TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of mechanical disturbance in soft sediments due to tickler-chain SumWing trawl vs. electro-fitted PulseWing trawl.
AU - Depestele, Jochen
AU - Degrendele, Koen
AU - Esmaeili, Moosa
AU - Ivanovic, Ana
AU - Kröger, Silke
AU - O'neill, Finnbar G.
AU - Parker, Ruth
AU - Polet, Hans
AU - Roche, Marc
AU - Teal, Lorna R.
AU - Vanelslander, Bart
AU - Rijnsdorp, Adriaan
PY - 2018/9/20
Y1 - 2018/9/20
N2 - Tickler-chain SumWing and electrode-fitted PulseWing trawls were compared to assess seabed impacts. Multi-beam echo sounder (MBES) bathymetry 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 showed that SumWing trawls (3.11 dB) flattened seabed roughness significantly more than PulseWing trawls (2.37 dB). Sediment Profile Imagery (SPI) showed that SumWing trawls (mean, SD) 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). The reduced PulseWing trawling impacts allowed a faster re-establishment of the oxidised layer and micro-topography. 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). Total penetration depth (mean, SD) of the SumWing trawls (4.1 cm, 0.9 cm) and PulseWing trawls (1.8 cm, 0.8 cm) was estimated by the depth of the disturbance layer and the layer of mobilized sediment (SumWing = 0.7 cm; PulseWing trawl = 0.8 cm). PulseWing trawls reduced most of the mechanical seabed impacts compared to SumWing trawls for this substrate and area characteristics.
AB - Tickler-chain SumWing and electrode-fitted PulseWing trawls were compared to assess seabed impacts. Multi-beam echo sounder (MBES) bathymetry 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 showed that SumWing trawls (3.11 dB) flattened seabed roughness significantly more than PulseWing trawls (2.37 dB). Sediment Profile Imagery (SPI) showed that SumWing trawls (mean, SD) 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). The reduced PulseWing trawling impacts allowed a faster re-establishment of the oxidised layer and micro-topography. 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). Total penetration depth (mean, SD) of the SumWing trawls (4.1 cm, 0.9 cm) and PulseWing trawls (1.8 cm, 0.8 cm) was estimated by the depth of the disturbance layer and the layer of mobilized sediment (SumWing = 0.7 cm; PulseWing trawl = 0.8 cm). PulseWing trawls reduced most of the mechanical seabed impacts compared to SumWing trawls for this substrate and area characteristics.
UR - https://academic.oup.com/icesjms/advance-article/doi/10.1093/icesjms/fsy124/5104431
UR - http://www.mendeley.com/research/comparison-mechanical-disturbance-soft-sediments-due-ticklerchain-sumwing-trawl-vs-electrofitted-pul
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsy124
DO - https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsy124
M3 - A1: Web of Science-article
JO - ICES Journal of Marine Science
JF - ICES Journal of Marine Science
SN - 1095-9289
ER -