Ecological monitoring of the Russian continental shelf of Arctic seas: criterion selection, assessment, and prospects
https://doi.org/10.21443/3034-1434-2023-1-1-51-58
Abstract
The article provides an analytical review of long-term studies assessing the ecological state of Arctic marine ecosystems. The focus is on integral estimation methods. The issues associated with the application of biological methods for assessing the ecological state of the Russian continental shelf of Arctic seas are considered. The author briefly reviews existing methods for biotesting the marine environment and provides examples of the use of biotest systems. On the example of model benthic communities, an ecological assessment of marine benthic ecosystems is presented.
About the Author
D. K. Alexeev
Russian State Hydrometeorological University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Saint Petersburg
References
1. Nesterova N.P., Simonov A.I. Chemical pollution and methods of dealing with it. In: Oceanology. Ocean Chemistry. T.1. Chemistry of ocean waters. Moscow: Nauka Publ.; 1979, p. 436–456. (In Russ.)
2. Krivolutsky D.A., Stepanov A.M., Tikhomirov F.A., Fedorov E.L. Ecological regulation on the example of radioactive and chemical pollution of ecosystems. In: Methods of bioindication of the environment in the areas of nuclear power plants. Moscow: Nauka Publ.; 1988, p. 4–16. (In Russ.)
3. Alexeev D.K., Galtsova V.V. Effect of radioactive pollution on the biodiversity of marine benthic ecosystems of the Russian Arctic shelf. Polar Science. 2012;6(2):183–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polar.2012.04.001
4. Kuznetsov A.P. Ecology of pubic communities in the shelf zones of the World Ocean (trophic structure of the marine benthic fauna). Moscow: Nauka Publ.; 1980. (In Russ.)
5. Dauer D.M., Alden R.W. Long-term trends in the macrobenthos and water quality of the lower Chesapeake Bay (1985–1991). Marine Pollution Bulletin. 1995;30(12):840–850. https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-326X(95)00091-Z
6. Simpson E.H. Measurement of Diversity. Nature. 1949;163:688. http://doi.org/10.1038/163688a0
7. Shannon C.E., Weaver W. The Mathematical Theory of Communication. The University of Illinois Press, Urbana; 1979.
8. Pielou E.C. The Measurement of Diversity in Different Types of Biological Collections. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 1966;13:131–144. http://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5193(66)90013-0
9. Odum E.P. Basic Ecology. N.Y., Philadelphia: Holt-Saunders International Editions; 1983.
10. Warwick R.M. A new method for detecting pollution effects on marine macrobenthic communities. Mar. Biol. 1986;92:557–562. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00392515
11. Beukema J.J. An evaluation of the ABC-method (abundance/biomass comparison) as applied to macrozoobenthic communities living on tidal flats in the Dutch Wadden Sea. Mar. Biol. 1988;99:425–433. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02112136
12. Meire P.M., Dereu, J. Use of the Abundance/Biomass Comparison Method for Detecting Environmental Stress: Some Considerations Based on Intertidal Macrozoobenthos and Bird Communities. Journal of Applied Ecology. 1990;27(1):210–223. https://doi.org/10.2307/2403579
13. Raffaelli D.G., Mason C.F. Pollution monitoring with meiofauna, using the ratio of nematodes to copepods. Marine Pollution Bulletin. 1981;12(5):158–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/0025326X(81)90227-7
14. Wormald A.P. Effects of a spill of marine diesel oil on the meiofauna of a sandy beach at picnic bay, Hong Kong. Environmental Pollution. 1976;11(2):117–130.
15. Pogrebov V.B., Galtsova V.V., Fokin S.I. Meioand microbenthos of the area of the Prirazlomnoye oil field: assessment of the state for the purpose of environmental monitoring. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Series 3. Biology. 1995;(4):9–19. (In Russ.)
16. Galtsova V.V., Kulangieva L.V. Meiobenthos of the Yarnyshnaya Bay of the Barents Sea. Biologiya moray = Russian Journal of Marine Biology. 1996;22(1):3–9. (In Russ.)
17. Zenin A.N., Belousov N.V. Hydrochemical Dictionary. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat Publ.; 1988. (In Russ.)
18. Dyatlov S.E., Petrosyan A.G. Phaeodactylum tricornutum Bohl. (Chrysophyta) as a Test Species. Salinity Tolerance Range. Algology. 2001; 11(2): 259–264. (In Russ.)
19. Galtsova V.V., Kulangieva L.V., Alekseev D.K. Assessment of the ecological state of bottom sediments in the Kola Bay of the Barents Sea. In: Questions of applied ecology. Collection of scientific papers. St. Petersburg: Russian State Humanitarian University; 2002, p. 65–70. (In Russ.)
20. I. Dmitriev V.V., Myakisheva N.V., Khovanov N.V. Multi-criteria assessment of the ecological state and sustainability of geosystems based on the method of summary indicators. I. The quality of natural waters. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Series 7. Geology. Geography. 1996;(3):40–52. (In Russ.)
21. Galtsova V.V., Alexeev D.K., Dmitriev V.V. Multi-criteria assessment of the ecological state of the shelf zone of the Arctic seas of Russia. In: Geographical and geoecological aspects of the development of nature and society. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University; 2008, p. 242–251. (In Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Alexeev D.K. Ecological monitoring of the Russian continental shelf of Arctic seas: criterion selection, assessment, and prospects. Arctic and Innovations. 2023;1(1):51-58. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21443/3034-1434-2023-1-1-51-58
Views:
517
Email this article 