- 0.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
- 0.1 Program Objectives and Participants
- 0.1.1 The Pan-Arctic Region: Highlights of the Literature Review
- 0.1.1.1 Behavior and Fate of Oil in the Arctic
- 0.1.1.2 VECs and Ecotoxicity
- 0.1.2 Role of Ecosystem Consequence Analyses in NEBA Applications for the Arctic
- 0.1.2.1 Arctic Population Resiliency and Potential for Recovery
- 0.2 Priority Recommendations to Enhance NEBA Applications in the Arctic
- 0.2.1 Development of ARCAT Matrices
- 0.2.2 Influence of Oil on Unique Arctic Communities
- 0.2.3 Biodegradation in Unique Communities
- 0.2.4 Modeling of Acute and Chronic Population Effects of Exposure to OSRs
- 0.3 Further Information
- 1.0 THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
- 1.1 Introduction
- 1.1.1 The Arctic Ocean, Marginal Seas, and Basins
- 1.2 Knowledge Status
- 1.2.1 The Circumpolar Margins
- 1.2.2 Arctic Hydrography
- 1.2.3 Ice And Ice-Edges
- 1.2.4 Seasonality: Productivity and the Carbon Cycle in the Arctic
- 1.3 Future Research Considerations
- 1.3.1 Priority Recommendations to Enhance NEBA Applications in the Arctic
- 1.4 Further Information
- 2.0 ARCTIC ECOSYSTEMS AND VALUABLE RESOURCES
- 2.1 Introduction
- 2.2 Knowledge Status
- 2.2.1 Habitats of the Arctic
- 2.2.2 Arctic Food Webs
- 2.2.2.1 Pelagic Communities
- 2.2.2.2 Benthic and Demersal Communities
- 2.2.2.2 Sea-ice Communities
- 2.2.2.4 Mammals and Birds
- 2.2.2.5 Communities of Special Significance
- 2.2.3 Pelagic Realm
- 2.2.3.1 Phytoplankton
- 2.2.3.2 Zooplankton
- 2.2.3.3 Neuston
- 2.2.3.4 Other Pelagic Invertebrates
- 2.2.3.4.1 Krill
- 2.2.3.4.2 Amphipods
- 2.2.3.4.3 Cephalopods
- 2.2.3.4.4 Jellyfish
- 2.2.3.5 Fish
- 2.2.3.5.1 Pelagic Fish
- 2.2.3.5.2 Anadromous Fish
- 2.2.3.5.3 Demersal Fish
- 2.2.3.5.4 Deep-Sea Fish
- 2.2.3.6 Marine Mammals
- 2.2.3.6.1 Bowhead Whale (Balaena mysticetus)
- 2.2.3.6.2 White Whale (Delphinapterus Leucas)
- 2.2.3.6.3 Narwhal (Monodon monoceros)
- 2.2.3.6.4 Ice Seals
- 2.2.3.6.5 Walrus (Odobenus rosmarus)
- 2.2.3.6.6 Orca Whales (Orcinus orca)
- 2.2.3.6.7 Polar Bear (Ursus maritimus)
- 2.2.3.7 Birds
- 2.2.3.7.1 Black-legged kittiwakes (Rissa tridactyla)
- 2.2.3.7.2 Black Guillemots (Cepphus grille)
- 2.2.3.7.3 Thick billed Murres (Uria lomvia)
- 2.2.3.7.4 Northern Fulmar (Fulmarus glacialis)
- 2.2.3.7.5 Common Eider (Somateria mollissima)
- 2.2.3.7.6 Little Auk/Dovekie (Alle alle)
- 2.2.3.7.7 Glaucous gull (Larus glaucescens)
- 2.2.3.7.8 Arctic jaeger (Stercorarius parasiticus)
- 2.2.4 Benthic Realm
- 2.2.4.1 Intertidal Communities
- 2.2.4.2 Shelf and Deepwater Communities
- 2.2.4.3 Mollusca
- 2.2.4.4 Polychaetes
- 2.2.4.5 Amphipods
- 2.2.4.6 Decapod Crustaceans
- 2.2.4.7 Echinoderms
- 2.2.5 Sea-Ice Realm
- 2.2.5.1 Ice Algae
- 2.2.5.2 Sympagic Copepods
- 2.2.5.3 Ice Amphipods
- 2.2.5.4 Pelagic Copepods
- 2.2.5.5 Sympagic Fish
- 2.2.5.6 Mammals
- 2.2.5.7 Birds
- 2.2.6 VECs of Arctic Marine Environments
- 2.2.6.1 Seasonal Distribution Patterns of Arctic Marine Populations
- 2.3 Future Research Considerations
- 2.3.1 Priority Recommendations to Enhance NEBA Applications in the Arctic
- 2.4 Further Information
- 3.0 THE TRANSPORT AND FATE OF OIL IN THE ARCTIC
- 3.1 Introduction
- 3.2 Knowledge Status
- 3.2.1 Weathering of Oil Spilled in Ice
- 3.2.2 Oil in Ice Interactions
- 3.2.3 Oil on Arctic Shorelines
- 3.2.4 Oil-Sediment Interactions
- 3.3 Future Research Considerations
- 3.3.1 Priority Recommendations for Enhanced NEBA Applications in the Arctic
- 3.4 Further Information
- 4.0 OIL SPILL RESPONSE STRATEGIES
- 4.1 Introduction
- 4.1.1 Environmental Uniqueness of the Arctic Region in Relation to OSR
- 4.2 Knowledge Status - Impact of OSRs
- 4.2.1 Natural Attentuation
- 4.2.1.1 Potential Environmental Impact of Untreated Oil
- 4.2.1.2 Conclusions on Natural Attenuation
- 4.2.2 Mechanical Recovery and Containment
- 4.2.2.1 Environmental impacts from Mechanical Recovery and Containment
- 4.2.2.2 Conclusions
- 4.2.3 In-Situ Burning and Chemical Herders
- 4.2.3.1 Potential environmental and human health effects of ISB residues and unburnt oil
- 4.2.3.2 Environmental Impact of Herders
- 4.2.3.3 Conclusions on ISB and Herders
- 4.2.4 Improving Dispersion of Oil
- 4.2.4.1 Impact of Chemically Dispersed Oil
- 4.2.4.2 Conclusions on Chemical Dispersion
- 4.2.4.3 Dispersing Oil using Oil Mineral Aggregates (OMA)
- 4.2.4.4 Environmental Impact of OMA formation
- 4.2.4.5 Conclusions on OMA
- 4.3 Future Research Considerations
- 4.3.1 Priority Recommendations for Enhanced NEBA Applications in the Arctic
- 4.4 Further Information
- 5.0 BIODEGRADATION
- 5.1 Introduction
- 5.1.1 The Microbiology of the Arctic Oceans
- 5.1.1.1 Transport routes
- 5.1.1.2 Microbial populations in the Arctic Ocean
- 5.1.2 Microbial Adaptation to Arctic Conditions
- 5.1.2.1 Low temperature and microbial adaptions
- 5.1.2.2 Light and microbial phototrophs
- 5.1.2.3 Marine ice and microbial survival and metabolism
- 5.2 Knowledge Status
- 5.2.1 Biodegradation of Oil in Cold Marine Environments
- 5.2.1.1 Types of Crude Oils
- 5.2.1.2 Surface oil spills
- 5.2.1.2.1 Evaporation
- 5.2.1.2.2 Water solubility
- 5.2.1.2.3 Photooxidation
- 5.2.1.2.4 Sedimentation
- 5.2.1.2.5 Water-in-oil emulsification
- 5.2.1.2.6 Natural dispersion
- 5.2.1.2.7 Oil films
- 5.2.1.3 Microbial Oil-Degrading Populations in Cold Water Environments
- 5.2.1.3.1 Indigenous Microorganism Populations
- 5.2.1.3.2 Population Effects on Oil Degradation
- 5.2.1.4 Hydrocarbon biodegradation in cold marine environments
- 5.2.1.4.1 Seawater
- 5.2.1.4.2 Sediments and soils
- 5.2.1.4.3 Sea ice
- 5.2.1.5 Modeling of biodegradation
- 5.2.1.5.1 Biodegradation in oil spill models
- 5.2.1.5.2 Biodegradation modeling and temperature
- 5.2.1.6 Determination of Biodegradation
- 5.2.1.6.1 Analytical methods for oil compound analyses
- 5.2.1.6.2 Experimental apparatus
- 5.2.1.6.3 Biodegradation data processing
- 5.2.1.7 Persistent Oil Compounds
- 5.2.2 Accelerated Biodegradation
- 5.2.2.1 Biostimulation
- 5.2.2.1.1 Shoreline sediments
- 5.2.2.1.2 Seawater
- 5.2.2.1.3 Marine ice
- 5.2.2.2 Bioaugmentation
- 5.2.2.3 Understanding Processes in Accelerated Biodegradation
- 5.3 Future Research Considerations
- 5.3.1 Priority Recommendations for Enhanced NEBA Applications in the Arctic
- 5.4 Further Information
- 6.0 ECOTOXICOLOGY OF OIL AND TREATED OIL IN THE ARCTIC
- 6.1 Introduction
- 6.1.1 General Methods and Relevant Endpoints in Laboratory Testing
- 6.1.1.1 Test Exposure
- 6.1.1.2 Test Media Preparation
- 6.1.1.2.1 Water Soluble Fractions (WSF)
- 6.1.1.2.2 Water Accommodated Fractions (WAF, CEWAF)
- 6.1.1.2.3 Oil-in-Water Dispersions (Oil Droplets)
- 6.1.1.2.4 Oil Type/Weathering
- 6.1.1.2.5 Exposure Concentrations
- 6.1.1.2.6 Test Organisms
- 6.1.1.2.7 Test Endpoints and Exposures
- 6.1.1.2.8 Data Extrapolation and Population Models
- 6.2 Knowledge Status
- 6.2.1 Species represented in the data set
- 6.2.2 Arctic ecosystem compartments in the dataset
- 6.2.2.1 Pack ice
- 6.2.2.2 Pelagic
- 6.2.2.3 Benthic
- 6.2.3 Review by Taxa
- 6.2.3.1 Phytoplankton and seaweed
- 6.2.3.2 Mysids
- 6.2.3.3 Copepods
- 6.2.3.4 Amphipods
- 6.2.3.5 Benthic organisms
- 6.2.3.6 Fish
- 6.3 Discussion
- 6.3.1 Petroleum related components
- 6.3.1.1 Crude oil
- 6.3.1.2 Single PAH
- 6.3.2 Chemically dispersed oil versus physically dispersed oil
- 6.3.3 Are Arctic species more sensitive than temperate species?
- 6.4 Future Research Considerations
- 6.4.1 Priority Recommendations to Enhance NEBA Applications in the Arctic
- 6.5 Further Information
- 7.0 POPULATION EFFECTS MODELING
- 7.1 Introduction
- 7.2 Knowledge Status
- 7.2.1 Parameters Needed to Assess Potential Responses of VECs to Environmental Stressors
- 7.2.1.1 Transport and fate / exposure potential
- 7.2.1.2 Oil toxicity evaluations / sensitivity
- 7.2.1.3 Population distributions, stressors, and mortality rates
- 7.2.2 Copepod Population Ecology
- 7.2.2.1 Copepod Growth and Development
- 7.2.2.2 Summary of Arctic and Sub-Arctic Copepod Species
- 7.2.3 Copepod Populations
- 7.2.4 Arctic Fish Population Ecology
- 7.2.4.1 Arctic Fish Species Diversity
- 7.2.4.2 Representative Fish Species
- 7.2.5 Application of Population Models
- 7.3 Future Research Considerations
- 7.3.1 Priority Recommendations to Enhance NEBA Applications in the Arctic
- 7.4 Further Information
- 8.0 ECOSYSTEM RECOVERY
- 8.1 Introduction
- 8.2 Knowledge Status
- 8.2.1 Resilience and Potential for Recovery
- 8.3 Future Research Considerations
- 8.3.1 Priority Recommendations for Enhanced NEBA Applications in the Arctic
- 8.4 Further Information
- 9.0 NET ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFIT ANALYSES FOR OIL SPILL
- 9.1 Introduction
- 9.2 Knowledge Status
- 9.2.1 Importance of NEBA Development for Arctic Regions
- 9.2.2 Scope and Applicability
- 9.2.3 Information Required to Utilize the NEBA Process
- 9.2.3.1 Potential oil spill scenarios
- 9.2.3.2 Response resources available
- 9.2.4 Ecological Resources at Risk
- 9.2.5 Social and Economic Relevance
- 9.2.6 Historical uses of NEBA and Case Studies
- 9.2.6.1 Assessing response strategy effectiveness and estimating oil fate and transport
- 9.2.6.2 Assessing the potential impacts and resource recovery rates
- 9.2.7 Historical Spills that Used or Informed NEBA Processes
- 9.2.7.1 A. Experimental: Baffin Island tests in northern Canada
- 9.2.7.2 B. Experimental: TROPICS study
- 9.2.7.3 C. Tanker: Braer Spill
- 9.2.7.4 D. Tanker: Sea Empress spill
- 9.2.7.5 E. Well Blowout: Montara spill (also known as the West Atlas Spill)
- 9.2.8 Potential Challenges to Applying NEBA Processes in the Arctic Environment
- 9.3 Future Research Considerations
- 9.3.1 Priority Recommendations for Enhanced NEBA Applications in the Arctic
- 9.4 Further Information
- APPENDIX: USE OF NEDRA IN CONNECTION TO OIL SPILL CONTINGENCY PLANNING IN NORWAY
- 10.0 SUPPORTING REPORTS
Add notes to:
Or add a reference to download later
2.2.3.4 Other Pelagic Invertebrates
The pelagic invertebrate community includes a wide variety of other species, including amphipods, mysids, shrimp, squid, jellyfish, pteropods, chaetognaths, and ichthyoplankton. There are only two Arctic species of pelagic shrimp and they do not appear to be a common component of the nekton (Hopcroft et al. 2008). This section will focus on certain elements of the pelagic invertebrate community that are important food web components.
Unlike the Antarctic, euphausiids are not abundant in Arctic waters. However they can be difficult to accurately assess in ice-covered waters as they seek shelter in the pockets and fissures in the ice (Percy and Fife 1985). Euphausiids are not considered to be a truly Arctic species, rather they are advected from the Bering Sea Water inflow (Suydam and Moore 2004) or from the Atlantic (Letessier et al. 2009). The euphausiids Thysanoessa raschii and T. inermis were important prey items associated with bowhead whales in the western Beaufort Sea (Brinton 1962). Euphausiids are found from the surface to the deep midwater pelagic areas, in depths greater than 500 m.
Free-swimming amphipods are a key component of the Arctic food web, representing a link between zooplankton and higher level consumers such as fish, marine mammals, and birds. Hyperiid and Lysianassid amphipods are among the common taxa found in Arctic waters and are a dominant component of the zooplankton abundance and biomass (Auel et al. 2002). The hyperiid amphipod, Themisto libellula is a pan-Arctic species that can occur in high numbers in the ice free waters of the Arctic. Based on the high amounts of C20:1 (n-9) and C22:1 (n-11) fatty acids and alcohols found in T. libellulatissues, their diet was domianted by Calanoid copepods. Further analysis indicated a close association with ice-algal production. This confirms field sampling data showing Themisto sp. associated wtih sympagic communities.
Themisto abyssorum is more closely associated with deepwater communties. Themisto abyssorum is considered to be a boreal species and is found in close association with the Atlantic Water that moves northward through Fram Strait. Abundance generally decreases from east to west, dropping from >200 ind/m2 over the contiental slope north of Spitsbergen to <40 ind/m2 in the central Arctic (Auel et al. 2002). It does not show a similar lipid signature seen in T. libellula, indicating that copepods are not a dominnant component of the diet. Rather, the deepwater species is more likely an omnivore and scavenger.
Cyclocaris guilelmi, is also an epipelagic species, occurring in the deep-waters of the Arctic. As wtih T. abyssorum, C. guilelmi appears to be Atlantic in origin but is found throughout the Arctic ocean. Kraft (2012) found C. guilelmi to be a dominant component found in deepwater traps in Fram Strait. The population appeared to be stable with peaks from August to February.
Cephalopods are a predator of and a key prey item for many of the VECs in the Arctic. Squid move vertically through the water column, integrating marine resources throughout the pelagic environment. The squid Gonatus fabricii is the most commonly reported species in the Arctic, with numerous records in the Atlantic sector, the Barents Sea and the high Canadian Arctic (Gardiner and Dick 2010). Berrytheuthis magister is the predominant squid species found in the Pacific domain. Squid exhibit all manners of vertical distribution: near-surface dwellers (to 50 m), vertical migrators that either move into the surface waters at night or just move higher in the water column, and near-bottom dwellers. In addition, some species exhibit ontogenetic descent moving progressively deeper as they age (Roper and Young 1975). Cephalopods are voracious predators feeding on crustaceans, fish, other squids, and zooplankton. Based on isotope analysis, squid are occupying different trophic levels in different regions (Navarro et al. 2013) indicating that squid are able to shift their diet based on availability. The isotope ratios for Arctic squid indicated a trophic level of 3 to 5. Squid are an important component of marine mammal and sea bird diets, including narwhals, White whales, walrus, murres and fulmars (Gardiner and Dick 2010).
Gelatinous zooplankton are poorly understood in the Arctic, largely due to the difficulty of capturing them with traditional sampling methods. However, they are considered to be a substantial sink for primary and secondary production (Purcell et al. 2009). In the Beaufort Sea, the scyphomedusa, Chrysaora melanaster is among the most common gelatinous zooplankton in shelf waters 25 to 75 m in depth (Purcell et al. 2009). In shallower waters, there was a more diverse community dominated by the delicate medusa Bolinopsis infundibulum, other small cnidarians, and ctenophore species occurred immediately underneath the sea ice (Purcell et al. 2009; Raskoff et al. 2010b). Other common species include Sminthea arctica in the midwater depths, and Atolla tenella which was found in high abundance in the deep Canadian Basin (Raskoff et al. 2010b).
Large populations of gelatinous zooplankton have been observed throughout the Arctic, particularly in at convergences, fronts, and polynyas (Ashjian et al. 1997). In such areas, medusa and ctenophores can have a substantial grazing impact. In the eastern Canadian high Arctic, the ctenophore Mertensia ovum was estimated to consume up to 9% per day of the C. hyperboreus population and 3-4% of the C. glacialis population. Other prey items included hyperiid amphipods, pteropods, and smaller copepods. Other food resources for gelatinous zooplankton include detritus and algal cells and in some cases small or juvenile fish (e.g. larval capelin and herring; Raskoff et al. 2010b).
2.2.3.4.1 Krill
Unlike the Antarctic, euphausiids are not abundant in Arctic waters. However they can be difficult to accurately assess in ice-covered waters as they seek shelter in the pockets and fissures in the ice (Percy and Fife 1985). Euphausiids are not considered to be a truly Arctic species, rather they are advected from the Bering Sea Water inflow (Suydam and Moore 2004) or from the Atlantic (Letessier et al. 2009). The euphausiids Thysanoessa raschii and T. inermis were important prey items associated with bowhead whales in the western Beaufort Sea (Brinton 1962). Euphausiids are found from the surface to the deep midwater pelagic areas, in depths greater than 500 m.
2.2.3.4.2 Amphipods
Free-swimming amphipods are a key component of the Arctic food web, representing a link between zooplankton and higher level consumers such as fish, marine mammals, and birds. Hyperiid and Lysianassid amphipods are among the common taxa found in Arctic waters and are a dominant component of the zooplankton abundance and biomass (Auel et al. 2002). The hyperiid amphipod, Themisto libellula is a pan-Arctic species that can occur in high numbers in the ice free waters of the Arctic. Based on the high amounts of C20:1 (n-9) and C22:1 (n-11) fatty acids and alcohols found in T. libellulatissues, their diet was domianted by Calanoid copepods. Further analysis indicated a close association with ice-algal production. This confirms field sampling data showing Themisto sp. associated wtih sympagic communities.
Themisto abyssorum is more closely associated with deepwater communties. Themisto abyssorum is considered to be a boreal species and is found in close association with the Atlantic Water that moves northward through Fram Strait. Abundance generally decreases from east to west, dropping from >200 ind/m2 over the contiental slope north of Spitsbergen to <40 ind/m2 in the central Arctic (Auel et al. 2002). It does not show a similar lipid signature seen in T. libellula, indicating that copepods are not a dominnant component of the diet. Rather, the deepwater species is more likely an omnivore and scavenger.
Cyclocaris guilelmi, is also an epipelagic species, occurring in the deep-waters of the Arctic. As wtih T. abyssorum, C. guilelmi appears to be Atlantic in origin but is found throughout the Arctic ocean. Kraft (2012) found C. guilelmi to be a dominant component found in deepwater traps in Fram Strait. The population appeared to be stable with peaks from August to February.
2.2.3.4.3 Cephalopods
Cephalopods are a predator of and a key prey item for many of the VECs in the Arctic. Squid move vertically through the water column, integrating marine resources throughout the pelagic environment. The squid Gonatus fabricii is the most commonly reported species in the Arctic, with numerous records in the Atlantic sector, the Barents Sea and the high Canadian Arctic (Gardiner and Dick 2010). Berrytheuthis magister is the predominant squid species found in the Pacific domain. Squid exhibit all manners of vertical distribution: near-surface dwellers (to 50 m), vertical migrators that either move into the surface waters at night or just move higher in the water column, and near-bottom dwellers. In addition, some species exhibit ontogenetic descent moving progressively deeper as they age (Roper and Young 1975). Cephalopods are voracious predators feeding on crustaceans, fish, other squids, and zooplankton. Based on isotope analysis, squid are occupying different trophic levels in different regions (Navarro et al. 2013) indicating that squid are able to shift their diet based on availability. The isotope ratios for Arctic squid indicated a trophic level of 3 to 5. Squid are an important component of marine mammal and sea bird diets, including narwhals, White whales, walrus, murres and fulmars (Gardiner and Dick 2010).
2.2.3.4.4 Jellyfish
Gelatinous zooplankton are poorly understood in the Arctic, largely due to the difficulty of capturing them with traditional sampling methods. However, they are considered to be a substantial sink for primary and secondary production (Purcell et al. 2009). In the Beaufort Sea, the scyphomedusa, Chrysaora melanaster is among the most common gelatinous zooplankton in shelf waters 25 to 75 m in depth (Purcell et al. 2009). In shallower waters, there was a more diverse community dominated by the delicate medusa Bolinopsis infundibulum, other small cnidarians, and ctenophore species occurred immediately underneath the sea ice (Purcell et al. 2009; Raskoff et al. 2010b). Other common species include Sminthea arctica in the midwater depths, and Atolla tenella which was found in high abundance in the deep Canadian Basin (Raskoff et al. 2010b).
Large populations of gelatinous zooplankton have been observed throughout the Arctic, particularly in at convergences, fronts, and polynyas (Ashjian et al. 1997). In such areas, medusa and ctenophores can have a substantial grazing impact. In the eastern Canadian high Arctic, the ctenophore Mertensia ovum was estimated to consume up to 9% per day of the C. hyperboreus population and 3-4% of the C. glacialis population. Other prey items included hyperiid amphipods, pteropods, and smaller copepods. Other food resources for gelatinous zooplankton include detritus and algal cells and in some cases small or juvenile fish (e.g. larval capelin and herring; Raskoff et al. 2010b).