Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m8s7h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T21:07:01.681Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sand and mud communities in the Dovey estuary

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

F. Louise Beanland
F. Louise Beanland
Affiliation:
Lecturer in Biology, Municipal College, Portsmouth
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This paper presents results of an ecological study towards high-tide level near the mouth of the Dovey estuary, carried out in 1925–6. The area was treated as an extension of the sea floor, the only comparable work at that time being submarine. Petersen (1918) showed that on the bed of shallow seas the fauna could be grouped into “animal communities”, whose constitution was determined by depth, distance from shore, shelter and salinity. Analysed with regard to distance from high-water mark, and degree of shelter, the fauna of this part of the estuary shows Petersen's Macoma community over most of the area, with a Corophium community at high tide in the more sheltered part. Davis (1925), in the North Sea, substituted “soil associations” as an alternative ecological unit, a certain grade of soil carrying its typical fauna wherever it might be found. The two groupings already found in the Dovey estuary clearly emerged as soil associations, after adoption of a reliable method for analysis of fine-grade soils. Up to the present, oceanographers have used sieves or elutriation for soil analysis. Up to the present, oceanographers have used sieves or elutriation for soil analysis. These methods are unsatisfactory for examinations of estuarine soils, with their large proportion of fine material.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 24 , Issue 2 , August 1940 , pp. 589 - 611
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1940

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Allen, E. J., 1899. On the fauna and bottom deposits near the 30-fathom line from the Eddystone Grounds to Start Point. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. V, pp. 365–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, E. J. & Todd, R. A., 1900. Fauna of the Salcombe estuary. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. VI, p. 151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, E. J. & Todd, R. A., 1901. The fauna of the Exe estuary. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. VI, p. 295.Google Scholar
Bassindale, R., 1938. The infauna of the Mersey estuary. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. XXIII, pp. 83–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bate, C. S. & Westwood, P. O., 1863. A History of the British Sessile-Eyed Crustacea, Vol. I, pp. 493–6. London.Google Scholar
Borley, J. O., 1923. The marine deposits of the southern North Sea. Min. Agr. Fish., Fishery Invest., Series 11, Vol. IV, No. 6, pp. 1–62.Google Scholar
Crawford, G. I., 1937. A review of the amphipod genus Corophium, with notes on the British species. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. XXI, No. 2, pp. 589–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, F. M., 1925. Quantitative studies on the fauna of the sea bottom. No. 2. Results of the investigations into the southern North Sea, 1921–24. Min. Agr. Fish., Fishery Invest., Series 11, Vol. VIII, No. 4, pp. 1–50.Google Scholar
Durlacher, F. W., 1914. On the drift of sewage in the Dovey estuary in relation to the mussel beds. Trans. Biol. Soc. Liverpool, Vol. XXVIII, pp. 335–52.Google Scholar
Elmhirst, R., 1932. Quantitative studies between tide marks. The Glasgow Naturalist, Vol. X, pp. 56–62.Google Scholar
Fraser, J. H., 1932. Observations on the fauna and constituents of an estuarine mud in a polluted area. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. XVIII, pp. 69–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, T. J., 1930. Preliminary notes on the bionomics of the amphipod Corophium volutator Pallas. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. XVI, pp. 761–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marine Biological Association, 1931. Plymouth Marine Fauna. 2nd edition.Google Scholar
Nicol, E. A. T., 1935. The ecology of a salt marsh. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. XX, pp. 203–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Percival, E., 1929. Report on the fauna of the estuaries of the River Tamar and the River Lynher. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. XVI, pp. 81–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petersen, C. G. J., 1918. The sea bottom and its production offish foods; a survey of the work done in connexion with valuation of the Danish waters from 1883 to 1917. Rept. Dan. Biol. Sta., Vol. XXV, pp. 1–62. Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Pirrie, M. E., Bruce, J. R. & Moore, H. B., 1932. A quantitative study of the fauna of the sandy beach at Port Erin. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. XVIII, pp. 279–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rees, C. B., 1940. A preliminary study of the ecology of a mud flat. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. XXIV, pp. 185–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, G. W., 1922. A new method for the mechanical analysis of soils and other dispersions. Journ. Agr. Sci., Vol. XII, pp. 306–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spooner, G. M. & Moore, H. B., 1940. The ecology of the Tamar estuary. VI. An account of the macrofauna of the intertidal muds. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. XXIV, pp. 283–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stephen, A. C., 1929. Studies on the Scottish marine fauna. Trans. Roy. Soc. Edin., Vol. 56, pp. 291–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar