If you can't read please download the document
Upload
avalon
View
30
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Monitoring and modeling of estuarine benthic macrofauna and their relevance to resource management problems. Tom Ysebaert, Peter Herman, Herman Hummel, Bart Schaub, Wil Sistermans & Carlo Heip Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO) [email protected]. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Monitoring and modeling of estuarine benthic macrofauna and their relevance to resource management problems
Tom Ysebaert, Peter Herman, Herman Hummel, Bart Schaub, Wil Sistermans & Carlo HeipNetherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO)
[email protected] Colour of Ocean Data - The Palais des Congrs, Brussels, Belgium, 25-27 November 2002
OUTLINEIntroduction: estuarine management and the problem of scale
Benthic monitoring programmesPredictive modelingSpatio-temporal dynamicsTrend calculations
General conclusions
FIELD STUDIES - EXPERIMENTSENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMSSCALETIDAL FLAT+ multidisciplinary research + detailed process studies+ food web and stable isotope studies + sediment processes
LINKS monitoring integrative studies time-series data modelingSmallLargeSCHELDE ESTUARY- large-scale dredging operations- habitat loss- water quality- fisheries
INTRODUCTION
Benthic monitoring programmesBenthic organisms: suitable indicators for changes in environmental qualityDutch Delta area (SW Netherlands): long tradition in monitoring of estuarine benthic macrofaunadesigned to detect long-term trends in large parts of different systems (e.g. Grevelingen) Explore relationships between biota and environmental variables to improve prediction and trend calculations
SCHELDE ESTUARYLarge data set available (>5000 samples)Different sampling designs (stratified random, fixed stations)Environmental variables (model derived)
Predictive modelingLogistic regression: model probability of occurrence of species as a function of environmental variables
Ysebaert et al. 2002, MEPS
Macoma balthica: comparison pred./obs.Observed presencesPredicted presencesYsebaert et al. 2002, MEPS
Predictive modeling: conclusionsfor 20 macrobenthic species response surfaces were modeled (Ysebaert et al., MEPS 2002)
the overall prediction performed very well (>75%).
% predicted observed vs actually observed: 25%-85%.
Within-estuary validation: successful
where patterns of distribution are strongly and directly coupled to physico-chemical processes, our modeling approach is capable of predicting macrobenthic species distributions with a relatively high degree of success
Time-averaged approach - no temporal dynamicsExtrapolation to other systems limited - needs incorporation of system-wide characteristics (e.g. SPM content, productivity, wave vs. tide dominance)No prediction of abundance or biomass
Limitations of the approachAnalysis of spatio-temporal variability of abundance and biomassAnalysis of dependence on environmental factors
11 transects in 3 salinity zones, 2-4 stations per transect15 replicates per stationsampled twice yearly 1994-2000 height, mud content, chl a monitoredFit hierarchical Anova model to observations (variance components)Regression on environmental variables
Spatio-temporal dynamics
R0.41Mud0.37 ***MedianChl aHeight0.53 ***SlopeSalinityFlood0.33 ***Ebb-0.16 MudChl a0.15 Height-0.16 Salinity0.21 *Macoma balthica: spatial and temporal variabilityYsebaert et al., in press, MEPS
In general fair proportion of variance explained by station-averaged environmental variablesTemporal variation in environmental variables poor explanatorsTemporal variation synchronized over estuary or region for bivalves (recruitment) but seldom for other speciesLargest proportion of variance usually in unsyn-chronized, station-dependent, temporal variation points to important patchiness and independent development at a scale > replicate scale (1m2), but < transect scale -> biological interactions?Spatio-temporal dynamics: conclusions
Application to trend calculationsUse information on the environment in trend calculationsBIOMON Westerschelde: stratified random design
Approach : define relationships between environment and biota (presence-absence, abundance, biomass)Compare regression models where year is considered the only independent variable with regression models with year and environmental variables as independent variables
Trends 1992-2001
Chart4
7.06603023857.053215574
6.58449705525.0113479639
6.1357792156.1797382047
5.71764043025.8061064273
5.32799681084.2661010592
4.96490647883.701248232
4.62655989093.9991305371
4.31127081954.371222843
4.01746794984.479861118
3.7436870484.4082393282
trend [year]
trend [year+env]
count
Heteromastus filiformis
Sheet1
hetefilimacobaltbathpilopygoeleghydrulvaaphemarinephcirrneredivearenmaricorovoluceraedul
trend [year]trend [year+env]predpred-envpredpred-envpredpred-envpredpred-envpredpred-envpredpred-envpredpred-envpredpred-envpredpred-envpredpred-env
19927.06603023857.0532155743.36009784423.49818265864.05222232523.50499502237.11507843714.90925506725.1524047445.35665438682.99337833462.96815356190.29957435250.28578022071.34972937081.00154005980.13456869070.13791135595.1049584946.25827152552.45207373072.6084427824
19936.58449705525.01134796393.12671397292.75195667764.10331069934.38630690357.43843838625.39009690144.92445280934.14307009293.13052797962.91696997840.25518267390.26129082641.26307402640.87886691550.13156781450.1252280285.12766489353.16839358142.29315349341.7485409957
19946.1357792156.17973820473.06706420022.9849478484.21244589954.60407090087.6446190876.7456576955.00137096145.43296221843.42288314192.41083600590.21655846570.21230954441.23550855691.17882376260.12819498450.13877132425.23056224377.5306240922.22622306531.83619622
19955.71764043025.80610642732.99794022622.49728739464.32061423824.91966068217.86510037047.0713715355.05873954194.67487835353.73146304312.79564844440.18362483930.16975331521.20498334511.07016138070.12549841850.12346786696.98451277748.6608646011.90741590482.3061898959
19965.32799681084.26610105922.90466506143.34134284194.42141452974.01677424538.11508232357.49482567545.06507440985.83434572284.03773498334.82468247780.15438985270.16789576691.16654611560.96110239510.12507732280.11975071778.17305779987.24854710211.38584950341.12775744
19974.96490647883.7012482322.8631546863.24857254134.54505305323.77987008428.32567539996.98345284665.17282157016.38663055554.43317380966.06013110990.13081646940.15179612931.14581358170.84546735130.12210072080.11472333589.11914544845.42074794061.2901525661.2585268231
19984.62655989093.99913053712.74011362713.07395353514.6360502794.07088624118.62533335817.29254612155.10647030865.32370548264.74734169145.4403556930.11100845410.12111793711.09782029460.94328223320.11943838940.10779418337.93875051985.54833945021.12646685221.0615432582
19994.31127081954.3712228432.67714286072.86957128564.75462593695.11189763178.87502277279.39040437235.16225435985.25109416245.17341054985.14526396010.09405604450.0889249511.07030301960.93399346370.11715518480.11724203218.31344598797.71313108671.06086551781.1874273017
20004.01746794984.4798611182.46393258182.82265701874.80141260625.44958081619.308928601410.90459177744.8711369965.11936563375.36091856115.37404340790.07995022960.07477021870.99246070881.1348461060.11501913990.128981203510.697991957814.27362896840.74087043530.7820145884
20013.7436870484.40823932822.66779720411.97695888395.05967833875.13106270769.255807421110.22065920175.54129008224.06629035216.37272583034.54479528940.06778437020.05506056191.05508529860.94369737660.11106622120.118195627113.084355909410.16073130360.79275997960.9817382348
Sheet1
trend [year]
trend [year+env]
count
Heteromastus filiformis
Sheet2
trend [year]
trend [year+env]
count
Macoma balthica
Sheet3
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
trend
trend env
count
Bathyporeia pilosa
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
trend
trend env
count
Pygospio elegans
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
trend
trend env
count
Hydrobia ulvae
trend [year]
trend [year+env]
count
Aphelochaeta marioni
trend [year]
trend [year+env]
count
Nephtys cirrosa
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
trend
trend env
count
Nereis diversicolor
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
trend
trend env
count
Arenicola marina
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
trend
trend env
count
Corophium volutator
trend
trend env
count
Cerastoderma edule
7.06603023857.053215574
6.58449705525.0113479639
6.1357792156.1797382047
5.71764043025.8061064273
5.32799681084.2661010592
4.96490647883.701248232
4.62655989093.9991305371
4.31127081954.371222843
4.01746794984.479861118
3.7436870484.4082393282
trend [year]
trend [year+env]
count
Heteromastus filiformis
Trends 1992-2001
Chart6
3.36009784423.4981826586
3.12671397292.7519566776
3.06706420022.984947848
2.99794022622.4972873946
2.90466506143.3413428419
2.8631546863.2485725413
2.74011362713.0739535351
2.67714286072.8695712856
2.46393258182.8226570187
2.66779720411.9769588839
trend [year]
trend [year+env]
count
Macoma balthica
Sheet1
hetefilimacobaltbathpilopygoeleghydrulvaaphemarinephcirrneredivearenmaricorovoluceraedul
trend [year]trend [year+env]predpred-envpredpred-envpredpred-envpredpred-envpredpred-envpredpred-envpredpred-envpredpred-envpredpred-envpredpred-env
19927.06603023857.0532155743.36009784423.49818265864.05222232523.50499502237.11507843714.90925506725.1524047445.35665438682.99337833462.96815356190.29957435250.28578022071.34972937081.00154005980.13456869070.13791135595.1049584946.25827152552.45207373072.6084427824
19936.58449705525.01134796393.12671397292.75195667764.10331069934.38630690357.43843838625.39009690144.92445280934.14307009293.13052797962.91696997840.25518267390.26129082641.26307402640.87886691550.13156781450.1252280285.12766489353.16839358142.29315349341.7485409957
19946.1357792156.17973820473.06706420022.9849478484.21244589954.60407090087.6446190876.7456576955.00137096145.43296221843.42288314192.41083600590.21655846570.21230954441.23550855691.17882376260.12819498450.13877132425.23056224377.5306240922.22622306531.83619622
19955.71764043025.80610642732.99794022622.49728739464.32061423824.91966068217.86510037047.0713715355.05873954194.67487835353.73146304312.79564844440.18362483930.16975331521.20498334511.07016138070.12549841850.12346786696.98451277748.6608646011.90741590482.3061898959
19965.32799681084.26610105922.90466506143.34134284194.42141452974.01677424538.11508232357.49482567545.06507440985.83434572284.03773498334.82468247780.15438985270.16789576691.16654611560.96110239510.12507732280.11975071778.17305779987.24854710211.38584950341.12775744
19974.96490647883.7012482322.8631546863.24857254134.54505305323.77987008428.32567539996.98345284665.17282157016.38663055554.43317380966.06013110990.13081646940.15179612931.14581358170.84546735130.12210072080.11472333589.11914544845.42074794061.2901525661.2585268231
19984.62655989093.99913053712.74011362713.07395353514.6360502794.07088624118.62533335817.29254612155.10647030865.32370548264.74734169145.4403556930.11100845410.12111793711.09782029460.94328223320.11943838940.10779418337.93875051985.54833945021.12646685221.0615432582
19994.31127081954.3712228432.67714286072.86957128564.75462593695.11189763178.87502277279.39040437235.16225435985.25109416245.17341054985.14526396010.09405604450.0889249511.07030301960.93399346370.11715518480.11724203218.31344598797.71313108671.06086551781.1874273017
20004.01746794984.4798611182.46393258182.82265701874.80141260625.44958081619.308928601410.90459177744.8711369965.11936563375.36091856115.37404340790.07995022960.07477021870.99246070881.1348461060.11501913990.128981203510.697991957814.27362896840.74087043530.7820145884
20013.7436870484.40823932822.66779720411.97695888395.05967833875.13106270769.255807421110.22065920175.54129008224.06629035216.37272583034.54479528940.06778437020.05506056191.05508529860.94369737660.11106622120.118195627113.084355909410.16073130360.79275997960.9817382348
Sheet1
trend [year]
trend [year+env]
count
Heteromastus filiformis
Sheet2
trend [year]
trend [year+env]
count
Macoma balthica
Sheet3
trend [year]
trend [year+env]
count
Bathyporeia pilosa
trend [year]
trend [year+env]
count
Pygospio elegans
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
trend
trend env
count
Hydrobia ulvae
trend [year]
trend [year+env]
count
Aphelochaeta marioni
trend [year]
trend [year+env]
count
Nephtys cirrosa
trend [year]
trend [year+env]
count
Nereis diversicolor
trend [year]
trend [year+env]
count
Arenicola marina
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
trend
trend env
count
Corophium volutator
trend
trend env
count
Cerastoderma edule
7.06603023857.053215574
6.58449705525.0113479639
6.1357792156.1797382047
5.71764043025.8061064273
5.32799681084.2661010592
4.96490647883.701248232
4.62655989093.9991305371
4.31127081954.371222843
4.01746794984.479861118
3.7436870484.4082393282
trend [year]
trend [year+env]
count
Heteromastus filiformis
3.36009784423.4981826586
3.12671397292.7519566776
3.06706420022.984947848
2.99794022622.4972873946
2.90466506143.3413428419
2.8631546863.2485725413
2.74011362713.0739535351
2.67714286072.8695712856
2.46393258182.8226570187
2.66779720411.9769588839
trend [year]
trend [year+env]
count
Macoma balthica
Trends 1992-2001
Trend calculations: conclusionsFor some species, regression models with the factor year as independent variable or regression models with the factor year and environmental variables as independent variables showed similar results, but for several species the significant trend disappeared when environmental variables were included
environmental variables, incorporated into regression models, might improve long-term trend calculations, as they allow to compensate for differences in local environmental variability.
GENERAL CONCLUSIONSThe results demonstrate the important role environmental variables play in explaining variability of soft-sediment benthic macrofauna at scales from 100m to complete estuarine systems.
Predictions of presence-absence data of macrobenthic species successful within the Schelde estuary
environmental variables, incorporated into regression models, might improve long-term trend calculations, as they allow to compensate for differences in local environmental variability.
GENERAL CONCLUSIONSA large proportion of variance is in 10m - 100 m unpredictable patchiness and (biologically induced?) year-to-year variation
Emphasis of monitoring of impacts should be on long-term (> 3yr) average populations, and should be related to long-term changes in environment
There is a gap in the monitoring scheme at scales between 1m and ~200 m, which could be important to cover
Thank youData obtained in co-operation with RIKZ,the National Institute for Coastal and Marine Management (The Netherlands)