The GEEP Workshop: field sampling

Folium, OA; Moe, KA

doi:10.3354/meps046007

Cited by 12 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1 of Follum & Moe 1988), owned by the Norwegian Institute for Water Research. The indoor mesocosm facility consists of 2 main concrete enclosures, each divided into 3 basins with bottom areas from 28 to 39 m2.…”

Section: Mesocosmsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On 17 April, 1986,20 box samples (47.5 X 47.5 cm area, 30 cm deep, 10 cm overlying bottom water) were sampled at B j~r -nehodet Bay, Oslofjord (see Fig. 1 of Follum & Moe 1988) and transplanted to the mesocosms. Five boxes were placed in each basin at equal distances from the inlet water in order to give a similar water flow pattern across all sediment surfaces.…”

Section: Transplantation Of Sediments and Organismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When sampling a basin for epifauna, the water of a single basin was drained to a depth of 10 cm, and all individuals could thereby be easily picked out by hand within 1 h. All samples were coded before being handed over to workshop participants, with the exception of H dose mussels, which were the only samples not analysed 'blind' at the workshop. Packing and transport of samples to the University of Oslo followed the same procedure as for field samples (Follum & Moe 1988).…”

Section: Sampling Programmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The GEEP Workshop: mesocosm exposures

Bakke¹,

Folium²,

Moe³

et al. 1988

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For the GEEP Workshop, 4 indoor mesocosms at the Marine Research Station Solbergstrand were stocked with equal numbers of Platichthys flesus, Carcinus maenas, Mytilus edulis, httorina littorea and Nucula tenuis as well as subtidal soft bottom sections taken with an USNEL box corer. For 4 mo prior to the workshop, 3 of the basins were continuously exposed to a mixture of diesel oil (125.32 and 6 pg 1-' total hydrocarbons in the water) and copper (nominal 20, 5 and 0.8 pg 1-' Cu2+), with the fourth mesocosm basin as a control (measured total hydrocarbons of 3 pg I-'). Sediment sections were sampled by corers for community fauna1 analysis prior to the workshop; sampling of N. tenuis and epifauna was carried out during the workshop.

show abstract

Section: Mesocosmsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Transplantation Of Sediments and Organismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Sampling Programmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The GEEP Workshop: mesocosm exposures

Bakke¹,

Folium²,

Moe³

et al. 1988

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We give here a sketch of the GEEP Workshop time-(1) Great stress was laid on obtaining comparable table; further timing details of the field programme can be found in Follum & Moe (1988) and details of the experimental programme in Bakke et al (1988). Practical effort began in January 1986, with a cruise on the research ship F/F 'Trygve Braarud' (University of Oslo) to the Frierfjord/Langesundfjord in order to sample the benthic community macrofauna.…”

Section: Statistical Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Background and rationale to a practical workshop on biological effects of pollutants

Bayne¹,

Clarke²,

Gray³

1988

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Practical Workshop on Biological Effects of Pollutants (GEEP Workshop) was held in August 1986 at the University of Oslo, Norway, under the auspices of the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission's Group of Experts on the Effects of Pollutants (GEEP). The workshop was attended by 35 participants from 11 countries. This MEPS SPECIAL contains the major results and conclusions, and thls first paper introduces and explains the background and rationale to the workshop.

show abstract

“…Folium & Moe (1988). Site A had a higher species diversity and site C the lowest but the others were not significantly different ( Figure 5).…”

Section: Frierfjord Macrobenthosmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of some methods for analysing changes in benthic community structure

1991

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Statistical methods for analysing changes in community structure fall under the three general headings of univariate, graphical/distributional and multivariate. These methods are applied to a variety of benthic community data (macrobenthos, meiobenthos, corals, demersal fish), from a variety of localities (intertidal/subtidal, temperate/tropical) and over both spatial and temporal scales. Four general conclusions emerge from this comparative study:(1) The similarity between sites or times based on their univariate or graphical/ distributional properties is usually different from their clustering in multivariate analyses.(2) Species dependent (multivariate) methods are much more sensitive than species independent (univariate and graphical/distributional) methods in discriminating between sites or times.(3) In examples where more than one component of the fauna has been studied, univariate and graphical/distributional methods may give different results for different components, whereas multivariate methods tend to give the same results.(4) By matching multivariate ordinations from subsets of environmental data to an ordination of faunistic data, the key environmental variables responsible for community change may be identified.

show abstract

The GEEP Workshop: field sampling

Cited by 12 publications

References 1 publication

The GEEP Workshop: mesocosm exposures

The GEEP Workshop: mesocosm exposures

Background and rationale to a practical workshop on biological effects of pollutants

A Comparison of some methods for analysing changes in benthic community structure

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About