4.6 Article

Recent benthic foraminiferal distribution in the Elbe Estuary (North Sea, Germany): A response to environmental stressors

期刊

ESTUARINE COASTAL AND SHELF SCIENCE
卷 251, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecss.2021.107198

关键词

Foraminifera; Benthic ecology; Transitional environments; River; Elbe estuary; North sea

资金

  1. Alexander von Humboldt Foundation [3.3 -ITA -1203503-HFST-P]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study aims to investigate the modern composition and species-environment relations of benthic foraminifera, finding that salinity and grain-size are the major factors influencing their distribution.
For the past 200 years, estuarine environments experienced intense and rapid environmental degradations due to human interventions. In addition, Global Changes are modifying the estuarine physiography, leading to a restructuration of marginal marine benthic communities. The aim of this study is to document, the modern assemblage composition and the species-environment relations of benthic foraminifera upstream the Elbe Estuary (southern North Sea) and to observe what has changed since the first survey in 1981. For this purpose, a surface sampling was carried out from 22 stations along the transitional area of the Elbe Estuary. Living (roseBengal stained) and dead foraminiferal assemblages were analysed as well as hydrological and sedimentological parameters (such as salinity, pH, grain-size, and organic matter). Living faunas are characterized by very low densities and largely dominated by Ammonia species. Dead assemblages are more diverse and dominated by Ammonia aomoriensis, Haynesina germanica, and Cribroelphidium selseyense. Salinity and grain-size seem to be the major factors influencing foraminiferal distributions in the transitional area. Under the ongoing climate changes, future strategies will be taken to the application of benthic foraminifera as biomonitoring tool in the Elbe Estuary, via this baseline investigation.

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

4.6
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