The Marine Life Information Network

Information on the biology of species and the ecology of habitats found around the coasts and seas of the British Isles

Navigation

Saccorhiza polyschides and other opportunistic kelps on disturbed sublittoral fringe rock

Distribution MapBIO Map Legend

Summary

UK and Ireland classification

Description

Exposed low-lying reefs in the sublittoral fringe or upper infralittoral (generally above 5m depth), mainly in the southwest and west, dominated by the kelp Saccorhiza polyschides. This opportunistic colonizer replaces Laminaria digitata or Laminaria hyperborea as the dominant kelp, following the disturbance of the canopy. This may be the result of storms when loose sediment and even cobbles or boulders are mobilised, scouring most seaweeds and animals from the surrounding rock. As Saccorhiza polyschides is essentially a summer annual (occasionally it lasts into a second year), it is also particularly common close to rock/sand interfaces that become too scoured during winter months to prevent the longer-living kelps from surviving. As a result of the transient nature of this biotope, its composition is varied; it may contain several other kelp species, including Laminaria digitataSaccharina latissima and Alaria esculenta, at varying abundances. Laminaria spp. sporelings can also be a prominent feature of the site. Beneath the kelp, (scour-tolerant) red seaweeds including Corallina officinalisKallymenia reniformisPlocamium cartilagineumChondrus crispusDilsea carnosa and encrusting coralline algae are often present. Foliose red seaweeds such as Metacallophyllis laciniataCryptopleura ramosa and Palmaria palmata also occur in this biotope. P. palmata and Delesseria sanguinea often occur as epiphytes on the stipes of L. hyperborea, when it is present. The foliose green seaweed Ulva spp. is fast to colonise newly cleared areas of rock and is often present along with the foliose brown seaweed Dictyota dichotoma. Due to the disturbed nature of this biotope, fauna are generally sparse, being confined to encrusting bryozoans and/or sponges, such as Halichondria panicea and the gastropod Steromphala cineraria.

On some shores (for example in Cornwall and south-west Ireland), Saccorhiza polyschides competes so effectively with the other laminarians that it forms a well-defined zone in shallow water, between the Laminaria digitata (Ldig) and Laminaria hyperborea zones (LhypR and Lhyp). Elsewhere, it is found at sites that have been physically disturbed, removing areas of established kelp (Laminaria hyperborea) thus allowing this opportunistic biotope to develop over a short space of time.  There may be significant variations in this biotope over time, as by its very nature, it is dominated by many fast-growing annual seaweeds. The foliose green seaweed Ulva sp. is fast to colonise newly cleared areas of rock and can be present as a dense growth on the rock around the Saccorhiza polyschides. Similarly, large patches of Laminaria spp. sporelings may be present at times.

Depth range

Lower shore, 0-5 m

Additional information

-

Listed By

Sensitivity reviewHow is sensitivity assessed?

Sensitivity characteristics of the habitat and relevant characteristic species

IR.HIR.KSed.Sac, IR.HIR.KSed.SlatSac, IR.HIR.KSed.DesFilR, and IR.HIR.KSed.XKScrR are within the sediment affected or disturbed kelp and seaweed communities (IR.HIR.KSed) habitat complex. As a result of nearby sediment scouring or seasonally unstable infralittoral rock, opportunistic brown seaweeds; Desmarestia spp., Saccharina latissima (formerly Laminaria saccharina) & Saccorhiza polyschides can proliferate. Laminaria hyperborea can be present within the community but does not become fully established, due to the disturbed nature of IR.HIR.KSed biotopes and sporophytes do not typically survive beyond a couple of seasons (Connor et al., 2004).

The understorey community can vary locally and is characterized by scour tolerant or ephemeral red seaweeds, such as Corallina officinalis, Plocamium cartilagineum, Chondrus crispus, Dilsea carnosa, and encrusting coralline algae.  Faunal diversity and abundance are also generally low and typically limited to encrusting bryozoans and/or sponges.  In areas sheltered from sediment scour or sediment,  the biological diversity increases and Laminaria hyperborea becomes more dominant (Connor et al., 2004).

In undertaking this assessment of sensitivity, an account is taken of knowledge of the biology of all characterizing species/taxa in the biotope. However, 'indicative species' are particularly important in undertaking the assessment as they structure and characterize the biotope. . For this sensitivity assessment, the opportunistic brown seaweeds;  Saccharina latissima and Saccorhiza polyschides are the primary foci of research. Examples of important species groups are mentioned where appropriate.

Resilience and recovery rates of habitat

Saccorhiza polyschides and Saccharina latissima (formerly Laminaria saccharina) are opportunistic seaweeds that have relatively fast growth rates when compared to other perennial species, and dominate areas subject to recurrent disturbance or in areas where environmental conditions limit competition from Laminaria hyperborea.

Saccharina latissima is widely distributed in the north Atlantic from Svalbard to Portugal (Birket et al., 1998; Connor et al., 2004; Bekby & Moy 2011; Moy & Christie 2012), Saccorhiza polyschides from mid-Norway to Ghana, and present in parts of the Mediterranean (Lüning, 1990). Saccorhiza polyschides is also termed as an annual and can reach maturity in 8 months, although sporophytes that do not reach maturity within the first growth season can overwinter and have a life expectancy of 16 months (Birket et al., 1998; Fernández, 2011), during which time fronds can reach a length of 3-4m (D. Birkett, pers. obs in Birkett et al., 1998b).  Saccharina latissima  is a perennial kelp that can reach maturity in 15-20 months and has a life expectancy of 2-4 years.

Laminariales have heteromorphic life strategies (Edwards, 1998). Mature sporophytes broadcast zoospores which settle onto the rock and develop into gametophytes, following fertilization these germinate into juvenile sporophytes. Kelp zoospores are expected to have a large dispersal range, but zoospore density and the rate of successful fertilization decreases exponentially with distance from the parental source (Fredriksen et al., 1995). Hence, recruitment following disturbance can be influenced by the proximity of mature kelp beds producing viable zoospores to the disturbed area (Kain, 1979; Fredriksen et al., 1995). Saccorhiza polyschides and Saccharina latissima both release zoospores from reproductive structures known as sori, located centrally on the blade (Saccharina latissima and Saccorhiza polyschides), stipe and holdfast/bulb (Saccorhiza polyschides).

Saccorhiza polyschides sporophytes appear from March-April, beyond which is a period of rapid growth. Saccorhiza polyschides sporophytes are capable of growing ≤6.2 cm per week (Norton, 1970; Fernández, 2011) and reaching a maximum length of 3-4 m (Birket et al., 1998; Fernández, 2011). The onset of maturity triggers a phase of senescence in which growth ceases and the frond erodes, resulting in the blade becoming progressively smaller and by winter the entire sporophyte can disappear (Birkett et al., 1998b; Fernández, 2011). Saccharina latissima recruits appear in late winter early spring beyond which is a period of rapid growth, in late summer and autumn growth rates slow and spores are released from autumn to winter (Parke, 1948; Lüning, 1979; Birkett et al., 1998b). The overall length of the sporophyte may not change during the growing season due to marginal erosion because the growth of the blade has been measured at 1.1 cm/day, with a total length addition of ≥2.25 m per year (Birkett et al., 1998b).

Saccharina latissima can be quite ephemeral in nature and appear early in algal succession. For example, Leinaas & Christie (1996) removed Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis from “Urchin Barrens” and observed a succession effect.  The substratum was colonized initially by filamentous algae, but after a couple of weeks, these were out-competed and the habitat dominated by Saccharina latissima which themselves were subsequently out-competed by Laminaria hyperborea. In the Isle of Man, Kain (1975) cleared sublittoral blocks of Laminaria hyperborea at different times of the year for several years.  The first colonizers and succession community differed between blocks and at what time of year the blocks were cleared. However, Saccharina latissima was an early colonizer, but within two years of clearance, the blocks were dominated by Laminaria hyperborea.

Resilience assessment. All three canopy-forming seaweeds that characterize IR.HIR.KSed.Sac, IR.HIR.KSed.SlatSac, IR.HIR.KSed.DesFilR, and IR.HIR.KSed.XKScrR are opportunistic species with rapid colonization and growth rates. Saccorhiza polyschides are capable of reaching maturity within a year. Saccharina latissima has been shown to be an early colonizer within macroalgal succession, appearing within 2 weeks of clearance. Therefore, resilience has been assessed as ‘High’.

Climate Change Pressures

Use / to open/close text displayedResistanceResilienceSensitivity
Low Very Low High
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: High
C: High

The distribution of kelp is strongly influenced by climatic conditions; therefore, kelp species are extremely sensitive to the ongoing ocean warming (Kain, 1979; Van Den Hoek, 1982; Breeman, 1990; Lüning, 1990; Assis et al., 2016; Smale, 2020). Northern distribution boundaries are set by winter temperatures that are lethal, or summer temperatures too low for growth and/or reproduction, whilst southern limits are set by high lethal summer temperatures or winter temperatures too high for induction of a crucial step in the life cycle (Breeman, 1990). 

Kelps have a high dependence on ocean temperatures, which make them highly vulnerable to ocean warming (Assis et al., 2014). As temperatures increase, populations found towards the upper limit of their temperature range may be adversely affected by warming as physiological thresholds are exceeded (Wiens, 2016). Thermal stress can lead to mortality and consequent population-level effects, such as decreased abundance, altered size structure, local extinction and range contractions (Smale, 2020). 

Saccorhiza polyschides is a fast-growing, short-lived opportunist species that rapidly colonizes cleared areas of the substratumSaccorhiza polyschides has a wide geographic distribution from Norway to Morocco and can tolerate a wide range of temperatures (Hawkins & Harkin 1985), with an upper survival temperature tolerance of 24°C (Dieck, 1993). Sporophyte growth can occur from 3-24°C and gametophyte development from 5-25°C (Norton, 1977). Fernández (2011) however suggested that summer temperatures of >20°C sustained for longer than a period of 30 days may inhibit development and recruitment.

Saccorhiza polyschides abundance has increased rapidly in the English Channel displacing cold water laminarian species in the intertidal (Birchenough et al., 2013). The abundance of Saccorhiza polyschides is predicted to increase in the UK as a response to ocean warming (Smale et al., 2013). However, studies conducted in Spain and Portugal have documented declines in abundance, range constrictions and local extinctions of Saccorhiza polyschides (Smale et al., 2020). 

Saccharina latissima is a polar to temperate macroalgae distributed from Greenland to the coast of Portugal, and in the NW Atlantic, is found as far south as New York State, USA. In the UK, sea surface temperatures are range between 6-19°C (Huthnance, 2010), and Saccharina latissima is in the middle of its biogeographic range. At its southern distribution in New York, temperatures can regularly reach ≥20°C for six weeks or more during summer months (Gerard & Du Bois, 1988).

Saccharina latissima has an optimal growth temperature between 10- 15°C, with growth reducing by 50-70% at 20°C, and all experimental specimens disintegrating after 7 days at 23°C (Bolton & Lüning, 1982). The temperature isotherm of 19-20°C has been reported as limiting Saccharina latissima growth (Müller et al., 2009). Temperature is an environmental factor controlling the development of the microscopic stages of Saccharina latissima, with crucial changes in survival, growth, and gametogenesis occurring within a few degrees of its upper thermal limits (Redmond, 2013). The optimal germination temperature for Saccharina latissima is between 2°C and 12°C, with gametophyte survival between 23-25°C (Müller et al., 2009). Germination rates drop at 22°C, with surviving gametophytes smaller than those grown at lower temperatures (Redmond, 2013). Park et al. (2017) observed reductions in the percentage of sporophytes produced at 15°C when compared to values produced at 5°C and 10°C. 

In the field, Saccharina latissima has shown significant regional variation in its acclimation response to changing environmental conditions.  For example, Gerard & Dubois (1988) observed sporophytes of Saccharina latissima that were regularly exposed to ≥20°C tolerated these high temperatures, whereas sporophytes from other populations which rarely experience ≥17°C showed 100% mortality after 3 weeks of exposure to 20°C.

Saccharina latissima has suffered a dramatic decline in the Skagerrak region, Norway. Where community structure has shifted from Saccharina latissima forests to communities dominated by filamentous macroalgae (Moy & Christie, 2012). In 2006, Andersen et al. (2011) transplanted Saccharina latissima into areas from where this species had been lost previously to determine whether the kelp could grow and mature. High mortality occurred from August-November each year. In 2008, only six of the seventeen original transplanted Saccharina latissima sporophytes survived (approx. 65% mortality rate). All surviving sporophytes were heavily fouled by epiphytic organisms (estimated cover of 80 & 100%). Between 1960 and 2009, sea surface temperatures in the region had regularly exceeded 20°C and so had the duration at which temperatures remain above 20°C. High sea temperatures have been linked to the slow growth of Saccharina latissima which is likely due to a decrease in the photosynthetic ability of Saccharina latissima, and an increase in vulnerability to epiphytic loading, bacterial and viral attacks (Anderson et al., 2011).

Assis et al. (2018) predicted that, under the highest emission scenario (RCP 8.5), the range of Saccharina latissima and Saccorhiza polyschides would move northwards, retreating from their southernmost locations, and predicted the loss of Saccharina latissima from the south-west coast of the UK.  

Many of the red algae species associated with the understory turf can tolerate warm water temperatures. Corallina officinalis may tolerate between -4 to 28°C (Lüning, 1990), although when Colthart & Johansen (1973) exposed this species to a number of different temperatures, they found that growth was maintained at 18°C and ceased at 25°C. Abrupt temperature changes (10°C in California, Seapy & Littler 1984; 4.8 to 8.5°C, Hawkins & Hartnoll, 1985) resulted in dramatic declines. However, in both cases recovery was rapid, suggesting that the crustose bases survived. 

Sensitivity Assessment. UK populations of Saccharina latissima are found in the middle of the species distribution and are known to be able to survive at higher temperatures than currently experienced around the UK. The ability to tolerate summer seawater temperatures of >20°C in populations at their southern geographic limit is thought to be a genetic adaptation (Gerard & Du Bois, 1988), and maybe crucial in the persistence of this species around the UK, as seawater temperatures rise. In the UK, Saccorhiza polyschides is in the middle of its geographic range, so is unlikely to be affected by an increase of 3°C by the end of the century. However, a change in 4-5°C may put the species outside its lethal limits. 

With sea surface temperature around the UK of between 6-19°C (Huthnance, 2010), populations of Saccorhiza polyschides, Saccharina latissima, and the understorey community of mixed red seaweeds may be able to adapt to cope with a gradual rise in ocean temperatures of 3°C (middle emission scenario) by the end of this century, leading to maximum summer high temperatures in the south of the UK of 22°C. Therefore, resistance is assessed as ‘Medium’, and resilience is assessed as ‘Very Low’, as the loss is likely to be a long-term decline, due to the long-term nature of ocean warming. Therefore, this biotope is assessed as ‘Medium’ sensitivity to ocean warming in the middle emission scenario.

For the high emission scenario and extreme scenario, whereby sea temperatures rise by 4-5°C to potential southern summer temperatures of 23-24°C by the end of this century Saccorhiza polyschides and Saccharina latissima are likely to be lost from southern England. This assessment corresponds with the results of ecological niche modelling by Assis et al. (2018) who predicted that Saccharina latissima would be lost from the southwest coast of the UK, because of climate change.  Therefore, resistance is assessed as ‘Low’, and resilience is assessed as ‘Very low’. This biotope SlatSac is assessed as having ‘High’ sensitivity to ocean warming in the high and extreme emission scenarios.

Low Very Low High
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: High
C: High

The distribution of kelp is strongly influenced by climatic conditions; therefore, kelp species are extremely sensitive to the ongoing ocean warming (Kain, 1979; Van Den Hoek, 1982; Breeman, 1990; Lüning, 1990; Assis et al., 2016; Smale, 2020). Northern distribution boundaries are set by winter temperatures that are lethal, or summer temperatures too low for growth and/or reproduction, whilst southern limits are set by high lethal summer temperatures or winter temperatures too high for induction of a crucial step in the life cycle (Breeman, 1990). 

Kelps have a high dependence on ocean temperatures, which make them highly vulnerable to ocean warming (Assis et al., 2014). As temperatures increase, populations found towards the upper limit of their temperature range may be adversely affected by warming as physiological thresholds are exceeded (Wiens, 2016). Thermal stress can lead to mortality and consequent population-level effects, such as decreased abundance, altered size structure, local extinction and range contractions (Smale, 2020). 

Saccorhiza polyschides is a fast-growing, short-lived opportunist species that rapidly colonizes cleared areas of the substratumSaccorhiza polyschides has a wide geographic distribution from Norway to Morocco and can tolerate a wide range of temperatures (Hawkins & Harkin 1985), with an upper survival temperature tolerance of 24°C (Dieck, 1993). Sporophyte growth can occur from 3-24°C and gametophyte development from 5-25°C (Norton, 1977). Fernández (2011) however suggested that summer temperatures of >20°C sustained for longer than a period of 30 days may inhibit development and recruitment.

Saccorhiza polyschides abundance has increased rapidly in the English Channel displacing cold water laminarian species in the intertidal (Birchenough et al., 2013). The abundance of Saccorhiza polyschides is predicted to increase in the UK as a response to ocean warming (Smale et al., 2013). However, studies conducted in Spain and Portugal have documented declines in abundance, range constrictions and local extinctions of Saccorhiza polyschides (Smale et al., 2020). 

Saccharina latissima is a polar to temperate macroalgae distributed from Greenland to the coast of Portugal, and in the NW Atlantic, is found as far south as New York State, USA. In the UK, sea surface temperatures are range between 6-19°C (Huthnance, 2010), and Saccharina latissima is in the middle of its biogeographic range. At its southern distribution in New York, temperatures can regularly reach ≥20°C for six weeks or more during summer months (Gerard & Du Bois, 1988).

Saccharina latissima has an optimal growth temperature between 10- 15°C, with growth reducing by 50-70% at 20°C, and all experimental specimens disintegrating after 7 days at 23°C (Bolton & Lüning, 1982). The temperature isotherm of 19-20°C has been reported as limiting Saccharina latissima growth (Müller et al., 2009). Temperature is an environmental factor controlling the development of the microscopic stages of Saccharina latissima, with crucial changes in survival, growth, and gametogenesis occurring within a few degrees of its upper thermal limits (Redmond, 2013). The optimal germination temperature for Saccharina latissima is between 2°C and 12°C, with gametophyte survival between 23-25°C (Müller et al., 2009). Germination rates drop at 22°C, with surviving gametophytes smaller than those grown at lower temperatures (Redmond, 2013). Park et al. (2017) observed reductions in the percentage of sporophytes produced at 15°C when compared to values produced at 5°C and 10°C. 

In the field, Saccharina latissima has shown significant regional variation in its acclimation response to changing environmental conditions.  For example, Gerard & Dubois (1988) observed sporophytes of Saccharina latissima that were regularly exposed to ≥20°C tolerated these high temperatures, whereas sporophytes from other populations which rarely experience ≥17°C showed 100% mortality after 3 weeks of exposure to 20°C.

Saccharina latissima has suffered a dramatic decline in the Skagerrak region, Norway. Where community structure has shifted from Saccharina latissima forests to communities dominated by filamentous macroalgae (Moy & Christie, 2012). In 2006, Andersen et al. (2011) transplanted Saccharina latissima into areas from where this species had been lost previously to determine whether the kelp could grow and mature. High mortality occurred from August-November each year. In 2008, only six of the seventeen original transplanted Saccharina latissima sporophytes survived (approx. 65% mortality rate). All surviving sporophytes were heavily fouled by epiphytic organisms (estimated cover of 80 & 100%). Between 1960 and 2009, sea surface temperatures in the region had regularly exceeded 20°C and so had the duration at which temperatures remain above 20°C. High sea temperatures have been linked to the slow growth of Saccharina latissima which is likely due to a decrease in the photosynthetic ability of Saccharina latissima, and an increase in vulnerability to epiphytic loading, bacterial and viral attacks (Anderson et al., 2011).

Assis et al. (2018) predicted that, under the highest emission scenario (RCP 8.5), the range of Saccharina latissima and Saccorhiza polyschides would move northwards, retreating from their southernmost locations, and predicted the loss of Saccharina latissima from the south-west coast of the UK.  

Many of the red algae species associated with the understory turf can tolerate warm water temperatures. Corallina officinalis may tolerate between -4 to 28°C (Lüning, 1990), although when Colthart & Johansen (1973) exposed this species to a number of different temperatures, they found that growth was maintained at 18°C and ceased at 25°C. Abrupt temperature changes (10°C in California, Seapy & Littler 1984; 4.8 to 8.5°C, Hawkins & Hartnoll, 1985) resulted in dramatic declines. However, in both cases recovery was rapid, suggesting that the crustose bases survived. 

Sensitivity Assessment. UK populations of Saccharina latissima are found in the middle of the species distribution and are known to be able to survive at higher temperatures than currently experienced around the UK. The ability to tolerate summer seawater temperatures of >20°C in populations at their southern geographic limit is thought to be a genetic adaptation (Gerard & Du Bois, 1988), and maybe crucial in the persistence of this species around the UK, as seawater temperatures rise. In the UK, Saccorhiza polyschides is in the middle of its geographic range, so is unlikely to be affected by an increase of 3°C by the end of the century. However, a change in 4-5°C may put the species outside its lethal limits. 

With sea surface temperature around the UK of between 6-19°C (Huthnance, 2010), populations of Saccorhiza polyschides, Saccharina latissima, and the understorey community of mixed red seaweeds may be able to adapt to cope with a gradual rise in ocean temperatures of 3°C (middle emission scenario) by the end of this century, leading to maximum summer high temperatures in the south of the UK of 22°C. Therefore, resistance is assessed as ‘Medium’, and resilience is assessed as ‘Very Low’, as the loss is likely to be a long-term decline, due to the long-term nature of ocean warming. Therefore, this biotope is assessed as ‘Medium’ sensitivity to ocean warming in the middle emission scenario.

For the high emission scenario and extreme scenario, whereby sea temperatures rise by 4-5°C to potential southern summer temperatures of 23-24°C by the end of this century Saccorhiza polyschides and Saccharina latissima are likely to be lost from southern England. This assessment corresponds with the results of ecological niche modelling by Assis et al. (2018) who predicted that Saccharina latissima would be lost from the southwest coast of the UK, because of climate change.  Therefore, resistance is assessed as ‘Low’, and resilience is assessed as ‘Very low’. This biotope SlatSac is assessed as having ‘High’ sensitivity to ocean warming in the high and extreme emission scenarios.

Medium Very Low Medium
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: High
C: High

The distribution of kelp is strongly influenced by climatic conditions; therefore, kelp species are extremely sensitive to the ongoing ocean warming (Kain, 1979; Van Den Hoek, 1982; Breeman, 1990; Lüning, 1990; Assis et al., 2016; Smale, 2020). Northern distribution boundaries are set by winter temperatures that are lethal, or summer temperatures too low for growth and/or reproduction, whilst southern limits are set by high lethal summer temperatures or winter temperatures too high for induction of a crucial step in the life cycle (Breeman, 1990). 

Kelps have a high dependence on ocean temperatures, which make them highly vulnerable to ocean warming (Assis et al., 2014). As temperatures increase, populations found towards the upper limit of their temperature range may be adversely affected by warming as physiological thresholds are exceeded (Wiens, 2016). Thermal stress can lead to mortality and consequent population-level effects, such as decreased abundance, altered size structure, local extinction and range contractions (Smale, 2020). 

Saccorhiza polyschides is a fast-growing, short-lived opportunist species that rapidly colonizes cleared areas of the substratumSaccorhiza polyschides has a wide geographic distribution from Norway to Morocco and can tolerate a wide range of temperatures (Hawkins & Harkin 1985), with an upper survival temperature tolerance of 24°C (Dieck, 1993). Sporophyte growth can occur from 3-24°C and gametophyte development from 5-25°C (Norton, 1977). Fernández (2011) however suggested that summer temperatures of >20°C sustained for longer than a period of 30 days may inhibit development and recruitment.

Saccorhiza polyschides abundance has increased rapidly in the English Channel displacing cold water laminarian species in the intertidal (Birchenough et al., 2013). The abundance of Saccorhiza polyschides is predicted to increase in the UK as a response to ocean warming (Smale et al., 2013). However, studies conducted in Spain and Portugal have documented declines in abundance, range constrictions and local extinctions of Saccorhiza polyschides (Smale et al., 2020). 

Saccharina latissima is a polar to temperate macroalgae distributed from Greenland to the coast of Portugal, and in the NW Atlantic, is found as far south as New York State, USA. In the UK, sea surface temperatures are range between 6-19°C (Huthnance, 2010), and Saccharina latissima is in the middle of its biogeographic range. At its southern distribution in New York, temperatures can regularly reach ≥20°C for six weeks or more during summer months (Gerard & Du Bois, 1988).

Saccharina latissima has an optimal growth temperature between 10- 15°C, with growth reducing by 50-70% at 20°C, and all experimental specimens disintegrating after 7 days at 23°C (Bolton & Lüning, 1982). The temperature isotherm of 19-20°C has been reported as limiting Saccharina latissima growth (Müller et al., 2009). Temperature is an environmental factor controlling the development of the microscopic stages of Saccharina latissima, with crucial changes in survival, growth, and gametogenesis occurring within a few degrees of its upper thermal limits (Redmond, 2013). The optimal germination temperature for Saccharina latissima is between 2°C and 12°C, with gametophyte survival between 23-25°C (Müller et al., 2009). Germination rates drop at 22°C, with surviving gametophytes smaller than those grown at lower temperatures (Redmond, 2013). Park et al. (2017) observed reductions in the percentage of sporophytes produced at 15°C when compared to values produced at 5°C and 10°C. 

In the field, Saccharina latissima has shown significant regional variation in its acclimation response to changing environmental conditions.  For example, Gerard & Dubois (1988) observed sporophytes of Saccharina latissima that were regularly exposed to ≥20°C tolerated these high temperatures, whereas sporophytes from other populations which rarely experience ≥17°C showed 100% mortality after 3 weeks of exposure to 20°C.

Saccharina latissima has suffered a dramatic decline in the Skagerrak region, Norway. Where community structure has shifted from Saccharina latissima forests to communities dominated by filamentous macroalgae (Moy & Christie, 2012). In 2006, Andersen et al. (2011) transplanted Saccharina latissima into areas from where this species had been lost previously to determine whether the kelp could grow and mature. High mortality occurred from August-November each year. In 2008, only six of the seventeen original transplanted Saccharina latissima sporophytes survived (approx. 65% mortality rate). All surviving sporophytes were heavily fouled by epiphytic organisms (estimated cover of 80 & 100%). Between 1960 and 2009, sea surface temperatures in the region had regularly exceeded 20°C and so had the duration at which temperatures remain above 20°C. High sea temperatures have been linked to the slow growth of Saccharina latissima which is likely due to a decrease in the photosynthetic ability of Saccharina latissima, and an increase in vulnerability to epiphytic loading, bacterial and viral attacks (Anderson et al., 2011).

Assis et al. (2018) predicted that, under the highest emission scenario (RCP 8.5), the range of Saccharina latissima and Saccorhiza polyschides would move northwards, retreating from their southernmost locations, and predicted the loss of Saccharina latissima from the south-west coast of the UK.  

Many of the red algae species associated with the understory turf can tolerate warm water temperatures. Corallina officinalis may tolerate between -4 to 28°C (Lüning, 1990), although when Colthart & Johansen (1973) exposed this species to a number of different temperatures, they found that growth was maintained at 18°C and ceased at 25°C. Abrupt temperature changes (10°C in California, Seapy & Littler 1984; 4.8 to 8.5°C, Hawkins & Hartnoll, 1985) resulted in dramatic declines. However, in both cases recovery was rapid, suggesting that the crustose bases survived. 

Sensitivity Assessment. UK populations of Saccharina latissima are found in the middle of the species distribution and are known to be able to survive at higher temperatures than currently experienced around the UK. The ability to tolerate summer seawater temperatures of >20°C in populations at their southern geographic limit is thought to be a genetic adaptation (Gerard & Du Bois, 1988), and maybe crucial in the persistence of this species around the UK, as seawater temperatures rise. In the UK, Saccorhiza polyschides is in the middle of its geographic range, so is unlikely to be affected by an increase of 3°C by the end of the century. However, a change in 4-5°C may put the species outside its lethal limits. 

With sea surface temperature around the UK of between 6-19°C (Huthnance, 2010), populations of Saccorhiza polyschides, Saccharina latissima, and the understorey community of mixed red seaweeds may be able to adapt to cope with a gradual rise in ocean temperatures of 3°C (middle emission scenario) by the end of this century, leading to maximum summer high temperatures in the south of the UK of 22°C. Therefore, resistance is assessed as ‘Medium’, and resilience is assessed as ‘Very Low’, as the loss is likely to be a long-term decline, due to the long-term nature of ocean warming. Therefore, this biotope is assessed as ‘Medium’ sensitivity to ocean warming in the middle emission scenario.

For the high emission scenario and extreme scenario, whereby sea temperatures rise by 4-5°C to potential southern summer temperatures of 23-24°C by the end of this century Saccorhiza polyschides and Saccharina latissima are likely to be lost from southern England. This assessment corresponds with the results of ecological niche modelling by Assis et al. (2018) who predicted that Saccharina latissima would be lost from the southwest coast of the UK, because of climate change.  Therefore, resistance is assessed as ‘Low’, and resilience is assessed as ‘Very low’. This biotope SlatSac is assessed as having ‘High’ sensitivity to ocean warming in the high and extreme emission scenarios.

None Very Low High
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: High
C: High

Marine heatwaves are extreme weather events defined as periods of extreme sea surface temperature that persists for days to months (Frölicher et al., 2018). Marine heatwaves 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). Marine heatwaves are known to cause significant impacts to kelp forests, particularly if a population is found towards the edge of its southern limit (Smale et al., 2019). 

Saccharina latissima has disappeared almost completely from the Danish estuary Limfjorden, where maximum surface temperatures in summer have increased by 0.7°C per decade over the last 40 years while the number of days with temperatures above 20°C has increased dramatically from 1-2 days year to >25 days year (Pedersen, 2015). Similarly, Saccharina latissima has been lost from the Skagerrak coast of Norway, which is thought to be due to an increase in summer temperatures, coupled with eutrophication (Moy & Christie, 2012).

Under experimental conditions, Nepper-Davidson et al. (2019) exposed a northern (Denmark) population of Saccharina latissima to a simulated three-week heatwave of three different intensities; 18, 21 and 24°C. When exposed to heatwaves of 18 and 21°C there was a decrease in photosynthesis and growth. When a 24°C was simulated, 91% of sporophytes were dead within a week, and the fronds of the few survivors were disintegrating, so the experiment was terminated (Nepper-Davidsen et al., 2019). These results suggest that this species is unlikely to survive heatwaves of the length and magnitude predicted by the end of this century for both the middle and high emission scenarios.

Simonson et al. (2015) investigated the impacts of four temperature treatments (11°C, 14°C, 18°C & 21°C) on Saccharina latissima tissue over three weeksHistological analysis showed temperature mediated tissue damage, including holes, splitting of the medulla, damage to the meristoderm and loss of differentiation between tissue layers at temperatures between 14-21°C. 

Studies conducted in Spain and Portugal have documented declines in abundance, range constrictions and local extinctions of Saccorhiza polyschides (Smale et al., 2020). A long-term study has shown a significant decrease in Saccorhiza polyschides populations with decreases in the number of reproductive plants and recruitment, which suggested that the long warm summer periods of temperatures above 20°C sustained for over 30 days could be altering the kelps survival (Fernàndez, 2011). 

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. A heatwave of this magnitude is likely to cause mass mortality of Saccharina latissima and severe mortality of Saccorhiza polyschides. Therefore, resistance has been assessed as ‘None’. As widespread mortality may lead to a lack of viable sporophytes for recruitment, resilience has been assessed as ‘Very low.’ This biotope IR.HIR.KSed.Sac is assessed as having ‘High’ sensitivity to marine heatwaves under the middle emission scenario.

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. Under this scenario, Saccorhiza polyschides and Saccharina latissima. are likely to be already lost from this biotope as a result of rising temperatures (see Global warming), although mortality of any surviving specimens would occur as a result of this projected heatwave. Therefore, resistance has been assessed as ‘None’. As widespread mortality may lead to a lack of viable sporophytes for recruitment, resilience has been assessed as ‘Very low.’ Therefore, this biotope IR.HIR.KSed.Sac is assessed as having ‘High’ sensitivity to marine heatwaves under the high emission scenario.

None Very Low High
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: High
C: High

Marine heatwaves are extreme weather events defined as periods of extreme sea surface temperature that persists for days to months (Frölicher et al., 2018). Marine heatwaves 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). Marine heatwaves are known to cause significant impacts to kelp forests, particularly if a population is found towards the edge of its southern limit (Smale et al., 2019). 

Saccharina latissima has disappeared almost completely from the Danish estuary Limfjorden, where maximum surface temperatures in summer have increased by 0.7°C per decade over the last 40 years while the number of days with temperatures above 20°C has increased dramatically from 1-2 days year to >25 days year (Pedersen, 2015). Similarly, Saccharina latissima has been lost from the Skagerrak coast of Norway, which is thought to be due to an increase in summer temperatures, coupled with eutrophication (Moy & Christie, 2012).

Under experimental conditions, Nepper-Davidson et al. (2019) exposed a northern (Denmark) population of Saccharina latissima to a simulated three-week heatwave of three different intensities; 18, 21 and 24°C. When exposed to heatwaves of 18 and 21°C there was a decrease in photosynthesis and growth. When a 24°C was simulated, 91% of sporophytes were dead within a week, and the fronds of the few survivors were disintegrating, so the experiment was terminated (Nepper-Davidsen et al., 2019). These results suggest that this species is unlikely to survive heatwaves of the length and magnitude predicted by the end of this century for both the middle and high emission scenarios.

Simonson et al. (2015) investigated the impacts of four temperature treatments (11°C, 14°C, 18°C & 21°C) on Saccharina latissima tissue over three weeksHistological analysis showed temperature mediated tissue damage, including holes, splitting of the medulla, damage to the meristoderm and loss of differentiation between tissue layers at temperatures between 14-21°C. 

Studies conducted in Spain and Portugal have documented declines in abundance, range constrictions and local extinctions of Saccorhiza polyschides (Smale et al., 2020). A long-term study has shown a significant decrease in Saccorhiza polyschides populations with decreases in the number of reproductive plants and recruitment, which suggested that the long warm summer periods of temperatures above 20°C sustained for over 30 days could be altering the kelps survival (Fernàndez, 2011). 

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. A heatwave of this magnitude is likely to cause mass mortality of Saccharina latissima and severe mortality of Saccorhiza polyschides. Therefore, resistance has been assessed as ‘None’. As widespread mortality may lead to a lack of viable sporophytes for recruitment, resilience has been assessed as ‘Very low.’ This biotope IR.HIR.KSed.Sac is assessed as having ‘High’ sensitivity to marine heatwaves under the middle emission scenario.

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. Under this scenario, Saccorhiza polyschides and Saccharina latissima. are likely to be already lost from this biotope as a result of rising temperatures (see Global warming), although mortality of any surviving specimens would occur as a result of this projected heatwave. Therefore, resistance has been assessed as ‘None’. As widespread mortality may lead to a lack of viable sporophytes for recruitment, resilience has been assessed as ‘Very low.’ Therefore, this biotope IR.HIR.KSed.Sac is assessed as having ‘High’ sensitivity to marine heatwaves under the high emission scenario.

High High Not sensitive
Q: High
A: Medium
C: Medium
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: Medium
C: Medium

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), with it expected to drop up to a further 0.35 units by the end of this century, dependent on emission scenario. Marine autotrophs will generally benefit from ocean acidification, through an increase in the availability of aqueous COfor photosynthesis (Koch et al., 2013). 

Research on most kelp species has revealed a positive or neutral effect of ocean acidification (Roleda et al., 2012, Fernández et al., 2015, Nunes et al., 2015, Iñiguez et al., 2016b, a), except for one study, that found ocean acidification negatively impacted photosynthesis and growth in the southern hemisphere species, Ecklonia radiata (Britton et al., 2016).

Under experimental COenrichment at levels expected by the end of this century, germination rates in Saccharina latissima were the same as control samples but gametophyte size increased, suggesting a benefit for juvenile stages of this species (Roleda et al., 2012). Nunes et al. (2015) found that experimental exposure of adult Saccharina latissima to enhanced CO2 led to an increase in net primary production, whilst Gordillo et al. (2015) found that enhanced CO2 led to increased photosynthesis and growth. In contrast, Iñiguez et al. (2016) found no increase in carbon fixation under elevated CO2 conditions. Whilst contrasting in findings, these studies suggest that ocean acidification will not negatively impact Saccharina latissima. No evidence of the effect of ocean acidification on Saccorhiza polyschides was found. 

Corallina officinalis is a highly calcified, erect, red algae. Results of experimental COenrichment suggest that this species could be significantly negatively affected by future ocean acidification. Hofmann et al. (2012) found that growth and photosynthesis decreased as a result of a 0.3 unit decrease in pH. Further investigation showed that skeletal CaCO3 decreased with increasing COat levels expected for both the middle emission and high emission scenarios, although this decrease was small (< 2%) (Hofmann et al., 2013). Yildiz et al. (2013) showed that although CaCO3 decreased in Corallina officinalis as a result of ocean acidification, photosynthesis increased. When ocean acidification was combined with an increase in UV radiation, which led to an increase in growth rate. They summarised that a decrease in CaCO3 content may not be negative but may lead to this species absorbing and using light differently. Brodie et al. (2014) reported that Corallina species were more resilient to ocean acidification than other calcified algae species, although competition from flesh algal species that benefit from high CO2 may indirectly cause the loss of calcified species from biotopes. Similarly, observations have indicated Corallinales to be adversely affected at locations where CO2 gradients occur naturally, with evidence of Corallinales being outcompeted by heterokont algae at Mediterranean CO2 seeps (Martin & Hall-Spencer, 2017).  

Sensitivity Assessment. Kelp forests live in a naturally variable pH habitat, with diel fluctuations of 0.3 - 0.45 pH units (Krause-Jensen et al., 2015, Britton et al., 2016), and boundary layer pH fluctuation of up to 0.8 units (Krause-Jensen et al., 2015). Saccharina latissima is not expected to exhibit negative effects from ocean acidification at levels expected for the end of this century, and Saccorhiza polyschides may not be affected. Due to the disturbed nature of the biotope, the understorey community can vary locally, therefore impacts on the understory community have not been included in the assessment. Under both the middle and high emission scenario resistance is assessed as ‘High’, and resilience is assessed as ‘High’ so that sensitivity is assessed as ‘Not sensitive’.

High High Not sensitive
Q: High
A: Medium
C: Medium
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: Medium
C: Medium

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), with it expected to drop up to a further 0.35 units by the end of this century, dependent on emission scenario. Marine autotrophs will generally benefit from ocean acidification, through an increase in the availability of aqueous COfor photosynthesis (Koch et al., 2013). 

Research on most kelp species has revealed a positive or neutral effect of ocean acidification (Roleda et al., 2012, Fernández et al., 2015, Nunes et al., 2015, Iñiguez et al., 2016b, a), except for one study, that found ocean acidification negatively impacted photosynthesis and growth in the southern hemisphere species, Ecklonia radiata (Britton et al., 2016).

Under experimental COenrichment at levels expected by the end of this century, germination rates in Saccharina latissima were the same as control samples but gametophyte size increased, suggesting a benefit for juvenile stages of this species (Roleda et al., 2012). Nunes et al. (2015) found that experimental exposure of adult Saccharina latissima to enhanced CO2 led to an increase in net primary production, whilst Gordillo et al. (2015) found that enhanced CO2 led to increased photosynthesis and growth. In contrast, Iñiguez et al. (2016) found no increase in carbon fixation under elevated CO2 conditions. Whilst contrasting in findings, these studies suggest that ocean acidification will not negatively impact Saccharina latissima. No evidence of the effect of ocean acidification on Saccorhiza polyschides was found. 

Corallina officinalis is a highly calcified, erect, red algae. Results of experimental COenrichment suggest that this species could be significantly negatively affected by future ocean acidification. Hofmann et al. (2012) found that growth and photosynthesis decreased as a result of a 0.3 unit decrease in pH. Further investigation showed that skeletal CaCO3 decreased with increasing COat levels expected for both the middle emission and high emission scenarios, although this decrease was small (< 2%) (Hofmann et al., 2013). Yildiz et al. (2013) showed that although CaCO3 decreased in Corallina officinalis as a result of ocean acidification, photosynthesis increased. When ocean acidification was combined with an increase in UV radiation, which led to an increase in growth rate. They summarised that a decrease in CaCO3 content may not be negative but may lead to this species absorbing and using light differently. Brodie et al. (2014) reported that Corallina species were more resilient to ocean acidification than other calcified algae species, although competition from flesh algal species that benefit from high CO2 may indirectly cause the loss of calcified species from biotopes. Similarly, observations have indicated Corallinales to be adversely affected at locations where CO2 gradients occur naturally, with evidence of Corallinales being outcompeted by heterokont algae at Mediterranean CO2 seeps (Martin & Hall-Spencer, 2017).  

Sensitivity Assessment. Kelp forests live in a naturally variable pH habitat, with diel fluctuations of 0.3 - 0.45 pH units (Krause-Jensen et al., 2015, Britton et al., 2016), and boundary layer pH fluctuation of up to 0.8 units (Krause-Jensen et al., 2015). Saccharina latissima is not expected to exhibit negative effects from ocean acidification at levels expected for the end of this century, and Saccorhiza polyschides may not be affected. Due to the disturbed nature of the biotope, the understorey community can vary locally, therefore impacts on the understory community have not been included in the assessment. Under both the middle and high emission scenario resistance is assessed as ‘High’, and resilience is assessed as ‘High’ so that sensitivity is assessed as ‘Not sensitive’.

Low Very Low High
Q: Low
A: NR
C: NR
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: Low
A: Low
C: Low

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). Sea-level rise is expected to lead to substantial loss of intertidal habitats. Rocky shores backed by cliffs constitute about 80% of oceanic coastlines globally and in Britain, 42% of the coastline is hard rock, with many areas having cliffs behind the shore (Jackson & McIlvenny, 2011).

Light availability and water turbidity are principal factors in determining kelp depth range (Birkett et al. 1998b), with laminarians being reported to be able to withstand light levels of up to 1% surface irradiance. In Maine, USA, Saccharina latissima is abundant at both turbid and deep sites where surface irradiance averages 2.5% surface irradiance and has adapted to low-light conditions (Gerard, 1990).

This biotope IR.HIR.KSed.Sac occurs on very exposed, exposed and moderately exposed infralittoral and sublittoral bedrock and boulders (JNCC, 2015). Both Saccharina latissima and Saccorhiza polyschides occur in a wide range of water flow rates, from strong tidal currents to areas with low wave exposure (Norton, 1978; Birkett et al., 1998b). Therefore, these species are unlikely to be affected by a change in water flow. 

Understanding how sea-level rise will affect 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.

Sensitivity assessment. The IR.HIR.KSed.Sac biotope occurs in disturbed areas on seasonally unstable boulders and/or sand/pebble scour (JNCC, 2015). Disturbance, in particular, due to winter storms prevents long-lived kelps (e.g., Laminaria hyperborea) from becoming established so that the biotope is dominated by opportunistic kelps and other fast-growing brown macroalgae.  

This biotope may be able to expand its range and migrate landwards to compensate for sea-level rise, if not constrained by lack of tide-swept rock, or human-modified shorelines (IPCC, 2019). If landward migration is not possible, it is expected that depth distribution of this biotope will shrink substantially in response to a 50, 70 or 107 cm sea-level rise, without the possibility of recovery, due to the increased depth, leading to a reduction in light availability for photosynthesis. More importantly, in areas where wave action is the greatest contributor to water movement and, hence, scour, especially due to storms, an increase in sea-level is likely to reduce the depth of this biotope as the substratum becomes more stable and opportunistic kelps are outcompeted by other macroalgae. This biotope will probably be replaced by another disturbed kelp dominated biotope such as IR.HIR.KSed.SlatSac, which occurs at greater depths than KSed.Sac.

There is likely to be considerable variation between sites, the relative contribution of wave surge and exposure to habitat suitability, and the depth range occupied by the biotope. Hence, it is difficult to assess the effect of the different sea-level rise scenarios. However, this biotope (KSed.Sac) is recorded from the sublittoral fringe to 5 m in depth but ‘generally above 5 m’ (JNCC, 2015). Therefore, it is assumed at a sea-level rise of 50 cm, or 70 cm (middle to high emission scenarios) may result in a change of biotope, but that a 107cm rise (the extreme emission scenario) might result in a significant loss of some of the deeper extent of the biotope in some sites. Therefore, resistance is assessed as ‘Medium’ under the middle and high emission scenarios so that resilience is ‘Very low’ and sensitivity assessed as ‘Medium’. However, resistance may be ‘Low’ under the extreme emission scenario so that resilience is ‘Very low’ and sensitivity assessed as ‘High’, albeit with ‘Low’ confidence as the assessments are based on ‘expert judgement’. 

Medium Very Low Medium
Q: Low
A: NR
C: NR
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: Low
A: Low
C: Low

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). Sea-level rise is expected to lead to substantial loss of intertidal habitats. Rocky shores backed by cliffs constitute about 80% of oceanic coastlines globally and in Britain, 42% of the coastline is hard rock, with many areas having cliffs behind the shore (Jackson & McIlvenny, 2011).

Light availability and water turbidity are principal factors in determining kelp depth range (Birkett et al. 1998b), with laminarians being reported to be able to withstand light levels of up to 1% surface irradiance. In Maine, USA, Saccharina latissima is abundant at both turbid and deep sites where surface irradiance averages 2.5% surface irradiance and has adapted to low-light conditions (Gerard, 1990).

This biotope IR.HIR.KSed.Sac occurs on very exposed, exposed and moderately exposed infralittoral and sublittoral bedrock and boulders (JNCC, 2015). Both Saccharina latissima and Saccorhiza polyschides occur in a wide range of water flow rates, from strong tidal currents to areas with low wave exposure (Norton, 1978; Birkett et al., 1998b). Therefore, these species are unlikely to be affected by a change in water flow. 

Understanding how sea-level rise will affect 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.

Sensitivity assessment. The IR.HIR.KSed.Sac biotope occurs in disturbed areas on seasonally unstable boulders and/or sand/pebble scour (JNCC, 2015). Disturbance, in particular, due to winter storms prevents long-lived kelps (e.g., Laminaria hyperborea) from becoming established so that the biotope is dominated by opportunistic kelps and other fast-growing brown macroalgae.  

This biotope may be able to expand its range and migrate landwards to compensate for sea-level rise, if not constrained by lack of tide-swept rock, or human-modified shorelines (IPCC, 2019). If landward migration is not possible, it is expected that depth distribution of this biotope will shrink substantially in response to a 50, 70 or 107 cm sea-level rise, without the possibility of recovery, due to the increased depth, leading to a reduction in light availability for photosynthesis. More importantly, in areas where wave action is the greatest contributor to water movement and, hence, scour, especially due to storms, an increase in sea-level is likely to reduce the depth of this biotope as the substratum becomes more stable and opportunistic kelps are outcompeted by other macroalgae. This biotope will probably be replaced by another disturbed kelp dominated biotope such as IR.HIR.KSed.SlatSac, which occurs at greater depths than KSed.Sac.

There is likely to be considerable variation between sites, the relative contribution of wave surge and exposure to habitat suitability, and the depth range occupied by the biotope. Hence, it is difficult to assess the effect of the different sea-level rise scenarios. However, this biotope (KSed.Sac) is recorded from the sublittoral fringe to 5 m in depth but ‘generally above 5 m’ (JNCC, 2015). Therefore, it is assumed at a sea-level rise of 50 cm, or 70 cm (middle to high emission scenarios) may result in a change of biotope, but that a 107cm rise (the extreme emission scenario) might result in a significant loss of some of the deeper extent of the biotope in some sites. Therefore, resistance is assessed as ‘Medium’ under the middle and high emission scenarios so that resilience is ‘Very low’ and sensitivity assessed as ‘Medium’. However, resistance may be ‘Low’ under the extreme emission scenario so that resilience is ‘Very low’ and sensitivity assessed as ‘High’, albeit with ‘Low’ confidence as the assessments are based on ‘expert judgement’. 

Medium Very Low Medium
Q: Low
A: NR
C: NR
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: Low
A: Low
C: Low

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). Sea-level rise is expected to lead to substantial loss of intertidal habitats. Rocky shores backed by cliffs constitute about 80% of oceanic coastlines globally and in Britain, 42% of the coastline is hard rock, with many areas having cliffs behind the shore (Jackson & McIlvenny, 2011).

Light availability and water turbidity are principal factors in determining kelp depth range (Birkett et al. 1998b), with laminarians being reported to be able to withstand light levels of up to 1% surface irradiance. In Maine, USA, Saccharina latissima is abundant at both turbid and deep sites where surface irradiance averages 2.5% surface irradiance and has adapted to low-light conditions (Gerard, 1990).

This biotope IR.HIR.KSed.Sac occurs on very exposed, exposed and moderately exposed infralittoral and sublittoral bedrock and boulders (JNCC, 2015). Both Saccharina latissima and Saccorhiza polyschides occur in a wide range of water flow rates, from strong tidal currents to areas with low wave exposure (Norton, 1978; Birkett et al., 1998b). Therefore, these species are unlikely to be affected by a change in water flow. 

Understanding how sea-level rise will affect 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.

Sensitivity assessment. The IR.HIR.KSed.Sac biotope occurs in disturbed areas on seasonally unstable boulders and/or sand/pebble scour (JNCC, 2015). Disturbance, in particular, due to winter storms prevents long-lived kelps (e.g., Laminaria hyperborea) from becoming established so that the biotope is dominated by opportunistic kelps and other fast-growing brown macroalgae.  

This biotope may be able to expand its range and migrate landwards to compensate for sea-level rise, if not constrained by lack of tide-swept rock, or human-modified shorelines (IPCC, 2019). If landward migration is not possible, it is expected that depth distribution of this biotope will shrink substantially in response to a 50, 70 or 107 cm sea-level rise, without the possibility of recovery, due to the increased depth, leading to a reduction in light availability for photosynthesis. More importantly, in areas where wave action is the greatest contributor to water movement and, hence, scour, especially due to storms, an increase in sea-level is likely to reduce the depth of this biotope as the substratum becomes more stable and opportunistic kelps are outcompeted by other macroalgae. This biotope will probably be replaced by another disturbed kelp dominated biotope such as IR.HIR.KSed.SlatSac, which occurs at greater depths than KSed.Sac.

There is likely to be considerable variation between sites, the relative contribution of wave surge and exposure to habitat suitability, and the depth range occupied by the biotope. Hence, it is difficult to assess the effect of the different sea-level rise scenarios. However, this biotope (KSed.Sac) is recorded from the sublittoral fringe to 5 m in depth but ‘generally above 5 m’ (JNCC, 2015). Therefore, it is assumed at a sea-level rise of 50 cm, or 70 cm (middle to high emission scenarios) may result in a change of biotope, but that a 107cm rise (the extreme emission scenario) might result in a significant loss of some of the deeper extent of the biotope in some sites. Therefore, resistance is assessed as ‘Medium’ under the middle and high emission scenarios so that resilience is ‘Very low’ and sensitivity assessed as ‘Medium’. However, resistance may be ‘Low’ under the extreme emission scenario so that resilience is ‘Very low’ and sensitivity assessed as ‘High’, albeit with ‘Low’ confidence as the assessments are based on ‘expert judgement’. 

Hydrological Pressures

Use / to open/close text displayedResistanceResilienceSensitivity
None High Medium
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: High
C: High

Saccorhiza polyschides has a wide geographic distribution and can tolerate a wide range of temperatures. Sporophyte growth can occur from 3-24°C and gametophyte development from 5-25°C (Norton, 1977). Fernández (2011) however suggested that summer temperatures of >20°C sustained for longer than a period of 30 days may inhibit development and recruitment.

Desmarestiales are unusual in that they produce and accumulate sulphuric acid within intracellular vacuoles (McClintock et al., 1982; Connor et al., 2004; Gagnon et al., 2013). Seasonal increases in temperatures limit the ability of the storage vacuoles to contain the acid and release it into the surrounding environment. The continued release of acid results in progressive decolourisation, tissue degradation and mortality of Desmarestia sporophytes (Gagnon et al., 2013). Gagnon et al. (2013) exposed Desmarestia viridis samples during 30 hour salinity and temperature treatments. At 29 and 32psu (MNCR: Full Salinity scale), Desmarestia viridis was able to tolerant to changes in temperature from 5-12°C, but exposure to 18°C was lethal to sporophytes.

The geographic distribution of Saccharina latissima is determined by the 19-20°C isotherm (Müller et al., 2009). Gametophytes can develop in ≤23°C (Lüning, 1990), but the optimal temperature range for sporophyte growth is 10-15°C (Bolton & Lüning, 1982).  Bolton & Lüning (1982) experimentally observed that sporophyte growth was inhibited by 50-70% at 20°C and following 7 days at 23°C all specimens completely disintegrated. In the field, Saccharina latissima has significant regional variation in its acclimation to temperature change. For example, Gerard & Dubois (1988) observed sporophytes of Saccharina latissima which were regularly exposed to ≥20°C could tolerate these temperatures whereas sporophytes from other populations which rarely experience ≥17°C showed 100% mortality after 3 weeks of exposure to 20°C. Therefore, the response of Saccharina latissima to a change in temperatures is likely to be locally variable.

Anderson et al. (2011) transplanted Saccharina latissima from the Skagerrak region, Norway an area which has experienced a 50.7-83% Saccharina latissima decline since 2002 (Moy & Christie, 2012). Since 1960-2009 sea surface temperatures in the region have regularly exceeded 20°C (the temperature at which Saccharina latissima growth is severely inhibited) and so has the number of days which remain above 20°C. Anderson et al. (2011) hypothesised that high sea temperatures were indirectly linked to Saccharina latissima deforestation in the region, causing high epiphytic loading of sporophyte fronds (estimated to cover 80 & 100% of transplanted sporophytes). High sea temperatures have been linked to the slow growth of Saccharina latissima which is likely to decrease the photosynthetic ability of, and increase the vulnerability of Saccharina latissima to epiphytic loading, bacterial and viral attacks (Anderson et al., 2011).

Desmarestiales are sensitive to high temperatures and low salinities (Gagnon et al., 2013). Desmarestiales are unusual in that they produce and accumulate sulphuric acid (H2SO4) within intracellular vacuoles (McClintock et al., 1982; Connor et al., 2004; Gagnon et al., 2013). Increases in temperatures and low salinities limit the ability of the storage vacuoles to contain the acid and release it into the surrounding environment. The continued release of acid results in progressive decolourisation, tissue degradation and mortality of Desmarestia sporophytes (Gagnon et al., 2013). Gagnon et al. (2013) exposed Desmarestia viridis samples during 30 hour salinity and temperature treatments, observing at 29 and 32 psu (MNCR: Full Salinity scale) Desmarestia viridis was tolerant to changes in temperature from 5-12°C, exposure to 18°C was lethal to sporophytes. Furthermore, sporophytes that had already begun the senescence phase were exposed to 10.8 ± 0.3°C and completely shed all tissue from the stipe and laterals within ca15 days, whereas those exposed to lower temperatures of 2.5± 0.1°C lasted ca30 days. Gagnon et al. (2013) also observed Desmarestia spp. degraded progressively in low salinity treatments of 26, 23 & 20psu (<20psu was not tested). Therefore indicating Desmarestia spp. are highly sensitive to both high temperature (12-18°C) and low salinities (<26 psu).

IR.HIR.KSed.Sac, IR.HIR.KSed.SlatSac, IR.HIR.KSed.DesFilR, IR.HIR.KSed.XKScrR are distributed throughout the UK (Connor et al., 2004). Northern to southern Sea Surface Temperature (SST) ranges from 8-16°C in summer and 6-13°C in winter (Beszczynska-Möller & Dye, 2013)

Sensitivity assessment. Acute 5°C increases in temperature for a period of 1 month combined with high summer temperatures may exceed the threshold temperature of 18-20°C in biotopes within the south of the UK, which would likely cause mortality of Desmarestia spp., and severely limit Saccorhiza polyschides recruitment & Saccharina latissima sporophyte growth. A 2°C increase in temperature for a period of 1 year would likely result in the exceeding an 18°C temperature threshold in the south of the UK. This temperature threshold would likely result in high mortality of Desmarestia spp. Saccharina latissima that is not acclimated to similar temperatures may also experience high and rapid mortality. Resistance has been assessed as ‘None’, Resilience as ‘High’. Sensitivity has been assessed as ‘Medium’.

Low High Low
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: High
C: High

Demarestia spp. are a cold water adapted genus with a polar distribution, which can grow abundantly in water temperatures of ca 0.5°C (Gagnon et al., 2013).  Saccharina latissima is also widely spread throughout the Arctic and has a lower temperature threshold for sporophyte growth at 0°C (Lüning, 1990). Subtidal red algae can survive at -2°C (Lüning, 1990; Kain & Norton, 1990). These temperatures are well below that considered within this pressure benchmark. Demarestia spp. Saccharina latissima are therefore unlikely to be adversely affected by a decrease in temperature at the benchmark level.

Saccorhiza polyschides sporophyte growth can occur within a range from 3-24°C and gametophyte development within a range of 5-25°C (Norton, 1977). Norton (1977) experimentally observed that at 3-5°C gametophytes failed to develop into viable sporophytes. This temperature range also corresponds with Saccorhiza polyschides northern range edge (ca 65° 35’N, mid-Norway), above which the average winter temperature is ≤4°C (U.S. Navy, 1958).

IR.HIR.KSed.Sac, IR.HIR.KSed.SlatSac, IR.HIR.KSed.DesFilR, and IR.HIR.KSed.XKScrR are distributed throughout the UK (Connor et al., 2004). Northern to southern Sea Surface Temperature (SST) ranges from 8-16°C in summer and 6-13°C in winter (Beszczynska-Möller & Dye, 2013)

Sensitivity assessment. Both long-term and acute temperature decrease 2-5°C combined with low winter temperatures could negatively affect Saccorhiza polyschides recruitment in biotopes located in the north of the UK. Resistance has been assessed as ‘Low’, resilience as ‘High’. Sensitivity has been assessed as ‘Low’.

 

Low High Low
Q: Medium
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: Low
C: High
Q: Medium
A: Low
C: High

Lüning (1990) suggest that kelps are stenohaline, their general tolerance to salinity as a phenotypic group covering 16-50 PSU over a 24 hr period. Optimal growth probably occurring between 30-35 PSU (MNCR category-Full Salinity) and growth rates are likely to be affected by periodic salinity stress. Birkett et al. (1998) suggested that long-term increases in salinity may affect kelp growth and may result in loss of affected kelp, and, therefore, loss of the biotope.

Karsten (2007) tested the photosynthetic ability of Saccharina latissima under acute 2 & 5 day exposure to salinity treatments ranging from 5-60 psu. A control experiment was also carried at 34 PSU (Salinity under normal marine conditions). Between 25-55 PSU Saccharina latissima had a high photosynthetic ability at >80% of the control levels.

Sensitivity assessment. The evidence suggests that Saccharina latissima can tolerate exposure to hypersaline conditions of ≥40‰ (MNCR full salinity range=30-40‰). Optimal salinities for other kelps are assumed to be 30-35 PSU. Hypersaline tolerances for Desmarestia spp. are unknown. Resistance has been assessed as ‘Low’, resilience as ‘High’. The sensitivity of this biotope to an increase in salinity has been assessed as ‘Low’.

Low High Low
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: High
C: High

Saccorhiza polyschides is affected by low salinities. Norton & South (1969) observed at ≤9‰ zoospores often burst due to internal osmotic pressure and none developed. At ≤25‰,  only 25% of gametophytes germinated and at ≤20‰ sporophyte growth was often retarded. At ≤35‰, 76% of gametophytes germinated. These results demonstrate that at ≤25‰ recruitment may be inhibited and sporophyte growth retarded.

Karsten (2007) tested the photosynthetic ability of Saccharina latissima under acute 2 & 5 day exposure to salinity treatments ranging from 5-60 psu. A control experiment was also carried at 34 psu (Salinity under normal marine conditions). Between 25-55 psu Saccharina latissima had a high photosynthetic ability at >80% of the control levels. Hyposaline treatment of 10-20 psu led to a gradual decline of photosynthetic ability. After 2 days at 5 psu Saccharina latissima s photosynthetic ability was ~30% of control. After 5 days at 5 psu Saccharina latissima specimens became bleached and showed signs of severe damage. The experiment was conducted on Saccharina latissima from the Arctic, and the authors suggest that at extremely low water temperatures (1-5°C) macroalgae acclimation to rapid salinity changes could be slower than at temperate latitudes. It is, therefore, possible that Saccharina latissima of the UK may be able to acclimate to salinity changes more effectively and quicker.

Gagnon et al. (2013) observed Desmarestia spp. sporophytes degraded progressively in low salinity treatments of 26, 23 & 20 psu (<20 psu was not tested). Desmarestia spp. accumulate sulphuric acid throughout the growth season which is released when the sporophyte becomes stressed under high temperatures or low salinities. Acid release causes progressive degradation of the sporophyte and mortality. Gagnon et al. (2013) exposed Desmarestia viridis samples during 30 hour salinity and temperature treatments, observing Desmarestia spp. degraded progressively in low salinity treatments of 26, 23 & 20psu (<20psu was not tested).

Sensitivity assessment. A decrease in one MNCR salinity scale from “Full Salinity” (30-40psu) to “Reduced Salinity” (18-30 psu) may result in mortality of Desmarestia spp. inhibit Saccorhiza polyschides recruitment and inhibit Saccharina latissima photosynthesis. Resistance has been assessed as ‘Low’ resilience as ‘High’. The sensitivity of this biotope to a decrease in salinity has been assessed as ‘Low’.

High High Not sensitive
Q: Medium
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: Medium
A: High
C: High

Peteiro & Freire (2013) measured Saccharina latissima growth from 2 sites, the 1st had maximal water velocities of 0.3 m/sec and the 2nd 0.1 m/sec. At site 1 Saccharina latissima had significantly larger biomass than at site 2 (16kg /m to 12 kg /m respectively). Peteiro & Freire (2013) suggested that faster water velocities were beneficial to Saccharina latissima growth. However, Gerard & Mann (1979) measured Saccharina latissima productivity at greater water velocities and found Saccharina latissima productivity is reduced in moderately strong tidal streams (≤1m/sec) when compared to weak tidal streams (<0.5m/sec).

IR.HIR.KSed.SlatSac can be found from very strong (>3m/sec) to very weak tidal streams. IR.HIR.KSed.Sac, IR.HIR.KSed.DesFilR, IR.HIR.KSed.XKScrR can be found from moderately strong (0.5-1.5m/sec) to weak tidal streams (0.5m/sec). An increase in tidal flow may increase local sediment mobility and scour, potentially increasing dislodgment of kelps (Birket et al., 1998) and Desmarestia spp.

Sensitivity assessment. Due to the range of tidal streams which these biotopes can be found a change of 0.1m/s to 0.2m/s, is not likely to dramatically affect biotope structure. Resistance has been assessed as ‘High’, resilience as ‘High’. Sensitivity has been assessed as ‘Not Sensitive’.

Low High Low
Q: Low
A: NR
C: NR
Q: High
A: Low
C: High
Q: Low
A: NR
C: NR

IR.HIR.KSed.Sac and IR.HIR.KSed.XKScr can be found on the sublittoral fringe rock so that the characterizing species would be exposed during low spring tides. IR.HIR.KSed.SlatSac and IR.HIR.KSed.DesFilR are found in the infralittoral and as such would only be exposed on extreme low tides (Connor et al., 2004).

An increase in emergence will result in an increased risk of desiccation and mortality of the dominant seaweeds (Desmarestia spp., Saccorhiza polyschides, Saccharina latissima). Removal of canopy forming seaweeds has also been shown to increase desiccation and mortality of the understorey macroalgae (Hawkins & Harkin, 1985). Providing that suitable substrata are present, the biotope is likely to re-establish further down the shore within a similar emergence regime to that which existed previously.  A decrease in emergence could, however, result in  the extension of the biotope further up the shore, although its lower limit is still probably controlled by light penetration, competition and grazing so that entire extent of the biotope may  move.

Sensitivity assessment. Resistance has been assessed as ‘Low’. Resilience as ‘High’. The sensitivity of this biotope to a change in emergence is considered as ‘Low’.

High High Not sensitive
Q: Low
A: NR
C: NR
Q: High
A: Low
C: High
Q: Low
A: NR
C: NR

IR.HIR.KSed.Sac, IR.HIR.KSed.SlatSac, IR.HIR.KSed.DesFilR, IR.HIR.KSed.XKScrR are recorded from extremely exposed to wave sheltered sites and characterized by rapidly colonizing macro-algae (Connor et al., 2004). As a result, of rapid recovery, the community is relatively resistant to disturbance when compared to other kelp biotopes (e.g. IR.HIR.Kfar.LhypR). Birkett et al., (1998) suggest that Saccharina latissima and Saccorhiza polyschides are rarely present in areas of wave exposure, where they may be spatially out-competed by Laminaria hyperborea.  However, the seasonally unstable nature of the substrata or periodic sediment scour within theses biotopes is likely to inhibit the growth of long lived species, such as Laminaria hyperborea and allow opportunistic species such as Demarestia spp., Saccharina latissima and Saccorhiza polyschides to proliferate.  An increase in local wave height may increase local sediment mobility and scour, potentially increasing dislodgment of kelps (Birket et al., 1998) and Desmarestia spp.. The biotopes may appear sparse after winter storms but the biotope recovers again due to rapid colonization and growth by the dominant kelps and Desmarestia spp.

Sensitivity assessment. The biotope is dominated by rapid colonizing species that tolerate or rapidly recover from scour, siltation and burial.  They occur across a broad wave exposure range, and, therefore, a change in nearshore significant wave height of 3-5% is not likely to have a significant effect on biotope structure. Resistance has been assessed as ’High’, resilience as ‘High’. Therefore, sensitivity has been assessed as ‘Not Sensitive’ at the benchmark level.

Chemical Pressures

Use / to open/close text displayedResistanceResilienceSensitivity
Not Assessed (NA) Not assessed (NA) Not assessed (NA)
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR

Bryan (1984) suggested that the general order for heavy metal toxicity in seaweeds is: Organic Hg > inorganic Hg > Cu > Ag > Zn > Cd > Pb. Cole et al. (1999) reported that Hg was very toxic to macrophytes. Similarly, Hopkin & Kain (1978) demonstrated sub-lethal effects of heavy metals on kelp gametophytes and sporophytes, including reduced growth and respiration. Sheppard et al. (1980) noted that increasing levels of heavy metal contamination along the west coast of Britain reduced species number and richness in holdfast fauna, except for suspension feeders which became increasingly dominant. Gastropods may be relatively tolerant of heavy metal pollution (Bryan, 1984). Although macroalgae species may not be killed, except by high levels of contamination, reduced growth rates may impair the ability of the biotope to recover from other environmental disturbances. Thompson & Burrows (1984) observed the growth of Saccharina latissima sporophyte growth was significantly inhibited at 50 µg Cu /l, 1000 µg Zn/l and 50 µg Hg/l. Zoospores were found to be more intolerant and significant reductions in survival rates were observed at 25 µg Cu/l, 1000 µg Zn/l and 5 µg/l.

However, this pressure is Not assessed.

Not Assessed (NA) Not assessed (NA) Not assessed (NA)
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR

IR.HIR.KSed.Sac, IR.HIR.KSed.SlatSac, IR.HIR.KSed.DesFilR, IR.HIR.KSed.XKScrR, are predominantly recorded in the sub-tidal (<0 m). These habitats are therefore not likely to come into contact with freshly released oil but only to sinking emulsified oil and oil adsorbed onto particles (Birket et al., 1998). The mucilaginous slime layer coating of laminarians may protect them from smothering by oil. Hydrocarbons in solution reduce photosynthesis and may be algicidal. However, Holt et al. (1995) reported that oil spills in the USA and from the Torrey Canyon had little effect on kelp forests. Similarly, surveys of subtidal communities at a number sites between 1-22.5m below chart datum showed no noticeable impacts of the Sea Empress oil spill and clean up (Rostron & Bunker, 1997). Laboratory studies of the effects of oil and dispersants on several red algae species, including Delesseria sanguinea (Grandy 1984; cited in Holt et al., 1995) concluded that they were all sensitive to oil/ dispersant mixtures, with little differences between adults, sporelings, diploid or haploid life stages.

However, this pressure is Not assessed.

Not Assessed (NA) Not assessed (NA) Not assessed (NA)
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR

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

O'Brian & Dixon (1976) suggested that red algae were the most sensitive group of macrophytes to oil and dispersant contamination (see Smith, 1968). Saccharina latissima has also been found to be sensitive to antifouling compounds. Johansson (2009) exposed samples of Saccharina latissima to several antifouing compounds, observing chlorothalonil, DCOIT, dichlofluanid and tolylfluanid inhibited photosynthesis. Exposure to Chlorothalonil and tolylfluanid, was also found to continue inhibiting oxygen evolution after exposure had finished, and may cause irreversible damage.

Smith (1968) observed that epiphytic and benthic red algae were intolerant of dispersant or oil contamination during the Torrey Canyon oil spill; only the epiphytes Crytopleura ramosa and Spermothamnion repens and some tufts of Jania rubens survived together with Osmundea pinnatifida, Gigartina pistillata and Phyllophora crispa from the sublittoral fringe. Delesseria sanguinea was probably the most intolerant since it was damaged at depths of 6m (Smith, 1968). Holt et al.(1995) suggested that Delesseria sanguinea is probably generally sensitive of chemical contamination.

Not relevant (NR) Not relevant (NR) No evidence (NEv)
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR

No evidence

Not Assessed (NA) Not assessed (NA) Not assessed (NA)
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR

This pressure is Not assessed.

High High Not sensitive
Q: Medium
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: Medium
A: High
C: High

Reduced oxygen concentrations can inhibit both photosynthesis and respiration in macroalgae (Kinne, 1977). Despite this, macroalgae are thought to buffer the environmental conditions of low oxygen, thereby acting as a refuge for organisms in oxygen-depleted regions especially if the oxygen depletion is short-term (Frieder et al., 2012). If levels do drop below 4 mg/l negative effects on these organisms can be expected, with adverse effects occurring below 2mg/l (Cole et al., 1999).  However, in wave exposed, highly mixed, areas, the hypoxic conditions are likely to be transient.

Sensitivity Assessment. Reduced oxygen levels are likely to inhibit photosynthesis and respiration but not cause a loss of the macroalgae population directly. Resistance has been assessed as ‘High’, Resilience as ‘High’. Sensitivity has been assessed as ‘Not sensitive’ at the benchmark level.

Not relevant (NR) Not relevant (NR) Not sensitive
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR

Conolly & Drew (1985) found that Saccharina latissima sporophytes plants at the most eutrophic site in a study on the east coast of Scotland where nutrient levels were 25% higher than ambient levels exhibited a high growth rate. However, Read et al. (1983) reported after removal of a major sewage pollution in the Firth of Forth, Saccharina latissima became abundant where previously it had been absent. Bokn et al. (2003) conducted a nutrient loading experiment on intertidal fucoids. Within 3 years of the experiment no significant effect was observed in the communities, however, 4-5 years into the experiment a shift occurred from perennials to ephemeral algae occurred. Although Bokn et al. (2003) focussed on fucoids the results could indicate that long-term (>4 years) nutrient loading can result in community shift to ephemeral algae species, and explain the disparity between the findings of Conolly & Drew (1985) & Read et al. (1983).

Johnston & Roberts (2009) conducted a meta-analysis, which reviewed 216 papers to assess how a variety of contaminants (including sewage and nutrient loading) affected 6 marine habitats (including subtidal reefs). A 30-50% reduction in species diversity and richness was identified from all habitats exposed to the contaminant types. Johnston & Roberts (2009) however also highlighted that macroalgal communities are relatively tolerant to contamination, but that contaminated communities can have low diversity assemblages which are dominated by opportunistic and fast growing species (Johnston & Roberts, 2009 and references therein). Nutrient enrichment may also result in phytoplankton blooms that increase turbidity and, therefore, may negatively impact photosynthesis.

Sensitivity assessment. However, the biotope is assessed as ‘Not sensitive’ at the pressure benchmark that assumes compliance with good status as defined by the WFD.

Medium High Low
Q: Medium
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: Medium
C: High
Q: Medium
A: Medium
C: High

Conolly & Drew (1985) found Saccharina latissima sporophytes had relatively higher growth rates close to a sewage outlet in St Andrews, UK when compared to other sites along the east coast of Scotland. At St Andrews, nitrate levels were 20.22µM, which represents an approx 25% increase when compared to other comparable sites (approx 15.87 µM). Handå et al. (2013) also reported Saccharina latissima sporophytes grew approx 1% faster per day when in close proximity to Norwegian Salmon farms, where elevated ammonium can be readily absorbed.  Read et al. (1983) reported after the installation of new sewage treatment works, which reduced the suspended solid content of liquid effluent by 60% in the Firth of Forth, Saccharina latissima became abundant where previously it had been absent. Bokn et al. (2003) conducted a nutrient loading experiment on intertidal fucoids. Within 3 years of the experiment no significant effect was observed in the communities, however, 4-5 years into the experiment a shift occurred from perennials to ephemeral algae occurred. Although Bokn et al. (2003) focussed on fucoids the results could indicate that long-term (>4 years) nutrient loading can result in community shift to ephemeral algae species. Differences between the findings of the aforementioned studies are likely to be related to the level of organic enrichment, however, could also be time dependent.

Johnston & Roberts (2009) conducted a meta-analysis, which reviewed 216 papers to assess how a variety of contaminants (including sewage and nutrient loading) affected 6 marine habitats (including subtidal reefs). A 30-50% reduction in species diversity and richness was identified from all habitats exposed to the contaminant types. Johnston & Roberts (2009) however also highlighted that macroalgal communities are relatively tolerant to contamination, but that contaminated communities can have low diversity assemblages which are dominated by opportunistic and fast growing species (Johnston & Roberts, 2009 and references therein). Organic enrichment may also result in phytoplankton blooms that increase turbidity and, therefore, may negatively impact photosynthesis.

Sensitivity assessment. Although short-term exposure (<4 years) to organic enrichment may not affect seaweeds directly, indirect effects such as turbidity may significantly affect photosynthesis.  Therefore, resistance has been assessed as ‘Medium’, resilience as ‘High’ and sensitivity as ’Low’.

Physical Pressures

Use / to open/close text displayedResistanceResilienceSensitivity
None Very Low High
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: High
C: High

All marine habitats and benthic species are considered to have a resistance of ‘None’ to this pressure and to be unable to recover from a permanent loss of habitat (resilience is ‘Very Low’).  Sensitivity within the direct spatial footprint of this pressure is therefore ‘High’.  Although no specific evidence is described confidence in this assessment is ‘High’, due to the incontrovertible nature of this pressure.

None Very Low High
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: High
A: High
C: High

If rock substrata were replaced with sedimentary substrata this would represent a fundamental change in habitat type, which Saccharina latissima, Saccorhiza polyschides and Desmarestia spp. would not be able to tolerate. The biotope would be lost.

Sensitivity assessment. Resistance to the pressure is considered ‘None’, and resilience ‘Very Low’. The sensitivity of this biotope to change from sedimentary or soft rock substrata to hard rock or artificial substrata or vice-versa is assessed as ‘High’.

Not relevant (NR) Not relevant (NR) Not relevant (NR)
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR

Not relevant

Not relevant (NR) Not relevant (NR) Not relevant (NR)
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR

Not relevant on hard rock substrata.

None High Medium
Q: Low
A: NR
C: NR
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: Low
A: NR
C: NR

Abrasion of the substratum e.g. from bottom or pot fishing gear, cable laying etc. may cause localised mobility of the substrata and mortality of the resident community. The effect would be situation dependent however if bottom fishing gear were towed over a site it may mobilise a high proportion of the rock substrata and cause high mortality in the resident community.

However, the characteristic species within IR.HIR.KSed.Sac, IR.HIR.KSed.SlatSac, IR.HIR.KSed.DesFilR, IR.HIR.KSed.XKScrR have rapid growth rates and are distinctive of 'disturbed' areas. Information on from experimental clearances is summarised under resilience above.

Sensitivity assessment. Resistance has been assessed as ‘None’, Resilience as ‘High’. Sensitivity has been assessed as ‘Medium’.

Not relevant (NR) Not relevant (NR) Not relevant (NR)
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR

Not relevant, please refer to pressure “Abrasion/disturbance of the substratum on the surface of the seabed”.

Low High Low
Q: Medium
A: Medium
C: Medium
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: Medium
A: Medium
C: Medium

Suspended Particle Matter (SPM) concentration has a linear relationship with subsurface light attenuation (Kd) (Devlin et al., 1998). Light penetration influences the maximum depth at which kelp species can grow and it has been reported that laminarians grow at depths at which the light levels are reduced to 1 percent of incident light at the surface. Maximal depth distribution of laminarians, therefore, varies from 100 m in the Mediterranean to only 6-7m in the silt laden German Bight.  In Atlantic European waters, the depth limit is typically 35 m. In very turbid waters the depth at which kelp is found may be reduced, or in some cases excluded completely (e.g. Severn Estuary), because of the alteration in light attenuation by suspended sediment (Lüning, 1990; Birkett et al., 1998b). Limited information is available on which to assess the effect of a decrease in water clarity on Laminariales show a decrease of 50% photosynthetic activity when turbidity increases by 0.1/m (light attenuation coefficient =0.1-0.2/m; Staehr & Wernberg, 2009). Demarestia spp. recruitment has also been found highly affected by light attenuation and frequency, typically rare (ca <10% coverage (Edwards, 1998) beneath kelp canopies where light levels can be 1-5% of surface irradiance (Kitching, 1941).

A decrease in water clarity as a result of mobilised sediments may also increase sediment scour of biotopes within close proximity. However, the characterizing species within IR.HIR.KSed.Sac, IR.HIR.KSed.SlatSac, IR.HIR.KSed.DesFilR, IR.HIR.KSed.XKScrR have rapid growth and colonisation rates are as such relatively resilient to sediment scouring.

Sensitivity assessment. An increase in water clarity from clear to intermediate (10-100 mg/l) represent a change in light attenuation of ca 0.67-6.7 Kd/m and is likely to result in a greater than 50% reduction in photosynthesis of Laminaria spp. Resistance to this pressure is defined as ‘Low’ as the biotope is typical of sediment affected habitats. Resilience to this pressure is defined as ‘High’ and this biotope is regarded as having a sensitivity of ‘Low‘.

High High Not sensitive
Q: Low
A: NR
C: NR
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: Low
A: Low
C: Low

Smothering by sediment e.g. 5 cm material during a discrete event is unlikely to damage Saccharina latissima, Saccorhiza polyschides, and Desmarestia spp. sporophytes but may provide a physical barrier to zoospore settlement and, therefore, negatively impact on recruitment processes (Moy & Christie, 2012). Laboratory studies showed that kelp and gametophytes can survive in darkness for between 6-16 months at 8°C and would probably survive smothering by a discrete event and once returned to normal conditions gametophytes resumed growth or maturation within 1 month (Dieck, 1993). Saccorhiza polyschides zoospores successfully developed after 180 days of darkness (Norton, 1977). Intolerance to this factor is likely to be higher during the peak periods of sporulation and/or spore settlement.

IR.HIR.KSed.Sac, IR.HIR.KSed.SlatSac, IR.HIR.KSed.DesFilR, IR.HIR.KSed.XKScrR are found from extreme wave exposed-sheltered sites (Connor et al., 2004). In wave exposed biotopes deposited sediment is unlikely to remain for more than a few tidal cycles (due to water flow or wave action). In sheltered biotopes deposited sediment could remain and the effects of deposition could be longer lasting.

Sensitivity assessment. Resistance has been assessed as ‘High’, resilience as ‘High’ and sensitivity as ‘Not Sensitive’.

Medium High Low
Q: Low
A: NR
C: NR
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: Low
A: Low
C: Low

Smothering by sediment e.g. 30 cm material during a discrete event is unlikely to damage Saccharina latissima, Saccorhiza polyschides, and Desmarestia spp. sporophytes but may provide a physical barrier to zoospore settlement and therefore negatively impact on recruitment processes (Moy & Christie, 2012). The volume of sediment may also inundate juvenile sporophytes. Given the short life expectancy of Saccharina latissima (2-4 years; Parke, 1948), self-sustaining populations are likely to be dependent on annual recruitment (Moy & Christie, 2012). Given the microscopic size of the gametophyte, 30 cm of sediment could be expected to significantly inhibit growth.  Laboratory studies showed that kelp and gametophytes can survive in darkness for between 6-16 months at 8°C and would probably survive smothering by a discrete event and once returned to normal conditions gametophytes resumed growth or maturation within 1 month (Dieck, 1993).  Saccorhiza polyschides zoospores, specifically, successfully developed after 180 days of darkness (Norton, 1977). Intolerance to this factor is likely to be higher during the peak periods of sporulation and/or spore settlement.

IR.HIR.KSed.XKScrR is subject to periodic burial from surrounding sediments, however, IR.HIR.KSed.Sac, IR.HIR.KSed.SlatSac, IR.HIR.KSed.DesFilR, IR.HIR.KSed.XKScrR are recorded from extreme wave exposed-sheltered sites (Connor et al., 2004) and, therefore, the effects of burial are likely to be mediated. In highly wave exposed biotopes, deposited sediment is unlikely to remain for more than a few tidal cycles (due to water flow or wave action). In sheltered biotopes, the high volume of deposited sediment could remain and the effects could be longer lasting. However, these biotopes are periodically disturbed by winter storms or sediment scour therefore deposited sediments are unlikely to remain for a full season.

Sensitivity assessment. Resistance has been assessed as ‘Medium’, resilience as ‘High’. Sensitivity has been assessed as ‘Low’.

Not Assessed (NA) Not assessed (NA) Not assessed (NA)
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR

Not assessed.

No evidence (NEv) Not relevant (NR) No evidence (NEv)
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR

No evidence

Not relevant (NR) Not relevant (NR) Not relevant (NR)
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR

Not relevant

Low Medium Medium
Q: Low
A: NR
C: NR
Q: Low
A: NR
C: NR
Q: Low
A: NR
C: NR

There is no evidence to suggest that anthropogenic light sources would affect Saccharina latissima, Saccorhiza polyschides, and Desmarestia spp. Shading of the biotope (e.g. by the construction of a pontoon, pier etc) could adversely affect the biotope in areas where the water clarity is also low, and tip the balance to shade tolerant species, resulting in the loss of the biotope directly within the shaded area, or a reduction in seaweed abundance.

Sensitivity assessment. Resistance is probably 'Low', with a 'Medium' resilience and a sensitivity of 'Medium', albeit with 'low' confidence due to the lack of direct evidence.

Not relevant (NR) Not relevant (NR) Not relevant (NR)
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR

Not relevant. This pressure is considered applicable to mobile species, e.g. fish and marine mammals rather than seabed habitats. Physical and hydrographic barriers may limit the dispersal of spores.  But spore dispersal is not considered under the pressure definition and benchmark.

Not relevant (NR) Not relevant (NR) Not relevant (NR)
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR

Not relevant. Collision from grounding vessels is addressed under abrasion above.

Not relevant (NR) Not relevant (NR) Not relevant (NR)
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR

Not relevant

Biological Pressures

Use / to open/close text displayedResistanceResilienceSensitivity
Not relevant (NR) Not relevant (NR) No evidence (NEv)
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR

No evidence regarding the genetic modification or effects of translocation of native kelp populations was found.

Medium High Low
Q: Low
A: NR
C: NR
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: Low
A: Low
C: Low

Competition with invasive macroalgae may be a potential threat to kelp biotopes.  Potential invasives include Undaria pinnatifida and Sargassum muticum. Sargassum muticum is a circumglobal invasive species (Engelen et al., 2015).  It is recorded (2015) from Norway to Morocco and into the Mediterranean in the eastern Atlantic and from Alaska to Baja California in the eastern Pacific and from southern Russia to southern China in the western Pacific (Engelen et al., 2015).  It colonizes a variety of habitats and can tolerate -1°C to 30°C and survive salinities below 10 ppt.  Although fertilization does not occur below 15 ppt and growth of germlings is limited below 10°C it can complete its life cycle as long as temperatures are over 8°C for at least four months of the year (Engelen et al., 2015).  However, its distribution is limited by the availability of hard substratum (e.g. stones >10 cm) and light (Staeher et al., 2000; Strong & Dring 2011; Engelen et al., 2015).  It is most abundant between 1 and 3 m below mean water.  But it has been recorded at 18 m or 30 m in the clear waters of California.  However, it is a poor competitor under low light and only develops dense canopies in shallow areas (Engelen et al., 20125).

Sargassum muticum was shown to replace and out-compete leathery, canopy-forming macroalgae such as Saccharina latissima, Halidrys siliquosa, and Fucus spp. and, to a lesser degree, understorey species such as Codium fragile, Chondrus crispus and Dictyota dichotoma in Limfjorden, Denmark between 1984 and 1997 (Staehr et al., 2000; Engelen et al., 2015; de Bettignies et al., 2021).  The invasion in Limfjorden had stabilized by 2005 although many of the native macroalgal species continued to decline (Engelen et al., 2015).  In Limfjorden, the distribution of Sargassum muticum was limited to areas with hard substratum, in particular stones > 10 cm in diameter, while smaller stones, gravel and sand were unsuitable.  It was most abundant between 1 and 4 m in depth but had low cover at 0-0.5 m or 4-6 m, in the turbid waters of the Limfjorden.  Limfjorden is wave sheltered although wave exposure has been reported to restrict the growth and survival of Sargassum muticum (Staehr et al., 2000).  Viejo et al. (1995) reported that Sargassum muticum transplanted to wave exposed shores in Spain experienced >80% breakages within a month and that the growth of undamaged plants was significantly lower than that of plants on sheltered shores.  Similarly, Andrew & Viejo (1998) noted that Sargassum muticum was restricted to intertidal rockpools in wave exposed sites in the Bay of Biscay.

Strong & Dring (2011) used canopy removal experiments to investigate inter- and intra-species competition between Sargassum muticum and Saccharina latissima in the Dorn, Strangford Lough, N. Ireland.  The Dorn consists of tidal pools, very sheltered from wave action but with moderately strong tidal streams (1-2 knots).  Sargassum muticum grew better in mixed stands with Saccharina latissima than in the highest density monospecific stands examined.  However, the growth of Saccharina was not affected by the proportion of Sargassum in mixed stands. They concluded that Saccharina was not impacted significantly by the alien species while Sargassum benefited from growth in mixed stands.  Experimental manipulation of subtidal algal canopies in San Juan Islands, Washington State, USA, showed that Sargassum muticum reduced the abundance of native macroalgae, including the kelp Laminaria bongardiana due to shadingHowever, experimental removal of Sargassum resulted in the recovery of native species within about one year (Britton-Simmons, 2004; Engelen et al., 2015).  The negative effects of Sargassum muticum on native macroalgae are mainly due to completion to light, rather than changes in nutrient availability, sedimentation or water flow (Britton-Simmons, 2004; Engelen et al., 2015).   

Undaria pinnatifida, (Wakame or Asian kelp), is a large brown seaweed and an Invasive Non-Indigenous Species (INIS) that could out-compete native UK kelp species (see Farrell & Fletcher, 2006; Thompson & Schiel, 2012; Brodie et al., 2014; Hieser et al., 2014; Arnold et al., 2016; Epstein & Smale, 2017; Kraan, 2017; Epstein & Smale, 2018; Epstein et al., 2019a,b; Tidbury, 2020). Undaria pinnatifida originates from Japan but is established currently on the coastlines of New Zealand, Australia, Northern France, Spain, Italy, the UK, Portugal, Belgium, Holland, Argentina, Mexico, and the USA (De Leij et al., 2017). Undaria pinnatifida was first recorded in the UK in the Hamble Estuary in 1994 (Macleod et al., 2016) and has since proliferated along UK coastlines. Although initially restricted to artificial habitats, such as marinas and ports, it is now widespread in natural habitats in several areas, including Plymouth Sound. One year after its discovery at the Queen Anne Battery marina, Plymouth, it had become a major fouling plant on pontoons (Minchin & Nunn, 2014).

Undaria pinnatifida seems to settle better on artificial substrata (e.g. floats, marinas or piers) than on natural rocky shores among local kelps (Vaz-Pinto et al., 2014). It is found predominantly in low intertidal to shallow subtidal habitats (Epstein et al., 2019b) and is significantly more abundant on artificial substrata compared to natural rocky substrata (Heiser et al., 2014; Epstein & Smale, 2018). James (2017) suggested that Undaria pinnatifida could out-compete native species on artificial substrata (such as marinas and wharf structures). De Leij et al. (2017) suggested that in natural substrata, Undaria pinnatifida can be inhibited by the presence of native competitors, such as large perennial species. The species behaves as a winter annual and recruitment occurs in winter followed by rapid growth through spring, maturity and then senescence through summer, with only the microscopic life stages persisting through autumn. It exhibits multiple dispersal strategies, such as short-range spore dispersal, and long-range dispersal as whole drift plants or fragments. Undaria pinnatifida has spread rapidly across the UK and Europe, resulting in community-wide responses and impacts (Vaz-Pinto et al., 2014; Epstein & Smale, 2017). Its impacts are complex and context-specific, depending on space, time, and taxa present in the introduced location (Epstein & Smale, 2017; Teagle et al., 2017; Tidbury, 2020).

Epstein & Smale (2018) reported clear similarities between Undaria pinnatifida and Saccorhiza polyschides, that is they both are annual kelp species, occupy similar niches, and are opportunistic, which suggested that they could be in direct competition. In Plymouth Sound (UK), under certain environmental conditions, Undaria pinnatifida can out-compete and subsequently suppress, displace but not completely exclude Saccorhiza polyschides (Epstein & Smale, 2018; Epstein et al., 2019a). For example, Undaria pinnatifida is less tolerant of wave action than Saccorhiza polyschides, so competitive exclusion and displacement of Saccorhiza polyschides is more likely to occur in wave-sheltered areas (Epstein et al., 2019a). Epstein et al. (2019a) reported that Saccorhiza polyschides did not increase significantly after the removal of 50% of Undaria pinnatifida, which suggested that Undaria pinnatifida exerted a relatively strong suppressive effect on this native species even at relatively low densities and cover. In contrast, the removal of 100% of Undaria pinnatifida had a statistically significant increase in abundance and biomass of Saccorhiza polyschides (5.3- and 3.6-fold respectively) (Epstein et al., 2019a). Although not conclusive, Epstein et al. (2019b) suggested that Undaria pinnatifida may have higher fitness than native canopy-formers on artificial substrata (i.e. man-made structures such as marina pontoons, pilings and port walls), where it can proliferate with or without disturbance to native macroalgae and become the dominant canopy-former.

Undaria pinnatifida was found to co-exist with Saccorhiza polyschides in St Malo, France (Castric-Fey et al., 1993). Epstein & Smale (2018) also found that a higher coverage of Saccorhiza polyschides was positively associated with the occurrence of Undaria pinnatifida and there was a significant pattern of co-occurrence of the two species. This evidence suggested that the presence of one species indicated that the other species could also occur, due to their similarities in habitat preferences (Epstein & Smale, 2018). Also, Epstein et al. (2019b) observed a positive relationship between Saccorhiza polyschides and Undaria pinnatifida in intertidal and subtidal habitats in Plymouth Sound (UK), although it was not statistically significant.

Arnold et al. (2016) suggested that Saccorhiza polyschides and Undaria pinnatifida attract similar epifaunal and epifloral assemblages, which implied that community-level impacts may be minimal. By contrast, Salland & Smale (2021) found that the large, hollow structure of Saccorhiza polyschides holdfasts supported a distinct and diverse assemblage compared to that found in claw-like Laminarian holdfasts, the latter of which are more similar in structure to those of Undaria pinnatifida. Undaria pinnatifida was successfully eradicated on a sunken ship in Clatham Islands, New Zealand, by applying a heat treatment of 70°C (Wotton et al., 2004) however numerous other eradication attempts have failed and, as noted by Fletcher & Farrell (1998), once established Undaria pinnatifida resists most attempts at long-term removal.

Sensitivity assessment. The above evidence suggests that Undaria pinnatifida can out-compete but not exclude Saccorhiza polyschides, especially in artificial habitats and/or wave sheltered habitats. However, this biotope IR.HIR.KSed.Sac is structured by high-energy conditions due to wave exposure and tidal streams, and resultant disturbance due to storm damage and scour. As a result, the biotope is dominated by opportunistic kelps and seaweeds, although patches of perennial kelps may also be present. Therefore, while Undaria pinnatifida might be able to colonize this biotope after disturbance it will probably not be able to compete with Sacchorhiza polyschides under the conditions that characterize this biotope. Similarly, Sargassum muticum does not grow well under wave exposed conditions and is unlikely to out-compete the native species in this biotope. 

Therefore, resistance is assessed as ‘Medium’ to represent the potential Undaria or Sargassum to colonize the biotope, probably at low abundance.  Resilience is assessed as ‘High’ as the biotope is disturbed and both the native and non-native species would recolonize and/or regrow annually. Hence, sensitivity is assessed as ‘Low’.  Overall, confidence is assessed as ‘Low’ due to evidence of variation and site-specific nature of competition between native kelps and both Undaria pinnatifida and Sargassum muticum.

No evidence (NEv) No evidence (NEv) No evidence (NEv)
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR
Q: NR
A: NR
C: NR

Laminarians may be infected by the microscopic brown alga Streblonema aecidioides. Infected algae show symptoms of Streblonema disease, i.e. alterations of the blade and stipe ranging from dark spots to heavy deformations and completely crippled thalli Infection can reduce growth rates of host algae (Peters & Scaffelke, 1996). The marine fungi Eurychasma spp can also infect early life stages of laminarians and Desmarestia viridis, however, the effects of infection are unknown (Müller et al., 1999).

Sensitivity assessment. Due to a lack of conclusive evidence the sensitivity of this biotope cannot be assessed against this pressure.

None High Medium
Q: Low
A: NR
C: NR
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: Low
A: NR
C: NR

There has been recent commercial interest in Saccharina latissima as a consumable called “sea vegetables” (Birkett et al., 1998b). However, Saccharina latissima sporophytes are typically matured on ropes (Handå et al., 2013) and not directly extracted from the seabed, as with Laminaria hyperborea (Christie et al., 1998). No evidence has been found for commercial extraction of Saccorhiza polyschides or Desmarestia spp. However, if the biotopes were subject to harvest, then a large proportion of the resident kelp population could be removed.  Thus evidence to assess the resistance of IR.HIR.KSed.Sac, IR.HIR.KSed.SlatSac, IR.HIR.KSed.DesFilR, IR.HIR.KSed.XKScrR to direct harvesting is limited. It has been assumed that if targeted harvesting were in operation it would remove >75% of sporophytes.

Sensitivity assessment. Resistance has been assessed as ‘None’, Resilience as ‘High’. Sensitivity has been assessed as ‘Medium’.

None High Medium
Q: Low
A: NR
C: NR
Q: High
A: High
C: High
Q: Low
A: NR
C: NR

IR.HIR.KSed.Sac, IR.HIR.KSed.SlatSac, IR.HIR.KSed.DesFilR, IR.HIR.KSed.XKScrR Are characterised by a canopy of Saccorhiza polyschides, Saccharina latissima and Desmarestia spp. If the canopy were removed the red seaweeds understorey community may become bleached, and/or perish (Hawkins & Harkin, 1985), leading to further reductions in biodiversity. The biotope is however naturally periodically disturbed and as such would recover rapidly.

Sensitivity assessment. Resistance has been assessed as ‘None’, Resilience as ‘High’. Sensitivity has been assessed as ‘Medium’.

Bibliography

  1. Andersen, G.S., Steen, H., Christie, H., Fredriksen, S. & Moy, F.E., 2011. Seasonal patterns of sporophyte growth, fertility, fouling, and mortality of Saccharina latissima in Skagerrak, Norway: implications for forest recovery. Journal of Marine Biology, 2011, Article ID 690375, 8 pages.

  2. Arnold, M., Teagle, H., Brown, M.P. & Smale, D.A., 2016. The structure of biogenic habitat and epibiotic assemblages associated with the global invasive kelp Undaria pinnatifida in comparison to native macroalgae. Biological Invasions, 18 (3), 661-676. DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-015-1037-6

  3. Assis, J., Araújo, M.B. & Serrão, E.A., 2018. Projected climate changes threaten ancient refugia of kelp forests in the North Atlantic. Global Change Biology, 24 (1), e55-e66. DOI https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13818

  4. Assis, J., Lucas, A.V., Bárbara, I. & Serrão, E.Á., 2016. Future climate change is predicted to shift long-term persistence zones in the cold-temperate kelp Laminaria hyperborea. Marine Environmental Research, 113, 174-182. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marenvres.2015.11.005

  5. Assis, J., Serrão, E.A., Claro, B., Perrin, C. & Pearson, G.A., 2014. Climate-driven range shifts explain the distribution of extant gene pools and predict future loss of unique lineages in a marine brown alga. Molecular Ecology, 23 (11), 2797-2810. DOI https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.12772

  6. Baardseth, E., 1956. The growth rings in Alaria stipes.  In Proceedings of the International Seaweed Symposium, 2, Trondheim (eds T. Braarud & N.A. Sorensen)  pp. 153-157. London: Pergamon Press.

  7. Bégin, C., Johnson, L.E. & Himmelman, J.H., 2004. Macroalgal canopies: distribution and diversity of associated invertebrates and effects on the recruitment and growth of mussels. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 271 (1), 121-132.

  8. Bekkby, T. & Moy, F.E., 2011. Developing spatial models of sugar kelp (Saccharina latissima) potential distribution under natural conditions and areas of its disappearance in Skagerrak. Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science, 95 (4), 477-483.

  9. Beszczynska-Möller, A., & Dye, S.R., 2013. ICES Report on Ocean Climate 2012. In ICES Cooperative Research Report, vol. 321 pp. 73.

  10. Birchenough, S., Bremner, J., Henderson, P., Hinz, H., D, S., Mieszkowska, N., Roberts, J., Kamenos, N. & Plenty, S., 2013. Impacts of climate change on shallow and shelf subtidal habitats. Marine Climate Change Impacts Partnership: Science Review, 2013. DOI http://doi.org/10.14465/2013.arc20.193-203

  11. Birkett, D.A., Maggs, C.A., Dring, M.J. & Boaden, P.J.S., 1998b. Infralittoral reef biotopes with kelp species: an overview of dynamic and sensitivity characteristics for conservation management of marine SACs. Natura 2000 report prepared by Scottish Association of Marine Science (SAMS) for the UK Marine SACs Project., Scottish Association for Marine Science. (UK Marine SACs Project, vol VI.), 174 pp. Available from: http://ukmpa.marinebiodiversity.org/uk_sacs/pdfs/reefkelp.pdf

  12. Bolton, J.J. & Lüning, K.A.F., 1982. Optimal growth and maximal survival temperatures of Atlantic Laminaria species (Phaeophyta) in culture. Marine Biology, 66, 89-94.

  13. Bower, S.M., 1996. Synopsis of Infectious Diseases and Parasites of Commercially Exploited Shellfish: Bald-sea-urchin Disease. [On-line]. Fisheries and Oceans Canada. [cited 26/01/16]. Available from: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/aah-saa/diseases-maladies/bsudsu-eng.html

  14. Breeman, A.M., 1990. Expected Effects of Changing Seawater Temperatures on the Geographic Distribution of Seaweed Species. In Beukema, J.J., et al. (eds.). Expected Effects of Climatic Change on Marine Coastal Ecosystems, Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, pp. 69-76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2003-3_9

  15. Britton, D., Cornwall, C.E., Revill, A.T., Hurd, C.L. & Johnson, C.R., 2016. Ocean acidification reverses the positive effects of seawater pH fluctuations on growth and photosynthesis of the habitat-forming kelp, Ecklonia radiata. Scientific reports, 6 (1), 26036. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1038/srep26036

  16. Brodie J., Williamson, C.J., Smale, D.A., Kamenos, N.A., Mieszkowska, N., Santos, R., Cunliffe, M., Steinke, M., Yesson, C. & Anderson, K.M., 2014. The future of the northeast Atlantic benthic flora in a high CO2 world. Ecology and Evolution, 4 (13), 2787-2798. DOI  https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.1105

  17. Bryan, G.W., 1984. Pollution due to heavy metals and their compounds. In Marine Ecology: A Comprehensive, Integrated Treatise on Life in the Oceans and Coastal Waters, vol. 5. Ocean Management, part 3, (ed. O. Kinne), pp.1289-1431. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

  18. Burrows, M.T., Smale, D., O’Connor, N., Rein, H.V. & Moore, P., 2014. Marine Strategy Framework Directive Indicators for UK Kelp Habitats Part 1: Developing proposals for potential indicators. Joint Nature Conservation Comittee,  Peterborough. Report no. 525.

  19. Casas, G., Scrosati, R. & Piriz, M.L., 2004. The invasive kelp Undaria pinnatifida (Phaeophyceae, Laminariales) reduces native seaweed diversity in Nuevo Gulf (Patagonia, Argentina). Biological Invasions, 6 (4), 411-416.

  20. Castric-Fey, A., Girard, A. & L'Hardy-Halos, M.T., 1993. The Distribution of Undaria pinnatifida (Phaeophyceae, Laminariales) on the Coast of St. Malo (Brittany, France). Botanica Marina, 36 (4), 351-358. DOI https://doi.org/10.1515/botm.1993.36.4.351

  21. 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

  22. Christie, H., Fredriksen, S. & Rinde, E., 1998. Regrowth of kelp and colonization of epiphyte and fauna community after kelp trawling at the coast of Norway. Hydrobiologia, 375/376, 49-58.

  23. 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

  24. 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. DOI https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(2004)017

  25. Cole, S., Codling, I.D., Parr, W. & Zabel, T., 1999. Guidelines for managing water quality impacts within UK European Marine sites. Natura 2000 report prepared for the UK Marine SACs Project. 441 pp., Swindon: Water Research Council on behalf of EN, SNH, CCW, JNCC, SAMS and EHS. [UK Marine SACs Project.]. Available from: http://ukmpa.marinebiodiversity.org/uk_sacs/pdfs/water_quality.pdf

  26. Colhart, B.J., & Johanssen, H.W., 1973. Growth rates of Corallina officinalis (Rhodophyta) at different temperatures. Marine Biology, 18, 46-49.

  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. Cosse, A., Potin, P. & Leblanc, C., 2009. Patterns of gene expression induced by oligoguluronates reveal conserved and environment‐specific molecular defence responses in the brown alga Laminaria digitata. New Phytologist, 182 (1), 239-250.

  30. Dauvin, J.C., Bellan, G., Bellan-Santini, D., Castric, A., Francour, P., Gentil, F., Girard, A., Gofas, S., Mahe, C., Noel, P., & Reviers, B. de., 1994. Typologie des ZNIEFF-Mer. Liste des parametres et des biocoenoses des cotes francaises metropolitaines. 2nd ed. Secretariat Faune-Flore, Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris (Collection Patrimoines Naturels, Serie Patrimoine Ecologique, No. 12). Coll. Patrimoines Naturels, vol. 12, Secretariat Faune-Flore, Paris.

  31. 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.

  32. Dayton, P.K., Tegner, M.J., Parnell, P.E. & Edwards, P.B., 1992. Temporal and spatial patterns of disturbance and recovery in a kelp forest community. Ecological Monographs, 62, 421-445.

  33. De Leij, R., Epstein, G., Brown, M.P. & Smale, D.A., 2017. The influence of native macroalgal canopies on the distribution and abundance of the non-native kelp Undaria pinnatifida in natural reef habitats. Marine Biology, 164 (7). DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-017-3183-0

  34. Devlin, M.J., Barry, J., Mills, D.K., Gowen, R.J., Foden, J., Sivyer, D. & Tett, P., 2008. Relationships between suspended particulate material, light attenuation and Secchi depth in UK marine waters. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 79 (3), 429-439.

  35. Dieck, T.I., 1992. North Pacific and North Atlantic digitate Laminaria species (Phaeophyta): hybridization experiments and temperature responses. Phycologia, 31, 147-163.

  36. Dieck, T.I., 1993. Temperature tolerance and survival in darkness of kelp gametophytes (Laminariales: Phaeophyta) - ecological and biogeographical implications. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 100, 253-264.

  37. Dinesen G., 1999. Modiolus modiolus and the associated fauna. In Bruntse, G., Lein, T.E., Nielsen, R. (eds), Marine benthic algae and invertebrate communities from the shallow waters of the Faroe Islands: a base line study. Kaldbak Marine Biological Laboratory, pp. 66-71.

  38. Eckman, J.E., 1983. Hydrodynamic processes affecting benthic recruitment 1. Limnology and Oceanography, 28 (2), 241-257.

  39. Edwards, A., 1980. Ecological studies of the kelp Laminaria hyperborea and its associated fauna in south-west Ireland. Ophelia, 9, 47-60.

  40. Elner, R.W. & Vadas, R.L., 1990. Inference in ecology: the sea urchin phenomenon in the northwest Atlantic. American Naturalist, 136, 108-125.

  41. Elsäßer, B., Fariñas-Franco, J.M., Wilson, C.D., Kregting, L. & Roberts, D., 2013. Identifying optimal sites for natural recovery and restoration of impacted biogenic habitats in a special area of conservation using hydrodynamic and habitat suitability modelling. Journal of Sea Research, 77, 11-21.

  42. Epstein, G. & Smale, D.A., 2017. Undaria pinnatifida: A case study to highlight challenges in marine invasion ecology and management. Ecology and Evolution, 7 (20), 8624-8642. DOI https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3430

  43. Epstein, G. & Smale, D.A., 2018. Environmental and ecological factors influencing the spillover of the non-native kelp, Undaria pinnatifida, from marinas into natural rocky reef communities. Biological Invasions, 20 (4), 1049-1072. DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-017-1610-2

  44. Epstein, G., Foggo, A. & Smale, D.A., 2019a. Inconspicuous impacts: Widespread marine invader causes subtle but significant changes in native macroalgal assemblages. Ecosphere, 10 (7). DOI https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.2814

  45. Epstein, G., Hawkins, S.J. & Smale, D.A., 2019b. Identifying niche and fitness dissimilarities in invaded marine macroalgal canopies within the context of contemporary coexistence theory. Scientific Reports, 9. DOI https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-45388-5

  46. Erwin, D.G., Picton, B.E., Connor, D.W., Howson, C.M., Gilleece, P. & Bogues, M.J., 1990. Inshore Marine Life of Northern Ireland. Report of a survey carried out by the diving team of the Botany and Zoology Department of the Ulster Museum in fulfilment of a contract with Conservation Branch of the Department of the Environment (N.I.)., Ulster Museum, Belfast: HMSO.

  47. Farrell, P. & Fletcher, R., 2006. An investigation of dispersal of the introduced brown alga Undaria pinnatifida (Harvey) Suringar and its competition with some species on the man-made structures of Torquay Marina (Devon, UK). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 334 (2), 236-243.

  48. Fernández, P.A., Roleda, M.Y. & Hurd, C.L., 2015. Effects of ocean acidification on the photosynthetic performance, carbonic anhydrase activity and growth of the giant kelp Macrocystis pyrifera. 124 (3), 293-304. DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s11120-015-0138-5

  49. Fernández, C., 2011. The retreat of large brown seaweeds on the north coast of Spain: the case of Saccorhiza polyschides. European Journal of Phycology, 46 (4), 352-360. DOI https://doi.org/10.1080/09670262.2011.617840

  50. Fletcher, R. & Farrell, P., 1998. Introduced brown algae in the North East Atlantic, with particular respect to Undaria pinnatifida (Harvey) Suringar. Helgolander Meeresuntersuchungen, 52 (3-4), 259-275.

  51. Fletcher, R.L., 1996. The occurrence of 'green tides' - a review. In Marine Benthic Vegetation. Recent changes and the Effects of Eutrophication (ed. W. Schramm & P.H. Nienhuis). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag. [Ecological Studies, vol. 123].

  52. Forrest, B.M. & Taylor, M.D., 2002. Assessing invasion impact: Survey design considerations and implications for management of an invasive marine plant. Biological Invasions, 4 (4), 375-386. DOI https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023613428351

  53. Fredriksen, S., Sjøtun, K., Lein, T.E. & Rueness, J., 1995. Spore dispersal in Laminaria hyperborea (Laminariales, Phaeophyceae). Sarsia, 80 (1), 47-53.

  54. Frieder, C., Nam, S., Martz, T. & Levin, L., 2012. High temporal and spatial variability of dissolved oxygen and pH in a nearshore California kelp forest. Biogeosciences, 9 (10), 3917-3930.

  55. 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

  56. Gainey, L.F., 1994. Volume regulation in three species of marine mussels. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 181 (2), 201-211.

  57. Gerard, V.A. & Du Bois, K.R., 1988. Temperature ecotypes near the southern boundary of the kelp Laminaria saccharina. Marine Biology, 97, 575-580.

  58. Gerard, V.A., 1990. Ecotypic differentiation in the kelp Laminaria saccharina: Phase-specific adaptation in a complex life cycle. Marine Biology, 107 (3), 519-528. DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01313437

  59. Gommez, J.L.C. & Miguez-Rodriguez, L.J., 1999. Effects of oil pollution on skeleton and tissues of Echinus esculentus L. 1758 (Echinodermata, Echinoidea) in a population of A Coruna Bay, Galicia, Spain. In Echinoderm Research 1998. Proceedings of the Fifth European Conference on Echinoderms, Milan, 7-12 September 1998, (ed. M.D.C. Carnevali & F. Bonasoro) pp. 439-447. Rotterdam: A.A. Balkema.

  60. Gorman, D., Bajjouk, T., Populus, J., Vasquez, M. & Ehrhold, A., 2013. Modeling kelp forest distribution and biomass along temperate rocky coastlines. Marine Biology, 160 (2), 309-325.

  61. Grandy, N., 1984. The effects of oil and dispersants on subtidal red algae. Ph.D. Thesis. University of Liverpool.

  62. Hammer, L., 1972. Anaerobiosis in marine algae and marine phanerograms. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Seaweed Symposium, Sapporo, Japan, August 8-12, 1971 (ed. K. Nisizawa, S. Arasaki, Chihara, M., Hirose, H., Nakamura V., Tsuchiya, Y.), pp. 414-419. Tokyo: Tokyo University Press.

  63. Harkin, E., 1981. Fluctuations in epiphyte biomass following Laminaria hyperborea canopy removal. In Proceedings of the Xth International Seaweed Symposium, Gø teborg, 11-15 August 1980 (ed. T. Levring), pp.303-308. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

  64. Hawkins, S.J. & Hartnoll, R.G., 1985. Factors determining the upper limits of intertidal canopy-forming algae. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 20, 265-271.

  65. Hayward, P.J. 1988. Animals on seaweed. Richmond, Surrey: Richmond Publishing Co. Ltd. [Naturalists Handbooks 9].

  66. Heiser, S., Hall-Spencer, J.M. & Hiscock, K., 2014. Assessing the extent of establishment of Undaria pinnatifida in Plymouth Sound Special Area of Conservation, UK. Marine Biodiversity Records, 7, e93.

  67. Hiscock, K. & Mitchell, R., 1980. The Description and Classification of Sublittoral Epibenthic Ecosystems. In The Shore Environment, Vol. 2, Ecosystems, (ed. J.H. Price, D.E.G. Irvine, & W.F. Farnham), 323-370. London and New York: Academic Press. [Systematics Association Special Volume no. 17(b)].

  68. Hoare, R. & Hiscock, K., 1974. An ecological survey of the rocky coast adjacent to the effluent of a bromine extraction plant. Estuarine and Coastal Marine Science, 2 (4), 329-348.

  69. Hofmann, L.C., Straub, S. & Bischof, K., 2013. Elevated CO2 levels affect the activity of nitrate reductase and carbonic anhydrase in the calcifying rhodophyte Corallina officinalis. Journal of Experimental Botany, 64 (4), 899-908. DOI https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/ers369

  70. 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.

  71. Hopkin, R. & Kain, J.M., 1978. The effects of some pollutants on the survival, growth and respiration of Laminaria hyperborea. Estuarine and Coastal Marine Science, 7, 531-553.

  72. Huthnance, J., 2010. Ocean Processes Feeder Report. London, DEFRA on behalf of the United Kingdom Marine Monitoring and Assessment Strategy (UKMMAS) Community.

  73. Iñiguez, C., Carmona, R., Lorenzo, M.R., Niell, F.X., Wiencke, C. & Gordillo, F.J.L., 2016. Increased temperature, rather than elevated CO2, modulates the carbon assimilation of the Arctic kelps Saccharina latissima and Laminaria solidungula. 163 (12), 248. DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-016-3024-6

  74. Iñiguez, C., Carmona, R., Lorenzo, M.R., Niell, F.X., Wiencke, C. & Gordillo, F.J.L., 2016a. Increased CO2 modifies the carbon balance and the photosynthetic yield of two common Arctic brown seaweeds: Desmarestia aculeata and Alaria esculenta. Polar Biology, 39 (11), 1979-1991. DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s00300-015-1724-x

  75. Jackson, A.C. & McIlvenny, J., 2011. Coastal squeeze on rocky shores in northern Scotland and some possible ecological impacts. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 400 (1), 314-321. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2011.02.012
  76. James, K, 2017. A review of the impacts from invasion by the introduced kelp Undaria pinnatifida. Waikato Regional Council Technical Report 2016/40, Institute of Marine Science, University of Auckland, Hamilton, 40 pp. Available from: https://www.waikatoregion.govt.nz/assets/WRC/WRC-2019/TR201640.pdf

  77. James, K., Kibele, J. & Shears, N.T., 2015. Using satellite-derived sea surface temperature to predict the potential global range and phenology of the invasive kelp Undaria pinnatifida. Biological Invasions, 17 (12), 3393-3408. DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-015-0965-5

  78. 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/

  79. 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/

  80. 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

  81. Jones, C.G., Lawton, J.H. & Shackak, M., 1994. Organisms as ecosystem engineers. Oikos, 69, 373-386.

  82. Jones, D.J., 1971. Ecological studies on macro-invertebrate communities associated with polluted kelp forest in the North Sea. Helgolander Wissenschaftliche Meersuntersuchungen, 22, 417-431.

  83. 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://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/pdfs/marine-habitats-review.pdf

  84. Jones, N.S. & Kain, J.M., 1967. Subtidal algal recolonisation following removal of Echinus. Helgolander Wissenschaftliche Meeresuntersuchungen, 15, 460-466.

  85. Kain, J.M., 1964. Aspects of the biology of Laminaria hyperborea III. Survival and growth of gametophytes. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 44 (2), 415-433.

  86. Kain, J.M. & Svendsen, P., 1969. A note on the behaviour of Patina pellucida in Britain and Norway. Sarsia, 38, 25-30.

  87. Kain, J.M., 1967. Populations of Laminaria hyperborea at various latitudes. Helgolander Wissenschaftliche Meeresuntersuchungen, 15, 489-499.

  88. Kain, J.M., 1971a. Synopsis of biological data on Laminaria hyperborea. FAO Fisheries Synopsis, no. 87.

  89. Kain, J.M., 1975a. Algal recolonization of some cleared subtidal areas. Journal of Ecology, 63, 739-765.

  90. Kain, J.M., 1979. A view of the genus Laminaria. Oceanography and Marine Biology: an Annual Review, 17, 101-161.

  91. Kain, J.M., 1987. Photoperiod and temperature as triggers in the seasonality of Delesseria sanguinea. Helgolander Meeresuntersuchungen, 41, 355-370.

  92. Kain, J.M., & Norton, T.A., 1990. Marine Ecology. In Biology of the Red Algae, (ed. K.M. Cole & Sheath, R.G.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  93. Kain, J.M., Drew, E.A. & Jupp, B.P., 1975. Light and the ecology of Laminaria hyperborea II. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth Symposium of the British Ecological Society, 26-28 March 1974. Light as an Ecological Factor: II (ed. G.C. Evans, R. Bainbridge & O. Rackham), pp. 63-92. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications.

  94. Karsten, U., 2007. Research note: salinity tolerance of Arctic kelps from Spitsbergen. Phycological Research, 55 (4), 257-262.

  95. Kelly, M.S., 2000. The reproductive cycle of the sea urchin Psammechinus miliaris (Echinodermata: Echinoidea) in a Scottish sea loch. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 80, 909-919.

  96. Kinne, O., 1977. International Helgoland Symposium "Ecosystem research": summary, conclusions and closing. Helgoländer Wissenschaftliche Meeresuntersuchungen, 30(1-4), 709-727.

  97. Kitching, J., 1941. Studies in sublittoral ecology III. Laminaria forest on the west coast of Scotland; a study of zonation in relation to wave action and illumination. The Biological Bulletin, 80 (3), 324-337

  98. Kraan, S., 2017. Undaria marching on; late arrival in the Republic of Ireland. Journal of Applied Phycology, 29 (2), 1107-1114. DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s10811-016-0985-2

  99. Kregting, L., Blight, A., Elsäßer, B. & Savidge, G., 2013. The influence of water motion on the growth rate of the kelp Laminaria hyperborea. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 448, 337-345.

  100. Kruuk, H., Wansink, D. & Moorhouse, A., 1990. Feeding patches and diving success of otters, Lutra lutra, in Shetland. Oikos, 57, 68-72.

  101. Lang, C. & Mann, K., 1976. Changes in sea urchin populations after the destruction of kelp beds. Marine Biology, 36 (4), 321-326.

  102. Lein, T.E., Sjøtun, K. & Wakili, S., 1991. Mass-occurrence of a brown filamentous endophyte in the lamina of the kelp Laminaria hyperborea (Gunnerus) Foslie along the southwestern coast of Norway. Sarsia, 76 (3), 187-193. DOI https://doi.org/10.1080/00364827.1991.10413474

  103. Leinaas, H.P. & Christie, H., 1996. Effects of removing sea urchins (Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis): stability of the barren state and succession of kelp forest recovery in the east Atlantic. Oecologia, 105(4), 524-536.

  104. 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

  105. Lobban, C.S. & Harrison, P.J., 1997. Seaweed ecology and physiology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  106. Lüning, K., 1990. Seaweeds: their environment, biogeography, and ecophysiology: John Wiley & Sons.

  107. Müller, R., Laepple, T., Bartsch, I. & Wiencke, C., 2009. Impact of oceanic warming on the distribution of seaweeds in polar and cold-temperate waters. Botanica Marina, 52 (6), 617-638.

  108. Macleod, A., Cottier-Cook, E., Hughes, D. & Allen, C., 2016. Investigating the impacts of marine invasive non-native species. Natural England Commissioned Report NECR223, Natural England, 58 pp. Available from: https://pureadmin.uhi.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/3729569/NECR223_edition_1.pdf

  109. Mann, K.H., 1982. Kelp, sea urchins, and predators: a review of strong interactions in rocky subtidal systems of eastern Canada, 1970-1980. Netherlands Journal of Sea Research, 16, 414-423.

  110. MarLIN, 2015. MarLIN (Marine Life Network). (13-10-2015). http://www.marlin.ac.uk

  111. Martin, S. & Hall-Spencer, J.M., 2017. Effects of Ocean Warming and Acidification on Rhodolith / Maerl Beds. In Riosmena-Rodriguez, R., Nelson, W., Aguirre, J. (ed.) Rhodolith / Maerl Beds: A Global Perspective, Switzerland: Springer Nature, pp. 55-85. [Coastal Research Library, 15].

  112. Miller III, H.L., Neale, P.J. & Dunton, K.H., 2009. Biological weighting functions for UV inhibtion of photosynthesis in the kelp Laminaria hyperborea (Phaeophyceae) 1. Journal of Phycology, 45 (3), 571-584.

  113. Minchin, D. & Nunn, J., 2014. The invasive brown alga Undaria pinnatifida (Harvey) Suringar, 1873 (Laminariales: Alariaceae), spreads northwards in Europe. Bioinvasions Records, 3 (2), 57-63. DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.3391/bir.2014.3.2.01

  114. Moore, P.G., 1973a. The kelp fauna of north east Britain I. Function of the physical environment. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 13, 97-125.

  115. Moore, P.G., 1973b. The kelp fauna of north east Britain. II. Multivariate classification: turbidity as an ecological factor. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 13, 127-163.

  116. Moore, P.G., 1978. Turbidity and kelp holdfast Amphipoda. I. Wales and S.W. England. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 32, 53-96.

  117. Moore, P.G., 1985. Levels of heterogeneity and the amphipod fauna of kelp holdfasts. In The Ecology of Rocky Coasts: essays presented to J.R. Lewis, D.Sc. (ed. P.G. Moore & R. Seed), 274-289. London: Hodder & Stoughton Ltd.

  118. Morelissen, B., Dudley, B. D. & Phillips, N. E., 2016. Recruitment of the invasive kelp Undaria pinnatifida does not always benefit from disturbance to native algal communities in low-intertidal habitats. Marine Biology, 163 (12). DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-016-3014-8

  119. Moy, F.E. & Christie, H., 2012. Large-scale shift from sugar kelp (Saccharina latissima) to ephemeral algae along the south and west coast of Norway. Marine Biology Research, 8 (4), 309-321.

  120. NBN, 2015. National Biodiversity Network 2015(20/05/2015). https://data.nbn.org.uk/

  121. Nepper-Davidsen, J., Andersen, D.T. & Pedersen, M.F., 2019. Exposure to simulated heatwave scenarios causes long-term reductions in performance in Saccharina latissima. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 630, 25-39
  122. Nichols, D., 1981. The Cornish Sea-urchin Fishery. Cornish Studies, 9, 5-18.

  123. Norderhaug, K., 2004. Use of red algae as hosts by kelp-associated amphipods. Marine Biology, 144 (2), 225-230.

  124. Norderhaug, K.M. & Christie, H.C., 2009. Sea urchin grazing and kelp re-vegetation in the NE Atlantic. Marine Biology Research, 5 (6), 515-528.

  125. Norderhaug, K.M., Christie, H. & Fredriksen, S., 2007. Is habitat size an important factor for faunal abundances on kelp (Laminaria hyperborea)? Journal of Sea Research, 58 (2), 120-124.

  126. Nordheim, van, H., Andersen, O.N. & Thissen, J., 1996. Red lists of Biotopes, Flora and Fauna of the Trilateral Wadden Sea area, 1995. Helgolander Meeresuntersuchungen, 50 (Suppl.), 1-136.

  127. Norton, T.A., 1978. The factors influencing the distribution of Saccorhiza polyschides in the region of Lough Ine. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 58, 527-536.

  128. Norton, T.A., 1992. Dispersal by macroalgae. British Phycological Journal, 27, 293-301.

  129. Norton, T.A., Hiscock, K. & Kitching, J.A., 1977. The Ecology of Lough Ine XX. The Laminaria forest at Carrigathorna. Journal of Ecology, 65, 919-941.

  130. Nunes, J., McCoy, S.J., Findlay, H.S., Hopkins, F.E., Kitidis, V., Queirós, A.M., Rayner, L. & Widdicombe, S., 2015. Two intertidal, non-calcifying macroalgae (Palmaria palmata and Saccharina latissima) show complex and variable responses to short-term CO2 acidification. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 73 (3), 887-896. DOI https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsv081

  131. O'Brien, P.J. & Dixon, P.S., 1976. Effects of oils and oil components on algae: a review. British Phycological Journal, 11, 115-142.

  132. Park, J., Kim, J., Kong, J.-A., Depuydt, S., Brown, M. & Han, T., 2017. Implications of rising temperatures for gametophyte performance of two kelp species from Arctic waters. Botanica Marina, 60. DOI http://doi.org/10.1515/bot-2016-0103

  133. Pedersen, M., 2015. Temperature effects on the kelp Saccharina latissimaASLO,  Grenada, Spain,  pp.

  134. Pedersen, M.F., Nejrup, L.B., Fredriksen, S., Christie, H. & Norderhaug, K.M., 2012. Effects of wave exposure on population structure, demography, biomass and productivity of the kelp Laminaria hyperborea. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 451, 45-60.

  135. Penfold, R., Hughson, S., & Boyle, N., 1996. The potential for a sea urchin fishery in Shetland. http://www.nafc.ac.uk/publish/note5/note5.htm, 2000-04-14

  136. Philippart, C.J., Anadón, R., Danovaro, R., Dippner, J.W., Drinkwater, K.F., Hawkins, S.J., Oguz, T., O'Sullivan, G. & Reid, P.C., 2011. Impacts of climate change on European marine ecosystems: observations, expectations and indicators. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 400 (1), 52-69.

  137. 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

  138. Raffaelli, D.G.  & Hawkins, S.J., 1999. Intertidal Ecology 2nd edn.. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

  139. Redmond, S. 2013. Effects of Increasing Temperature and Ocean Acidification on the Microstages of two Populations of Saccharina latissima in the Northwest Atlantic. Master of Science,  University of Connecticut.

  140. Rinde, E. & Sjøtun, K., 2005. Demographic variation in the kelp Laminaria hyperborea along a latitudinal gradient. Marine Biology, 146 (6), 1051-1062.

  141. Roleda, M.Y., Morris, J.N., McGraw, C.M. & Hurd, C.L., 2012. Ocean acidification and seaweed reproduction: increased CO2 ameliorates the negative effect of lowered pH on meiospore germination in the giant kelp Macrocystis pyrifera (Laminariales, Phaeophyceae). Global Change Biology, 18 (3), 854-864. DOI https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2011.02594.x

  142. Rostron, D.M. & Bunker, F. St P.D., 1997. An assessment of sublittoral epibenthic communities and species following the Sea Empress oil spill. A report to the Countryside Council for Wales from Marine Seen & Sub-Sea Survey., Countryside Council for Wales, Bangor, CCW Sea Empress Contact Science, no. 177.

  143. Salland, N. & Smale, D., 2021. Spatial variation in the structure of overwintering, remnant Saccorhiza polyschides sporophytes and their associated assemblages. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 101 (4), 639-648. DOI https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025315421000692

  144. Schiel, D.R. & Foster, M.S., 1986. The structure of subtidal algal stands in temperate waters. Oceanography and Marine Biology: an Annual Review, 24, 265-307.

  145. Seapy , R.R. & Littler, M.M., 1982. Population and Species Diversity Fluctuations in a Rocky Intertidal Community Relative to Severe Aerial Exposure and Sediment Burial. Marine Biology, 71, 87-96.

  146. Sheppard, C.R.C., Bellamy, D.J. & Sheppard, A.L.S., 1980. Study of the fauna inhabiting the holdfasts of Laminaria hyperborea (Gunn.) Fosl. along some environmental and geographical gradients. Marine Environmental Research, 4, 25-51.

  147. Simonson, E., Scheibling, R. & Metaxas, A., 2015. Kelp in hot water: I.Warming seawater temperature induces weakening and loss of kelp tissue. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 537. DOI http://doi.org/10.3354/meps11438

  148. Sivertsen, K., 1997. Geographic and environmental factors affecting the distribution of kelp beds and barren grounds and changes in biota associated with kelp reduction at sites along the Norwegian coast. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 54, 2872-2887.

  149. Sjøtun, K., Christie, H. & Helge Fosså, J., 2006. The combined effect of canopy shading and sea urchin grazing on recruitment in kelp forest (Laminaria hyperborea). Marine Biology Research, 2 (1), 24-32.

  150. Sjøtun, K. & Schoschina, E.V., 2002. Gametophytic development of Laminaria spp. (Laminariales, Phaeophyta) at low temperatures. Phycologia, 41, 147-152.

  151. Smale, D.A., 2020. Impacts of ocean warming on kelp forest ecosystems. New Phytologist, 225, 1447-1454. DOI https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.16107

  152. Smale, D.A., Burrows, M.T., Moore, P., O'Connor, N. & Hawkins, S.J., 2013. Threats and knowledge gaps for ecosystem services provided by kelp forests: a northeast Atlantic perspective. Ecology and evolution, 3 (11), 4016-4038.

  153. Smale, D.A., Epstein, G., Hughes, E., Mogg, A.O.M. & Moore, P.J., 2020. Patterns and drivers of understory macroalgal assemblage structure within subtidal kelp forests. Biodiversity and Conservation, 29 (14), 4173-4192. DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-020-02070-x

  154. Smale, D.A., Wernberg, T., Oliver, E.C.J., Thomsen, M., Harvey, B.P., Straub, S.C., Burrows, M.T., Alexander, L.V., Benthuysen, J.A., Donat, M.G., Feng, M., Hobday, A.J., Holbrook, N.J., Perkins-Kirkpatrick, S.E., Scannell, H.A., Sen Gupta, A., Payne, B.L. & Moore, P.J., 2019. Marine heatwaves threaten global biodiversity and the provision of ecosystem services. Nature Climate Change, 9 (4), 306-312. DOI https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0412-1

  155. Smale, D.A., Wernberg, T., Yunnie, A.L. & Vance, T., 2014. The rise of Laminaria ochroleuca in the Western English Channel (UK) and comparisons with its competitor and assemblage dominant Laminaria hyperborea. Marine ecology.

  156. Smith, J.E. (ed.), 1968. 'Torrey Canyon'. Pollution and marine life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  157. Somerfield, P.J. & Warwick, R.M., 1999. Appraisal of environmental impact and recovery using Laminaria holdfast faunas. Sea Empress, Environmental Evaluation Committee., Countryside Council for Wales, Bangor, CCW Sea Empress Contract Science, Report no. 321.

  158. South, P. M., Lilley, S. A., Tait, L. W., Alestra, T., Hickford, M. J. H., Thomsen, M. S. & Schiel, D. R., 2016. Transient effects of an invasive kelp on the community structure and primary productivity of an intertidal assemblage. Marine and Freshwater Research, 67 (1), 103-112. DOI https://doi.org/10.1071/MF14211

  159. Staehr, P.A. & Wernberg, T., 2009. Physiological responses of Ecklonia radiata (Laminariales) to a latitudinal gradient in ocean temperature. Journal of Phycology, 45, 91-99.

  160. Steneck, R.S., Graham, M.H., Bourque, B.J., Corbett, D., Erlandson, J.M., Estes, J.A. & Tegner, M.J., 2002. Kelp forest ecosystems: biodiversity, stability, resilience and future. Environmental conservation, 29 (04), 436-459.

  161. Steneck, R.S., Vavrinec, J. & Leland, A.V., 2004. Accelerating trophic-level dysfunction in kelp forest ecosystems of the western North Atlantic. Ecosystems, 7 (4), 323-332.

  162. Svendsen, P. & Kain, J.M., 1971. The taxonomic status, distribution, and morphology of Laminaria cucullata sensu Jorde and Klavestad. Sarsia, 46 (1), 1-22.

  163. Teagle, H., Hawkins, S. J., Moore, P. J. & Smale, D. A., 2017. The role of kelp species as biogenic habitat formers in coastal marine ecosystems. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 492, 81-98. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2017.01.017

  164. Thompson, G.A. & Schiel, D.R., 2012. Resistance and facilitation by native algal communities in the invasion success of Undaria pinnatifida. Marine Ecology, Progress Series, 468, 95-105.

  165. Tidbury, H, 2020. Wakame (Undaria pinnatifida). GB Non-native Species Rapid Risk Assessment., 15 pp. Available from: http://www.nonnativespecies.org/index.cfm?pageid=143

  166. Vadas, R.L. & Elner, R.W., 1992. Plant-animal interactions in the north-west Atlantic. In Plant-animal interactions in the marine benthos, (ed. D.M. John, S.J. Hawkins & J.H. Price), 33-60. Oxford: Clarendon Press. [Systematics Association Special Volume, no. 46].

  167. Vadas, R.L., Johnson, S. & Norton, T.A., 1992. Recruitment and mortality of early post-settlement stages of benthic algae. British Phycological Journal, 27, 331-351.

  168. Valentine, J. P. & Johnson, C. R., 2003. Establishment of the introduced kelp Undaria pinnatifida in Tasmania depends on disturbance to native algal assemblages. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 295 (1), 63-90. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-0981(03)00272-7

  169. Van den Hoek, C., 1982. The distribution of benthic marine algae in relation to the temperature regulation of their life histories. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 18, 81-144.

  170. Vaz-Pinto, F., Rodil, I.F., Mineur, F., Olabarria, C. & Arenas, F., 2014. Understanding biological invasions by seaweeds. In Pereira, L. & Neto, J.M. (eds.). Marine algae: biodiversity, taxonomy, environmental assessment and biotechnology. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press, pp. 140-177.

  171. Vost, L.M., 1983. The influence of Echinus esculentus grazing on subtidal algal communities. British Phycological Journal, 18, 211.

  172. Werner, A. & Kraan, S., 2004. Review of the potential mechanisation of kelp harvesting in Ireland. Marine Environment and Health Series, (No. 17).

  173. Whittick, A., 1983. Spatial and temporal distributions of dominant epiphytes on the stipes of Laminaria hyperborea (Gunn.) Fosl. (Phaeophyta: Laminariales) in S.E. Scotland. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 73, 1-10.

  174. Wiens, J.J., 2016. Climate-Related Local Extinctions Are Already Widespread among Plant and Animal Species. PLOS Biology, 14 (12), e2001104. DOI https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2001104
  175. Wotton, D.M., O'Brien, C., Stuart, M.D. & Fergus, D.J., 2004. Eradication success down under: heat treatment of a sunken trawler to kill the invasive seaweed Undaria pinnatifida. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 49 (9), 844-849.

  176. Yildiz, G., Hofmann Laurie, C., Bischof, K. & Dere, Ş., 2013. Ultraviolet radiation modulates the physiological responses of the calcified rhodophyte Corallina officinalis to elevated CO2Botanica Marina, vol. 56 pp. 161

Citation

This review can be cited as:

Stamp, T.E., Williams, E., Lloyd, K.A.,, Mardle, M.J., & Tyler-Walters, H. 2022. Saccorhiza polyschides and other opportunistic kelps on disturbed sublittoral fringe rock. In Tyler-Walters H. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Reviews, [on-line]. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. [cited 27-01-2023]. Available from: https://www.marlin.ac.uk/habitat/detail/118

 Download PDF version


Last Updated: 19/05/2022