4.4 Article

Persisting intertidal seagrass beds in the northern Wadden Sea since the 1930s

Journal

JOURNAL OF SEA RESEARCH
Volume 82, Issue -, Pages 134-141

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.seares.2012.04.007

Keywords

Long-term development; Intertidal seagrass beds; Aerial photographs; Eutrophication; Water Framework Directive; Sediment dynamics

Funding

  1. State Agency for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Areas, Flintbek (LLUR)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In contrast to the global crisis of seagrass ecosystems, intertidal Zostera-beds in the Northfrisian Wadden Sea (coastal North Sea) have recovered recently. Present areal extent resembles that of the mid 1930s. In spite of an intermittent loss in area by about 60% in the 1970s to 1990s, beds have maintained their general spatial distribution pattern. Aerial photographs from parts of the region in 1935-37, and the total region in 1958-59 and 2005 were visually analysed, and seagrass beds were recorded and quantified with a geographic information system (GIS). Data from direct aerial mapping were added to extend the survey until 2010. From the mid 2000s to 2010, intertidal seagrass areas estimated from these records range between 84 and 142 km(2) (10-16% of the intertidal area), while records from the 1970 to 90s merely range between 30 and 40 km(2) (3-5%) (Reise and Kohlus, 2008). Despite variation in size, core positions of individual seagrass beds were identified and they shifted very little over the last decades. Most beds occur in the upper intertidal zone and where barrier islands offer shelter against swell from the open sea. While land claim activities since the 1930s have irreversibly eliminated at least 11 km(2) of seagrass beds, we suggest that intermittent losses of seagrass area were mainly caused by sediment dynamics and a phase of elevated eutrophication. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available