EPIBENTHIC COMMUNITIES IN TWO CONTRASTING AREAS OF THE BALEARIC ISLANDS

Montserrat Ramón(1 2) Pere Abelló(2) Xisco Ordinas(1) Alberto Serrano(3)Montserrat Ramón(1,2), Pere Abelló(2), Xisco Ordinas(1), Alberto Serrano(3), Enric Massutí(1)

(1) IEO ‐ Centre Oceanogràfic de les Balears ‐ IEO( ) g f(2) Institut de Ciències del Mar – CSIC(3) Centro Oceanográfico de Santander ‐ IEO

Final workshop IDEADOS:

“THE WRAPPING UP OF THE IDEADOS PROJECT, INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP ONENVIRONMENT, ECOSYSTEMS AND DEMERSAL RESOURCES AND FISHERIES”Palma de Mallorca 14‐ 16 November 2012Palma de Mallorca,  14‐ 16 November 2012

INTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTION

Many studies have been conducted in the Mediterranean addressing megafaunal demersalassemblages (Abelló et al 1988; Cartes and Sardà 1993; Stefanescu et al 1993; Sardà et alassemblages (Abelló et al., 1988; Cartes and Sardà, 1993; Stefanescu et al., 1993; Sardà et al.,1994; Moranta et al., 1998; Carrassón and Cartes, 2002; D’Onghia et al., 2004). Most of them arebased on fish and decapod crustaceans, which are the most abundant groups in Mediterraneanepibenthic communities.

In the Balearic Islands, studies on megafaunal assemblages (mainly fish, decapod crustaceans,cephalopods and echinoderms) have been performed on the continental shelf and slope, from 40to 750 m depth (Massutí & Reñones 2005 Moranta et al 2008 Ordines & Massutí 2009)to 750 m depth (Massutí & Reñones, 2005, Moranta et al., 2008, Ordines & Massutí, 2009).

In the present study we have taken into account the overall taxocenoses present in samplescollected with a beam trawl of 10 mm diamond mesh cod‐end.

OBJETIVES

To analyze the existence of spatial and seasonal variations of megafaunal communities present inthe bottom in two areas of Mallorca (Sóller and Cabrera), along a depth gradient from the shelfedge to the middle slope.

SAMPLING

On board the trawler “Punta desVent”

EPIBENTHIC BEAM TRAWL:

horizontal and vertical openings: 3 5 mhorizontal and vertical openings: 3.5 mand 0.6 m respectively

10 mm diamond mesh cod‐end10 mm diamond mesh cod end

Each haul lasted 15 minutes at atowing speed of 2.1 knotsg p

The sampling area varied between 679and 1136 m2

A SCANMAR system and CTD fitted tothe upper part of the beam trawlmouthmouth

SAMPLES CHARACTERISTICSSAMPLES CHARACTERISTICS

Beam trawlnumber

Cabrera Cabrera Cabrera Sóller Sóller Sóller Total

Depth estrata Shelfedge

Upperslope

Middleslope

Shelfedge

Upperslope

Middleslope

9‐17 DEC 2009 2 2 2 2 2 2 12

Mean depth (m) 305 708 875 252 649 848

Depth range 262‐347 704‐711 852‐898 228‐276 622‐664 843‐852

16‐26 JULY 2010 5 3 3 3 3 3(2) 20(19)

Mean depth (m) 250 685 883 308 674 861

D th 250 342 648 738 859 900 259 339 646 707 834 882Depth range 250‐342 648‐738 859‐900 259‐339 646‐707 834‐882

FAUNISTICSCABRERA SHELF MD % CABRERA UPPER MD % CABRERA MIDDLE MD %

Plesionika antigai 17035 20,2

Plesionika

acanthonotus 5083 10,8 Gennadas elegans 3962 11,8

A total of 199 taxa werecollected, of which 177 wereid ifi d i l l

Plesionika heterocarpus 10500 12,5 Gennadas elegans 4542 9,7 Antalis agilis 2498 7,4

Thenea muricata 7536 9,0 Boreomysis arctica 3877 8,2 Cyclothone braueri 1939 5,8

Lophogaster typicus 5737 6,8

Philocheras

echinulatus 3759 8,0 Boreomysis arctica 1822 5,4

identified to species level(150 taxa were identified inCabrera and 167 in Sóller).

Philocheras echinulatus 5310 6,3 Cyclothone braueri 3586 7,6

Plesionika

acanthonotus 1790 5,3

Ophiuridae 4029 4,8 Plesionika martia 3325 7,1 Polycheles typhlops 1736 5,2

Parapenaeus longirostris 3752 4,5 Ophiuridae 2828 6,0 Munida tenuimana 1405 4,2

Lesueurigobius friesii 3195 3,8 Benthosema glaciale 1853 3,9 Geryon longipes 1226 3,7

Of the 23 large zoologicalgroups, the most diversewas the Crustacea Decapoda

Lepidorhombus boscii 2211 2,6 Lampanyctus pusillus 1287 2,7 Richardina sp. 1224 3,6

Rondeletiola minor 2120 2,5 Sergestes arcticus 1280 2,7

Calocaris

macandreae 1218 3,6

SÓLLER SHELF MD % SÓLLER UPPER MD % SÓLLER MIDDLE MD %was the Crustacea Decapoda(61 taxa), followed byVertebrata Osteichthyes (51species) Echinodermata (16

SÓLLER SHELF MD % SÓLLER UPPER MD % SÓLLER MIDDLE MD %

Callumbonella suturale 40095 20,9 Gennadas elegans 11217 22,2 Antalis agilis 52320 43,0

Processa nouveli 12574 6,6 Boreomysis arctica 6012 11,9 Polymastia tissieri 13289 10,9

Gaidropsarusspecies), Echinodermata (16especies), and MolluscaCephalopoda (11 species);the rest of groups showed a

Plesionika heterocarpus 10734 5,6 biscayensis 3702 7,3 Bathyarca philippiana 9747 8,0

Cymbulia peronii 9718 5,1 Aristeus antennatus 2958 5,9

Pontophilus

norvegicus 4523 3,7

Philocheras echinulatus 9091 4 7

Philocheras

echinulatus 2407 4 8 Thenea muricata 4418 3 6the rest of groups showed anumber of species lowerthan 10 .

Philocheras echinulatus 9091 4,7 echinulatus 2407 4,8 Thenea muricata 4418 3,6

Ophiuridae 7306 3,8 Munida tenuimana 1663 3,3 Gryphus vitreus 3611 3,0

Aporrhais serresianus 5760 3,0

Lampanyctus

crocodilus 1657 3,3 Gennadas elegans 3541 2,9

Gadiculus argenteus 4798 2,5 Calocaris macandreae 1371 2,7 Boreomysis arctica 3366 2,8

Lunatia fusca 4640 2,4 Processa canaliculata 1229 2,4 Munida tenuimana 2595 2,1

Lepidorhombus boscii 4435 2,3 Pyrosoma atlanticum 1216 2,4

Plesionika

acanthonotus 2069 1,7

MDS analysisMDS analysisStandardized abundances (number of individuals km‐2) fourth root transformed; Bray–Curtis similarity coefficient

S

Stress: 0.12

M

squares: CabreraS

S

UM M

Msquares: Cabrera, circles: Sóller; 

White : July ,

S S S

SS

MM

MM

M M

M

White : July ,grey: December; 

Shelf edge (S),

S

S S

S

U

UUUU

UM g ( ),

Upper Slope (U)and Middle (M).

S

S

U

U

U

Two way crossed ANOSIM testsTwo‐way crossed ANOSIM tests 

AREAS SEASONS

R p R p

SHELF 0.617 0.012 0.584 0.019

250 m

UPPER 0.629 0.033 0.625 0.020

650 m

MIDDLE 0.080 0.467 0.385 0.100

850 m

SIMPERSIMILARITY

Cabrera Shelf July Av.Ab. Contr% Cum.% Cabrera Shelf December Av.Ab. Contr% Cum.%Average similarity: 50.73% Average similarity: 44.01%Plesionika antigai 20930 7 12 0 12 0 Plesionika heterocarpus 28533 9 10 3 10 3SIMILARITY

RESULTSP antigai

Plesionika antigai 20930,7 12,0 12,0 Plesionika heterocarpus 28533,9 10,3 10,3Lesueurigobius friesii 4472,7 8,4 20,3 Parapenaeus longirostris 4648,0 7,4 17,7Parapenaeus longirostris 3393,8 7,6 28,0 Thenea muricata 15440,2 7,2 24,9Thenea muricata 4373,6 7,4 35,3 Lophogaster typicus 16331,3 7,2 32,1

P. antigaiCabrera Upper July Av.Ab. Contr% Cum.% Cabrera Upper December Av.Ab. Contr% Cum.%Average similarity: 58,56% Average similarity: 42.86%Cyclothone braueri 3816,1 7,5 7,5 Gennadas elegans 3474,8 11,6 11,6Plesionika acanthonotus 7492,8 7,2 14,7 Boreomysis arctica 3636,4 11,3 22,8Plesionika martia 5443 0 6 7 21 3 Ophiuridae 2990 0 10 7 33 5

P.  heterocarpus

Plesionika martia 5443,0 6,7 21,3 Ophiuridae  2990,0 10,7 33,5Ophiuridae  2719,5 6,5 27,8 Pandalina profunda 903,6 8,6 42,0

Soller Shelf July Av.Ab. Contr% Cum.% Soller Shelf December Av.Ab. Contr% Cum.%Average similarity: 54,98% Average similarity: 53,51%Plesionika heterocarpus 16847,6 5,0 5,0 Cymbulia peronii 24295,5 6,5 6,5Lunatia fusca 7542,3 5,0 10,1 Processa nouveli 31435,7 6,3 12,8Ophiuridae  9893,1 4,8 14,8 Processa canaliculata 10224,8 5,7 18,6Aporrhais serresianus 9011,5 4,6 19,4 Alpheus glaber 7333,0 5,4 23,9

T. muricataSoller Upper July Av.Ab. Contr% Cum.% Soller Upper December Av.Ab. Contr% Cum.%Average similarity: 49,25% Average similarity: 49,82%Gaidropsarus biscayensis 4799,6 10,0 10,0 Gennadas elegans 25104,5 8,2 8,2Philocheras echinulatus 3918,1 9,2 19,2 Lampanyctus crocodilus 3847,7 6,8 15,0Aristeus antennatus 2742,6 7,3 26,5 Aristeus antennatus 3280,6 6,5 21,5Processa canaliculata 1861,1 6,5 33,0 Gaidropsarus biscayensis 2055,0 5,9 27,4

Middle Av.Ab. Contr% Cum.%Average similarity: 48 42%

L.typicus

Average similarity: 48,42%Plesionika acanthonotus 1913,8 7,4 7,4Munida tenuimana 1933,8 7,1 14,5Gennadas elegans 3774,8 6,8 21,3Gaidropsarus biscayensis 975,1 27,2

SIMPER BETWEN ZONES BETWEEN SEASONS

CSJ‐SSJ Av.Ab.1 Av.Ab.2 Cum.% CSJ‐CSD Av.Ab.1 Av.Ab.2 Cum.%Average disimilarity: 60,59% Average disimilarity: 57,55%

DISIMILARITYRESULTS

Average disimilarity: 60,59% Average disimilarity: 57,55%Callumbonella suturalis 0 65236 3,4 Plesionika heterocarpus 3286 28534 3,4Aporrhais serresianus 0 9012 6,5 Lesueurigobius friesii 4473 0 6,7Plesionika antigai 20931 980 9,3 Gobiidae  0 2534 9,7Pagurus alatus 0 3036 11,6 Plesionika antigai 20931 7294 12,6

P. nouveli Ophiuridae  1419 9893 13,8 Plesionika edwardsii 0 1596 15,2   

CSD‐SSD Av.Ab.1 Av.Ab.2 Cum.% SSJ‐SSD Av.Ab.1 Av.Ab.2 Cum.%Average disimilarity: 58,24% Average disimilarity: 61,55%Processa nouveli 0 31436 3,9 Processa nouveli 0 31436 3,3Processa nouveli 0 31436 3,9 Processa nouveli 0 31436 3,3Thenea muricata 15440 0 7,1 Cymbulia peronii 0 24296 6,5Cymbulia peronii 252 24296 10,2 Processa canaliculata 0 10225 9,2Lophogaster typicus 16331 1122 12,3 Callumbonella suturalis 65236 2384 11,6Plesionika heterocarpus 28534 1563 14,3 Scaphander lignarius 5779 0 13,8

P. canaliculataCUJ‐SUJ Av.Ab.1 Av.Ab.2 Cum.% CUJ‐CUD Av.Ab.1 Av.Ab.2 Cum.%

Average disimilarity: 55,14% Average disimilarity: 55,58%Ophiuridae  2719 0 3,9 Sergestes arcticus 2134 0 3,7Plesionika acanthonotus 7493 294 7,6 Philocheras echinulatus 6264 0 7,3Plesionika acanthonotus 7493 294 7,6 Philocheras echinulatus 6264 0 7,3Plesionika martia 5443 196 10,5 Nematoscelis megalops 1631 0 10,7Aristeus antennatus 309 2743 13,3 Plesionika martia 5443 147 14,1Stomias boa 762 0 16,0 Lampanyctus pusillus 2146 0 17,2   

P. typhlopsCUD‐SUD Av.Ab.1 Av.Ab.2 Cum.% SUJ‐SUD Av.Ab.1 Av.Ab.2 Cum.%

Average disimilarity: 65,67% Average disimilarity: 59,85%Ophiuridae  2990 0 3,0 Gennadas elegans 1959 25104 3,2Pyrosoma atlanticum 0 2451 5,8 Cymbulia peronii 0 1671 5,8Munida tenuimana 0 1220 8,2 Philocheras echinulatus 3918 140 8,4

C. suturalisM. tenuimana

Munida tenuimana 0 1220 8,2 Philocheras echinulatus 3918 140 8,4Polycheles typhlops 0 1098 10,5 Hygophum benoiti 0 963 10,8Hygophum benoiti 0 963 12,8 Boreomysis arctica 9207 1220 13,1

Diversity indexes

CSJ CSD SSJ SSD CUJ CUD SUJ SUD M

Total s 75 65 79 80 50 46 55 65 77

MIN 21 35 35 54 28 28 27 39 20MIN s 21 35 35 54 28 28 27 39 20

MAX s 40 48 65 56 32 30 33 47 33

MEDIAN s 34 41.5 45 55 30 29 29 43 31MEDIAN s

MEDIAN J' 0.9 0.8 0.82 0.71 0.75 0.7 0.6 0.71 0.75

MEDIAN H' 4.2 4.2 3.95 3.37 3.56 3.75 2.8 3.56 3.94

Codes of assemblages correspond to area (Cabrera/Sóller: C/S), depth stratum (Shelf edge, Upper slope, Middle slope: S/U/M), and season (December/July: D/J).

Canonical Correspondence Analysis 

Sample labels on circlesand squares representstrata (Shelf: S, Upperl U Middl l M)

M MM

slope: U, Middle slope: M);

colours are white for Julyand grey for December;

SAL

DEPGRA

COS ShShShSh

Sh MM

MM

M

circles correspond to Sóllerand squares to Cabrera.

Th i t l l b l

TEM

Sh

Sh

ShShShSh UU U

U M

MMM

U

The environmental labelsrepresent depth (DEP),salinity (SAL), temperature(TEMP), %gravel (GRA),% d (COS) %fi

POMPOS

FIS

Sh

Sh

UU UU

UUU %coarse sand (COS), %fine

sand (FIS), %coarse mud(COM), %silt (SIL), %finemud (FIM) %surface

i t t (POS) dCOM

FIMSIL

Sh organic content (POS), and%total organic content(POM).

Conclusions

The present study has shown the existence of differences at community levelbetween two contrasting areas separated 50 nm. These differences wereid i h h lf b k d h l ( ) b i hevident in the shelf break and the upper slope (228‐738 m), but not in the

deeper waters of the middle slope (843‐900 m). The fact that our studydetected locality differences also in the shelf break is probably due to takingi t t th ll t t i th l i f linto account the overall taxocenoses present in the samples, since faunaldiscontinuities are not always sharp and they hardly ever coincide acrossanimal taxocenoses.

Seasonality has been found in the shelf break (228‐347 m) and upper slope(646‐738) assemblages in both areas, but not in the middle slope. This seasonaldifferences in faunistic assemblage dynamics may be attributed to differencesdifferences in faunistic assemblage dynamics may be attributed to differencesin the relative abundance of the species or also to important presence/absencepatterns of key species related to migration/aggregation in relation withreproduction.reproduction.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We are deeply grateful to all participants in the IDEADOS surveys on board R/V “Sarmiento de Gamboa” and F/S “Punta des Vent”.