4.2 Article

Benthic foraminifera and environmental quality: the case study of Sulaibikhat Bay (Kuwait)

Journal

ARABIAN JOURNAL OF GEOSCIENCES
Volume 8, Issue 10, Pages 8527-8538

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s12517-015-1812-9

Keywords

Trace elements; TOC; Benthic foraminifera; Environmental quality; Sulaibikhat Bay

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The environmental quality of Sulaibikhat Bay (Kuwait) has been evaluated with an integrated approach that combines trace elements and grain size, organic matter qualification and quantification, and benthic foraminiferal analyses. On the basis of the comparison of the trace element concentrations to both background levels and values reported for the USEPA's sediment guidelines, the bay can be considered from moderately to severely contaminated. More specifically, the eastern part of the bay appears to be more affected by trace element pollution whereas the western one is characterized by relatively high values of total organic carbon (TOC). Biotic and abiotic data, analyzed with bivariate and multivariate techniques of statistical analysis, confirm the marked distinction between the eastern and western parts of the bay. The lowest values of benthic foraminiferal diversity (S, H, and Fisher alpha index) were found near the Al-Shuwaikh port in the eastern part of the bay, where there is also the highest level of pollution. Conversely, the western part of the bay was characterized by higher values of foraminiferal density probably in response of higher TOC values. The present study represents a first attempt to evaluate the level of pollution and its effects on the bay by assessing sediment characteristics and benthic foraminifera as bioindicators of environmental quality. Knowledge of the impact of pollution on the biological constituents of the marine environment in the area is essential when it comes to planning sustainable future developments.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available