Abstract
This study presents a novel approach resulting in the first cold-water coral reef biomass maps, used to assess associated ecosystem functions, such as carbon (C) stock and turnover. We focussed on two dominant ecosystem engineers at the Mingulay Reef Complex, the coral Lophelia pertusa (rubble, live and dead framework) and the sponge Spongosorites coralliophaga. Firstly, from combining biological (high-definition video, collected specimens), environmental (extracted from multibeam bathymetry) and ecosystem function (oxygen consumption rate values) data, we calculated biomass, C stock and turnover which can feed into assessments of C budgets. Secondly, using those values, we employed random forest modelling to predictively map whole-reef live coral and sponge biomass. The whole-reef mean biomass of S. coralliophaga was estimated to be 304 T (range 168–440 T biomass), containing 10 T C (range 5–18 T C) stock. The mean skeletal mass of the coral colonies (live and dead framework) was estimated to be 3874 T (range 507–9352 T skeletal mass), containing a mean of 209 T of biomass (range 26–515 T biomass) and a mean of 465 T C (range 60–1122 T C) stock. These estimates were used to calculate the C turnover rates, using respiration data available in the literature. These calculations revealed that the epi- and microbial fauna associated with coral rubble were the largest contributor towards C turnover in the area with a mean of 163 T C year−1 (range 149–176 T C year−1). The live and dead framework of L. pertusa were estimated to overturn a mean of 32 T C year−1 (range 4–93 T C year−1) and 44 T C year−1 (range 6–139 T C year−1), respectively. Our calculations showed that the Mingulay Reef overturned three to seven (with a mean of four) times more C than a soft-sediment area at a similar depth. As proof of concept, the supply of C needed from surface water primary productivity to the reef was inferred. Since 65–124 T C year−1 is supplied by natural deposition and our study suggested that a mean of 241 T C year−1 (range 160–400 T C year−1), was turned over by the reef, a mean of 117–176 T C year−1 (range 36–335 T C year−1) of the reef would therefore be supplied by tidal downwelling and/or deep-water advection. Our results indicate that monitoring and/or managing surface primary productivity would be a key consideration for any efforts towards the conservation of cold-water coral reef ecosystems.
Highlights
Cold-water coral (CWC) reefs are important marine ecosystems, as they are hotspots of biomass and biodiversity that provide a wide range of ecosystem processes and services (Armstrong et al 2012) through carbon (C) cycling, C burial, fisheries and new opportunities for pharmaceutical development (Foley et al 2010; Skropeta 2008; van Oevelen et al 2009)
This study presents a novel approach resulting in the first cold-water coral reef biomass maps, used to assess associated ecosystem functions, such as carbon (C) stock and turnover
Our results indicate that monitoring and/or managing surface primary productivity would be a key consideration for any efforts towards the conservation of cold-water coral reef ecosystems
Summary
Cold-water coral (CWC) reefs are important marine ecosystems, as they are hotspots of biomass and biodiversity that provide a wide range of ecosystem processes and services (Armstrong et al 2012) through carbon (C) cycling, C burial, fisheries and new opportunities for pharmaceutical development (Foley et al 2010; Skropeta 2008; van Oevelen et al 2009). Climate change models predict global increases in ocean temperatures, as well as associated increases in ocean acidification and decreases in ocean oxygen levels (IPCC 2018). These changes might affect ocean currents, organisms’ metabolic demands and the export flux of POM, affecting the amount of biomass deep-sea ecosystems can support and affecting ecosystem processes such as C cycling (Sweetman et al 2017). Biomass values can be used to calculate C standing stock, which could feed into assessments of C budgets and help evaluate the importance of CWC reefs as carbonate sinks or sources (Burrows et al 2014; Titschack et al 2015)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
