Sabellaria spinulosa on stable circalittoral mixed sediment

Summary

UK and Ireland classification

Description

The tube-building polychaete Sabellaria spinulosa at high abundances on mixed sediment. This species typically forms loose agglomerations of tubes forming a low-lying matrix of sand, gravel, mud and tubes on the seabed. The infauna comprises typical sublittoral polychaete species such as Protodorvillea kefersteiniPholoe inornataHarmothoe spp, Scoloplos armigerMediomastus fragilisLanice conchilega and cirratulids, together with the bivalve Abra alba, and tube building amphipods such as Ampelisca spp. The epifauna comprise a variety of bryozoans including Flustra foliaceaAlcyonidium diaphanum and Cellepora pumicosa, in addition to calcareous tubeworms, pycnogonids, hermit crabs and amphipods. The reefs formed by Sabellaria consolidate the sediment and allow the settlement of other species not found in adjacent habitats leading to a diverse community of epifaunal and infaunal species. The development of such reefs is assisted by the settlement behaviour of larval Sabellaria which are known to selectively settle in areas of suitable sediment and particularly on existing Sabellaria tubes (Wilson, 1929; Tait & Dipper, 1997). These reefs are particularly affected by dredging or trawling and in heavily dredged or disturbed areas an impoverished community may be left (e.g. SS.SCS.CCS.Pkef) particularly if the activity or disturbance is prolonged. However, it is likely that reefs of Sabellaria spinulosa can recover quite quickly from short-term or intermediate levels of disturbance, as found by Vorberg (2000). In the case of disturbance from shrimp fisheries, recovery will be accelerated if some of the reef is left intact following the disturbance as this will assist in larval settlement of the species. Variations of the biotope may appear in sandier sediments, with a lesser extent of reef (Information from JNCC, 2022).

Depth range

10-20 m, 20-30 m

Additional information

-

Habitat review

Ecology

Ecological and functional relationships

As a result of the complex habitat created by the Sabellaria spinulosa tubes (see Habitat Complexity), there are a wealth of different species associated with SS.SBR.PoR.SspiMx. Sabellaria spinulosa crusts also occur amongst sediment so that a mixture of sessile or sedentary epifauna is mixed with burrowing fauna in the sediment. In the Thames estuary, Attrill et al. (1996) discovered that, in an area where Sabellaria spinulosa was among the most abundant fauna, species richness in this area was much higher than in surrounding areas due to the stability of the sediment and the high number of available niches. >200 species of invertebrates were recorded over a three year period in <5 m² (Attrill et al., 1996). The relationships between members of the associated community are not especially complex but the roles of various fauna have been elucidated below.
  • Aside from Sabellaria spinulosa, the community is dominated by various different polychaetes. These include deposit feeders such as Caulleriella zetlandica, Mediomastus fragilis, Scalibregma inflatum, Scoloplos armiger and Spiophanes bombyx. Carnivorous species may also be common including Eteone longa, Eumida sanguinea, Lumbrineris gracilis and Nephtys hombergi, the latter of which is also a scavenger.
  • Suspension feeders are diverse and may include dead man's fingers Alcyonium digitatum, the acorn barnacle Balanus crenatus, the tubeworm Spirobranchus triqueter and the baked bean ascidian Dendrodoa grossularia. Several suspension feeding bivalves may also be present, especially Abra alba, Hiatella arctica (a boring bivalve), Kurtiella bidentata, Modiolus modiolus and Sphenia binghami. Some of these are also deposit feeders as is the bivalve Nucula nitidosa. Sphenia binghami may be found nestled in crevices attached by a weak byssus. Other suspension feeders include the brittlestars Ophuira sp, especially Ophiura albida, amphipods such as Ampelisca sp. and bryozoans including Flustra foliacea and Alcyonidium diaphanum. Ampelisca tenuicornis is primarily a deposit feeder but is also capable of suspension feeding.
  • Mobile epibenthic predators include hermit crabs such as Pagurus bernhardus and pycnogonids. Pagurus bernhardus is an active omnivore that scavenges and preys upon various food items. It is also capable of suspension feeding. The pycnogonid Achelia echinata preys upon the bryozoan Flustra foliacea.
  • No macroalgae are associated with the biotope since it occurs below the compensation zone for photosynthesis for most algal species. Also, the turbid habitat within which the biotope is found may be detrimental to many algal species both in terms of increased light attenuation and physical abrasion caused by the scouring of the sand on the fronds.
  • Although Sabellaria spinulosa is, by its nature, an ephemeral species, the stable nature of the substratum associated with SS.SBR.PoR.SspiMx mean that the crusts of Sabellaria spinulosa may be well established, certainly more than one year old. George & Warwick (1985) found that most of the worms in the aggregation of Sabellaria spinulosa they studied in the Bristol Channel were more than one year old. Furthermore, the species associated with them were found to be slow growing. The associated community are likely to depend on the frequency of the disturbance to the habitat. Furthermore, areas of SS.SBR.PoR.SspiMx that have recently disturbed are likely to be characterised by a very different fauna to a well established and undisturbed variant.

Seasonal and longer term change

Sabellaria spinulosa are known as 'r'-strategists and are adapted to live in frequently disturbed environments. Despite the stable nature of the sediment on which SS.SBR.PoR.SspiMx is found, winter storms may be expected to break up the Sabellaria spinulosa matrix every few years although given the depth at which the biotope is found, it will be affected comparatively less than shallower mixed sediment communities. In areas where the biotope is periodically destroyed by storm events, a cyclical shift in biotopes from SspiMx to other biotopes e.g. SS.SCS.CCS.Pkef or SS.SSa.CMuSa.AalbNuc , with re-establishment of the Sabellaria colonies in the following year, may occur (Connor et al., 2004). Crusts of Sabellaria spinulosa are likely to reform within 1-3 years. George & Warwick (1985) found that most of the worms in the aggregation of Sabellaria spinulosa they studied in the Bristol Channel were more than one year old. Furthermore, the species associated with them were found to be slow growing. Due to the lack of algal species, little change is to be expected in terms of floral growth. The most likely source of seasonal changes is species composition because some short lived species such as Chaetozone setosa will die off over the winter months and, therefore, species diversity can be expected to decrease in winter. The time taken to develop, longevity and importance as a habitat of raised reefs of Sabellaria spinulosa is not established but is now (2005) the subject of studies.

Habitat structure and complexity

At the Bristol Channel location studied by George & Warwick (1985), densities in excess of 4,000/m² for loosely aggregated Sabellaria spinulosa were recorded. The Sabellaria at their study site was loosely aggregated and not extended above the seabed in a 'reef' formation, that is, their study focused on a biotope more representative of SS.SBR.PoR.SspiMx.

In the UK SACs Biogenic Reef volume (Holt et al., 1998), CMX.SspiMx has been described as a biogenic reef and, although it may be destroyed by winter storms, will offer a stabilizing effect on the substratum. In addition to the stabilizing effect of the tubes, the physical structure of the mass of tubes themselves provides a matrix of burrows, nooks and crannies which are ideal for offering protection for nestling and cryptic species. Other tube building polychaetes include Lanice conchilega. Lanice conchilega tubes provide structure to the sediment, very much like a hollow rod stabilising the sediment (Jones & Jago, 1993). Tube building amphipods such as Ampelisca sp. will also contribute to the habitat complexity, as will the bryozoan Flustra foliacea. The matrix of various tubes and other erect structures will trap sediment providing food for deposit feeders. The trapped sediment also means that the biotope will be composed of habitats similar to both sedimentary and hard substratum environments, thereby increasing the number of potential niches. The aggregation provides shelter and protection for small species in an otherwise 'exposed' (in terms of nowhere to hide) sedimentary landscape.

Productivity

Sabellaria spinulosa 'reefs' can support a highly diverse fauna. George and Warwick (1985), reported that the total production of extensive reefs of Sabellaria spinulosa in the Bristol Channel was 34.1 g dry wt / m² / year. 96 % of production attributed to suspension feeders, of which Ophiothrix fragilis dominated. This species is not though to be particularly common in CMX.SspiMx although Ophiura sp., especially Ophiura albida may be abundant. Sabellaria spinulosa itself has a rather low rate of production (George & Warwick, 1985).

Recruitment processes

Recruitment processes are described for dominant and representative species.

Wilson (1970b) stated that the larvae of Sabellaria spinulosa spend between six weeks and two months in the plankton. Reproductive seasonality is unclear but George & Warwick (1985) and Wilson (1970a) have both reported larval settlement in March in the Bristol Channel and Plymouth areas respectively. George & Warwick (1985) also reported a secondary smaller settlement in November in the Bristol Channel. Wilson (1970a) found that the spawning period extended from January to March in Plymouth. Fecundity and recruitment may be variable (Holt et al., 1998) but may be similar to Sabellaria alveolata. Settlement of Sabellaria spinulosa is thought to be strongly influenced by the presence of existing Sabellaria spinulosa (Wilson, 1970a). The presence of Ophiothrix fragilis can greatly reduce recruitment (Holt et al., 1998). However, Ophiothrix fragilis is not commonly associated with SS.SBR.PoR.SspiMx although Ophuira sp. may have a similar effect.

Epifauna

  • Hayward & Ryland (1995b) and Segrove (1941) suggested that breeding of Spirobranchus triqueter probably takes place throughout the year. However, Hayward & Ryland (1995b) noted a breeding peak in spring and summer and records from Port Erin by Moore (1937) indicated that breeding only took place in April in this location. Castric-Fey (1983) studied variations in settlement rate and concluded that, although the species settled all year round, very rare settlement was observed during winter and maximum settlement occurred in April, June, August and Sept-Oct. Studies in Bantry Bay (Cotter et al., 2003) revealed a single peak in recruitment during summer (especially July and August) with very little recruitment at other times of the year. Larvae are pelagic for about 2-3 weeks in the summer. However, in the winter this amount of time increases to about 2 months (Hayward & Ryland, 1995b).
  • Hornwrack Flustra foliacea is likely to be the most abundant of the bryozoan species associated with the biotope. Flustra foliacea bears both male and female zooids and is presumably hermaphrodite (see MarLIN review). Fertilization in brooding species such as Flustra foliacea is probably internal (Hayward & Ryland, 1998). Released sperm are entrained by the tentacles of feeding polypides and may not disperse far, resulting in self-fertilization. However, genetic cross-fertilization is assumed in oviparous and brooding bryozoans, although there is evidence of self fertilization (Hayward & Ryland, 1998). Dalyell (cited in Hincks, 1880) stated that ca 10,000 larvae were released from a specimen of Flustra foliacea within 3 hrs. Larvae are positively phototactic on release, and swim for only short periods. Daylength is an important cue for larval release in some species of bryozoa, and Flustra foliacea releases larvae in spring (February- April) (Eggleston, 1972a; Hayward & Ryland, 1998). The short larval life probably results in good local but poor long-range dispersal.
  • Alcyonium digitatum spawns during December and January. Gametes are released into the water and fertilization occurs externally. The embryos are neutrally buoyant and float freely for 7 days. The embryos give rise to actively swimming lecithotrophic planulae which may have an extended pelagic life before they eventually settle (usually within one or two further days) and metamorphose to polyps (Matthews, 1917; Hartnoll, 1975). In laboratory experiments, several larvae of Alcyonium digitatum failed to settle within 10 days, presumably finding the conditions unsuitable. These larvae proved to be able to survive 35 weeks as non-feeding planulae. After 14 weeks some were still swimming and after 24 weeks the surface ciliation was still active although they rested on the bottom of the tanks, by the end of the experiment at 35 weeks the larvae had shrunk to a diameter of 0.3 mm. This ability to survive for long periods in the plankton may favour the dispersal and eventual discovery of a site suitable for settlement (Hartnoll, 1975).
  • Balanus crenatus is an obligate cross-fertilizing hermaphrodite. Nauplii larvae are released from the barnacle between February and September, with peaks in April and late summer when phytoplankton levels are highest. Nauplii larvae are planktotrophic and develop in the surface waters stages before eventually developing into a cyprid larva. Peak settlement occurs in April and declines until October. Metamorphosis usually takes place within 24 hours of settlement. April-settled individuals may release larvae the same July and reach full size before their first winter.
  • Ampelisca spinipes is likely to be have direct development. Recruitment is therefore likely to be high in local areas and although the dispersal of juveniles is relatively low, adults are highly motile.
  • The timing of reproduction and recruitment in the baked bean ascidian Dendrodoa grossularia depends partly on geographic location but the general patterns is of annual episodic reproduction with major periods of settlement occurring in spring and autumn (Millar, 1954). Fertilised eggs are brooded until an advanced larvae stage.
Infauna
  • Two types of development have been reported in Scoloplos armiger: a holobenthic type and a pelagic larvae. The holobenthic type crawls out from a cocoon fixed on the substratum and burrows immediately, usually associated with intertidal populations in North Sea region and adjacent waters and a pelagic larvae associated with subtidal populations (Kruse et al., 2003; Kruse et al., 2004). At the Isle of Sylt, North Sea, egg cocoons are found on intertidal flats between Feb-April (Kruse et al., 2004). Spawning varies with location. In North Sea, main spawn March, secondary (pelagic) spawn from offshore in Oct (Kruse et al., 2004). At Whitstable, spawned four times in one year, main late Feb-April (Gibbs, 1968). 600-1920 / m² Oosterschelde (Coosen et al., 1994), 800 / m² at Whitstable (Gibbs, 1968). Scoloplos armiger does not mature until 2 years of age. Many other polychaete species will be found in this biotope.
  • The larvae of Lanice conchilega spend up to 60 days in the plankton, so that larvae could potentially disperse over a great distance, depending on the hydrographical regime. Heuers & Jaklin (1999) found that areas with adult worms or artificial tubes were settled and areas without these structures were not.
  • Species such as Spiophanes bombyx are regarded as a typical 'r' selecting species with a short lifespan, high dispersal potential and high reproductive rate.

Time for community to reach maturity

Sabellaria spinulosa is a fast growing annual species. Areas where Sabellaria spinulosa had been lost due to winter storms appeared to recolonize up to a maximum of 2.4 cm during the following summer (R. Holt, pers. comm in Jones et al., 2000). However, George & Warwick (1985) found that, in the Bristol Channel, the reef was comprised mostly of worms over one year old. They also noted that the diverse small species found nestling within the reef were slow growing. Since SS.SBR.PoR.SspiMx is characterized only by the presence of Sabellaria spinulosa, the biotope is likely to 'mature' into the recognisable biotope within one year. However, the epibiotic species typically associated with the special features of Sabellaria spinulosa crusts are likely to take longer to develop. In stable conditions the community may continue to mature into a more diverse community over several years.

Additional information

-

Preferences & Distribution

Habitat preferences

Depth Range 10-20 m, 20-30 m
Water clarity preferencesLow clarity / High turbidity
Limiting Nutrients No information
Salinity preferences Full (30-40 psu)
Physiographic preferences Open coast
Biological zone preferences Circalittoral
Substratum/habitat preferences Mixed
Tidal strength preferences Moderately strong 1 to 3 knots (0.5-1.5 m/sec.), Strong 3 to 6 knots (1.5-3 m/sec.)
Wave exposure preferences Moderately exposed, Sheltered
Other preferences

Additional Information

Reported from moderately wave exposed or sheltered areas with moderately strong to strong tidal streams.  Sabellaria spinulosa requires sand grains which it uses to construct its tubes. Therefore, it is only found in areas with turbid water (Jones et al., 2000). Although Sabellaria spinulosa may be found individually in the intertidal, reefs are only found subtidally.

Species composition

Species found especially in this biotope

    Rare or scarce species associated with this biotope

    -

    Additional information

    The MNCR recorded 283 species in 10 records of CMS.SspiMx although not all the species occurred in all records of the biotope (JNCC, 1999).

    Sensitivity review

    Sensitivity characteristics of the habitat and relevant characteristic species

    As Sabellaria spinulosa is the species that creates the biogenic reef habitat, the sensitivity assessments are based on Sabellaria spinulosa alone and do not consider the sensitivity of associated species that may be free-living or attached to the reef.  Although a wide range of species are associated with reef biotopes, which provide habitat and food resources, these characterizing species occur in a range of other biotopes and were, therefore, not considered by Gibb et al. (2014) to characterize the sensitivity of this biotope.  The reef and individual Sabellaria spinulosa worms are not dependent on associated species to create or modify habitat, provide food or other resources.  OSPAR (2008) note that where reefs consist of empty tubes rather than tubes with living Sabellaria spinulosa they point to the presence of suitable habitat and should be reported as Sabellaria spinulosa reef.  For the purposes of the sensitivity assessments, however, reference has been made to impacts on living worms and tubes rather than empty tubes alone.

    Resilience and recovery rates of habitat

    Gibb et al. (2014) noted that empirical evidence to assess the likely recovery rate of Sabellaria spinulosa reefs from impacts is limited and significant information gaps regarding recovery rates, stability and persistence of Sabellaria spinulosa reefs were identified. Any extrapolations between different population densities e.g. between thin crusts and thick reefs and between Sabellaria spinulosa and the congener Sabellaria alveolata must, therefore, be treated cautiously as the evidence may not be applicable.  It should also be noted that the recovery rates are only indicative of the recovery potential.  Recovery of impacted populations will always be mediated by stochastic events and processes acting over different scales including, but not limited to, local habitat conditions, further impacts and processes such as larval-supply and recruitment between populations. 

    Studies carried out on reefs of the congener Sabellaria alveolata within the low inter-tidal suggest that areas of small, surficial damage within reefs may be rapidly repaired by the tube building activities of adult worms.  Vorberg (2000) found that trawl impressions made by a light trawl in Sabellaria alveolata reefs disappeared four to five days later due to the rapid rebuilding of tubes by the worms.  Similarly, studies of intertidal reefs of Sabellaria alveolata by Cunningham et al. (1984) found that minor damage to the worm tubes as a result of trampling, (i.e. treading, walking or stamping on the reef structures) was repaired within 23 days. However, more severe, localised damage, caused by kicking and jumping on the reef structure, resulted in large cracks between the tubes, and removal of sections (ca 15x15x10 cm) of the structure (Cunningham et al., 1984).  Subsequent wave action enlarged the holes or cracks.  However, after 23 days, at one site, one side of the hole had begun to repair, and tubes had begun to extend into the eroded area.  At another site, a smaller section (10x10x10 cm) was lost but after 23 days the space was already smaller due to rapid growth (Cunningham et al., 1984).  Sabellaria spinulosa reefs are more fragile than Sabellaria alveolata (Bryony Pearce, pers comm, 2014, cited in Gibb et al., 2014) and recovery rates between reefs made by the two species may vary, but this has not been established.

    Where reefs are extensively damaged or removed, then recovery will rely on larval recolonization.  Aspects of Sabellaria spinulosa reproduction have been studied (Wilson, 1970a; Pearce et al., 2007; Pearce et al., 2011b). Individuals may rapidly reach sexual maturity, Linke (1951) reported that Sabellaria spinulosa inhabiting the intertidal spawned at 1 or 2 years old and growth rate studies by Pearce et al. (2007) also suggest sexual maturity for subtidal populations could be reached within the first year.  Pearce et al. (2007) constructed size-frequency histograms based on wet weight of complete Sabellaria spinulosa collected from the Hastings Shingle Bank.  These suggest that Sabellaria spinulosa is capable of rapid growth, approaching maximal adult biomass within months (Pearce et al., 2007).

    The reproductive phase (see below) appears to be relatively long and Sabellaria spinulosa spend 6-8 weeks as planktonic larvae (Wilson, 1970a&b).  As a result, there is a good larval supply with high dispersal potential.  Pearce et al., (2011a) found that separating the adult Sabellaria spinulosa from tubes in the laboratory induced gamete release.  Pearce et al. (2011a) suggested that this represented a ‘significant evolutionary development whereby sabellariid polychaetes spawn in response to disturbance as a means of potentially securing the future population’.

    Aside from induced spawning by disturbance, a number of studies have indicated that the major spawning event is in the spring.  Plankton trawls during a survey by Pearce et al. (2011a) revealed a high abundance of Sabellaria spinulosa larvae in February 2008 and smaller numbers in September and November 2009 while Garwood (1982) found planktonic larvae on the north east coast of England from August to November. These findings suggest that the main spawning event is at the beginning of the year but larvae are produced throughout the subsequent months. A Februarry spawning event resulting in spring settlement is supported by the findings of George & Warwick (1985) and Wilson (1970a), who reported larval settlement in March in the Bristol Channel and Plymouth areas respectively. These findings suggest colonization of suitable habitats may be most likely in the Spring but could occur over extended periods.

    The longevity of Sabellaria spinulosa reefs is not known and may vary between sites depending on local habitat conditions.  In naturally disturbed areas reefs may undergo annual cycles of erosion and recolonization (Holt et al., 1998).  Surveys on the North Yorkshire and Northumberland coasts found that areas, where Sabellaria spinulosa had been lost due to winter storms, appeared to be recolonized up to the maximum observed 2.4 cm thickness during the following summer (R. Holt pers comm., cited from Holt et al., 1998).  Recovery of thin encrusting reefs may, therefore, be relatively rapid. 

    In some areas reefs may persist for long periods, although there is a significant lack of studies on the temporal stability of Sabellaria spinulosa reefs (Limpenny et al., 2010).  It has been suggested that the tubes of the worm are able to persist for some time in the marine environment, therefore the age of the colony may exceed the age of the oldest individuals present (Earll & Erwin, 1983).  Laboratory experiments have suggested that larvae settle preferentially on old tubes (Wilson, 1970).  Therefore, providing environmental conditions are still favourable, recovery of senescent or significantly degraded reefs through larval settlement of Sabellaria spinulosa is stimulated by the presence of existing tubes (Earll & Erwin, 1983).

    Successful recruitment may be episodic. Wilson (1971) cites the work of Linke (1951) who recorded the appearance of Sabellaria spinulosa reefs on stone-work of intertidal protective groynes.  In 1943 no colonies were present (time of year of this observation is unknown) but by September 1944 there were reefs 6-8 m wide and 40-60 cm high stretching for 60 m.  Linke (1951) assumed that settlement took place in 1944.  In the summer of 1945 many colonies were dead and those remaining ceased growth in the autumn.  Thick reefs may, therefore, develop rapidly and may also decline quickly. It should be noted, that these results should be interpreted cautiously, due to the possibility that the observed species may have been Sabellaria alveolata (Bryony Pearce, pers comm.).

    Other evidence, such as the studies undertaken within and adjacent to the Hastings Shingle Bank aggregate extraction area, demonstrate a similarly rapid recolonization process (Cooper et al., 2007; Pearce et al., 2007).  Recolonization within two previously dredged areas appeared to be rapid.  Substantial numbers of Sabellaria spinulosa were recorded in one area in the summer following cessation of dredging activities and another area was recolonized within 16-18 months (Pearce et al., 2007).  Recruitment was therefore annual rather than episodic in this area.  Recovery to the high abundance and biomass of more mature reefs was considered to require 3-5 years in larval recruitment was successful every year (Pearce et al., 2007).

    In some cases, however, when reefs are removed they may not recover.  The Wadden Sea has experienced a widespread decline of Sabellaria spinulosa over recent decades with little sign of recovery.  This is thought to be partly due to ecosystem changes that have occurred (Reise, et al., 1989; Buhs & Reise, 1997) exacerbated by fishing pressures that still continue (Riesen & Reise, 1982; Reise & Schubert, 1987).  Likewise, no recovery of Sabellaria spinulosa has occurred in the approach channels to Morecambe Bay (Mistakidis 1956; cited from Holt et al., 1998).  There is no overriding explanation for this, but it is believed this is due to a lack of larval supply or larval settlement, since larvae may preferentially settle on existing adult reefs (although directly settlement on sediments  also occurs), or alterations in habitat (Holt et al., 1998).

    Resilience assessment. The evidence for recovery rates of Sabellaria spinulosa reefs from different levels of impact is very limited and the rates at which reefs recover from different levels of impact, and whether these rates are similar or not between biotopes, have not been documented.  Recovery rates are likely to be determined by a range of factors such as the degree of impact, the season of impact, larval supply and local environmental factors including hydrodynamics.

    The evidence from Sabellaria alveolata reefs (Vorberg, 2000; Cunningham, et al., 1984) suggests that areas of limited damage on a reef, e.g. where resistance is 'Medium', could be repaired rapidly (within weeks) through the tube-building activities of adults).  It is not known if Sabellaria spinulosa exhibits the same response but the assessment of resilience in this instance as ‘High’ indicating that recovery would be likely to occur within 2 years is relatively precautionary. 

    Predicting the rate of recovery following extensive removal is more problematic. Some thin crusts of Sabellaria spinulosa are relatively ephemeral and disappear following natural disturbance such as storms but recover the following year (Holt et al., 1998), suggesting that recovery is ‘High’ (within 2 years), even where reefs are removed. In other instances, recolonization has been observed within 16-18 months but full recovery to a state similar to the pre-impact condition of high adult density and adult biomass is suggested to require three to five years where recruitment is annual (Pearce et al., 2007). Recovery from significant impacts (where resistance is assessed as ‘None’ or 'Low') is therefore predicted to be ‘Medium’ (2-10 years). An exception is made for permanent or ongoing (long-term) pressures where recovery is not possible as the pressure is irreversible, in which case resilience is assessed as ‘Very low’ by default. 

    The evidence varies between peer reviewed literature on life histories and grey literature on recovery from impacts. Therefore, the confidence in the quality of the evidence is assessed as ‘Medium’. The applicability of the evidence is also ‘Medium’ based on limited studies of direct impact and inference from the life history of the species, while the concordance is assessed as ‘Medium’ based on agreement in direction but not magnitude, that is, the rate of recovery.

    NB: The resilience and the ability to recover from human induced pressures is a combination of the environmental conditions of the site, the frequency (repeated disturbances versus a one-off event) and the intensity of the disturbance.  Recovery of impacted populations will always be mediated by stochastic events and processes acting over different scales including, but not limited to, local habitat conditions, further impacts and processes such as larval-supply and recruitment between populations. Full recovery is defined as the return to the state of the habitat that existed prior to impact.  This does not necessarily mean that every component species has returned to its prior condition, abundance or extent but that the relevant functional components are present and the habitat is structurally and functionally recognisable as the initial habitat of interest. It should be noted that the recovery rates are only indicative of the recovery potential.  

    Climate Change Pressures

    Use [show more] / [show less] to open/close text displayed

    ResistanceResilienceSensitivity
    Global warming (extreme) [Show more]

    Global warming (extreme)

    Extreme emission scenario (by the end of this century 2081-2100) benchmark of:

    • A 5°C rise in SST and NBT (coastal to the shelf seas),

    • A 6°C rise in surface air temperature (in eulittoral and supralittoral habitats).

    • A 1°C rise in Deep-sea habitats (>200 m) off the continental shelf, and

    • A 5°C rise in surface air temperature in intertidal habitats exclusive to Scotland. Further detail.

    Evidence

    The honeycomb worm, Sabellaria spinulosa has the greatest geographical range of all the sabellariids, according to current records, encompassing Iceland, the Skagerrak, and the Kattegat, the North Sea, the English Channel, the North East Atlantic, the Mediterranean, the Wadden Sea, and the Indian Ocean, (Achari, 1974; Riesen & Reise, 1982; Reise & Schubert,1987; Hayward & Ryland, 1998; Foster-Smith, 2000; Collins, 2005). It does not form reefs across most of its geographic range (Jackson & Hiscock, 2008), although Sabellaria spinulosa reefs are known from all North Atlantic European coasts, except the Baltic and the waters of the Kattegat and Skagerrak (OSPAR, 2010). In the Mediterranean Sea, the most common reef-forming sabellid worm is Sabellaria alveolata, although extensive Sabellaria spinulosa reefs have been found in the Adriatic Sea (Gravina et al., 2018).

    Sensitivity assessment. Under the middle and high emission and extreme scenarios seawater temperatures are expected to temperatures rise by 3-5°C to potential southern summer temperatures of 22 - 24°C and northern summer temperatures of 19 - 21°C. No empirical evidence was found for the temperature tolerance of Sabellaria spinulosa; nevertheless, biogeographic distribution is often a good predictor of temperature tolerance (Jeffree & Jeffree, 1994), and its widespread distribution suggests that it is tolerant to temperature variations (Gibb et al., 2014).  Extensive Sabellaria spinulosa reefs are found off the coast of Vieste, Italy, in the Adriatic Sea (Gravina et al., 2018), where water temperatures range from 12 – 28°C (www.seatemperature.org), which suggests that this biotope will be able to withstand the predicted temperature changes for the end of this century. Therefore, this biotope is assessed as having a ‘High’ resistance to ocean warming.  Resilience is assessed as ‘High, as no recovery is necessary. This biotope is assessed as ‘Not sensitive’ under the middle and high emission and extreme scenarios

    High
    Medium
    Medium
    Medium
    Help
    High
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Not sensitive
    Medium
    Medium
    Medium
    Help
    Global warming (high) [Show more]

    Global warming (high)

    High emission scenario (by the end of this century 2081-2100) benchmark of:

    • A 4°C rise in SST, NBT (coastal to the shelf seas) and surface air temperature (in eulittoral and supralittoral habitats).

    • A 1°C rise in Deep-sea habitats (>200 m) off the continental shelf, and

    • A 3°C rise in surface air temperature in intertidal habitats exclusive to Scotland. Further detail.

    Evidence

    The honeycomb worm, Sabellaria spinulosa has the greatest geographical range of all the sabellariids, according to current records, encompassing Iceland, the Skagerrak, and the Kattegat, the North Sea, the English Channel, the North East Atlantic, the Mediterranean, the Wadden Sea, and the Indian Ocean, (Achari, 1974; Riesen & Reise, 1982; Reise & Schubert,1987; Hayward & Ryland, 1998; Foster-Smith, 2000; Collins, 2005). It does not form reefs across most of its geographic range (Jackson & Hiscock, 2008), although Sabellaria spinulosa reefs are known from all North Atlantic European coasts, except the Baltic and the waters of the Kattegat and Skagerrak (OSPAR, 2010). In the Mediterranean Sea, the most common reef-forming sabellid worm is Sabellaria alveolata, although extensive Sabellaria spinulosa reefs have been found in the Adriatic Sea (Gravina et al., 2018).

    Sensitivity assessment. Under the middle and high emission and extreme scenarios seawater temperatures are expected to temperatures rise by 3-5°C to potential southern summer temperatures of 22 - 24°C and northern summer temperatures of 19 - 21°C. No empirical evidence was found for the temperature tolerance of Sabellaria spinulosa; nevertheless, biogeographic distribution is often a good predictor of temperature tolerance (Jeffree & Jeffree, 1994), and its widespread distribution suggests that it is tolerant to temperature variations (Gibb et al., 2014).  Extensive Sabellaria spinulosa reefs are found off the coast of Vieste, Italy, in the Adriatic Sea (Gravina et al., 2018), where water temperatures range from 12 – 28°C (www.seatemperature.org), which suggests that this biotope will be able to withstand the predicted temperature changes for the end of this century. Therefore, this biotope is assessed as having a ‘High’ resistance to ocean warming.  Resilience is assessed as ‘High, as no recovery is necessary. This biotope is assessed as ‘Not sensitive’ under the middle and high emission and extreme scenarios

    High
    Medium
    Medium
    Medium
    Help
    High
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Not sensitive
    Medium
    Medium
    Medium
    Help
    Global warming (middle) [Show more]

    Global warming (middle)

    Middle emission scenario (by the end of this century 2081-2100) benchmark of:

    • A 3°C rise in SST, NBT (coastal to the shelf seas) and surface air temperature (in eulittoral and supralittoral habitats).

    • A 1°C rise in Deep-sea habitats (>200 m) off the continental shelf.

    • A 2°C rise in surface air temperature in intertidal habitats exclusive to Scotland. Further detail.

    Evidence

    The honeycomb worm, Sabellaria spinulosa has the greatest geographical range of all the sabellariids, according to current records, encompassing Iceland, the Skagerrak, and the Kattegat, the North Sea, the English Channel, the North East Atlantic, the Mediterranean, the Wadden Sea, and the Indian Ocean, (Achari, 1974; Riesen & Reise, 1982; Reise & Schubert,1987; Hayward & Ryland, 1998; Foster-Smith, 2000; Collins, 2005). It does not form reefs across most of its geographic range (Jackson & Hiscock, 2008), although Sabellaria spinulosa reefs are known from all North Atlantic European coasts, except the Baltic and the waters of the Kattegat and Skagerrak (OSPAR, 2010). In the Mediterranean Sea, the most common reef-forming sabellid worm is Sabellaria alveolata, although extensive Sabellaria spinulosa reefs have been found in the Adriatic Sea (Gravina et al., 2018).

    Sensitivity assessment. Under the middle and high emission and extreme scenarios seawater temperatures are expected to temperatures rise by 3-5°C to potential southern summer temperatures of 22 - 24°C and northern summer temperatures of 19 - 21°C. No empirical evidence was found for the temperature tolerance of Sabellaria spinulosa; nevertheless, biogeographic distribution is often a good predictor of temperature tolerance (Jeffree & Jeffree, 1994), and its widespread distribution suggests that it is tolerant to temperature variations (Gibb et al., 2014).  Extensive Sabellaria spinulosa reefs are found off the coast of Vieste, Italy, in the Adriatic Sea (Gravina et al., 2018), where water temperatures range from 12 – 28°C (www.seatemperature.org), which suggests that this biotope will be able to withstand the predicted temperature changes for the end of this century. Therefore, this biotope is assessed as having a ‘High’ resistance to ocean warming.  Resilience is assessed as ‘High, as no recovery is necessary. This biotope is assessed as ‘Not sensitive’ under the middle and high emission and extreme scenarios

    High
    Medium
    Medium
    Medium
    Help
    High
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Not sensitive
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Marine heatwaves (high) [Show more]

    Marine heatwaves (high)

    High emission scenario benchmark: A marine heatwave occurring every two years, with a mean duration of 120 days, and a maximum intensity of 3.5°C. Further detail.

    Evidence

    Marine heatwaves due to increased air-sea heat flux are predicted to occur more frequently, last for longer and at increased intensity by the end of this century under both middle and high emission scenarios (Frölicher et al., 2018). Whilst there are no laboratory studies on the upper thermal limit of Sabellaria spinulosa, its biogeographical distribution suggests that, similar to the reef-forming Sabellaria alveolata, this species may be tolerant to a wide range of temperatures.

    Muir et al. (2016) found that Sabellaria alveolata was able to adapt to a step-change increase in temperature from 15°C to 25°C, however, over the long term (60 days), changes in lipid composition possibly suggested a stress response. Whilst high temperatures may cause stress, they rarely appear to lead to mortality, as when summer temperatures were increased from 18°C to 23°C in Scottish populations of Sabellaria alveolata, mortality remained the same as controls, except when coupled with high levels of chlorine (Last et al., 2016). Similarly, when the density of tube occupancy was used as a proxy for mortality by Muir et al. (2016), an increase in temperatures from 15°C to 25°C in populations from Scotland to North Africa did not lead to a decrease in occupancy in four out of the five populations tested, with a decrease in occupancy only observed for the Bay of Biscay population, which the authors attributed to the poor state of the reef.

    Sensitivity Assessment. Under the middle emission scenario, if heatwaves occurred every three years, with a maximum intensity of 2°C for 80 days by the end of this century, this could lead to summer sea temperatures reaching up to 24°C in southern England. Under the high emission scenario, if heatwaves occur every two years by the end of this century, reaching a maximum intensity of 3.5°C for 120 days, this could lead to the heatwave lasting the entire summer with temperatures reaching up to 26.5°C. Sabellaria spinulosa is known to form extensive reefs in the Adriatic Sea (Gravina et al., 2018), where water temperatures reach up to 28°C (www.seatemperature.org) (see Global warming). Whilst empirical evidence of how Sabellaria spinulosa would react to exposure to a marine heatwave is lacking, it is likely that this species would be able to tolerate marine heatwaves at both these levels. Therefore, this species is likely to be able to cope with future marine heatwaves expected for the end of this century, and under both the middle and high emission scenarios, and resistance has been assessed as ‘High’. As no recovery is likely necessary, recovery has been assessed as ‘High’, leading to an assessment of ‘Not sensitive’ for this biotope. 

    High
    Low
    NR
    NR
    Help
    High
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Not sensitive
    Low
    Low
    Low
    Help
    Marine heatwaves (middle) [Show more]

    Marine heatwaves (middle)

    Middle emission scenario benchmark:  A marine heatwave occurring every three years, with a mean duration of 80 days, with a maximum intensity of 2°C. Further detail.

    Evidence

    Marine heatwaves due to increased air-sea heat flux are predicted to occur more frequently, last for longer and at increased intensity by the end of this century under both middle and high emission scenarios (Frölicher et al., 2018). Whilst there are no laboratory studies on the upper thermal limit of Sabellaria spinulosa, its biogeographical distribution suggests that, similar to the reef-forming Sabellaria alveolata, this species may be tolerant to a wide range of temperatures.

    Muir et al. (2016) found that Sabellaria alveolata was able to adapt to a step-change increase in temperature from 15°C to 25°C, however, over the long term (60 days), changes in lipid composition possibly suggested a stress response. Whilst high temperatures may cause stress, they rarely appear to lead to mortality, as when summer temperatures were increased from 18°C to 23°C in Scottish populations of Sabellaria alveolata, mortality remained the same as controls, except when coupled with high levels of chlorine (Last et al., 2016). Similarly, when the density of tube occupancy was used as a proxy for mortality by Muir et al. (2016), an increase in temperatures from 15°C to 25°C in populations from Scotland to North Africa did not lead to a decrease in occupancy in four out of the five populations tested, with a decrease in occupancy only observed for the Bay of Biscay population, which the authors attributed to the poor state of the reef.

    Sensitivity Assessment. Under the middle emission scenario, if heatwaves occurred every three years, with a maximum intensity of 2°C for 80 days by the end of this century, this could lead to summer sea temperatures reaching up to 24°C in southern England. Under the high emission scenario, if heatwaves occur every two years by the end of this century, reaching a maximum intensity of 3.5°C for 120 days, this could lead to the heatwave lasting the entire summer with temperatures reaching up to 26.5°C. Sabellaria spinulosa is known to form extensive reefs in the Adriatic Sea (Gravina et al., 2018), where water temperatures reach up to 28°C (www.seatemperature.org) (see Global warming). Whilst empirical evidence of how Sabellaria spinulosa would react to exposure to a marine heatwave is lacking, it is likely that this species would be able to tolerate marine heatwaves at both these levels. Therefore, this species is likely to be able to cope with future marine heatwaves expected for the end of this century, and under both the middle and high emission scenarios, and resistance has been assessed as ‘High’. As no recovery is likely necessary, recovery has been assessed as ‘High’, leading to an assessment of ‘Not sensitive’ for this biotope. 

    High
    Low
    NR
    NR
    Help
    High
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Not sensitive
    Low
    Low
    Low
    Help
    Ocean acidification (high) [Show more]

    Ocean acidification (high)

    High emission scenario benchmark: a further decrease in pH of 0.35 (annual mean) and corresponding 120% increase in H+ ions , seasonal aragonite saturation of 20% of UK coastal waters and North Sea bottom waters, and the aragonite saturation horizon in the NE Atlantic, off the continental shelf, occurring at a depth of 400 m by the end of this century 2081-2100. Further detail 

    Evidence

    Increasing levels of CO2 in the atmosphere have led to the average pH of sea surface waters dropping from 8.25 in the 1700s to 8.14 in the 1990s (Jacobson, 2005). There is no direct evidence of the impact of ocean acidification on Sabellaria spinulosa or any species from the family Sabellariidae. Unlike the tube-dwelling, calcifying polychaetes from the family Serpulidae, Sabellaria spinulosa does not form its tubes through calcification. Tubes are formed from coarse sand and shell grains cemented together with an adhesive protein cement secreted by the worm (Lisco et al., 2017).

    Non-calcifying polychaetes thought to be less sensitive than many other taxa to ocean acidification.  When non-calcifying polychaetes were transplanted from control to low pH areas, they showed evidence of either adaptation or acclimation to their conditions (Calosi et al., 2013). There is some evidence that sperm may be affected by ocean acidification at levels expected in the high emission scenario, with percentage sperm motility (Schlegel et al., 2014) and sperm velocity (Campbell et al., 2014) decreasing in the polychaetes Galeolaria caespitosa and Arenicola marina, leading to a decrease in sperm fertility success (Campbell et al., 2014). Reduced sperm fertility and hence recruitment, may lead to some population-level effects. However, at natural CO2 vents, the abundance of polychaetes either remained the same (Kroeker et al., 2011) or increased (Garrard et al., 2014, Vizzini et al., 2017). Most species of polychaetes generally exhibit high fecundity and are free spawning (Ramirez-Llodra, 2002), which may help them maintain population levels, even with a decrease in fertilization success. Fecundity in Sabellaria spinulosa expected to be high and is thought to be similar to that of Sabellaria alveolata (Jackson & Hiscock, 2008), which releases an average of 100,000 eggs into the water column during a spawning cycle (Dubois, 2003).

    Sensitivity Assessment. Direct evidence of the impact of ocean acidification on Sabellaria spinulosa is lacking. However, in general, non-calcifying polychaetes appear to be tolerant. Therefore, it is likely that the characterizing species of this biotope will show a ‘High’ resistance to a decrease in pH, even though ocean acidification has been shown to lead to negative impacts on polychaete fertilization success under experimental conditions (Campbell et al., 2014, Schlegel et al., 2014). Hence, based on the evidence available, under both the middle and high emission scenarios the biotope is assessed as ‘High’ resistance to ocean acidification, and ‘High’ resilience, leading to an assessment of ‘Not sensitive’ at the benchmark level.

    High
    Medium
    Medium
    High
    Help
    High
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Not sensitive
    Medium
    Medium
    High
    Help
    Ocean acidification (middle) [Show more]

    Ocean acidification (middle)

    Middle emission scenario benchmark: a further decrease in pH of 0.15 (annual mean) and corresponding 35% increase in H+ ions with no coastal aragonite undersaturation and the aragonite saturation horizon in the NE Atlantic, off the continental shelf, at a depth of 800 m by the end of this century 2081-2100. Further detail.

    Evidence

    Increasing levels of CO2 in the atmosphere have led to the average pH of sea surface waters dropping from 8.25 in the 1700s to 8.14 in the 1990s (Jacobson, 2005). There is no direct evidence of the impact of ocean acidification on Sabellaria spinulosa or any species from the family Sabellariidae. Unlike the tube-dwelling, calcifying polychaetes from the family Serpulidae, Sabellaria spinulosa does not form its tubes through calcification. Tubes are formed from coarse sand and shell grains cemented together with an adhesive protein cement secreted by the worm (Lisco et al., 2017).

    Non-calcifying polychaetes thought to be less sensitive than many other taxa to ocean acidification.  When non-calcifying polychaetes were transplanted from control to low pH areas, they showed evidence of either adaptation or acclimation to their conditions (Calosi et al., 2013). There is some evidence that sperm may be affected by ocean acidification at levels expected in the high emission scenario, with percentage sperm motility (Schlegel et al., 2014) and sperm velocity (Campbell et al., 2014) decreasing in the polychaetes Galeolaria caespitosa and Arenicola marina, leading to a decrease in sperm fertility success (Campbell et al., 2014). Reduced sperm fertility and hence recruitment, may lead to some population-level effects. However, at natural CO2 vents, the abundance of polychaetes either remained the same (Kroeker et al., 2011) or increased (Garrard et al., 2014, Vizzini et al., 2017). Most species of polychaetes generally exhibit high fecundity and are free spawning (Ramirez-Llodra, 2002), which may help them maintain population levels, even with a decrease in fertilization success. Fecundity in Sabellaria spinulosa expected to be high and is thought to be similar to that of Sabellaria alveolata (Jackson & Hiscock, 2008), which releases an average of 100,000 eggs into the water column during a spawning cycle (Dubois, 2003).

    Sensitivity Assessment. Direct evidence of the impact of ocean acidification on Sabellaria spinulosa is lacking. However, in general, non-calcifying polychaetes appear to be tolerant. Therefore, it is likely that the characterizing species of this biotope will show a ‘High’ resistance to a decrease in pH, even though ocean acidification has been shown to lead to negative impacts on polychaete fertilization success under experimental conditions (Campbell et al., 2014, Schlegel et al., 2014). Hence, based on the evidence available, under both the middle and high emission scenarios the biotope is assessed as ‘High’ resistance to ocean acidification, and ‘High’ resilience, leading to an assessment of ‘Not sensitive’ at the benchmark level.

    High
    Medium
    Medium
    High
    Help
    High
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Not sensitive
    Medium
    Medium
    High
    Help
    Sea level rise (extreme) [Show more]

    Sea level rise (extreme)

    Extreme scenario benchmark: a 107 cm rise in average UK by the end of this century (2018-2100). Further detail.

    Evidence

    Sea level rise is occurring through a combination of thermal expansion and ice melt.  Sea levels have risen 1-3 mm/yr. in the last century (Cazenave & Nerem, 2004, Church et al., 2004, Church & White, 2006). This biotope generally occurs between 10–30 m depth in the UK, although Sabellaria spinulosa reefs have been recorded from 10–50 m depth in Europe (OSPAR, 2010), therefore an increase in depth of between 50–107 cm is unlikely to have large implications for this biotope.

    Sabellaria spinulosa reefs occur on stable circalittoral mixed sediment in moderately exposed or sheltered environments with strong tidal currents. Sabellaria spinulosa reefs generally occur in areas of high sediment disturbance (OSPAR, 2010).  Understanding how sea-level rise will affect exposure or tidal energy is fraught with uncertainty, although evidence appears to suggest that any alterations will be non-linear (Pickering et al., 2012, Li et al., 2016). Modelling potential outcomes of sea-level rise on the tidal and residual currents in the Bohai Sea, China showed effects were site-dependent, with energy either increasing or decreasing (Li et al., 2016). Similarly, Pickering et al. (2012) found a similar pattern around the UK for tidal amplitude. The effects of sea-level rise and increased wave action may be increased further due to storms and storm surges.  IPCC (2019) note that the frequency of extreme sea-level events (e.g. due to storms) are predicted to increase as sea-level rises, however, there is no consensus on the future storm and, hence, wave climate around UK coasts (Mossman et al., 2015, Lowe et al., 2018, Palmer et al., 2018).

    Sensitivity assessment. This habitat occurs from 10-30 m although Sabellaria spinulosa reefs can be found at depths of up to 50 m. Any change to the habitat in terms of its exposure or tidal currents cannot be evaluated at the current time, although evidence suggests that changes to tidal currents and tidal amplitude with sea-level rise will be site-specific. Therefore, under the available evidence, resistance to sea-level rise has been assessed as ‘High’ for both the middle (50 cm) and high (70 cm) emission scenario, and the extreme scenario (107 cm). As no recovery is deemed necessary, resilience has been assessed as ‘High’, and therefore this biotope has been classified as ‘Not sensitive’ to sea-level rise at each of the benchmarks albeit with ‘Low’ confidence.

    High
    Low
    NR
    NR
    Help
    High
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Not sensitive
    Low
    Low
    Low
    Help
    Sea level rise (high) [Show more]

    Sea level rise (high)

    High emission scenario benchmark: a 70 cm rise in average UK by the end of this century (2018-2100). Further detail.

    Evidence

    Sea level rise is occurring through a combination of thermal expansion and ice melt.  Sea levels have risen 1-3 mm/yr. in the last century (Cazenave & Nerem, 2004, Church et al., 2004, Church & White, 2006). This biotope generally occurs between 10–30 m depth in the UK, although Sabellaria spinulosa reefs have been recorded from 10–50 m depth in Europe (OSPAR, 2010), therefore an increase in depth of between 50–107 cm is unlikely to have large implications for this biotope.

    Sabellaria spinulosa reefs occur on stable circalittoral mixed sediment in moderately exposed or sheltered environments with strong tidal currents. Sabellaria spinulosa reefs generally occur in areas of high sediment disturbance (OSPAR, 2010).  Understanding how sea-level rise will affect exposure or tidal energy is fraught with uncertainty, although evidence appears to suggest that any alterations will be non-linear (Pickering et al., 2012, Li et al., 2016). Modelling potential outcomes of sea-level rise on the tidal and residual currents in the Bohai Sea, China showed effects were site-dependent, with energy either increasing or decreasing (Li et al., 2016). Similarly, Pickering et al. (2012) found a similar pattern around the UK for tidal amplitude. The effects of sea-level rise and increased wave action may be increased further due to storms and storm surges.  IPCC (2019) note that the frequency of extreme sea-level events (e.g. due to storms) are predicted to increase as sea-level rises, however, there is no consensus on the future storm and, hence, wave climate around UK coasts (Mossman et al., 2015, Lowe et al., 2018, Palmer et al., 2018).

    Sensitivity assessment. This habitat occurs from 10-30 m although Sabellaria spinulosa reefs can be found at depths of up to 50 m. Any change to the habitat in terms of its exposure or tidal currents cannot be evaluated at the current time, although evidence suggests that changes to tidal currents and tidal amplitude with sea-level rise will be site-specific. Therefore, under the available evidence, resistance to sea-level rise has been assessed as ‘High’ for both the middle (50 cm) and high (70 cm) emission scenario, and the extreme scenario (107 cm). As no recovery is deemed necessary, resilience has been assessed as ‘High’, and therefore this biotope has been classified as ‘Not sensitive’ to sea-level rise at each of the benchmarks albeit with ‘Low’ confidence.

    High
    Low
    NR
    NR
    Help
    High
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Not sensitive
    Low
    Low
    Low
    Help
    Sea level rise (middle) [Show more]

    Sea level rise (middle)

    Middle emission scenario benchmark: a 50 cm rise in average UK sea-level rise by the end of this century (2081-2100). Further detail.

    Evidence

    Sea level rise is occurring through a combination of thermal expansion and ice melt.  Sea levels have risen 1-3 mm/yr. in the last century (Cazenave & Nerem, 2004, Church et al., 2004, Church & White, 2006). This biotope generally occurs between 10–30 m depth in the UK, although Sabellaria spinulosa reefs have been recorded from 10–50 m depth in Europe (OSPAR, 2010), therefore an increase in depth of between 50–107 cm is unlikely to have large implications for this biotope.

    Sabellaria spinulosa reefs occur on stable circalittoral mixed sediment in moderately exposed or sheltered environments with strong tidal currents. Sabellaria spinulosa reefs generally occur in areas of high sediment disturbance (OSPAR, 2010).  Understanding how sea-level rise will affect exposure or tidal energy is fraught with uncertainty, although evidence appears to suggest that any alterations will be non-linear (Pickering et al., 2012, Li et al., 2016). Modelling potential outcomes of sea-level rise on the tidal and residual currents in the Bohai Sea, China showed effects were site-dependent, with energy either increasing or decreasing (Li et al., 2016). Similarly, Pickering et al. (2012) found a similar pattern around the UK for tidal amplitude. The effects of sea-level rise and increased wave action may be increased further due to storms and storm surges.  IPCC (2019) note that the frequency of extreme sea-level events (e.g. due to storms) are predicted to increase as sea-level rises, however, there is no consensus on the future storm and, hence, wave climate around UK coasts (Mossman et al., 2015, Lowe et al., 2018, Palmer et al., 2018).

    Sensitivity assessment. This habitat occurs from 10-30 m although Sabellaria spinulosa reefs can be found at depths of up to 50 m. Any change to the habitat in terms of its exposure or tidal currents cannot be evaluated at the current time, although evidence suggests that changes to tidal currents and tidal amplitude with sea-level rise will be site-specific. Therefore, under the available evidence, resistance to sea-level rise has been assessed as ‘High’ for both the middle (50 cm) and high (70 cm) emission scenario, and the extreme scenario (107 cm). As no recovery is deemed necessary, resilience has been assessed as ‘High’, and therefore this biotope has been classified as ‘Not sensitive’ to sea-level rise at each of the benchmarks albeit with ‘Low’ confidence.

    High
    Low
    NR
    NR
    Help
    High
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Not sensitive
    Low
    Low
    Low
    Help

    Hydrological Pressures

    Use [show more] / [show less] to open/close text displayed

    ResistanceResilienceSensitivity
    Temperature increase (local) [Show more]

    Temperature increase (local)

    Benchmark. A 5°C increase in temperature for one month, or 2°C for one year. Further detail

    Evidence

    No empirical evidence was found for the temperature tolerance of Sabellaria spinulosa; nevertheless, its widespread distribution suggests that it is tolerant to temperature variations (Gibb et al., 2014). Sabellaria spinulosa has the greatest geographical range of all the sabellariids, according to current records, encompassing Iceland, the Skagerrak and the Kattegat, the North Sea, the English Channel, the northeast Atlantic, the Mediterranean, the Wadden Sea and the Indian Ocean, (Achari, 1974; Riesen & Reise, 1982; Reise & Schubert,1987; Hayward & Ryland, 1998; Foster-Smith, 2000; Collins, 2005).

     

    High
    Medium
    Low
    NR
    Help
    High
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Not sensitive
    Medium
    Low
    Low
    Help
    Temperature decrease (local) [Show more]

    Temperature decrease (local)

    Benchmark. A 5°C decrease in temperature for one month, or 2°C for one year. Further detail

    Evidence

    Sabellaria spinulosa occurs north to the Arctic and is therefore considered tolerant of a decrease in temperature at the pressure benchmark. This conclusion is supported by observations made on oyster grounds in the River Crouch throughout the severe winter of 1962–1963 that Sabellaria spinulosa appeared unaffected by the cold. The mean daily temperature was recorded at a depth of 1 fathom (1.8m) below low water (equinoctial spring tide) and the lowest temperature recorded was -1.8°C (Crisp, 1964). At Penmon in Bangor, Sabellaria spinulosa also appeared not to suffer from the low temperatures and live individuals were readily found (Crisp, 1964). 

    Sensitivity assessment. Given the widespread distribution of Sabellaria spinulosa, it is unlikely that this species is sensitive to temperature variations at the pressure benchmark. Resistance is therefore assessed as ‘High’ and resilience is assessed as ‘High’ (no impact to recover from) so that all the Sabellaria biotopes within this group are assessed as ‘Not Sensitive’.

    High
    High
    Medium
    NR
    Help
    High
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Not sensitive
    High
    Medium
    Low
    Help
    Salinity increase (local) [Show more]

    Salinity increase (local)

    Benchmark. A increase in one MNCR salinity category above the usual range of the biotope or habitat. Further detail

    Evidence

    No evidence for the range of physiological tolerances to salinity changes was found for Sabellaria spinulosa by Gibb et al., (2014).  As reefs are largely subtidal they are less exposed to hypersaline conditions resulting from coastal brine discharge and natural evaporation (lagoons).  There is, therefore, no direct or indirect evidence for sensitivity to an increase in salinity and this element of the pressure is not assessed. 

    Sensitivity assessment. No evidence was found for tolerance of hypersaline conditions and sensitivity to this benchmark is not assessed based on lack of evidence.

    No evidence (NEv)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    No evidence (NEv)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    No evidence (NEv)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Salinity decrease (local) [Show more]

    Salinity decrease (local)

    Benchmark. A decrease in one MNCR salinity category above the usual range of the biotope or habitat. Further detail

    Evidence

    No evidence for the range of physiological tolerances to decreases in salinity was found for Sabellaria spinulosa by Gibb et al. (2014).  The sensitivity assessment made in that report was therefore based on recorded habitat preferences, as described below. 

    Sabellaria spinulosa does not seem to occur in very low salinity areas (Holt et al., 1998) but has been recorded from estuaries including the Crouch, Mersey (Killeen & Light, 2000) and the Thames (Limpenny et al., 2010).  Buhs & Reise (1997) surveyed 12 channel systems in the Wadden Sea and found that Sabellaria spinulosa reefs occurred in the northern tidal inlets which experienced salinity levels ranging from 28 to 30 psu.  There is some speculation (Foster-Smith & Hendrick, 2003) that Mcintosh (1922) misidentified samples of Sabellaria spinulosa as the congener Sabellaria alveolata from the Humber estuarine population (Holt et al., 1998).  These records indicate that reduced and variable salinities can be tolerated to some extent but the paucity of records suggests that areas of reduced salinity do not provide optimal habitat.

    Sensitivity assessment. As the salinity tolerances of Sabellaria spinulosa are unclear the potential impact of salinity change, at the pressure benchmark, is uncertain.  The reported distribution of Sabellaria spinulosa from fully marine to estuarine habitats does suggest some tolerance of changes in salinity although a decrease in salinity at the extreme of the pressure benchmark (reduction to variable salinity 18-35 ppt or reduced salinity 18-30 ppt) may result in extensive losses.  Resistance is therefore assessed as ‘Low’ (loss of 25-75% of extent).  Reef resilience (following habitat recovery) is considered to be “Medium’ (2-10 years).  Sensitivity, based on combined resistance and recovery, is therefore assessed as ‘Medium’.

    Low
    Medium
    Low
    NR
    Help
    Medium
    Medium
    Medium
    Medium
    Help
    Medium
    Medium
    Low
    Low
    Help
    Water flow (tidal current) changes (local) [Show more]

    Water flow (tidal current) changes (local)

    Benchmark. A change in peak mean spring bed flow velocity of between 0.1 m/s to 0.2 m/s for more than one year. Further detail

    Evidence

    Sabellaria spinulosa tend to occur in areas of high water movement where larvae, tube building materials and food particles are suspended and transported (Jones et al., 2000).  The relative importance of tidal versus wave induced movements to support reefs is, however, unclear (Holt et al., 1998). There is currently limited in-situ data on the specific water flow tolerances of Sabellaria spinulosa, although colonies have been found in areas with sedimentary bed forms that suggest current velocities in the range of 0.5 m/s to 1.0 m/s (Mistakidis, 1956; Jones et al., 2000; Davies et al., 2009).  In the southern North Sea close to the coast of England, Sabellaria spinulosa reefs have been recorded in areas exposed to peak spring tidal flows of 1.0 m/s (Pearce et al., 2014). Davies et al. (2009) also found through laboratory experiments with Sabellaria spinulosa in tanks that increased the water flow to an average of 0.03 m/s is adequate to begin distribution of the sediment rain from the airlift throughout the tank and that doubling the water flow to almost 0.07 m/s further improved particle distribution throughout the tank.  It is therefore likely that Sabellaria spinulosa will exist in habitats with a water flow anywhere above 0.07 m/s so that particles are suspended and distributed for the use of tube building and feeding. 

    Tillin (2010) used logistic regression to develop statistical models that indicate how the probability of occurrence of the congener Sabellaria alveolata changes over environmental gradients within the Severn Estuary.  The model predicted response surfaces were derived for each biotope for each of the selected habitat variables, using logistic regression.  From these response surfaces the optimum habitat range for each biotope could be defined based on the range of each environmental variable where the probability of occurrence, divided by the maximum probability of occurrence, is 0.75 or higher.  These results identify the range for each significant variable where the habitat is most likely to occur.  The modelled ranges should be interpreted with caution and apply to the Severn Estuary alone (which experiences large tidal ranges, high currents and extremely high suspended sediment loads and is therefore distinct from many other estuarine systems).  However, these ranges do provide some useful information on environmental tolerances.  The models indicate that for subtidal Sabellaria alveolata the maximum optimal current speed (the range in which it is most likely to occur) ranges from 1.26-2.46 m/s and the optimal mean current speed ranges from 0.5-1.22 m/s.  Although not directly applicable to Sabellaria spinulosa this data suggests that tube-building Sabellariids are able to occur within a broad range of current speeds.

    In cases of reduced water flow, Sabellaria spinulosa is likely to suffer a reduction in the supply of suspended food and particles that are integral for growth and repair.  A long-term decrease in water flow may reduce the viability of populations by limiting growth and tube building. No evidence was found for threshold levels relating to impact.

    Sensitivity assessment. The range of flow tolerances recorded (0.5 m/s to 1 m/s cited by Jones et al., 2000; Braithwaite et al., 2006; Davies et al., 2009) suggest that the worms have a broad tolerance of different flow levels.  Tillin (2010) modelled optimal flow speeds of 0.5-1.22 m/s for the congener Sabellaria alveolata.  The worms may retract into tubes to withstand periods of high flows at spring tides and some non-lethal reduction in feeding efficiency and growth rate may occur at the edge of the range.  Similarly, a reduction in flow may reduce the supply of tube-building materials and food but again, given the range of reported tolerances a change at the pressure benchmark is not considered to result in mortality.  Resistance is therefore assessed as ‘High’ and resilience as ‘High’ (no impact to recover from).  All the biotopes within this biotope group are therefore considered to be ‘Not sensitive’.

    High
    High
    Low
    High
    Help
    High
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Not sensitive
    High
    Low
    High
    Help
    Emergence regime changes [Show more]

    Emergence regime changes

    Benchmark.  1) A change in the time covered or not covered by the sea for a period of ≥1 year or 2) an increase in relative sea level or decrease in high water level for ≥1 year. Further detail

    Evidence

    Changes in emergence are not relevant to this biotope, which is restricted to subtidal habitats.

     

    Not relevant (NR)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not relevant (NR)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not relevant (NR)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Wave exposure changes (local) [Show more]

    Wave exposure changes (local)

    Benchmark. A change in near shore significant wave height of >3% but <5% for more than one year. Further detail

    Evidence

    No empirical evidence was found to assess this pressure.  Intertidal Sabellaria spinulosa are directly exposed to breaking waves and water movements generated by waves can also potentially affect subtidal Sabellaria spinulosa reefs.  At depth, the motion from surface waves becomes oscillatory and produces back-and-forth water movement at the seabed (Dubois et al., 2006).  In sublittoral habitats, water movements are likely to provide sand and food particles that are necessary for Sabellaria spinulosa to build tubes, feed and subsequently grow and develop.  

    Sensitivity assessment. As Sabellaria spinulosa reefs are robust, stable structures that are present subtidally in naturally disturbed environments and areas with high water flow, changes (decrease or increase) in wave height at the pressure benchmark are not considered to affect reefs.  All biotopes within this group are therefore considered to have ‘High’ resistance to this pressure, resilience is assessed as ‘High’ (no impact to recover from) and all subtidal reef biotopes are considered to be ‘Not Sensitive’.  Intertidal populations of Sabellaria spinulosa would be more exposed to the impacts of wave exposure but the corresponding biotopes for these habitats are not included in this assessment.  

    High
    Low
    NR
    NR
    Help
    High
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Not sensitive
    Low
    Low
    Low
    Help

    Chemical Pressures

    Use [show more] / [show less] to open/close text displayed

    ResistanceResilienceSensitivity
    Transition elements & organo-metal contamination [Show more]

    Transition elements & organo-metal contamination

    Benchmark. Exposure of marine species or habitat to one or more relevant contaminants via uncontrolled releases or incidental spills. Further detail

    Evidence

    This pressure is Not assessed but evidence is presented where available.

    Not Assessed (NA)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not assessed (NA)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not assessed (NA)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Hydrocarbon & PAH contamination [Show more]

    Hydrocarbon & PAH contamination

    Benchmark. Exposure of marine species or habitat to one or more relevant contaminants via uncontrolled releases or incidental spills. Further detail

    Evidence

    This pressure is Not assessed but evidence is presented where available.

    Not Assessed (NA)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not assessed (NA)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not assessed (NA)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Synthetic compound contamination [Show more]

    Synthetic compound contamination

    Benchmark. Exposure of marine species or habitat to one or more relevant contaminants via uncontrolled releases or incidental spills. Further detail

    Evidence

    This pressure is Not assessed but evidence is presented where available.

    Not Assessed (NA)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not assessed (NA)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not assessed (NA)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Radionuclide contamination [Show more]

    Radionuclide contamination

    Benchmark. An increase in 10µGy/h above background levels. Further detail

    Evidence

    No evidence.

    No evidence (NEv)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    No evidence (NEv)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    No evidence (NEv)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Introduction of other substances [Show more]

    Introduction of other substances

    Benchmark. Exposure of marine species or habitat to one or more relevant contaminants via uncontrolled releases or incidental spills. Further detail

    Evidence

    This pressure is Not assessed.

    Not Assessed (NA)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not assessed (NA)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not assessed (NA)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    De-oxygenation [Show more]

    De-oxygenation

    Benchmark. Exposure to dissolved oxygen concentration of less than or equal to 2 mg/l for one week (a change from WFD poor status to bad status). Further detail

    Evidence

    Cole et al. (1999) suggest possible adverse effects on marine species below 4 mg/l and probable adverse effects below 2 mg/l. No information was found regarding Sabellaria spinulosa tolerance to changes in oxygenation and this pressure is not assessed due to lack of evidence.

    No evidence (NEv)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    No evidence (NEv)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    No evidence (NEv)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Nutrient enrichment [Show more]

    Nutrient enrichment

    Benchmark. Compliance with WFD criteria for good status. Further detail

    Evidence

    No direct evidence was found to assess this pressure. As the reefs are circalittoral increased nutrient enrichment (eutrophication) would not stimulate the overgrowth of macroalgae on reefs as light penetration is too limited (especially in turbid areas) to allow growth. Enhanced phytoplankton production may increase food supply and increased siltation and deoxygenation from algal blooms is likely to be mitigated by water movements in the areas most suitable for Sabellaria spinulosa reefs. 

    Sensitivity assessment. At the pressure benchmark, which refers to the maintenance of 'good' status according to the Water Framework Directive, Sabellaria spinulosa reefs are considered 'Not sensitive'. 

    High
    Low
    NR
    NR
    Help
    High
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Not sensitive
    Low
    Low
    Low
    Help
    Organic enrichment [Show more]

    Organic enrichment

    Benchmark. A deposit of 100 gC/m2/yr. Further detail

    Evidence

    Limited direct evidence was found to assess the effects of this pressure. The presence and enhanced growth of Sabellaria spinulosa adjacent to a sludge dumping area in Dublin (Walker & Rees 1980)  suggest that Sabellaria spinulosa reef biotopes are resistant to a high level of organic enrichment.  Information on the levels of organic matter in Dublin Bay was not provided and so it is unclear how the levels experienced relate to the pressure benchmark. 

    Sabellaria spinulosa reefs are found in areas of high water movement (up to 1 m/s from (Pearce et al., 2014, see 'change in water flow' for further details) that would naturally disperse some organic matter preventing accumulation and siltation.  In larger, dense colonies of Sabellaria spinulosa, sand, detritus, and finer faecal materials collect in between worm tubes.  These detritus layers do not interrupt the normal growth of the individuals or of the colony as a whole (Schafer, 1972).  Taking into consideration these points it seems likely that Sabellaria spinulosa are resistant to the deposition of a fine layer of organic materials.

    Indirect effects arising from inputs of organic matter are possible where habitat quality and species interactions are altered.  In the Wadden Sea, large subtidal areas of Sabellaria spinulosa reefs have been completely lost since the 1920s.  This decline has been partly attributed to an increase in coastal eutrophication that has favoured blue mussel beds (Dörjes, 1992; Hayward & Ryland, 1998; Benson et al., 2013).  However, a direct causal link has not been established and it is possible that the decline of Sabellaria spinulosa reefs was due to physical damage from fishing activities rather than competitive interactions (Jones et al., 2000).

    Sensitivity assessment. Little evidence was found to support this sensitivity assessment.  Habitat preferences for areas of high water movement suggest that organic matter would not accumulate on reefs, limiting exposure to this pressure.  Sabellaria spinulosa and the associated species assemblage (which typically includes attached filter feeders from a number of phyla) is likely to be able to consume extra organic matter.  This conclusion is supported by the enhanced growth rates that have been recorded in the vicinity of sewage disposal areas (Walker & Rees, 1980).  Resistance is therefore assessed as ‘High’ to this pressure and recovery is assessed as ‘High’ (no impact to recover from) and the biotope is considered to be ‘Not Sensitive’ at the pressure benchmark. 

    High
    Medium
    High
    NR
    Help
    High
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Not sensitive
    Medium
    High
    Low
    Help

    Physical Pressures

    Use [show more] / [show less] to open/close text displayed

    ResistanceResilienceSensitivity
    Physical loss (to land or freshwater habitat) [Show more]

    Physical loss (to land or freshwater habitat)

    Benchmark. A permanent loss of existing saline habitat within the site. Further detail

    Evidence

    All marine habitats and benthic species are considered to have ‘No Resistance’ to this pressure and to be unable to recover from a permanent loss of habitat.  Sensitivity within the direct spatial footprint of this pressure is, therefore ‘High’.  Although no specific evidence is described confidence in the resistance assessment is ‘High’, due to the incontrovertible nature of this pressure.  Adjacent habitats and species populations may be indirectly affected where meta-population dynamics and trophic networks are disrupted and where the flow of resources e.g. sediments, prey items, loss of nursery habitat etc. is altered. No recovery is predicted to occur.

    None
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Very Low
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    High
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Physical change (to another seabed type) [Show more]

    Physical change (to another seabed type)

    Benchmark. Permanent change from sedimentary or soft rock substrata to hard rock or artificial substrata or vice-versa. Further detail

    Evidence

    The introduction of artificial hard substratum or the exposure of natural hard substratum is considered at the pressure benchmark level and it is noted that Sabellaria spinulosa can colonise bedrock and artificial structures (Mistakidis, 1956).  An increase in the availability of hard substratum may, therefore, be beneficial in areas where sedimentary habitats were previously unsuitable for colonisation.  

    Sensitivity assessment. Based on reported habitat preferences the species (rather than the biotope) is considered to be ‘Not Sensitive’ as the resulting habitat is suitable for the development of reefs (however these would be classified as a different biotope type).  The resistance of the biotope is, therefore, assessed as None (loss of >75% of extent), resilience is Very low (the pressure is a permanent change) and sensitivity is assessed as High. The more precautionary assessment for the biotope, rather than the species, is presented in the table as it is considered that any change from a sedimentary habitat to a rock reef habitat would alter the biotope classification and hence the more sensitive assessment is appropriate.

    None
    Medium
    Low
    NR
    Help
    Very Low
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    High
    Medium
    Low
    Low
    Help
    Physical change (to another sediment type) [Show more]

    Physical change (to another sediment type)

    Benchmark. Permanent change in one Folk class (based on UK SeaMap simplified classification). Further detail

    Evidence

    Dredging and dumping of sediment and infrastructure developments can lead to changes in sediment character.  The impact of the change will depend on the sediment changes that result.  Foster-Smith (2001b) reported that the best Sabellaria spinulosa reefs identified in an area of the Wash were associated with ground clearly scarred by dredging activities.  It is believed that this was most likely due to a reduction in the overburden of sand resulting in a substratum more suitable for reef formation (Foster-Smith, 2001b).

    Sabellaria spinulosa biotopes that occur on mixed sediments are not considered to be affected by a change in sediment type of one Folk class that leads to a change to ‘coarse sediments’ characterized as gravel, sandy gravel or gravelly sand (based on the Long (2006) simplified Folk classification) or a change to sands and muddy sand as this species is found on sands (George & Warwick, 1985).  It should be note, that changes in substratum type and water flows, that resulted in a loss of supply of suitable tube-building materials, would negatively impact this biotope. However, this biotope is considered to be negatively impacted by a change to the fine sediment e.g. a change in the sediment classification to ‘mud and sandy mud’.  This assessment is based on the lack of records of reefs occurring on these sediment types and is likely due to the mobility of the sediment, the lack of sand for tube-building and possibly the re-suspension of fine sediments clogging feeding structures and gills, however, this is assumed rather than based on direct evidence.

    Sensitivity assessment.  Based on reported habitat preferences and evidence from Foster-Smith (2001b), where a change in one Folk class results in increased coarseness (e.g. a change to a coarse sediment of gravel, sandy gravel or gravelly sand) then the biotope is considered to be ‘Not Sensitive’ as the resulting habitat is suitable for this species.  However, an increase in fine sediments to the degree that sediments are re-classified as mud or sandy mud would severely reduce habitat suitability.  Therefore, resistance has been assessed as ‘None’, resilience as Very low (the pressure is a permanent change), and sensitivity as High. 

    None
    Medium
    Low
    NR
    Help
    Very Low
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    High
    Medium
    Low
    Low
    Help
    Habitat structure changes - removal of substratum (extraction) [Show more]

    Habitat structure changes - removal of substratum (extraction)

    Benchmark. The extraction of substratum to 30 cm (where substratum includes sediments and soft rock but excludes hard bedrock). Further detail

    Evidence

    The removal of sediment or substratum down to 30 cm depth is likely to remove the whole Sabellaria spinulosa reef within the extraction footprint.  For example, no reefs were present in the active dredge zone when dredging was taking place at the Hastings Shingle Bank  (Pearce et al., 2007).  Therefore resistance to this pressure is assessed as ‘None’.  However, if suitable substrata were to remain (as specified in the pressure benchmark), reef recovery would depend on larval settlement and survival. 

    Hill et al., (2011) reviewed the recoverability of seabed sediments following marine aggregate extraction.  Rapid recovery was reported in areas with high levels of sediment mobility (8 months) which is likely to include the habitat that Sabellaria spinulosa is commonly found in (Holt et al., 1998).  For example, in areas such as the Bristol Channel (where Sabellaria spinulosa is currently distributed), physical traces of dredging that had been carried out in mobile sandy habitats disappeared within a few tidal cycles (Newell et al., 1998).  Similarly, dredge tracks at an area of the North Sea exposed to high levels of wave action disappeared in less than a year (Hill et al., 2011).  With regards to Sabellaria spinulosa specifically, rapid recovery after the cessation of dredging has been observed at high dredging intensity zones in the Hastings Shine Bank area (new establishment observed in less than a year) (Pearce et al., 2007).  

    Sensitivity assessment. As Sabellaria spinulosa reefs are present on the surface they will be directly removed by extraction of the sediment, resistance to this pressure is therefore assessed as ‘None’.  Resilience informed by (Pearce et al., 2007) is considered to be ‘Medium’ to allow for the establishment of reef structure and the potential for variable recruitment and this biotope is therefore considered to have ‘Medium’ sensitivity to this pressure.

    None
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Medium
    Medium
    High
    Medium
    Help
    Medium
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Abrasion / disturbance of the surface of the substratum or seabed [Show more]

    Abrasion / disturbance of the surface of the substratum or seabed

    Benchmark. Damage to surface features (e.g. species and physical structures within the habitat). Further detail

    Evidence

    Sabellaria spinulosa reef biotopes are directly exposed to physical damage that affects the surface.  Gibb et al. (2014) found no direct evidence for impacts of the surface only for Sabellaria spinulosa.  Studies of intertidal reefs of the congener Sabellaria alveolata (Cunningham et al.,1984) have found that the reef recovered within 23 days from the effects of trampling, (i.e. treading, walking or stamping on the reef structures) by repairing minor damage to the worm tube porches.  Severe, localised damage, caused by kicking and jumping on the reef structure, resulted in large cracks between the tubes, and removal of sections (ca 15 x15 x10 cm) of the structure (Cunningham et al., 1984).  Subsequent wave action enlarged the holes or cracks.  However, after 23 days, at one site, one side of the hole had begun to repair, and tubes had begun to extend into the eroded area. 

    To address concerns regarding damage from fishing activities in the Wadden Sea, Vorberg (2000) used video cameras to study the effect of shrimp fisheries on Sabellaria alveolata reefs.  The imagery showed that the 3m beam trawl easily ran over a reef that rose to 30 to 40 cm, although the beam was occasionally caught and misshaped on the higher sections of the reef.  At low tide, there were no signs of the reef being destroyed and, although the trawl had left impressions, all traces had disappeared four to five days later due to the rapid rebuilding of tubes by the worms.  The daily growth rate of the worms during the restoration phase was significantly higher than undisturbed growth (undisturbed: 0.7 mm, after removal of 2 cm of surface: 4.4 mm) and indicates that as long as the reef is not completely destroyed recovery can occur rapidly. 

    Sabellaria spinulosa reefs are suggested to be more fragile than Sabellaria alveolata (B. Pearce, pers comm, cited from Gibb et al., 2014) and therefore surface abrasion may lead to greater damage and lower recovery rates than observed for Sabellaria alveolata.  Sabellaria spinulosa reefs are often only approximately 10cm thick, surface abrasion can, therefore, severely damage and/or remove a reef (see also evidence from penetration and disturbance of the sunbstratum, below).  No direct observations of reef recovery, through repair, from abrasion were found for Sabellaria spinulosa.

    Sensitivity assessment. Based on the evidence discussed above, abrasion at the surface of Sabellaria spinulosa reefs is considered likely to damage the tubes and result in sub-lethal and lethal damage to the worms.  Resistance is therefore assessed as ‘Low’ (loss of 25-75% of tubes and worms within the impact footprint).  Resilience is therefore assessed as ‘Medium’ (within 2 years) and sensitivity is therefore assessed as ‘Medium’.  This assessment is relatively precautionary and it should be noted the degree of resilience will be mediated by the character of the impact.  The recovery of small areas of surficial damage in thick reefs is likely to occur through tube repair and may be relatively rapid. 

    Low
    Low
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Medium
    Medium
    High
    Medium
    Help
    Medium
    Low
    Low
    Low
    Help
    Penetration or disturbance of the substratum subsurface [Show more]

    Penetration or disturbance of the substratum subsurface

    Benchmark. Damage to sub-surface features (e.g. species and physical structures within the habitat). Further detail

    Evidence

    Sabellaria spinulosa reef biotopes are directly exposed to physical damage that affects the surface layers (abrasion) and penetrates deeper beneath the surface of the reef.   No quantitative studies were found and although Vorberg (2000) is widely cited (see above in the abrasion section) the study used a light shrimp trawl on Sabellaria alveolata reefs and the relevance to Sabellaria spinulosa and the use of heavy fishing trawls is questionable.

    Sabellaria spinulosa reefs in the Wadden Sea suffered great losses in the 1950s which are thought to be due to heavy anchor chains being trawled over grounds in association with shrimp fishing (Reise & Schubert, 1987; JNCC, 2013).  It is believed that local fishermen targeted areas of Sabellaria spinulosa reef due to their association with the brown shrimp Crangon crangon, and that deliberate attempts to remove the reefs were made so that fishing gear was not snagged and damaged  (Defra, 2004; JNCC, 2013).  Similar activity has been reported by fishermen at Ramsgate on Sabellaria spinulosa reefs in the Thames sea area but no direct evidence has been identified (Fariñas-Franco, 2014). 

    Other studies have found significant evidence of trawl scars from unspecified fisheries through Sabellaria spinulosa reefs (Collins, 2003; Pearce et al., 2007) indicating that damage from fishing gear is a real possibility (Hendrick et al., 2011).  Obvious evidence of the destruction of Sabellaria spinulosa reef clumps by a beam trawler has been reported off the coast of Swanage, Dorset (Collins, 2003; cited from Benson et al., 2013).  The loss of reefs within a monitoring zone may have been due to bottom trawling based on the presence of trawl scars within the survey area, although the loss cannot be directly attributed to this activity based on the lack of direct observation (Pearce et al., 2011a).

    Sabellaria spinulosa reefs remain extensive despite clear damage from bottom trawling at Hastings Shingle Bank (Cooper et al., 2007; Pearce et al., 2007) and at the Thanet offshore wind farm site (Pearce et al., in press).  However, in other areas such as the Wadden Sea (Riesen & Reise, 1982) and Morecambe Bay (see references in Holt et al., 1998), reefs which have been thought to have been trawled have disappeared and have not recovered.  It is acknowledged that the limited evidence available does not allow these losses to be directly attributed to fishing.

    At the Hastings site, a newly developed reef (six months old) demonstrated the same multivariate community structure of fauna inhabiting a nearby reef that had been observed over the past 5 years (Pearce et al., 2007).  This suggests that the epifauna community associated with Sabellaria spinulosa reefs could also recover from fishing activity quickly, but it should be noted that the older reef had experienced on-going fishing activity and so the associated assemblage may be at a relatively early successional stage (Pearce et al., 2007). The quick recovery of the reef and associated biota was not seen in the Wadden Sea after shrimping activity in the 1950’s.  Instead, together with a loss of mussel beds and seagrass, community composition in the subtidal zone changed and a significant decline in sessile species was observed (Reise et al., 1989; Buhs & Reise, 1997; Reise & Buhs, 1999; Reise, 2005).

    Sensitivity assessment. Structural damage to the seabed sub-surface is likely to damage and break-up tube aggregations leading to the loss of reef within the footprint of direct impact.  Sabellaria spinulosa is assessed as having a resistance of ‘None’ to this pressure (removal of >75% of the reef in the pressure footprint).  Based on evidence (Pearce et al., 2007; Pearce et al., 2011a) resilience was assessed as ‘Medium’, therefore, the sensitivity of Sabellaria spinulosa biotopes is considered to be ‘Medium’.  

    None
    Medium
    High
    High
    Help
    Medium
    Medium
    High
    Medium
    Help
    Medium
    Medium
    High
    Medium
    Help
    Changes in suspended solids (water clarity) [Show more]

    Changes in suspended solids (water clarity)

    Benchmark. A change in one rank on the WFD (Water Framework Directive) scale e.g. from clear to intermediate for one year. Further detail

    Evidence

    Sabellaria spinulosa do not rely on light penetration for photosynthesis, it is also believed that visual perception is limited and that this species does not rely on sight to locate food or other resources.  In a recent review of the sensitivity of Sabellaria spinulosa reefs to anthropogenic disturbance,  Fariñas-Franco et al.  (2014) concluded that impacts on Sabellaria spinulosa due to a decrease in water clarity resulting from an increase in suspended solids (inorganic or organic) are unlikely although no thresholds regarding tolerance or intolerance were found.  Decreases in suspended particles that reduce the supply of food or tube-building materials may, however, negatively impact this species (Davies et al., 2009; Last et al., 2011).

    Sabellaria spinulosa relies on a supply of suspended solids and organic matter in order to filter feed and build protective tubes and so they are often found in areas with high levels of turbidity.  Davies, et al. (2009) and Last et al. (2011) developed Vortex Resuspension Tanks (VoRT) which are able to test the effects of a change in the composition of suspended sediment on benthic species.  This laboratory experiment manipulated turbidity and current flow and demonstrated the susceptibility of Sabellaria spinulosa to a decrease in suspended particulate matter (SPM).  A clear erosion of tubes was observed in the absence of SPM and subsequent starvation of tube building materials.  At high and intermediate sediment regimes (high SPM ~71 mg / l) conditions were comparable to what might be expected within only a few hundred meters distance of a primary aggregate extraction site and Sabellaria spinulosa maintained a cumulative growth rate at these rates of SPM.  This supports the view that availability of suspended particles is necessary for Sabellaria spinulosa development and that tolerance of elevated levels is likely (Davies et al., 2009).

    Indirect evidence for the tolerance of Sabellaria spinulosa for changes in turbidity is provided by the persistence of reefs on the outskirts of aggregate dredging areas (Pearce et al., 2007, 2011a) which appear unaffected by extraction which is likely to have led to sediment plumes.  Such plumes, however, are short-lived (Tillin et al., 2011) and, therefore, the long-term effect depends on the duration of dredging activities.

    Tillin, (2010) used logistic regression to develop statistical models that indicate how the probability of occurrence of the congener Sabellaria alveolata changes over environmental gradients within the Severn Estuary.  The model predicted response surfaces were derived for each biotope for each of the selected habitat variables, using logistic regression.  From these response surfaces the optimum habitat range for each biotope could be defined based on the range of each environmental variable where the probability of occurrence, divided by the maximum probability of occurrence, is 0.75 or higher.  These results identify the range for each significant variable where the habitat is most likely to occur.  The modelled ranges should be interpreted with caution and apply to the Severn Estuary alone (which experiences large tidal ranges, high currents, and extremely high suspended sediment loads and is, therefore, distinct from many other estuarine systems).  However, these ranges do provide some useful information on environmental tolerances.  The models indicate that for subtidal Sabellaria alveolata the optimal mean neap sediment concentrations range from 515.7-906 mg/l and optimal mean spring sediment concentrations range from 855.3-1631 mg/l.  Although not directly applicable to S. spinulosa this data suggests that tube-building sabellariids are tolerant to very high levels of suspended sediment.  Fine sediments such as mud may clog the gills and feeding tentacles of some polychaetes and therefore, the potential impact will be mediated by the character of the pressure.

    Sensitivity assessment. The benchmark for this pressure refers to a change in turbidity of one rank (see benchmark)  Sabellaria spinulosa do not photosynthesise and do not rely on sight to locate resources and, therefore, no effects are predicted for reef biotopes from an increase or decrease in clarity resulting from a change in one rank on the water framework directive scale.  Experiments (Davies et al., 2009) and predictive modelling (Tillin, 2010) indicate that tube building sabellariids can tolerate a broad range of suspended solids. Resistance to an increase or decrease at the pressure benchmark is therefore assessed as ‘High’ and resilience as ‘High’ (no impact to recover from). 

    High
    High
    Low
    High
    Help
    High
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Not sensitive
    High
    Low
    High
    Help
    Smothering and siltation rate changes (light) [Show more]

    Smothering and siltation rate changes (light)

    Benchmark. ‘Light’ deposition of up to 5 cm of fine material added to the seabed in a single discrete event. Further detail

    Evidence

    Sabellaria spinulosa are often found in areas of high water movement with some degree of sediment transport essential for tube-building and feeding.  Sabellaria spinulosa reefs adjacent to aggregate dredging areas appear unimpacted by dredging operations (Pearce et al., 2007; Pearce et al., 2011a).  Evidence suggests that given the dynamic sedimentary environments in which sabellariids live, their populations can certainly persevere in turbid conditions in spite of ‘typical’ natural levels of burial (Last et al., 2011) and that recovery from burial events is high.  

    Direct evidence for the effects of siltation on Sabellaria spinulosa is limited to the experiments undertaken by Last et al., (2011).  Last et al. (2011) buried Sabellaria spinulosa worms (isolated into artificial tubes), under three different depths of sediment – shallow (2cm), medium (5cm) and deep (7cm).  The results indicate that Sabellaria spinulosa can survive short-term (32 days), periodic sand burial of up to 7 cm.  Last et al. (2011) suggested that the formation of ‘emergence tubes’ (newly created tubes extending to the surface) under sediment burial allowed Sabellaria spinulosa to tolerate gradual burial and that perhaps this mechanism allows for continued adult dispersal.  This mechanism occurred most rapidly throughout the 8-day burial at ~1 mm per day (Last et al., 2011) but even though tube-growth still seems possible under burial, it is likely that a dumping of fine and coarse material will block feeding apparatus and, therefore, worm development will be curtailed.

    The evidence above suggests that Ross worm reefs are sensitive to damage from siltation events (Hendrick et al., 2011).  However, at the pressure benchmark, the depth of burial is likely to be similar or less than that experienced during natural storm events that move sediments and, in areas of high water movement, deposits of fine sediments are likely to be remobilised and moved.

    Sensitivity assessment. In areas of high water flow dispersion of fine sediments may be rapid and this will mitigate the magnitude of this pressure by reducing the time exposed.  Based on the experiments by Last et al. (2011) which are considered relevant to the pressure benchmark, resistance and resilience are assessed as ‘High’ and this biotope is considered to be 'Not sensitive'.   

    High
    High
    Medium
    NR
    Help
    High
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Not sensitive
    High
    Medium
    Low
    Help
    Smothering and siltation rate changes (heavy) [Show more]

    Smothering and siltation rate changes (heavy)

    Benchmark. ‘Heavy’ deposition of up to 30 cm of fine material added to the seabed in a single discrete event. Further detail

    Evidence

    Sabellaria spinulosa reefs adjacent to aggregate dredging areas appear unimpacted by dredging operations (Pearce et al., 2007; Pearce et al., 2011a).  Evidence suggests that given the dynamic sedimentary environments in which sabellariids live, their populations can certainly persevere in turbid conditions in spite of ‘typical’ natural levels of burial (Last et al., 2011) and that recovery from burial events is high.  The congener S. alveolata was reported to survive short-term burial for days and even weeks in the south west as a result of storms that altered sand levels up to two meters, they were, however, killed by longer-term burial (Earll & Erwin 1983).

    Direct evidence for the effects of siltation on Sabellaria spinulosa is limited to the experiments undertaken by Last et al. (2011).  The experimental conditions do not, however, relate to the pressure benchmark (30 cm of siltation in a single event).  Last et al., (2011) buried Sabellaria spinulosa worms (isolated into artificial tubes), under three different depths of sediment – shallow (2 cm), medium (5 cm) and deep (7 cm).  The results indicate that Sabellaria spinulosa can survive short-term (32 days), periodic sand burial of up to 7 cm.  Last et al. (2011) suggested that the formation of ‘emergence tubes’ (newly created tubes extending to the surface) under sediment burial allowed Sabellaria spinulosa to tolerate gradual burial and that perhaps this mechanism allows for continued adult dispersal.  This mechanism occurred most rapidly throughout the 8-day burial at ~1 mm per day (Last et al., 2011) but even though tube-growth still seems possible under burial, it is likely that a dumping of fine and coarse material will block feeding apparatus and therefore worm development will be curtailed.

    A Sabellaria spinulosa reef off the coast of Dorset has shown periodic burial from large sand waves (Collins, 2003).  The displacement of some colonies that had established themselves on a gas pipeline 1 km off the coast of Aberdeen was also associated with burial (Mistakidis, 1956; cited by Holt et al., 1998).  Furthermore the loss of a 2 km2 area of Ross worm reef in Jade Bay, North Sea was attributed to burial as a consequence of mud deposition, although fishing activity may have contributed to the decline (Dörjes, 1992, cited from Hendrick et al., 2011). 

    The evidence above suggests that Sabellaria spinulosa reefs are sensitive to damage from siltation events (Hendrick et al., 2011).  However, recovery is likely to be rapid given that larval dispersal is not interrupted and new reefs are likely to be able to establish themselves over old buried ones as postulated by (Fariñas-Franco et al., 2014).

    Sensitivity assessment. No direct evidence was found for the length of time that Sabellaria spinulosa can survive beneath 30 cm of sediment.  In areas of high water flow dispersion of fine sediments may be rapid and this will mitigate the magnitude of this pressure by reducing the time exposed.  However, this mitigating effect was not taken into account as it depends on site-specific conditions.  Resistance was assessed as ‘None’ due to the depth of overburden. Resilience was assessed as ‘Medium’ (2-10 years) and sensitivity was therefore categorised as ‘Medium’.  

    None
    Low
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Medium
    High
    Low
    High
    Help
    Medium
    Low
    Low
    Low
    Help
    Litter [Show more]

    Litter

    Benchmark. The introduction of man-made objects able to cause physical harm (surface, water column, seafloor or strandline). Further detail

    Evidence

    Not assessed.

    Not Assessed (NA)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not assessed (NA)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not assessed (NA)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Electromagnetic changes [Show more]

    Electromagnetic changes

    Benchmark. A local electric field of 1 V/m or a local magnetic field of 10 µT. Further detail

    Evidence

    No evidence.

    No evidence (NEv)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    No evidence (NEv)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    No evidence (NEv)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Underwater noise changes [Show more]

    Underwater noise changes

    Benchmark. MSFD indicator levels (SEL or peak SPL) exceeded for 20% of days in a calendar year. Further detail

    Evidence

    Not relevant.

    Not relevant (NR)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not relevant (NR)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not relevant (NR)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Introduction of light or shading [Show more]

    Introduction of light or shading

    Benchmark. A change in incident light via anthropogenic means. Further detail

    Evidence

    Not relevant.

    Not relevant (NR)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not relevant (NR)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not relevant (NR)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Barrier to species movement [Show more]

    Barrier to species movement

    Benchmark. A permanent or temporary barrier to species movement over ≥50% of water body width or a 10% change in tidal excursion. Further detail

    Evidence

    No direct evidence was found to assess this pressure. As the larvae of Sabellaria spinulosa are planktonic and are transported by water movements, barriers that reduce the degree of tidal excursion may alter the supply of Sabellaria spinulosa to suitable habitats from source populations. However, the presence of barriers may enhance local population supply by preventing the loss of larvae from enclosed habitats.  This species is therefore potentially sensitive to barriers that restrict water movements, whether this will lead to beneficial or negative effects will depend on whether enclosed populations are sources of larvae or are ‘sink’ populations that depend on outside supply of larvae to sustain the local population.

    Sensitivity assessment. As this habitat is potentially sensitive to changes in tidal excursion and exchange, resistance is assessed as ‘Medium’ and resilience as ‘High’, sensitivity is, therefore ‘Low’. It should be noted that offshore circalittoral habitats are unlikely to be exposed to this pressure.

    Medium
    Low
    NR
    NR
    Help
    High
    Medium
    Low
    Medium
    Help
    Low
    Low
    Low
    Low
    Help
    Death or injury by collision [Show more]

    Death or injury by collision

    Benchmark. Injury or mortality from collisions of biota with both static or moving structures due to 0.1% of tidal volume on an average tide, passing through an artificial structure. Further detail

    Evidence

    Not relevant’ to seabed habitats.  NB. Collision by grounding vessels is addressed under ‘surface abrasion’.

    Not relevant (NR)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not relevant (NR)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not relevant (NR)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Visual disturbance [Show more]

    Visual disturbance

    Benchmark. The daily duration of transient visual cues exceeds 10% of the period of site occupancy by the feature. Further detail

    Evidence

    Not relevant.

    Not relevant (NR)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not relevant (NR)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not relevant (NR)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help

    Biological Pressures

    Use [show more] / [show less] to open/close text displayed

    ResistanceResilienceSensitivity
    Genetic modification & translocation of indigenous species [Show more]

    Genetic modification & translocation of indigenous species

    Benchmark. Translocation of indigenous species or the introduction of genetically modified or genetically different populations of indigenous species that may result in changes in the genetic structure of local populations, hybridization, or change in community structure. Further detail

    Evidence

    Sabellaria spinulosa is not farmed or translocated and, therefore, this pressure is 'Not relevant' to this biotope.

    Not relevant (NR)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not relevant (NR)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not relevant (NR)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Introduction or spread of invasive non-indigenous species [Show more]

    Introduction or spread of invasive non-indigenous species

    Benchmark. The introduction of one or more invasive non-indigenous species (INIS). Further detail

    Evidence

    No direct evidence relating to the impacts of the introduction of non-indigenous species on Sabellaria spinulosa reefs was found by Gibb et al. (2014). There are no records to suggest that their distribution overlaps with Sabellaria spinulosa reefs for many of the non-indigenous species that are found in UK seabed habitats, t

    The oyster drill, Urosalpinx cinerea, is not known to predate on polychaetes (Brown & Richardson, 1988), therefore, their introduction is not considered a threat to Sabellaria spinulosa. There is, however, some overlap between the environmental niche of Sabellaria spinulosa and the oysters that Urosalpinx cinerea selectively feed on (Brown & Richardson, 1988).  Japanese wireweed Sargassum muticum and green sea fingers Codium fragile have the potential to compete for space where Sabellaria spinulosa reefs occur intertidally, however, intertidal biotopes are not included in this assessment and these species are unlikely to impact deeper subtidal reefs. No records of the reef-building serpulid Ficopomatus enigmaticus, the colonial sea squirt Perophora japonica, or Japanese kelp Undaria pinnatifida, suggest these species occur on or near Sabellaria spinulosa reefs. However, further spread may impact subtidal Sabellaria spinulosa reefs through smothering or competition, although this is entirely speculative.Sabellaria spinulosa reefs support a variety of attached epifauna including species of bryozoans, hydroids and sponges. As Sabellaria spinulosa reefs are known to support encrusting organisms without apparent adverse effects, the stalked sea squirt Styela clava, as a solitary sea squirt is considered unlikely to have greater negative impacts than native species.

    Two species that potentially pose a threat to Sabellaria spinulosa reefs are the Pacific oyster Magallana gigas and the slipper limpet Crepidula fornicata. Reefs of Sabellaria alveolata in the bay of Mont Saint Michel, France were increasingly colonized by the Pacific oyster Magallana gigas (Dubois et al. 2006). Given the high filtration rates of Magallana gigas, it is believed that they can out-compete Sabellaria alveolata for feeding resources (Dubois et al. 2006). In the Wadden Sea, Magallana gigas have replaced blue mussels (Diederich, 2005; 2006) suggesting that Magallana gigas may impact filter feeding, reef-forming organisms in general. The reasons underlying the species shift from Mytilus edulis to Magallana gigas have not been elucidated, however, it may be due to recent changes in climactic conditions (Thieltges, 2005) rather than competitive interactions. It should be noted that even though Magallana gigas is distributed throughout UK waters following an initial introduction in 1926 (Linke, 1951) there is currently no evidence, in the absence of any targeted studies, that this species is impacting native Sabellaria spinulosa or Sabellaria alveolata reefs (Crisp, 1964; Hendrick, et al. 2011).

    Crepidula fornicata is recorded from shallow, sheltered bays, lagoons and estuaries or the sheltered sides of islands, in variable salinity (18 to 40) although it prefers ca 30 (Tillin et al., 2020). Larvae require hard substrata for settlement. It prefers muddy gravelly, shell-rich, substrata that include gravel, or shells of other Crepidula, or other species e.g., oysters, and mussels. It is highly gregarious and seeks out adult shells for settlement, forming characteristic ‘stacks’ of adults. But it also recorded in a wide variety of habitats including clean sands, artificial substrata, Sabellaria alveolata reefs and areas subject to moderately strong tidal streams (Blanchard, 1997, 2009; Bohn et al., 2012, 2013a, 2013b, 2015; De Montaudouin et al., 2018; Hinz et al., 2011; Powell-Jennings & Calloway, 2018; Preston et al., 2020; Stiger-Pouvreau & Thouzeau, 2015; Tillin et al., 2020). High densities of Crepidula fornicata cause ecological impacts on sedimentary habitats. The species can form dense carpets that can smother the seabed in shallow bays, changing and modifying the habitat structure. At high densities, the species physically smothers the sediment, and the resultant build-up of silt, pseudofaeces, and faeces is deposited and trapped within the bed (Tillin et al., 2020, Fitzgerald, 2007, Blanchard, 2009, Stiger-Pouvreau & Thouzeau, 2015). The biodeposition rates of Crepidula are extremely high and once deposited, form an anoxic mud, making the environment suitable for other species, including most infauna (Stiger-Pouvreau & Thouzeau, 2015, Blanchard, 2009).

    Crepidula fornicata has been recorded in association with Sabellaria spinulosa reefs at Hastings Shingle Bank (up to 66 individuals per grab, Pearce, 2007) and in lower numbers in the East Coast REC area (maximum 4 per grab, Pearce et al., 2011a). The relationship between Crepidula fornicata and Sabellaria spinulosa has not been investigated. However, potential impacts on Sabellaria spinulosa reefs could occur through changes to substratum suitability or other interactions.

    The carpet sea squirt Didemnum vexillum (syn. Didemnum vestitum; Didemnum vestum) is a colonial ascidian with rapidly expanding populations that have invaded most temperate coastal regions around the world (Kleeman, 2009; Stefaniak et al., 2012; Tillin et al., 2020). It is an ‘ecosystem engineer’ that can change or modify invaded habitats and alter biodiversity (Griffith et al., 2009; Mercer et al., 2009). Didemnum vexillum has colonized and established populations in the northeast Pacific, Canadian and USA coast; New Zealand; France, Spain, and the Wadden Sea, Netherlands; the Mediterranean Sea and Adriatic Sea (Bullard et al., 2007; Coutts & Forrest, 2007; Dijkstra et al., 2007; Valentine et al., 2007a; Valentine et al., 2007b; Lambert, 2009; Hitchin, 2012; Tagliapietra et al., 2012; Gittenberger et al., 2015; Vercaemer et al., 2015; Mckenzie et al., 2017; Cinar & Ozgul, 2023; Holt, 2024). In the UK, Didemnum vexillum has colonized Holyhead marina and Milford Haven, Wales; the west coast of Scotland (marinas around Largs, Clyde, Loch Creran and Loch Fyne), South Devon (Plymouth, Yealm, and Dartmouth estuaries), the Solent, northern Kent, Essex, and Suffolk coasts (Griffith et al., 2009; Lambert, 2009; Hitchin, 2012; Michin & Nunn, 2013; Bishop et al., 2015; Mckenzie et al., 2017; Tillin et al., 2020, Holt, 2024; NBN, 2024).

    Although a widespread invader, Didemnum vexillum has a limited ability for natural dispersal since the pelagic larvae remain in the water column for a short time (up to 36 hours). Therefore, it has a short dispersal phase that can allow the species to build localized populations (Herborg et al., 2009; Vercaemer et al., 2015; Holt, 2024). However, Bullard et al. (2007) suggested that Didemnum vexillum can form new colonies asexually by fragmentation. Colonies can produce long tendrils from an encrusting colony, which can fragment, disperse and settle, attaching to suitable hard substrata elsewhere (Bullard et al., 2007; Lambert, 2009; Stefaniak & Whitlatch, 2014). A fragmented colony can spread naturally for up to three weeks transported by ocean currents, attached to floating seaweed, seagrass or other floating biota, or as free-floating spherical colonies (Bullard et al., 2007; Lengyel et al., 2009; Stefaniak & Whitlatch, 2014; Holt, 2024). Fragments can reattach to suitable substrata within six hours of contact. Fragments have the potential to disperse around 20 km before reattachment (Lengyel et al., 2009). Valentine et al. (2007a) reported that colonies of Didemnum vexillum enlarged by 6 to 11 times by asexual budding after 15 days and enlarged 11 to 19 times after 30 days. Valentine et al. (2007a) concluded fragments could successfully grow, survive, and help to spread Didemnum vexillum.

    While natural fragmentation of tendrils is thought to allow Didemnum vexillum to invade longer distances and increase its dispersal potential, Stefaniak & Whitlatch (2014) found that only one tendril out of 80 reattached to the flat, bare substrata used in their study, because tendrils required an extensive (at least eight hour) period of contact to reattach. Stefaniak & Whitlatch (2014) suggested that once fragmented from a colony, the success of tendril reattachment was limited, and reattachment was not a major contributor to the invasive success of Didemnum vexillum. However, Stefaniak & Whitlatch (2014) also found that larvae-packed tendril fragments may increase natural dispersal distance, reproduction, and invasive success of Didemnum vexillum, and increase the distance larvae can travel. Not all colonies produce tendrils at all locations.

    Human-meditated transport via aquaculture facilities, boat hulls, commercial fishing vessels, and ballast water is probably the most important vector that has aided the long-distance dispersal of Didemnum vexillum and explains its prevalence in harbours and marinas (Bullard et al., 2007; Dijkstra et al., 2007; Griffith et al., 2009; Herborg et al., 2009). Fragmentation of colonies during transport or human disturbance (such as trawling or dredging) could indirectly disperse the species and enable it to find suitable conditions for establishment (Herborg et al., 2009). For example, in oyster farms in British Columbia, large fragments of Didemnum sp. come off oyster strings when they are pulled out of water and other fragments can be pulled off oysters and mussels and thrown back into the water, which is likely to aid dispersal of the invasive species (Bullard et al., 2007). Dijkstra et al. (2007) hypothesised that Didemnum sp. was introduced to the Gulf of Maine with oyster aquaculture in the Damariscotta River and transported via Pacific oysters.

    Didemnum vexillum was likely introduced into the UK from northern Europe or Ireland via poorly maintained or not antifouled vessels, movement of contaminated shellfish stock and aquaculture equipment, or via marine industries such as oil, gas, renewables, and dredging (Holt, 2024). Recent evidence from genetic material suggests that human-mediated dispersal, between marinas and shellfish culture sites, is the most likely pathway for connectivity of Didemnum vexillum populations throughout Ireland and Britain (Prentice et al., 2021; Holt, 2024). Didemnum vexillum can disperse away from artificial substrata, invading and colonizing natural substrata in surrounding areas (Tillin et al., 2020). Holt (2024) noted that Didemnum vexillum had not spread as far as feared in the UK since it was first recorded. The current evidence of Didemnum vexillum’s ability to spread on natural habitats in this area is sparse and often conflicting, complicated by genetics and its apparent variable habitat preferences and tolerances and its variable ability to adapt to ‘new’ conditions (Holt 2024).

    Didemnum vexillum has a seasonal growth cycle that is influenced by temperature (Valentine et al., 2007a). In warmer months (June and July) colonies may be large and well-developed encrusting mats. Populations experience more rapid growth from July to September sometimes continuing into December. Colonies begin to decline in health and ‘die-off’ when temperatures drop below 5°C during winter months from around October to April (Gittenberger, 2007; Valentine et al., 2007a; Herborg et al., 2009). Cold water months cause colonies to regress and reduce in size, yet they often regenerate as temperatures warm (Griffith et al., 2009; Kleeman, 2009, Mercer et al., 2009), although some populations may not survive winter at all (Dijkstra et al., 2007). The early growth phase, from May to July, is initiated by smaller colonies developing from remnants of colonies that survived the cold water (Valentine et al., 2007a). The seasonal growth cycle is also likely influenced by location. For example, the Didemnum sp. growth cycle for colonies in Sandwich tide pool (temperature range from -1 °C to 24 °C, with daily fluctuations), probably does not occur in deep offshore subtidal habitats in Georges Bank (annual temperature range from 4 °C to 15°C, and daily fluctuations are minimal) (Valentine et al., 2007a).  Larval release and recruitment typically occur between 14 to 20°C and slow or cease below 9 to 11°C as summer ends (Griffith et al., 2009; Mckenzie et al., 2017). In New Zealand, recruitment occurs from November to July, where the highest average temperatures were recorded in February (18 to 22°C) and the lowest average temperatures were recorded in July (9 to 10°C) (Fletcher et al., 2013a). In this New Zealand study, higher water temperatures were associated with a higher level of recruitment (Fletcher et al., 2013a).

    Didemnum vexillum requires suitable hard substrata for successful settlement and the establishment of colonies. It can grow quickly and establish large colonies of dense encrusting mats on a variety of hard substrata (Valentine et al., 2007a; Griffith et al., 2009; Lambert, 2009; Groner et al., 2011; Cinar & Ozgul, 2023). Gittenberger (2007) stated that invasive Didemnum sp. was a threat to native ecosystems because of its ability to overgrow virtually all hard substrata present. Suitable hard substrata can include rocky substrata such as bedrock gravel, pebble, cobble, or boulders or artificial substrata such as a variety of maritime structures such as pontoons, docks, wood and metal pilings, chains, ropes and moorings, plastic and ship hulls and at aquaculture facilities (Valentine et al., 2007 a&b; Bullard et al., 2007; Griffith et al., 2009; Lambert, 2009; Tagliapietra et al., 2012; Tillin et al., 2020). Didemnum vexillum has been reported colonizing these types of hard substrata in the USA, Canada, northern Kent, and the Solent (Bullard et al., 2007; Valentine et al., 2007a; Valentine et al., 2007b; Hitchin, 2012; Vercaemer et al., 2015; Tillin et al., 2020).

    Didemnum vexillum has the ability to rapidly overgrow and displace on other sessile organisms such as other colonial ascidians (Ciona intestinalis, Styela clava, Ascidiella aspera, Botrylloides violaceus, Botryllus schlosseri, Diplosoma listerianium and Aplidium spp.), bryozoan, hydroids, sponges (Clione celata and Halichrondria sp.), anemone (Diadumene cincta), calcareous tube worms, eelgrass (Zostera marina), kelp (Laminaria spp. and Agarum sp.), green algae (Codium fragile subsp. fragile), red algae (Plocamium, Chondrus crispus and bush weed Agardhiella subulata), brown algae (Ascophyllum nodosum, Sargassum, Halidrys, Fucus evanescens and Fucus serratus), calcareous algae (Corallina officinalis), mussels (Mytilus galloprovincialis, Perna canaliculus  and Mytilus edulis), barnacles, oysters (Magallana gigas, Ostrea edulis and Crassostrea virginica), sea scallops (Placopecten magellanicus), or dead shells (Dijkstra et al., 2007; Gittenberger, 2007; Valentine et al., 2007a; Valentine et al., 2007b; Griffith et al., 2009; Carman & Grunden, 2010; Dijkstra & Nolan, 2011; Groner et al., 2011; Hitchin, 2012; Tagliapietra et al., 2012; Minchin & Nunn, 2013; Gittenberger et al., 2015; Long & Groholz, 2015; Vercaemer et al., 2015).

    In contrast, Didemnum vexillum’s preference for sheltered conditions, established colonies observed in Georges Bank and Long Island Sound were exposed to moderately strong tidal currents (1 to 2 knots; ca 0.5 to 1 m/s recorded at both sites) that may mobilise sediment (Valentine et al., 2007b; Mercer et al., 2009; Tillin et al., 2020). However, Valentine et al. (2007b) describe the substratum as immobile, presumably consolidated, gravel, cobbles, and pebbles. Kleeman (2009), stated that the presence of a consistent mild wave action or ‘swash zone’ appears to favour Didemnum sp. establishment in the intertidal. Although some evidence suggests that waves and currents can facilitate the fragmentation and spread of Didemnum vexillum (Mckenzie et al., 2017), the tidal current velocities at some sites where Didemnum vexillum has been reported (for example, New England, where current velocities reach up to around 3 m/s) is lower than the current velocity required for the dislodgement of Didemnum vexillum fragments (around 7.6 m/s) (Reinhardt et al., 2012). This suggests that not all tidal currents are likely to dislodge Didemnum vexillum fragments. When on boat hulls the species can experience higher current velocities which is enough to cause dislodgement (Reinhardt et al., 2012).  

    Sensitivity assessment. No evidence was found that non-indigenous species are currently significantly impacting Sabellaria spinulosa reef biotopes. Therefore, there is not enough evidence of the interaction between non-native species to make an assessment at present (2023), in particular for Crepidula and Magallana. However, it should be noted that Crepidula fornicata and Magallana gigas may pose a potential threat in terms of competition for food and space so this assessment may require updating in the future as the distributions and interactions between these species are better understood. 

    Didemnum vexillum has not been recorded colonizing Sabellaria reefs or associating with Sabellaria spinulosa. No evidence was found on the potential effects of Didemnum sp. on Sabellaria. Nevertheless, Didemnum vexillum has been recorded in the sublittoral to depths of 81 m in Georges Bank and 30 m in Long Island, USA (Bullard et al., 2007; Valentine et al., 2007b; Mercer et al., 2009). This Sabellaria biotope occurs on mixed sediment, which could provide a suitable hard substratum for colonization by Didemnum sp. Didemnum vexillum has also been recorded in moderately strong currents (Valentine et al., 2007b; Mercer et al., 2009; Tillin et al., 2020) and predicted to survive stronger currents, as the current velocity which will dislodge Didemnum vexillum is around 7.6 m/s (Reinhardt et al., 2012). Therefore, Didemnum vexillum could colonize examples of these biotopes in tide-swept conditions. Didemnum vexillum regresses as temperatures decline in winter so shallow examples may be able to recover their condition in winter (Gittenberger, 2007; Valentine et al., 2007a; Herborg et al., 2009). However, deeper examples may not experience enough temperature change to trigger the decline in Didemnum vexillum (Valentine et al., 2007a). If Didemnum sp. could gain a 'foothold' it might overgrow, smother or cause mortality on the Sabellaria reefs. Holt (2024) noted that Didemnum vexillum had not spread as far as feared in the UK since it was first recorded. Therefore, a resistance of 'Medium' (some, <25% mortality) is suggested as a precaution in case Didemnum vexillum could colonize the biotope, but with 'Low' confidence due to the lack of direct evidence. Resilience is assessed as 'Very low' as recovery would require the physical removal of Didemnum sp., so sensitivity is assessed as 'Medium'. 

    Medium
    Low
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Very Low
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Medium
    Low
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Introduction of microbial pathogens [Show more]

    Introduction of microbial pathogens

    Benchmark. The introduction of relevant microbial pathogens or metazoan disease vectors to an area where they are currently not present (e.g. Martelia refringens and Bonamia, Avian influenza virus, viral Haemorrhagic Septicaemia virus). Further detail

    Evidence

    No evidence was found for adverse impacts of microbial pathogens on Sabellaria spinulosa.

    No evidence (NEv)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Not relevant (NR)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    No evidence (NEv)
    NR
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Removal of target species [Show more]

    Removal of target species

    Benchmark. Removal of species targeted by fishery, shellfishery or harvesting at a commercial or recreational scale. Further detail

    Evidence

    Sabellaria spinulosa may be directly removed or damaged by static or mobile gears that are targeting other species. These direct, physical impacts are assessed through the abrasion and penetration of the seabed pressures. The sensitivity assessment for this pressure considers any biological effects resulting from the removal of target species on Sabellaria spinulosa biotopes.

    Sabellaria spinulosa has no economic value and is not commercially harvested. Gibb et al. (2014) reviewed the evidence regarding potential biological effects of the removal of other target species on the Sabellaria spinulosa reef biotopes. Experimental laboratory work reported that scallop shells, especially Pecten maximus, induced Sabellaria spinulosa larvae to settle (Earll & Erwin 1983). However; the settlement-inducing property of Pecten maximus shells related mostly to the upper valve which was covered in sand grains (an existing requirement of larvae settlement) and given the diverse range of substrata that Sabellaria spinulosa have been reported in (see physical change pressure below) it is unlikely that the removal of scallops will have a significant negative impact on larval recruitment.

    Gibb et al. (2014) suggest that the removal of target species that prey on Sabellaria spinulosa could potentially be beneficial to this species. Assessment of this indirect effect is limited by the lack of empirical evidence for predator-prey relationships. Sabellaria spinulosa reefs appear to be important nursery areas for commercially targeted flat fish including Dover sole (Bryony Pearce, pers comm). Stomach analysis of fish by Pearce (2011b) found that juvenile flatfish captured in reef areas including Dover sole, dab and plaice fed preferentially on Sabellaria spinulosa. Where these species are removed as target species (or as by-catch, given that commercial fisheries are unliklely to focus on juveniles), then predation rates on Sabellaria spinulosa could be reduced.  

    Sensitivity assessment. Sabellaria spinulosa has no economic value and is not commercially harvested. The Sabellaria spinulosa biotopes are not, therefore directly impacted by this pressure and all biotopes within this group are considered, by default, to be ‘Not Sensitive’. The removal of target species that predate on Sabellaria spinulosa may have a potentially beneficial effect and the biotope is not considered to be sensitive to ecological effects resulting from their removal. 

     

    High
    Low
    NR
    NR
    Help
    High
    High
    High
    High
    Help
    Not sensitive
    Low
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Removal of non-target species [Show more]

    Removal of non-target species

    Benchmark. Removal of features or incidental non-targeted catch (by-catch) through targeted fishery, shellfishery or harvesting at a commercial or recreational scale. Further detail

    Evidence

    Sabellaria spinulosa biotopes may be removed or damaged by static or mobile gears that are targeting other species. These direct, physical impacts are assessed through the abrasion and penetration of the seabed pressures. Evidence for ecological interactions between Sabellaria spinulosa and other species is limited. The removal of Sabellaria spinulosa predators as bycatch may be beneficial. Pearce et al. (2011b) found that as well as the commercially targeted species described for the removal of target species pressure, butterfish Pholis gunnelis and dragonet Callionymus lyra predated on Sabellaria spinulosa. Previous studies have also shown that Carcinus maenas feeds on Sabellaria spinulosa (Taylor 1962; Bamber & Irving, 1997). Other invertebrates such as Pandalus montagui and Asterias rubens found in association with Sabellaria spinulosa reefs may also be feeding on the worms or on species associated with the reefs rather than Sabellaria spinulosa. Due to the limited information available on predator-prey relationships, the impact of predator removal on Sabellaria spinulosa reef biotopes cannot be assessed.

    Dense aggregations of the brittle star, Ophiothrix fragilis, have been suggested to compete with Sabellaria spinulosa for space and food and potentially to consume the gametes inhibiting recruitment (George & Warwick 1985). Removal of this species as by-catch could potentially be beneficial to the reef biotopes. A further potential interaction has been identified between Sabellaria spinulosa and the sand mason Lanice conchilega. It has been observed that sand stabilised by the sand mason Lanice conchilega is stable enough for colonization by Sabellaria alveolata (Larsonneur et al. 1994). It is believed that the same may also be possible for Sabellaria spinulosa, as Lanice conchilega and Sabellaria spinulosa are sometimes found together (Holt et al. 1997). However, a decline in Sabellaria spinulosa numbers was coincident with an increase in Lanice conchilega numbers (see Limpenny et al., 2010 and references therein). It is not clear from the available evidence therefore whether removal of Lanice conchilega would have any impact on Sabellaria spinulosa reefs (Foster-Smith 2001a).

    Sensitivity assessment.The biogenic structure created by the Sabellaria spinulosa worms is the key characterizing feature of this biotope.  Removal of the worms and tubes as by-catch would remove the biotope and hence this group is considered to have a resistance of 'None' to this pressure and to have ‘Medium’ recovery. Sensitivity is, therefore ‘Medium’.

    None
    Low
    NR
    NR
    Help
    Medium
    High
    Medium
    High
    Help
    Medium
    Low
    Low
    Low
    Help

    Bibliography

    1. Anonymous, 1999r. Sabellaria spinulosa reefs. In UK Biodiversity Group. Tranche 2 Action Plans. English Nature for the UK Biodiversity Group, Peterborough., English Nature for the UK Biodiversity Group, Peterborough.

    2. Attrill, M.J., Ramsay, P.M., Thomas, R.M. & Trett, M.W., 1996. An estuarine biodiversity hot-spot. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 76, 161-175.

    3. Bamber, R.N. & Irving, P.W., 1997. The differential growth of Sabellaria alveolata (L.) reefs at a power station outfall. Polychaete Research, 17, 9-14.

    4. Benson, A., Foster-Smith, B., Gubbay, S. & Hendrick, V., 2013. Background document on Sabellaria spinulosa reefs. Biodiversity Series, OSPAR Commission, London, 25 pp. Available from: https://www.ospar.org/documents?d=7342

    5. Bishop, J. D. D., Wood, C. A., Yunnie, A. L. E. & Griffiths, C. A., 2015. Unheralded arrivals: non-native sessile invertebrates in marinas on the English coast. Aquatic Invasions, 10 (3), 249-264. DOI https://doi.org/10.3391/ai.2015.10.3.01

    6. Blanchard, M., 2009. Recent expansion of the slipper limpet population (Crepidula fornicata) in the Bay of Mont-Saint-Michel (Western Channel, France). Aquatic Living Resources, 22 (1), 11-19. DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/alr/2009004

    7. Blanchard, M., 1997. Spread of the slipper limpet Crepidula fornicata (L.1758) in Europe. Current state and consequences. Scientia Marina, 61, Supplement 9, 109-118. Available from: http://scimar.icm.csic.es/scimar/index.php/secId/6/IdArt/290/

    8. Bohn, K., Richardson, C. & Jenkins, S., 2012. The invasive gastropod Crepidula fornicata: reproduction and recruitment in the intertidal at its northernmost range in Wales, UK, and implications for its secondary spread. Marine Biology, 159 (9), 2091-2103. DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-012-1997-3

    9. Bohn, K., Richardson, C.A. & Jenkins, S.R., 2015. The distribution of the invasive non-native gastropod Crepidula fornicata in the Milford Haven Waterway, its northernmost population along the west coast of Britain. Helgoland Marine Research, 69 (4), 313.

    10. Bohn, K., Richardson, C.A. & Jenkins, S.R., 2013a. Larval microhabitat associations of the non-native gastropod Crepidula fornicata and effects on recruitment success in the intertidal zone. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 448, 289-297. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2013.07.020

    11. Bohn, K., Richardson, C.A. & Jenkins, S.R., 2013b. The importance of larval supply, larval habitat selection and post-settlement mortality in determining intertidal adult abundance of the invasive gastropod Crepidula fornicata. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 440, 132-140. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2012.12.008

    12. Braithwaite, C., Robinson, R., & Jones, G., 2006. Sabellarids: a hidden danger or an aid to subsea pipelines? Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology, 39(3), 259-265.

    13. Brown, K.M. & Richardson, T.D., 1988. Foraging ecology of the southern oyster drill Thais haemastoma (Gray): constraints on prey choice. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 114 (2), 123-141.

    14. Buhs, F., & Reise, K. 1997. Epibenthic fauna dredged from tidal channels in the Wadden Sea of Schleswig-Holstein: spatial patterns and a long-term decline. Helgoländer Meeresuntersuchungen 51: 343-59

    15. Bullard, S. G., Lambert, G., Carman, M. R., Byrnes, J., Whitlatch, R. B., Ruiz, G., Miller, R. J., Harris, L., Valentine, P. C., Collie, J. S., Pederson, J., McNaught, D. C., Cohen, A. N., Asch, R. G., Dijkstra, J. & Heinonen, K., 2007. The colonial ascidian Didemnum sp. A: Current distribution, basic biology and potential threat to marine communities of the northeast and west coasts of North America. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 342 (1), 99-108. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2006.10.020

    16. Calosi, P., Rastrick, S.P.S., Lombardi, C., Guzman, H.J.d., Davidson, L., Jahnke, M., Giangrande, A., Hardege, J.D., Schulze, A., Spicer, J.I. & Gambi, M.-C., 2013. Adaptation and acclimatization to ocean acidification in marine ectotherms: an in situ transplant experiment with polychaetes at a shallow CO2 vent system. 368 (1627), 20120444. DOI https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2012.0444

    17. Campbell, A.L., Mangan, S., Ellis, R.P. & Lewis, C., 2014. Ocean acidification increases copper toxicity to the early life history stages of the Polychaete Arenicola marina in artificial seawater. Environmental Science & Technology, 48 (16), 9745-9753.

    18. Carman, M.R. & Grunden, D.W., 2010. First occurrence of the invasive tunicate Didemnum vexillum in eelgrass habitat. Aquatic Invasions, 5 (1), 23-29. DOI https://doi.org/10.3391/ai.2010.5.1.4

    19. Castric-Fey, A., 1983. Recruitment, growth and longevity of Pomatoceros triqueter and Pomatoceros lamarckii (Polychaeta, Serpulidae) on experimental panels in the Concarneau area, South Brittany. Annales de l'Institut Oceanographique, Paris, 59, 69-91.

    20. Cazenave, A. & Nerem, R.S., 2004. Present-day sea-level change: Observations and causes. Reviews of Geophysics, 42 (3). DOI https://doi.org/10.1029/2003rg000139

    21. Church, J.A. & White, N.J., 2006. A 20th century acceleration in global sea-level rise. Geophysical Research Letters, 33 (1). DOI https://doi.org/10.1029/2005gl024826

    22. Church, J.A., White, N.J., Coleman, R., Lambeck, K. & Mitrovica, J.X., 2004. Estimates of the Regional Distribution of Sea Level Rise over the 1950–2000 Period. Journal of Climate, 17 (13), 2609-2625.

    23. Cinar, M. E. & Ozgul, A., 2023. Clogging nets Didemnum vexillum (Tunicata: Ascidiacea) is in action in the eastern Mediterranean. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 103. DOI https://doi.org/10.1017/s0025315423000802

    24. Collins, K., 2003a. Dorset marine habitat surveys: maerl, worms reefs, seagrass and brittlestars. 2002 survey results. Report to Dorset Wildlife Trust, English Nature and PADI AWARE from the School of Ocean and Earth Science. University of Southampton. 18 pp.

    25. Collins, K., 2003b. Dorset marine habitat surveys: maerl, worms reefs, bream nests, sea fans and brittlestars. 2003 survey results. Report to Dorset Wildlife Trust and English Nature from the School of Ocean and Earth Science. University of Southampton. 14 pp.

    26. Collins, K., 2005. Dorset marine habitat surveys: maerl, worm reefs, brittlestars, sea fans and seagrass. 2004 field report. Progress report to English Nature from the School of Ocean and Earth Science. University of Southampton. [Project Ref: DP1/Dorset/MarineHabitat/04/06]. 14 pp.

    27. Connor, D.W., Allen, J.H., Golding, N., Howell, K.L., Lieberknecht, L.M., Northen, K.O. & Reker, J.B., 2004. The Marine Habitat Classification for Britain and Ireland. Version 04.05. ISBN 1 861 07561 8. In JNCC (2015), The Marine Habitat Classification for Britain and Ireland Version 15.03. [2019-07-24]. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. Available from https://mhc.jncc.gov.uk/

    28. Connor, D.W., Dalkin, M.J., Hill, T.O., Holt, R.H.F. & Sanderson, W.G., 1997a. Marine biotope classification for Britain and Ireland. Vol. 2. Sublittoral biotopes. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough, JNCC Report no. 230, Version 97.06., Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough, JNCC Report no. 230, Version 97.06.

    29. Cooper, K., Boyd, S., Eggleton, J., Limpenny, D., Rees, H. & Vanstaen, K., 2007. Recovery of the seabed following marine aggregate dredging on the Hastings Shingle Bank off the southeast coast of England. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 75, 547-58.

    30. Coosen, J., Seys, J., Meire, P.M. & Craeymeersch, J.A.M, 1994. Effect of sedimentological and hydrodynamical changes in the intertidal areas of the Oosterschelde estuary (SW Netherlands) on distribution, density and biomass of five common macrobenthic species… (abridged). Hydrobiologia, 282/283, 235-249.

    31. Cotter, E., O’Riordan, R.M. & Myers, A.A., 2003. Recruitment patterns of serpulids (Annelida: Polychaeta) in Bantry Bay, Ireland. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 83 (1), 41- 48. DOI https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025315403006787h

    32. Coutts, A.D.M. & Forrest, B.M., 2007. Development and application of tools for incursion response: Lessons learned from the management of the fouling pest Didemnum vexillum. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 342 (1), 154-162. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2006.10.042

    33. Crisp, D.J. (ed.), 1964. The effects of the severe winter of 1962-63 on marine life in Britain. Journal of Animal Ecology, 33, 165-210.

    34. Cunningham, P.N., Hawkins, S.J., Jones, H.D. & Burrows, M.T., 1984. The geographical distribution of Sabellaria alveolata (L.) in England, Wales and Scotland, with investigations into the community structure of and the effects of trampling on Sabellaria alveolata colonies. Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough, Contract Report no. HF3/11/22., University of Manchester, Department of Zoology.

    35. Davies, A.J., Last, K.S., Attard, K. & Hendrick, V.J., 2009. Maintaining turbidity and current flow in laboratory aquarium studies, a case study using Sabellaria spinulosa. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 370, 35-40

    36. Davies, C.E. & Moss, D., 1998. European Union Nature Information System (EUNIS) Habitat Classification. Report to European Topic Centre on Nature Conservation from the Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Monks Wood, Cambridgeshire. [Final draft with further revisions to marine habitats.], Brussels: European Environment Agency.

    37. De Montaudouin, X., Andemard, C. & Labourg, P-J., 1999. Does the slipper limpet (Crepidula fornicata L.) impair oyster growth and zoobenthos diversity ? A revisited hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 235, 105-124.

    38. De Montaudouin, X., Blanchet, H. & Hippert, B., 2018. Relationship between the invasive slipper limpet Crepidula fornicata and benthic megafauna structure and diversity, in Arcachon Bay. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 98 (8), 2017-2028. DOI https://doi.org/10.1017/s0025315417001655

    39. Defra, 2004. Review of Marine Nature Conservation. Working Group report to Government. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London, 160 pp.

    40. Diederich, S., 2005. Differential recruitment of introduced Pacific oysters and native mussels at the North Sea coast: coexistence possible? Journal of Sea Research, 53 (4), 269-281.

    41. Diederich, S., 2006. High survival and growth rates of introduced Pacific oysters may cause restrictions on habitat use by native mussels in the Wadden Sea. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 328 (2), 211-227.

    42. Dijkstra, J. A. & Nolan, R., 2011. Potential of the invasive colonial ascidian, Didemnum vexillum, to limit escape response of the sea scallop, Placopecten magellanicus. Aquatic Invasions, 6 (4), 451-456. DOI https://doi.org/10.3391/ai.2011.6.4.10

    43. Dijkstra, J., Harris, L.G. & Westerman, E., 2007. Distribution and long-term temporal patterns of four invasive colonial ascidians in the Gulf of Maine. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 342 (1), 61-68. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2006.10.015

    44. Dörjes, J., 1992. Langzeitentwicklung makrobenthischer Tierarten im Jadebussen (Nordsee) während der Jahre 1974 bis 1987. Senckenbergiana maritima, 22, 37-57.

    45. Dubois, S., 2003. Écologie des formations récifales à Sabellaria alveolata (L. ) : valeur fonctionnelle et patrimoniale. Thèse de doctorat, Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris.

    46. Dubois, S., Commito, J.A., Olivier, F. & Retière, C., 2006. Effects of epibionts on Sabellaria alveolata (L.) biogenic reefs and their associated fauna in the Bay of Mont Saint-Michel. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 68 (3), 635-646. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2006.03.010

    47. Earll R. & Erwin, D.G. 1983. Sublittoral ecology: the ecology of the shallow sublittoral benthos. Oxford University Press, USA.

    48. Eggleston, D., 1972a. Patterns of reproduction in marine Ectoprocta off the Isle of Man. Journal of Natural History, 6, 31-38.

    49. Fariñas-Franco, J.M., Pearce, B., Porter, J., Harries, D., Mair, J.M. & Sanderson, W.G, 2014. Development and validation of indicators of Good Environmental Status for biogenic reefs formed by Modiolus modiolus, Mytilus edulis and Sabellaria spinulosa under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive. Joint Nature Conservation Committee,

    50. FitzGerald, A., 2007. Slipper Limpet Utilisation and Management. Final Report. Port of Truro Oyster Management Group., Truro, 101 pp. Available from https://www.shellfish.org.uk/files/Literature/Projects-Reports/0701-Slipper_Limpet_Report_Final_Small.pdf

    51. Fletcher, L. M., Forrest, B. M., Atalah, J. & Bell, J. J., 2013a. Reproductive seasonality of the invasive ascidian Didemnum vexillum in New Zealand and implications for shellfish aquaculture. Aquaculture Environment Interactions, 3 (3), 197-211. DOI https://doi.org/10.3354/aei00063

    52. Folk, R.L., 1954. The distinction between grain size and mineral composition in sedimentary-rock nomenclature. 62The Journal of Geology, 344-359.

    53. Foster-Smith R.L. 2001a. Report of the field survey for the 2001 Sabellaria spinulosa project. Eastern Sea Fisheries Joint Committee and English Nature,  45 pp.

    54. Foster-Smith R.L. 2001b. Sabellaria spinulosa reef in the Wash and North Norfolk Coast cSAC and its approaches: Part II, fine scale mapping of the spatial and temporal distribution of reefs and the development of techniques for monitoring condition. English Nature Research Reports, English Nature, Peterborough, 544.

    55. Foster-Smith, J. (ed.), 2000. The marine fauna and flora of the Cullercoats District. Marine species records for the North East Coast of England. Sunderland: Penshaw Press, for the Dove Marine Laboratory, University of Newcastle upon Tyne.

    56. Foster-Smith, R.L. & Hendrick, V.J., 2003. Sabellaria spinulosa reef in The Wash and North Norfolk cSAC and its approaches: Part III, summary of knowledge, recommended monitoring strategies and outstanding research requirements. Rep. 543.

    57. Frölicher, T.L., Fischer, E.M. & Gruber, N., 2018. Marine heatwaves under global warming. Nature, 560 (7718), 360-364. DOI https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0383-9

    58. Garrard, S.L., Gambi, M.C., Scipione, M.B., Patti, F.P., Lorenti, M., Zupo, V., Paterson, D.M. & Buia, M.C., 2014. Indirect effects may buffer negative responses of seagrass invertebrate communities to ocean acidification. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 461, 31-38. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2014.07.011

    59. Garwood, P.R., 1982. Polychaeta - Sedentaria incl. Archiannelida. Report of the Dove Marine Laboratory Third Series, 23, 273p.

    60. George, C.L. & Warwick, R.M., 1985. Annual macrofauna production in a hard-bottom reef community. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 65, 713-735.

    61. Gibb, N., Tillin, H.M., Pearce, B. & Tyler-Walters, H., 2014. Assessing the sensitivity of Sabellaria spinulosa reef biotopes to pressures associated with marine activities. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough, JNCC report No. 504, 67 pp. Available from: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/PDF/JNCC_Report_504_web.pdf

    62. Gibbs, P.E., 1968. Observations on the population of Scoloplos armiger at Whitstable. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 48, 225-254.

    63. Gittenberger, A, Rensing, M, Dekker, R, Niemantsverdriet, P, Schrieken, N & Stegenga, H, 2015. Native and non-native species of the Dutch Wadden Sea in 2014. Issued by Office for Risk Assessment and Research, The Netherlands Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority.

    64. Gittenberger, A., 2007. Recent population expansions of non-native ascidians in The Netherlands. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 342 (1), 122-126. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2006.10.022

    65. Gravina, M.F., Cardone, F., Bonifazi, A., Bertrandino, M.S., Chimienti, G., Longo, C., Marzano, C.N., Moretti, M., Lisco, S., Moretti, V., Corriero, G. & Giangrande, A., 2018. Sabellaria spinulosa (Polychaeta, Annelida) reefs in the Mediterranean Sea: Habitat mapping, dynamics and associated fauna for conservation management. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 200, 248-257. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2017.11.017

    66. Griffith, K., Mowat, S., Holt, R.H., Ramsay, K., Bishop, J.D., Lambert, G. & Jenkins, S.R., 2009. First records in Great Britain of the invasive colonial ascidian Didemnum vexillum Kott, 2002. Aquatic Invasions, 4 (4), 581-590. DOI https://doi.org/10.3391/ai.2009.4.4.3

    67. Groner, F., Lenz, M., Wahl, M. & Jenkins, S.R., 2011. Stress resistance in two colonial ascidians from the Irish Sea: The recent invader Didemnum vexillum is more tolerant to low salinity than the cosmopolitan Diplosoma listerianum. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 409 (1), 48-52. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2011.08.002

    68. Hartnoll, R.G., 1975. The annual cycle of Alcyonium digitatum. Estuarine and Coastal Marine Science, 3, 71-78.

    69. Hayward, P.J. & Ryland, J.S. 1998. Cheilostomatous Bryozoa. Part 1. Aeteoidea - Cribrilinoidea. Shrewsbury: Field Studies Council. [Synopses of the British Fauna, no. 10. (2nd edition)]

    70. Hayward, P.J. & Ryland, J.S. (ed.) 1995b. Handbook of the marine fauna of North-West Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    71. Hendrick, V., Foster-Smith, R., Davies, A. & Newell, R., 2011. Biogenic Reefs and the Marine Aggregate Industry. Marine ALSF Science Monograph Series, Cefas,  60pp.

    72. Herborg, L.M., O’Hara, P. & Therriault, T.W., 2009. Forecasting the potential distribution of the invasive tunicate Didemnum vexillum. Journal of Applied Ecology, 46 (1), 64-72. DOI https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01568.x

    73. Heuers, J. & Jaklin, S., 1999. Initial settlement of Lanice conchilega. Senckenbergiana Maritima, 29 (suppl.), 67-69.

    74. Hill, A.S., Brand, A.R., Veale, L.O. & Hawkins, S.J., 1997. Assessment of the effects of scallop dredging on benthic communities. Final Report to MAFF, Contract CSA 2332, Liverpool: University of Liverpool

    75. Hill, J., Marzialetti, S., Pearce, B. & Newell, R., 2011. Recovery of seabed resources following marine aggregate extraction.Marine ALSF Science Monograph Series,   0907545459, 44 pp.

    76. Hincks, T., 1880. A history of British marine Polyzoa, vol. I & II. London: John van Voorst.

    77. Hinz, H., Capasso, E., Lilley, M., Frost, M. & Jenkins, S.R., 2011. Temporal differences across a bio-geographical boundary reveal slow response of sub-littoral benthos to climate change. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 423, 69-82. DOI https://doi.org/10.3354/meps08963

    78. Hitchin, B., 2012. New outbreak of Didemnum vexillum in North Kent: on stranger shores. Porcupine Marine Natural History Society Newsletter, 31, 43-48.

    79. Holt, R., 2024. GB Non-native organism risk assessment for Didemnum vexillum. GB Non-native Species Information Portal, GB Non-native Species Secretariat.

    80. Holt, T.J., Hartnoll, R.G. & Hawkins, S.J., 1997. The sensitivity and vulnerability to man-induced change of selected communities: intertidal brown algal shrubs, Zostera beds and Sabellaria spinulosa reefs. English Nature, Peterborough, English Nature Research Report No. 234.

    81. Holt, T.J., Jones, D.R., Hawkins, S.J. & Hartnoll, R.G., 1995. The sensitivity of marine communities to man induced change - a scoping report. Countryside Council for Wales, Bangor, Contract Science Report, no. 65.

    82. Holt, T.J., Rees, E.I., Hawkins, S.J. & Seed, R., 1998. Biogenic reefs (Volume IX). An overview of dynamic and sensitivity characteristics for conservation management of marine SACs. Scottish Association for Marine Science (UK Marine SACs Project), 174 pp. Available from: http://ukmpa.marinebiodiversity.org/uk_sacs/pdfs/biogreef.pdf

    83. Jackson, A. & Hiscock, K., 2008. Urticina felina. Dahlia anemone. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme [On-line]. ]. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. [cited 21/12/2015]. Available from: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/species/detail/1392

    84. Jacobson, M.Z., 2005. Studying ocean acidification with conservative, stable numerical schemes for nonequilibrium air-ocean exchange and ocean equilibrium chemistry. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 110 (D7). DOI https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD005220

    85. Jeffree, E.P. & Jeffree, C.E., 1994. Temperature and the Biogeographical Distributions of Species. Functional Ecology, 8 (5), 640-650. DOI https://doi.org/10.2307/2389927

    86. JNCC, 2013. Progress towards the development of a standardised UK pressure-activities matrix. Briefing paper to UKMMAS evidence groups. Presented 10/10/2013. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough,

    87. JNCC (Joint Nature Conservation Committee), 2022.  The Marine Habitat Classification for Britain and Ireland Version 22.04. [Date accessed]. Available from: https://mhc.jncc.gov.uk/

    88. JNCC (Joint Nature Conservation Committee), 1999. Marine Environment Resource Mapping And Information Database (MERMAID): Marine Nature Conservation Review Survey Database. [on-line] http://www.jncc.gov.uk/mermaid

    89. Jones, L.A., Hiscock, K. & Connor, D.W., 2000. Marine habitat reviews. A summary of ecological requirements and sensitivity characteristics for the conservation and management of marine SACs. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. (UK Marine SACs Project report.). Available from: http://ukmpa.marinebiodiversity.org/uk_sacs/pdfs/marine-habitats-review.pdf

    90. Jones, S.E. & Jago, C.F., 1993. In situ assessment of modification of sediment properties by burrowing invertebrates. Marine Biology, 115, 133-142.

    91. Kenny, A.J. & Rees, H.L., 1994. The effects of marine gravel extraction on the macrobenthos: early post dredging recolonisation. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 28, 442-447.

    92. Killeen, I.J. & Light, J.M., 2000. Sabellaria, a polychaete host for the gastropods Noemiamea dolioliformis and Graphis albidaJournal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom80 (3), 571-573.
    93. Kroeker, K.J., Micheli, F., Gambi, M.C. & Martz, T.R., 2011. Divergent ecosystem responses within a benthic marine community to ocean acidification. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108 (35), 14515. DOI https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1107789108

    94. Kruse, I., Reusch, T.B.H. & Schneider, M.V., 2003. Sibling species or poecilogony in the polychaete Scoloplos armiger? Marine Biology, 142, 937-947.

    95. Kruse, I., Strasser, M. & Thiermann, F., 2004. The role of ecological divergence in speciation between intertidal and subtidal Scoloplos armiger (Polychaeta, Orbiniidae). Journal of Sea Research, 51, 53-62.

    96. Lambert, G., 2009. Adventures of a sea squirt sleuth: unraveling the identity of Didemnum vexillum, a global ascidian invader. Aquatic Invaders, 4(1), 5-28. DOI https://doi.org/10.3391/ai.2009.4.1.2

    97. Last, K.S., Hendrick V. J, Beveridge C. M & Davies A. J, 2011. Measuring the effects of suspended particulate matter and smothering on the behaviour, growth and survival of key species found in areas associated with aggregate dredging. Report for the Marine Aggregate Levy Sustainability FundProject MEPF 08/P76, 69 pp.

    98. Last, K.S., Hendrick, V.J., Beveridge, C.M., Roberts, D.A. & Wilding, T.A., 2016. Lethal and sub-lethal responses of the biogenic reef forming polychaete Sabellaria alveolata to aqueous chlorine and temperature. Marine Environmental Research, 117, 44-53. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marenvres.2016.04.001

    99. Lengyel, N.L., Collie, J.S. & Valentine, P.C., 2009. The invasive colonial ascidian Didemnum vexillum on Georges Bank - Ecological effects and genetic identification. Aquatic Invasions, 4(1), 143-152. DOI https://doi.org/10.3391/ai.2009.4.1.15

    100. Li, Y., Zhang, H., Tang, C., Zou, T. & Jiang, D., 2016. Influence of Rising Sea Level on Tidal Dynamics in the Bohai Sea. 74 (SI), 22-31. DOI https://doi.org/10.2112/si74-003.1

    101. Limpenny D.S., Foster-Smith, R.L., Edwards, T.M., Hendrick, V.J., Diesing, M., Eggleton, J.D., Meadows, W.J., Crutchfield, Z., Pfeifer, S. and Reach, I.S. 2010. Best methods for identifying and evaluating Sabellaria spinulosa and cobble reef, Marine Aggregate Levy Sustainability Fund

    102. Linke, O. 1951. Neue Beobachtungen uber Sandkorallen-Riffe in der Nordsee. Natur und Volk 81: 77-84

    103. Lisco, S., Moretti, M., Moretti, V., Cardone, F., Corriero, G. & Longo, C., 2017. Sedimentological features of Sabellaria spinulosa biocontructions. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 87, 203-212. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2017.06.013

    104. Long, D., 2006. BGS detailed explanation of seabed sediment modified Folk classification. Available from: http://www.emodnet-seabedhabitats.eu/PDF/GMHM3_Detailed_explanation_of_seabed_sediment_classification.pdf

    105. Long, H. A. & Grosholz, E. D., 2015. Overgrowth of eelgrass by the invasive colonial tunicate Didemnum vexillum: Consequences for tunicate and eelgrass growth and epifauna abundance. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 473, 188-194. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2015.08.014

    106. Lowe, J., Bernie, D., Bett, P., Bricheno, L., Brown, S., Calvert, D., Clark, R.T., Eagle, K.E., Edwards, T., Fosser, G., Fung, F., Gohar, L., Good, P., Gregory, J., Harris, G.R., Howard, T., Kaye, N., Kendon, E.J., Krijnen, J., Maisey, P., McDonald, R.E., McInnes, R.N., McSweeney, C.F., Mitchell, J.F.B., Murphy, J.M., Palmer, M., Roberts, C., Rostron, J.W., Sexton, D.M.H., Thornton, H.E., Tinker, J., Tucker, S., Yamazaki, K. & Belcher, S., 2018. UKCP18 Science Overview Report. Meterological Office, Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK, 73 pp. Available from https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/approach/collaboration/ukcp/index

    107. Mackie, A.S.Y., James, J.W.C., Rees, E.I.S., Darbyshire, T., Philpott, S.L., Mortimer, K., Jenkins, G.O. & Morando, A., 2006. BIOMÔR 4. The Outer Bristol Channel Marine Habitat Study. Studies in marine biodiversity and systematics from the National Museum of Wales, Cardiff. BIOMÔR Reports 4: 1–249 and A1–A227, + DVD-ROM (2007).

    108. Matthews, A., 1917. The development of Alcyonium digitatum with some notes on early colony formation. Quarterly Journal of Microscopial Science, 62, 43-94.

    109. Maurer, D. & Lethem, W., 1980. Dominant species of polychaetous annelids of Georges Bank. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 3, 135-144.

    110. McIntosh, W.C., 1922-1923. A monograph of the British marine annelids. Vol 4. Part I: Hermellidae - Sabellidae. Part II: Sabellidae - Serpulidae.

    111. McKenzie, C.H, Reid, V., Lambert, G., Matheson, K., Minchin, D., Pederson, J., Brown, L., Curd, A., Gollasch, S., Goulletquer, P, Occphipinti-Ambrogi, A., Simard, N. & Therriault, T.W., 2017. Alien species alert: Didemnum vexillum Kott, 2002: Invasion, impact, and control. ICES Cooperative Research Reports (CRR), 33 pp. DOI http://doi.org/10.17895/ices.pub.2138

    112. Mercer, J.M, Whitlatch, R.B, & Osman, R.W. 2009. Potential effects of the invasive colonial ascidian (Didemnum vexillum Kott, 2002) on pebble-cobble bottom habitats in Long Island Sound, USA. Aquatic Invasions, 4, 133-142. DOI https://doi.org/10.3391/ai.2009.4.1.14

    113. Millar, R.H., 1954. The annual growth and reproductive cycle of the ascidian Dendrodoa grossularia (van Beneden). Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 33 (1), 33-48. DOI https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025315400003453

    114. Minchin, D.M & Nunn, J.D., 2013. Rapid assessment of marinas for invasive alien species in Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland Environment Agency Research and Development Series, Northern Ireland Environment Agency.

    115. Mistakidis, M.N. 1956. Survey of the pink shrimp fishery in Morecambe Bay, Lancashire and Western Sea Fisheries Joint Committee

    116. Moore, H.B., 1937. Marine Fauna of the Isle of Man. Liverpool University Press.

    117. Mossman, H.L., Grant, A., Lawrence, P.J. & Davy, A.J., 2015. Biodiversity climate change impacts report card technical paper 10. Implications of climate change for coastal and inter-tidal habitats of the UK. Biodiversity climate change impacts, Living With Environmental Change, NERC, UKRI,  26 pp. Available from https://nerc.ukri.org/research/partnerships/ride/lwec/report-cards/biodiversity-source10/

    118. Muir, A.P., Nunes, F.L.D., Dubois, S.F. & Pernet, F., 2016. Lipid remodelling in the reef-building honeycomb worm, Sabellaria alveolata, reflects acclimation and local adaptation to temperature. Scientific reports, 6, 35669-35669. DOI https://doi.org/10.1038/srep35669

    119. NBN (National Biodiversity Network) Atlas. Available from: https://www.nbnatlas.org.

    120. Newell, R.C., Seiderer, L.J. & Hitchcock, D.R., 1998. The impact of dredging works in coastal waters: a review of the sensitivity to disturbance and subsequent biological recovery of biological resources on the sea bed. Oceanography and Marine Biology: an Annual Review, 36, 127-178.

    121. OSPAR, 2008. OSPAR List of Threatened and/or Declining Species and Habitats (Reference Number: 2008-6), OSPAR Convention For The Protection Of The Marine Environment Of The North-East Atlantic

    122. OSPAR, 2010. Sabellaria spinulosa reefs. QUALITY STATUS REPORT 2010 . Case Reports for the OSPAR List of threatened and/or declining species and habitats – Update, OSPAR Commission. https://qsr2010.ospar.org/media/assessments/Species/p0010_supplements/CH10_04_Sabellaria_spinulosa.pdf

    123. Palmer, M., Howard, T., Tinker, J., Lowe, J., Bricheno, L., Calvert, D., Edwards, T., Gregory, J., Harris, G., Krijnen, J., Pickering, M., Roberts, C. & Wolf, J., 2018. UKCP18 Marine Report. Met Office, The Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK, 133 pp. Available from https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/pub/data/weather/uk/ukcp18/science-reports/UKCP18-Marine-report.pdf

    124. Pearce, B., Fariñas-Franco, J.M., Wilson, C., Pitts, J., deBurgh, A. & Somerfield, P.J., 2014. Repeated mapping of reefs constructed by Sabellaria spinulosa Leuckart 1849 at an offshore wind farm site. Continental Shelf Research, 83, 3-13.

    125. Pearce, B., Hill, J.M., Grubb, L., Harper, G., 2011a. Impacts of marine aggregate extraction on adjacent Sabellaria spinulosa aggregations and other benthic fauna. Rep. MEPF 08/P39, The Crown Estate.  DOI https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.29285.91361

    126. Pearce, B., Hill, J.M., Wilson, C., Griffin, R., Earnshaw, S., Pitts, J. 2011b. Sabellaria spinulosa reef ecology and ecosystem services The Crown Estate. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.4856.0644

    127. Pearce, B., Taylor, J., Seiderer, L.J. 2007. Recoverability of Sabellaria spinulosa Following Aggregate Extraction: Marine Ecological Surveys Limited.

    128. Pickering, M.D., Wells, N.C., Horsburgh, K.J. & Green, J.A.M., 2012. The impact of future sea-level rise on the European Shelf tides. Continental Shelf Research, 35, 1-15. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csr.2011.11.011

    129. Powell-Jennings, C. & Callaway, R., 2018. The invasive, non-native slipper limpet Crepidula fornicata is poorly adapted to sediment burial. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 130, 95-104. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.03.006

    130. Prentice, M. B., Vye, S. R., Jenkins, S. R., Shaw, P. W. & Ironside, J. E., 2021. Genetic diversity and relatedness in aquaculture and marina populations of the invasive tunicate Didemnum vexillum in the British Isles. Biological Invasions, 23 (12), 3613-3624. DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-021-02615-3

    131. Preston, J., Fabra, M., Helmer, L., Johnson, E., Harris-Scott, E. & Hendy, I.W., 2020. Interactions of larval dynamics and substrate preference have ecological significance for benthic biodiversity and Ostrea edulis Linnaeus, 1758 in the presence of Crepidula fornicata. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 30 (11), 2133-2149. DOI https://doi.org/10.1002/aqc.3446

    132. Pyefinch, K.A. & Mott, J.C., 1948. The sensitivity of barnacles and their larvae to copper and mercury. Journal of Experimental Biology, 25, 276-298.

    133. Ramirez-Llodra, E., 2002. Fecundity and life-history strategies in marine invertebrates. Advances in marine biology, 43, 87-170. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2881(02)43004-0

    134. Reinhardt, J.F., Gallagher, K.L., Stefaniak, L.M., Nolan, R., Shaw, M.T. & Whitlatch, R. B., 2012. Material properties of Didemnum vexillum and prediction of tendril fragmentation. Marine Biology, 159 (12), 2875-2884. DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-012-2048-9

    135. Reise, K., 2005. Coast of change: habitat loss and transformations in the Wadden Sea. Helgoland Marine Research, 59 (1), 9-21.

    136. Reise, K. & Buhs, F., 1999. Reply to the comment of Damm and Neudecker (1999): long-term decline in epibenthic fauna of tidal channels near the island of Sylt in the northern Wadden Sea. Helgoland Marine Research, 53 (2), 143-145.

    137. Reise, K., Herre, E., & Sturm, M. 1989. Historical changes in the benthos of the Wadden Sea around the island of Sylt in the North Sea. Helgoländer Meeresuntersuchungen, 43, 417-433.

    138. Reise, R. & Schubert, A., 1987. Macrobenthic turnover in the subtidal Wadden Sea: the Norderaue revisited after 60 years. Helgoländer Meeresuntersuchungen, 41, 69-82.

    139. Riesen, W. & Reise, K., 1982. Macrobenthos of the subtidal Wadden Sea: revisited after 55 years. Helgoländer Meeresuntersuchungen, 35, 409-423.

    140. Ryland, J.S., 1970. Bryozoans. London: Hutchinson University Library.

    141. Kleeman, S.N., 2009. Didemnum vexillum - Feasibility of Eradication and/or Control. CCW Contract Science report, 53 pp.

    142. Schäfer, W., 1972. Ecology and palaeoecology of marine environments, 568 pp. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd.

    143. Schlegel, P., Havenhand, J.N., Obadia, N. & Williamson, J.E., 2014. Sperm swimming in the polychaete Galeolaria caespitosa shows substantial inter-individual variability in response to future ocean acidification. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 78 (1), 213-217. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2013.10.040

    144. Segrove, F., 1941. The development of the serpulid Pomatoceros triqueta L. Quarterly Journal of Microscopical Science, 82, 467-540.

    145. Seiderer, L.J. & Newell, R.C., 1999. Analysis of the relationship between sediment composition and benthic community structure in coastal deposits: Implications for marine aggregate dredging. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 56, 757-765.

    146. Stefaniak, L. M. & Whitlatch, R. B., 2014. Life history attributes of a global invader: factors contributing to the invasion potential of Didemnum vexillum. Aquatic Biology, 21 (3), 221-229. DOI https://doi.org/10.3354/ab00591

    147. Stefaniak, L., Zhang, H., Gittenberger, A., Smith, K., Holsinger, K., Lin, S. & Whitlatch, R.B., 2012. Determining the native region of the putatively invasive ascidian Didemnum vexillum Kott, 2002. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 422-423, 64-71. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2012.04.012

    148. Stiger-Pouvreau, V. & Thouzeau, G., 2015. Marine Species Introduced on the French Channel-Atlantic Coasts: A Review of Main Biological Invasions and Impacts. Open Journal of Ecology, 5, 227-257. DOI https://doi.org/10.4236/oje.2015.55019

    149. Suchanek, T.H., 1993. Oil impacts on marine invertebrate populations and communities. American Zoologist, 33, 510-523. DOI https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/33.6.510

    150. Tagliapietra, D., Keppel, E., Sigovini, M. & Lambert, G., 2012. First record of the colonial ascidian Didemnum vexillum Kott, 2002 in the Mediterranean: Lagoon of Venice (Italy). Bioinvasions Records, 1 (4), 247-254. DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.3391/bir.2012.1.4.02

    151. Tait, R.V. & Dipper, R.A., 1998. Elements of Marine Ecology. Reed Elsevier.

    152. Taylor, A.M., 1962. Notes on the radioecology of Sellafield beach. PG Report 353. UK Atomic Energy Authority Production Group,  20 pp.

    153. Thieltges, D.W., 2005. Impact of an invader: epizootic American slipper limpet Crepidula fornicata reduces survival and growth in European mussels. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 286, 13-19. DOI https://doi.org/10.3354/meps286013

    154. Thomas, J.G., 1940. Pomatoceros, Sabella and Amphitrite. LMBC Memoirs on typical British marine plants and animals no.33. University Press of Liverpool. Liverpool

    155. Tillin, H.M., 2010. Marine Ecology: Annex 4 Ecological (logistic regression and HABMAP) modelling based predictions., Parsons Brinkerhoff Ltd, Bristol.

    156. Tillin, H.M., Houghton, A.J., Saunders, J.E., Drabble, R. & Hull, S.C., 2011. Direct and Indirect Impacts of Aggregate Dredging. Marine ALSF Science Monograph Series,   MEPF 10/P144., 41 pp.

    157. Tillin, H.M., Hull, S.C. & Tyler-Walters, H., 2010. Development of a sensitivity matrix (pressures-MCZ/MPA features). Report to the Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs from ABPmer, Southampton and the Marine Life Information Network (MarLIN) Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the UK., Defra Contract no. MB0102 Task 3A, Report no. 22., London, 145 pp.

    158. Tillin, H.M., Kessel, C., Sewell, J., Wood, C.A. & Bishop, J.D.D., 2020. Assessing the impact of key Marine Invasive Non-Native Species on Welsh MPA habitat features, fisheries and aquaculture. NRW Evidence Report. Report No: 454. Natural Resources Wales, Bangor, 260 pp. Available from https://naturalresourceswales.gov.uk/media/696519/assessing-the-impact-of-key-marine-invasive-non-native-species-on-welsh-mpa-habitat-features-fisheries-and-aquaculture.pdf

    159. Valentine, P.C., Carman, M.R., Blackwood, D.S. & Heffron, E.J., 2007a. Ecological observations on the colonial ascidian Didemnum sp. in a New England tide pool habitat. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 342 (1), 109-121. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2006.10.021

    160. Valentine, P.C., Collie, J.S., Reid, R.N., Asch, R.G., Guida, V.G. & Blackwood, D.S., 2007b. The occurrence of the colonial ascidian Didemnum sp. on Georges Bank gravel habitat — Ecological observations and potential effects on groundfish and scallop fisheries. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 342 (1), 179-181. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2006.10.038

    161. Vercaemer, B., Sephton, D., Clément, P., Harman, A., Stewart-Clark, S. & DiBacco, C., 2015. Distribution of the non-indigenous colonial ascidian Didemnum vexillum (Kott, 2002) in the Bay of Fundy and on offshore banks, eastern Canada. Management of Biological Invasions, 6, 385-394. DOI https://doi.org/10.3391/mbi.2015.6.4.07

    162. Vizzini, S., Martínez-Crego, B., Andolina, C., Massa-Gallucci, A., Connell, S.D. & Gambi, M.C., 2017. Ocean acidification as a driver of community simplification via the collapse of higher-order and rise of lower-order consumers. Scientific reports, 7 (1), 4018. DOI https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-03802-w

    163. Vorberg, R., 2000. Effects of shrimp fisheries on reefs of Sabellaria spinulosa (Polychaeta). ICES Journal of Marine Science, 57, 1416-1420.

    164. Walker, A.J.M. & Rees, E.I.S., 1980. Benthic ecology of Dublin Bay in relation to sludge dumping. Irish Fisheries Investigations, Series B (Marine), 22, 1-59. Available from http://oar.marine.ie/handle/10793/146

    165. Wilson, D.P., 1929. The larvae of the British sabellarians. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 16, 221-269.

    166. Wilson, D.P., 1970a. Additional observations on larval growth and settlement of Sabellaria alveolata. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 50, 1-32.

    167. Wilson, D.P., 1970b. The larvae of Sabellaria spinulosa and their settlement behaviour. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 50, 33-52.

    168. Wilson, D.P., 1971. Sabellaria colonies at Duckpool, North Cornwall 1961 - 1970 Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 54, 509-580.

    Citation

    This review can be cited as:

    Tillin, H.M., Marshall, C.E., Garrard, S.L.,, Gibb, N., & Watson, A., 2024. Sabellaria spinulosa on stable circalittoral mixed sediment. In Tyler-Walters H. and Hiscock K. (eds) Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Reviews, [on-line]. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. [cited 27-12-2024]. Available from: https://marlin.ac.uk/habitat/detail/377

     Download PDF version


    Last Updated: 25/11/2024

    1. Ross worm
    2. reef