4.3 Article

Patterns and drivers of megabenthic secondary production on the Barents Sea shelf

期刊

MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES
卷 546, 期 -, 页码 1-16

出版社

INTER-RESEARCH
DOI: 10.3354/meps11662

关键词

Arctic; Benthos; Megafauna; Pelagic-benthic coupling; Geographically weighted regression; GWR; Geostatistics

资金

  1. graduate program POLMAR
  2. Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Megabenthos plays a major role in the overall energy flow on Arctic shelves, but information on megabenthic secondary production on large spatial scales is scarce. Here, we estimated for the first time megabenthic secondary production for the entire Barents Sea shelf by applying a species-based empirical model to an extensive dataset from the joint Norwegian-Russian ecosystem survey. Spatial patterns and relationships were analyzed within a GIS. The environmental drivers behind the observed production pattern were identified by applying an ordinary least squares regression model. Geographically weighted regression ( GWR) was used to examine the varying relationship of secondary production and the environment on a shelf-wide scale. Significantly higher megabenthic secondary production was found in the northeastern, seasonally ice-covered regions of the Barents Sea than in the permanently ice-free southwest. The environmental parameters that significantly relate to the observed pattern are bottom temperature and salinity, sea ice cover, new primary production, trawling pressure, and bottom current speed. The GWR proved to be a versatile tool for analyzing the regionally varying relationships of benthic secondary production and its environmental drivers( R-2 = 0.73). The observed pattern indicates tight pelagic-benthic coupling in the realm of the productive marginal ice zone. Ongoing decrease of winter sea ice extent and the associated poleward movement of the seasonal ice edge point towards a distinct decline of benthic secondary production in the northeastern Barents Sea in the future.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据