Page tree
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata
Assessment page for species/group

MEASO Biota Assessment pages should be titled: MEASO Biota: Species name/group

The purpose of these assessment pages is to summarise basic information for a species or taxonomic group and how the status and ecology of the group may be changing over time (link here to the framework for assessing biota within the MEASO framework):

  • General Description
  • Autecology (species' ecology: life history, phenology, food, energetics, movement, rate processes)
  • Habitat (physical environment, biological dependencies,Relationships, thresholds and limits )
  • Population (distribution, status and trends in abundance)
  • Synecology (species interactions: food webs, competitors)
  • Assessments of status (critical state of population e.g. IUCN Red List)
  • Contributing authors and experts
  • References

Authors are encouraged to use the spatial partitioning of the marine ecosystem assessment (sectors etc - link here), as well as circumpolar information where available. Assessments of change can include, where possible, historical change, current trends and prognoses for future change. Generalities should be avoided and, instead, replaced with specific quantities of change and parameters, including error/uncertainty.  Qualitative statements are acceptable provided the reasons for the qualitative conclusions are given, along with the scope for the application of the statements, and the uncertainty surrounding them. 

In the case of Parameter Tables, authors are asked to include estimates of parameters and their error, wherever possible. Delete parameters that are not relevant.  Add parameters that are relevant but not included in the tables.  The reference/s estimating the parameters should be cited, along with any statements as to the maturity of the estimates if known (e.g. under development, personal communications, future work is examining.....).  For some species, life history information and parameters are co-opted from areas outside of the subject area, e.g. from outside the Southern Ocean.  This proxy information is reasonable to include.  Please include also the rationale for co-opting these data, and citations.

Biota pages need to be written concisely, well-referenced, and using the uncertainty language of the IPCC. In the first instance, references can be from peer-reviewed literature, reports that are publicly available or references in the grey literature that could be obtained from repositories. If the information is known but the references cannot be sourced in the first instance that put a placeholder for filling in the citation.  This is useful for translating common ideas into this assessment without worrying about the pedigree of the idea in the first instance.

Under each heading is a list of information (in red italics) that is desirable for that section. Please do not change these main headings. If needed, a section can be further subdivided. Please delete the red italics and the instructions window from the page when it is completed (when the page is in edit mode you can select it for deletion).

On photographs, figures and tables:

If these are taken from publications or libraries that require recognition of copyright then we need to secure the necessary permissions to include them on these pages.  Put a placeholder with a reference to the material and then seek permission for use.  Or contact us and we will undertake this process.

All materials taken from libraries or references need to be cited appropriately, including photographs and text from web sites.  See citation instructions (link here)

Other finalised MEASO Biota pages provide good examples of how to populate these assessments.

MEASO Assessment pages should be titled: MEASO Biota: Species name/group

The purpose of these assessment pages is to summarise basic information for a species or taxonomic group and how the status and ecology of the group may be changing over time (link here to the framework for assessing biota within the MEASO framework). Authors are encouraged to use the partitioning of the marine ecosystem assessment (sectors etc - link here) as well as circumpolar information. Assessments of change can include historical change, current trends and/or prognoses for future change. Ideally, assessments will be quantitative but can include qualitative statements as well. Estimates of error and points of critical uncertainty need to be identified where possible.

Final assessments need to be written concisely, well-referenced, and using the uncertainty language of the IPCC. In the first instance, references can be from peer-reviewed literature, reports that are publicly available or references in the grey literature that could be obtained from repositories.

Under each heading is a list of information (in red italics) that is desirable for that section. Please do not change these main headings. If needed, a section can be further subdivided. Please delete the red italics and this window from the page when you have completed it (when the page is in edit mode you can select it for deletion).

Other finalised MEASO Biota pages provide good examples of how to populate these assessments.


IN REVIEW

Description

The Antarctic benthos represents one of the largest habitats and diverse communities within the Southern Ocean. These species and habitats are of interest to policy makers because of their vulnerability to demersal fishing methods and are globally important in terms of ocean carbon storage and climate regulation (Barnes and Sands 2017).  By studying the evolution (e.g. using genetic analysis) of benthic species provides sight into previous and current levels of species connectivity within the Southern Ocean and species migration into or out of Antarctic waters (Thatje et al. 2005, Strugnell et al. 2008, Allcock et al. 2012, Riesgo et al. 2015). With changing ice conditions benthic habitats on the continental shelf around Antarctica may be exposed for the first time in millions of years or subject to increased disturbance by ice scouring (Barnes and Souster, 2011, Gutt et al. 2013). 

TaxaSize*Description/Summary of role in ecosystem**Key groups/speciesExample photograph Example References 

Porifera

(sponges)

macro/megaHighly diverse and often a dominant group by biomass with eurybathic distributions. Sponges are sessile, reef building species providing structural heterogeneity for colonizing epiboints. Significant nutrient source to predators. 

Hexactinellidae 

Demospongiae

(Image Australian Antarctic Division) 

McClintock et al. 2005

Ascidians

(sea squirts)

macro/mega~250 species recorded between the below the sub-tropical front from the intertidal zone to abyssal depths. Sessile species often dominate numbers and biomass within benthic communities. Important role in structuring suspension-feeding communities. Molgula pedunculata (Herdman, 1881)(image Martin Rauschert, 1981) 

Molgula pedunculata

Primo and Vasquez, 2009; 2014
Bryozoamacro/megaAlmost exclusively colonial and generally sessile animal, can be encrusting (on rocks, algae or other animals) or form their own structures. Often resemble (and mistaken for) other taxa such as algae, corals and hydroids. The cheilostome order may be one of the most successful taxa on the Antarctic continental shelf often showing eurybathic distributions. Important carbon regulators. 

Cheilostomes 

Cyclostomes 

(Images Top =  bryozoan assemblage at 450 m Ross Sea shelf, NIWA. Bottom = Antarctic cyclostome bryozoa Fasciculipora ramosa, Blanca Figuerola)


Parker and Bowden, 2010 (and refs there in), Barnes and Downey, 2014, Barnes, 2015, Figuerola et al. 2012,
Nematodesmeio~524 valid species within Antarctic sediments the most abundant metazoan organism in marine sediments. Important role in decomposition processes and nutrient cycling. Desmodora campbelli (Allgén, 1932)(image F. Hauquier) 

Ingels et al. 2006, 2010, 2014, 
Polychaetes
(bristle worms) 
macro/megaHighly diverse both taxonomically and functionally from mobile predators, symbionts or sessile tube dwelling filter feeders. Can represent 70% of the macrofauna, ~403 valid species within Antarctic sediments but recent analysis has uncovered high levels of cryptic diversity. 

Laetmonice producta Grube, 1877

Polynoidae

Spionidae e.g. 

Laonice weddellia Hartman, 1978 (image, WoRMs). 

Schuller and Ebbe, 2014, Brasier et al. 2016. 
Foraminiferameio and megaHeterotrophic protists, includes calcareous (meio), aggluntinated and organic-walled species (mega). Found at all depths, originally thought to contain many cosmopolitan species but genetic analysis suggests higher levels of endemism. Septuma ocotillo Tendal & Hessler, 1977 (Image Andrew Gooday)

Image result for septuma ocotillo

Pawlowski et al. 2002, Gooday et al. 2014. 

Hydrozoa

Including: Hydroids and Stylasteridae (hydrocorals)

mega

Hydroids: Highly diverse but most diverse is concentrated within a few genera. Sessile filter feeders, highly edemic (90% of species) within Antarctic and sub-Antarctic waters. Eurybathic distributions. 

Stylasteridae: Calcified, colourful, colonial hydroids. 33 species recorded south of the polar front. Eurybathic within Antarctica and structure forming species.  

Hydroids: Staurotheca

Stylasteridae: Errina spp. 

(Image coral field of Errina (orange coral) > 450 m Durmont d'Urville Sea, Australian Antarctic Division) 

Parker et al. 2009, Parker and Bowden, 2010 (and refs there in), Cantero 2004, Bax and Cairns, 2014, Cantero et al. 2014 

Hexacorals

Including: Scleractina (stony corals), Antipatharia (black corals), Zoantharia (zoanthids), Actiniaria (aneomones) 


mega

Scleractina: Solitary cups, not reef forming but may form matrices. Uncommon at depths greater than 1000 m. Most species grow on other biogenic structures, often small (<10 cm), slow growing (0.5-2 cm year-1) and long lived (over 200 years). 

Antipatharia: Large (can be over 3 m) can be fan or whip shaped, eurybathic from shallow water to ~5000 m. Can be very long lived (1000s years) in the deep sea. 

Zoantharia: Erect "coral like" colonies, may reach 3m in hieght generally found at 400-600m. Often grow on or colonise other corals. 

Actiniaria: Sessile filter feeders important in suspension feeding communities. High levels of endemism, some species circumpolar others show differentiation between east and west Antarctica. Eurybathic from littoral to 5000 m. 

Scleractina: Caryophyllia antarctica Marenzeller, 1904, Gardineria antarctica Gardiner, 1929, Flabellum inpensum? 

Antipatharia: Bathypathes

Zoantharia: Gerardia

Actiniaria: Stomphia selaginella (Stephenson, 1918), Capnea georgiana (Carlgren, 1927), Hormathia lacunifera (Stephenson, 1918) an image by Julian Gutt. 

Parker et al. 2009, Parker and Bowden, 2010 (and refs there in), Rodriguez and Fautin, 2014. 

Octocorals

Including: Alcyonacea (soft corals), Gorgonacea (sea whips), Pennatulacea (sea pens) 

mega

Alcyonacea: soft corals, abundant on the shelf and slope, less abundant in deep water. Can form dense aggregations of encrusting corals. 

Gorgonacea: Structure forming coral with diverse morphology. Can be 3 m tall with complex branching morphology. Depth range from very shallow to over 3500 m. 

Pennatulacea: Live in softer sediments from littoral to abyssal depths and may be more vulnerable to fishing activities. Generally tall with a thin stalk and branched polyps or a head of polyps. 

Alcyonacea: Anthomastus 

Gorgonacea: Thourella spp. 

Pennatulacea: Umbellula spp. 

(Image assemblage dominated by Thourella spp. and soft corals at 550 m Ross Sea, NIWA)

Parker et al. 2009, Parker and Bowden, 2010 (and refs there in),

Asteroidea

(sea stars) 

megaSuccessful benthic species in the Antarctic containing about 235 species. Abundant, widely distributed and eurybathic. Diverse feeding strategies including omnivorous, deposit-feeding, suspension-feeding, and often top predators. Odontaster validus Koehler, 1906 (image, Stefano Schiaparelli)

Danis et al. 2014. 

Crinoidea

(sea lillies and feather stars)

megaContains mobile unstalked forms and sessile stalked forms. 43 recognised species, 31 endemic to the Southern Ocean found on the shelf and to > 2000 m. Suspension feeders. Promachocrinus kerguelensis Carpenter, 1879 (image Martin Rauschert, 1986) 

Promachocrinus kerguelensis

Hemery et al. 2012, Eleaume et al. 2014. 

Echinoidea 

(Urchins) 

mega82 species south of the polar front, widely distributed from shelf to abyssal depths but most abundant at shallower depths. Include epifaunal and endofaunal species with a variety of feeding strategies. Cidariod species (pencil urhcins) provide microhabitats for other species including bivavles 

Ctenocidaris spp. 

Abatus spp. 

Sterechinus neumayeri (Meissner, 1900)(image Stefano Schiaparelli)

Sterechinus neumayeri 1

Linse et al. 2008, Saucede et al. 2014. 

Ophuroidea 

(brittle stars) 

megaVery common throughout the Southern Ocean, 219 recognised species, 126 are endemic to the Southern Ocean.  Omnivore/scavengers within the Antarctic benthos. Ophionotus victoriae Bell, 1902 (image WoRMs) 

Martin-Ledo and Lopez-Gonzalez, 2014, Galaska et al. 2016. 
Amphipodamacro/mega801 benthic or bentho-pelagic species south of the sub-tropical polar front. Highly diverse functional traits across habitats, feeding strategies and size. Important food source for other invertebrates, fish, seabirds and marine mammals.

Epimeria (Hoplepimeria) rubrieques (De Broyer & Klages, 1991) on the bryozoan Reteporella sp.

(image, naturalsciences.be)

De Broyer and Jazdzewska, 2014. 

Decapoda: Crabs and lobsters 

mega22 species recorded from the from the Southern Ocean, 12 of which can be found south of 60o. restricted to areas above 0-0.5oC. Most abundant species are Lithodidae (king crabs) which are predatory. 

Lithodidae (king crabs)

Paralomis stevensi Ahyong & Dawson, 2006 (image Ahyong and Dawson, 2006). 

Hall and Thatje, 2011, Griffiths et al. 2013, Griffiths et al. 2014, 
Isopodamacro/mega

Isopod can be a major component of the Antarctic benthos particularly in the deep sea with over 700 species. Diverse functional traits especially in feeding strategies from detritus and filter feeding to ecto-parasites and active predators. 

Glyptonotus antarcticus Eights, 1852 (image Martin Rauschert, 1981). 

Ceratoserolis trilobitoides (Eights, 1833)

Glyptonotus antarcticus

Brandt, 1992, Kaiser et al. 2009, Kaiser, 2014. 

Shrimp

(Decapoda and Mysida)

megaPlay a significant role in the food web as prey and in the recycling of organic material at the sea floor. Variable trophic traits from deposit feeding to carnivory. 

Nematocarcinus lanceopes Spence Bate, 1888

Chorismus antarcticus (Pfeffer, 1887)(image Dianne Pitassy) 

Basher and Costello, 2014. 

Pycnogonida

(sea spiders)

mega264 species recorded in Munilla and Membrives (2009) from Antarctic and sub-Antarctic waters. 108 species are endemic to Antarctica waters and 55 are circumpolar including Nymphon australe, the most abundant species. Mostly carnivorous feeding on other invertebrates. 

Nymphon australe Hodgson, 1902 (image Adrian James Testa) 

Gusso and Gravina, 2001, Munilla and Membrives 2009, Arrango et al. 2011. 

Gastropoda

(Snails) 

macro/mega~600 species known within the Southern Ocean at the time of the Biogeographic Atlas accounting for <1% of the global specie of gastropods. Highest abundance and diversity on the shelf, diverse feeding behaviours from grazers to scavenger/predators found in deep-water locations. Nacella concinna (Strebel, 1908)(image Matrin Rauschert, 1986) 

Nacella concinna

Linse et al. 2006, Schiaparelli and Linse, 2014 

Bivalvia

(Clams, mussels, scallops etc.)

macro/megaFunctionally diverse within the Antarctica, over 50% of species are <10 mm in size with 90% have a very thin shell. Most are infaunal or epifaunal species either desposit or suspension feeders. The exception is Adamussium colbecki the Antarctic scallop that can swim and attach to substrate using byssus. 

Aequiyoldia eightsii (Jay, 1839)

Adamussium colbecki (E. A. Smith, 1902)(image Stefano Schiaparelli) 

Adamussium colbecki 1

Bailey et al. 2005, Linse, 2014. 
OctopodamegaMost southern ocean octopus are found within the orders Cirrata (finned) or Incirrata. The number of species is not known. Some species have limited depth ranges which may reflect their reproductive mode. Prey on benthic invertebrates, some species selective feeders. Pareledone spp. (images Mike Vecchione, Uwe Piatowski and Lousie Allcock). 

Antarctic octopuses

Daly, 1996, Allcock, 2014. 
Macroalgaemega~120 recognised species in Antarctica, this is a lower species richness than temperate and tropical waters. The highest biomass and diversity of macroalgae in Antarctica is found in the shallow sub-tidal zone. Important for carbon drawn down and grazers. 

Desmarestia antarctica R.L.Moe & P.C.Silva, 1989, Himantothallus grandifolius (A.Gepp & E.S.Gepp) Zinova, 1959 (Image Martin Rauschert, 1986). 


Wiencke and Clayton, 2002, Wiencke et al. 2014. 

* Fauna size: mega, macro (>1mm), meio (63 μm - 1mm), micro (< 50 μm)

** the number of species estimates from the time of the Biogeographic Atlas of the Southern Ocean. This is likely to now be an underestimate for most groups with new species are still being discovered within the Antarctic benthos especially in the deep-sea and with the use of genetics to uncover previously overlooked cryptic species.


State of knowledge 

Please note that the ecological and physiological data available for each taxa is limited and often specific specific. In Brasier et al. (2019) the number of status assessments (measures of species/group abundance/desnity) of benthic fauna in the Southern Ocean is documented in the table below, highlighting the varying degree of information available for each taxa. Our understanding of the ecology and physiology of benthic taxa is just as variable, thus on this page values presented are species specific and may not be common across all species within their higher classification and definitely not all benthic species.  

Taxonomic and distributional data available for many species at: 

http://www.marinespecies.org/index.php

https://obis.org/

Autecology


Many (but not all) Antarctic benthic species have characteristics of k-strategists i.e. slow growth, long maturation, long life expectancy, large body size, larger eggs, brooding etc. in comparison to similar temperate or tropical species. These characteristics may be an adaption to living in cold or under a highly seasonal food supply (Clarke, 1979). 

A high proportion of brooding species has been repeatedly recorded within the Antarctic benthos, 50-70% depending on phyla (Perl and Poulin 2010). This trait is particularly dominant in echinoids (Poulin and Feral 1996, Poulin et al. 2002) see Box 1 from Poulin et al. 2002 and crustaceans (Brandt, 2000; Brandt et al. 2007a, 2007b). A review of the evolutionary and environmental factors that may have resulted in different reproductive traits within Antarctic benthic invertebrates are discussed in Pearse et al. (2008). In contrast some of the most successful shallow water species with planktotrophic species includes the sea urchin Sterechinus neumayeri (Bosch et al. 1987, Brey and Gutt 1991), the seastars Odontaster validus, O. meridionalis and Porania antarctica (Pearse, 1994), the ophiuroid Ophionotus victoriae (Pearse, 1994), the Antarctic scallop Adamussium colbecki (Chiantore et al. 2001), and the clam Laternula elliptica (Bosch and Pearse 1988).

 


The reproduction of shallow water benthic invertebrates has been studied for a select number of species, these are generally collected within the vicinity of research stations. These species include: the brachiopod Liothyrella uva (Meidlinger et al. 1998), the scallop Adamussium colbecki (Chiantore et al. 2002, Tyler et al. 2003), the bivalves Adacnarca nitens (Higgs et al. 2009) and Aequiyoldia eightsiith (Lau et al. 2018), the crabs Lithodes santolla and Paralomis granulosa (Calcagno et al. 2004), the tunicate Cnemidocarpa verrucosa (Sahade et al. 2004, Strathmann et al. 2006), the sea urchin Sterechinus neumayeri (Brockington et al. 2006, Bosch et al. 1987), the crinoid Promachorcinus kerguelensis (McClintock and Pearse, 1987), the seastars Odontaster validus (Grange et al. 2007, Pearse 1965, Stanwell-Smith and Clarke 1998, Pearse and Bosch, 1986), Lophaster gaini, Psilaster charcoti (McClintock, 1989), Porania antarctica, Diplasterias brucei, and Acodontaster conspicuus (Bosch and Pearse, 1990), and the brittle star Ophionotus victoriae (Grange et al. 2004).  Deep sea species studied include the 3 Yoldiella species (Reed et al. 2014).

There is evidence for interannual variation in the reproductive output of benthic species that reflects interannual changes in primary production, this is evident in species whose have seasonal spawning events and such as Odontaster validus and Ophionotus victoriae (Grange et al. 2011, Brasier unpublished data). 

Life history

Parameters

Modes and examples 

Maximum age

Variable between taxa/species. 

Mostly unknown, suggested that some Echinodermata could live for up to 100 years with low predation pressure or interspecific competition (Pearse, 1969). 

Corals may live over 1000 years - see descriptions table. 

Age at maturity

Variable between taxa/species. 

Spawning/breeding season

Seasonal spawning can occur in late summer when the increased food supply initiates the onset of vitellogenesis. This occurs in the ophiuroid Ophionotus victoriae (Grange et al. 2004), the seastar Odontaster validus (Grange et al. 2007) and the holothurian Peniagone vignoni (Galley et al. 2008).

Spawning in winter has also been recorded with peak spawning recorded between September to November in the echinoid Sterechinus neumayeri (Brockington et al. 2001), the scallop Adamussium colbecki (Tyler et al. 2003) and the tunicate Cnemidocarpa verrucosa (Sahade et al. 2004).

Other species may continuously spawn year round and/or opportunistically spawn when increased food availability (Galley et al. 2008). 

Insight from larval studies... Near Rothera "Larvae were present in all months of the year and although planktotrophic larvae were more abundant in summer, both feeding and non-feeding types were present in all months."  Bowden et al. 2009 and near at Signy Island ""Summer, late summer and winter spawning strategies were discernable, and in some groups larvae occurred throughout the year." Stanwell-Smith et al. 1999. Pearse et al. 1991 provide a review of spawning times for McMurdo Sound fauna.

Duration of gametogenesis 

Generally "prolonged". 

"The accepted paradigm for reproduction in Antarctic marine species is one where oogenesis takes 18 months to 2 years, and a bimodal egg-size distribution where two cohorts of eggs are present in female gonads throughout the year." Lau et al. 2018. 

Examples: 

Sterechinus neumayeri 18 to 24 month vitellogenic cycle, 12 month spermatogenesis (Brockington et al. 2001). 

Adamussium colbecki 12 month gametogenesis (Tyler et al. 2003).

Odontaster validus 18 to 24 month gametogenesis with bi- and trimodal oocyte cycles (Pearse, 1965).

Kidderia subquadratum 15 to 19 month oocyte development, Bovallia gigantia >12 month oocyte development, Serolis polita 24 month oocyte development (Meidlinger et al. 1998)

Paralomis granulosa 18-22 month gametogenesis and Lithodes santolla 9-10 months (Thatje et al. 2003 and refs therein) 

Dominant reproductive strategy 

Brooders, often associated with larger oocyte size and lower fecundity. Considered to be a prevalent reproductive trait in polar invertebrates especially bivalves and echinoderms (Higgs et al. 2009). 

e.g. Holothurian Psolus dubiosus (Gutt et al. 1992), Adacnarca nitens (Higgs et al. 2009), Liothyrella uva (Peck and Robinson, 1994), Diplasterias brucei and Notasterias armata (Pearse et al. 1991).

Broadcast spawners, often associated with smaller oocyte size and higher fecundity. 

e.g. Odontaster validus, Odontaster meridionalis, Porania antarctica, Psilaster charcoti and others reviewed in Pearse et al. 1991

Larval types

Often determined from the size of oocytes. 

Lechitrophic e.g. Yoldiella spp. (Reed et al. 2014). 

Planktotrophic e.g. Odontaster validus (Pearse, 1965) 

Also variation in larval behaviour from demersal to planktonic. Larval types for Antarctic taxa are reviewed in Pearse et al. 1991.

Larval duration Potentially universal that Antarctic invertebrates undergo slower embryonic and larval development than similar species in temperate and tropical regions. This is based on studies of brachiopods, echinoderms and nemerteans (Peck and Robinson, 1994), also see Pearse et al. (1991) for review. 
Time of recruitment 

Seasonal recruitment has been recorded in the shallow water benthos form settlement plate experiments where: 

At Signy Island (5-25 m) settlement by dominant species (bryozoa and spirobid polychaetes) was continuously low throughout the year (Stanwell-Smith and Barnes 1997). 

Within the Antarctic circle out of 39 settling species most recruited through-out the year but with a clear seasonal signal, with peak recruitment in late winter (Bowden 2005). 

Mobile species such as Odontaster validus (Asteroidea) may recruit all year round (McClintock et al. 1988) despite seasonal spawning cycles (Grange et al. 2007). 

Insight from larval studies... "Comparisons of seasonal larval abundances with data from a settlement study at the same sites and from the literature show that larvae of mobile adults settle in summer regardless of developmental type, whereas sessile taxa settle in all seasons." Bowden et al. (2009), near Rothera, West Antarctic Peninsula. 

Location of recruits

Brooders have limited dispersal and recruits are close to parent site e.g. octopus 

Dispersal mechanisms e.g. ACC and counter current, genetic evidence of connected populations... papers cited in Brasier et al. 2017. 

Size of recruits

Variable between taxa/species. 

Overall natural mortality rate

Non assessed/unknown? (unless lab studies?) 

Non-predation natural mortality rates

Non assessed/unknown? (unless lab studies?) 

Natural larval mortality has not been extensively studied in the Antarctic though few laboratory studies exist.

e.g. McClintock and Baker (1997) found low larval mortality (9 to 25%) of the seastars Perknaster fuscus and Psilaster charcoti was found for lecithotrophic larvae after contacting sea anemone (Isotealia antarctica) tentacles possibly from damage by neumatocysts.

Mobility

Within the antarctic benthos most species are either sessile or slow moving however some species are motile. The degree of mobility is important for connectivity between populations across local, regional and ocean scales but also for the exposure or avoidance of physical disturbance e.g. ice-seabed interactions and predator avoidance.

The classification of mobility can vary across studies but is important for trait based analysis and assessing the effect of some impact drivers. In Smale (2008a) Low mobility = Taxa are completely or largely immobile. Includes sedentary worms, some bivalves and all sessile taxa and high mobility = Includes mobile worms, all crustaceans, gastropod and some bivalve molluscs. As suggested in Smale (2008a), mobility traits may correlate with disturbance "at one site, the relative abundance of the low mobility group was significantly greater at low disturbance levels, whilst the relative abundance of the high dispersal group (taxa with pelagic larvae) was elevated at high disturbance levels. At the other site, the relative abundance of secondary consumers was greater at high disturbance levels." 

Connectivity between sites and regions may be maintained by larval transport, especially if larvae are pelagic over a long duration (Brasier et al. 2017). However, in highly retentive coastal regions (e.g. fjords) connectivity can still be limited over small spatial scales (100 km) even for larvae with  a long pelagic phase. In these regions, self-recruitment is important for maintaining local populations especially for low dispersal potential organisms with short pelagic phases (e.g. tunicates) and these populations could be more sensitive to future stochastic events (Ziegler et al. in prep).

Diet (foraging and consumption)

Various feeding strategies are used by benthic species here are the main types: 

Filter feeders and Suspension feeders

Many Antarctic benthic communities are dominated by filter and suspension feeders especially in coastal and shelf locations these include sessile sponges, tunicates, cnidarians, bryozoans and some echinoderms (Dayton et al. 1986). A key difference between filter and suspension feeders is their selective abilities. Filter feeders such as sponges filter seawater to obtain particles whereas suspension feeders feed by extending specialised feeding structures into bottom currents to collect organic particles (including detrital material, living plankton, larvae and eggs) from the surrounding water. Therefore, suspension feeders are more susceptible to changes in turbidity, for example, from glacial runoff. Given the seasonal supply of food seasonal variation in suspension feeding activity has been observed, animals can cease feeding for a short period during winter (Barnes and Clarke, 1995, Gili et al. 2001). 

Deposit feeders 

Deposit feeders consume material from the surface or subsurface of the seafloor. Many deposit feeders are motile using specialised body parts, e.g. palps or tentacles, to collect and ingest organic material. Detritus from the summer phytoplankton blooms is the primary source of organic material for most of the Antarctic detritivorous benthos however, biochemical analysis found little evidence of seasonal signals within benthic species suggesting that long-term variability in production processes in the water column are integrated in benthic habitats (Mincks et al. 2008). Nonetheless, during periods of high phytodetrital accumulation at the seafloor, deposit feeders can consume organic matter at rates comparable to shallow, warmer water deposit feeders and affect rates of organic carbon burial and cycling (Ziegler et al. in prep). In this way, pelagic-benthic coupling is seasonally decoupled in some regions such as the WAP. 

Deposit feeding species including many holothurians species, including the surface deposit feeders Peniagone vignoni, Protelpidia murrayi and Pseudostichopus mollis and subsurface deposit feeders Molpadia musculus and Ypsilocucumis turricata, as well as polychaetes, including many surface feeding spinoidae and subsurface feeding scalibregmatidae (Mincks et al. 2008, Brasier et al. in prep).  In coastal fjords (e.g. Andvord Bay), the deposit-feeding community can be dominated by smaller deposit feeders such as Amythas membranifera, an ampharetid polychaete (Grange and Smith, 2013).

Omnivores

Omnivores have a broad diet and can switch between feeding on organic material derived from primary producers to scavenging on other animals. Omnivory can be opportunistic or temporal omnivores depending on conditions and may be more common in food limited environments such as the deep-sea. Omnivorous species include some of the most abundant echinoderms including the brittle star Ophionotus victoriae, the echinoid Sterechinus neumayeri, the seastar Odontaster validus (McClintock, 1994 and references there in) as well as many polychaetes and crustaceans. 

Predators

Predators prey on other animals by active hunting or luring individuals, they often have specialised sensory organs or jaws. Predators can have a signficant structuring role in marine communities, in the Antarctic "modern" predators such as fast moving, skeleton-crushing (durophagos) fish, sharks and crabs are rare or absent and asteroids and nemerteans are generally the top predators (Aronson et al. 2007 and references there in). 

Scavenger

Scavengers feed on carrion or dead material that they do not kill themselves thus scavengers are sometimes referred to as necrophages. Necorphages are opportunistic feeders exploiting energy rich food falls (e.g. marine mammals) from surface waters or dead benthic animals. This trait may be widespread in the Antarctic benthos among amphipods, gastropods, ophiuroids, echinoids and nemerteans (Presler, 1986). Baited experiments have shown variation in levels of necrophagy between Antarctic sites and within species across seasons (Smale et al. 2007a). 

A note on benthic dietary analyses

Historically the trophic traits and dietary information of benthic marine species has been assigned based on morphological traits i.e. if the species has large jaws it is likely to be a predator/scavenger, or where possible gut content analysis and observations. More recently there has been an increase in the number of species level investigations using biochemical methods such as fatty acid biomarkers and stable isotopes to determine the trophic level and trophic traits of different species. 

For example Würzberg et al. (2011a-c) has used fatty acid biomarkers to examine the dietery components of polychaetes, demersal fish and peracarid crustaceans in the deep-sea and Antarctic shelf. These studies highlight selective feeding between higher taxonomic classifications and within the same family at different depths for polychaetes and ontogenetic changes in demersal fish.  

Stable isotope analysis has also been used to estimate trophic position of Antarctic benthic species e.g. Nyssen et al. (2005) and Norkko et al. (2007). A limitation of many stable isotope studies or the use of collection material for analysis is obtaining a signature or value for the "source" material such as filtered seawater or phytodetrius. A way of overcoming this problem is using methods like compound specific stable isotope analysis where a source signature is contained within each individual. This method has been trialed in preserved polychaetes from the West Antarctic Peninsula (Brasier et al. in prep) and has the potential to obtain information about the trophic level of collection material. 

At present the SO-Diet database can not filter for benthic species. 

Energetics

Parameters


Ingestion rate

0.57 cm3 ind-1 d-1 average Amythas membranifera (deposit-feeding polychaete) feeding rate based on fecal cast production rate and a maximum of 11.49 cm3 ind-1 d-1 (Ziegler et al. in prep)

9 - 19 cm3 ind-1 d-1  Protelpidia murrayi (holothurian) feeding rate based on volumetric fecal cast production (Sumida et al. 2014)

Metabolism
Fecundity

Varies between brooders and broadcast spawners, brooders generally have a lower fecundity. 

Brooders:

Diplasterias brucei produced < 300 embryos (Bosch and Pearse, 1990)

Notasterias armata approximately 50 eggs (Bosch and Pearse, 1990)

Amphipneustes lorioli 81 to 372 oocytes per female (mean 215) (Galley et al. 2005)


Broadcast spawners:

Peniagone vignoni produced 1498 to 9986 oocytes per female, mean of approximately 5000 (Galley et al. 2008)

Acodontaster conspicuus, A. elogonatus, Lophaster gaini release 3000 to 5000 eggs per female (Bosch and Pearse, 1990)

Porania antarcticus produces approximately 35,000 eggs while other Porania sp. produced far fewer ~ 100 to 310 eggs (Bosch, 1989)

Sterechinus neumayeri 12,700 eggs per female (Galley, 2004 - thesis)

Ophionotus victoriae 140,000 eggs per female (Grange, 2005 - thesis)

*See Grange 2005 (thesis) for more examples

Growth rate

Larval growth may be much slower than temperate regions... "Embryos of the large infaunal clam Laternula elliptica and the scallop Adamussium colbecki, from Antarctica, were cultured over an 18-month period. Their development rates were extremely slow, taking 240 and 177 h, respectively, to reach the trochophore stage. This is ×4 to ×18 slower than related clams and scallops from temperate latitudes."... Peck et al. (2001)

Growth rates may vary with depth and season that can influence the amount of food available. However some benthic habitats may have "food bank" of detrial material that persists in the benthos for which species may feed on during periods of lower production (Smith et al. 2006). 

Size at age


Population Productivity (average life time)


Habitat


Benthic habitats can vary in many ways and can be "classified" by geomorphic features that can relate to topographic, sedimentary and oceanographic conditions such as substrate, elevation and current regime (e.g. in Post et al. 2014). The table below shows how depth and sediment can be used to describe benthic habitats and influence the faunal communities found there. 

Benthic zoneDescription
Intertidal The shallowest habitat is the intertidal zone at the very edge of the continent or sub-Antarctic islands. A low water these habitats are exposed but submerged at high water. An area of high disturbance. 
Shelf The benthos covering the continental shelf which in Antarctica is unusually deep, averaging 450 m but exceeding 1000 m in places. Can be covered by ice sheets or sea ice, exposed to iceberg scour. 
SlopeThe continental shelf joins the continental slope at the shelf break which usually occurs between 200 – 1000 m depth. The slope is very steep and overlain with circumpolar deep water (2-2.5 oC). 
Abyssal PlainAt the bottom of the continental slope, a generally flat area at a minimum depth of 3000 m. Often food limited as rely on falling organic matter. 
TroughA steep-sloping depression in the seafloor can be very deep (>7000 m), specialist deep-sea fauna. 
SeamountAn elevation in the sea floor, often referred to as underwater mountains. Often productive regions as the associated with currents, the associated mixing of nutrients promotes primary production. 

Benthic habitats can also vary by the sediment type, this can impact the fauna that inhabits them. Benthic habitats are "patchy" in that a flat sandy area may have infrequent drop stones or rocks that give rise to different fauna, a few examples are shown in the table below from Brasier et al. (2018): 

Sediment typeImage
Sand/silt

Gravel/rocks

Boulders/drop stones

For some regions of the continental shelf, geomorphic features can be used to map the distribution benthic biota and communities e.g. Barry et al. 2003, Beaman and Harris 2005, Thrush et al. 2006, Gutt 2007, Post et al. 2011. However, benthic environments are patchy at all scales measured to date and fine scale variation can override any larger scale geomorphic community patterns, for example, the presence of soft or hard substrate across different geomorphological areas (Post et al. 2010, Brasier et al. 2018).

Relationships, thresholds and limits

Species within the Antarctic benthos are generally considered to be stenothermal having evolved in a relatively stable cold environment (Peck et al. 2004) this may make then vulnerable to increasing temperatures and ocean acidificiation especially the developmental stage of calcifying organisms. Juveniles are also considered to be vulnerable however when warmed at 1°C 3 days−1, adults of Laternula ellipticaCucumaria georgiana, Sterechinus neumayeri, and Odontaster validus juveniles survived to higher temperatures than adults in all species studied (Peck et al. 2013). 

Functional responses of taxon (y-axis) to habitat variables (x-axis) are described here (with citations to the evidence). Parameters for a response type are to be given with their attendant uncertainties/errors/range, with references.

Variable

Taxon size/stage impacted

Functional response (icon)

Parameters and uncertainties

Risk areas/regions impacted

Notes

ProductivityReproductive output of benthic invertebrates with seasonal reproductive cycles e.g. O. validus and O. victoriae

Non linear.png

Some responses may be lagged. Potential "foodbanc" resources. West Antarctic Peninsula 

Grange et al. 2004. 

Brasier unpublished data. 

Ocean acidification

Larval stage of calcifying organisms

Species with high-Mg calcite skeletons (eg. the bryozoan Beania erecta and some spirorbid polychaetes) could be particularly sensitive to multiple stressors under predictions for near-future global ocean chemistry changes (e.g. ocean acidification).

 or 



E.g.

Andersson et al. 2008

Figuerola et al. 2019

Temperature

Bivalves Laternula ellipticaand Adamussium colbeckii shut down at temperatures 2–3°C above ambient

Ophionotus victoriae were unable to acclimate to temperature increase of 2–3°C above ambient, with failure occurring from day 19 at +3°C and day 24 at +2°C

Tipping point decrease.png

Rate of acclimation in laboratory vs in situ. 

West Antarctic Peninsula Peck et al. 2005, 2009. 
Increasing temperature and acidity10–11% decrease in normal development of blastulae of Sterechinus neumayeri occurred at +3° across all pH levels (decreased pH (−0.3 and −0.5 pH units)) 

Deleterious interactive effects were evident at projected conditions for 2100 and beyond. West Antarctic Peninsula 

Ericson et al. 2012

Increased sediment run-offFilter feeders

lack of baseline surveysShallow coastal areas in the vicinity of retreating glaciers e.g. WAPSee Sahade et al. 2015 for benthic community change at King George Island
Changing phyoplankton dynamics

Increasing number of smaller phyotplankon such as ciliates and flagellates which are important for suspension-feeding benthos. 



Increase in pelagic production following ice shelf disintigration

Increase 2.jpg




limited baseline studies and initial response ("time zero")




McMurdo Sound, Larsen A ice shelf

Barnes et al. 2017, Dayton et al. 2019 (McMurdo Sound)

Fillinger et al. 2013 (Larsen A), Gutt et al. 2013 (Larsen B)

Temperature

Macroalgae

Most Antarctic endemics have a growth range <10 oC and a upper temperature limit of 11-15oc. 

Change in distribution 

Changes to predation rates that may be influenced by biochemical changes in macroalgae. 

West Antarctic Peninsual, Scotia Arc islandsWienke et al. 2014 and references there in. 


As temperature changes on the Antarctic shelf species may "lose" or "gain" in potential available habitat (area within their temperature tolerance). This has been investigated using occurrence records and projected climate models (RCP8.5) in Griffiths et al.(2017). Figure shows the percentage of 963 shelf-dwelling species that are expected to experience a change in suitable available habitat. 

Population


Measuring the abundance or density of benthic fauna is incredibly difficult especially over large spatial scales. Most sampling methods are qualitative or quantitative and the patchiness of benthic environments can lead to high uncertainty when up-scaling. In general species abundance is similar to that of temperate and tropical regions and diversity is generally high (Clarke, 1996). 

Range and Structure

The Antarctic benthos is a complex ecosystem and the benthic communities exhibit high patchiness at all spatial scales. This patchiness is a result of interacting biological and physical factors including ice scour, species-specific habitat requirements (e.g. attachment for sessile species) and other biological characteristics of single species such as predominance of vegetative reproduction (e.g. sponges and soft corals), slow dispersion and slow growth (Barnes et al. 2007 and refs there in). Fine scale patchiness can prevent the detection of large scale ecological patterns within the benthos (e.g. Brasier et al. 2018). 

Changes in species abundance and diversity with depth have been recorded. For example Neal et al. (2018) found depth to be the main structuring factor of polychaete diversity in the Atlantic and East Pacific sectors of the Southern Ocean between 500 and 3500 m, similar results were found for Isopoda by Brandt et al. (2004). Additionally, some cryptic species have been found to be isolated by depth (Schüller, 2011). 

Griffiths et al. (2011) explores circumpolar benthic diversity but results are biased towards sampling effort. 

For the distribution of specific taxa please refer to the SCAR Biogeographic Atlas

Placeholder for map

Dynamics

In general the Antarctic benthos is considered to be relatively stable an exceptional to this are shallow water communities at depths <10 m which may be impacted by ice more than once a year (Brown et al. 2004). The frequency of ice disturbance decreases with depth (Smale et al. 2007b) and below 30 m less likely to be structured by ice disturbance but other physical and biological factors. Including, for biological, primary production input, competition and predation, and physical, substratum, contamination and current flow (Smale 2008b and refs therein). However, ice scour can impact the deep benthos up to 550 m from grounding of tabular icebergs in coastal regions (Barnes and Conlan, 2007 and refs therein).

Responses to climate change have already been detected in some benthic species on the West Antarctic Peninsula, community changes including a sudden shift from filter feeding-ascidian dominated communities to a mixed assemblage at King George Island might be associated with sediment run-off triggered by glacier retreat (Sahade et al. 2015). 

In the Ross Sea where the phytoplankton bloom period is lengthening, driven by winds that have expanded the extent of polynyas, has resulted in the growth of phytoplankton-consuming benthos communities (Barnes et al. 2011). 

In McMurdo sound, the growth rates and recruitment of suspension feeding sponges have dramatically increased in response to a shift in the pelagic community to a dominance by bacterioplankton which the sponges are particularly effective at exploiting (Dayton et al. 2019).

Species movements and range shifts are predicted under changing water temperatures at the seafloor. These changes could remove physiological barriers to some species and facilitate their movement/re-invasion into the shallow Antarctic benthos including shell-crushing predatory crabs which may have significant impacts on the benthic communities (Aronson et al. 2007).

Abundance information - general overview, comment on increases or decreases in population size and where/why?

Placeholder for trends in abundance in different sectors


Synecology



Consumers (predators)

Modern predators (e.g. shell crushing species such as crabs, fish, sharks and rays) are rare or absent from the Antarctic benthos. Among Antarctic marine mammals Weddell seals will occasionally take benthic prey but primarily feed on fish and squid. The key predators to benthic species are slow moving invertebrates within the benthos including asteroids and nemerteans (Aronson et al. 2007). 

Along the West Antarctic Peninsula demersal fish are major consumers of benthos at inshore habitats. At offshore locations demersal fish are less dependent on benthos where they feed on more nutritional prey such as krill and nekton. Benthic feeders include Gobionotothen gibberifrons and Notothenia rossii juveniles (Barrera-O 2002). Gut content and fatty acid analyses by Würzberg et al. (2011c) found amphipods, polychaetes, gastropods and other crustaceans were the main dietary components of demersal fish from the Nototheniidae, Macrouridae, Channichtyidae, Bathydraconidae and Artedidraconidae families. 

Competitors

Benthic species can be in direct competition for space and food. 

Analysis of bryozoa from Alaska to Antarctica has suggested that competition within the benthos is more hierarchical towards the poles (Barnes, 2002).

In the Antarctic benthos in the absence of disturbance (ice scour), the combination of slow, temporally restricted growth with consistent annual recruitment of larvae (characteristic of Antarctic fauna) may result in successional processes during early colonisation being largely deterministic, with the occupation of free space being achieved primarily by high density of recruitment rather than by competitive interaction or differential growth rates (Bowden et al. 2006). 

Sub-lethal mortality (e.g. some zooids are killed but the colony survives) by competitive interaction is common along the Antarctic Peninsula in coastal rock communities (Barnes and Arnold, 2001). 

However species may have evolved to exist symmetrically by reducing competition. A recent study of octopods off South Georgia shows how functionally similar co-existing species (Adelieledone polymorpha and Pareledone turqueti) can have different trophic niches that may reduce competition. Such differences may be of benefit under current changing conditions in this area (Matias et al. 2019).  

Cryo-pelagic-benthic coupling

The degree of coupling between the cryosphere, pelagic process and benthic communities is an area of current and future research. Understanding how changes in the cryopshere and/or the pelagic system might effect the benthos could identify drivers of change. 

On the West Antarctic Peninsula, Smith et al. (2006) found poor coupling between the summer phytoplankton bloom and benthic processes on the shelf, with limited seasonality in the trophic signatures of benthic fauna. Also along the West Antarctic Peninsula weak hints of cryo-pelagic-benthic coupling were recorded in Gutt et al. (2019) which may indicate the complexity of ecological interactions within benthic habitats. 

In a shallow water study in the Ross Sea Cummings et al. (2018) found that 95% of variation within macrofaunal communities was explained by 6 factors including ice duration, ice thickness, snow cover as well as % cover of sediment detritus and sand, % organic content.  

Some pelagic species including krill and salps interact with the benthos. Salps can migrate to a depth of 700 m and are a significant prey species (almost 100% of prey items) consumed by the octocorallian Anthomastus bathyproctus (Gili et al. 2006). For krill, net and acoustic data show that 2-20% of the Scotia Sea summer population can swamp at depths between 200 and 2000 m just above the seabed. Deep migrations and foraging above the seafloor may be important for the coupling of benthic and pelagic environments and food webs (Schmidt et al. 2011). 

Studies generally investigate how the cryo or pelagic environment might influence the benthos, whilst how the benthos may influence the pelagic environment is often ignored Arntz et al. (1999). 

Role in biogeochemical cycles 

Benthic activity has a significant role in biogeochemical cycles. Feeding and burrowing activity reworks sediment that effects the rate of diagenic rations (Kirtensen, 1988). 

Benthic production also has a significant role in carbon storage known as "blue carbon" see Barnes (2017a, 2017b) and Barnes et al. (2018). 

Other interactions e.g. disease

Symbioses

  • Abundance of symbiotic associations within the Antarctic benthos have been noted within the Weddell and Ross Sea (see Alvaro and Braco, 2013 and Schiaparelli, 2014).
  • Most of the symbioses have shifted towards parasitism with polychaetes and molluscs being the most common symbionts (Schiaparelli et al. 2007, Schiaparelli, 2014)
  • Very few of these relationships have been studied in detail with the exception of inquilistic commensalism and parasitic species on echinoderm hosts (Schiapelli et al. 2010, 2011) 
  • Current work investigating symbioses between polynoid polychaetes and coral hosts within the South Orkney Islands Southern Shelf MPA (Brasier et al. in prep). 

Human Impacts


Bottom trawling, long-lines

  • Kock (1990) first to examine the impacts of bottom trawling in the South Atlantic, indicating that over a 20 year period fishing activities have had a considerable effect on benthic community structure. 
  • In Prydz Bay the biomass of benthic invertebrates caught from bottom trawls was greater (up to 10x) than the biomas of finfish. The most abundant species (by biomass) were sponges, ascidians, holothurians and crinoids (Constable, 1991). 
  • CCAMLR has a management framework designed for the protection of benthic habitats through the vulnerbale marine ecosystem (VME) indicator taxa. VME taxa are deemed vulnerable to the impacts of destructive fishing, these taxa include many reef building and slow growning species (e.g. corals, sponges) (for details see Parker and Bowden, 2010). A VME risk area is contains a threshold of 10 kg biomass of VME taxa from a single longline segment (1200 m section of longline gear), if this threshold is reached during fishing activities the area is closed to fishing until managment actions are determined by CCAMLR (CCAMLR, 2009)  
  • Impacts of longline gear are harder to assess, species may be damaged but not recovered to the surface, in this case it may underestimate the impacts of fishing gear and the presence of VME taxa (Brasier et al. 2018). 
  • Regionally high abundance of octopus around Elephant Island which may be due to overfishing of fin fish in that area in the 1980s (Vecchione et al. 2009). 

Marine debris

  • Circumpolar recorded of micro and macroplastics in the Southern Ocean (Waller et al. 2017)
  • Microplastics have been found in sediments in the Ross Sea (Munari et al. 2017), Admiralty Bay (South Shetland Islands) (Absher et al. 2019), near Rothera Station (Reed et al. 2018), the vicinity of South Georgia (Barnes et al. 2009), the deep Weddell Sea (Van Cauwenberghe et al. 2013). 
  • Suspension and deposit feeding animals at risk of microplastic ingestion that can effect food intake, energy reserves and survival rates (Waller et al. 2017). 

Outflow from research stations

  • Evidence of sewage enrichment near Casey, Davis and McMurdo Station (Thompson et al. 2003, Conlan et al. 2004, Stark et al. 2015, 2016).
  • Implementation of sewage treatment might have reduced this impact.
  • Other sources of chemical contamination e.g. oil spills discussed in Tin et al. (2009). 
  • High metal concentrations were identified in the Antarctic marine benthos near Rothera research station, but bioaccumulation varied between species. "Anthropogenic activities at Rothera Research Station appeared to have some impact on metal concentrations in the sampled invertebrates, with concentrations of several metals higher in Laternula elliptica near the runway and aircraft activities, but this was not a trend that was detected in the other species." Evidence of trace metal pollution from local anthropogenic sources was limited and sedimentary analysis of bedrock suggest that metals were released into the marine environment by glacial activity (Webb et al. 2019). 

Assessments of Status


IUCN Red List

'None of these species has been assessed for the Red List'

Other

Parker, S.J. & Bowden, D.A. (2010). Identifying taxonomic groups vulnerable to bottom longline fishing gear in the Ross Sea region. CCAMLR Science17: 105-127.

References


A list of references referred to on this page.

Please use Ecology style, for more information and examples see: 

https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/hub/journal/13652745/author-guidelines

Absher, T.M., Ferreira, S.L., Kern, Y., Ferreira, A.L., Christo, S.W. & Ando, R.A. (2019). Incidence and identification of microfibers in ocean waters in Admiralty Bay, Antarctica. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26:292-298. doi:10.1007/s11356-018-3509-6.

Allcock, A.L. (2014). 5.12. Southern Ocean Octopuses. In C. De Broyer & P, Koubbi (eds) Biogeographic atlas of the Southern Ocean (pp. 129-133). Cambridge, UK: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. 

Allcock, A.L. & Strugnell, J.M., (2012). Southern Ocean diversity: new paradigms from molecular ecology. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 27:520-528. doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2012.05.009

Alvaro, M.C. & Braco, A. (2013). Symbiotic interactions. In: J. Gutt (ed) The expedition of the research vessel "Polarstern" to the Antarctic in 2013 (ANT-XXIX/3). Bremerhaven, Germany: Alfred-Wegener-Institut. 

Andersson, A.J., Mackenzie, F.T. & Bates, N.R. (2008). Life on the margin: Implications of ocean acidification on Mg-calcite, high latitude and cold-water marine calcifiers. Marine Ecology Progress Series373:265-273 doi:10.3354/meps07639

Arango, C.P., Soler-Membrives, A. & Miller, K.J. (2011). Genetic differentiation in the circum—Antarctic sea spider Nymphon australe (Pycnogonida; Nymphonidae). Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 58:212-219. doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2010.05.019

Arntz, W.E., Gili, J.M. & Reise, K. (1999). Unjustifiably ignored: reflections on the role of benthos in marine ecosystems. In J. Gray, W. Ambrose Jr & A. Szaniawska (eds) Biogeochemical Cycling and Sediment Ecology (pp. 105-124). Springer, Dordrecht.

Aronson, R.B., Thatje, S., Clarke, A., Peck, L.S., Blake, D.B., Wilga, C.D. & Seibel, B.A. (2007). Climate change and invasibility of the Antarctic benthos. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 38:129-154. doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.38.091206.095525

Bailey, D.M., Johnston, I.A. & Peck, L.S. (2005). Invertebrate muscle performance at high latitude: swimming activity in the Antarctic scallop, Adamussium colbecki. Polar Biology, 28:464-469. doi:10.1007/s00300-004-0699-9

Barnes, D.K. (2002). Polarization of competition increases with latitude. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences269:2061-2069. doi:10.1098/rspb.2002.2105

Barnes, D.K.A. (2015). Antarctic sea ice losses drive gains in benthic carbon drawdown. Current Biology, 25:PR789-R790. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2015.07.042

Barnes, D.K. (2017). Polar zoobenthos blue carbon storage increases with sea ice losses, because across‐shelf growth gains from longer algal blooms outweigh ice scour mortality in the shallows. Global Change Biology, 23: 5083-5091. doi:10.1111/gcb.13772

Barnes, D.K. & Clarke, A. (1995). Seasonality of feeding activity in Antarctic suspension feeders. Polar Biology, 15:335-340. doi:10.1007/BF00238483

Barnes, D.K. & Arnold, R. (2001). Competition, sub-lethal mortality and diversity on Southern Ocean coastal rock communities. Polar Biology24:447-454. doi:10.1007/s003000100240

Barnes, D.K. & Souster, T. (2011). Reduced survival of Antarctic benthos linked to climate-induced iceberg scouring. Nature Climate Change, 1:365-368. doi:10.1038/NCLIMATE1232

Barnes, D.K. & Downey, R.V. (2014). 5.23. Bryozoa. In C. De Broyer & P, Koubbi (eds) Biogeographic atlas of the Southern Ocean (pp. 195-199). Cambridge, UK: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. 

Barnes, D.K. & Sands, C.J. (2017). Functional group diversity is key to Southern Ocean benthic carbon pathways. PloS One, 12:e0179735. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0179735

Barnes, D.K.A. and Conlan, K.E. (2007). Disturbance, colonization and development of Antarctic benthic communities. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 362:11-38. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2006.1951.

Barnes, D.K., Galgani, F., Thompson, R.C. & Barlaz, M. (2009). Accumulation and fragmentation of plastic debris in global environments. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364:1985-1998. doi:10.1098/rstb.2008.0205

Barnes, D.K., Kuklinski, P., Jackson, J.A., Keel, G.W., Morley, S.A. & Winston, J.E. (2011). Scott's collections help reveal accelerating marine life growth in Antarctica. Current Biology21: R147-R148.  doi:10.1016/j.cub.2011.01.033

Barnes, D.K. (2017). Iceberg killing fields limit huge potential for benthic blue carbon in Antarctic shallows. Global Change Biology, 23(7): 2649-2659. doi: doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13523

Barnes, D.K. (2017). Polar zoobenthos blue carbon storage increases with sea ice losses, because across‐shelf growth gains from longer algal blooms outweigh ice scour mortality in the shallows. Global Change Biology, 23(12), 5083-5091. doi: 10.1111/gcb.13772

Barnes, D.K., Fleming, A., Sands, C.J., Quartino, M.L. and Deregibus, D., 2018. Icebergs, sea ice, blue carbon and Antarctic climate feedbacks. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences376(2122), 20170176. doi: 10.1098/rsta.2017.0176

Barrera-Oro, E. (2002). The role of fish in the Antarctic marine food web: differences between inshore and offshore waters in the southern Scotia Arc and west Antarctic Peninsula. Antarctic Science14:293-309. doi:10.1017/S0954102002000111

Barry, J.P., Grebmeier, J.M., Smith, J. & Dunbar, R.B. (2003). Oceanographic versus seafloor‐habitat control of benthic megafaunal communities in the SW Ross Sea, Antarctica. Biogeochemistry of the Ross Sea, 78, pp.327-353.

Basher, Z. & Castello, M.J. (2014). 5.22. Shrimps (Crustacea: Decapoda). In C. De Broyer & P, Koubbi (eds) Biogeographic atlas of the Southern Ocean (pp. 190-194). Cambridge, UK: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. 

Bax, N., & Cairns, S. (2014). 5.7. Stylasteridae (Cnidaria, Hydrozoa). In C. De Broyer & P, Koubbi (eds) Biogeographic atlas of the Southern Ocean (pp. 107-112). Cambridge, UK: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. 

Beaman, R.J. & Harris, P.T. (2005). Bioregionalization of the George V Shelf, East Antarctica. Continental Shelf Research, 25(14), pp.1657-1691.

Bosch, I. & Pearse, J.S. (1988). Seasonal pelagic development and juvenile recruitment of the bivalve Laternula elliptica in McMurdo Sound, Antarctica. American Zoologist, 28, 89. 

Bosch, I., Beauchamp, K.A., Steele, M.E. & Pearse, J.S. (1987). Development, metamorphosis, and seasonal abundance of embryos and larvae of the Antarctic sea urchin Sterechinus neumayeriThe Biological Bulletin173:126-135.

Bosch, I. and Pearse, J.S. (1990). Development types of shallow-water asteroids of McMurdo Sound, Antarctica. Marine Biology, 104:41-46.

Bowden, D.A. (2005). Seasonality of recruitment in Antarctic sessile marine benthos. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 297:101-118. doi:10.3354/meps297101

Bowden, D.A., Clarke, A., Peck, L.S. & Barnes, D.K. (2006). Antarctic sessile marine benthos: colonisation and growth on artificial substrata over three years. Marine Ecology Progress Series316:1-16. doi:10.3354/meps316001

Bowden, D.A., Clarke, A. & Peck, L.S. (2009). Seasonal variation in the diversity and abundance of pelagic larvae of Antarctic marine invertebrates. Marine Biology, 156:2033-2047. doi:10.1007/s00227-009-1235-9

Brandt, A. (1992). Origin of Antarctic Isopoda (Crustacea, Malacostraca). Marine Biology, 113:415-423. doi:10.1007/BF00349167

Brandt, A. (2000). Hypotheses on Southern Ocean Peracarid Evolution and Radiation (Crustacea, Malacostrasca). Antarctic Science, 12:269–275. doi:10.1017/S095410200000033X

Brandt, A., Brökeland, W., Brix, S. & Malyutina, M. (2004). Diversity of Southern Ocean deep-sea Isopoda (Crustacea, Malacostraca)—a comparison with shelf data. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 51(14-16): 1753-1768. doi: 10.1016/j.dsr2.2004.06.033

Brandt, A., C. De Broyer, I. De Mesel, K. E. Ellingsen, A. J. Gooday, B. Hilbig, K., Linse, M. R. A. Thomson, & P. A. Tyler. (2007a). The Biodiversity of the Deep Southern Ocean Benthos. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series B, 362: 39– 66. doi:10.1098/rstb.2006.1952

Brandt, A., Gooday, A.J., Brandao, S.N., Brix, S., Brökeland, W., Cedhagen, T., ... &  Diaz, R.J. (2007). First insights into the biodiversity and biogeography of the Southern Ocean deep sea. Nature447(7142): 307.

Brasier, M.J., Wiklund, H., Neal, L., Jeffreys, R., Linse, K., Ruhl, H& Glover, A.G. (2016). DNA barcoding uncovers cryptic diversity in 50% of deep-sea Antarctic polychaetes. Royal Society open science, 3:160432.

Brasier, M.J., Harle, J., Wiklund, H., Jeffreys, R.M., Linse, K., Ruhl, H.A. & Glover, A.G. (2017). Distributional Patterns of Polychaetes Across the West Antarctic Based on DNA Barcoding and Particle Tracking Analyses. Frontiers in Marine Science, 4:356.

Brasier, M.J., Grant, S.M., Trathan, P.N., Allcock, L., Ashford, O., Blagbrough, H., Brandt, A., Danis, B., Downey, R., Eléaume, M.P., ... & Enderlein, P. (2018). Benthic biodiversity in the South Orkney Islands Southern Shelf Marine Protected Area. Biodiversity, 19:5-19.

Brasier, M.J., Constable, A., Melbourne-Thomas, J., Trebilco, R., Griffiths, H., Van de Putte, A. & Sumner, M. (2019). Observations and models to support the first Marine Ecosystem Assessment for the Southern Ocean (MEASO). Journal of Marine Systems, 197: 103182. doi: 10.1016/j.jmarsys.2019.05.008

Brasier, M.J., Jeffreys, R., Wolff, G., Glover, A.J., Taylor, M., In Prep. Classifying Sybiotic relationships in the Antarctic: Coral and Polynoidae of the South Orkney Islands Southern Shelf MPA. 

Brey, T. & Gutt, J. (1991). The genus Sterechinm (Echinodermata: Echinoidea) on the Weddell Sea shelf and slope (Antarctica): distribution, abundance and biomass. Polar Biology, 11:227-232. doi:10.1007/BF00238455

Brown, K.M., Fraser, K.P., Barnes, D.K. & Peck, L.S. (2004). Links between the structure of an Antarctic shallow-water community and ice-scour frequency. Oecologia141:121-129. doi:10.1007/s00442-004-1648-6

Brockington, S., Peck, L.S. & Tyler, P.A. (2007). Gametogenesis and gonad mass cycles in the common circumpolar Antarctic echinoid Sterechinus neumayeri. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 330:139-147. doi:10.3354/meps330139 

Calcagno, J.A., Anger, K., Lovrich, G.A., Thatje, S. and Kaffenberger, A. (2004). Larval development of the subantarctic king crabs Lithodes santolla and Paralomis granulosa reared in the laboratory. Helogoland Marine Research, 58:11-14. doi: 10.1007/s10152-003-0157-z.

Cantero, A.L.P. (2004). How rich is the deep-sea Antarctic benthic hydroid fauna?. Polar Biology, 27:767-774. doi:10.1007/s00300-004-0654-9

Cantero, A.L.P. (2014). 5.6. Benthic Hydroids (Cnidaria, Hydrozoa). In C. De Broyer & P, Koubbi (eds) Biogeographic atlas of the Southern Ocean (pp. 103-106). Cambridge, UK: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. 

CCAMLR (2009). "Conservation Measure 22-07." Interim measure for bottom fishing activities subject to Conervation Measure 22-06 encountering potential vulnerable marine ecosystems in the Convention Areas. Schedule of Conservation Measure in Force 2017/18. Hobart, Australia: CCAMLR. 

Chiantore, M., Cattaneo-Vietti, R., Berkman, P.A., Nigro, M., Vacchi, M., Schiaparelli, S. & Albertelli, G. (2001). Antarctic scallop (Adamussium colbecki) spatial population variability along the Victoria Land Coast, Antarctica. Polar Biology24:139-143. doi:10.1007/s003000000191

Chiantore, M., Cattaneo-Vietti, R., Elia, L., Guidetti, M. & Antonini, M. (2002). Reproduction and condition of the scallop Adamussium colbecki (Smith 1902), the sea-urchin Sterechinus neumayeri (Meissner 1900) and the sea-star Odontaster validus Koehler 1911 at Terra Nova Bay (Ross Sea): different strategies related to inter-annual variations in food availability. Polar Biology25:251-255. doi:10.1007/s00300-001-0331-1

Conlan, K.E., Kim, S.L., Lenihan, H.S. & Oliver, J.S. (2004). Benthic changes during 10 years of organic enrichment by McMurdo Station, Antarctica. Marine Pollution Bulletin49:43-60. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2004.01.007

Clarke, A. (1992). Reproduction in the cold: Thorson revisited. Invertebrate Reproduction & Development22:175-183. doi:10.1080/07924259.1992.9672270

Constable, C. (1991). Potential impacts of bottom trawling on benthic communities in Prydz Bay, Antarctica. SC-CCAMLR-X/BG/19. 

Cummings, V.J., Hewitt, J.E., Thrush, S.F., Marriott, P.M., Halliday, N.J.& Norkko, A.M. (2018). Linking Ross Sea coastal benthic communities to environmental conditions: documenting baselines in a spatially variable and changing world. Frontiers in Marine Science5:232. doi:10.3389/fmars.2018.00232

Daly, H.I. (1996). Ecology of the Antarctic octopus Pareledone from the Scotia Sea. PhD Thesis, University of Aberdeen. 

Danis, B., Griffiths, H. & Jangoux, M. (2014). 5.24. Asteroidea.  In C. De Broyer & P, Koubbi (eds) Biogeographic atlas of the Southern Ocean (pp. 200-207). Cambridge, UK: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. 

Dayton, P.K., Watson, D., Palmisano, A., Barry, J.P., Oliver, J.S. & Rivera, D. (1986). Distribution patterns of benthic microalgal standing stock at McMurdo Sound, Antarctica. Polar Biology6:207-213. doi:10.1007/BF00443397

Dayton, P.K., Jarrell, S.C., Kim, S., Parnell, P.E., Thrush, S.F., Hammerstrom, K., and Leichter, J. (2019). Benthic responses to an Antarctic regime shift: food particle size and recruitment biology. Ecological Applications, 29:1-20. doi: 10.1002/eap.1823.

De Broyer, C., & Jazdzewska, A. (2014). 5.17. Biogeographic patterns of Southern Ocean benthic amphipods. In C. De Broyer & P, Koubbi (eds) Biogeographic atlas of the Southern Ocean (pp. 155-165). Cambridge, UK: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. 

Eleaume, M., Hemery, L.G., Roux, M. & Ameziane, N. (2014). 5.25. Southern Ocean Crinoids. In C. De Broyer & P, Koubbi (eds) Biogeographic atlas of the Southern Ocean (pp. 208-212). Cambridge, UK: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. 

Ericson, J.A., Ho, M.A., Miskelly, A., King, C.K., Virtue, P., Tilbrook, B. & Byrne, M. (2012). Combined effects of two ocean change stressors, warming and acidification, on fertilization and early development of the Antarctic echinoid Sterechinus neumayeri. Polar Biology, 35:1027-1034. doi:10.1007/s00300-011-1150-7

Feral, J.P. & Poulin, E. (2010). Kerguelen Islands: a living laboratory to understand the benthic biodiversity of the Antarctic. In 1st International Scientific Symposium on the Kerguelen Plateau. French Ichthyological Society-Cybium.

Figuerola, B., Gore, D.B., Johnstone, G. & Stark, J.S. (2019). Spatio-temporal variation of skeletal Mg-calcite in Antarctic marine calcifiers. PLoS One 14:e0210231. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0210231

Figuerola, B., Monleón-Getino, T., Ballesteros, M. & Avila, C. (2012). Spatial patterns and diversity of bryozoan communities from the Southern Ocean: South Shetland Islands, Bouvet Island and Eastern Weddell Sea. Systematics and Biodiversity, 10:109-123. doi:10.1080/14772000.2012.668972

Fillinger, L., Janussen, D., Lundälv,T., and Richter, C. (2013). Rapid glass sponge expansion after climate-induced Antarctic ice shelf collapse. Current Biology, 23:1330-1334. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2013.05.051.

Galaska, M.P., Sands, C.J., Santos, S.R., Mahon, A.R. & Halanych, K.M. (2017). Geographic structure in the Southern Ocean circumpolar brittle star Ophionotus victoriae (Ophiuridae) revealed from mt DNA and single‐nucleotide polymorphism data. Ecology and evolution, 7:475-485. doi:10.1002/ece3.2617

Galley, E.A., Tyler, P.A., Clarke, A., and Smith, C.R. (2005). Reproductive biology and biochemical composition of the brooding echinoid Amphipneustes lorioli on the Antarctic continental shelf. Marine Biology, 148:59-71. doi: 10.1007/s00227-005-0069-3.

Galley, E.A., Tyler, P.A., Smith, C.R. & Clarke, A. (2008). Reproductive biology of two species of holothurian from the deep-sea order Elasipoda, on the Antarctic continental shelf. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 55:2515-2526. doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2008.07.002

Gili, J.M., Coma, R., Orejas, C., López-González, P.J. & Zabala, M. (2001). Are Antarctic suspension-feeding communities different from those elsewhere in the world? Polar Biology, 24:473-485. doi:10.1007/s003000100257

Gili, J.M., Rossi, S., Pagès, F., Orejas, C., Teixidó, N., López-González, P.J. & Arntz, W.E. (2006). A new trophic link between the pelagic and benthic systems on the Antarctic shelf. Marine Ecology Progress Series322:.43-49. doi:10.3354/meps322043

Gooday, A.J. Rothe, N., Bowers, S. & Pawlowski, J. (2014). 5.2 Foraminifera. In C. De Broyer & P, Koubbi (eds) Biogeographic atlas of the Southern Ocean (pp. 74-82). Cambridge, UK: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. 

Grange, L.J., Tyler, P.A., Peck, L.S. & Cornelius, N. (2004). Long-term interannual cycles of the gametogenic ecology of the Antarctic brittle star Ophionotus victoriae. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 278:141-155. doi:10.3354/meps278141

Grange, L.J. (2005). Reproductive success in Antarctic marine invertebrates. thesis

Grange, L.J., Tyler, P.A. & Peck, L.S. (2007). Multi-year observations on the gametogenic ecology of the Antarctic seastar Odontaster validusMarine Biology153:15-23. doi:10.1007/s00227-007-0776-z

Grange, L.J., Peck, L.S. & Tyler, P.A. (2011). Reproductive ecology of the circumpolar Antarctic nemertean Parborlasia corrugatus: no evidence for inter-annual variation. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 404:98-107. doi:10.1016/j.jembe.2011.04.011

Griffiths, H.J., Whittle, R.J., Roberts, S.J., Belchier, M. & Linse, K. (2013). Antarctic crabs: invasion or endurance? PLoS One, 8:e66981. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0066981

Griffiths, H.J., Whittle, R.J., Roberts, S.J., Belchier, M., Linse, K. & Thatje, S. (2014). 5.21. Decapods: Crabs and Lobsters. In C. De Broyer & P, Koubbi (eds) Biogeographic atlas of the Southern Ocean (pp. 185-189). Cambridge, UK: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. 

Griffiths, H.J., Meijers, A.J. & Bracegirdle, T.J. (2017). More losers than winners in a century of future Southern Ocean seafloor warming. Nature Climate Change, 7:749.

Gusso, C.C. & Gravina, M.F. (2001). Faunistic and biological traits of some Antarctic Pycnogonida. Italian Journal of Zoology68:.335-344. doi:10.1080/11250000109356428

Gutt, J., Gerdes, D. & Klages, M. (1992). Seasonality and spatial variability in the reproduction of two Antarctic holothurians (Echinodermata). Polar Biology, 11:533-544. doi:10.1007/BF00237946

Gutt, J. (2007). Antarctic macro-zoobenthic communities: a review and an ecological classification. Antarctic Science, 19(2), pp.165-182. doi: 10.1017/S0954102007000247

Gutt, J., Cape, M., Dimmler, W., Fillinger, L., Isla, E., Lieb, V., Lundälv, T. & Pulcher, C. (2013). Shifts in Antarctic megabenthic structure after ice-shelf disintegration in the Larsen area east of the Antarctic Peninsula. Polar Biology, 36:895-906. doi:10.1007/s00300-013-1315-7

Ingels, J., Vanhove, S., De Mesel, I. & Vanreusel, A. (2006). The biodiversity and biogeography of the free-living nematode genera Desmodora and Desmodorella (family Desmodoridae) at both sides of the Scotia Arc. Polar Biology, 29:936-949. doi:10.1007/s00300-006-0135-4

Ingels, J., Van den Driessche, P., De Mesel, I., Vanhove, S., Moens, T. & Vanreusel, A. (2010). Preferred use of bacteria over phytoplankton by deep-sea nematodes in polar regions. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 406:121-133. doi:10.3354/meps08535

Ingels, J., Hauquier, F., Raes, M. & Vanreusel, A. (2014). Antarctic free-living marine nematodes. In C. De Broyer & P, Koubbi (eds) Biogeographic atlas of the Southern Ocean (pp. 83-87). Cambridge, UK: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research.  

Hall, S. & Thatje, S. (2011). Temperature-driven biogeography of the deep-sea family Lithodidae (Crustacea: Decapoda: Anomura) in the Southern Ocean. Polar biology34:363-370. doi:0.1007/s00300-010-0890-0

Hemery, L.G., Eléaume, M., Roussel, V., Améziane, N., Gallut, C., Steinke, D., Cruaud, C., Couloux, A. & Wilson, N.G. (2012). Comprehensive sampling reveals circumpolarity and sympatry in seven mitochondrial lineages of the Southern Ocean crinoid species Promachocrinus kerguelensis (Echinodermata). Molecular Ecology, 21:2502-2518. doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2012.05512.x

Higgs, N.D., Reed, A.J., Hooke, R., Honey, D.J., Heilmayer, O. & Thatje, S. (2009). Growth and reproduction in the Antarctic brooding bivalve Adacnarca nitens (Philobryidae) from the Ross Sea. Marine Biology156:1073-1081. doi:10.1007/s00227-009-1154-9

Kaiser, S. (2014). 5.18. Antarctic and sub-Antarctic Isopod Crustaceans (Peracarida, Malacostraca). In C. De Broyer & P, Koubbi (eds) Biogeographic atlas of the Southern Ocean (pp. 166-172). Cambridge, UK: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. 

Kaiser, S., Barnes, D.K., Sands, C.J. & Brandt, A. (2009). Biodiversity of an unknown Antarctic Sea: assessing isopod richness and abundance in the first benthic survey of the Amundsen continental shelf. Marine Biodiversity, 39:27. doi:10.1007/s12526-009-0004-9

Kristensen, E. (2000). Organic matter diagenesis at the oxic/anoxic interface in coastal marine sediments, with emphasis on the role of burrowing animals. In: T. H. Blackburn and J. Sorensen (Eds.) Life at interfaces and under extreme conditions (pp. 1-24). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.

Lau, S.C., Grange, L.J., Peck, L.S. & Reed, A.J. (2018). The reproductive ecology of the Antarctic bivalve Aequiyoldia eightsii (Protobranchia: Sareptidae) follows neither Antarctic nor taxonomic patterns. Polar Biology, 41:1693. doi:10.1007/s00300-018-2309-2

Linse, K. (2014). 5.11. Bivavlia. In C. De Broyer & P, Koubbi (eds) Biogeographic atlas of the Southern Ocean (pp. 126-128). Cambridge, UK: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. 

Linse, K., Walker, L.J. & Barnes, D.K. (2008). Biodiversity of echinoids and their epibionts around the Scotia Arc, Antarctica. Antarctic Science20:227-244. doi:10.1017/S0954102008001181

Linse, K., Griffiths, H.J., Barnes, D.K. & Clarke, A. (2006). Biodiversity and biogeography of Antarctic and sub-Antarctic mollusca. Deep sea research Part II: Topical studies in oceanography, 53:985-1008. doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2006.05.003

Martín-Ledo, R., & López-González, P. J. (2014). Brittle stars from Southern Ocean (Echinodermata: Ophiuroidea). Polar Biology, 37:73–88. doi:10.1007/s00300-013-1411-8

Matias, R.S., Gregory, S., Ceia, F.R., Baeta, A., Seco, J., Rocha, M.S., ... & Piatkowski, U. (2019). Show your beaks and we tell you what you eat: Different ecology in sympatric Antarctic benthic octopods under a climate change context. Marine Environmental Research, 150: 104757. doi: 10.1016/j.marenvres.2019.104757

McClintock, J.B. and Pearse, J.S. (1987). Reproductive biology of the common Antarctic crinoid Pomachocrinus kerguelensis (Echinodermata: Crinoidea). Marine Biology, 96:375-383. doi:10.1007/BF00412521.

McClintock, J.B. (1989). Energetic composition, reproductive output, and resource allocation of Antarctic asteroids. Polar Biology, 9:147-153. doi: 10.1007/BF00297169.

McClintock, J.B. (1994). Trophic biology of Antarctic shallow-water echinoderms. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 111:191-202.

McClintock, J.B. and Baker, B.J. (1997). Palatability and chemical defense of eggs, embryos and larvae of shallow-water Antarctic marine invertebrates. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 154:121-131. doi: 10.3354/meps154121.

McClintock, J.B., Pearse, J.S. & Bosch, I. (1988). Population structure and energetics of the shallow-water Antarctic sea star Odontaster validus in contrasting habitats. Marine Biology, 99:235-246. doi:10.1007/BF00391986

McClintock, J.B., Amsler, C.D., Baker, B.J. & Van Soest, R.W. (2005). Ecology of Antarctic marine sponges: an overview. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 45:359-368. doi:10.1093/icb/45.2.359

Meidlinger, K., Tyler, P.A. & Peck, L.S. (1998). Reproductive patterns in the Antarctic brachiopod Liothyrella uvaMarine Biology132:153-162. doi:10.1007/s002270050381

Mincks, S.L., Smith, C.R., Jeffreys, R.M. & Sumida, P.Y. (2008). Trophic structure on the West Antarctic Peninsula shelf: detritivory and benthic inertia revealed by δ13C and δ15N analysis. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography55:2502-2514. doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2008.06.009

Munari, C., Infantini, V., Scoponi, M., Rastelli, E., Corinaldesi, C. & Mistri, M. (2017). Microplastics in the sediments of Terra Nova Bay (Ross Sea, Antarctica). Marine Pollution Bulletin, 122:161-165. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.06.039

Munilla, T. & Membrives, A.S. (2009). Check-list of the pycnogonids from Antarctic and sub-Antarctic waters: zoogeographic implications. Antarctic Science21:99-111. doi:10.1017/S095410200800151X

Norkko, A., Thrush, S.F., Cummings, V.J., Gibbs, M.M., Andrew, N.L., Norkko, J. & Schwarz, A.M. (2007). Trophic structure of coastal Antarctic food webs associated with changes in sea ice and food supply. Ecology, 88(11), pp.2810-2820.Parker, S.J. & Bowden, D.A. (2010). Identifying taxonomic groups vulnerable to bottom longline fishing gear in the Ross Sea region. CCAMLR Science, 17: 105-127.

Nyssen, F., Brey, T., Dauby, P. & Graeve, M. (2005). Trophic position of Antarctic amphipods—enhanced analysis by a 2-dimensional biomarker assay. Marine Ecology Progress Series300: 135-145.doi:10.3354/meps300135

Parker, S., Tracey, D., Mackay, E., Mills, S., Marriott, P., & Anderson, O. (2009). CCAMLR VME Taxa Identification Guide Version 2009. Hobart, Australia: Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources. 

Pawlowski, J., Fahrni, J.F., Brykczynska, U., Habura, A. & Bowser, S.S. (2002). Molecular data reveal high taxonomic diversity of allogromiid Foraminifera in Explorers Cove (McMurdo Sound, Antarctica). Polar Biology, 25:96-105. doi:10.1007/s003000100317

Pearse, J.S. (1965). Reproductive periodicities in several contrasting populations of Odontaster validus Koehler, a common Antarctic asteroid. Biology of the Antarctic seas II5:39-85.

Pearse, J.S. (1969). Slow developing demersal embryos and larvae of the Antarctic sea star Odontaster validus. Marine Biology, 3:110-116. doi:10.1007/BF00353429

Pearse, J.S. (1994). Cold-water echinoderms break Thorson’s rule. In C.M. Young & K.J. Eckelbarger (eds) Reproduction, Larval Biology and Recruitment in the Deep-sea Benthos. Columbia University Press.

Pearse, J.S., Mooi, R., Lockhart, S.J. & Brandt, A. (2009). Brooding and species diversity in the Southern Ocean: selection for brooders or speciation within brooding clades? Smithsonian at the poles: contributions to international polar year science.

Pearse, J.S., McClintock, J.B., and Bosch, I. (1991). Reproduction of Antarctic benthic marine invertebrates: tempos, modes, and timing. American Zoologist, 31:65-80. doi: 10.1093/icb/31.1.65.

Peck, L.S. & Robinson, K. (1994). Pelagic larval development in the brooding Antarctic brachiopod Liothyrella uva. Marine Biology, 120:279-286. doi:10.1007/BF00349689

Peck, L.S. (2005). Prospects for survival in the Southern Ocean: vulnerability of benthic species to temperature change. Antarctic Science, 17:497–507. doi:10.1017/S0954102005002920

Peck, L.S., Webb, K.E. & Bailey, D.M. (2004). Extreme sensitivity of biological function to temperature in Antarctic marine species. Functional Ecology, 18:625–630. doi:10.1111/j.0269-8463.2004.00903.x

Peck, L.S., Powell, D.K. & Tyler, P.A. (2007). Very slow development in two Antarctic bivalve molluscs, the infaunal clam Laternula elliptica and the scallop Adamussium colbecki. Marine Biology, 150:1191-1197. doi:10.1007/s00227-006-0428-8

Peck, L.S., Massey, A., Thorne, M.A. & Clark, M.S., 2009. Lack of acclimation in Ophionotus victoriae: brittle stars are not fish. Polar Biology, 32:399-402. doi:10.1007/s00300-008-0532-y

Peck, L.S., Souster, T. & Clark, M.S. (2013). Juveniles are more resistant to warming than adults in 4 species of Antarctic marine invertebrates. PLoS One, 8:.e66033. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0066033

Poulin, É. & Féral, J.P. (1996). Why are there so many species of brooding Antarctic echinoids?. Evolution50:820-830. doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.1996.tb03891.x

Poulin, E., Palma, A.T. & Féral, J.P. (2002). Evolutionary versus ecological success in Antarctic benthic invertebrates. Trends in Ecology & Evolution17:218-222. doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(02)02493-X

Post, A.L., O’Brien, P.E., Beaman, R.J., Riddle, M.J. & De Santis, L. (2010). Physical controls on deep water coral communities on the George V Land slope, East Antarctica. Antarctic Science, 22(4): 371-378. doi: 10.1017/S0954102010000180

Post, A.L., Beaman, R.J., O’Brien, P.E., Eléaume, M. & Riddle, M.J. (2011). Community structure and benthic habitats across the George V Shelf, East Antarctica: trends through space and time. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 58(1-2): 105-118.

Post A.L., Meijers A.J.S., Fraser A.D., Meiners K.M., Ayers J., Bindoff N.L., ... & Raymond, B. (2014). In: C. De Broyer, P. Koubbi (Eds.). Biogeographic Atlas of the Southern Ocean. Cambridge, UK: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research, pp. 46-64.

Presler, P. (1986). Necrophagous invertebrates of the Admiralty Bay of King George Island (South Shetland Islands, Antarctica). Polish Polar Research, 7:25-61. 

Primo, C. & Vázquez, E. (2009). Antarctic ascidians: an isolated and homogeneous fauna. Polar Research, 28:403-414. doi:10.1111/j.1751-8369.2009.00110.x

Primo, C. & Vázquez, E. (2014). 5.27. Ascidian fauna south of the Sub-Tropical Front. In C. De Broyer & P. Koubbi (eds) Biogeographic Atlas of the Southern Ocean (pp. 221-228). Cambridge, UK: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. 

Raupach, & A. Vanreusel. (2007b). First Insights into the Biodiversity and Biogeography of the Southern Ocean Deep Sea. Nature, 447:307– 311. doi:10.1038/nature05827

Reed, A.J., Morris, J.P., Linse, K. & Thatje, S. (2014). Reproductive morphology of the deep-sea protobranch bivalves Yoldiella ecaudata, Yoldiella sabrina, and Yoldiella valettei (Yoldiidae) from the Southern Ocean. Polar biology37:1383-1392 doi:10.1007/s00300-014-1528-4

Reed, S., Clark, M., Thompson, R. & Hughes, K.A. (2018). Microplastics in marine sediments near Rothera Research Station, Antarctica. Marine pollution bulletin, 133:460-463. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.05.068

Riesgo, A., Taboada, S. & Avila, C. (2015). Evolutionary patterns in Antarctic marine invertebrates: An update on molecular studies. Marine Genomics, 23:1-13. doi:10.1016/j.margen.2015.07.005

Rodriguez, E. & Fautin, D.G. (2014). 5.8. Antarctic Hexacorals (Cnidaria, Anthozoa, Hexacorallia). In C. De Broyer & P. Koubbi (eds) Biogeographic Atlas of the Southern Ocean (pp. 113-116). Cambridge, UK: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. 

Saucede, T., Pierrat, B. & David, B. (2014). 5.62. Echinoids. In C. De Broyer & P. Koubbi (eds) Biogeographic Atlas of the Southern Ocean (pp. 213-220). Cambridge, UK: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. 

Sahade, R., Tatián, M., and Esnal, G.B. (2004). Reproductive ecology of the ascidian Cnemidocarpa verrucosa at Potter Cove South Shetland Islands, Antarctica. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 272:131-140.

Sahade, R., Lagger, C., Torre, L., Momo, F., Monien, P., Schloss, I., Barnes, D.K., Servetto, N., Tarantelli, S., Tatián, M. & Zamboni, N. (2015). Climate change and glacier retreat drive shifts in an Antarctic benthic ecosystem. Science Advances1:e1500050. doi:10.1126/sciadv.1500050 

Schuller, M. & Ebbe, B. (2014). 5.13. Polychaetes. In C. De Broyer & P. Koubbi (eds) Biogeographic Atlas of the Southern Ocean (pp. 135-137). Cambridge, UK: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. 

Schiaparelli, S., Ghirardo, C., Bohn, J., Chiantore, M., Albertelli, G. & Cattaneo-Vietti, R. (2007). Antarctic associations: the parasitic relationship between the gastropod Bathycrinicola tumidula (Thiele, 1912) (Ptenoglossa: Eulimidae) and the comatulid Notocrinus virilis Mortensen, 1917 (Crinoidea: Notocrinidae) in the Ross Sea. Polar Biology30:1545-1555. doi:10.1007/s00300-007-0315-x

Schiaparelli, S., Alvaro, M.C., Bohn, J. & Albertelli, G. (2010). ‘Hitchhiker’polynoid polychaetes in cold deep waters and their potential influence on benthic soft bottom food webs. Antarctic Science, 22:399-407. doi:10.1017/S0954102010000210

Schiaparelli, S., Alvaro, M.C. & Barnich, R. (2011). Polynoid polychaetes living in the gut of irregular sea urchins: a first case of inquilinism in the Southern Ocean. Antarctic Science, 23:144-151. doi:10.1017/S0954102011000083

Schiaparelli, S. (2014). Biotic Interactions. In C. De Broyer & P. Koubbi (eds) Biogeographic Atlas of the Southern Ocean (pp. 245-252). Cambridge, UK: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. 

Schiaparelli, S., & Linse, K. (2014). 5.10. Gastropoda. In C. De Broyer & P. Koubbi (eds) Biogeographic Atlas of the Southern Ocean (pp. 122-125. Cambridge, UK: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. 

Schmidt, K., Atkinson, A., Steigenberger, S., Fielding, S., Lindsay, M.C., Pond, D.W., Tarling, G.A., Klevjer, T.A., Allen, C.S., Nicol, S. & Achterberg, E.P. (2011). Seabed foraging by Antarctic krill: Implications for stock assessment, bentho‐pelagic coupling, and the vertical transfer of iron. Limnology and Oceanography, 56:1411-1428. doi:10.4319/lo.2011.56.4.1411

Schüller, M. 2011. Evidence for a role of bathymetry and emergence in speciation in the genus Glycera (Glyceridae, Polychaeta) from the deep Eastern Weddell Sea. Polar Biology, 34, 549-564. doi: 10.1007/s00300-010-0913-x 

Smale, D.A., Barnes, D.K., Fraser, K.P., Mann, P.J. & Brown, M.P. (2007a). Scavenging in Antarctica: intense variation between sites and seasons in shallow benthic necrophagy. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 349:405-417. doi:10.1016/j.jembe.2007.06.002

Smale, D.A., Barnes, D.K. & Fraser, K.P. (2007b). The influence of ice scour on benthic communities at three contrasting sites at Adelaide Island, Antarctica. Austral Ecology, 32:878-888. doi:10.1111/j.1442-9993.2007.01776.x 

Smale, D.A. (2008a). Ecological traits of benthic assemblages in shallow Antarctic waters: does ice scour disturbance select for small, mobile, secondary consumers with high dispersal potential?. Polar Biology, 31:1225-1231. doi: F10.1007/s00300-008-0461-9

Smale, D.A. (2008b). Continuous benthic community change along a depth gradient in Antarctic shallows: evidence of patchiness but not zonation. Polar Biology, 31:189-198. doi:10.1007/s00300-007-0346-3

Smith, C.R., Mincks, S. & DeMaster, D.J. (2006). A synthesis of bentho-pelagic coupling on the Antarctic shelf: food banks, ecosystem inertia and global climate change. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 53:875-894. doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2006.02.001

Stanwell-Smith, D. & Clarke, A. (1998). Seasonality of reproduction in the cushion star Odontaster validus at Signy Island, Antarctica. Marine Biology131:479-487. doi:10.1007/s002270050339

Stanwell-Smith, D., Peck, L.S., Clarke, A., Murray, A.W. & Todd, C.D. (1999). The distribution, abundance and seasonality of pelagic marine invertebrate larvae in the maritime Antarctic. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 354:471-484. doi:10.1098/rstb.1999.0398

Stark, J.S., Smith, J., King, C.K., Lindsay, M., Stark, S., Palmer, A.S., Snape, I., Bridgen, P. & Riddle, M. (2015). Physical, chemical, biological and ecotoxicological properties of wastewater discharged from Davis Station, Antarctica. Cold Regions Science and Technology, 113:52-62. doi:10.1016/j.coldregions.2015.02.006

Stark, J.S., Bridgen, P., Dunshea, G., Galton-Fenzi, B., Hunter, J., Johnstone, G., King, C., Leeming, R., Palmer, A., Smith, J. & Snape, I. (2016). Dispersal and dilution of wastewater from an ocean outfall at Davis Station, Antarctica, and resulting environmental contamination. Chemosphere152:142-157. doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2016.02.053

Stanwell-Smith, D. & Barnes, D.K. (1997). Benthic community development in Antarctica: recruitment and growth on settlement panels at Signy Island. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology212:61-79. doi:10.1016/S0022-0981(96)02754-2

Strathmann, R.R., Kendall, L.R., and Marsh, A.G. (2006). Embryonic and larval development of a cold adapted Antarctic ascidian. Polar Biology, 29:495-501. doi: 10.1007/s00300-005-0080-7.

Strugnell, J.M., Rogers, A.D., Prodöhl, P.A., Collins, M.A. & Allcock, A.L. (2008). The thermohaline expressway: the Southern Ocean as a centre of origin for deep‐sea octopuses. Cladistics, 24:853-860. doi:10.1111/j.1096-0031.2008.00234.x

Thatje, S., Calcagno, J.A., Lovrich, G.A., Sartoris, F.J., and Anger, K. (2003). Extended hatching periods in the subantarctic lithodid crabs LIthodes santolla and Paralomis granulosa (Crustacea: Decapoda: Lithodidae). Helgoland Marine Research, 57: 110-113. doi: 10.1007/s10152-003-0145-3.

Thatje, S., Hillenbrand, C.D. & Larter, R. (2005). On the origin of Antarctic marine benthic community structure. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 20:534-540. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2005.07.010

Thrush, S., Dayton, P., Cattaneo-Vietti, R., Chiantore, M., Cummings, V., Andrew, N., Hawes, I., ... & Schwarz, A.M. (2006). Broad-scale factors influencing the biodiversity of coastal benthic communities of the Ross Sea. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 53(8-10): 959-971. doi: 10.1016/j.dsr2.2006.02.006

Tin, T., Fleming, Z.L., Hughes, K.A., Ainley, D.G., Convey, P., Moreno, C.A., Pfeiffer, S., Scott, J. & Snape, I. (2009). Impacts of local human activities on the Antarctic environment. Antarctic Science21:.3-33. doi:10.1017/S0954102009001722

Thompson, B.W., Riddle, M.J. & Stark, J.S. (2003). Cost-efficient methods for marine pollution monitoring at Casey Station, East Antarctica: the choice of sieve mesh-size and taxonomic resolution. Marine Pollution Bulletin46:232-243. doi:10.1016/S0025-326X(02)00366-1

Tyler, P.A., Reeves, S., Peck, L., Clarke, A. & Powell, D. (2003). Seasonal variation in the gametogenic ecology of the Antarctic scallop Adamussium colbeckiPolar Biology26:727-733. doi:10.1007/s00300-003-0548-2 

Van Cauwenberghe, L., Vanreusel, A., Mees, J. & Janssen, C.R. (2013). Microplastic pollution in deep-sea sediments. Environmental pollution, 182:495-499. doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2013.08.013

Vecchione, M., Allcock, L., Piatkowski, U., Jorgensen, E. & Barratt, I. (2009). Persistent elevated abundance of octopods in an overfished Antarctic area. Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press.

Waller, C.L., Griffiths, H.J., Waluda, C.M., Thorpe, S.E., Loaiza, I., Moreno, B., Pacherres, C.O. & Hughes, K.A. (2017). Microplastics in the Antarctic marine system: an emerging area of research. Science of the Total Environment, 598:220-227. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.03.283

Webb, A.L., Hughes, K.A., Grand, M.M., Lohan, M.C. & Peck, L.S. (2019). Sources of elevated heavy metal concentrations in sediments and benthic marine invertebrates of the western Antarctic Peninsula. Science of The Total Environment, p.134268.  doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.134268

Wiencke, C., Clayton, M.N. & Wägele, J.W., 2002. Antarctic seaweeds (Vol. 9). Ruggell: ARG Gantner Verlag.

Wiencke, C., Amsler, C.D. & Clayton, M.N. (2014). 5.1. Macroalgae. In: C, De Broyer & P, Koubbi (eds) Biogeographic Atlas of the Southern Ocean (pp. 66-73). Cambridge, UK: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research.

Würzberg, L., Peters, J., Schüller, M. & Brandt, A. (2011). Diet insights of deep-sea polychaetes derived from fatty acid analyses. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 58(1-2): 153-162. doi: 10.1016/j.dsr2.2010.10.014

Würzberg, L., Peters, J., Flores, H. & Brandt, A. (2011). Demersal fishes from the Antarctic shelf and deep sea: A diet study based on fatty acid patterns and gut content analyses. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 58(19-20): 2036-2042. doi: 10.1016/j.dsr2.2011.05.012

Würzberg, L., Peters, J. & Brandt, A. (2011). Fatty acid patterns of Southern Ocean shelf and deep sea peracarid crustaceans and a possible food source, foraminiferans. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 58(19-20): 2027-2035. doi: 10.1016/j.dsr2.2011.05.013 

People


Contributing authors

NameAffiliationNotes
Madeleine BrasierIMAS/ACE CRC
Amanda ZieglerUniversity of Hawai'i
Blanca FiguerolaICM-CSIC






Acknowledgements

We thank the following people for their assistance with the development of this page:

Name

Affiliation

Assistance

Julian GuttAWIPage structure and content 
Huw GriffithsBritish Antarctic SurveyPage structure and content 
Anton van de PutteKU Leuven Page structure and content 

Version history

 Version number

Date of creation *

Expert reviewers

Peer reviewers

Date of completion*

1.02019.05.19Amanda Ziegler











* Date format is YYYY.MM.DD

Citation



Please cite this page as:
SOKI Wiki (2014) Thursday 24 Oct 2019.



  • No labels

0 Comments

You are not logged in. Any changes you make will be marked as anonymous. You may want to Log In if you already have an account.
CAPTCHA image