Search

Arctic fjords ecosystems are highly dynamic, with organisms exposed to various natural stressors along with productivity clines driven by advection of water masses from shelves. The benthic response to these environmental clines has been extensively studied using traditional, morphology-based approaches mostly focusing on macroinvertebrates. In this study we analyse the effects of glacially mediated disturbance on the biodiversity of benthic macrofauna and meiobenthos (meiofauna and Foraminifera) in a Svalbard fjord by comparing morphology and eDNA metabarcoding. Three genetic markers targeting metazoans (COI), meiofauna (18S V1V2) and Foraminifera (18S 37f) were analyzed. Univariate measures of alpha diversity and multivariate compositional dissimilarities were calculated and tested for similarities in response to environmental gradients using correlation analysis. Our study showed different taxonomic composition of morphological and molecular datasets for both macrofauna and meiobenthos. Some taxonomic groups while abundant in metabarcoding data were almost absent in morphology-based inventory and vice versa. In general, species richness and diversity measures in macrofauna morphological data were higher than in metabarcoding, and similar for the meiofauna. Both methodological approaches showed different patterns of response to the glacially mediated disturbance for the macrofauna and the meiobenthos. Macrofauna showed an evident distinction in taxonomic composition and a dramatic cline in alpha diversity indices between the outer and inner parts of fjord, while the meiobenthos showed a gradual change and more subtle responses to environmental changes along the fjord axis. The two methods can be seen as complementing rather than replacing each other. Morphological approach provides more accurate inventory of larger size species and more reliable quantitative data, while metabarcoding allows identification of inconspicuous taxa that are overlooked in morphology-based studies. As different taxa may show different sensitivities to environmental changes, both methods shall be used to monitor marine biodiversity in Arctic ecosystems and its response to dramatically changing environmental conditions., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Maria Wlodarska-Kowalczuk reports financial support was provided by National Science Centre Poland. If there are other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The current understanding of Arctic ecosystems is deeply rooted in the classical view of a bottom-up controlled system with strong physical forcing and seasonality in primary-production regimes. Consequently, the Arctic polar night is commonly disregarded as a time of year when biological activities are reduced to a minimum due to a reduced food supply. Here, based upon a multidisciplinary ecosystem-scale study from the polar night at 79°N, we present an entirely different view. Instead of an ecosystem that has entered a resting state, we document a system with high activity levels and biological interactions across most trophic levels. In some habitats, biological diversity and presence of juvenile stages were elevated in winter months compared to the more productive and sunlit periods. Ultimately, our results suggest a different perspective regarding ecosystem function that will be of importance for future environmental management and decision making, especially at a time when Arctic regions are experiencing accelerated environmental change [1]., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Seagrasses and associated macrophytes are important components of coastal systems as ecosystem engineers, habitat formers, and providers of food and shelter for other organisms. The positive impacts of seagrass vegetation on zoobenthic abundance and diversity (as compared to bare sands) are well documented, but only in surveys performed in summer, which is the season of maximum canopy development. Here we present the results of the first study of the relationship between the seasonal variability of seagrass vegetation and persistence and magnitude of contrasts in faunal communities between vegetated and bare sediments. The composition, abundance, biomass, and diversity of macrozoobenthos in both habitats were compared five times throughout the year in temperate eelgrass meadows in the southern Baltic Sea. Significant positive effects of macrophyte cover on invertebrate density and biomass were recorded only in June, July, and October when the seagrass canopy was relatively well developed. The effects of vegetation cover on faunal species richness, diversity, and composition persisted throughout the year, but the magnitude of these effects varied seasonally and followed changes in macrophyte biomass. The strongest effects were observed in July and coincided with maximums in seagrass biomass and the diversity and biomass of other macrophytes. These observations indicate that in temperate, clearly seasonal systems the assessment of macrophyte impact cannot be based solely on observations performed in just one season, especially when that season is the one in which macrophyte growth is at its maximum. The widely held belief that macrophyte cover strongly influences benthic fauna in marine coastal habitats, which is based on summer surveys, should be revisited and complemented with information obtained in other seasons.