2005
DOI: 10.1357/002224005774464193
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Diffusion of organic and inorganic solutes through macrofaunal mucus secretions and tube linings in marine sediments

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
22
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The presence of tubes and burrows increases the sediment surface area (i.e., m 2 burrow surface area m 22 surface sediment) available for diffusive exchange 1-5 times relative to the sediment surface alone (Davey 1994). However, burrow walls should not be viewed simply as an extension of the sediment-water interface because physico-chemical properties such as redox conditions (Aller 1994), diffusion scales (Gilbert et al 2003), diffusive permeability (Hannides et al 2005), solute gradients (Meyers et al 1987), and organic matter content (Papaspyrou et al 2005) may be quite different in burrow walls relative to surface sediments. Irrigation and feeding activities of infauna also supply oxidants and reactive substrates deep into sediments, thus influencing solute exchange and enhancing total microbial metabolism by stimulating oxic and suboxic organic matter remineralization (see review by Kristensen and Kostka 2005).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The presence of tubes and burrows increases the sediment surface area (i.e., m 2 burrow surface area m 22 surface sediment) available for diffusive exchange 1-5 times relative to the sediment surface alone (Davey 1994). However, burrow walls should not be viewed simply as an extension of the sediment-water interface because physico-chemical properties such as redox conditions (Aller 1994), diffusion scales (Gilbert et al 2003), diffusive permeability (Hannides et al 2005), solute gradients (Meyers et al 1987), and organic matter content (Papaspyrou et al 2005) may be quite different in burrow walls relative to surface sediments. Irrigation and feeding activities of infauna also supply oxidants and reactive substrates deep into sediments, thus influencing solute exchange and enhancing total microbial metabolism by stimulating oxic and suboxic organic matter remineralization (see review by Kristensen and Kostka 2005).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, this is consistent with the lower sediment resuspension in the final erosion experiment at the high cockle density compared to the medium cockle density (see below). The hypothesis that mucus production by molluscs acts to bind sediment particles is supported by the study of Hannides et al (2005), who showed that the marine snails Neverita duplicata and Euspira heros crawling over glass beads increased the cohesiveness of the beads compared to clean beads. Detailed examination of the 8 tidal cycles corresponding to the 3rd and 4th days of the experiment gives more insight into the erosion and deposition processes occurring during each tidal-current cycle.…”
Section: Sediment Destabilisation By Cocklesmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…The reduction of the initial bSiO 2 dissolution rate with increasing TEP content, as well as elevated dSi concentrations in aggregate pore water, imply that TEP may play a role in decreasing dSi flux out of aggregates and therefore the initial bSiO 2 dissolution rate of aggregated diatoms. A reduction of the diffusion of solutes through mucus-coated sediments compared to sediments in free solution has been attributed to both size and charge inhibition due to mucus (Hannides et al 2005). Porous sediments covered with TEP-like mucus are to some extent comparable to marine snow-sized aggregates, although the porosity of aggregates is much higher.…”
Section: Transparent Exopolymer Particlesmentioning
confidence: 99%