Comparison of mechanical disturbance in soft sediments due to tickler-chain SumWing trawl versus electro-fitted PulseWing trawl

Jochen Depestele; Koen Degrendele; Moosa Esmaeili; Ana Ivanovic; Silke Kröger; Finbarr G. O'Neill; Ruth Parker; Hans Polet; Marc Roche; Lorna R. Teal; Bart Vanelslander; Adriaan D. Rijnsdorp

doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsy124

Comparison of mechanical disturbance in soft sediments due to tickler-chain SumWing trawl versus electro-fitted PulseWing trawl

Jochen Depestele (Corresponding Author), Koen Degrendele, Moosa Esmaeili, Ana Ivanovic, Silke Kröger, Finbarr G. O'Neill, Ruth Parker, Hans Polet, Marc Roche, Lorna R. Teal, Bart Vanelslander, Adriaan D. Rijnsdorp

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

28 Citations (Scopus)

5 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Ecosystem-based management strategies increasingly require assessments of bottom trawling impacts on benthic habitats at the detailed level of different gear types. Two types of bottom trawls for catching flatfish (tickler-chain SumWing and electrode-fitted PulseWing trawls) were compared by combining several observational and modelling techniques to assess the changes in trawl penetration and associated effects on the seabed texture and sediment sorting. Bathymetrical measurements using a multi-beam echo sounder (MBES) confirmed that the SumWing trawl tracks were consistently and uniformly deepened to 1.5 cm depth in contrast to 0.7 cm following PulseWing trawling. MBES backscatter strength analysis indicated that SumWing trawls (3.11 dB) also flattened seabed roughness significantly more than PulseWing trawls (2.37 dB). Sediment Profile Imagery (SPI) showed that SumWing trawls (mean, standard deviation) homogenised the sediment deeper (3.4 cm, 0.9 cm) and removed more of the oxidised layer than PulseWing trawls (1 cm, 0.8 cm). SPI imagery showed that the reduced PulseWing trawling impacts allowed a faster re-establishment of the oxidised layer and micro-topography in contrast to SumWing trawling. Particle size analysis suggested that SumWing trawls injected finer particles into the deeper sediment layers (~4 cm depth), while PulseWing trawling only caused coarsening of the top layers (winnowing effect). This is in agreement with numerical modelling, which predicted that SumWing trawls would penetrate deeper into the sediment than PulseWing trawls. The total penetration depth (mean, standard deviation) of the SumWing trawls (4.1 cm, 0.9 cm) and PulseWing trawls (1.8 cm, 0.8 cm) was estimated by measuring the depth of the disturbance layer and by modelling the erosion of the surficial sediments due to sediment mobilisation in the wake of the gear (SumWing = 0.7 cm; PulseWing trawl = 0.8 cm). Our study has shown that PulseWing trawls reduced most of the mechanical trawling impacts on the seabed compared to SumWing trawls for this substrate and area characteristics.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	312-329
Number of pages	18
Journal	ICES Journal of Marine Science
Volume	76
Issue number	1
Early online date	20 Sep 2018
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsy124
Publication status	Published - 1 Jan 2019

Keywords

beam trawl
biogeochemistry
habitat impacts
particle size distribution
penetration depth
pulse trawl
seafloor integrity
sediment resuspension
Seafloor integrity
Pulse trawl
Sediment resuspension
Penetration depth
Biogeochemistry
Particle size distribution
Habitat impacts
Beam trawl

Access to Document

10.1093/icesjms/fsy124Licence: Unspecified

Accepted Manuscript
This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced version of an article accepted for publication in ICES Journal Of Marine Science following peer review. The version of record Jochen Depestele, Koen Degrendele, Moosa Esmaeili, Ana Ivanović, Silke Kröger, Finbarr G O’Neill, Ruth Parker, Hans Polet, Marc Roche, Lorna R Teal, Bart Vanelslander, Adriaan D Rijnsdorp, Handling editor: Michael Pol; Comparison of mechanical disturbance in soft sediments due to tickler-chain SumWing trawl vs. electro-fitted PulseWing trawl, ICES Journal of Marine Science, Volume 76, Issue 1, 1 January 2019, Pages 312–329, is available online at: https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsy124website].
Accepted author manuscript, 2.33 MBLicence: Unspecified

Cite this

Depestele, J., Degrendele, K., Esmaeili, M., Ivanovic, A., Kröger, S., O'Neill, F. G., Parker, R., Polet, H., Roche, M., Teal, L. R., Vanelslander, B., & Rijnsdorp, A. D. (2019). Comparison of mechanical disturbance in soft sediments due to tickler-chain SumWing trawl versus electro-fitted PulseWing trawl. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 76(1), 312-329. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsy124

Depestele, J, Degrendele, K, Esmaeili, M, Ivanovic, A, Kröger, S, O'Neill, FG, Parker, R, Polet, H, Roche, M, Teal, LR, Vanelslander, B & Rijnsdorp, AD 2019, 'Comparison of mechanical disturbance in soft sediments due to tickler-chain SumWing trawl versus electro-fitted PulseWing trawl', ICES Journal of Marine Science, vol. 76, no. 1, pp. 312-329. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsy124

@article{4188aa290409419fa78b94230fdd9053,

title = "Comparison of mechanical disturbance in soft sediments due to tickler-chain SumWing trawl versus electro-fitted PulseWing trawl",

abstract = "Ecosystem-based management strategies increasingly require assessments of bottom trawling impacts on benthic habitats at the detailed level of different gear types. Two types of bottom trawls for catching flatfish (tickler-chain SumWing and electrode-fitted PulseWing trawls) were compared by combining several observational and modelling techniques to assess the changes in trawl penetration and associated effects on the seabed texture and sediment sorting. Bathymetrical measurements using a multi-beam echo sounder (MBES) confirmed that the SumWing trawl tracks were consistently and uniformly deepened to 1.5 cm depth in contrast to 0.7 cm following PulseWing trawling. MBES backscatter strength analysis indicated that SumWing trawls (3.11 dB) also flattened seabed roughness significantly more than PulseWing trawls (2.37 dB). Sediment Profile Imagery (SPI) showed that SumWing trawls (mean, standard deviation) homogenised the sediment deeper (3.4 cm, 0.9 cm) and removed more of the oxidised layer than PulseWing trawls (1 cm, 0.8 cm). SPI imagery showed that the reduced PulseWing trawling impacts allowed a faster re-establishment of the oxidised layer and micro-topography in contrast to SumWing trawling. Particle size analysis suggested that SumWing trawls injected finer particles into the deeper sediment layers (~4 cm depth), while PulseWing trawling only caused coarsening of the top layers (winnowing effect). This is in agreement with numerical modelling, which predicted that SumWing trawls would penetrate deeper into the sediment than PulseWing trawls. The total penetration depth (mean, standard deviation) of the SumWing trawls (4.1 cm, 0.9 cm) and PulseWing trawls (1.8 cm, 0.8 cm) was estimated by measuring the depth of the disturbance layer and by modelling the erosion of the surficial sediments due to sediment mobilisation in the wake of the gear (SumWing = 0.7 cm; PulseWing trawl = 0.8 cm). Our study has shown that PulseWing trawls reduced most of the mechanical trawling impacts on the seabed compared to SumWing trawls for this substrate and area characteristics. ",

keywords = "beam trawl, biogeochemistry, habitat impacts, particle size distribution, penetration depth, pulse trawl, seafloor integrity, sediment resuspension, Seafloor integrity, Pulse trawl, Sediment resuspension, Penetration depth, Biogeochemistry, Particle size distribution, Habitat impacts, Beam trawl",

author = "Jochen Depestele and Koen Degrendele and Moosa Esmaeili and Ana Ivanovic and Silke Kr{\"o}ger and O'Neill, {Finbarr G.} and Ruth Parker and Hans Polet and Marc Roche and Teal, {Lorna R.} and Bart Vanelslander and Rijnsdorp, {Adriaan D.}",

note = "This study was part-funded by the EU FP 7 project BENTHIS (grant no. 312088). It does not necessarily reflect the views of the European Commission and does not anticipate the Commission{\textquoteright}s future policy in this area. We are grateful for the logistic support of VLIZ, the fishermen of TX43 and TX29 and crew members of RV ISIS and RV Simon Stevin during the sea trials and NIOZ for the use of their box corer. ADR and LRT were partly supported by the project “Impact assessment pulsvisserij”. We are indebted to the skippers and Eddy Buyvoets for drawing the net plans of the trawls. We thank John Aldridge for his insights in sediment transport in relation to natural dynamics; Bavo De Witte for conducting the particle size analysis; Daniel Benden for assisting SPI analyses; Miriam Levenson for English-language editing and Julie Bremner and Stefan Bolam for their critical review. We also wish to thank 3 anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript.",

year = "2019",

month = jan,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1093/icesjms/fsy124",

language = "English",

volume = "76",

pages = "312--329",

journal = "ICES Journal of Marine Science",

issn = "1054-3139",

publisher = "Oxford University Press",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of mechanical disturbance in soft sediments due to tickler-chain SumWing trawl versus electro-fitted PulseWing trawl

AU - Depestele, Jochen

AU - Degrendele, Koen

AU - Esmaeili, Moosa

AU - Ivanovic, Ana

AU - Kröger, Silke

AU - O'Neill, Finbarr G.

AU - Parker, Ruth

AU - Polet, Hans

AU - Roche, Marc

AU - Teal, Lorna R.

AU - Vanelslander, Bart

AU - Rijnsdorp, Adriaan D.

N1 - This study was part-funded by the EU FP 7 project BENTHIS (grant no. 312088). It does not necessarily reflect the views of the European Commission and does not anticipate the Commission’s future policy in this area. We are grateful for the logistic support of VLIZ, the fishermen of TX43 and TX29 and crew members of RV ISIS and RV Simon Stevin during the sea trials and NIOZ for the use of their box corer. ADR and LRT were partly supported by the project “Impact assessment pulsvisserij”. We are indebted to the skippers and Eddy Buyvoets for drawing the net plans of the trawls. We thank John Aldridge for his insights in sediment transport in relation to natural dynamics; Bavo De Witte for conducting the particle size analysis; Daniel Benden for assisting SPI analyses; Miriam Levenson for English-language editing and Julie Bremner and Stefan Bolam for their critical review. We also wish to thank 3 anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript.

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Ecosystem-based management strategies increasingly require assessments of bottom trawling impacts on benthic habitats at the detailed level of different gear types. Two types of bottom trawls for catching flatfish (tickler-chain SumWing and electrode-fitted PulseWing trawls) were compared by combining several observational and modelling techniques to assess the changes in trawl penetration and associated effects on the seabed texture and sediment sorting. Bathymetrical measurements using a multi-beam echo sounder (MBES) confirmed that the SumWing trawl tracks were consistently and uniformly deepened to 1.5 cm depth in contrast to 0.7 cm following PulseWing trawling. MBES backscatter strength analysis indicated that SumWing trawls (3.11 dB) also flattened seabed roughness significantly more than PulseWing trawls (2.37 dB). Sediment Profile Imagery (SPI) showed that SumWing trawls (mean, standard deviation) homogenised the sediment deeper (3.4 cm, 0.9 cm) and removed more of the oxidised layer than PulseWing trawls (1 cm, 0.8 cm). SPI imagery showed that the reduced PulseWing trawling impacts allowed a faster re-establishment of the oxidised layer and micro-topography in contrast to SumWing trawling. Particle size analysis suggested that SumWing trawls injected finer particles into the deeper sediment layers (~4 cm depth), while PulseWing trawling only caused coarsening of the top layers (winnowing effect). This is in agreement with numerical modelling, which predicted that SumWing trawls would penetrate deeper into the sediment than PulseWing trawls. The total penetration depth (mean, standard deviation) of the SumWing trawls (4.1 cm, 0.9 cm) and PulseWing trawls (1.8 cm, 0.8 cm) was estimated by measuring the depth of the disturbance layer and by modelling the erosion of the surficial sediments due to sediment mobilisation in the wake of the gear (SumWing = 0.7 cm; PulseWing trawl = 0.8 cm). Our study has shown that PulseWing trawls reduced most of the mechanical trawling impacts on the seabed compared to SumWing trawls for this substrate and area characteristics.

AB - Ecosystem-based management strategies increasingly require assessments of bottom trawling impacts on benthic habitats at the detailed level of different gear types. Two types of bottom trawls for catching flatfish (tickler-chain SumWing and electrode-fitted PulseWing trawls) were compared by combining several observational and modelling techniques to assess the changes in trawl penetration and associated effects on the seabed texture and sediment sorting. Bathymetrical measurements using a multi-beam echo sounder (MBES) confirmed that the SumWing trawl tracks were consistently and uniformly deepened to 1.5 cm depth in contrast to 0.7 cm following PulseWing trawling. MBES backscatter strength analysis indicated that SumWing trawls (3.11 dB) also flattened seabed roughness significantly more than PulseWing trawls (2.37 dB). Sediment Profile Imagery (SPI) showed that SumWing trawls (mean, standard deviation) homogenised the sediment deeper (3.4 cm, 0.9 cm) and removed more of the oxidised layer than PulseWing trawls (1 cm, 0.8 cm). SPI imagery showed that the reduced PulseWing trawling impacts allowed a faster re-establishment of the oxidised layer and micro-topography in contrast to SumWing trawling. Particle size analysis suggested that SumWing trawls injected finer particles into the deeper sediment layers (~4 cm depth), while PulseWing trawling only caused coarsening of the top layers (winnowing effect). This is in agreement with numerical modelling, which predicted that SumWing trawls would penetrate deeper into the sediment than PulseWing trawls. The total penetration depth (mean, standard deviation) of the SumWing trawls (4.1 cm, 0.9 cm) and PulseWing trawls (1.8 cm, 0.8 cm) was estimated by measuring the depth of the disturbance layer and by modelling the erosion of the surficial sediments due to sediment mobilisation in the wake of the gear (SumWing = 0.7 cm; PulseWing trawl = 0.8 cm). Our study has shown that PulseWing trawls reduced most of the mechanical trawling impacts on the seabed compared to SumWing trawls for this substrate and area characteristics.

KW - beam trawl

KW - biogeochemistry

KW - habitat impacts

KW - particle size distribution

KW - penetration depth

KW - pulse trawl

KW - seafloor integrity

KW - sediment resuspension

KW - Seafloor integrity

KW - Pulse trawl

KW - Sediment resuspension

KW - Penetration depth

KW - Biogeochemistry

KW - Particle size distribution

KW - Habitat impacts

KW - Beam trawl

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85062507054&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.mendeley.com/research/comparison-mechanical-disturbance-soft-sediments-due-ticklerchain-sumwing-trawl-vs-electrofitted-pul

U2 - 10.1093/icesjms/fsy124

DO - 10.1093/icesjms/fsy124

M3 - Article

VL - 76

SP - 312

EP - 329

JO - ICES Journal of Marine Science

JF - ICES Journal of Marine Science

SN - 1054-3139

IS - 1

ER -

Comparison of mechanical disturbance in soft sediments due to tickler-chain SumWing trawl versus electro-fitted PulseWing trawl

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this