4981 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 2.28 <0.001 4983 <0.001

2009, 2015 3.26 <0.001 4982 <0.001

2011, 2015 2.78 <0.001 4978 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 1.99 <0.001 4981 <0.001

2009, 2015 4.16 <0.001 4979 <0.001

2011, 2015 3.78 <0.001 4975 <0.001







Unique


2009, 2011 2.13 <0.001 4985 0.001

2009, 2015 4.42 <0.001 4970 <0.001

2011, 2015 4.36 <0.001 4978 <0.001




Unique


2009, 2011 2.44 <0.001 4983 <0.001

2009, 2015 4.37 <0.001 4977 <0.001

2011, 2015 4.97 <0.001 4980 <0.001

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.94 <0.001 4981 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.98 <0.001 4973 <0.001

PL ABC, RB WE 2.88 <0.001 4983 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 2.57 <0.001 4982 <0.001




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.13 <0.001 4973 <0.001







Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.79 0.001 4983 0.002

PL ABC, RB WE 1.72 0.001 4978 0.002

PL DEF, RB WE 2.19 <0.001 4979 <0.001




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.82 <0.001 4975 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.98 0.001 4985 0.002

PL ABC, RB WE 1.31 0.054 4978 0.063

PL DEF, RB WE 2.01 0.001 4977 0.001




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.73 <0.001 4979 <0.001




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 3.14 <0.001 4968 <0.001

PL ABC, RB WE 3.24 <0.001 4975 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 3.63 <0.001 4977 <0.001






Period 1 5.8 5.80 0.76 0.671

Treatment 1 1.3 1.28 0.93 0.554

Year(Period) 2 16.1 8.04 12.58 RED






Res 1107 238.7 0.22

Total 1126 288.3

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique

Groups t P(perm) perms

2009, 2011 1.73 0.003 4977

2009, 2015 3.86 <0.001 4980

2011, 2015 5.28 <0.001 4976




Unique


2009, 2011 1.85 <0.001 4985

2009, 2015 3.55 <0.001 4986

2011, 2015 2.78 <0.001 4986




Unique


2009, 2011 1.39 0.014 4973

2009, 2015 2.72 <0.001 4976

2011, 2015 2.48 <0.001 4972







Unique


2009, 2011 1.63 0.006 4982

2009, 2015 2.58 <0.001 4980

2011, 2015 2.86 <0.001 4980




Unique


2009, 2011 2.54 <0.001 4987

2009, 2015 4.02 <0.001 4981

2011, 2015 3.60 <0.001 4979

PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.73 <0.001 4984




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.61 0.018 4989

PL ABC, RB WE 1.89 0.003 4985

PL DEF, RB WE 2.56 <0.001 4987




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 1.30 0.097 4978







Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.12 0.233 4981

PL ABC, RB WE 1.19 0.144 4974

PL DEF, RB WE 1.23 0.110 4985




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 2.31 <0.001 4982




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 1.35 0.029 4980

PL ABC, RB WE 1.33 0.054 4980

PL DEF, RB WE 2.47 <0.001 4978




Unique


LON NS, REF AC 3.39 <0.001 4984




Unique


PL ABC, PL DEF 2.95 <0.001 4976

PL ABC, RB WE 2.41 <0.001 4980

PL DEF, RB WE 2.91 <0.001 4977




APPENDIX G PERMANOVA AND POST-HOC ANALYSES OF BIOTIC ASSEMBLAGE – 2015 DATA


Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno G-2

Results of multivariate statistical analyses using PERMANOVA for biotic assemblage Table G-1data collected in 2015. Significant (at α < 0.05) p-values in bold. RED = redundant term due to significant interaction

Analysis of 2015 data 27 m PERMANOVA table of results Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Treatment 1 242.75 242.75 1.2807 0.297 Loc Group(Treatment) 3.0 643.0 214.34 7.121 <0.001Res 515.0 15503.0 30.10 Total 519.0 16388.0 PAIR-WISE TESTS Term 'Loc Group(Treatment)' Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL DEF, PL ABC 2.14 0.003 9958 0.003 PL DEF, RB WE 3.22 <0.001 9961 <0.001 PL ABC, RB WE 2.67 <0.001 9951 <0.001 Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) LON NS, REF AC 2.42 <0.001 9919 <0.001 Depth 37 Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Treatment 1 249.5 249.47 2.27 0.100 Loc Group(Treatment) 3 372.2 124.08 6.39 <0.001Res 515 10006.0 19.43

Total 519 10628.0 PAIR-WISE TESTS Term 'Loc Group(Treatment)' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) LON NS, REF AC 2.21 <0.001 9932 <0.001 Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 1.55 0.041 9946 0.041 PL ABC, RB WE 3.05 <0.001 9941 <0.001 PL DEF, RB WE 2.93 <0.001 9946 <0.001 37 m Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Treatment 1 2.6 2.67 1.50 0.097 Loc Group(Treatment) 3 6.0 2.00 8.46 <0.001



Analysis of 2015 data Res 515 121.6 0.24 Total 519 130.2 PAIR-WISE TESTS Term 'Loc Group(Treatment)' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) LON NS, REF AC 3.35 <0.001 4982 <0.001 Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 1.69 <0.001 4983 <0.001 PL ABC, RB WE 3.02 <0.001 4980 <0.001 PL DEF, RB WE 3.07 <0.001 4979 <0.001 47 m Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Treatment 1 263.4 263.42 4.01 0.102 Loc Group(Treatment) 3 219.4 73.13 4.07 <0.001Res 515 9247.1 17.96

Total 519 9729.9 PAIR-WISE TESTS Term 'Loc Group(Treatment)' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) LON NS, REF AC 1.16 0.204 4982 0.208 Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 1.65 0.009 4983 0.010 PL ABC, RB WE 2.59 <0.001 4994 <0.001 PL DEF, RB WE 2.43 <0.001 4990 <0.001 57 m Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Treatment 1 200.58 200.58 1.9212 0.264 Loc Group(Treatment) 3.0 348.7 116.25 6.158 <0.001Res 503.0 9495.6 18.88 Total 507.0 10040.0 PAIR-WISE TESTS Term 'Loc Group(Treatment)' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) LON NS, REF AC 1.68 0.015 4984 0.017



Analysis of 2015 data Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL DEF, PL ABC 1.01 0.439 4988 0.427 PL DEF, RB WE 4.06 <0.001 4993 <0.001 PL ABC, RB WE 2.13 0.003 4983 0.002


Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno H-1


APPENDIX H PERMANOVA AND POST-HOC ANALYSES OF NUMBER OF TAXA



Results of univariate statistical analyses using PERMANOVA testing for differences in Table H-1the number of taxa per frame at 27 m. Significant (at α < 0.05) p-values in bold. RED = redundant term due to significant interaction

Number of taxa at 27 m Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 626.39 626.39 2.51 0.174 Treatment 1 6.52 6.52 0.78 0.582 Year(Period) 2 1142.40 571.20 57.48 RED Loc Group(Treatment) 3 17.93 5.98 0.90 RED PeriodxTreatment 1 44.33 44.33 1.85 0.258 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 58.64 19.55 2.94 0.124 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 37.15 18.57 1.87 0.240 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 76.48 12.75 3.08 0.005 Res 1241 5142.40 4.14 Total 1260 8642.50





Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 2.91 0.008 44 0.006 2009, 2015 5.77 <0.001 61 <0.001 2011, 2015 2.45 0.016 60 0.015


Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 4.44 <0.001 61 <0.001 2009, 2015 5.88 <0.001 85 <0.001 2011, 2015 11.14 <0.001 106 <0.001







2011, 2015 8.80 <0.001 128 <0.001











Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) LON NS, REF AC 3.52 0.002 57 <0.001


Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 3.82 <0.001 71 0.001 PL ABC, RB WE 0.28 0.786 88 0.786 PL DEF, RB WE 3.11 0.002 98 0.003











Number of taxa at 37 m Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 935.3 935.3 0.97 0.500 Treatment 1 3.7 3.7 0.48 0.757 Year(Period) 2 1530.7 765.4 34.37 0.001 Loc Group(Treatment) 3 76.0 25.3 0.68 0.594 PeriodxTreatment 1 1.2 1.2 0.57 0.689 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 11.7 3.9 0.14 0.918 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 73.9 36.9 1.66 0.269 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 159.0 26.5 7.21 <0.001 Res 1578 5798.9 3.7 Total 1597 11217.0













Number of taxa at 37 m Unique

Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 1.38 0.185 71 0.167 2009, 2015 13.25 <0.001 125 <0.001 2011, 2015 14.95 <0.001 136 <0.001









Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 0.18 0.863 63 0.858 PL ABC, RB WE 4.11 <0.001 64 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 4.22 <0.001 70 <0.001







Number of taxa at 37 m Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level '2015' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment'







Number of taxa at 47 m Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 859.7 859.7 0.77 0.580 Treatment 1 19.0 19.0 3.19 0.129 Year(Period) 2 2118.7 1059.4 80.81 0.001 Loc Group(Treatment) 3 36.2 12.1 0.70 0.585 PeriodxTreatment 1 6.2 6.2 1.43 0.341 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 51.2 17.1 0.96 0.470 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 1.9 0.9 0.07 0.933 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 87.1 14.5 4.27 0.001 Res 1468 4991.6 3.4 Total 1487 9841.4







Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 2.52 0.019 55 0.016 2009, 2015 3.90 0.001 90 0.001 2011, 2015 6.77 <0.001 47 <0.001







Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 0.23 0.849 73 0.819 2009, 2015 8.99 <0.001 98 <0.001 2011, 2015 12.43 <0.001 120 <0.001

















Number of taxa at 47 m Within level '2015' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment'







Number of taxa at 57 m Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 444.3 444.3 0.71 0.611 Treatment 1 19.3 19.3 1.23 0.387 Year(Period) 2 1336.8 668.4 27.66 0.003 Loc Group(Treatment) 3 61.0 20.3 0.81 0.534 PeriodxTreatment 1 7.0 7.0 1.21 0.404 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 29.7 9.9 0.39 0.759 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 32.4 16.2 0.67 0.534 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 149.3 24.9 6.24 <0.001 Res 1107 4416.1 4.0 Total 1126 7928.2














Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 2.65 0.008 52 0.012

2009, 2015 6.20 <0.001 92 <0.001 2011, 2015 9.42 <0.001 106 <0.001

















Number of taxa at 57 m Within level '2015' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment'



Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 5.47 <0.001 127 <0.001



Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno I-1


APPENDIX I PERMANOVA AND POST-HOC ANALYSES OF TOTAL COVER OF BIOTA



Results of univariate statistical analyses using PERMANOVA testing for differences in Table I-1the total cover of biota at 27 m of depth. Significant (at α < 0.05) p-values in bold. RED = redundant term due to significant interaction

Total cover of biota at 27 m


Period 1 406.8 406.8 0.32 0.868

Treatment 1 1397.2 1397.2 0.40 0.818

Year(Period) 2 8708.9 4354.5 2.16 RED






Res 1241 528690.0 426.0

Total 1260 591260.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS




Within level 'LON NS' of factor 'Loc Group' Unique


2009, 2011 1.85 0.071 4616 0.068

2009, 2015 1.91 0.063 4520 0.057

2011, 2015 5.05 <0.001 4671 <0.001



Within level 'REF AC' of factor 'Loc Group' Unique


2009, 2011 2.06 0.048 4379 0.045

2009, 2015 2.86 0.007 3679 0.006

2011, 2015 0.13 0.893 3613 0.899



Within level 'PL ABC' of factor 'Loc Group' Unique


2009, 2011 0.22 0.822 4668 0.827

2009, 2015 0.80 0.429 4621 0.420

2011, 2015 1.14 0.250 4706 0.260



Within level 'PL DEF' of factor 'Loc Group' Unique


2009, 2011 3.61 <0.001 4761 0.001

2009, 2015 2.46 0.016 4670 0.014

2011, 2015 2.13 0.031 4753 0.035





Within level 'RB WE' of factor 'Loc Group' Unique


2009, 2011 2.50 0.015 4802 0.013

2009, 2015 1.85 0.072 4686 0.068

2011, 2015 5.52 <0.001 4660 <0.001

PAIR-WISE TESTS






LON NS, REF AC 4.17 <0.001 4488 <0.001





PL ABC, PL DEF 2.31 0.036 4110 0.036

PL ABC, RB WE 0.03 0.978 4463 0.975

PL DEF, RB WE 2.52 0.012 4587 0.012





LON NS, REF AC 4.54 <0.001 4497 <0.001





PL ABC, PL DEF 1.50 0.134 4639 0.134

PL ABC, RB WE 0.53 0.599 4768 0.598

PL DEF, RB WE 1.75 0.083 4789 0.081





LON NS, REF AC 4.13 <0.001 4571 <0.001





PL ABC, PL DEF 2.40 0.015 4724 0.019

PL ABC, RB WE 3.53 0.001 4760 0.001



PL DEF, RB WE 1.82 0.075 4733 0.070





LON NS, REF AC 2.70 0.008 142 0.009





PL ABC, PL DEF 0.29 0.779 184 0.773

PL ABC, RB WE 2.97 0.004 174 0.003

PL DEF, RB WE 2.48 0.014 188 0.014




Total cover of biota at 37 m Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 3970.1 3970.1 8.12 0.027 Treatment 1 406.9 406.9 0.24 0.917 Year(Period) 2 47.2 23.6 0.01 0.993 Loc Group(Treatment) 3 27684.0 9228.1 1.82 0.255 PeriodxTreatment 1 1175.2 1175.2 0.43 0.794 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 3761.8 1253.9 0.29 0.834 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 15742.0 7870.9 2.71 0.161 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 20683.0 3447.1 6.81 <0.001Res 1578 798860.0 506.3 Total 1597 893810.0 PAIR-WISE TESTS Term 'Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment)' for pairs of levels of factor 'Year'

Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment' Within level 'LON NS' of factor 'Loc Group' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 2.63 0.012 4657 0.013

2009, 2015 1.35 0.179 4581 0.186 2011, 2015 2.40 0.020 4642 0.017

Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment' Within level 'REF AC' of factor 'Loc Group' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 0.99 0.318 4649 0.326 2009, 2015 2.62 0.009 4530 0.011 2011, 2015 4.34 <0.001 4562 <0.001

Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment' Within level 'PL ABC' of factor 'Loc Group' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 0.09 0.934 4491 0.921 2009, 2015 0.88 0.380 4612 0.363 2011, 2015 0.73 0.472 2137 0.465

Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment' Within level 'PL DEF' of factor 'Loc Group' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 4.39 <0.001 4756 <0.001

2009, 2015 2.95 0.003 4720 0.007 2011, 2015 2.98 0.004 4819 0.003




Total cover of biota at 37 m Within level 'RB WE' of factor 'Loc Group' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 0.23 0.818 4765 0.815 2009, 2015 5.38 <0.001 4754 <0.001

2011, 2015 7.46 <0.001 4680 <0.001


Within level 'Before' of factor 'Period' Within level '2006' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) LON NS, REF AC 4.01 <0.001 4700 <0.001

Within level 'Before' of factor 'Period' Within level '2006' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 2.29 0.024 4787 0.021 PL ABC, RB WE 3.65 <0.001 4815 <0.001 PL DEF, RB WE 2.04 0.044 4858 0.042

Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level '2009' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) LON NS, REF AC 4.03 0.001 4660 <0.001

Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level '2009' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 1.85 0.072 4651 0.067 PL ABC, RB WE 1.04 0.294 4747 0.288 PL DEF, RB WE 2.72 0.007 4553 0.008

Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level '2011' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) LON NS, REF AC 4.23 <0.001 4632 <0.001






Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level '2015' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 1.92 0.059 216 0.062 PL ABC, RB WE 4.97 <0.001 180 <0.001 PL DEF, RB WE 6.12 <0.001 217 <0.001




Total cover of biota at 47 m Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 4213.4 4213.4 5.01 0.058 Treatment 1 9558.9 9558.9 2.46 0.182 Year(Period) 2 1728.7 864.4 0.18 0.839 Loc Group(Treatment) 3 17546.0 5848.5 0.85 0.513 PeriodxTreatment 1 5422.4 5422.4 3.99 0.087 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 3618.4 1206.1 0.19 0.893 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 3196.8 1598.4 0.33 0.725 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 32837.0 5472.9 11.51 <0.001Res 1468 697860.0 475.4 Total 1487 792180.0

PAIR-WISE TESTS Term 'Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment)' for pairs of levels of factor 'Year' Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment' Within level 'LON NS' of factor 'Loc Group' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 1.47 0.149 4563 0.145 2009, 2015 2.02 0.050 4669 0.045

2011, 2015 4.18 <0.001 4735 <0.001

Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment' Within level 'REF AC' of factor 'Loc Group' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 0.62 0.541 4577 0.538 2009, 2015 5.76 <0.001 4513 <0.001

2011, 2015 4.19 <0.001 4153 <0.001

Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment' Within level 'PL ABC' of factor 'Loc Group' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 0.02 0.985 4627 0.987 2009, 2015 3.50 0.001 4623 0.001

2011, 2015 3.96 <0.001 4616 <0.001

Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment' Within level 'PL DEF' of factor 'Loc Group' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 0.29 0.782 4547 0.770 2009, 2015 3.69 <0.001 4691 0.001

2011, 2015 4.10 <0.001 4721 <0.001





Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) 2009, 2011 1.80 0.071 4754 0.078 2009, 2015 1.77 0.085 4697 0.076 2011, 2015 5.34 <0.001 4777 <0.001


Within level 'Before' of factor 'Period' Within level '2006' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) LON NS, REF AC 1.41 0.157 4636 0.158

Within level 'Before' of factor 'Period' Within level '2006' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 1.49 0.130 4807 0.140 PL ABC, RB WE 1.68 0.096 4771 0.091 PL DEF, RB WE 0.09 0.931 4832 0.934




Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level '2011' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 3.63 0.002 4721 0.001 PL ABC, RB WE 3.77 <0.001 4756 0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 0.92 0.357 4763 0.372



Total cover of biota at 47 m Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level '2015' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Control' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) LON NS, REF AC 0.15 0.891 125 0.879

Within level 'After' of factor 'Period' Within level '2015' of factor 'Year' Within level 'Dredged' of factor 'Treatment' Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 3.01 0.003 188 0.003 PL ABC, RB WE 4.92 <0.001 196 <0.001

PL DEF, RB WE 1.90 0.062 203 0.061




Total cover of biota at 57 m Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm) Period 1 102 102 1.062 0.461 Treatment 1 1043 1043 0.254 0.906 Year(Period) 2 174 87 0.028 0.970 Loc Group(Treatment) 3 29420 9807 3.085 0.113 PeriodxTreatment 1 3065 3065 0.642 0.662 PeriodxLoc Group(Treatment) 3 8959 2986 0.940 0.494 Year(Period)xTreatment 2 13563 6782 2.217 0.197 Year(Period)xLoc Group(Treatment) 6 18903 3151 6.142 <0.001 Res 1107 567810 513 Total 1126 642230

PAIR-WISE TESTS




2011, 2015 6.94 <0.001 4747 <0.001





2011, 2015 3.51 0.001 4104 0.001



2011, 2015 2.26 0.026 4670 0.021




Total cover of biota at 57 m Within level 'RB WE' of factor 'Loc Group'


PAIR-WISE TESTS





Unique Groups t P(perm) perms P(MC) PL ABC, PL DEF 0.90 0.349 4696 0.364 PL ABC, RB WE 4.54 <0.001 4689 <0.001 PL DEF, RB WE 3.16 0.002 4799 0.002

















Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno J-1


APPENDIX J SIMPER ANALYSES OF HABITAT DESCRIPTORS



Results of SIMPER analysis for significant pair-wise comparisons in the habitat Table J-1descriptors analysis for the term Year x Location Groups at 27 m of depth

SIMPER - 27 m

Groups 2009LON NS & 2011LON NS

Average dissimilarity = 98.45

Group 2009LON NS

Group 2011LON NS

Species Av.Abund Av.Abund Av.Diss

Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 0.25 5.20 74.58 1.80 75.76 75.76

Shell piece/grit 0.23 0.00 13.01 0.40 13.22 88.97

Bare bedrock unimpacted 0.19 0.00 6.77 0.28 6.87 95.85



Group 2009LON NS

Group 2015LON NS


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.

% Sand 0.25 1.60 71.73 1.72 73.20 73.20

Shell grit 0.23 0.00 14.61 0.44 14.91 88.11

Bare bedrock unimpacted 0.19 0.05 11.65 0.39 11.89 100.00



Group 2011LON NS

Group 2015LON NS


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 5.20 1.60 85.85 2.98 94.02 94.02

Groups 2009PL ABC & 2015PL ABC


Group 2009PL ABC

Group 2015PL ABC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Exposed rock - bare 0.00 0.88 41.64 1.03 41.64 41.64

Sand 0.00 0.30 26.67 0.60 26.67 68.30

Rubble - Natural 0.00 0.05 13.33 0.39 13.33 81.64

Colonising biota with distinct colonies 0.00 0.40 8.35 0.51 8.35 89.98

Exposed rock - microbiota 0.00 0.08 6.09 0.42 6.09 96.08

Groups 2011PL ABC & 2015PL ABC


Group 2011PL Group 2015PL



SIMPER - 27 m

ABC ABC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%


Sand 0.00 0.30 26.67 0.60 26.67 68.30

Rubble - Natural 0.00 0.05 13.33 0.39 13.33 81.64



Groups 2009PL DEF & 2011PL DEF


Group 2009PL DEF

Group 2011PL DEF


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Rubble - Natural 3.10 0.00 28.12 0.65 28.14 28.14

Algal dominated understorey matrix 0.90 0.00 25.68 0.64 25.70 53.85

Sand 0.12 0.13 16.35 0.45 16.36 70.21


Colonising biota with recognisable diversity

0.41 0.00 8.47 0.34 8.47 87.47

Exposed rock - brown fines/turf 0.07 0.00 6.21 0.26 6.21 93.68

Groups 2009PL DEF & 2015PL DEF


Group 2009PL DEF

Group 2015PL DEF


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Rubble - Natural 3.10 0.10 22.58 0.58 22.74 22.74

Algal dominated understorey matrix 0.90 0.00 17.67 0.51 17.79 40.53

Sand 0.12 0.23 16.64 0.48 16.76 57.29



0.41 1.33 14.66 0.51 14.76 87.85


Groups 2009RB WE & 2011RB WE


Group 2009RB WE

Group 2011RB WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%



2.01 5.11 21.93 0.88 22.54 54.22


Rubble - Natural 4.69 0.00 13.69 0.56 14.07 83.33



SIMPER - 27 m




Group 2009RB WE

Group 2015RB WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Rubble - Natural 4.69 0.05 31.46 0.97 31.50 31.50




2.01 0.00 9.83 0.80 9.84 80.96


Steel surface 1.27 0.00 6.53 0.51 6.54 96.04



Group 2011RB WE

Group 2015RB WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%



5.11 0.00 31.58 1.08 31.60 77.72





Habitat descriptor (SIMPER) Depth 37 m Groups 2009LON NS & 2011LON NS

Average dissimilarity = 67.49 Group 2009LON

NS Group 2011LON

NS


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 25.53 13.12 59.99 1.72 88.89 88.89 Colonising biota with recognisable diversity

1.95 0.73 4.20 0.36 6.22 95.11

Groups 2009LON NS & 2015LON NS Average dissimilarity = 69.55 Group 2009LON

NS Group 2015LON

NS


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%


1.95 0.00 2.81 0.30 4.03 93.93


NS Group 2015LON

NS


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 13.12 8.25 69.30 2.06 93.81 93.81 Groups 2009REF AC & 2015REF AC

Average dissimilarity = 89.80 Group 2009REF

AC Group 2015REF

AC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.

% Sand 10.71 1.90 89.80 3.86 100.00 100.00 Groups 2009PL ABC & 2015PL ABC Average dissimilarity = 99.82 Group 2009PL

ABC Group 2015PL

ABC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Shell grit 3.26 0.03 31.91 0.74 31.96 31.96 Colonising biota with recognisable diversity

2.82 0.00 23.93 0.63 23.97 55.93

Rubble - Natural 0.86 0.00 13.02 0.45 13.04 68.98 Gravel 0.84 0.00 10.89 0.38 10.91 79.89 Sand 0.06 0.17 9.04 0.34 9.05 88.94 Exposed rock - bare 0.00 0.63 6.05 0.30 6.06 95.00



Habitat descriptor (SIMPER) Depth 37 m Groups 2011PL ABC & 2015PL ABC Average dissimilarity = 100.00 Group 2011PL

ABC Group 2015PL ABC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 0 0.17 42.86 0.86 42.86 42.86 Exposed rock - bare 0 0.63 27.9 0.73 27.9 70.75 Exposed rock - red fines/turf 0 0.7 10.24 0.44 10.24 81 Exposed rock - microbiota 0 0.03 7.36 0.29 7.36 88.35 Shell piece/grit 0 0.03 7.14 0.28 7.14 95.5 Groups 2009RB WE & 2011RB WE Average dissimilarity = 96.77 Group 2009RB

WE Group 2011RB WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Colonising biota with distinct colonies 17.01 0.74 28.76 0.72 29.72 29.72 Exposed rock - microbiota 2.77 7.62 25.6 0.7 26.46 56.18 Colonising biota with recognisable diversity

6.57 5.11 24.01 0.68 24.81 81

Exposed rock - red fines/turf 3.63 0 6.73 0.32 6.95 87.95 Exposed rock - bare 3.18 0.25 4.72 0.3 4.88 92.83 Groups 2009RB WE & 2015RB WE

Average dissimilarity = 99.07 Group 2009RB

WE Group 2015RB WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Colonising biota with distinct colonies 17.01 0.25 35.72 0.82 36.05 36.05 Colonising biota with recognisable diversity

6.57 0.47 21.34 0.61 21.54 57.6

Exposed rock - bare 3.18 1.15 15.55 0.53 15.7 73.3 Exposed rock - microbiota 2.77 0.28 11.43 0.42 11.54 84.84 Exposed rock - red fines/turf 3.63 0 8.51 0.35 8.59 93.43 Groups 2011RB WE & 2015RB WE Average dissimilarity = 98.54 Group 2011RB

WE Group 2015RB WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Exposed rock - microbiota 7.62 0.28 40.25 0.93 40.84 40.84 Colonising biota with recognisable diversity

5.11 0.47 29.11 0.75 29.54 70.39

Exposed rock - bare 0.25 1.15 15.32 0.52 15.55 85.94 Colonising biota with distinct colonies 0.74 0.25 7.05 0.3 7.15 93.09 Groups 2006LON NS & 2006REF AC Average dissimilarity = 97.34 Group 2006LON

NS Group 2006REF AC



Habitat descriptor (SIMPER) Depth 37 m Species Av.Abund Av.Abund Av.Dis

s Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Shell grit 7.3 0.35 46.88 0.97 48.16 48.16 Sand 2.19 2.29 46.16 0.96 47.42 95.58 Groups 2006PL ABC & 2006PL DEF

Average dissimilarity = 99.59 Group 2006PL

ABC Group 2006PL DEF


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Shell grit 0 2.96 59.57 1.26 59.82 59.82 Sand 0.31 1.09 29.09 0.66 29.21 89.02 Rubble - Natural 0.81 0.51 7.19 0.31 7.22 96.24 Groups 2006PL ABC & 2006RB WE


ABC Group 2006RB WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%


0 8.13 45.61 1.06 45.7 45.7

Exposed rock - bare 0 6.56 26.34 0.65 26.4 72.1 Sand 0.31 0.49 13.58 0.42 13.61 85.71 Colonising biota with distinct colonies 0 1.07 4.37 0.33 4.38 90.08 Groups 2006PL DEF & 2006RB WE


DEF Group 2006RB WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%


0 8.13 32.4 0.8 32.5 32.5

Shell grit 2.96 0 24.26 0.61 24.33 56.84 Exposed rock - bare 0.15 6.56 20.4 0.56 20.47 77.3 Sand 1.09 0.49 12.67 0.41 12.71 90.01 Groups 2009LON NS & 2009REF AC Average dissimilarity = 76.77 Group 2009LON

NS Group 2009REF AC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 25.53 10.71 70.44 2.15 91.77 91.77 Groups 2011LON NS & 2011REF AC


NS Group 2011REF AC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 13.12 4.03 78.77 2.34 87.07 87.07



Habitat descriptor (SIMPER) Depth 37 m Grey matrix 0 1.23 6.13 0.31 6.78 93.85 Groups 2011PL DEF & 2015RB WE Average dissimilarity = 98.77 Group 2011PL

DEF Group 2015RB WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Exposed rock - bare 7.04 1.15 29.53 0.8 29.9 29.9 Sand 2.04 0.02 29.13 0.69 29.49 59.39 Exposed rock - microbiota 5.82 0.28 19.34 0.65 19.58 78.96 Colonising biota with recognisable diversity

1.83 0.47 13 0.5 13.16 92.13

Groups 2015LON NS & 2015REF AC Average dissimilarity = 85.41 Group 2015LON

NS Group 2015REF AC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 8.25 1.9 82.89 2.91 97.04 97.04 Groups 2015PL ABC & 2015PL DEF




Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 0.17 1.1 36.89 0.8 37.53 37.53 Exposed rock - bare 0.63 5.15 28.79 0.86 29.28 66.81 Colonising biota with recognisable diversity

0 3.22 13.4 0.56 13.63 80.44

Shell grit 0.03 0.58 11.49 0.4 11.68 92.12 Groups 2015PL DEF & 2015RB WE


DEF Group 2015RB WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Exposed rock - bare 5.15 1.15 34.7 0.98 35.39 35.39 Sand 1.1 0.02 25.4 0.62 25.9 61.3 Colonising biota with recognisable diversity

3.22 0.47 19.09 0.66 19.47 80.77

Shell grit 0.58 0 8.43 0.34 8.6 89.37 Exposed rock - microbiota 0.07 0.28 6.14 0.32 6.27 95.63




Habitat descriptor (SIMPER) Depth 47 m Groups 2009LON NS & 2011LON NS Average dissimilarity = 76.83 Group 2009LON

NS Group 2011LON

NS


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 10.62 18.86 69.85 2.06 90.92 90.92 Groups 2009LON NS & 2015LON NS


NS Group 2015LON

NS


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 10.62 1.45 77.72 2.49 87.24 87.24 Shell grit 0.87 0.18 6.91 0.36 7.76 95.00 Groups 2011LON NS & 2015LON NS Average dissimilarity = 93.28 Group 2011LON

NS Group 2015LON

NS


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 18.86 1.45 83.71 3.10 89.74 89.74 Rubble - Natural 0.00 0.25 2.68 0.25 2.88 92.62 Groups 2009PL ABC & 2015PL ABC


ABC Group 2015PL

ABC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Shell grit 7.32 0.20 52.22 1.23 52.75 52.75 Sand 0.97 0.27 20.42 0.55 20.62 73.37 Exposed rock - bare 0.00 1.60 10.56 0.40 10.66 84.03 Gravel 2.47 0.00 7.28 0.38 7.35 91.38 Groups 2009PL DEF & 2015PL DEF Average dissimilarity = 95.00 Group 2009PL

DEF Group 2015PL

DEF


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 5.16 4.52 25.59 0.73 26.94 26.94 Shell grit 6.95 1.72 22.81 0.64 24.01 50.95 Gravel 10.43 0.00 16.81 0.56 17.69 68.64 Rubble - Natural 6.11 0.05 12.82 0.50 13.50 82.14 Exposed rock - bare 4.36 0.00 5.51 0.29 5.80 87.94 Colonising biota with recognisable diversity

1.78 0.00 4.36 0.25 4.59 92.53



Habitat descriptor (SIMPER) Depth 47 m Groups 2011PL DEF & 2015PL DEF Average dissimilarity = 93.76 Group 2011PL

DEF Group 2015PL

DEF


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 6.51 4.52 46.61 1.10 49.72 49.72 Exposed rock - bare 17.15 0.00 21.87 0.65 23.33 73.05 Shell grit 0.00 1.72 14.87 0.47 15.86 88.90 Exposed rock - microbiota 6.46 0.00 9.45 0.49 10.08 98.98 Groups 2009RB WE & 2015RB WE


WE Group 2015RB

WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%


6.28 3.15 32.86 0.79 33.75 33.75

Sand 1.29 2.00 24.12 0.61 24.78 58.53 Colonising biota with distinct colonies 6.54 0.75 15.63 0.51 16.05 74.58 Exposed rock - microbiota 2.55 0.15 6.94 0.30 7.13 81.71 Silt/Mud 0.23 0.00 5.40 0.24 5.55 87.26 Exposed rock - bare 1.43 0.68 5.02 0.31 5.16 92.42 Groups 2011RB WE & 2015RB WE


WE Group 2015RB

WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%


5.68 3.15 24.06 0.66 25.16 74.89

Exposed rock - microbiota 5.43 0.15 14.95 0.51 15.63 90.52 Groups 2006PL ABC & 2006PL DEF Average dissimilarity = 98.82 Group 2006PL

ABC Group 2006PL

DEF


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Shell grit 0.59 8.83 76.59 2.31 77.51 77.51 Rubble - Natural 0.00 0.99 8.86 0.40 8.97 86.47 Exposed rock - bare 0.26 0.54 7.91 0.40 8.00 94.47 Groups 2006PL ABC & 2006RB WE Average dissimilarity = 99.57 Group 2006PL

ABC Group 2006RB

WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 0.07 3.43 61.70 1.29 61.97 61.97 Exposed rock - bare 0.26 1.96 16.08 0.47 16.15 78.12



Habitat descriptor (SIMPER) Depth 47 m Shell grit 0.59 0.08 14.71 0.46 14.77 92.89 Groups 2006PL DEF & 2006RB WE Average dissimilarity = 99.62 Group 2006PL

DEF Group 2006RB

WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Shell grit 8.83 0.08 46.09 1.04 46.26 46.26 Sand 0.06 3.43 32.17 0.72 32.29 78.55 Exposed rock - bare 0.54 1.96 11.20 0.39 11.24 89.79 Rubble - Natural 0.99 0.15 7.57 0.35 7.60 97.38 Groups 2009LON NS & 2009REF AC


NS Group 2009REF

AC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 10.62 2.21 83.56 2.88 92.43 92.43 Groups 2009PL ABC & 2009PL DEF Average dissimilarity = 95.76 Group 2009PL

ABC Group 2009PL

DEF


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Shell grit 7.32 6.95 29.15 0.77 30.44 30.44 Gravel 2.47 10.43 19.13 0.62 19.97 50.41 Sand 0.97 5.16 16.33 0.52 17.05 67.46 Rubble - Natural 0.12 6.11 12.76 0.49 13.32 80.78 Exposed rock - bare 0.00 4.36 5.55 0.29 5.79 86.57 Colonising biota with recognisable diversity

0.65 1.78 5.51 0.30 5.75 92.33

Groups 2009PL ABC & 2009RB WE


ABC Group 2009RB

WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Shell grit 7.32 0.22 24.83 0.70 25.24 25.24 Colonising biota with recognisable diversity

0.65 6.28 24.29 0.66 24.69 49.93

Sand 0.97 1.29 16.93 0.49 17.21 67.15 Colonising biota with distinct colonies 0.28 6.54 12.17 0.44 12.37 79.52 Exposed rock - microbiota 0.00 2.55 5.77 0.27 5.86 85.38 Silt/Mud 0.00 0.23 4.43 0.22 4.50 89.88 Gravel 2.47 0.00 4.21 0.30 4.28 94.16 Groups 2009PL DEF & 2009RB WE Average dissimilarity = 97.76 Group 2009PL Group 2009RB



Habitat descriptor (SIMPER) Depth 47 m DEF WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Shell grit 6.95 0.22 16.08 0.49 16.45 16.45 Gravel 10.43 0.00 15.08 0.53 15.43 31.88 Colonising biota with recognisable diversity

1.78 6.28 14.80 0.53 15.14 47.02

Sand 5.16 1.29 14.75 0.49 15.08 62.10 Rubble - Natural 6.11 0.09 11.28 0.48 11.54 73.65 Colonising biota with distinct colonies 0.70 6.54 7.82 0.39 8.00 81.65 Exposed rock - microbiota 1.73 2.55 6.56 0.33 6.71 88.36 Exposed rock - bare 4.36 1.43 6.09 0.32 6.23 94.59 Groups 2011LON NS & 2011REF AC Average dissimilarity = 93.46 Group 2011LON

NS Group 2011REF

AC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 18.86 2.72 81.74 2.64 87.46 87.46 Grey matrix 0.00 1.55 7.25 0.37 7.76 95.22 Groups 2011PL ABC & 2011PL DEF


ABC Group 2011PL

DEF


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 0.00 6.51 37.79 0.86 37.95 37.95 Exposed rock - bare 0.00 17.15 30.02 0.81 30.15 68.09 Exposed rock - microbiota 1.04 6.46 16.65 0.65 16.73 84.82 Grey matrix 1.48 0.00 6.15 0.28 6.18 91.00 Groups 2011PL ABC & 2011RB WE


ABC Group 2011RB

WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%


1.90 5.68 24.27 0.66 24.55 67.18

Exposed rock - microbiota 1.04 5.43 19.26 0.59 19.48 86.67 Grey matrix 1.48 0.00 5.89 0.27 5.96 92.63 Groups 2011PL DEF & 2011RB WE Average dissimilarity = 92.98 Group 2011PL

DEF Group 2011RB WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 6.51 6.63 40.03 0.94 43.06 43.06 Exposed rock - bare 17.15 0.79 20.67 0.66 22.23 65.28 Exposed rock - microbiota 6.46 5.43 17.42 0.64 18.73 84.01 Colonising biota with recognisable 0.37 5.68 12.98 0.47 13.96 97.97



Habitat descriptor (SIMPER) Depth 47 m diversity Groups 2015PL ABC & 2015PL DEF Average dissimilarity = 97.72 Group 2015PL



Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 0.27 4.52 52.85 1.18 54.08 54.08 Shell grit 0.2 1.72 32.59 0.76 33.35 87.43 Exposed rock - bare 1.6 0 8.01 0.35 8.19 95.63 Groups 2015PL ABC & 2015RB WE Average dissimilarity = 98.95 Group 2015PL

ABC Group 2015RB WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 0.27 2 37 0.82 37.4 37.4 Exposed rock - bare 1.6 0.68 20.24 0.61 20.45 57.85 Shell grit 0.2 0 15 0.43 15.16 73.01 Colonising biota with recognisable diversity

0 3.15 13.9 0.45 14.05 87.06





Habitat descriptor (SIMPER) Depth 57 m Groups 2009LON NS & 2011LON NS Average dissimilarity = 91.78 Group 2009LON

NS Group 2011LON

NS


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Rubble - Natural 15.77 9.56 28.41 0.84 30.95 30.95 Sand 1.05 6.86 22.75 0.68 24.79 55.74 Shell grit 10.13 0.34 15.5 0.62 16.89 72.63 Exposed rock - microbiota 3.64 9.86 14.12 0.54 15.38 88.01 Colonising biota with recognisable diversity

1.15 3.22 5.27 0.46 5.75 93.76


NS Group 2015LON

NS


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Rubble - Natural 15.77 0.15 31.85 0.89 32.78 32.78 Shell grit 10.13 0.1 25.03 0.77 25.76 58.54 Sand 1.05 2.43 24.99 0.65 25.71 84.25 Exposed rock - microbiota 3.64 0 7.31 0.31 7.52 91.78 Groups 2011LON NS & 2015LON NS Average dissimilarity = 93.00 Group 2011LON

NS Group 2015LON

NS


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 6.86 2.43 44.85 1.05 48.23 48.23 Rubble - Natural 9.56 0.15 21.12 0.56 22.71 70.94 Exposed rock - microbiota 9.86 0 14.36 0.51 15.44 86.38 Stiff Sediment/Clay 1.14 0 5.26 0.26 5.66 92.05 Groups 2009REF AC & 2011REF AC Average dissimilarity = 97.56 Group 2009REF

AC Group 2011REF

AC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 22.57 0.82 92.16 5.13 94.46 94.46 Groups 2009REF AC & 2015REF AC

Average dissimilarity = 77.08 Group 2009REF

AC Group 2015REF

AC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 22.57 8.78 71.57 2.19 92.85 92.85



Habitat descriptor (SIMPER) Depth 57 m Groups 2011REF AC & 2015REF AC Average dissimilarity = 97.96 Group 2011REF

AC Group 2015REF

AC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 0.82 8.78 90.55 3.58 92.44 92.44 Groups 2009PL ABC & 2011PL ABC


ABC Group 2011PL

ABC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Shell grit 7 0 53.8 1.3 54.18 54.18 Colonising biota with recognisable diversity

4.8 0.59 26.9 0.72 27.08 81.26

Colonising biota with distinct colonies 3.51 0 8.91 0.37 8.98 90.24 Groups 2009PL ABC & 2015PL ABC


ABC Group 2015PL

ABC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Shell grit 7 1.28 41.84 1.05 43.3 43.3 Colonising biota with recognisable diversity

4.8 0.9 17.04 0.56 17.63 60.93

Sand 0 2.67 12.93 0.44 13.38 74.31 Colonising biota with distinct colonies 3.51 1.3 10.85 0.43 11.23 85.54 Exposed rock - bare 0 1.05 5.47 0.3 5.66 91.2 Groups 2011PL ABC & 2015PL ABC Average dissimilarity = 99.74 Group 2011PL

ABC Group 2015PL

ABC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 0 2.67 30.2 0.71 30.28 30.28 Shell grit 0 1.28 24.75 0.61 24.81 55.09 Colonising biota with recognisable diversity

0.59 0.9 17.43 0.5 17.47 72.56

Exposed rock - bare 0 1.05 12.53 0.45 12.57 85.12 Colonising biota with distinct colonies 0 1.3 10.35 0.39 10.37 95.5 Groups 2009PL DEF & 2015PL DEF


DEF Group 2015PL

DEF


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Exposed rock - bare 0 8.81 26.89 0.67 27.22 27.22 Rubble - Natural 14.68 0.43 26.85 0.66 27.17 54.39 Sand 0.41 4.72 17.23 0.58 17.43 71.82 Shell grit 1.22 3.06 16.67 0.55 16.87 88.7



Habitat descriptor (SIMPER) Depth 57 m Colonising biota with recognisable diversity

0.54 0.13 5.94 0.31 6.01 94.71

Group 2011PL

DEF Group 2015PL

DEF


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 4.87 4.72 42.09 1 43.3 43.3 Exposed rock - bare 0.66 8.81 29 0.72 29.83 73.13 Shell grit 0 3.06 11.56 0.45 11.89 85.03 Exposed rock - microbiota 3.84 1.13 10.97 0.51 11.28 96.31 Groups 2006LON NS & 2006REF AC


NS Group 2006REF

AC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.

% Sand 6.54 2.93 47.25 1.01 48.51 48.51 Stiff Sediment/Clay 7.14 0 23.34 0.6 23.96 72.47 Shell grit 3.06 0.29 14.71 0.48 15.11 87.57 Rubble - Natural 4.37 0 12.1 0.41 12.43 100

Groups 2006PL ABC & 2006PL DEF Average dissimilarity = 99.39 Group 2006PL

ABC Group 2006PL

DEF


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Exposed rock - bare 0 12.62 37.9 0.9 38.13 38.13 Shell grit 1.16 4.78 27.83 0.79 28 66.13 Sand 3.12 0.03 17.89 0.49 18 84.13 Rubble - Natural 0 6.2 15.47 0.5 15.57 99.7 Groups 2006PL DEF & 2006RB WE Average dissimilarity = 99.66 Group 2006PL

DEF Group 2006RB

WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 0.03 6.22 30.99 0.73 31.09 31.09 Exposed rock - bare 12.62 0 29.36 0.75 29.46 60.55 Shell grit 4.78 0.14 19.78 0.64 19.84 80.39 Rubble - Natural 6.2 0 12.13 0.44 12.17 92.57 Groups 2009LON NS & 2009REF AC


NS Group 2009REF

AC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 1.05 22.57 49.63 1.4 52.45 52.45 Rubble - Natural 15.77 0.1 19.02 0.69 20.1 72.55



Habitat descriptor (SIMPER) Depth 57 m Shell grit 10.13 0.3 14.88 0.63 15.72 88.27 Exposed rock - microbiota 3.64 0 4.64 0.27 4.9 93.18 Groups 2011LON NS & 2011REF AC Average dissimilarity = 98.90 Group 2011LON

NS Group 2011REF

AC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 6.86 0.82 46.68 1.02 47.2 47.2 Rubble - Natural 9.56 0 21.93 0.55 22.17 69.37 Exposed rock - microbiota 9.86 0 16.09 0.54 16.27 85.64 Stiff Sediment/Clay 1.14 0 6.38 0.28 6.45 92.09 Groups 2011PL ABC & 2011PL DEF


ABC Group 2011PL

DEF


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 0 4.87 70.12 1.73 70.18 70.18 Colonising biota with recognisable diversity

0.59 0.3 13.56 0.42 13.57 83.75

Exposed rock - microbiota 0 3.84 11.06 0.51 11.07 94.82 Groups 2015LON NS & 2015REF AC


NS Group 2015REF AC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Sand 2.43 8.78 79.83 2.47 88.95 88.95 Shell grit 0.1 0.33 5.72 0.31 6.38 95.33 Groups 2015PL DEF & 2015PL ABC Average dissimilarity = 96.71 Group 2015PL

DEF Group 2015PL ABC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

Exposed rock - bare 8.81 1.05 31.02 0.77 32.07 32.07 Sand 4.72 2.67 27.5 0.72 28.43 60.51 Shell grit 3.06 1.28 20.99 0.62 21.71 82.21 Exposed rock - microbiota 1.13 0.22 6.91 0.36 7.14 89.35 Colonising biota with distinct colonies 0 1.3 5.22 0.28 5.4 94.76


Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno K-1


APPENDIX K SIMPER ANALYSES OF BIOTA ASSEMBLAGE



Results of biota SIMPER analysis for significant pair-wise comparisons for the term Year Table K-1x Location Groups at 27 m of depth.

SIMPER – Biota at 27 m Groups 2009LON NS & 2011LON NS Average dissimilarity = 80.35 Group

2009LON NS Group

2011LON NS

Species Av.Abund Av.Abund Av.Diss Diss/SD Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 15.57 10.24 14.45 1.17 17.98 17.98 Rhodophyta 7.82 5.32 9.35 0.86 11.63 29.61 Parazoanthus sp 7.61 1.46 7.85 0.49 9.77 39.39 Ecklonia radiata 3.05 2.94 4.78 0.79 5.95 45.34 ENoscY 3.87 0.79 4.60 0.67 5.72 51.06 H. australe/ S. indivisus/ S. robusta 0.00 3.75 3.94 0.55 4.90 55.97 Nemertesia procumbens 1.93 2.05 3.60 0.54 4.48 60.45 MAoscG 2.13 2.00 3.24 0.60 4.03 64.48 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 0.00 3.15 3.11 0.47 3.87 68.34 ENrufCR 1.39 1.42 2.56 0.45 3.18 71.53

Carijoa sp. 2 0.00 2.29 2.43 0.37 3.02 74.55 Ritterella pedunculata 0.00 2.24 2.23 0.46 2.78 77.33 Herdmania momus/grandis 0.87 1.38 1.98 0.75 2.46 79.79

Holopsamma laminaefavosa 1.35 0.09 1.49 0.59 1.85 81.64 Purple Squat Bulb Sponge 1.19 0.27 1.27 0.30 1.58 83.23 ENoscCR 0.95 0.13 1.17 0.36 1.46 84.69 Textured Yellow Sponge 0.89 0.00 0.95 0.19 1.18 85.87 Encrusting Blue Sponge 0.75 0.08 0.94 0.25 1.17 87.04 Culicia spp 0.00 0.87 0.83 0.14 1.03 88.08

Orthoscuticella ventricosa 0.00 0.68 0.80 0.27 0.99 89.07 Rambling Grey Sponge 0.78 0.00 0.78 0.19 0.97 90.04 Groups 2011LON NS & 2015LON NS Average dissimilarity = 76.34 Group

2011LON NS Group

2015LON NS

Species Av.Abund Av.Abund Av.Diss Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 10.24 19.25 13.46 1.32 17.63 17.63 Rhodophyta 5.32 8.10 8.87 1.04 11.62 29.26 ENrufCR 1.42 6.68 6.41 1.24 8.39 37.65 Unidentified Sponge/Colonial Ascidian

0.00 4.58 4.60 1.11 6.02 43.67

Ecklonia radiata 2.94 2.30 3.98 0.68 5.21 48.88 H. austral / S. indivisus / S. robusta 3.75 0.65 3.84 0.61 5.03 53.91 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 3.15 1.30 3.51 0.55 4.59 58.50 Carijoa sp. 2 2.29 1.85 3.32 0.57 4.35 62.85

Nemertesia procumbens 2.05 1.55 2.83 0.63 3.71 66.57 MAoscG 2.00 1.00 2.61 0.49 3.41 69.98 Ritterella pedunculata 2.24 0.08 2.10 0.47 2.75 72.73

Parazoanthus sp 1.46 0.60 1.80 0.28 2.36 75.10 Herdmania momus/grandis 1.38 0.45 1.58 0.68 2.07 77.17 Orthoscuticella ventricosa 0.68 0.98 1.45 0.31 1.90 79.06

Iotrochotid sp. 0.74 0.65 1.26 0.41 1.65 80.71 Didemnum spp 0.00 1.03 0.94 0.39 1.23 81.94 Culicia spp 0.87 0.03 0.79 0.15 1.04 82.98 ENoscY 0.79 0.23 0.79 0.26 1.04 84.02 Solandaria fusca 0.00 0.90 0.76 0.17 1.00 85.02



SIMPER – Biota at 27 m

Mopsella spp 0.00 0.70 0.69 0.32 0.90 85.92 Ascidian - unidentified 0.30 0.48 0.68 0.50 0.89 86.81 ENoscCR 0.13 0.45 0.56 0.22 0.74 87.55 Filograna implexa 0.41 0.13 0.54 0.24 0.71 88.25 Thorecta sp. 0.00 0.55 0.51 0.28 0.67 88.93 Encrusting corallines 0.00 0.48 0.47 0.37 0.61 89.54 Ircinia spp. 0.00 0.48 0.44 0.19 0.58 90.12 Groups 2009REF AC & 2011REF AC Average dissimilarity = 82.14 Group

2009REF AC Group

2011REF AC


Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 37.35 6.91 22.52 1.60 27.42 27.42

Ritterella pedunculata 7.41 11.63 9.15 1.01 11.14 38.56 Nemertesia procumbens 9.69 2.15 7.07 0.84 8.61 47.16 Textured Yellow Sponge 2.79 6.95 5.33 0.96 6.49 53.65 ENoscCR 0.00 6.26 4.01 0.52 4.88 58.53 Rhodophyta 3.63 2.20 3.37 0.83 4.11 62.64 MAoscG 0.00 4.66 3.35 0.58 4.07 66.71 Aglaophenia divaricata var divaricata 0.00 3.56 2.62 0.53 3.19 69.90 Ecklonia radiata 2.68 1.27 2.60 0.48 3.17 73.07 Echinochalina sp. 0.00 3.07 2.18 0.44 2.66 75.73 Rambling Grey Sponge 0.00 2.82 2.03 0.33 2.48 78.20 H. australe/ S. indivisus/ S. robusta 0.00 2.56 1.73 0.59 2.11 80.31 ENrufCR 0.00 2.62 1.72 0.64 2.09 82.40 Unknown grey branched cnidarian 1.99 0.63 1.67 0.63 2.04 84.44 Ascidian - unidentified 1.54 0.73 1.52 0.42 1.86 86.30 Halicornopsis elegans 1.44 0.69 1.32 0.64 1.60 87.90

Callyspongiid sp. 0.12 1.80 1.31 0.51 1.59 89.49 Gymnangium spp 1.53 0.20 1.10 0.42 1.34 90.83 Groups 2011REF AC & 2015REF AC Average dissimilarity = 81.76 Group

2011REF AC Group

2015REF AC


Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 6.91 21.38 12.28 1.46 15.02 15.02

Ritterella pedunculata 11.63 1.38 8.30 0.96 10.15 25.17 ENrufCR 2.62 10.15 6.83 1.46 8.35 33.52 Textured Yellow Sponge 6.95 0.00 5.22 0.86 6.38 39.90 Rhodophyta 2.20 6.13 5.04 0.89 6.16 46.06 ENoscCR 6.26 1.13 4.75 0.60 5.82 51.88 ENoscY 0.00 5.63 4.20 0.58 5.13 57.01 MAoscG 4.66 0.10 3.64 0.57 4.45 61.46 Echinochalina sp. 3.07 2.35 3.55 0.61 4.34 65.81 Aglaophenia divaricata var divaricata 3.56 0.35 2.94 0.55 3.60 69.40

Nemertesia procumbens 2.15 2.53 2.88 0.76 3.53 72.93 Ecklonia radiata 1.27 2.05 2.27 0.57 2.78 75.71 Rambling Grey Sponge 2.82 0.00 2.20 0.33 2.69 78.40 H. australe/ S. indivisus/ S. robusta 2.56 0.55 2.04 0.64 2.50 80.90 Polyandrocarpa labidosa 0.96 1.63 1.70 0.46 2.08 82.97 Callyspongiid sp. 1.80 0.00 1.39 0.49 1.70 84.67



SIMPER – Biota at 27 m Unidentified Sponge/Colonial Ascidian

0.20 1.60 1.31 0.60 1.60 86.28

Ascidian - unidentified 0.73 0.83 1.11 0.47 1.35 87.63 Unknown grey branched cnidarian 0.63 0.90 1.00 0.60 1.23 88.86 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 1.19 0.15 0.96 0.55 1.18 90.04 Groups 2009PL ABC & 2011PL ABC Average dissimilarity = 76.36 Group 2009PL

ABC Group 2011PL

ABC


Contrib%

Cum.%

Parazoanthus sp 6.38 22.39 18.00 0.96 23.57 23.57 ENrufG 17.29 22.47 14.97 1.23 19.61 43.18 Rhodophyta 10.21 3.98 8.70 0.66 11.39 54.57 Gymnangium spp 5.45 1.09 4.68 0.67 6.14 60.71

Halicornopsis elegans 4.43 0.61 3.84 0.62 5.02 65.73 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 1.20 3.96 3.66 0.61 4.80 70.53 Orthoscuticella ventricosa 2.03 2.86 3.31 0.65 4.34 74.87

Nemertesia procumbens 2.87 0.09 2.52 0.47 3.30 78.16 Aglaophenia divaricata var divaricata 1.95 0.98 2.17 0.52 2.84 81.00 Ecklonia radiata 2.34 0.37 1.82 0.30 2.38 83.39 ENrufCR 1.15 1.30 1.69 0.53 2.21 85.60 Corynactis australis 0.00 1.80 1.42 0.26 1.86 87.46 Amathia sp. 1.50 0.04 1.19 0.28 1.56 89.02 ENoscY 1.11 0.00 0.95 0.40 1.24 90.26 Groups 2009PL DEF & 2011PL DEF


DEF Group 2011PL

DEF


Contrib%

Cum.%

Rhodophyta 20.21 5.28 15.58 1.11 19.81 19.81 Parazoanthus sp 10.62 13.60 14.48 0.81 18.41 38.22 ENrufG 14.03 11.66 10.92 1.09 13.88 52.10 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 4.82 4.87 6.06 0.72 7.70 59.79 ENrufCR 4.01 2.18 3.96 0.61 5.04 64.84

Ecklonia radiata 3.39 1.12 3.34 0.55 4.24 69.08 Orthoscuticella ventricosa 1.33 2.37 2.58 0.58 3.29 72.36 Unidentified Sponge/Colonial Ascidian

0.08 2.04 1.80 0.34 2.29 74.65

Holopsamma laminaefavosa 1.28 0.69 1.57 0.49 1.99 76.64 H. australe/ S. indivisus/ S. robusta 0.09 1.54 1.34 0.41 1.70 78.34 Aglaophenia divaricata var divaricata 0.00 1.59 1.21 0.32 1.54 79.88 Iotrochotid sp. 0.75 0.84 1.18 0.27 1.50 81.38

Halicornopsis elegans 1.09 0.39 1.13 0.32 1.43 82.81 MAoscG 0.03 1.09 1.03 0.29 1.31 84.12 Nemertesia procumbens 0.40 0.63 0.85 0.39 1.08 85.20 Rambling Grey Sponge 0.84 0.12 0.80 0.27 1.02 86.22 Ascidian - unidentified 0.72 0.23 0.78 0.43 0.99 87.21 Gymnangium spp 1.08 0.00 0.78 0.18 0.99 88.20

Synoicum spp 0.00 0.97 0.76 0.27 0.96 89.16 Synoicum sphinctorum 0.00 0.95 0.74 0.26 0.94 90.09



SIMPER – Biota at 27 m Groups 2009RB WE & 2011RB WE Average dissimilarity = 81.89 Group 2009RB

WE Group 2011RB

WE


Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 19.06 10.68 17.19 1.06 20.99 20.99 Rhodophyta 16.12 8.69 16.49 0.91 20.13 41.12 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 2.30 3.81 5.19 0.55 6.34 47.46 Ecklonia radiata 4.10 1.16 5.16 0.44 6.31 53.77

Corynactis australis 3.18 2.30 4.17 0.43 5.09 58.86 Parazoanthus sp 1.03 3.35 3.51 0.37 4.28 63.14 Orthoscuticella ventricosa 1.62 1.75 2.98 0.47 3.64 66.78

Amathia sp. 1.95 0.95 2.42 0.25 2.95 69.74 Holopsamma laminaefavosa 1.63 0.67 1.95 0.55 2.38 72.11 Unidentified Sponge/Colonial Ascidian

0.09 1.84 1.75 0.28 2.14 74.25

ENrufCR 0.31 1.59 1.67 0.27 2.04 76.29 Aglaophenia divaricata var cystifera 1.51 0.00 1.45 0.22 1.77 78.07 Gymnangium spp 1.50 0.15 1.42 0.23 1.73 79.79

Halicornopsis elegans 1.20 0.41 1.37 0.33 1.67 81.46 Aglaophenia divaricata var divaricata 0.31 1.34 1.37 0.32 1.67 83.13 Ascidian - unidentified 0.75 0.56 1.03 0.29 1.26 84.39

Culicia spp 0.41 0.83 1.03 0.33 1.26 85.64 Synoicum spp 0.00 1.66 0.99 0.23 1.21 86.85 Synoicum sphinctorum 0.00 1.66 0.99 0.23 1.21 88.05 ENoscCR 0.07 1.24 0.96 0.15 1.17 89.23 Echinochalina sp. 0.00 1.12 0.95 0.19 1.16 90.38 Groups 2011RB WE & 2015RB WE Average dissimilarity = 80.82 Group 2011RB

WE Group 2015RB

WE


Contrib%

Cum.%

Rhodophyta 8.69 20.73 18.32 0.97 22.67 22.67 ENrufG 10.68 11.72 11.22 1.11 13.88 36.55

Parazoanthus sp 3.35 6.75 7.77 0.49 9.61 46.15 Corynactis australis 2.30 5.73 6.33 0.72 7.83 53.98 Culicia spp 0.83 4.03 4.14 0.50 5.13 59.11 ENrufCR 1.59 3.60 4.07 0.67 5.04 64.15 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 3.81 0.83 3.43 0.63 4.25 68.39 Orthoscuticella ventricosa 1.75 2.63 3.35 0.62 4.14 72.54

Ecklonia radiata 1.16 2.30 2.69 0.47 3.33 75.87 Unidentified Sponge/Colonial Ascidian

1.84 1.62 2.64 0.51 3.27 79.14

Amathia sp. 0.95 1.07 1.69 0.33 2.10 81.23 Echinochalina sp. 1.12 0.95 1.64 0.33 2.03 83.26

Aglaophenia divaricata var divaricata 1.34 0.22 1.21 0.32 1.50 84.76 Holopsamma laminaefavosa 0.67 0.63 1.06 0.47 1.32 86.08 Synoicum spp 1.66 0.12 1.01 0.25 1.25 87.33 ENoscCR 1.24 0.22 1.00 0.18 1.24 88.57 Synoicum sphinctorum 1.66 0.07 0.97 0.24 1.20 89.76 Didemnum spp 0.56 0.58 0.92 0.47 1.14 90.91 Groups 2006LON NS & 2006REF AC Average dissimilarity = 42.85



SIMPER – Biota at 27 m Group

2006LON NS Group

2006REF AC


Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 41.95 56.02 19.94 1.26 46.54 46.54 Rambling Grey Sponge 0.12 7.11 5.57 0.55 12.99 59.53 Nemertesia procumbens 2.52 3.22 3.61 0.72 8.43 67.96 Textured Yellow Sponge 0.00 4.06 2.83 0.43 6.61 74.56 Aglaophenia divaricata var divaricata 1.03 1.27 1.72 0.45 4.02 78.59 ENoscY 0.60 1.63 1.55 0.37 3.61 82.20 Rhodophyta 1.29 0.00 1.09 0.36 2.55 84.75 ENrufCR 1.39 0.00 1.07 0.44 2.51 87.26 Mopsella species X 0.00 0.74 0.95 0.29 2.22 89.48

Amathia sp. 0.12 1.03 0.91 0.47 2.13 91.61 Groups 2006PL ABC & 2006RB WE


ABC Group 2006RB

WE


Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 35.62 33.56 19.41 1.03 31.57 31.57 Nemertesia procumbens 20.43 0.13 17.06 1.13 27.75 59.33 Rhodophyta 0.00 10.56 8.00 0.79 13.01 72.33 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 0.00 4.42 3.26 0.49 5.30 77.64 ENoscY 2.90 1.04 2.65 0.65 4.31 81.94 Parazoanthus sp 0.00 3.18 2.40 0.40 3.91 85.85 ENrufCR 0.57 1.29 1.28 0.33 2.09 87.94 Ecklonia radiata 0.00 1.74 1.24 0.34 2.01 89.95 Halicornopsis elegans 1.58 0.00 1.24 0.79 2.01 91.96 Groups 2009LON NS & 2009REF AC Average dissimilarity = 73.54 Group

2009LON NS Group

2009REF AC


Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 15.57 37.35 20.59 1.43 28.00 28.00

Nemertesia procumbens 1.93 9.69 7.82 0.82 10.64 38.64 Rhodophyta 7.82 3.63 6.26 0.86 8.51 47.15 Parazoanthus sp 7.61 1.56 5.98 0.52 8.13 55.28

Ritterella pedunculata 0.00 7.41 5.69 0.57 7.74 63.02 Ecklonia radiata 3.05 2.68 3.79 0.65 5.15 68.17 ENoscY 3.87 0.00 3.06 0.65 4.17 72.33 Textured Yellow Sponge 0.89 2.79 2.59 0.49 3.53 75.86 Unknown grey branched cnidarian 0.23 1.99 1.69 0.58 2.30 78.16 MAoscG 2.13 0.00 1.48 0.45 2.02 80.17 Ascidian - unidentified 0.19 1.54 1.33 0.34 1.80 81.98 Halicornopsis elegans 0.30 1.44 1.25 0.62 1.70 83.67 Holopsamma laminaefavosa 1.35 0.34 1.18 0.65 1.60 85.28

Gymnangium spp 0.00 1.53 1.09 0.37 1.48 86.75 ENrufCR 1.39 0.00 0.95 0.30 1.29 88.05 Purple Squat Bulb Sponge 1.19 0.00 0.82 0.27 1.11 89.16

Herdmania momus/grandis 0.87 0.25 0.80 0.60 1.09 90.25

Groups 2009PL ABC & 2009PL DEF



SIMPER – Biota at 27 m Average dissimilarity = 78.56 Group 2009PL

ABC Group 2009PL

DEF


Contrib%

Cum.%

Rhodophyta 10.21 20.21 15.82 1.11 20.14 20.14 ENrufG 17.29 14.03 12.62 1.11 16.06 36.20 Parazoanthus sp 6.38 10.62 10.62 0.68 13.52 49.72 Gymnangium spp 5.45 1.08 4.66 0.63 5.93 55.65 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 1.20 4.82 3.95 0.62 5.03 60.68 Halicornopsis elegans 4.43 1.09 3.94 0.63 5.01 65.70 Ecklonia radiata 2.34 3.39 3.81 0.53 4.86 70.55 ENrufCR 1.15 4.01 3.28 0.57 4.18 74.73 Nemertesia procumbens 2.87 0.40 2.60 0.48 3.31 78.04 Orthoscuticella ventricosa 2.03 1.33 2.39 0.50 3.04 81.08

Aglaophenia divaricata var divaricata 1.95 0.00 1.59 0.41 2.02 83.10 Amathia sp. 1.50 0.39 1.35 0.31 1.72 84.82 Textured Yellow Sponge 1.04 0.76 1.31 0.34 1.67 86.49

Holopsamma laminaefavosa 0.22 1.28 1.12 0.52 1.42 87.92 ENoscY 1.11 0.00 0.93 0.39 1.18 89.10 ENoscCR 1.04 0.03 0.77 0.26 0.98 90.08 Groups 2009PL DEF & 2009RB WE Average dissimilarity = 75.29 Group 2009PL

DEF Group 2009RB

WE


Contrib%

Cum.%

Rhodophyta 20.21 16.12 17.21 1.11 22.86 22.86 ENrufG 14.03 19.06 13.55 1.13 18.00 40.86 Parazoanthus sp 10.62 1.03 8.78 0.55 11.67 52.53

Ecklonia radiata 3.39 4.10 5.02 0.60 6.67 59.19 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 4.82 2.30 4.89 0.59 6.50 65.69 ENrufCR 4.01 0.31 3.24 0.51 4.31 70.00

Orthoscuticella ventricosa 1.33 1.62 2.12 0.53 2.82 72.82 Corynactis australis 0.00 3.18 2.06 0.28 2.74 75.55 Holopsamma laminaefavosa 1.28 1.63 1.93 0.65 2.57 78.12

Gymnangium spp 1.08 1.50 1.77 0.28 2.35 80.47 Halicornopsis elegans 1.09 1.20 1.65 0.37 2.19 82.66 Amathia sp. 0.39 1.95 1.59 0.22 2.11 84.78

Aglaophenia divaricata var cystifera 0.00 1.51 1.14 0.23 1.52 86.29 Ascidian - unidentified 0.72 0.75 1.06 0.39 1.40 87.70 Nemertesia procumbens 0.40 0.85 0.86 0.33 1.14 88.84 Grey Cleft Sponge 0.22 0.73 0.74 0.28 0.98 89.82 Unidentified algae 0.63 0.31 0.70 0.29 0.94 90.76 Groups 2011LON NS & 2011REF AC

Average dissimilarity = 84.52 Group

2011LON NS Group

2011REF AC


Contrib%

Cum.%

Ritterella pedunculata 2.24 11.63 10.14 0.97 12.00 12.00 ENrufG 10.24 6.91 8.32 1.08 9.84 21.84 Textured Yellow Sponge 0.00 6.95 6.32 0.83 7.48 29.32



SIMPER – Biota at 27 m Rhodophyta 5.32 2.20 5.39 0.72 6.38 35.69 ENoscCR 0.13 6.26 5.15 0.52 6.09 41.79 MAoscG 2.00 4.66 5.14 0.63 6.08 47.87 H. australe/ S. indivisus/ S. robusta 3.75 2.56 4.53 0.75 5.36 53.23 Aglaophenia divaricata var divaricata 0.04 3.56 3.54 0.51 4.19 57.41 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 3.15 1.19 3.27 0.57 3.86 61.27 Nemertesia procumbens 2.05 2.15 3.25 0.64 3.85 65.12 Ecklonia radiata 2.94 1.27 3.24 0.60 3.83 68.95 ENrufCR 1.42 2.62 2.99 0.67 3.54 72.49 Echinochalina sp. 0.00 3.07 2.87 0.43 3.40 75.89 Rambling Grey Sponge 0.00 2.82 2.68 0.33 3.18 79.07

Carijoa sp. 2 2.29 0.00 2.14 0.37 2.53 81.60 Callyspongiid sp. 0.08 1.80 1.73 0.50 2.05 83.65 Herdmania momus/grandis 1.38 0.38 1.55 0.67 1.83 85.47

Parazoanthus sp 1.46 0.00 1.25 0.22 1.48 86.96 Ascidian - unidentified 0.30 0.73 1.01 0.44 1.19 88.15 Orthoscuticella ventricosa 0.68 0.29 0.87 0.35 1.03 89.18

Culicia spp 0.87 0.00 0.74 0.14 0.88 90.06 Groups 2011PL ABC & 2011RB WE


ABC Group 2011RB

WE


Contrib%

Cum.%

Parazoanthus sp 22.39 3.35 20.66 0.86 25.18 25.18 ENrufG 22.47 10.68 18.42 1.06 22.45 47.63 Rhodophyta 3.98 8.69 8.84 0.74 10.77 58.40 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 3.96 3.81 5.71 0.72 6.95 65.36 Orthoscuticella ventricosa 2.86 1.75 3.69 0.64 4.50 69.85 Corynactis australis 1.80 2.30 3.28 0.43 3.99 73.84 ENrufCR 1.30 1.59 2.42 0.40 2.95 76.79 Aglaophenia divaricata var divaricata 0.98 1.34 1.86 0.41 2.26 79.05 Unidentified Sponge/Colonial Ascidian

0.00 1.84 1.51 0.28 1.84 80.89

Ecklonia radiata 0.37 1.16 1.40 0.33 1.70 82.60 Gymnangium spp 1.09 0.15 1.18 0.27 1.43 84.03 Culicia spp 0.37 0.83 1.12 0.25 1.36 85.39

Synoicum spp 0.00 1.66 0.93 0.23 1.13 86.52 Synoicum sphinctorum 0.00 1.66 0.93 0.23 1.13 87.66 Echinochalina sp. 0.03 1.12 0.90 0.20 1.09 88.75 ENoscCR 0.06 1.24 0.88 0.15 1.08 89.82 Amathia sp. 0.04 0.95 0.84 0.20 1.02 90.84 Groups 2011PL DEF & 2011RB WE Average dissimilarity = 83.78 Group 2011PL

DEF Group 2011RB

WE


Contrib%

Cum.%

Parazoanthus sp 13.60 3.35 13.34 0.66 15.92 15.92 ENrufG 11.66 10.68 13.04 1.03 15.57 31.49 Rhodophyta 5.28 8.69 10.43 0.79 12.45 43.94 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 4.87 3.81 6.96 0.66 8.31 52.25 Unidentified Sponge/Colonial Ascidian

2.04 1.84 3.63 0.41 4.33 56.58

Orthoscuticella ventricosa 2.37 1.75 3.48 0.56 4.16 60.74



SIMPER – Biota at 27 m ENrufCR 2.18 1.59 3.13 0.45 3.74 64.48 Aglaophenia divaricata var divaricata 1.59 1.34 2.46 0.42 2.94 67.42

Corynactis australis 0.28 2.30 2.23 0.44 2.66 70.08 Ecklonia radiata 1.12 1.16 2.15 0.39 2.56 72.64 H. australe/ S. indivisus/ S. robusta 1.54 0.49 1.94 0.43 2.31 74.95

Synoicum spp 0.97 1.66 1.86 0.35 2.22 77.17 Synoicum sphinctorum 0.95 1.66 1.84 0.34 2.19 79.37 MAoscG 1.09 0.25 1.64 0.27 1.96 81.33

Amathia sp. 0.52 0.95 1.40 0.26 1.68 83.00 Holopsamma laminaefavosa 0.69 0.67 1.36 0.32 1.62 84.62 Echinochalina sp. 0.23 1.12 1.15 0.24 1.37 85.99 ENoscCR 0.27 1.24 1.14 0.18 1.36 87.36 Nemertesia procumbens 0.63 0.04 0.78 0.34 0.93 88.29 Iotrochotid sp. 0.84 0.00 0.76 0.16 0.91 89.20

Culicia spp 0.00 0.83 0.72 0.26 0.86 90.06 Groups 2015LON NS & 2015REF AC

Average dissimilarity = 60.70 Group

2015LON NS Group

2015REF AC


Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 19.25 21.38 9.59 1.27 15.81 15.81 Rhodophyta 8.10 6.13 6.74 1.11 11.11 26.92 ENrufCR 6.68 10.15 5.54 1.27 9.13 36.04

ENoscY 0.23 5.63 4.39 0.59 7.24 43.28 Unidentified Sponge/Colonial Ascidian

4.58 1.60 3.41 1.10 5.62 48.91

Ecklonia radiata 2.30 2.05 2.80 0.61 4.60 53.51

Nemertesia procumbens 1.55 2.53 2.55 0.75 4.20 57.71 Echinochalina sp. 0.48 2.35 2.06 0.45 3.40 61.11 Carijoa sp. 2 1.85 0.20 1.51 0.64 2.49 63.60

Polyandrocarpa labidosa 0.05 1.63 1.28 0.39 2.11 65.71 ENoscCR 0.45 1.13 1.19 0.41 1.95 67.67 Ritterella pedunculata 0.08 1.38 1.14 0.49 1.88 69.55 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 1.30 0.15 1.03 0.39 1.69 71.24 Didemnum spp 1.03 0.33 0.95 0.48 1.56 72.80 MAoscG 1.00 0.10 0.94 0.29 1.55 74.34

Orthoscuticella ventricosa 0.98 0.38 0.91 0.26 1.50 75.84 Ascidian - unidentified 0.48 0.83 0.89 0.43 1.47 77.31 H. australe/ S. indivisus/ S. robusta 0.65 0.55 0.84 0.53 1.38 78.68 Unknown grey branched cnidarian 0.20 0.90 0.80 0.55 1.31 80.00 Solandaria fusca 0.90 0.03 0.66 0.17 1.08 81.08 Mopsella spp 0.70 0.05 0.59 0.34 0.97 82.05

Amathia sp. 0.13 0.63 0.58 0.40 0.95 82.99 Parazoanthus sp 0.60 0.18 0.57 0.24 0.95 83.94 Synoicum sphinctorum 0.00 0.73 0.55 0.28 0.91 84.85

Iotrochotid sp. 0.65 0.00 0.51 0.29 0.85 85.69 Aglaophenia divaricata var cystifera 0.05 0.53 0.46 0.35 0.76 86.45 Triphyllozoon moniliferum 0.28 0.38 0.45 0.38 0.75 87.20

Thorecta sp. 0.55 0.05 0.45 0.31 0.74 87.94 Herdmania momus/grandis 0.45 0.15 0.44 0.47 0.72 88.66 Gymnangium spp 0.08 0.45 0.41 0.32 0.68 89.34

Ircinia spp. 0.48 0.05 0.40 0.21 0.66 90.00 Encrusting corallines 0.48 0.03 0.39 0.39 0.65 90.65



SIMPER – Biota at 27 m Groups 2015PL DEF & 2015PL ABC Average dissimilarity = 71.17 Group 2015PL

DEF Group 2015PL

ABC


Contrib%

Cum.%

Parazoanthus sp 14.27 6.43 13.14 0.79 18.46 18.46 ENrufG 14.25 16.98 10.93 1.20 15.36 33.82 Rhodophyta 8.25 8.37 9.48 0.84 13.33 47.15 ENrufCR 6.02 4.68 4.56 1.02 6.41 53.56

Amathia sp. 1.82 3.32 3.40 0.65 4.78 58.34 Unidentified Sponge/Colonial Ascidian

2.08 3.45 3.29 0.81 4.63 62.97

Orthoscuticella ventricosa 2.00 2.58 2.94 0.76 4.14 67.10 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 0.42 1.45 1.36 0.54 1.91 69.01 ENoscY 0.72 1.03 1.32 0.42 1.85 70.86 Echinochalina sp. 1.15 0.75 1.31 0.55 1.84 72.71

Ecklonia radiata 0.88 0.75 1.17 0.34 1.64 74.35 Nemertesia procumbens 0.32 1.23 1.16 0.41 1.63 75.97 Biflustra perfragilis 0.60 0.87 1.14 0.26 1.61 77.58

Gymnangium spp 0.52 0.80 1.01 0.34 1.42 79.00 Didemnum spp 1.03 0.37 0.99 0.66 1.38 80.38 Culicia spp 0.00 1.22 0.94 0.22 1.31 81.70

Sertularella pinnata 0.53 0.58 0.87 0.30 1.23 82.92 Aglaophenia divaricata var divaricata 0.27 0.72 0.79 0.33 1.10 84.03 ENoscCR 0.42 0.52 0.74 0.37 1.04 85.06

Iotrochotid sp. 0.78 0.00 0.65 0.21 0.92 85.98 Polyandrocarpa labidosa 0.30 0.57 0.65 0.36 0.92 86.90 Ascidian - unidentified 0.52 0.22 0.54 0.53 0.76 87.66 Unknown grey branched cnidarian 0.30 0.33 0.48 0.41 0.67 88.33 Grey Rambley Ridge Sponge 0.23 0.40 0.48 0.21 0.67 89.00 Ircinia spp. 0.32 0.32 0.47 0.22 0.66 89.66 H. australe/ S. indivisus/ S. robusta 0.32 0.23 0.45 0.39 0.63 90.28 Groups 2015PL ABC & 2015RB WE


ABC Group 2015RB

WE


Contrib%

Cum.%

Rhodophyta 8.37 20.73 15.53 1.03 21.08 21.08 ENrufG 16.98 11.72 9.82 1.28 13.32 34.41 Parazoanthus sp 6.43 6.75 8.56 0.57 11.62 46.02

Corynactis australis 0.32 5.73 4.77 0.74 6.48 52.51 ENrufCR 4.68 3.60 3.85 0.97 5.23 57.73 Culicia spp 1.22 4.03 3.80 0.53 5.16 62.89

Orthoscuticella ventricosa 2.58 2.63 3.11 0.77 4.23 67.12 Amathia sp. 3.32 1.07 3.00 0.59 4.07 71.19 Unidentified Sponge/Colonial Ascidian

3.45 1.62 2.95 0.79 4.00 75.19

Ecklonia radiata 0.75 2.30 2.00 0.45 2.72 77.91 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 1.45 0.83 1.54 0.59 2.09 79.99 Echinochalina sp. 0.75 0.95 1.17 0.47 1.59 81.58 Nemertesia procumbens 1.23 0.02 0.94 0.35 1.28 82.86 ENoscY 1.03 0.08 0.84 0.34 1.14 84.00 Aglaophenia divaricata var divaricata 0.72 0.22 0.70 0.33 0.96 84.96 Biflustra perfragilis 0.87 0.00 0.67 0.19 0.91 85.87




Didemnum spp 0.37 0.58 0.67 0.51 0.91 86.77 Gymnangium spp 0.80 0.07 0.66 0.38 0.89 87.66

Holopsamma laminaefavosa 0.15 0.63 0.61 0.44 0.83 88.49 ENoscCR 0.52 0.22 0.55 0.28 0.75 89.24 Aplidium clivosum 0.30 0.38 0.51 0.43 0.69 89.94 Encrusting corallines 0.08 0.63 0.51 0.42 0.69 90.63 Groups 2015PL DEF & 2015RB WE


DEF Group 2015RB

WE


Contrib%

Cum.%

Rhodophyta 8.25 20.73 15.51 1.02 20.82 20.82 Parazoanthus sp 14.27 6.75 12.91 0.79 17.33 38.15 ENrufG 14.25 11.72 8.95 1.11 12.02 50.17

Corynactis australis 0.00 5.73 4.77 0.72 6.40 56.57 ENrufCR 6.02 3.60 4.45 1.08 5.98 62.55 Culicia spp 0.00 4.03 3.19 0.48 4.28 66.83

Orthoscuticella ventricosa 2.00 2.63 2.89 0.71 3.88 70.71 Ecklonia radiata 0.88 2.30 2.09 0.44 2.81 73.52 Unidentified Sponge/Colonial Ascidian

2.08 1.62 2.07 0.85 2.78 76.30

Amathia sp. 1.82 1.07 2.03 0.51 2.72 79.02 Echinochalina sp. 1.15 0.95 1.44 0.51 1.93 80.95 Didemnum spp 1.03 0.58 1.06 0.68 1.42 82.37 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 0.42 0.83 0.87 0.47 1.17 83.54 Iotrochotid sp. 0.78 0.05 0.67 0.23 0.89 84.43 Ascidian - unidentified 0.52 0.43 0.66 0.54 0.89 85.32 ENoscY 0.72 0.08 0.63 0.30 0.84 86.16 Holopsamma laminaefavosa 0.15 0.63 0.61 0.44 0.81 86.98 Encrusting corallines 0.18 0.63 0.58 0.45 0.77 87.75 ENoscCR 0.42 0.22 0.49 0.35 0.66 88.41 Aplidium clivosum 0.25 0.38 0.47 0.45 0.63 89.04 Biflustra perfragilis 0.60 0.00 0.45 0.19 0.61 89.65

Gymnangium spp 0.52 0.07 0.44 0.18 0.60 90.25




SIMPER – Biota at 37 m Groups 2009LON NS & 2011LON NS Average dissimilarity = 78.18 Group 2009LON

NS Group 2011LON

NS


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 10.32 23.95 22.78 1.23 29.13 29.13 Iotrochotid sp. 5.74 3.93 8.37 0.76 10.70 39.84 Orthoscuticella ventricosa 2.28 5.35 8.02 0.65 10.25 50.09

Nemertesia procumbens 4.37 0.99 5.29 0.69 6.77 56.86 Halicornopsis elegans 3.69 1.05 5.09 0.63 6.52 63.37 Grey Rambley Ridge Sponge 1.05 2.17 3.81 0.34 4.87 68.24

Halopteris glutinosa 1.61 1.63 3.13 0.51 4.00 72.24 ENrufCR 1.12 0.85 1.98 0.39 2.53 74.77 H. australe/ S. indivisus/ S. robusta 0.26 1.04 1.61 0.36 2.07 76.84 MAoscG 0.63 0.85 1.61 0.34 2.06 78.90 Ritterella pedunculata 0.40 0.84 1.43 0.33 1.82 80.73 Erect Pink Sponge 0.91 0.35 1.26 0.23 1.61 82.34 Vanessa Sponge 0.06 0.74 1.03 0.29 1.31 83.65 Solandaria fusca 0.24 0.64 0.87 0.22 1.12 84.77 Plumularia sulcata 0.64 0.06 0.81 0.31 1.04 85.81 Rambling Grey Sponge 0.53 0.09 0.79 0.30 1.02 86.82 Unknown grey branched cnidarian 0.44 0.25 0.79 0.27 1.01 87.83 ENsmoY 0.28 0.43 0.67 0.17 0.86 88.69 Chlorophyta 0.43 0.00 0.62 0.21 0.79 89.48 Textured Yellow Sponge 0.36 0.15 0.61 0.26 0.78 90.26 Groups 2011LON NS & 2015LON NS Average dissimilarity = 67.39 Group 2011LON

NS Group 2015LON

NS


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 23.95 21.23 18.62 1.33 27.63 27.63

Orthoscuticella ventricosa 5.35 0.05 6.50 0.59 9.65 37.28 Iotrochotid sp. 3.93 2.15 5.30 0.71 7.87 45.15 Unidentified Sponge/Colonial Ascidian

0.00 2.95 3.30 0.91 4.89 50.04

Nemertesia procumbens 0.99 2.40 3.21 0.66 4.76 54.80 Rhodophyta 0.06 2.70 3.08 0.68 4.57 59.37 ENrufCR 0.85 2.20 2.95 0.82 4.38 63.74 Grey Rambley Ridge Sponge 2.17 0.55 2.88 0.29 4.28 68.03

Halopteris glutinosa 1.63 0.08 1.92 0.38 2.85 70.88 H. australe/ S. indivisus/ S. robusta 1.04 0.28 1.45 0.39 2.16 73.04 MAoscG 0.85 0.58 1.45 0.33 2.15 75.19

Carijoa sp. 2 0.00 1.10 1.21 0.36 1.80 76.99 Halicornopsis elegans 1.05 0.03 1.04 0.26 1.55 78.54 Sertularella pinnata 0.00 0.95 1.04 0.32 1.54 80.08

Ritterella pedunculata 0.84 0.15 1.02 0.36 1.51 81.59 Mopsella spp 0.30 0.55 0.89 0.39 1.31 82.91 Vanessa Sponge 0.74 0.00 0.87 0.28 1.29 84.20 ENoscCR 0.57 0.28 0.83 0.29 1.23 85.43 Herdmania momus/grandis 0.26 0.45 0.73 0.46 1.08 86.51



SIMPER – Biota at 37 m Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 0.28 0.40 0.71 0.31 1.05 87.56 Solandaria fusca 0.64 0.03 0.62 0.18 0.92 88.48

Holopsamma laminaefavosa 0.10 0.43 0.57 0.32 0.85 89.33 Purple Cup Sponge 0.61 0.00 0.53 0.18 0.79 90.12 Groups 2009REF AC & 2011REF AC Average dissimilarity = 67.83 Group 2009REF

AC Group 2011REF

AC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 26.25 31.01 19.01 1.17 28.03 28.03

Halopteris glutinosa 16.72 4.42 11.58 1.28 17.07 45.10 ENrufCR 0.00 11.73 8.13 0.60 11.99 57.08 Nemertesia procumbens 7.84 1.85 5.85 1.02 8.62 65.71

Orthoscuticella ventricosa 2.35 6.74 5.77 0.84 8.51 74.21 Halicornopsis elegans 1.63 1.93 2.40 0.64 3.54 77.76 Textured Yellow Sponge 0.96 2.57 2.25 0.41 3.32 81.08

Ritterella pedunculata 2.46 0.32 2.00 0.50 2.94 84.02 Encrusting corallines 0.00 1.72 1.88 0.34 2.78 86.80 ENoscCR 0.00 2.46 1.75 0.21 2.58 89.38 Erect Pink Sponge 2.22 0.29 1.75 0.53 2.58 91.96 Groups 2009PL ABC & 2011PL ABC


ABC Group 2011PL

ABC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 20.38 25.07 21.29 1.36 27.64 27.64 Grey Rambley Ridge Sponge 0.00 7.25 6.65 0.55 8.63 36.27

Orthoscuticella ventricosa 0.77 4.54 4.83 0.60 6.27 42.54 Nemertesia procumbens 4.57 1.86 4.48 0.97 5.82 48.36 ENrufCR 0.55 4.39 4.34 0.48 5.63 53.99 Rhodophyta 3.54 0.00 4.05 0.52 5.25 59.24 Textured Yellow Sponge 2.88 2.34 3.89 0.52 5.06 64.30 Gymnangium spp 1.64 1.71 3.47 0.43 4.50 68.80

Halopteris glutinosa 3.53 0.59 3.12 0.65 4.04 72.84 Halicornopsis elegans 2.62 0.00 3.05 0.62 3.96 76.80 Unknown grey branched cnidarian 2.34 0.00 1.98 0.40 2.57 79.38

Aglaophenia divaricata var divaricata

1.48 0.00 1.60 0.48 2.08 81.46

Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 0.58 1.33 1.59 0.37 2.07 83.53 Vanessa Sponge 0.60 0.56 1.19 0.40 1.55 85.07 ENoscY 1.27 0.00 1.19 0.36 1.54 86.62 Carijoa sp. 2 0.00 1.15 1.05 0.34 1.37 87.99 Unidentified algae 0.75 0.00 1.03 0.20 1.34 89.32 MAoscG 0.96 0.00 1.01 0.31 1.31 90.63 Groups 2009PL DEF & 2011PL DEF


DEF Group 2011PL

DEF


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%



SIMPER – Biota at 37 m ENrufG 24.25 12.80 20.21 1.18 25.03 25.03 Orthoscuticella ventricosa 2.95 6.27 6.94 0.72 8.60 33.63

Halopteris glutinosa 7.09 1.48 6.71 0.78 8.31 41.93 Unknown grey branched cnidarian 4.71 0.44 4.89 0.52 6.05 47.99 Halicornopsis elegans 3.23 0.90 3.78 0.46 4.69 52.67 Erect Pink Sponge 2.41 0.76 3.15 0.36 3.90 56.57 Nemertesia procumbens 2.65 1.05 3.14 0.55 3.89 60.46 ENrufCR 1.13 2.50 3.13 0.49 3.88 64.34 Textured Yellow Sponge 2.18 1.80 3.08 0.39 3.81 68.15 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 0.76 2.07 2.66 0.40 3.30 71.45 Ritterella pedunculata 1.87 0.44 2.06 0.44 2.55 74.01

Botrylloides leachi 1.72 0.00 1.97 0.26 2.44 76.45 Ascidian - unidentified 1.62 0.25 1.90 0.27 2.35 78.80 FlfrufCR 0.00 2.26 1.87 0.25 2.32 81.11

Gymnangium spp 1.57 0.09 1.50 0.34 1.86 82.97 MAoscG 1.06 0.29 1.34 0.32 1.66 84.63 H. australe/ S. indivisus/ S. robusta 0.10 1.33 1.26 0.33 1.56 86.19

Iotrochotid sp. 0.88 0.27 0.94 0.21 1.17 87.36 Grey Rambley Ridge Sponge 0.43 0.62 0.92 0.23 1.14 88.50 Callyspongiid sp. 0.67 0.40 0.89 0.40 1.10 89.60 FlfoscCR 0.00 0.84 0.80 0.13 0.99 90.59 Groups 2009RB WE & 2011RB WE


WE Group 2011RB

WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 21.25 13.81 23.71 1.15 28.39 28.39 Rhodophyta 9.70 0.11 8.45 0.51 10.12 38.50

Orthoscuticella ventricosa 0.56 6.12 7.75 0.53 9.28 47.78 ENrufCR 0.59 4.73 5.82 0.54 6.96 54.74 Nemertesia procumbens 2.07 1.82 3.70 0.52 4.43 59.17

Halopteris glutinosa 2.95 0.73 3.48 0.57 4.17 63.34 Unknown grey branched cnidarian 1.90 0.92 3.39 0.35 4.06 67.40 Textured Yellow Sponge 1.53 1.45 2.89 0.40 3.46 70.86

Halicornopsis elegans 0.91 1.60 2.51 0.39 3.01 73.87 H. australe/ S. indivisus/ S. robusta 0.19 1.97 2.37 0.31 2.84 76.70 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 0.30 1.23 2.16 0.30 2.58 79.29 Grey Rambley Ridge Sponge 0.31 1.41 1.80 0.23 2.15 81.44 ENoscCR 0.05 1.25 1.42 0.22 1.69 83.13 Iotrochotid sp. 0.09 1.08 1.17 0.27 1.40 84.54

Holopsamma laminaefavosa 0.65 0.53 1.16 0.35 1.39 85.93 Echinochalina sp. 0.00 0.74 1.04 0.23 1.25 87.17 Corynactis australis 0.30 0.82 1.00 0.28 1.19 88.37 Rambling Grey Sponge 0.70 0.14 0.94 0.21 1.13 89.50 MAoscG 0.11 0.66 0.91 0.20 1.09 90.59 Groups 2006PL ABC & 2006RB WE Average dissimilarity = 62.88 Group 2006PL

ABC Group 2006RB

WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 35.52 29.14 26.17 1.18 41.62 41.62



SIMPER – Biota at 37 m Nemertesia procumbens 9.69 5.58 10.61 0.84 16.86 58.48 Halopteris glutinosa 3.81 3.52 5.94 0.54 9.44 67.92

Parazoanthus sp 2.80 0.78 2.95 0.29 4.69 72.61 ENrufCR 2.09 1.33 2.74 0.44 4.35 76.97 Halicornopsis elegans 2.37 0.71 2.69 0.48 4.29 81.25 Grey Rambley Ridge Sponge 0.00 1.86 1.49 0.25 2.37 83.62 Amathia sp. 1.18 0.47 1.47 0.29 2.33 85.95 Rambling Grey Sponge 0.54 0.57 0.90 0.28 1.43 87.38

Gymnangium spp 0.86 0.01 0.88 0.18 1.39 88.77 ENoscY 0.09 0.81 0.75 0.24 1.20 89.97 Rhodophyta 0.39 0.37 0.66 0.25 1.06 91.03 Groups 2006PL DEF & 2006RB WE Average dissimilarity = 65.98 Group 2006PL

DEF Group 2006RB

WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 32.08 29.14 28.54 1.24 43.25 43.25 Nemertesia procumbens 5.81 5.58 8.52 0.80 12.91 56.16 Halopteris glutinosa 5.85 3.52 7.77 0.63 11.78 67.94 ENoscY 2.13 0.81 2.61 0.33 3.96 71.90 Halicornopsis elegans 0.99 0.71 1.82 0.32 2.76 74.66 ENrufCR 0.81 1.33 1.74 0.31 2.63 77.29 Grey Rambley Ridge Sponge 0.00 1.86 1.61 0.25 2.43 79.73 MAoscG 1.03 0.48 1.55 0.28 2.35 82.07 Parazoanthus sp 0.94 0.78 1.33 0.18 2.01 84.08

Orthoscuticella ventricosa 1.04 0.26 1.27 0.30 1.92 86.00 Amathia sp. 0.75 0.47 1.15 0.32 1.75 87.75 Rhodophyta 0.62 0.37 1.06 0.23 1.60 89.36

Gymnangium spp 0.72 0.01 0.76 0.22 1.15 90.51 Groups 2009LON NS & 2009REF AC


NS Group 2009REF

AC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 10.32 26.25 21.49 1.35 27.60 27.60 Halopteris glutinosa 1.61 16.72 16.15 1.26 20.75 48.35

Nemertesia procumbens 4.37 7.84 8.84 0.98 11.36 59.71 Iotrochotid sp. 5.74 0.00 5.29 0.56 6.80 66.51 Halicornopsis elegans 3.69 1.63 4.69 0.71 6.03 72.54

Orthoscuticella ventricosa 2.28 2.35 3.90 0.75 5.01 77.54 Erect Pink Sponge 0.91 2.22 2.80 0.48 3.60 81.14 Ritterella pedunculata 0.40 2.46 2.61 0.47 3.36 84.50 Grey Rambley Ridge Sponge 1.05 0.46 1.53 0.28 1.97 86.47 Textured Yellow Sponge 0.36 0.96 1.12 0.28 1.43 87.90 ENrufCR 1.12 0.00 0.99 0.26 1.27 89.18

Callyspongiid sp. 0.27 0.60 0.90 0.32 1.15 90.33 Groups 2011PL ABC & 2011PL DEF

Average dissimilarity = 77.37 Group 2011PL Group 2011PL



SIMPER – Biota at 37 m ABC DEF


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 25.07 12.80 22.42 1.19 28.97 28.97 Orthoscuticella ventricosa 4.54 6.27 9.17 0.69 11.85 40.82 Grey Rambley Ridge Sponge 7.25 0.62 8.19 0.55 10.59 51.41 ENrufCR 4.39 2.50 6.42 0.56 8.30 59.71 Textured Yellow Sponge 2.34 1.80 3.40 0.44 4.40 64.10 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 1.33 2.07 3.35 0.47 4.32 68.43

Nemertesia procumbens 1.86 1.05 2.59 0.65 3.35 71.78 Gymnangium spp 1.71 0.09 2.23 0.29 2.88 74.65 FlfrufCR 0.00 2.26 2.00 0.26 2.58 77.24

Halopteris glutinosa 0.59 1.48 1.82 0.57 2.35 79.59 Carijoa sp. 2 1.15 0.18 1.38 0.35 1.79 81.38 H. australe/ S. indivisus/ S. robusta 0.00 1.33 1.26 0.32 1.63 83.01

Halicornopsis elegans 0.00 0.90 0.94 0.23 1.22 84.23 Purple Squat Bulb Sponge 0.52 0.12 0.93 0.29 1.20 85.43 Encrusting corallines 0.51 0.02 0.89 0.27 1.15 86.58 FlfoscCR 0.00 0.84 0.86 0.13 1.11 87.68 Sertularella pinnata 0.67 0.22 0.83 0.32 1.07 88.76 Vanessa Sponge 0.56 0.17 0.82 0.32 1.06 89.82

Parazoanthus sp 0.00 0.95 0.79 0.14 1.02 90.84 Groups 2011PL ABC & 2011RB WE


ABC Group 2011RB

WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 25.07 13.81 21.32 1.30 27.90 27.90 Orthoscuticella ventricosa 4.54 6.12 9.00 0.70 11.78 39.69 Grey Rambley Ridge Sponge 7.25 1.41 8.26 0.57 10.81 50.50 ENrufCR 4.39 4.73 7.42 0.66 9.72 60.22 Textured Yellow Sponge 2.34 1.45 3.23 0.50 4.23 64.45

Nemertesia procumbens 1.86 1.82 3.18 0.59 4.17 68.62 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 1.33 1.23 2.55 0.41 3.34 71.96 Gymnangium spp 1.71 0.12 2.12 0.30 2.78 74.74 H. australe/ S. indivisus/ S. robusta 0.00 1.97 1.70 0.32 2.23 76.97 Halicornopsis elegans 0.00 1.60 1.48 0.32 1.94 78.91 Halopteris glutinosa 0.59 0.73 1.25 0.45 1.64 80.55 ENoscCR 0.00 1.25 1.18 0.22 1.55 82.10 Carijoa sp. 2 1.15 0.02 1.18 0.33 1.55 83.64 Unknown grey branched cnidarian 0.00 0.92 1.02 0.23 1.34 84.98

Aglaophenia divaricata var cystifera 0.56 0.40 0.95 0.32 1.25 86.23 Iotrochotid sp. 0.00 1.08 0.93 0.27 1.22 87.45 Encrusting corallines 0.51 0.00 0.80 0.27 1.05 88.50

Echinochalina sp. 0.00 0.74 0.79 0.28 1.04 89.53 Purple Squat Bulb Sponge 0.52 0.00 0.78 0.27 1.02 90.55 Groups 2015LON NS & 2015REF AC Average dissimilarity = 59.03 Group 2015LON

NS Group 2015REF

AC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%



SIMPER – Biota at 37 m ENrufG 21.23 21.68 12.63 1.27 21.39 21.39 Nemertesia procumbens 2.40 5.08 5.77 0.86 9.78 31.17 ENrufCR 2.20 3.55 3.71 0.92 6.28 37.44 Rhodophyta 2.70 0.65 3.08 0.73 5.22 42.67 Unidentified Sponge/Colonial Ascidian

2.95 1.00 2.91 0.92 4.92 47.59

Iotrochotid sp. 2.15 0.25 2.48 0.57 4.20 51.79 Sertularella pinnata 0.95 1.60 2.36 0.66 3.99 55.78 Echinochalina sp. 0.38 1.90 2.16 0.41 3.65 59.43

Ritterella pedunculata 0.15 1.60 1.67 0.48 2.84 62.26 Carijoa sp. 2 1.10 0.38 1.47 0.41 2.49 64.75 Polyandrocarpa labidosa 0.20 1.23 1.46 0.37 2.47 67.22 Orange X sponge 0.33 0.98 1.32 0.26 2.23 69.45 ENoscCR 0.28 1.05 1.26 0.46 2.13 71.58 Halicornopsis elegans 0.03 1.03 1.12 0.32 1.89 73.47 Purple Squat Bulb Sponge 0.00 1.05 1.05 0.19 1.77 75.24 Halopteris glutinosa 0.08 0.88 0.99 0.52 1.68 76.93 Orthoscuticella ventricosa 0.05 0.90 0.98 0.44 1.67 78.60 MAoscG 0.58 0.35 0.96 0.36 1.62 80.22 Herdmania momus/grandis 0.45 0.50 0.90 0.55 1.52 81.74 Ascidian - unidentified 0.33 0.50 0.83 0.44 1.40 83.14 ENoscY 0.05 0.65 0.72 0.24 1.22 84.37 Serpulids 0.20 0.48 0.71 0.44 1.21 85.57 Holopsamma laminaefavosa 0.43 0.28 0.68 0.39 1.15 86.72 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 0.40 0.23 0.62 0.41 1.06 87.78 Mopsella spp 0.55 0.00 0.58 0.31 0.98 88.76 Massive Papillate Sponge 0.00 0.58 0.57 0.18 0.97 89.73 Grey Rambley Ridge Sponge 0.55 0.00 0.46 0.12 0.79 90.51 Groups 2015PL ABC & 2015PL DEF


ABC Group 2015PL

DEF


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 17.48 17.23 11.57 1.20 17.39 17.39 Parazoanthus sp 5.12 5.45 8.09 0.54 12.16 29.54 Unidentified Sponge/Colonial Ascidian

6.55 3.55 5.94 0.97 8.94 38.48

ENrufCR 4.00 5.45 5.31 0.93 7.99 46.46 Rhodophyta 2.65 2.13 3.44 0.73 5.17 51.64

Nemertesia procumbens 2.22 2.42 3.35 0.67 5.03 56.67 ENoscY 2.70 1.20 3.00 0.53 4.52 61.19 Orthoscuticella ventricosa 1.70 1.55 2.44 0.63 3.67 64.86

Amathia sp. 1.92 1.27 2.40 0.72 3.61 68.47 ENoscCR 0.65 0.97 1.35 0.41 2.03 70.50 Biflustra perfragilis 0.83 0.72 1.34 0.39 2.01 72.50 Ascidian - unidentified 0.77 0.90 1.29 0.51 1.94 74.45 Echinochalina sp. 0.92 0.63 1.29 0.47 1.94 76.38 Polyandrocarpa labidosa 0.45 0.97 1.28 0.37 1.92 78.30

Ritterella pedunculata 1.02 0.12 0.97 0.46 1.45 79.76 Sertularella pinnata 0.28 0.80 0.93 0.39 1.40 81.15 Solandaria fusca 0.72 0.22 0.85 0.32 1.28 82.43

Aplidium clivosum 0.50 0.37 0.73 0.47 1.10 83.54 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 0.27 0.42 0.62 0.43 0.93 84.47 Halicornopsis elegans 0.25 0.45 0.60 0.40 0.91 85.37



SIMPER – Biota at 37 m Iotrochotid sp. 0.08 0.58 0.60 0.30 0.90 86.27 Didemnum spp 0.45 0.25 0.59 0.37 0.88 87.15


0.32 0.37 0.56 0.36 0.84 87.99

H. australe/ S. indivisus/ S. robusta 0.30 0.32 0.53 0.43 0.80 88.79 Orange X sponge 0.00 0.58 0.53 0.21 0.79 89.58

Corynactis australis 0.53 0.00 0.52 0.26 0.78 90.36 Groups 2015PL ABC & 2015RB WE


ABC Group 2015RB

WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 17.48 18.78 9.39 1.34 13.65 13.65 ENrufCR 4.00 8.00 6.07 0.99 8.83 22.48 Rhodophyta 2.65 6.02 5.80 0.69 8.44 30.92 Unidentified Sponge/Colonial Ascidian

6.55 1.87 5.05 0.97 7.34 38.26

Corynactis australis 0.53 5.18 4.60 0.52 6.69 44.95

Parazoanthus sp 5.12 0.40 4.13 0.39 6.01 50.96 ENoscY 2.70 2.23 3.22 0.64 4.68 55.64 Culicia spp 0.32 3.07 2.67 0.32 3.88 59.52

Orthoscuticella ventricosa 1.70 2.15 2.62 0.61 3.80 63.33 Nemertesia procumbens 2.22 1.43 2.38 0.64 3.46 66.79 Amathia sp. 1.92 0.83 1.91 0.63 2.77 69.56

Biflustra perfragilis 0.83 1.33 1.66 0.38 2.41 71.97 Echinochalina sp. 0.92 1.32 1.57 0.56 2.29 74.26 ENoscCR 0.65 1.40 1.49 0.57 2.17 76.43 Ascidian - unidentified 0.77 0.70 1.08 0.43 1.57 78.00 Ritterella pedunculata 1.02 0.33 0.96 0.52 1.40 79.40 Holopsamma laminaefavosa 0.18 0.88 0.83 0.37 1.21 80.61 Unknown grey branched cnidarian 0.27 0.80 0.80 0.46 1.17 81.78 Sertularella pinnata 0.28 0.80 0.80 0.43 1.16 82.94 Didemnum spp 0.45 0.58 0.77 0.46 1.12 84.06

Iotrochotid sp. 0.08 0.73 0.66 0.31 0.96 85.02 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 0.27 0.53 0.64 0.32 0.94 85.96 Solandaria fusca 0.72 0.03 0.58 0.29 0.85 86.81 Purple Squat Bulb Sponge 0.32 0.42 0.58 0.22 0.84 87.65 Polyandrocarpa labidosa 0.45 0.27 0.57 0.38 0.84 88.48 Aplidium clivosum 0.50 0.18 0.52 0.44 0.76 89.24 H. australe/ S. indivisus/ S. robusta 0.30 0.37 0.50 0.41 0.72 89.96 Grey Rambley Ridge Sponge 0.00 0.60 0.48 0.20 0.70 90.66 Groups 2015PL DEF & 2015RB WE Average dissimilarity = 69.67 Group 2015PL

DEF Group 2015RB

WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 17.23 18.78 10.97 1.24 15.74 15.74 ENrufCR 5.45 8.00 6.63 0.98 9.51 25.25 Rhodophyta 2.13 6.02 5.78 0.65 8.29 33.54 Corynactis australis 0.00 5.18 4.75 0.48 6.81 40.35 Parazoanthus sp 5.45 0.40 4.47 0.40 6.41 46.77



SIMPER – Biota at 37 m Unidentified Sponge/Colonial Ascidian

3.55 1.87 3.15 0.97 4.53 51.29

Culicia spp 0.00 3.07 2.65 0.30 3.80 55.09

Orthoscuticella ventricosa 1.55 2.15 2.59 0.62 3.72 58.81 Nemertesia procumbens 2.42 1.43 2.58 0.67 3.70 62.51 ENoscY 1.20 2.23 2.50 0.60 3.59 66.10 ENoscCR 0.97 1.40 1.75 0.54 2.51 68.61 Biflustra perfragilis 0.72 1.33 1.66 0.35 2.38 71.00 Amathia sp. 1.27 0.83 1.56 0.56 2.24 73.24

Echinochalina sp. 0.63 1.32 1.50 0.57 2.15 75.38 Sertularella pinnata 0.80 0.80 1.18 0.46 1.70 77.08 Ascidian - unidentified 0.90 0.70 1.17 0.43 1.68 78.76

Iotrochotid sp. 0.58 0.73 1.06 0.40 1.53 80.28 Polyandrocarpa labidosa 0.97 0.27 1.01 0.35 1.45 81.74 Holopsamma laminaefavosa 0.20 0.88 0.89 0.36 1.28 83.02 Orange X sponge 0.58 0.42 0.82 0.28 1.17 84.19 Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 0.42 0.53 0.77 0.36 1.11 85.29 Unknown grey branched cnidarian 0.03 0.80 0.70 0.40 1.01 86.31

Didemnum spp 0.25 0.58 0.67 0.42 0.96 87.27 Grey Rambley Ridge Sponge 0.18 0.60 0.64 0.24 0.92 88.19 Purple Squat Bulb Sponge 0.22 0.42 0.56 0.18 0.81 89.00 H. australe/ S. indivisus/ S. robusta 0.32 0.37 0.53 0.43 0.76 89.76 Callyspongiid sp. 0.22 0.37 0.45 0.15 0.65 90.40







Group 2009LON NS

Group 2011LON NS


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 22.22 17.04 20.22 1.29 26.41 26.41

Iotrochotid sp. 4.04 5.10 7.70 0.70 10.05 36.47

Nemertesia procumbens 6.64 0.94 7.00 0.79 9.14 45.61

Halopteris glutinosa 6.50 2.01 6.36 0.87 8.31 53.92


H. australe/ S. indivisus/ S. robusta 0.26 2.42 2.73 0.44 3.57 64.18

Grey Rambley Ridge Sponge 0.73 1.63 2.25 0.28 2.93 67.11

MAoscG 1.40 0.94 2.24 0.38 2.93 70.04

Unknown grey branched cnidarian 0.89 0.94 2.04 0.45 2.66 72.70

ENrufCR 0.47 1.69 1.90 0.45 2.48 75.18

Carijoa sp. 2 0.20 1.41 1.58 0.25 2.06 77.25

Halicornopsis elegans 0.99 0.37 1.54 0.41 2.01 79.26

Callyspongiid sp. 0.89 0.70 1.47 0.48 1.93 81.19

Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 0.72 0.50 1.35 0.34 1.77 82.95

Purple Squat Bulb Sponge 1.00 0.39 1.10 0.23 1.43 84.39

Textured Yellow Sponge 0.77 0.30 1.06 0.22 1.39 85.77

Herdmania momus/grandis 0.51 0.35 1.01 0.33 1.32 87.09

Grey Cleft Sponge 1.01 0.17 0.90 0.22 1.18 88.27

Erect Pink Sponge 0.55 0.26 0.90 0.27 1.18 89.45

Polyandrocarpa labidosa 0.00 0.97 0.76 0.16 0.99 90.44

Groups 2009REF AC & 2011REF AC


Group 2009REF AC

Group 2011REF AC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 30.72 40.43 21.43 1.37 30.85 30.85


ENrufCR 0 7.93 5.19 0.59 7.48 57.05



Ritterella pedunculata 4.96 0.32 3.44 0.51 4.95 73.35

Amathia sp. 3.57 0 2.16 0.31 3.12 76.46



Unknown grey branched cnidarian 1.11 2.42 2 0.69 2.88 85.51




Brain Sponge 2.84 0.44 1.96 0.31 2.83 88.34

MAoscG 0 1.45 1.15 0.3 1.66 90



Group 2009RB WE

Group 2011RB WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 25.74 13.35 25.13 1.25 30.66 30.66



Iotrochotid sp. 0.96 3.91 5.13 0.46 6.26 51.99


ENrufCR 0.32 3.15 3.61 0.46 4.41 62.12



Halicornopsis elegans 0 1.86 2.14 0.26 2.61 70.66

Rambling Grey Sponge 1.54 0.61 1.94 0.21 2.37 73.02



ENoscY 1.38 0.02 1.62 0.31 1.98 79.39

ENoscCR 0.56 0.82 1.59 0.27 1.94 81.33


Holopsamma laminaefavosa 0.74 0.53 1.35 0.42 1.65 84.64

MAoscG 0.61 0.78 1.23 0.28 1.5 86.13


Ircinia spp. 0.99 0.09 1.01 0.16 1.24 88.75


Grey Cleft Sponge 0.6 0.16 0.78 0.21 0.95 90.8

Groups 2006LON NS & 2006REF AC


Group 2006LON NS

Group 2006REF AC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 40.98 33.79 20.39 1.31 37.87 37.87


Nemertesia procumbens 8.07 7.63 8.4 1 15.6 70.15


ENrufCR 0.04 2.75 2.23 0.39 4.13 84.42

Amathia sp. 0 1.94 1.49 0.37 2.76 87.18

ENoscY 1.42 0 1.16 0.27 2.15 89.33

MAoscG 1.16 0.46 1.1 0.2 2.05 91.37






Group 2006PL ABC

Group 2006PL DEF


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 37.19 37.61 24.34 1.18 42.34 42.34



ENrufCR 2.08 2.36 3.19 0.54 5.54 77.13


Parazoanthus sp 1.3 1.06 1.75 0.25 3.04 83.25


0 1.91 1.4 0.29 2.43 85.68


Rhodophyta 0.48 0.86 1.32 0.29 2.3 90.35



Group 2006PL ABC

Group 2006RB WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 37.19 36.86 21.08 1.27 39.81 39.81



ENrufCR 2.08 1.02 2.42 0.45 4.57 76.39


ENoscY 0.62 1.32 1.44 0.34 2.72 81.91


MAoscG 0.82 0.5 1.2 0.24 2.27 86.47


Amathia sp. 0.41 0.82 1.05 0.33 1.98 90.49



Group 2009LON NS

Group 2009REF AC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 22.22 30.72 17.53 1.32 25.61 25.61



Ritterella pedunculata 0 4.96 3.92 0.49 5.73 60.91

Iotrochotid sp. 4.04 0 3.19 0.53 4.66 65.57





Amathia sp. 0 3.57 2.49 0.31 3.64 73.29

Brain Sponge 0 2.84 2.01 0.27 2.94 76.23




Purple Squat Bulb Sponge 1 0.72 1.15 0.29 1.68 83.95

MAoscG 1.4 0 1.02 0.3 1.49 85.44







Group 2009PL ABC

Group 2009PL DEF


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 26.14 15.61 22.44 1.23 30.44 30.44







Encrusting Grey Pitted Sponge 2.73 0 2.3 0.25 3.12 77.7


MAoscG 0.44 1.6 2 0.32 2.71 83.14


Iotrochotid sp. 0.6 0.54 1.44 0.32 1.96 87.08

Grey Rambley Ridge Sponge 1.24 0 1.27 0.27 1.72 88.8


Groups 2009PL DEF & 2009RB WE


Group 2009PL DEF

Group 2009RB WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 15.61 25.74 26.37 1.24 33.95 33.95


Halicornopsis elegans 5.38 0 6.49 0.47 8.35 55.97







MAoscG 1.6 0.61 2.22 0.33 2.86 73.72


ENoscY 0 1.38 1.71 0.3 2.2 78.26


Iotrochotid sp. 0.54 0.96 1.5 0.31 1.93 82.37

Ircinia spp. 0.52 0.99 1.46 0.21 1.88 84.26

Rambling Grey Sponge 0 1.54 1.26 0.14 1.62 85.88



Purple Squat Bulb Sponge 0.85 0.22 0.89 0.26 1.15 89.61

Holopsamma laminaefavosa 0 0.74 0.87 0.31 1.12 90.73



Group 2011LON NS

Group 2011REF AC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 17.04 40.43 28.14 1.21 35.83 35.83

ENrufCR 1.69 7.93 7.19 0.64 9.16 44.99



Iotrochotid sp. 5.1 0.08 4.15 0.51 5.29 67.03




MAoscG 0.94 1.45 2.25 0.36 2.87 79.9



Grey Wobbly Cup Sponge 0.62 1.1 1.17 0.24 1.49 85.8

Carijoa sp. 2 1.41 0 1.15 0.22 1.46 87.27

FlfrufCR 0 1.07 0.96 0.29 1.23 88.5





Group 2011PL ABC

Group 2011PL DEF


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 23.19 13.39 23.71 1.12 29.35 29.35


ENrufCR 3.33 2.1 4.72 0.59 5.84 48.62

Encrusting Grey Pitted Sponge 3.95 1.35 4.71 0.32 5.83 54.46





Gymnangium spp 2.6 0 3.47 0.27 4.29 63.52



Iotrochotid sp. 2.31 0.31 2.68 0.4 3.32 74.94


Sertularella pinnata 1.52 0 1.82 0.29 2.26 80.12

Clathrozoon wilsoni 1.77 0 1.64 0.15 2.03 82.15

Erect Pink Sponge 0 1.68 1.45 0.28 1.8 83.95


Vanessa Sponge 0.97 0.14 1.22 0.32 1.52 87.09


MAoscG 0.24 0.8 0.9 0.27 1.11 89.32

Rambling Grey Sponge 0 1.14 0.79 0.14 0.98 90.3



Group 2011PL ABC

Group 2011RB WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 23.19 13.35 21.06 1.2 26.44 26.44


Iotrochotid sp. 2.31 3.91 5.32 0.55 6.68 43.87

ENrufCR 3.33 3.15 5.17 0.64 6.49 50.37




Gymnangium spp 2.6 0.04 3.08 0.28 3.86 69.18



Sertularella pinnata 1.52 0.06 1.69 0.31 2.13 77.97

Clathrozoon wilsoni 1.77 0 1.53 0.16 1.92 79.89

Grey Rambley Ridge Sponge 1.33 0.32 1.47 0.22 1.85 81.74

Corynactis australis 0 1.28 1.27 0.23 1.6 83.34

Vanessa Sponge 0.97 0.19 1.2 0.35 1.5 84.84

FlfrufCR 0.4 0.51 0.93 0.24 1.17 86.01

MAoscG 0.24 0.78 0.87 0.22 1.09 87.1

Echinochalina sp. 0.21 0.61 0.76 0.25 0.96 88.06



0.34 0.35 0.73 0.21 0.92 89.9

ENoscCR 0 0.82 0.73 0.2 0.91 90.81






Group 2011PL DEF

Group 2011RB WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 13.39 13.35 21.92 1.05 25.73 25.73

Orthoscuticella ventricosa 6.95 4.07 11.08 0.74 13 38.73

ENrufCR 2.1 3.15 5.77 0.56 6.77 45.5

Iotrochotid sp. 0.31 3.91 5.74 0.43 6.74 52.25





Corynactis australis 0 1.28 1.82 0.23 2.14 72.63


Erect Pink Sponge 1.68 0 1.75 0.29 2.06 76.81

MAoscG 0.8 0.78 1.59 0.28 1.87 78.68




ENoscCR 0.46 0.82 1.51 0.26 1.77 85.92




Holopsamma laminaefavosa 0 0.53 0.77 0.27 0.9 90.85



Group 2015PL ABC

Group 2015PL DEF


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 18.48 19.8 11.5 1.27 17.81 17.81

ENrufCR 4.32 4.7 5.51 1.05 8.53 26.34

Unidentified Sponge/Colonial Ascidian

4.33 1.95 4.52 0.91 7 33.34

Parazoanthus sp 2.62 1.8 3.82 0.37 5.92 39.26

Sertularella pinnata 1.32 2.52 3.23 0.58 5 44.26

Amathia sp. 1.52 2.55 3.11 0.77 4.82 49.08



ENoscY 1.13 0.93 1.82 0.48 2.81 60.09


Iotrochotid sp. 0.63 1.33 1.71 0.51 2.64 65.47

Solandaria fusca 1.45 0.02 1.56 0.42 2.41 67.88

Biflustra perfragilis 0.72 0.67 1.24 0.34 1.93 69.81





Ascidian - unidentified 0.35 1.02 1.2 0.56 1.87 73.56




ENoscCR 0.22 0.82 0.97 0.32 1.5 80.08


Halopteris campanula 0 0.82 0.88 0.36 1.36 82.92



Gymnangium spp 0.42 0.4 0.75 0.3 1.16 86.68

Carijoa sp. 2 0.2 0.63 0.75 0.45 1.16 87.84



0.05 0.65 0.69 0.27 1.07 90.02



Group 2015PL ABC

Group 2015RB WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 18.48 18.33 11.77 1.24 17.64 17.64


ENrufCR 4.32 7.17 6.36 1.13 9.53 38.51


4.33 1.9 4.18 0.91 6.26 44.78

Parazoanthus sp 2.62 2.2 4.13 0.36 6.2 50.98


Culicia spp 0.38 2.1 2.18 0.47 3.27 58.47


Amathia sp. 1.52 0.93 2 0.59 3.01 64.72



ENoscY 1.13 0.83 1.73 0.47 2.6 72.74

Solandaria fusca 1.45 0.12 1.56 0.43 2.34 75.08


Iotrochotid sp. 0.63 1.05 1.46 0.5 2.19 79.59




ENoscCR 0.22 0.65 0.76 0.38 1.13 85.93



Aplidium clivosum 0.35 0.28 0.55 0.35 0.83 88.93

Didemnum spp 0.13 0.52 0.55 0.31 0.82 89.75




Filograna implexa 0.38 0.18 0.54 0.41 0.81 90.56



Group 2015PL DEF

Group 2015RB WE


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 19.8 18.33 11.3 1.23 16.59 16.59


ENrufCR 4.70 7.17 6.01 1.1 8.83 35.27


Parazoanthus sp 1.80 2.2 3.11 0.33 4.56 45.26


Amathia sp. 2.55 0.93 2.68 0.68 3.94 53.62


1.95 1.9 2.67 0.75 3.91 57.53


Culicia spp 0.00 2.1 1.88 0.42 2.76 63.27

Iotrochotid sp. 1.33 1.05 1.81 0.53 2.66 65.93



ENoscY 0.93 0.83 1.35 0.38 1.99 72.33


ENoscCR 0.82 0.65 1.22 0.4 1.79 76.02





Halopteris campanula 0.82 0.13 0.91 0.38 1.33 83.47



Carijoa sp. 2 0.63 0.13 0.65 0.44 0.96 86.67



0.65 0 0.6 0.26 0.87 88.47

Orange X sponge 0.35 0.23 0.54 0.25 0.8 89.27

Serpulids 0.27 0.35 0.52 0.42 0.77 90.03





Groups 2009REF AC & 2011REF AC


Group 2009REF AC

Group 2011REF AC


Diss/SD

Contrib%

Cum.%

ENrufG 25.65 34.02 19.56 1.31 30.80 30.80




ENrufCR 0.00 4.41 3.58 0.64 5.64 67.51

Unknown grey branched cnidarian

1.37 3.55 3.57 0.51 5.63 73.14




H. australe/ S. indivisus/ S. robusta

1.20 0.79 1.50 0.43 2.35 87.41




Prepared for Port of Melbourne Corporation PMSS and Cardno L-1


APPENDIX L LIST OF TAXA AND PERCENT COVER PER FRAME



List of taxa Table L-1

Species/Taxa Family Order Class Phylum Kingdom

Filograna implexa Serpulidae Canalipalpata Polychaeta Annelida Animalia

Serpulids Serpulidae Canalipalpata Polychaeta Annelida Animalia

Carbasea pisciformis Gymnolaemata Bryozoa bryozoan Bryozoa Animalia

Carbasea pisciformis Gymnolaemata Bryozoa bryozoan Bryozoa Animalia

Biflustra perfragilis bryozoan bryozoan bryozoan Bryozoa Animalia

Cornucopina grandis bryozoan bryozoan bryozoan Bryozoa Animalia

Encrusting bryozoan brown bryozoan bryozoan bryozoan Bryozoa Animalia

Encrusting bryozoan cream bryozoan bryozoan bryozoan Bryozoa Animalia

Encrusting bryozoan orange bryozoan bryozoan bryozoan Bryozoa Animalia

Encrusting bryozoan red bryozoan bryozoan bryozoan Bryozoa Animalia

Hard bryozoans bryozoan bryozoan bryozoan Bryozoa Animalia

Hornera robusta bryozoan bryozoan bryozoan Bryozoa Animalia

Membranipora membranacea bryozoan bryozoan bryozoan Bryozoa Animalia

Other bryozoa bryozoan bryozoan bryozoan Bryozoa Animalia

Purple Arborescent Bryozoan bryozoan bryozoan bryozoan Bryozoa Animalia

Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan bryozoan bryozoan bryozoan Bryozoa Animalia

Adeona grisea Adeonidae Cheilostomata Gymnolaemata Bryozoa Animalia

Adeonellopsis sp Adeonidae Cheilostomata Gymnolaemata Bryozoa Animalia

Bugula dentata Bugulidae Cheilostomata Gymnolaemata Bryozoa Animalia

Bugularia dissimilis Bugulidae Cheilostomata Gymnolaemata Bryozoa Animalia

Orthoscuticella ventricosa Catenicellidae Cheilostomata Gymnolaemata Bryozoa Animalia

Celleporaria sp Lepraliellidae Cheilostomata Gymnolaemata Bryozoa Animalia

Mucropetraliella ellerii Petraliellidae Cheilostomata Gymnolaemata Bryozoa Animalia

Reteporella fissa Phidoloporidae Cheilostomata Gymnolaemata Bryozoa Animalia

Reteporella granulata Phidoloporidae Cheilostomata Gymnolaemata Bryozoa Animalia

Triphyllozoon moniliferum Phidoloporidae Cheilostomata Gymnolaemata Bryozoa Animalia

Triphyllozoon munitum Phidoloporidae Cheilostomata Gymnolaemata Bryozoa Animalia

Steginoporella chartacea Steginoporellidae Cheilostomata Gymnolaemata Bryozoa Animalia

Bryozoan - Erect folded, no holes Cheilostomata Gymnolaemata Bryozoa Animalia

Cryptopolyzoon sp. Buskiidae Ctenostomata Gymnolaemata Bryozoa Animalia

Amathia sp. Vesiculariidae Ctenostomata Gymnolaemata Bryozoa Animalia

Clavelina cylindrica Clavelinidae Aplousobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Clavelina spp Clavelinidae Aplousobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Didemnum spongioides Didemnidae Aplousobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Didemnum spp Didemnidae Aplousobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Leptoclinides sp. Didemnidae Aplousobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Poysyncraton galaxum Didemnidae Aplousobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Unidentified stalked colonial ascdian Holozoidae Aplousobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Polycitor giganteus Polycitoridae Aplousobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Aplidium brevilarvacium Polyclinidae Aplousobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Aplidium clivosum Polyclinidae Aplousobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Synoicum citrium Polyclinidae Aplousobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Synoicum sphinctorum Polyclinidae Aplousobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia




Synoicum spp Polyclinidae Aplousobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Pycnoclavella diminuta Pycnoclavellidae Aplousobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Pycnoclavella spp Pycnoclavellidae Aplousobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Ritterella pedunculata Riterellidae Aplousobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Coloninal Ascidian parazoanthus commensal

Unidentified Aplousobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Phallusia obesa Ascidiidae Phlebobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Eudistoma constrictum Polycitoridae Phlebobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Herdmania grandis Pyuridae Stolidobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Pyura spinifera Pyuridae Stolidobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Pyura spp Pyuridae Stolidobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Botrylloides leachi Stylediae Stolidobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Botrylloides magnicoecum Stylediae Stolidobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Cnemidocarpa radicosa Stylediae Stolidobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Polyandrocarpa labidosa Stylediae Stolidobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Polycarpa viridis? Stylediae Stolidobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Stolonica australis Stylediae Stolidobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Symplegma brakenhielmi Stylediae Stolidobranchia Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Ascidians unidentified Unidentified Unidentified Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Unidentified colonial ascidian Unidentified Unidentified Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Unidentified solitary ascidian Unidentified Unidentified Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia


Unidentified Unidentified Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Unidentified White Sponge/Ascidian Unidentified Unidentified Ascidiacea Chordata Animalia

Unidentified anemone anemone Actiniaria Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Alcyonarians alcyonarian Alcyonacea Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Erythropodium hicksoni Alcyoniidae Alcyonacea Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Pteronisis incerta Isididae Alcyonacea Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Pteronisis plumacea Isididae Alcyonacea Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Pteronisis spp Isididae Alcyonacea Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Acabaria sp Melithaeidae Alcyonacea Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Melithaea spp Melithaeidae Alcyonacea Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Mopsella klunzingeri Melithaeidae Alcyonacea Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Mopsella species X Melithaeidae Alcyonacea Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Mopsella spp Melithaeidae Alcyonacea Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Mopsella zimmeri Melithaeidae Alcyonacea Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Capnella erecta Nephtheidae Alcyonacea Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Capnella gaboensis Nephtheidae Alcyonacea Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Capnella johnstonei Nephtheidae Alcyonacea Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Capnella spp. Nephtheidae Alcyonacea Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Primnoella australasiae Primnoidae Alcyonacea Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Carijoa sp. 2 Telestidae Alcyonacea Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Corynactis australis jewel anemone Corallimorpharia Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Plesiastrea versipora alcyonarian Scleractinia Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Culicia spp Stony coral Scleractinia Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia




Culicia tenella stony coral Scleractinia Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Epizoanthus sabulosus zoanthid Zoanthidae Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Parazoanthus sp1 zoanthid Zoanthidae Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

temporary zoanthid zoanthid Zoanthidae Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Zoanthus robustus zoanthid Zoanthidae Anthozoa Cnidaria Animalia

H. australe/ S. indivisus/ S. robusta Hydroid on sponge hydroid Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Hydrodendron australe Hydroid on sponge hydroid Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Sertularella robusta Hydroid on sponge hydroid Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Symplectoscyphus indivisus Hydroid on sponge hydroid Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Fine Orange Hydroid Orange Fine Hydroid hydroid Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Halopteris glutinosa Red Stinging hydroid hydroid Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Hydroid Large Irregular Unidentified hydroid Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Hydroid Whispy Unidentified hydroid Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Hydroid/Algae 'fuzzy fuzz' Unidentified hydroid Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Hydroids Unidentified hydroid Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Unidentified hydroid/bryozoan Unidentified hydroid Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Unidentified white-speckled hydroid Unidentified hydroid Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Clathrozoon wilsoni Clathrozoidae Hydroida Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Aglaophenia divaricata var cystifera Plumulariidae Hydroida Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Aglaophenia divaricata var divaricata Plumulariidae Hydroida Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Gymnangium sp. Plumulariidae Hydroida Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Gymnangium superbum Plumulariidae Hydroida Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Halicornopsis elegans Plumulariidae Hydroida Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Halopteris campanula Plumulariidae Hydroida Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Nemertesia procumbens Plumulariidae Hydroida Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Plumularia sulcata Plumulariidae Hydroida Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Ralpharia magnifica S.O. Athecata Hydroida Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Solandaria fusca S.O. Athecata Hydroida Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Amphisbetia macrocarpa Sertulariidae Hydroida Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

Sertularella pinnata Sertulariidae Hydroida Hydrozoa Cnidaria Animalia

?Colonised Sea Whip ?Colonised Sea Whip Alcyonacea Unknown Cnidaria Animalia

Unknown Cnidarian Fan cnidarian fan cnidarian fan Unknown Cnidaria Animalia

Unknown cnidarian Unknown cnidarian Unknown cnidarian Unknown Cnidaria Animalia

Unknown grey branched cnidarian Grey branched Unknown cnidarian Unknown Cnidaria Animalia

Unknown Invertebrate Unknown Invertebrate Unknown Invertebrate

Unknown Invertebrate

Invertebrate Animalia

ARoscB Black Oscules Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARoscBL Blue Oscules Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARoscBR Brown Oscules Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARoscCR Cream Oscules Arborescent Porifera Animalia

Knobbly Fingers Cream Oscules Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARoscGR Green Oscules Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARoscG Grey Oscules Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARoscO Orange Oscules Arborescent Porifera Animalia




ARoscP Pink Oscules Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARoscPU Purple Oscules Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARoscW White Oscules Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARoscY Yellow Oscules Arborescent Porifera Animalia

AR-G Grey Other Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARretB Black Reticulated Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARretG Grey Reticulated Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARretO Orange Reticulated Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARrufB Black Ruffled Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARrufBL Blue Ruffled Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARrufBR Brown Ruffled Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARrufCR Cream Ruffled Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARrufGR Green Ruffled Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARrufG Grey Ruffled Arborescent Porifera Animalia

Callyspongiid sp. Grey Ruffled Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARrufO Orange Ruffled Arborescent Porifera Animalia

Iotrochotid sp. Orange Ruffled Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARrufP Pink Ruffled Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARrufPU Purple Ruffled Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARrufR Red Ruffled Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARrufW White Ruffled Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARrufY Yellow Ruffled Arborescent Porifera Animalia

Iototrochid sp. Ruffled Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARsmoBR Brown Smooth Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARsmoCR Cream Smooth Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARsmoGR Green Smooth Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARsmoG Grey Smooth Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARsmoO Orange Smooth Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARsmoP Pink Smooth Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARsmoPU Purple Smooth Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARsmoR Red Smooth Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARsmoW White Smooth Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARsmoY Yellow Smooth Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARspiO Orange Spiky Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARspiP Pink Spiky Arborescent Porifera Animalia

Dendrilla rosea Pink Spiky Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARspiW White Spiky Arborescent Porifera Animalia

ARspiY Yellow Spiky Arborescent Porifera Animalia

CUoscBR Brown Oscules Cup Porifera Animalia

CUoscG Grey Oscules Cup Porifera Animalia

Phyllospongia sp Phyllospongia sp Phyllospongia sp Cup Porifera Animalia

CUretCR Cream Reticulated Cup Porifera Animalia

CUretG Grey Reticulated Cup Porifera Animalia

CUretPU Purple Reticulated Cup Porifera Animalia




CUrufB Black Ruffled Cup Porifera Animalia

CUrufBL Blue Ruffled Cup Porifera Animalia

CUrufBR Brown Ruffled Cup Porifera Animalia

CUrufCR Cream Ruffled Cup Porifera Animalia

CUrufGR Green Ruffled Cup Porifera Animalia

CUrufG Grey Ruffled Cup Porifera Animalia

CUrufP Pink Ruffled Cup Porifera Animalia

CUrufPU Purple Ruffled Cup Porifera Animalia

CUrufR Red Ruffled Cup Porifera Animalia

CUrufW White Ruffled Cup Porifera Animalia

CUrufY Yellow Ruffled Cup Porifera Animalia

Carteriospongia caliciformis Grey Smooth Cup Porifera Animalia

CUsmoG Grey Smooth Cup Porifera Animalia

Grey Wobbly Cup Sponge Grey Smooth Cup Porifera Animalia

CUsmoO Orange Smooth Cup Porifera Animalia

CUsmoP Pink Smooth Cup Porifera Animalia

CUsmoPU Purple Smooth Cup Porifera Animalia

Purple Cup Sponge Purple Smooth Cup Porifera Animalia

CUsmoW White Smooth Cup Porifera Animalia

ENoscB Black Oscules Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENoscBL Blue Oscules Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENoscBR Brown Oscules Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENoscCR Cream Oscules Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENoscGR Green Oscules Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENoscG Grey Oscules Encrusting Porifera Animalia

Rambling Grey Sponge Grey Oscules Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENoscO Orange Oscules Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENoscP Pink Oscules Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENoscPU Purple Oscules Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENoscR Red Oscules Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENoscW White Oscules Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENoscY Yellow Oscules Encrusting Porifera Animalia

Hyphae Sponge Yellow Oscules Encrusting Porifera Animalia

Textured Yellow Sponge Yellow Oscules Encrusting Porifera Animalia

EN-B Black Other Encrusting Porifera Animalia

EN-BR Brown Other Encrusting Porifera Animalia

EN-G Grey Other Encrusting Porifera Animalia

EN-O Orange Other Encrusting Porifera Animalia

EN-P Pink Other Encrusting Porifera Animalia

EN-PU Purple Other Encrusting Porifera Animalia

EN-W White Other Encrusting Porifera Animalia

EN-Y Yellow Other Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENretB Black Reticulated Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENretBL Blue Reticulated Encrusting Porifera Animalia




ENretBR Brown Reticulated Encrusting Porifera Animalia

Clathrina sp. Cream Reticulated Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENretCR Cream Reticulated Encrusting Porifera Animalia

Holopsamma arborea Cream Reticulated Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENretGR Green Reticulated Encrusting Porifera Animalia

Common Grey Reticulated Sponge Grey Reticulated Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENretG Grey Reticulated Encrusting Porifera Animalia

Holopsamma laminaefavosa Grey Reticulated Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENretO Orange Reticulated Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENretP Pink Reticulated Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENretPU Purple Reticulated Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENretR Red Reticulated Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENretW White Reticulated Encrusting Porifera Animalia

Echinochalina sp. Yellow Reticulated Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENretY Yellow Reticulated Encrusting Porifera Animalia

Honey comb sponge Yellow Reticulated Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENrufB Black Ruffled Encrusting Porifera Animalia

Encrusting Blue Sponge Blue Ruffled Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENrufBL Blue Ruffled Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENrufBR Brown Ruffled Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENrufCR Cream Ruffled Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENrufGR Green Ruffled Encrusting Porifera Animalia

Encrusting Grey Pitted Sponge Grey Ruffled Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENrufG Grey Ruffled Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENrufO Orange Ruffled Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENrufP Pink Ruffled Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENrufPU Purple Ruffled Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENrufR Red Ruffled Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENrufW White Ruffled Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENrufY Yellow Ruffled Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENsmoB Black Smooth Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENsmoBL Blue Smooth Encrusting Porifera Animalia

Chondrilla sp. Brown Smooth Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENsmoBR Brown Smooth Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENsmoCR Cream Smooth Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENsmoGR Green Smooth Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENsmoG Grey Smooth Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENsmoO Orange Smooth Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENsmoP Pink Smooth Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENsmoPU Purple Smooth Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENsmoR Red Smooth Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENsmoW White Smooth Encrusting Porifera Animalia

White plate sponge White Smooth Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENsmoY Yellow Smooth Encrusting Porifera Animalia




ENspiB Black Spiky Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENspiBL Blue Spiky Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENspiBR Brown Spiky Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENspiCR Cream Spiky Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENspiG Grey Spiky Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENspiO Orange Spiky Encrusting Porifera Animalia

Aplysilla rosea Pink Spiky Encrusting Porifera Animalia

Dendrilla cactos Pink Spiky Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENspiP Pink Spiky Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENspiPU Purple Spiky Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENspiW White Spiky Encrusting Porifera Animalia

Darwinella sp. Yellow Spiky Encrusting Porifera Animalia

ENspiY Yellow Spiky Encrusting Porifera Animalia

FLoscBL Blue Oscules Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLoscBR Brown Oscules Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLocsCr Cream Oscules Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLoscG Grey Oscules Flabellate Porifera Animalia

Taonura flabelliformis Grey Oscules Flabellate Porifera Animalia

Echinoclathria leporina Orange Oscules Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLoscO Orange Oscules Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLoscP Pink Oscules Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLoscPU Purple Oscules Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLoscW White Oscules Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLoscY Yellow Oscules Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLretG Grey Reticulated Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLretP Pink Reticulated Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLretPU Purple Reticulated Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLrufB Black Ruffled Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLrufBL Blue Ruffled Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLrufBR Brown Ruffled Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLrufCR Cream Ruffled Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLrufG Grey Ruffled Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLrufO Orange Ruffled Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLrufP Pink Ruffled Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLrufPU Purple Ruffled Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLrufR Red Ruffled Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLrufW White Ruffled Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLrufY Yellow Ruffled Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLsmoBR Brown Smooth Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLsmoCR Cream Smooth Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLsmoGR Green Smooth Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLsmoG Grey Smooth Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLsmoO Orange Smooth Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLsmoP Pink Smooth Flabellate Porifera Animalia




FLsmoPU Purple Smooth Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLsmoR Red Smooth Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLsmoW White Smooth Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLsmoY Yellow Smooth Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLspiG Grey Spiky Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLspiO Orange Spiky Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FLspiP Pink Spiky Flabellate Porifera Animalia

FlfoscCR Cream Oscules Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

FlfoscG Grey Oscules Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

FlfoscO Orange Oscules Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

FlfoscP Pink Oscules Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

FlfoscPU Purple Oscules Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

FlfoscW White Oscules Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

FlfoscY Yellow Oscules Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

FlfretO Orange Reticulated Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

FlfretPU Purple Reticulated Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

FlfrufBR Brown Ruffled Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

FlfrufCR Cream Ruffled Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

FlfrufG Grey Ruffled Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

FlfrufO Orange Ruffled Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

Erect Pink Sponge Pink Ruffled Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

FlfrufP Pink Ruffled Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

FlfrufPU Purple Ruffled Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

FlfrufR Red Ruffled Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

FlfrufW White Ruffled Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

FlfrufY Yellow Ruffled Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

FlfsmoBR Brown Smooth Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

FlfsmoCR Cream Smooth Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

FlfsmoG Grey Smooth Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

FlfsmoPU Purple Smooth Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

Pitted white folded sponge White Smooth Flab-Folded Porifera Animalia

GLoscBL Blue Oscules Globular Porifera Animalia

GLoscBR Brown Oscules Globular Porifera Animalia

GLoscCR Cream Oscules Globular Porifera Animalia

GLoscG Grey Oscules Globular Porifera Animalia

GLoscO Orange Oscules Globular Porifera Animalia

GLoscP Pink Oscules Globular Porifera Animalia

GLoscPU Purple Oscules Globular Porifera Animalia

GLoscR Red Oscules Globular Porifera Animalia

GLoscW White Oscules Globular Porifera Animalia

GLoscY Yellow Oscules Globular Porifera Animalia

GL-R Red Other Globular Porifera Animalia

GLretG Grey Reticulated Globular Porifera Animalia

Reticulated Stone Sponge Grey Reticulated Globular Porifera Animalia




GLretO Orange Reticulated Globular Porifera Animalia

GLretP Pink Reticulated Globular Porifera Animalia

GLretPU Purple Reticulated Globular Porifera Animalia

GLretW White Reticulated Globular Porifera Animalia

GLretY Yellow Reticulated Globular Porifera Animalia

GLrufBL Blue Ruffled Globular Porifera Animalia

GLrufBR Brown Ruffled Globular Porifera Animalia

GLrufCR Cream Ruffled Globular Porifera Animalia

GLrufG Grey Ruffled Globular Porifera Animalia

Grey Cleft Sponge Grey Ruffled Globular Porifera Animalia

GLrufO Orange Ruffled Globular Porifera Animalia

GLrufP Pink Ruffled Globular Porifera Animalia

Tethya bergquistae Pink Ruffled Globular Porifera Animalia

GLrufPU Purple Ruffled Globular Porifera Animalia

Purple Round Vase Sponge Purple Ruffled Globular Porifera Animalia

GLrufR Red Ruffled Globular Porifera Animalia

Oceanapia sp. Red Ruffled Globular Porifera Animalia

GLrufW White Ruffled Globular Porifera Animalia

GLrufY Yellow Ruffled Globular Porifera Animalia

GLsmoBL Blue Smooth Globular Porifera Animalia

GLsmoBR Brown Smooth Globular Porifera Animalia

GLsmoCR Cream Smooth Globular Porifera Animalia

GLsmoG Grey Smooth Globular Porifera Animalia

GLsmoO Orange Smooth Globular Porifera Animalia

GLsmoP Pink Smooth Globular Porifera Animalia

GLsmoPU Purple Smooth Globular Porifera Animalia

GLsmoR Red Smooth Globular Porifera Animalia

GLsmoW White Smooth Globular Porifera Animalia

GLsmoY Yellow Smooth Globular Porifera Animalia

GLspiG Grey Spiky Globular Porifera Animalia

GLspiY Yellow Spiky Globular Porifera Animalia

MAoscB Black Oscules Massive Porifera Animalia

MAoscBL Blue Oscules Massive Porifera Animalia

MAoscBR Brown Oscules Massive Porifera Animalia

MAoscCR Cream Oscules Massive Porifera Animalia

MAoscGR Green Oscules Massive Porifera Animalia

Grey Rambley Ridge Sponge Grey Oscules Massive Porifera Animalia

MAoscG Grey Oscules Massive Porifera Animalia

MAoscO Orange Oscules Massive Porifera Animalia

Orange X sponge Orange Oscules Massive Porifera Animalia

MAoscP Pink Oscules Massive Porifera Animalia

MAoscPU Purple Oscules Massive Porifera Animalia

Purple Squat Bulb Sponge Purple Oscules Massive Porifera Animalia

Spheciospongia purpurea Purple Oscules Massive Porifera Animalia




MAoscR Red Oscules Massive Porifera Animalia

MAoscW White Oscules Massive Porifera Animalia

MAoscY Yellow Oscules Massive Porifera Animalia

MA-G Grey Other Massive Porifera Animalia

MA-O Orange Other Massive Porifera Animalia

MAretB Black Reticulated Massive Porifera Animalia

MAretBL Blue Reticulated Massive Porifera Animalia

MAretBR Brown Reticulated Massive Porifera Animalia

MAretCR Cream Reticulated Massive Porifera Animalia

MAretG Grey Reticulated Massive Porifera Animalia

MAretO Orange Reticulated Massive Porifera Animalia

MAretP Pink Reticulated Massive Porifera Animalia

MAretPU Purple Reticulated Massive Porifera Animalia

MAretR Red Reticulated Massive Porifera Animalia

MAretW White Reticulated Massive Porifera Animalia

MAretY Yellow Reticulated Massive Porifera Animalia

Massive Reticulated Yellow Sponge Yellow Reticulated Massive Porifera Animalia

MArufB Black Ruffled Massive Porifera Animalia

MArufBL Blue Ruffled Massive Porifera Animalia

Brain Sponge Brown Ruffled Massive Porifera Animalia

MArufBR Brown Ruffled Massive Porifera Animalia

Thorecta sp. Brown Ruffled Massive Porifera Animalia

MArufCR Cream Ruffled Massive Porifera Animalia

MArufGR Green Ruffled Massive Porifera Animalia

Grey Conjoined Tube Sponge Grey Ruffled Massive Porifera Animalia

Ircinia spp. Grey Ruffled Massive Porifera Animalia

MArufG Grey Ruffled Massive Porifera Animalia

MArufO Orange Ruffled Massive Porifera Animalia

Massive Papillate Sponge Orange Ruffled Massive Porifera Animalia

MArufP Pink Ruffled Massive Porifera Animalia

Vanessa Sponge Pink Ruffled Massive Porifera Animalia

MArufPU Purple Ruffled Massive Porifera Animalia

MArufR Red Ruffled Massive Porifera Animalia

MArufW White Ruffled Massive Porifera Animalia

MArufY Yellow Ruffled Massive Porifera Animalia

MAsmoB Black Smooth Massive Porifera Animalia

MAsmoBL Blue Smooth Massive Porifera Animalia

Brown Volcano Sponge Brown Smooth Massive Porifera Animalia

MAsmoBR Brown Smooth Massive Porifera Animalia

Chondropsis sp. Cream Smooth Massive Porifera Animalia

MAsmoCR Cream Smooth Massive Porifera Animalia

MAsmoG Grey Smooth Massive Porifera Animalia

MAsmoO Orange Smooth Massive Porifera Animalia

Oscule Ridge Sponge Orange Smooth Massive Porifera Animalia




MAsmoP Pink Smooth Massive Porifera Animalia

MAsmoPU Purple Smooth Massive Porifera Animalia

Spirastrella - Bob Square Pants Purple Smooth Massive Porifera Animalia

MAsmoR Red Smooth Massive Porifera Animalia

MAsmoW White Smooth Massive Porifera Animalia

MAsmoY Yellow Smooth Massive Porifera Animalia

MAspiB Black Spiky Massive Porifera Animalia

MAspiBL Blue Spiky Massive Porifera Animalia

MAspiBR Brown Spiky Massive Porifera Animalia

MAspiCR Cream Spiky Massive Porifera Animalia

MAspiGR Green Spiky Massive Porifera Animalia

MAspiG Grey Spiky Massive Porifera Animalia

MAspiO Orange Spiky Massive Porifera Animalia

MAspiP Pink Spiky Massive Porifera Animalia

MAspiPU Purple Spiky Massive Porifera Animalia

MAspiR Red Spiky Massive Porifera Animalia

MAspiW White Spiky Massive Porifera Animalia

MAspiY Yellow Spiky Massive Porifera Animalia

PAoscB Black Oscules Papillate Porifera Animalia

PAoscBR Brown Oscules Papillate Porifera Animalia

PAoscCR Cream Oscules Papillate Porifera Animalia

PAoscG Grey Oscules Papillate Porifera Animalia

PAoscO Orange Oscules Papillate Porifera Animalia

PAoscP Pink Oscules Papillate Porifera Animalia

PAoscPU Purple Oscules Papillate Porifera Animalia

PAoscW White Oscules Papillate Porifera Animalia

PAoscY Yellow Oscules Papillate Porifera Animalia

PAretG Grey Reticulated Papillate Porifera Animalia

PAretW White Reticulated Papillate Porifera Animalia

PArufB Black Ruffled Papillate Porifera Animalia

PArufBL Blue Ruffled Papillate Porifera Animalia

PArufBR Brown Ruffled Papillate Porifera Animalia

PArufCR Cream Ruffled Papillate Porifera Animalia

PArufGR Green Ruffled Papillate Porifera Animalia

PArufG Grey Ruffled Papillate Porifera Animalia

PArufO Orange Ruffled Papillate Porifera Animalia

PArufP Pink Ruffled Papillate Porifera Animalia

PArufPU Purple Ruffled Papillate Porifera Animalia

PArufR Red Ruffled Papillate Porifera Animalia

PArufW White Ruffled Papillate Porifera Animalia

PArufY Yellow Ruffled Papillate Porifera Animalia

PAsmoBR Brown Smooth Papillate Porifera Animalia

PAsmoCr Cream Smooth Papillate Porifera Animalia

PAsmoG Grey Smooth Papillate Porifera Animalia




PAsmoO Orange Smooth Papillate Porifera Animalia

PAsmoP Pink Smooth Papillate Porifera Animalia

PAsmoPU Purple Smooth Papillate Porifera Animalia

PAsmoW White Smooth Papillate Porifera Animalia

PAsmoY Yellow Smooth Papillate Porifera Animalia

Polymastia sp Yellow Smooth Papillate Porifera Animalia

Polymastia sp2 Yellow Smooth Papillate Porifera Animalia

PAspiG Grey Spiky Papillate Porifera Animalia

PEoscCR Cream Oscules Pedunculate Porifera Animalia

PEoscO Orange Oscules Pedunculate Porifera Animalia

PEoscP Pink Oscules Pedunculate Porifera Animalia

PErufBR Brown Ruffled Pedunculate Porifera Animalia

PErufCR Cream Ruffled Pedunculate Porifera Animalia

PErufG Grey Ruffled Pedunculate Porifera Animalia

PErufO Orange Ruffled Pedunculate Porifera Animalia

PErufP Pink Ruffled Pedunculate Porifera Animalia

PErufPU Purple Ruffled Pedunculate Porifera Animalia

PErufW White Ruffled Pedunculate Porifera Animalia

PErufY Yellow Ruffled Pedunculate Porifera Animalia

PEsmoBR Brown Smooth Pedunculate Porifera Animalia

PEsmoP Pink Smooth Pedunculate Porifera Animalia

PEsmoY Yellow Smooth Pedunculate Porifera Animalia

REoscBR Brown Oscules Repent Porifera Animalia

REoscCR Cream Oscules Repent Porifera Animalia

REoscG Grey Oscules Repent Porifera Animalia

REoscO Orange Oscules Repent Porifera Animalia

REoscP Pink Oscules Repent Porifera Animalia

REoscPU Purple Oscules Repent Porifera Animalia

REoscR Red Oscules Repent Porifera Animalia

REoscW White Oscules Repent Porifera Animalia

REoscY Yellow Oscules Repent Porifera Animalia

REretBL Blue Reticulated Repent Porifera Animalia

REretBR Brown Reticulated Repent Porifera Animalia

REretCR Cream Reticulated Repent Porifera Animalia

REretG Grey Reticulated Repent Porifera Animalia

REretPU Purple Reticulated Repent Porifera Animalia

RErufB Black Ruffled Repent Porifera Animalia

RErufBL Blue Ruffled Repent Porifera Animalia

RErufBR Brown Ruffled Repent Porifera Animalia

RErufCR Cream Ruffled Repent Porifera Animalia

RErufGR Green Ruffled Repent Porifera Animalia

RErufG Grey Ruffled Repent Porifera Animalia

RErufO Orange Ruffled Repent Porifera Animalia

RErufP Pink Ruffled Repent Porifera Animalia




RErufPU Purple Ruffled Repent Porifera Animalia

RErufR Red Ruffled Repent Porifera Animalia

RErufW White Ruffled Repent Porifera Animalia

RErufY Yellow Ruffled Repent Porifera Animalia

REsmoG Grey Smooth Repent Porifera Animalia

REsmoO Orange Smooth Repent Porifera Animalia

REsmoP Pink Smooth Repent Porifera Animalia

REsmoPU Purple Smooth Repent Porifera Animalia

Other sponges Other sponges Other sponges Sponges Porifera Animalia

TUoscBL Blue Oscules Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUoscG Grey Oscules Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUoscO Orange Oscules Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUoscP Pink Oscules Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUoscPU Purple Oscules Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUoscW White Oscules Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUoscY Yellow Oscules Tubular Porifera Animalia

TU-O Orange Other Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUretY Yellow Reticulated Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUrufB Black Ruffled Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUrufBR Brown Ruffled Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUrufCR Cream Ruffled Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUrufG Grey Ruffled Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUrufO Orange Ruffled Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUrufP Pink Ruffled Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUrufPU Purple Ruffled Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUrufR Red Ruffled Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUrufW White Ruffled Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUrufY Yellow Ruffled Tubular Porifera Animalia

Common tube sponge Cream Smooth Tubular Porifera Animalia

Sycon spp. Cream Smooth Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUsmoCR Cream Smooth Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUsmoG Grey Smooth Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUsmoO Orange Smooth Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUsmoPU Purple Smooth Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUsmoR Red Smooth Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUsmoW White Smooth Tubular Porifera Animalia

Crenulated tube Yellow Smooth Tubular Porifera Animalia

TUspiG Grey Spiky Tubular Porifera Animalia

Rhipiliopsis peltata Ripiliaceae Bryopsidales Ulvophyceae Chlorophyta Plantae

Drift seagrass Drift seagrass Drift seagrass Drift seagrass Magnoliophyta Plantae

Algal turf Algal turf Algal turf Algal turf Algal turf Protista

Caulerpa flexilis var. muelleri Caulerpaceae Bryopsidales Bryopsidophyceae Chlorophyta Protista

Caulerpa spp Caulerpaceae Bryopsidales Bryopsidophyceae Chlorophyta Protista

Filamentous greens Filamentous greens Filamentous greens Filamentous Chlorophyta Protista




greens

Ulva spp Ulvaceae Ulvales Ulvophyceae Chlorophyta Protista

Unidentified Green Algae Unidentified Unidentified Unidentified Chlorophyta Protista

Deep Turf Community Mixed Phyla Turf Mixed Phyla Turf Mixed Phyla Turf Deep Turf Community

Protista

Drift macroalgae Drift macroalgae Drift macroalgae Drift macroalgae Drift macroalgae Protista

Brown algae unidentified Brown algae unidentified

Brown algae unidentified

Phaeophyceae Heterokontophyta

Protista

Brown algal turf Brown algal turf Brown algal turf Phaeophyceae Heterokontophyta

Protista

Dictyopteris muelleri Dictyotaceae Dictyotales Phaeophyceae Heterokontophyta

Protista

Dictyopteris spp. Dictyotaceae Dictyotales Phaeophyceae Heterokontophyta

Protista

Dictyota dichotoma Dictyotaceae Dictyotales Phaeophyceae Heterokontophyta

Protista

Exallosorus olsenii Dictyotaceae Dictyotales Phaeophyceae Heterokontophyta

Protista

Homeostrichus sinclairii Dictyotaceae Dictyotales Phaeophyceae Heterokontophyta

Protista

Padina sp. Dictyotaceae Dictyotales Phaeophyceae Heterokontophyta

Protista

Zonaria angustata Dictyotaceae Dictyotales Phaeophyceae Heterokontophyta

Protista

Zonaria spp Dictyotaceae Dictyotales Phaeophyceae Heterokontophyta

Protista

Zonaria turneriana Dictyotaceae Dictyotales Phaeophyceae Heterokontophyta

Protista

Filamentous browns Filamentous browns Filamentous browns Phaeophyceae Heterokontophyta

Protista

Carpoglossum confluens Cystoseiraceae Fucales Phaeophyceae Heterokontophyta

Protista

Cystophora platylobium Cystoseiraceae Fucales Phaeophyceae Heterokontophyta

Protista

Cystophora retroflexa Cystoseiraceae Fucales Phaeophyceae Heterokontophyta

Protista

Sargassum spp Sargassaceae Fucales Phaeophyceae Heterokontophyta

Protista

Phyllospora comosa Seirococcaceae Fucales Phaeophyceae Heterokontophyta

Protista

Ecklonia radiata Alariaceae Laminariales Phaeophyceae Heterokontophyta

Protista

Macrocystis pyrifera Lessoniaceae Laminariales Phaeophyceae Heterokontophyta

Protista

Macrocystis pyrifera Lessoniaceae Laminariales Phaeophyceae Heterokontophyta

Protista

Halopteris spp Stypocaulaceae Sphacelariales Phaeophyceae Heterokontophyta

Protista

Cheilosporum sagittatum Corallinaceae Corallinales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Corallines unidentified Corallinaceae Corallinales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Encrusting corallines Corallinaceae Corallinales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Erect corallines Corallinaceae Corallinales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Haliptilon roseum Corallinaceae Corallinales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista




Gelidium asperum Gelidiaceae Gelidiales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Callophycus spp Areschougiaceae Gigartinales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Kallymenia cribrogloea Kallymeniaceae Gigartinales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Kallymenia sp. Kallymeniaceae Gigartinales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Sonderopelta coriacea Peyssonneliaceae Gigartinales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Sonderopelta/Peyssonelia Peyssonneliaceae Gigartinales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Phacelocarpus alatus Phacelocarpaceae Gigartinales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Phacelocarpus peperocarpos Phacelocarpaceae Gigartinales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Curdiea angustata Gracilariaceae Gracilariales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Gracilaria spp Gracilariaceae Gracilariales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Melanthalia abscissa Gracilariaceae Gracilariales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Melanthalia obtusata Gracilariaceae Gracilariales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Halymenia plana Halymeniaceae Halymeniales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Halymenia sp. nov. Halymeniaceae Halymeniales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Plocamium dilatatum Plocamiaceae Plocamiales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Plocamium mertensii Plocamiaceae Plocamiales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Plocamium sp. Plocamiaceae Plocamiales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Rhodymenia australis Rhodymeniaceae Rhodymeniales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Rhodymenia spp Rhodymeniaceae Rhodymeniales Florideophyceae Rhodophyta Protista

Filamentous red algae Unidentified red red Rhodophyta Protista

Long flat red like webervanbossia Unidentified red red Rhodophyta Protista

Other thallose red algae Unidentified red red Rhodophyta Protista

Red turfing algae Unidentified red red Rhodophyta Protista

Unidentified algae Unidentified algae Unidentified algae Unidentified algae Unidentified algae

Protista

Unknown biota biota biota biota Unknown Unknown

Grey sediment matrix Silt/biota unknown unknown Unknown Unknown

Unknown unknown unknown unknown Unknown Unknown

Steel surface steel steel Steel Artificial Abiotic

Gravel Gravel Gravel Gravel Gravel Abiotic

Algal dominated understorey matrix bare bare bare Rock Abiotic

Bare bedrock unimpacted bare bare bare Rock Abiotic

Colonising biota with distinct colonies

bare bare bare Rock Abiotic


bare bare bare Rock Abiotic

Exposed rock - red fines/turf bare bare bare Rock Abiotic

Exposed rock - bare bare bare bare Rock Abiotic

Exposed rock - brown fines/turf bare bare bare Rock Abiotic

Exposed rock - green turf bare bare bare Rock Abiotic

Exposed rock - microbiota bare bare bare Rock Abiotic

Rubble - Natural bare bare bare Rubble Abiotic

Burrows/mounds Sand sediment sediment Sediment Abiotic

Sand Sand sediment sediment Sediment Abiotic

Shell piece/grit Sand sediment sediment Sediment Abiotic




Silt/Mud Silt sediment sediment Sediment Abiotic

Stiff Sediment/Clay Silt sediment sediment Sediment Abiotic

Unknown abiotic unknown unknown unknown Unknown Abiotic



Mean (SE) cover per frame of the taxa included in the multivariate analyses of biota at the 27 m depth stratum Table L-2

Year 2006 2006 2009 2009 2011 2011 2015 2015

Treatment Control Dredged Control Dredged Control Dredged Control Dredged

Sonderpelta Personnelia 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.020 (0.020) 0.000 (0.000)

Triphyllozoon munitum 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.022 (0.014)

Chondropsis sp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Carbasea pisciformis 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.020 (0.020) 0.000 (0.000)

Phaeophyta 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.040 (0.040) 0.011 (0.008)

Echinoclathria leporina 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Filamentous browns 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.085 (0.085) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.017 (0.010)

Taonura flabelliformis 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.085 (0.085) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Capnella erecta 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.017 (0.017) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Caulerpa spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.080 (0.062) 0.000 (0.000)

Fucales 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.080 (0.047) 0.000 (0.000)

Zoanthus robustus 0.000 (0.000) 0.093 (0.093) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Erect corallines 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.005 (0.005) 0.050 (0.033) 0.000 (0.000)

Tethya bergquistae 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.007 (0.007) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Plesiastrea versipora 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Melithaea spp 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Adeona grisea 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.040 (0.040) 0.000 (0.000)

Synoicum citrium 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.019 (0.015) 0.000 (0.000) 0.004 (0.004) 0.000 (0.000) 0.006 (0.006)

Hornera robusta 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.030 (0.017) 0.050 (0.036)

Eudistoma constrictum 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.050 (0.027)

Knobbly Fingers 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Aplidium brevilarvacium 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.048 (0.048) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.011 (0.011)

Common Grey Reticulated Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.012 (0.009) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Clavelina spp 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.034 (0.018) 0.000 (0.000) 0.006 (0.006)

Massive Reticulated Yellow Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.030 (0.030) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Chlorophyta 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.008 (0.006) 0.020 (0.014) 0.022 (0.014)



Year 2006 2006 2009 2009 2011 2011 2015 2015


Symplegma brakenhielmi 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Clavelina cylindrica 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.006 (0.006) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Bugula dentata 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.007 (0.007) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.017 (0.012)

Brown Volcano Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.076 (0.058) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Bugularia dissimilis 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.130 (0.064) 0.006 (0.006)

Holopsamma arborea 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Erythropodium hicksoni 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.014 (0.014) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Oscule Ridge Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Encrusting Blue Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.032 (0.032) 0.342 (0.195) 0.030 (0.018) 0.028 (0.028) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Pitted white folded sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.012 (0.012) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Purple Round Vase Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.028 (0.028) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Polymastia sp 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Hard bryozoans 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.082 (0.045) 0.052 (0.016) 0.010 (0.010) 0.056 (0.022)

Phallusia obesa 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Pycnoclavella spp 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.050 (0.022) 0.022 (0.018)

Mopsella zimmeri 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.387 (0.190) 0.000 (0.000) 0.163 (0.082) 0.000 (0.000) 0.020 (0.014) 0.000 (0.000)

Mopsella klunzingeri 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.056 (0.056) 0.037 (0.031) 0.147 (0.062) 0.008 (0.006) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Mopsella species X 0.190 (0.116) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Capnella spp 0.111 (0.054) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Hyphae Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Honeycomb Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.146 (0.061) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Steginoporella chartacea 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.011 (0.011) 0.000 (0.000) 0.015 (0.009) 0.000 (0.000) 0.039 (0.017)

Celleporaria sp 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.045 (0.020) 0.040 (0.020) 0.033 (0.016)

Brain Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.047 (0.047) 0.048 (0.035) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Epizoanthus sabulosus 0.000 (0.000) 0.014 (0.014) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.120 (0.050) 0.039 (0.023)

Grey Conjoined Tube Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.100 (0.061) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.010 (0.010) 0.017 (0.010)

Massive Papillate Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.100 (0.053)

Polycitor giganteus 0.000 (0.000) 0.098 (0.057) 0.000 (0.000) 0.016 (0.012) 0.000 (0.000) 0.146 (0.047) 0.020 (0.014) 0.050 (0.020)



Year 2006 2006 2009 2009 2011 2011 2015 2015


Acabaria sp 0.044 (0.044) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.012 (0.009) 0.014 (0.014) 0.004 (0.004) 0.080 (0.040) 0.006 (0.006)

FlfoscCR 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Purple Cup Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Thorecta sp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.240 (0.086) 0.022 (0.011)

Flabellate osculated orange sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.037 (0.037) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Reticulated Stone Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.176 (0.067) 0.147 (0.096) 0.189 (0.040) 0.044 (0.044) 0.004 (0.004) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Pteronisis spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.108 (0.076) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.006 (0.006)

Leptoclinides sp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.120 (0.067) 0.122 (0.048)

Triphyllozoon moniliferum 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.075 (0.053) 0.027 (0.017) 0.290 (0.082) 0.200 (0.061)

Plumularia sulcata 0.012 (0.012) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.006 (0.006) 0.059 (0.059) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Clathrozoon wilsoni 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Brown algae unidentified 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.229 (0.085) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.360 (0.097) 0.117 (0.042)

Botrylloides leachi 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.147 (0.051) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.020 (0.020) 0.022 (0.018)

Spirastrella - Bob Square Pants 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.023 (0.023) 0.000 (0.000) 0.020 (0.014) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Grey Wobbly Cup Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Encrusting corallines 0.025 (0.025) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.058 (0.036) 0.208 (0.053) 0.200 (0.058) 0.300 (0.058)

Cornucopina grandis 0.036 (0.036) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.150 (0.075) 0.161 (0.047)

Halopteris campanula 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.022 (0.018)

Unidentified algae 0.087 (0.048) 0.083 (0.051) 0.419 (0.134) 0.360 (0.128) 0.000 (0.000) 0.016 (0.010) 0.310 (0.080) 0.072 (0.028)

Mopsella spp 0.445 (0.231) 0.000 (0.000) 0.707 (0.247) 0.029 (0.015) 0.059 (0.036) 0.008 (0.008) 0.300 (0.097) 0.178 (0.088)

Orange X sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.290 (0.152) 0.094 (0.044)

Encrusting smooth yellow sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.080 (0.051) 0.011 (0.011)

Aplidium clivosum 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.044 (0.033) 0.234 (0.036) 0.160 (0.057) 0.311 (0.057)

Serpulids 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.015 (0.015) 0.008 (0.005) 0.170 (0.056) 0.128 (0.029)

Solandaria fusca 0.037 (0.037) 0.045 (0.045) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.370 (0.239) 0.189 (0.076)

Filograna implexa 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.204 (0.108) 0.104 (0.031) 0.180 (0.059) 0.156 (0.048)

Didemnum spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.176 (0.050) 0.550 (0.127) 0.661 (0.079)

Aglaophenia divaricata var cystifera 0.000 (0.000) 1.180 (0.249) 0.000 (0.000) 0.457 (0.189) 0.014 (0.014) 0.008 (0.006) 0.230 (0.075) 0.000 (0.000)



Year 2006 2006 2009 2009 2011 2011 2015 2015


Vanessa Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.404 (0.191) 0.006 (0.006) 0.000 (0.000) 0.012 (0.009) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Herdmania momus grandis 0.106 (0.045) 0.000 (0.000) 0.437 (0.120) 0.010 (0.010) 1.050 (0.177) 0.041 (0.017) 0.440 (0.084) 0.078 (0.028)

Grey Cleft Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.074 (0.074) 0.361 (0.112) 0.272 (0.201) 0.288 (0.092) 0.000 (0.000) 0.100 (0.065)

Synoicum spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.019 (0.015) 0.000 (0.000) 1.085 (0.248) 0.010 (0.010) 0.083 (0.027)

Synoicum sphinctorum 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 1.081 (0.248) 0.290 (0.119) 0.117 (0.042)

Flab-folded cream sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Ircinia spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.631 (0.279) 0.197 (0.138) 0.000 (0.000) 0.030 (0.030) 0.210 (0.112) 0.211 (0.086)

Encrusting Grey Pitted Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.570 (0.315) 0.091 (0.062) 0.000 (0.000) 0.008 (0.006) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Biflustra perfragilis 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.183 (0.126) 0.172 (0.126) 0.029 (0.029) 0.069 (0.038) 0.470 (0.215) 0.489 (0.176)

Erect Pink Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.044 (0.044) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Carijoa sp. 2 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.941 (0.313) 0.008 (0.006) 0.820 (0.155) 0.128 (0.044)

Polyandrocarpa labidosa 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.533 (0.272) 0.110 (0.079) 0.670 (0.207) 0.311 (0.077)

Culicia spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.147 (0.053) 0.306 (0.306) 0.371 (0.093) 0.010 (0.010) 1.750 (0.322)

Echinochalina sp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.777 (0.281) 0.447 (0.131) 1.190 (0.303) 0.950 (0.134)

Callyspongiid sp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.139 (0.073) 0.116 (0.060) 0.675 (0.233) 0.123 (0.042) 0.030 (0.030) 0.006 (0.006)

Ascidian unidentified 0.302 (0.110) 0.580 (0.186) 0.469 (0.268) 0.559 (0.113) 0.379 (0.108) 0.425 (0.095) 0.580 (0.140) 0.389 (0.056)

Purple Squat Bulb Sponge 0.090 (0.067) 0.000 (0.000) 1.498 (0.688) 0.171 (0.123) 0.493 (0.373) 0.364 (0.144) 0.120 (0.060) 0.150 (0.073)

Sertularella pinnata 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.014 (0.014) 0.062 (0.048) 0.100 (0.049) 0.372 (0.111)

Rambling Grey Sponge 1.422 (0.584) 0.221 (0.195) 0.976 (0.489) 0.429 (0.147) 0.418 (0.297) 0.044 (0.027) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Grey Rambley Ridge Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.130 (0.094) 0.006 (0.006) 0.242 (0.121) 0.158 (0.075) 0.200 (0.128) 0.211 (0.091)

Gymnangium spp. 0.069 (0.046) 0.568 (0.319) 0.798 (0.338) 2.406 (0.366) 0.364 (0.150) 0.348 (0.098) 0.210 (0.073) 0.461 (0.122)

Encrusting osculated cream sponge 0.012 (0.012) 0.000 (0.000) 0.526 (0.217) 0.409 (0.164) 2.111 (0.705) 0.341 (0.177) 0.690 (0.177) 0.383 (0.089)

Aglaophenia divaricata var divaricata 1.087 (0.234) 0.000 (0.000) 0.134 (0.095) 0.825 (0.173) 1.052 (0.317) 1.222 (0.192) 0.160 (0.054) 0.400 (0.099)

Ritterella pedunculata 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 2.760 (0.937) 0.282 (0.080) 3.890 (0.683) 0.112 (0.030) 0.600 (0.137) 0.167 (0.050)

Holopsamma laminaefavosa 0.000 (0.000) 0.064 (0.053) 1.059 (0.211) 1.111 (0.150) 0.272 (0.111) 0.529 (0.118) 0.400 (0.085) 0.311 (0.057)

Ecklonia radiata 0.472 (0.192) 1.472 (0.380) 3.128 (0.832) 3.058 (0.424) 2.560 (0.512) 1.177 (0.192) 2.090 (0.358) 1.311 (0.244)

Unknown grey branched cnidarian 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 1.376 (0.476) 0.085 (0.031) 0.226 (0.116) 0.048 (0.023) 0.460 (0.094) 0.239 (0.048)

Textured Yellow Sponge 0.426 (0.230) 0.000 (0.000) 1.698 (0.581) 0.569 (0.173) 2.199 (0.506) 0.095 (0.091) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)



Year 2006 2006 2009 2009 2011 2011 2015 2015


Massive osculated grey sponge 0.877 (0.240) 0.250 (0.090) 1.220 (0.377) 0.510 (0.109) 2.717 (0.459) 0.544 (0.118) 0.530 (0.173) 0.144 (0.056)

H. australe/S. indivisus/S. robusta 0.096 (0.065) 0.063 (0.063) 0.113 (0.113) 0.212 (0.059) 3.554 (0.555) 1.307 (0.167) 0.530 (0.107) 0.200 (0.043)

Corynactis australis 0.000 (0.000) 0.152 (0.075) 0.000 (0.000) 0.820 (0.286) 0.176 (0.057) 1.564 (0.243) 0.000 (0.000) 2.017 (0.276)

Amathia sp. 0.260 (0.083) 0.000 (0.000) 0.346 (0.183) 1.417 (0.383) 0.014 (0.014) 0.567 (0.155) 0.370 (0.100) 2.067 (0.262)

Unidentified Sponge Colonial Ascidian 0.024 (0.017) 0.747 (0.172) 0.044 (0.044) 0.063 (0.039) 0.058 (0.041) 1.132 (0.192) 2.800 (0.246) 2.383 (0.206)

Encrusting osculated yellow 0.413 (0.179) 1.073 (0.265) 2.304 (0.574) 0.318 (0.077) 0.330 (0.214) 0.107 (0.063) 2.340 (0.487) 0.611 (0.130)

Iotrochotid sp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.120 (0.099) 0.293 (0.112) 0.474 (0.231) 0.172 (0.090) 0.420 (0.176) 0.278 (0.110)

Halicornopsis elegans 0.015 (0.015) 0.064 (0.038) 0.811 (0.242) 2.362 (0.344) 0.463 (0.179) 0.590 (0.123) 0.130 (0.047) 0.156 (0.053)

Unknown Arborescent Bryozoan 0.126 (0.055) 4.128 (0.703) 0.045 (0.032) 3.106 (0.400) 2.523 (0.438) 4.534 (0.367) 0.620 (0.175) 0.900 (0.124)

Orthoscuticella ventricosa 0.080 (0.047) 0.141 (0.052) 0.097 (0.097) 1.451 (0.196) 1.025 (0.274) 2.513 (0.243) 0.580 (0.245) 2.406 (0.228)

Parazoanthus sp. 0.151 (0.137) 2.476 (0.541) 6.006 (1.493) 5.681 (0.794) 1.611 (0.712) 11.498 (0.944) 0.360 (0.146) 9.150 (0.992)

Encrusting ruffled cream sponge 0.852 (0.194) 0.974 (0.326) 0.466 (0.276) 1.693 (0.252) 1.999 (0.372) 1.534 (0.192) 7.820 (0.407) 4.767 (0.280)

Halopteris glutinosa 0.329 (0.123) 0.188 (0.088) 0.297 (0.156) 0.124 (0.063) 0.043 (0.032) 0.008 (0.006) 0.040 (0.040) 0.017 (0.012)

Rhodophyta 1.440 (0.303) 7.591 (0.973) 5.930 (0.987) 16.403 (1.100) 4.337 (0.660) 6.879 (0.562) 7.890 (0.644) 12.450 (0.982)

Nemertesia procumbens 2.926 (0.425) 2.273 (0.521) 4.831 (1.008) 1.276 (0.220) 1.721 (0.382) 0.261 (0.052) 1.630 (0.246) 0.522 (0.118)

Encrusting ruffled grey sponge 42.628 (1.413) 32.315 (1.571) 23.602 (1.837) 16.540 (0.832) 9.208 (0.783) 14.394 (0.664) 18.790 (0.732) 14.317 (0.620)




Year 2006 2006 2009 2009 2011 2011 2015 2015




Chondropsis sp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)


Phaeophyta 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)




Capnella erecta 0.000 (0.000) 0.004 (0.004) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Caulerpa spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Fucales 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)





Melithaea spp 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Adeona grisea 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.062 (0.051) 0.000 (0.000)


Hornera robusta 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)


Knobbly Fingers 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)



Clavelina spp 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.062 (0.062) 0.000 (0.000)


Chlorophyta 0.000 (0.000) 0.004 (0.004) 0.128 (0.097) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)




Year 2006 2006 2009 2009 2011 2011 2015 2015



Bugula dentata 0.000 (0.000) 0.024 (0.012) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)









Polymastia sp 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.019 (0.019) 0.048 (0.041) 0.000 (0.000) 0.026 (0.021) 0.000 (0.000) 0.006 (0.006)

Hard bryozoans 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.011 (0.008)

Phallusia obesa 0.012 (0.012) 0.045 (0.024) 0.017 (0.017) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)





Capnella spp 0.095 (0.060) 0.034 (0.013) 0.097 (0.082) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Hyphae Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.092 (0.048) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)



Celleporaria sp 0.010 (0.010) 0.017 (0.015) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.017 (0.017) 0.000 (0.000) 0.106 (0.027)

Brain Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)





Acabaria sp 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.039 (0.039) 0.015 (0.015) 0.005 (0.005) 0.000 (0.000) 0.033 (0.016)



Year 2006 2006 2009 2009 2011 2011 2015 2015


FlfoscCR 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.374 (0.187) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)


Thorecta sp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.212 (0.079) 0.022 (0.014)



Pteronisis spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.024 (0.022) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.025 (0.018) 0.050 (0.050)













Mopsella spp 0.023 (0.016) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.511 (0.159) 0.005 (0.005) 0.275 (0.095) 0.017 (0.012)

Orange X sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.650 (0.282) 0.333 (0.107)



Serpulids 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.241 (0.182) 0.000 (0.000) 0.338 (0.085) 0.189 (0.043)



Didemnum spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.025 (0.018) 0.428 (0.077)


Vanessa Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.014 (0.014) 0.342 (0.278) 0.469 (0.149) 0.664 (0.192) 0.169 (0.062) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)



Year 2006 2006 2009 2009 2011 2011 2015 2015




Synoicum spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.075 (0.047) 0.117 (0.044)



Ircinia spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.029 (0.029) 0.000 (0.000) 0.376 (0.186) 0.191 (0.191) 0.027 (0.027) 0.000 (0.000) 0.167 (0.072)




Carijoa sp. 2 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.009 (0.009) 0.099 (0.076) 0.213 (0.076) 0.738 (0.205) 0.144 (0.046)


Culicia spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.032 (0.032) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.200 (0.059) 1.128 (0.335)








Gymnangium spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.327 (0.078) 0.049 (0.049) 1.174 (0.315) 0.000 (0.000) 0.239 (0.077) 0.162 (0.071) 0.144 (0.045)











Year 2006 2006 2009 2009 2011 2011 2015 2015




Amathia sp. 1.149 (0.247) 0.934 (0.125) 0.000 (0.000) 0.033 (0.020) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.188 (0.050) 1.339 (0.158)



Iotrochotid sp. 0.028 (0.028) 0.019 (0.012) 2.499 (0.663) 0.459 (0.190) 3.953 (0.678) 0.708 (0.171) 1.200 (0.243) 0.467 (0.101)




Parazoanthus sp. 0.489 (0.295) 1.159 (0.239) 0.000 (0.000) 0.082 (0.058) 0.000 (0.000) 0.244 (0.166) 0.138 (0.137) 3.656 (0.636)



Rhodophyta 0.000 (0.000) 0.540 (0.115) 0.216 (0.088) 5.191 (0.945) 0.068 (0.039) 0.153 (0.057) 1.675 (0.259) 3.600 (0.389)






Year 2006 2006 2009 2009 2011 2011 2015 2015




Chondropsis sp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)


Phaeophyta 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)




Capnella erecta 0.000 (0.000) 0.013 (0.013) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Caulerpa spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Fucales 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)





Melithaea spp 0.061 (0.061) 0.000 (0.000) 0.037 (0.037) 0.000 (0.000) 0.019 (0.019) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Adeona grisea 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.009 (0.009) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.012 (0.012) 0.000 (0.000)


Hornera robusta 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)


Knobbly Fingers 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.062 (0.062) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)



Clavelina spp 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.006 (0.006)


Chlorophyta 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)




Year 2006 2006 2009 2009 2011 2011 2015 2015



Bugula dentata 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)









Polymastia sp 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.046 (0.033) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Hard bryozoans 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.012 (0.012) 0.022 (0.011)

Phallusia obesa 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.054 (0.042) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)





Capnella spp 0.000 (0.000) 0.003 (0.003) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Hyphae Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.139 (0.068) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)



Celleporaria sp 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.050 (0.025) 0.039 (0.020)

Brain Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.580 (0.370) 0.000 (0.000) 0.049 (0.049) 0.066 (0.044) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)





Acabaria sp 0.000 (0.000) 0.016 (0.016) 0.207 (0.127) 0.000 (0.000) 0.085 (0.046) 0.005 (0.005) 0.050 (0.030) 0.011 (0.011)



Year 2006 2006 2009 2009 2011 2011 2015 2015


FlfoscCR 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.050 (0.050) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)


Thorecta sp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.112 (0.048) 0.089 (0.032)



Pteronisis spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.046 (0.046) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.025 (0.025) 0.011 (0.008)













Mopsella spp 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.129 (0.054) 0.000 (0.000) 0.038 (0.028) 0.006 (0.006)

Orange X sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.362 (0.183) 0.194 (0.068)



Serpulids 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.012 (0.012) 0.450 (0.102) 0.250 (0.050)



Didemnum spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.175 (0.048) 0.239 (0.070)


Vanessa Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.350 (0.157) 0.076 (0.032) 0.613 (0.168) 0.261 (0.071) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)



Year 2006 2006 2009 2009 2011 2011 2015 2015




Synoicum spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.109 (0.063) 0.512 (0.289) 0.183 (0.064)



Ircinia spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.150 (0.150) 0.463 (0.212) 0.000 (0.000) 0.024 (0.024) 0.138 (0.075) 0.172 (0.057)




Carijoa sp. 2 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.067 (0.042) 0.000 (0.000) 0.893 (0.343) 0.076 (0.039) 1.688 (0.284) 0.322 (0.059)


Culicia spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.020 (0.020) 0.125 (0.046) 0.828 (0.158)








Gymnangium spp. 0.100 (0.063) 0.248 (0.101) 0.058 (0.058) 0.373 (0.210) 0.051 (0.036) 0.399 (0.145) 0.075 (0.043) 0.306 (0.088)











Year 2006 2006 2009 2009 2011 2011 2015 2015




Amathia sp. 0.685 (0.285) 0.765 (0.125) 0.979 (0.465) 0.144 (0.052) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.750 (0.142) 1.667 (0.181)



Iotrochotid sp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 2.900 (0.596) 0.783 (0.196) 4.324 (0.671) 2.263 (0.335) 1.700 (0.316) 1.006 (0.151)




Parazoanthus sp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.644 (0.176) 0.000 (0.000) 0.024 (0.024) 0.000 (0.000) 0.140 (0.116) 0.000 (0.000) 2.206 (0.472)



Rhodophyta 0.070 (0.047) 0.430 (0.089) 0.013 (0.013) 0.312 (0.138) 0.000 (0.000) 0.039 (0.021) 0.000 (0.000) 0.022 (0.014)






Year 2006 2006 2009 2009 2011 2011 2015 2015




Chondropsis sp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.044 (0.044) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)


Phaeophyta 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)




Capnella erecta 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Caulerpa spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Fucales 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)





Melithaea spp 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Adeona grisea 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)


Hornera robusta 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)


Knobbly Fingers 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)



Clavelina spp 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)


Chlorophyta 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)




Year 2006 2006 2009 2009 2011 2011 2015 2015



Bugula dentata 0.037 (0.030) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)









Polymastia sp 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.015 (0.015) 0.000 (0.000) 0.104 (0.104) 0.025 (0.025) 0.011 (0.011)

Hard bryozoans 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Phallusia obesa 0.000 (0.000) 0.062 (0.062) 0.026 (0.026) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)





Capnella spp 0.142 (0.142) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)

Hyphae Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.144 (0.087) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)



Celleporaria sp 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.012 (0.012) 0.017 (0.010)

Brain Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)





Acabaria sp 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.186 (0.186) 0.000 (0.000) 0.030 (0.022) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)



Year 2006 2006 2009 2009 2011 2011 2015 2015


FlfoscCR 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)


Thorecta sp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.088 (0.041) 0.075 (0.027)



Pteronisis spp. 0.224 (0.224) 0.024 (0.024) 0.000 (0.000) 0.270 (0.174) 0.000 (0.000) 0.013 (0.013) 0.000 (0.000) 0.069 (0.036)













Mopsella spp 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.062 (0.037) 0.000 (0.000)

Orange X sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.300 (0.192) 0.109 (0.057)



Serpulids 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.019 (0.019) 0.500 (0.085) 0.402 (0.088)



Didemnum spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.162 (0.050) 0.126 (0.035)


Vanessa Sponge 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.207 (0.153) 0.065 (0.046) 0.132 (0.077) 0.180 (0.057) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)



Year 2006 2006 2009 2009 2011 2011 2015 2015




Synoicum spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.125 (0.055) 0.029 (0.015)



Ircinia spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.576 (0.349) 0.000 (0.000) 0.438 (0.210) 0.125 (0.081) 0.057 (0.032)




Carijoa sp. 2 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.024 (0.024) 0.010 (0.010) 0.562 (0.143) 0.213 (0.056)


Culicia spp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.175 (0.072) 0.897 (0.192)








Gymnangium spp. 0.083 (0.075) 0.143 (0.086) 0.118 (0.118) 0.259 (0.160) 0.148 (0.117) 0.220 (0.142) 0.062 (0.033) 0.092 (0.036)











Year 2006 2006 2009 2009 2011 2011 2015 2015




Amathia sp. 0.952 (0.262) 0.660 (0.207) 0.213 (0.192) 0.112 (0.100) 0.041 (0.041) 0.000 (0.000) 0.775 (0.149) 1.356 (0.174)



Iotrochotid sp. 0.037 (0.037) 0.250 (0.213) 0.415 (0.175) 1.557 (0.436) 2.333 (0.500) 3.149 (0.509) 1.638 (0.276) 1.063 (0.177)




Parazoanthus sp. 0.000 (0.000) 0.378 (0.193) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.060 (0.060) 0.722 (0.431) 2.013 (0.663) 2.483 (0.489)



Rhodophyta 0.000 (0.000) 0.562 (0.113) 0.000 (0.000) 0.013 (0.013) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000)



Date post:	12-Jun-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

Six Year Post-Construction Survey of Deep Reef …...Six Year Post-Construction Survey of Deep Reef...

Documents