Subtidal Benthos Monitoring Post Dredging Report - …€¦ · Subtidal Benthos Monitoring Post...

Subtidal Benthos Monitoring Post Dredging Report Ichthys Nearshore Environmental Monitoring Program

Subtidal Benthos Monitoring Post Dredging Report

Ichthys Nearshore Environmental Monitoring Program L384-AW-REP-10207

Prepared for INPEX

November 2015

Subtidal Benthos Monitoring Post Dredging Report

Ichthys Nearshore Environmental Monitoring Program L384-AW-REP-10207


Prepared for INPEX Cardno ii

Document Information

Prepared for INPEX

Project Name Ichthys Nearshore Environmental Monitoring Program

File Reference L384-AW-REP-10207_0_Subtidal Benthos Post Dredging Report.docm

Job Reference L384-AW-REP-10207

Date November 2015

Contact Information

Cardno (NSW/ACT) Pty Ltd Cardno (WA) Pty Ltd Cardno (NT) Pty Ltd

Level 9, The Forum 11 Harvest Terrace Level 6, 93 Mitchell Street

203 Pacific Highway West Perth WA 6005 Darwin NT 0800

St Leonards NSW 2065

Telephone: 02 9496 7700 Telephone: 08 9273 3888 Telephone: 08 8942 8200

Facsimile: 02 9499 3902 Facsimile: 08 9486 8664 Facsimile: 08 8942 8211

International: +61 2 9496 7700 International: +61 8 9273 3888 International: +61 8 8942 8211

www.cardno.com.au www.cardno.com.au www.cardno.com.au

Document Control

Version Date Author Author Initials

Reviewer Reviewer Initials

A 16/10/2015 Kate Reeds KR Christopher Holloway CGH

B 3/11/2015 Kate Reeds KR Christopher Holloway CGH

0 5/11/2015 Kate Reeds KR Christopher Holloway CGH

This document is produced by Cardno solely for the benefit and use by the client in accordance with the terms of the engagement for the performance of the Services. Cardno does not and shall not assume any responsibility or liability whatsoever to any third party arising out of any use or reliance by any third party on the content of this document.

http://www.cardno.com.au/

http://www.cardno.com.au/


Prepared for INPEX Cardno iii

Executive Summary

A Subtidal Benthos Monitoring Program (SBMP) has been developed to detect potential changes in infaunal

and epibenthic assemblages living in subtidal, soft sediment habitats and infer whether any changes

observed are a result of dredging and spoil disposal activities associated with the Ichthys LNG Project (the

Project) in Darwin Harbour. The SBMP investigates potential effects of the Project on soft sediment infauna

and epifauna in Darwin Harbour Inner and Darwin Outer.

This report outlines the findings of the SBMP Post Dredging (P1) survey (24 July 2015 to 28 July 2015) for

Darwin Outer and aims to address the potential impacts of spoil disposal on soft sediment assemblages

following completion of the Project.

Dredging and associated spoil disposal in East Arm (EA) and along the Gas Export Pipeline (GEP) was

completed on 11 June 2014 and 12 July 2014 respectively. The total volume of material approved to be

dredged and placed within the Spoil Disposal Area (SDA) was approximately 16.7 Mm3.

The SBMP involved sampling of infaunal and epibenthic assemblages over four Phases; Baseline (B1; May

2012 to July 2012), Dredging (D1; May 2013 to July 2013), End of Dredging (EoD; July 2014 to August

2014) and Post Dredging (P1; July 2015). At Darwin Outer, surveys were conducted during B1, D1 and P1

only.

Spoil disposal activities at Darwin Outer were expected to have direct impacts on subtidal infauna and

epifauna via direct placement of sediment and consequent smothering and burial within the SDA. Through

suspension and deposition of finer sediment particles mobilised during spoil disposal, there was also

potential for indirect affects to assemblages beyond the SDA within the Zone of Influence Near (ZoIN) and

Zone of Influence Far (ZoIF) delineated on the basis of modelled turbidity plumes.

The specific aim of this Post Dredging (P1) survey (July 2015) was also to assess the extent of recovery in

relation to spoil disposal at the SDA by comparing the abundance and taxonomic richness of infauna and

epifauna assemblages with that measured in the previous Baseline (B1) and during Dredging (D1) surveys.

Overall, results have shown that the distribution of epibenthic fauna and flora at locations throughout Darwin

Outer was relatively sparse and patchy during all phases of the SBMP, although a variety of taxa (including

sponges, hydroids, bryozoans, ascidians, macroalgae, gorgonians and corals) were recorded within the

SDA, ZoIN and ZoIF. Approximately 13 months following completion of spoil disposal, there did not appear

to have been any net effects on the percent cover of epifauna at any of the locations surveyed within Darwin

Outer.

In terms of benthic infauna, the overall temporal and spatial patterns of abundance, taxon richness and

assemblage composition observed indicated that as expected, spoil disposal within the SDA did have a

significant impact on the infaunal assemblage as measured during D1. Within the SDA, the changes in

median grain size and percent composition of fines also support the hypothesis of smothering and burial via

spoil placement being the main cause and effect pathway impacting benthic infauna. However, following

completion of spoil disposal, there has also been significant recovery in both the abundance and taxon

richness of these indicators back to baseline levels. Based on the locations monitored, these results also

indicated that the impacts observed were limited to within the boundaries of the SDA and did not have any

indirect net effects on benthic assemblages within the ZoIN and ZoIF.


Prepared for INPEX Cardno iv

Glossary

Term or Acronym Definition

B1 Baseline Phase survey (May 2012 to July 2012)

Benthic Living on or in the seabed

Benthos The collection of organisms attached to or resting on

the bottom sediments (i.e. epifauna) and those which

burrow into the sediments (i.e. infauna)

BHD Backhoe Dredger

Bioturbation The stirring or mixing of sediment or soil by organisms,

especially by burrowing or boring

Bray-Curtis dissimilarity matrices Matrices of dissimilarity between samples in the types

and relative abundance of species/substrata type

C1 Control Location 1

C2 Control Location 2

CoC Chain of Custody

CPCe Coral Point Count with Excel extensions

CSD Cutter Suction Dredger

D1 Dredging survey 1 (May 2013 to July 2013)

DSDMP Dredging and Spoil Disposal Management Plan

EA East Arm

EoD End of Dredging Survey (06 July 2014 to 07 August

2014)

EPA Environment Protection Approval

Epifauna Animals that live on the surface of the seabed

GEP Gas Export Pipeline

GPS Global Positioning System

Infauna Aquatic animals living within the sediment

IBMP Intertidal Benthos Monitoring Program

Intertidal The portion of shoreline between low and high tide

marks, that is intermittently submerged


Prepared for INPEX Cardno v


LAT Lowest Astronomical Tide

Macrofauna Organisms associated with sediment and retained in a

sieve of 0.5 mm to 1.0 mm

Macrotidal Applied to coastal areas where the tidal range is in

excess of 4 m. Tidal currents dominate the processes

active in macrotidal areas

MOF Module Offloading Facility

NATA National Association of Testing Authorities Australia

NEMP Nearshore Environmental Monitoring Plan

ORP (mV) Oxidation Reduction Potential; a measure of a water

systems capacity to release or gain electrons in

chemical reactions

P1 Post Dredging survey 1 (July 2015)

PCoA, PCA Principle Coordinates Analysis; Principal Components

Analysis

PERMDISP Test for homogeneity of dispersions

PERMANOVA+ Permutational Analysis of Variance

pH pH gives an indication of the acidity or alkalinity of a

solution by its ability to gain or lose hydrogen ions

PSD Particle Size Distribution

SBMP Subtidal Benthos Monitoring Program

SDA Spoil Disposal Area

SE Standard Error

SIMPER Similarity Percentage Analysis

SP Separable Portion

Subtidal Waters below the low-tide mark

Taxon (plural taxa) The named taxonomic unit to which individuals, or sets

of species, are assigned (e.g. genus, species, family

etc.)

TSHD Trailing Suction Hopper Dredger

TSS Total Suspended Solids


Prepared for INPEX Cardno vi


Turbidity Turbidity gives an indication of water clarity

WDL Waste Discharge Licence

WQSSMP Water Quality and Subtidal Sedimentation Monitoring

Program

ZoHI Zone of High Impact

ZoI Zone of Influence

ZoMI Zone of Moderate Impact


Prepared for INPEX Cardno vii

Table of Contents

Executive Summary iii

Glossary iv

1 Introduction 1

Background 1

Requirement to Monitor Subtidal Benthos 1

Results of Baseline Phase Survey (B1) 2

Results of Dredging Phase Survey (D1) 3

Results of End of Dredging Phase Survey (EoD) 3

Aims and Objectives 4

2 Methodology 5

Sampling Locations 5

Survey Schedule 5

Sampling Design 7

Field Methodology 8

2.4.1 Epibenthic Habitats 8

2.4.2 Benthic Infauna 8

2.4.3 Particle Size Distribution (PSD) 8

2.4.4 pH 8

2.4.5 Oxidation Reduction Potential (ORP) 8

Laboratory Methodology 10

2.5.1 Epibenthic Habitats 10

2.5.2 Benthic Infauna 12

2.5.3 Particle Size Distribution 12

Statistical and Analytical Methodology 12

2.6.1 General Findings 12

2.6.2 Multivariate Analyses 12

2.6.3 Univariate Analyses 13

2.6.4 Relating Physical and Biological Variables 13

Quality Control Procedures 13

2.7.1 Field 13

2.7.2 Laboratory 13

2.7.3 Data Processing 14

3 Dredging Operations 15

4 Results 17

Epibenthic Habitats and Assemblages 17


4.1.2 Analyses of Habitat Characteristics 20

4.1.3 Analyses of Epibenthic Assemblages 22

Infauna 24


4.2.2 Analyses of Abundance 29

4.2.3 Analyses of Taxon Richness 33

4.2.4 Analyses of Assemblages 37

4.2.5 Analyses of Populations 40

Particle Size Distribution 43


Prepared for INPEX Cardno viii

4.3.1 Mean Percentage Contribution 43

4.3.2 Median Particle Size 48

4.3.3 Percentage Contribution of Fines 51

pH 54

ORP 57

Relationship of Physical and Biological Variables 60

5 Discussion 61

Epibenthic Habitats 61

Infauna 61

Physical Indicators 62

6 Conclusion 64

7 Acknowledgements 65

8 References 66

Tables

Table 2-1 Dates of subtidal benthos monitoring surveys for B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013), EoD (July 2014 to August 2014) and P1 (July 2015) 5

Table 2-2 Sampling design for the P1 survey for Darwin Outer 7

Table 2-3 List of the categories and codes for epibenthic habitat analysis 11

Table 3-1 EA dredge footprint summary 15

Table 4-1 Mean percentage cover of subtidal epifauna and habitats recorded at locations in Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) 18

Table 4-2 PERMANOVA results of epibenthic habitat characteristics for the B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) surveys. Significant results in bold, RED = Redundant term 21

Table 4-3 PERMANOVA results for epibenthic assemblages for the B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) surveys. Significant results in bold, RED = Redundant term 22

Table 4-4 Abundance and taxon richness of subtidal infauna assemblages collected during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) 25

Table 4-5 PERMANOVA results for infaunal abundance for the B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) surveys. Significant results in bold, RED = Redundant term. 29

Table 4-6 Mean infaunal abundance (± SE) at sites in the SDA, ZoIN and ZoIF in Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=5) 30

Table 4-7 PERMANOVA results for infauna taxon richness for the B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015). Significant results in bold, RED = Redundant term. 33

Table 4-8 Mean infaunal abundance (± SE) at sites in the SDA, ZoIN and ZoIF in Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=5) 34

Table 4-9 PERMANOVA results for infaunal assemblages for the B1 (May 2012 to July 2013), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015). Significant results in bold, RED = Redundant term. 39

Table 4-10 Mean percentage contribution and median grain size collected during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=2) 45

Table 4-11 Mean pH (± SE) for locations sampled during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=7) 54

Table 4-12 Mean ORP (± SE) for locations sampled at Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=7) 57


Prepared for INPEX Cardno ix

Figures

Figure 2-1 Darwin Outer sampling Locations, including: Spoil Disposal Area (SDA), Zone of Influence Near (ZoIN), Zone of Influence Far (ZoIF) and Control locations (C1 and C2) 6

Figure 2-2 Images of: a) remote drop camera frame and housing; b) Ponar benthic grab sampler; and; c) pH and ORP measurement probes 9

Figure 2-3 Screenshot of the CPCe photoquadrat analyses frame with a virtual 64 point random stratified grid overlayed 10

Figure 3-1 EA and GEP dredging footprint 16

Figure 4-1 Photographs of representative epibenthic flora, fauna and habitats identified from Darwin Outer during P1 (July 2015) 19

Figure 4-2 Principle Coordinates Analyses (PCoA) of epibenthic habitat characteristics sampled during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015). 21

Figure 4-3 Principle Coordinates Analyses (PCoA) of epibenthic habitat characteristics sampled during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) 23

Figure 4-4 Percentage contribution of subtidal infauna abundance and taxa richness for major taxonomic groups collected at all sites in Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) 26

Figure 4-5 Photomicrographs of numerically abundant subtidal infauna taxa identified during P1 (July 2015) Crustaceans: a) Aoridae group, b) Apseudidae and c) Ampeliscidae; Polychaetes d) Spionidae; e) Ampharetidae f) Syllidae; g) Glyceridae; h) Nematode 27

Figure 4-6 Photomicrographs of other representative subtidal infauna taxa identified during P1 (July 2015) Crustaceans: a) Callianassidae and Leucosiidae b); Polychaetes: c) Sabellidae and d) Eunicidae; Molluscs: e) Nuculidae and Olividae f); Echinoderm: g) Class Crinoidea; Cnidarian: h) Order Actiniaria 28

Figure 4-7 Mean abundance (± SE) for infauna samples collected at locations from Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=6) 31

Figure 4-8 Mean abundance (± SE) for infauna samples collected at sites from Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=5) 32

Figure 4-9 Mean taxon richness (± SE) for infauna samples collected at locations from Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=6). 35

Figure 4-10 Mean taxon richness (± SE) for infauna samples collected at sites from Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=5) 36

Figure 4-11 Principal Coordinates Analyses (PCoA) of infaunal assemblages sampled at Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) 39

Figure 4-12 Mean abundance (± SE) of infaunal families sampled at Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) contributing to 5% or more to dissimilarities between and within Phases at the scale of Location (n=6). 41

Figure 4-13 Mean abundance (± SE) of infaunal families sampled at Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) contributing to 5% or more to dissimilarities between and within Phases at the scale of Site (n=5) 42

Figure 4-14 Mean PSD of sediment samples collected at sites in Darwin Outer during the P1 survey (July 2015) (n=2) 44

Figure 4-15 Mean median sediment particle size (mm) (± SE) for samples collected at locations in Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) 49

Figure 4-16 Mean median sediment particle size (mm) (± SE) for samples collected at sites in Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=2). 50

Figure 4-17 Mean percentage contribution of fines (silt and clay <0.06 mm) ± SE sampled at locations in Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=6) 52


Prepared for INPEX Cardno x

Figure 4-18 Mean percentage contribution of fines (silt and clay <0.06 mm) (± SE) for samples at sites in Darwin Outer collected during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=2) 53

Figure 4-19 Mean pH (± SE) for locations sampled at Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=6). 55

Figure 4-20 Mean pH (± SE) for sites sampled at Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=7). No data at Site 3 (SDA) 56

Figure 4-21 Mean ORP (± SE) for sites sampled at Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=7) 58

Figure 4-22 Mean ORP (± SE) for sites sampled at Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=7) 59

Figure 4-23 Distance-based redundancy analysis (dbRDA) ordination of infauna assemblage data compared with median grain size, percent fines and ORP for B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015). 60

Appendices

Appendix A Field Data

Appendix B CPCe Habitat Descriptions

Appendix C CPCe Summary Data

Appendix D CPCe Summary Graphs

Appendix E PERMANOVA Results

Appendix F Pairwise Test Results

Appendix G SIMPER Results

Appendix H PERMDISP Results

Appendix I Infauna Raw Data

Appendix J PSD Raw Data

Appendix K DIST LM Results


Prepared for INPEX Cardno 1

1 Introduction

Background

INPEX is the operator of the Ichthys LNG Project (the Project). The Project comprises the development of

offshore production facilities at the Ichthys Field in the Browse Basin, some 820 km west-south-west of

Darwin, an 889 km long subsea gas export pipeline (GEP) and an onshore processing facility and product

loading jetty at Bladin Point on Middle Arm Peninsula in Darwin Harbour. To support the nearshore

infrastructure at Bladin Point, dredging works were carried out to extend safe shipping access from near East

Arm Wharf to the new product loading facilities at Bladin Point, which will be supported by piles driven into

the sediment. A trench has also been dredged to seat and protect the GEP for the Darwin Harbour portion of

its total length. A detailed description of the dredging and spoil disposal methodology used is provided in

Section 2 of the East Arm (EA) Dredging and Spoil Disposal Management Plan (DSDMP Rev 4) (INPEX

2013) and GEP DSDMP Rev 6 (INPEX 2014).

Requirement to Monitor Subtidal Benthos

The EA dredging works comprised the approved removal of 16.1 Mm3 of material. The dredged material

was disposed of at an offshore spoil disposal area (SDA) located approximately 12 km north-west of Lee

Point. In Darwin Harbour Inner, dredging activities were expected to have direct impacts on subtidal infauna

and epifauna via direct removal within the dredge footprint (Zone of High Impact (ZoHI)). Through re-

suspension and deposition of finer sediment particles mobilised during dredging operations, there is also

potential for impacts to infaunal and epifaunal assemblages beyond the dredge footprint in the Zone of

Moderate Impact (ZoMI) and Zone of Influence (ZoI), delineated on the basis of predicted sediment

deposition and turbidity plumes. The methodology provided in the EA DSDMP Rev 4 (INPEX 2013) along

with the model predictions for the ZoMI and ZoI (Section 6.5.1 of the EA DSDMP) guided the development of

the Subtidal Benthos Monitoring Program (SBMP).

The SBMP investigates benthic assemblages of infauna (aquatic animals that live within the soft sediments

of the seabed) and epifauna (animals that live on the surface of the seabed), within the subtidal benthic

habitats in Darwin Harbour and the nearshore coastal environment at the SDA. The infaunal component

focused on macrofauna, which are classified as animals that are retained on a 0.5 mm mesh sieve. This

group comprises the vast majority of biomass found in benthic soft sediments (Schwinghamer 1981). In

tropical macrotidal estuaries, such as Darwin Harbour, infaunal assemblages generally contain burrowing

organisms, such as polychaete worms, amphipod crustaceans, bivalve and gastropod molluscs and other

worm-like phyla such as nemerteans and nematodes (which are often abundant). These animals are

generally found within the upper 30 cm of the sediment. As well as being a source of food for organisms

higher up the food chain, such as fish and large invertebrates, they also drive nutrient cycling through

reworking of the sediments (bioturbation), altering physical and chemical processes, excreting nutrient-rich

wastes and feeding on phytoplankton (Pennifold and Davis 2001). The activity of benthic assemblages in

nearshore sediments is linked to pelagic processes and thus affects exchange processes between coastal

and offshore systems (Eyre and Ferguson 2005; Connell and Gillanders 2007).

There are a range of bio-physical factors potentially driving the patterns in distribution and diversity of

macrofaunal assemblages. These include sediment composition and grain size (Coleman et al. 1978, Brown

and McLachlan 2006, Post et al. 2006), hydrographic processes, seabed exposure/sediment mobility (Post

et al. 2006), salinity, turbidity, dissolved oxygen and water depth (Semeniuk and Wurm 2000, Currie et al.

2009). Biotic factors such as invertebrate burrowing behaviours and density dependant interactions (such as

competition and predation), may also influence distribution and diversity (Connell and Gillanders 2007).

Epifauna can generally be classed as either sessile (i.e. attached to the seabed) or mobile. Sessile

organisms are often attached to hard structure such as reef or gravel, although some sponges, hydroids,

ascidians, burrowing anemones and tube-building polychaetes can also establish within soft sediments,

although these epifauna are comparatively sparse compared with that of hard bottom or coral reef substrata.

Mobile epifauna associated with subtidal soft sediments often include echinoderms (e.g. seastars, echinoids

and holothurians), gastropod molluscs, nemerteans and sipunculid worms, among others.



Infaunal and epifaunal assemblages within Darwin Harbour Inner and Darwin Outer have the potential to be

affected by dredging activities via three main mechanisms:

> Direct removal from within the dredge footprint;

> Direct smothering via placement of dredged material within the offshore SDA; and

> Indirect changes to their habitat from the physical changes of the sediment (e.g. through re-suspension

and deposition of finer sediment particles released during dredging and spoil disposal activities).

Dredging will remove infaunal and epifaunal invertebrates occurring on and within the sediments in the

dredge footprint itself, although these impacts may be localised and relatively short-term, persisting until re-

colonisation occurs (Newell et al. 1998). Dispersion of the sediment plume may also have effects beyond

the direct vicinity of the dredge footprint by sedimentation and/or causing clogging of respiratory and feeding

appendages (Newell et al. 1998; Miller et al. 2002; Tillin et al. 2011).

Re-colonisation of dredged and/or spoil disposal areas by benthos is likely to occur relatively quickly,

occurring within a few months of the cessation of dredging/spoil disposal, due to the colonisation of

opportunistic species (Sarda et al. 2000; van Dalfsen et al. 2000; Newell et al. 2004). However, recovery of

benthic assemblages to comparable pre-dredging/spoil disposal conditions may take much longer and the

rate of recovery will depend on the frequency of maintenance dredging, local hydrodynamic conditions, the

degree of changes in sediment composition caused by dredging (van Dalfsen et al. 2000) and the successful

recruitment of larvae and immigration of mobile species. Recovery may result in assemblages that are quite

different in structure and composition from those originally present due to changes in sediment composition

and changed water depth. As the material to be mobilised by dredging is not contaminated or vastly different

in composition from that at the SDA (INPEX 2011), it is not expected to inhibit the subsequent re-colonisation

of disturbed areas (URS 2009).

Results of Baseline Phase Survey (B1)

The overall percentage cover of epifauna in both Darwin Harbour Inner and Darwin Outer Baseline Phase

surveys (B1; May 2012 to July 2012) was sparse, with ascidians, sponges, hydroids, anemones, bryozoans,

macroalgae and filamentous algae collectively accounting for less than 1% of the total mean cover of all

photoquadrats sampled (Cardno 2013). The vast majority of the seabed was otherwise classified as sand.

Results also suggested that areas likely to be directly affected by dredging activities within the Darwin

Harbour and SDA do not provide any unique or significant habitat for subtidal soft sediment epifauna.

The Darwin Harbour Inner and Darwin Outer infaunal assemblages sampled were diverse, including several

types of crustaceans (amphipods, isopods, tanaids, cumaceans, penaeids, copepods, ostracods, shrimp,

hermit crabs, ghost shrimp and brachyuran crabs), polychaete worms (from a variety of families), molluscs

(gastropods, bivalves and opisthobranchs), echinoderms (ophiuroids, echinoids, holothurians and seastars)

and other worm taxa such as nematodes, nemerteans, oligochaetes, phoronids, platyhelminthes and

sipunculids. Other taxa recorded but identified to broader groups included anemones, bryozoans,

hydrozoans, sponges, and pycnogonids (sea spiders). A total of 15,487 individual animals comprised of 155

taxa were recorded from the Darwin Harbour Inner survey and 10,295 individual animals comprised of 150

taxa were recorded from the Darwin Outer survey. Darwin Harbour Inner infaunal assemblages did not vary

significantly among Control and Impact locations but did vary among sites. Darwin Outer assemblages

varied between Control and Impact locations and among sites within locations.

Darwin Harbour Inner sediments generally had higher proportions of clay and silt with varying proportions of

sand and gravel. Darwin Outer sediments consisted predominantly of sand and gravel with the exception of

Control location 2, which contained high percentages of clay and silt. Sediment pH was relatively consistent,

varying between 7.3 to 8.0 for Darwin Harbour Inner sites and 6.9 to 8.1 for Darwin Outer sites. Mean

Oxidation Reduction Potential (ORP) ranged between -200 mV to 322 mV for Darwin Harbour Inner sites and

between -108 mV to 185 mV for Darwin Outer sites, with strongly reducing conditions typically associated

with clay and silty sediment types.

No clear relationships between any physical parameters investigated and the infaunal assemblages

observed were evident, suggesting that other hydrographic, physico-chemical or biotic factors were

influencing site and location level distribution patterns.



Results of Dredging Phase Survey (D1)

Dredging Phase Survey 1 (D1; May 2013 to July 2013) was undertaken 12 months after B1 (May 2012 to

July 2012) and after the completion of EA dredging Season One (27 August 2012 to 30 April 2013), during

which approximately 43% of the approved total volume for the dredging program was dredged.

Results of sampling at sites within Darwin Harbour Inner did not indicate that dredging within East Arm had a

significant impact on epibenthic assemblages (Cardno 2014a). However, significant changes in relative

abundance, taxon richness and assemblage structure of benthic infauna at sites sampled within the ZoMI

and at some sites within the ZoI, but not at Control sites, indicated a potential dredging-related impact.

Despite the significant changes observed in infaunal assemblages, no significant differences in median

sediment grain size, pH or ORP were detected that were likely due to dredging activity or that could be

correlated with infaunal assemblages. Therefore, it is possible that other hydrographic, physico-chemical or

biotic factors may have influenced the changes in infaunal assemblages described. For example, strong

currents and seasonal rainfall within the channel of East Arm may lead to scouring/sedimentation and loss of

infauna to a greater extent at East Arm (ZoMI and ZoI) than at Control locations (West Arm area).

As expected, results of sampling at Darwin Outer suggested that spoil disposal activity had significant

impacts on subtidal epibenthic assemblages and infaunal abundance, taxon richness and assemblage

structure within the SDA and potentially at the Zone of Influence Near (ZoIN) and Zone of Influence Far

(ZoIF). However, in the absence of Control data, the extent of these changes in comparison with natural

variability could not be substantiated. Median sediment grain size also changed significantly at the SDA in

comparison with the ZoIN and ZoIF, indicating that spoil placement had resulted in substantial but localised

changes in sediment composition within the SDA. Results also suggest that spoil disposal may have

influenced small changes in sediment pH and more pronounced changes in ORP although there was no

obvious correlation of physical parameters measured with patterns observed in infaunal assemblages in

either B1 or D1.

Results of End of Dredging Phase Survey (EoD)

The End of Dredging (EoD) survey (6 July 2014 to 7 August 2014) commenced approximately one month

following the completion of EA dredging on 11 June 2014. It is noted that sampling was undertaken in

Darwin Harbour Inner only and not at Darwin Outer during this Phase.

Epibenthic fauna and flora were of a very low cover and showed some variability among Locations and

Phases, however, no significant changes indicative of a dredging related effect were detected.

Infauna on the other hand, were numerous and diverse and in accordance with the sampling approach

outlined in the NEMP, the changes observed between B1 and D1 and overall significant decreases in

abundance and taxon richness between B1 and EoD within the ZoMI, inferred a potential dredging-related

impact. The mechanisms potentially driving these changes, however, were unclear and there was no

conclusive cause and effect pathway to relate the key physical parameters measured as part of the SBMP to

dredging activity.

Site 3, located in the dredge footprint (ZoHI) showed a significant decrease in the abundance and taxon

richness of infauna from B1 to D1 which persisted during the EoD survey. No changes to sediment

characteristics were measured at this site between B1 and D1, although the percentage of fines did increase

significantly between D1 and the EoD survey. This would be expected given that EA dredging activities

removed up to 10 m of sediment at this site. The composition of the infaunal assemblage at Site 3 (within

the ZoHI) is unlikely to return to that observed during B1 as the physical characteristics of this site (in terms

of depth, sediment composition and hydrographic processes) have been permanently modified through

Project dredging.

In the absence of a clear impact pathway, it was concluded that a combination of mechanisms

(hydrographic, physico-chemical or biotic), both natural and potentially dredging-related, may have resulted

in the measured changes in infauna at some sites within the ZoMI (Cardno 2015a).



Aims and Objectives

The objectives of the SBMP are to:

> Investigate the potential effects of dredging and dredge spoil disposal on the abundance and diversity of

soft-bottom infauna and epifaunal communities;

> Determine whether there are significant changes in sediment characteristics (sediment grain size, ORP

and pH) before dredging/spoil disposal compared to during and after and how this affects abundance and

diversity of soft bottom communities; and

> Follow the subsequent recovery of any infauna and epifauna that may be impacted and relate this to

depth of sedimentation, nature of sediment and ORP.

The specific objectives for the P1 Phase are to:

> > Investigate the relationship between the physico-chemical characteristics of the sediment (particle size

distribution, REDOX and pH) and the composition of infaunal and epibenthic assemblages;

> > Assess recovery by comparing the abundance and diversity of infauna and epifauna assemblages with

that measured in previous phases;

> > Collect seabed sediment samples to determine changes in particle size characteristics after dredging;

and

> > Determine whether the REDOX potential and pH of the sediments has changed relative to previous

phases.

This report outlines the findings of the P1 survey undertaken during July 2015 as per the methodology

outlined in the Nearshore Environmental Monitoring Plan (NEMP Cardno 2014b). Where appropriate,

comparisons were made with surveys carried out during B1 and D1 phases.



2 Methodology

Sampling Locations

Darwin Outer sampling locations were selected to investigate the impacts of the spoil disposal area (SDA)

located approximately 12 km northwest of Lee Point (Figure 2-1). Previous surveys have described the SDA

as flat seabed comprised of a relatively featureless seafloor with sand/silt and very sparse epibenthic fauna,

with depths ranging from 15 m in the south-west end to 20 m in the north-east end (URS 2009).

The sampling design included three Impact locations; the SDA and two locations to the east of the spoil

disposal area, one in each of the Zone of Influence Near (ZoIN) and Zone of Influence Far (ZoIF). Based on

model predictions presented in the DSDMP Rev 0 (INPEX 2012), these are located in the zone of sediment

suspension and deposition from the SDA. These survey locations were similar in size to the SDA (i.e. 5 km x

2.5 km). Sites within locations were also standardised to an area of ~200 m x 200 m.

For B1, sampling was undertaken at two Control locations (C1 and C2), situated approximately 20 km west

of the SDA and outside of the GEP route, north-west of Charles Point. However, due to permit and access

restrictions, C1 and C2 could not be sampled during subsequent surveys. As such, any observed variation

in biological/physico-chemical indicators measured between B1, D1 and P1 (i.e. potentially due to spoil

disposal activities) cannot be separated from natural temporal variability. These data do, however, provide

an indication of the extent and possible recovery of soft sediment assemblages within the SDA and

surrounding zone of influence.

Survey Schedule

The dates of all subtidal benthos monitoring surveys carried out are listed in Table 2-1. It should be noted

that the trip carried out on the 15 September 2013 was to re-sample at Darwin Outer sites where full grab

samples could not be collected in the D1 (July 2013) grab sampling survey. Nineteen infauna samples and

two PSD samples were collected on that trip. GEP laying operations during the EoD survey also precluded

sampling at some sites during the scheduled survey times; therefore these samples were collected in

subsequent scheduled survey dates. Sampling at Darwin Outer was undertaken during B1, D1 (Dredging

Season One only) and P1, but not directly following the completion of Season Two dredging i.e. at the End of

Dredging (EoD; July 2014 to August 2014).

Table 2-1 Dates of subtidal benthos monitoring surveys for B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013), EoD (July 2014 to August 2014) and P1 (July 2015)

Phase Survey Date

Baseline (B1) Darwin Harbour Inner − Drop Camera 30 May 2012 to 02 June 2012

Darwin Harbour Inner − Grab Sampling 13 June 2012 to 16 June 2012

Darwin Outer − Drop Camera 27 June 2012 to 01 July 2012

Darwin Outer − Grab Sampling 12 July 2012 to 17 July 2012

Dredging Survey 1 (D1) Darwin Harbour Inner − Drop Camera 19 May 2013 to 21 May 2013

Darwin Harbour Inner − Grab Sampling 3 June 2013 to 05 June 2013

Darwin Outer − Drop Camera/Grab Sampling 3 July 2013 to 07 July 2013

Darwin Outer − Grab Sampling 15 September 2013

End of Dredging (EoD) Darwin Harbour Inner − Grab Sampling 6 July 2014 to 10 July 2014

Darwin Harbour Inner − Grab Sampling (Site 9 only) 20 July 2014

Darwin Harbour Inner − Drop Camera 20 July 2014 to 22 July 2014

Darwin Harbour Inner − Drop Camera (Sites 16, 17 and 18) 7 August 2014

Post Dredging (P1) Darwin Outer – Grab Sampling 24 July 2015 to 26 July 2015

Darwin Outer – Drop Camera 27 July 2015 to 28 July 2015



Figure 2-1 Darwin Outer sampling Locations, including: Spoil Disposal Area (SDA), Zone of Influence Near (ZoIN), Zone of Influence Far (ZoIF) and Control locations (C1 and C2)



Sampling Design

The sampling design is intended to be consistent with the ‘BACI’ (Before, After, Control, Impact) sampling

approach, which makes use of multiple controls in space and time (Underwood 1991, 1992; Long et al.

1996). This allows changes at a potential Impact location to be evaluated against variation measured at

multiple Control locations. The design requires that sampling be carried out in at least two external Control

locations in addition to the potential Impact locations. Monitoring was undertaken at Darwin Outer sampling

locations in relation to the SDA. However, as noted in Section 2.1.2, the Control locations in Darwin Outer

could not be surveyed during D1 or P1 and hence were not included in the statistical design for this report.

Comparisons were therefore made between the Baseline (B1), Dredging (D1) and Post Dredging (P1)

Phases and among the SDA, ZoIN and ZoIF sampling locations. Note that Darwin Outer was not sampled

during the End of Dredging (EoD) Phase. Alignment of sampling timing (during the Darwin dry season) was

undertaken to allow for direct comparisons between the Baseline, Dredging and Post Dredging Phases.

The sampling design for each area in is outlined in Table 2-2.

Table 2-2 Sampling design for the P1 survey for Darwin Outer

Locations/Treatment Sites Transects Replicates Total Samples (per survey)

Epifauna

x 3

SDA

ZoIN

ZoIF

x 6 within each location = total of 18 sites

x 2 per site

(A and B)

x 15 photoquadrats per transect

540

Infauna

x 3

SDA

ZoIN

ZoIF


N/A x 5 infauna samples

90

PSD

x 3

SDA

ZoIN

ZoIF


N/A x 2 PSD samples per site

36

pH

x 3

SDA

ZoIN

ZoIF


N/A x 7 measurements per site

126

ORP

x 3

SDA

ZoIN

ZoIF


N/A x 7 measurements per site

126



Field Methodology

2.4.1 Epibenthic Habitats

Epifauna was photographed using a high-definition underwater video drop camera and frame (Figure 2-2a).

The drop camera yields high-quality photographs in low light and low visibility conditions and produces

images suitable for photoquadrat analysis. The drop camera consisted of a Sony HDR-CX700 (1080i) digital

video camera, fitted with a 0.6 wide-angle conversion lens, pointing downwards, mounted within a waterproof

housing and frame and deployed from the survey vessel. The camera automatically adjusts focus and

exposure to suit conditions on the seafloor. The frame was built from solid aluminium and consisted of four

padded legs and a cradle to hold and secure the housed video camera. The unit was deployed with 1.35 kg

of lead weight attached to each leg as ballast to provide stability in surge or current. A length of silver rope

was attached to each corner of the frame for deployment and retrieval of the unit. The camera was lowered

to the seabed at the start of each transect and raised and lowered to approximately 50 cm above the

substratum, providing a quadrat size of ~40 cm x 65 cm, as the vessel drifted with the current (between 0.5

and 1 km/hr) until the end of the transect. Fifteen replicate quadrats were taken per transect. Darwin Outer

transects were approximately 100 m in length. Upon completion of each transect (A and B) at a site, the

video camera was retrieved and video footage was downloaded onto a laptop computer and external hard-

drive as a back-up.

GPS positions of each site were recorded so that the exact same positions could be revisited in future

surveys. Vessel movements throughout the course of the day were also tracked and downloaded.

2.4.2 Benthic Infauna

Sediment samples to be analysed for benthic infauna, PSD, pH and ORP were collected using a stainless

steel Ponar benthic grab sampler (Figure 2-2b) deployed by winch to the seabed at each site. The Ponar

grab can collect up to 4.5 L of sediment, with a bite depth of 90 mm and was fitted with stainless steel mesh

flaps to retain surface biota greater than 0.5 mm in size. The sample volume, water depth, time and GPS

position of each grab sample were recorded. Infauna samples were sieved on board the vessel through a

0.5 mm mesh sieve, with retained sediment and biota transferred to a labelled bag. The sieve was examined

after removal of retained sediment and any animals trapped in the mesh were added to the sample. The

sample was then preserved on board the vessel in a solution of 10% formalin and seawater with Rose

Bengal dye. Formalin stored on board the vessel was bunded within a plastic container to ensure no

leakage onto the deck. Sample bags were labelled internally and externally with Project details, time, date,

location, site and replicate number and placed in a sealed, labelled poly-drum.

2.4.3 Particle Size Distribution (PSD)

Sediment samples collected for PSD analysis were sealed into labelled bags and placed in a cooler to be

stored below 4°C until transfer to a freezer on land. They were later dispatched to a National Association of

Testing Authorities (NATA)-accredited laboratory (ALS Laboratories Darwin), accompanied by a Chain of

Custody (CoC) document for external laboratory analyses.

2.4.4 pH

Immediately after sample collection and prior to sieving, pH measurements were recorded using an Oakton

Instruments waterproof pH tester pen (Figure 2-2c). The probe was inserted 4 cm to 5 cm into the sediment

sample and left until the value on the instrument remained stable. Values were recorded on the field data

sheet. Tester pens were calibrated prior to each field trip and rinsed in a bucket of fresh water between

measurements.

2.4.5 Oxidation Reduction Potential (ORP)

Immediately after sample collection and prior to sieving, ORP measurements were recorded using an Oakton

Instruments waterproof ORP tester pen (Figure 2-2c). The probe was inserted 4 cm to 5 cm into the

sediment sample and left until the value on the instrument remained stable or after 30 seconds (whichever

was sooner). Measurements were then recorded on the field data sheet. Tester pens were calibrated prior

to each field trip and rinsed in fresh water between measurements.



Figure 2-2 Images of: a) remote drop camera frame and housing; b) Ponar benthic grab sampler; and; c) pH and ORP measurement probes

a)

b) c)



Laboratory Methodology

2.5.1 Epibenthic Habitats

Still images of each camera drop were captured using VLC Media Player. Each captured still image was

colour corrected using Adobe Photoshop software to improve image quality and aid in the processing of

photoquadrats. Each video transect was reviewed and a general habitat description recorded.

Photoquadrats were processed using the Coral Point Count with Excel extensions (CPCe) program (Kohler

and Gill 2006). The analysis involved digitally overlaying a virtual photoquadrat (scaled to approximately

40 cm x 65 cm) with 64 points in a random stratified grid on each captured video frame (Figure 2-3). Each

point was then assigned a category as indicated in Table 2-3. This provided an estimate of the percentage

cover of each habitat category (including biotic and abiotic categories).

Figure 2-3 Screenshot of the CPCe photoquadrat analyses frame with a virtual 64 point random stratified grid overlayed



Table 2-3 List of the categories and codes for epibenthic habitat analysis

Category Sub Category Code

ALGAE

Algal mat (ALG MAT)

Filamentous algae (ALG FIL)

Macroalgae (ALG MAC)

Wrack (ALG WRCK)

Seagrass (OTHER 1)

Leafy algae (OTHER 4)

CNIDARIA

Anemone (AMNE)

Hard coral (HD COR)

Hydroid (HYD)

Sea fan (SEA FN)

Sea whip (SEA WP)

Soft coral (OTHER 3)

Coral recruit (OTHER 5)

SUBSTRATUM

Burrow (BRW)

Gravel (GVL)

Organic debris (ORG)

Rubble (RUB)

Bare Sand/Silt (SND)

Shell grit (SHL GRT)

Bioturbated sand (SC3)

Algal mat on shell grit (SC4)

SPONGE

Sponge (SPNG)

ECHINODERM

Echinoid (ECND)

Ophiuroid (OPHI)

ANNELIDA

Worm-like phyla (OTHER 2)

CRUSTACEAN

Crustacean (OTHER)

MOLLUSC

Bivalve (BIV)

Gastropod (GAST)

BRYOZOAN

Bryozoan (BRYZ)

ASCIDIAN

Ascidian (ASCI)

QUALITY

Poor quality (PR QUAL)

INDETERMINATE

Indeterminate (IND)

FISH MOBILE

Fish mobile FSH MOB

TAPE, WAND, SHADOW

Shadow (SHAD)



2.5.2 Benthic Infauna

Samples for analyses of infaunal assemblages were sent via road freight to Cardno’s in-house laboratory.

Excess formalin in samples was initially drained from each sample over a 0.5 mm mesh sieve and

appropriately disposed of. Samples were then rinsed under tap water and transferred to an alcohol solution

for preservation and further processing. Large sandy samples (greater than 0.5 L) were elutriated to

separate animals from the substrate and improve sorting efficiency. The coarse fraction settled out from the

elutriation was then sorted in a tray to remove any larger invertebrates (such as bivalves) that may not have

been extracted during the elutriation. Animals were then removed from the sediment and elutriate fractions

under a binocular microscope using forceps and stored according to their taxonomic group with the Project

details and sample information. Animals were identified to Family level with each taxon separated into an

individually labelled vial. For groups where further identification would require a large expenditure of time

(e.g. oligochaetes and nematodes) or where taxonomic status in Australia was insufficient to achieve a finer

level of identification (e.g. anemones), identification was to a lower resolution such as Class or Sub Order.

2.5.3 Particle Size Distribution

Sediment samples collected for PSD analysis were dispatched to ALS Laboratories, Darwin (NATA-

accredited laboratory), accompanied with CoC documentation. The distribution of particle sizes greater than

0.001 mm and median grain size were determined using the dry sieve (AS 1289.3.6.1) and hydrometer

(AS1289.3.6.3) methods.

Statistical and Analytical Methodology

2.6.1 General Findings

General findings for infaunal assemblages are presented as total numbers of individuals and total number of

taxa (taxon richness) occurring among sampling sites. General findings for physical parameters (PSD, pH

and ORP) are presented as averages and standard errors (SE) of the mean for all sampling sites.

2.6.2 Multivariate Analyses

Statistical analysis of infauna data was done using PERMANOVA+ (based on Bray-Curtis dissimilarity

matrices) in PRIMER v6. This is a permutational approach to analysis of variance (ANOVA) that is superior

to traditional methods (Anderson et al. 2008) in that there is no assumption of normality in the data and

designs can be unbalanced (e.g. different numbers of replicate samples at different places or times) if

necessary. The approach yields exact tests for each level of an experimental design and is robust to

differences among variances. Post-hoc permutational t-tests or ‘pair-wise’ tests using PERMANOVA+ were

performed to examine significant interactions of main effects. Where the number of permutations was below

100, then Monte Carlo P-values were used to calculate the P-value. Prior to analyses, any CPCe samples

with greater than 50% poor quality/shadow or indeterminate categories were removed from the analysis.

Transformation of data to achieve normality was unnecessary for infauna data, although due to the

dominance of the bare sand group within the epibenthos habitat and assemblage analysis, these data were

4th root transformed to down-weight the contribution of the dominant groups. No transformation was used on

the epibenthos biota data as there was no one group that was numerically dominant.

In order to help discriminate between groups of interest (in this case locations and sites), multivariate data

were represented graphically using Principle Coordinates Analysis (PCoA), a generalised form of Principal

Components Analysis (PCA), which complements the permutational ANOVA procedure (Anderson et al.

2008). Samples were projected onto linear axes based on their dissimilarities in a way that best describes

the patterns among them using as few dimensions as possible (Clarke and Gorley 2006).

Similarity Percentage Analysis (SIMPER) was used to identify those taxa, or groups of taxa, contributing

most to dissimilarities between assemblages where appropriate. It should be noted that only higher level

interaction terms (i.e. at the scale of Phase and Location) are included in the relevant appendices.

Differences in the dispersion of data between surveys were examined using the PERMDISP routine in

PERMANOVA+. This routine was used to separate the effects of differences in dispersion of points within

clusters from differences in the relative positions of the clusters (Anderson et al. 2008).



The design for the statistical analyses for each component of the P1 Phase was as follows:

1. Darwin Outer Drop Camera:

> Phase: 3 levels (B1, D1, P1), fixed;

> Location: 3 levels (SDA, ZoIN, ZoIF), fixed;

> Sites: 6 levels, random, nested in Location;

> Transects: 2 levels (A and B), random, nested in Site; and

> Replicates: x 15.

2. Darwin Outer Grab Sampling:

> Phase: 3 levels (B1, D1, P1), fixed;

> Location: 3 levels (SDA, ZoIN, ZoIF), fixed;

> Sites: 6 levels, random, nested in Location; and

> Replicates: x 5 (infauna), x 2 (PSD), x7 (pH and ORP).

2.6.3 Univariate Analyses

Where appropriate, univariate analyses were done to investigate differences in taxon richness, taxon

abundance and individual populations of taxa contributing the most to spatial and temporal variability.

PERMANOVA+ (based on Euclidian distance) was used to perform permutational analyses of variance as

this approach does not require that the data come from a normal distribution or that variances are

homogeneous, as is the case with traditional ANOVA. After calculating a Euclidean distance matrix of all

possible pairs of samples of the variable of interest, the underlying distribution of the data was determined by

repeated randomisation of the samples in the matrix, enabling exact tests for all levels of the experimental

design (Anderson et al. 2008).

2.6.4 Relating Physical and Biological Variables

To examine the relationship between the physical variables of PSD, pH and ORP with the biotic data, a sub-

program within the PRIMER package called Distance Based Linear Models (DIST-LM) was used. DIST-LM

models the relationship between a multivariate data cloud (as described by a resemblance matrix) and one

or more predictor variables that were measured from the same set of samples. P-values for testing the null

hypothesis of no relationship are obtained using permutation methods rather than traditional tables.

Quality Control Procedures

2.7.1 Field

As per the requirements of INPEX’s Waste Discharge Licence (WDL) and EPA 8 permit conditions on

reporting, for all replicate samples collected, a unique sample code, a record of the GPS position, time, date,

depth, name of the sampler, sediment type and weather conditions were recorded on waterproof field sheets.

All data were then transcribed into the master Project database linked to each unique sample code. GPS

positions of sampling locations were downloaded into Excel format then imported into the master database

and checked against previous sampling locations. A photographic record was also archived for each PSD

grab sample collected. Sediment samples were transferred into polyurethane bags and labelled internally

and on the outside of the bag. Hard copies of all original datasheets were scanned and stored electronically

within the master database.

CoC documentation accompanied all consignments of samples being transported from one party to another.

Field quality assurance included the collection and analysis of a duplicate sample at a randomly selected

site. External laboratory quality assurance included the use of blind replicate environmental samples.

2.7.2 Laboratory

All samples were logged upon receipt from the field on a laboratory management sheet. In the laboratory, a

sample sign-in/sign out system was used to track sample status and time required to process each sample.

For each sample, the sediment remaining after removal of all biota was checked by a second experienced



person to recover any missed organisms. Verification of identifications and counts were completed by a

second experienced scientist on all samples. A voucher collection was retained for future comparison and

identification. External laboratory quality assurance included the use of blind replicate environmental

samples.

2.7.3 Data Processing

Personnel involved in sampling photographs using CPCe were required to demonstrate proficiency before

being authorised to begin sampling of photoquadrats. Proficiency was acquired through training by an

experienced scorer available to assist CPCe analysts full time throughout processing. All photos were

checked by an experienced staff member for consistency and accuracy. Once these checks were

completed, the Scope Leader or Data Manager approved the images for further analyses. Before exporting

data to Excel, the CPCe files were examined to ensure that all the points of each quadrat (i.e. 64 points)

were scored and to check that there was a CPCe file (‘.cpc’) for every photograph processed.

Prior to use in statistical analyses, data files were locked to avoid corruption or accidental over-write. The

video analysis and all field data were checked for errors before undertaking further analysis or presentation.

This involved one person entering the data and two scientists then checking the digital and hard copies

against each other.



3 Dredging Operations

The EA dredging program has involved a number of dredge vessels including Backhoe Dredgers (BHD),

Cutter Suction Dredger (CSD) and Trailing Suction Hopper Dredgers (TSHD), operating in different areas

depending on water depths, bed material characteristics and the amount of material to be removed.

The EA dredging campaign was divided into five Separable Portions (SP1 to SP5) that refer to the location

and duration of specific dredging activities. The SPs are summarised in Table 3-1 and presented in Figure

3-1.

EA dredging was completed over two seasons; Season One from 27 August 2012 to 30 April 2013 and

Season Two from 1 November 2013 to 11 June 2014, following a six-month hiatus. Overall, 16.1 Mm3 of

material was approved to be removed from EA. The dredged material was deposited at the offshore spoil

disposal area located to the north of Darwin Harbour, within the Beagle Gulf, approximately 12 km north-west

of Lee-Point.

The dredge spoil disposal location was selected to avoid adverse impacts on commercial shipping and

recreational fishing activities. The available location has an area of 12.5 km2 (5 km by 2.5 km) and was filled

progressively so that the full volume of dredged material could be accommodated within the nominated area.

Placement of the material inside the disposal ground took into consideration environmental factors such as

the bathymetry at the spoil ground and the characteristics of the disposed material. Placement of the

material during the works was done such that, in time, material was eventually spread out evenly across the

dredge spoil disposal area as far as practicably possible. The speed of the vessel when dumping was within

3 knots in order to minimise turbidity and remobilisation of sediments. Disposal of dredge material was

managed as described in the environmental management framework (Section 7.4.1. of the DSDMP Rev 4

(INPEX 2013)).

Dredging for the GEP was undertaken in stages from 23 October 2013 to 12 July 2014. Overall, 0.466 Mm3

of material was approved to be removed along the GEP and included the use of TSHDs and BHDs.

Table 3-1 EA dredge footprint summary

ID Separable Portion

SP1 Separable Portion 1 – Module Offloading Facility (MOF)

SP2 Separable Portion 2 – Jetty Pocket

SP3 Separable Portion 3 – Berth Area

SP4 Separable Portion 4 – Approach Channel, Berth Approach and Turning Area

SP5 Separable Portion 5 – Walker Shoal



Figure 3-1 EA and GEP dredging footprint



4 Results

Sampling dates for the P1 survey (July 2015) are presented in Table 4-1. Field notes and representative

photoquadrats of the seabed (including dates, times and GPS positions of sampling points) are presented in

Appendix A. Habitat descriptions and representative photoquadrats of each site are presented in Appendix

B. Summary data including mean percent cover of each category by site and location are presented in

Appendix C and graphically presented for P1 in Appendix D.

Epibenthic Habitats and Assemblages


In general, the area of seabed surveyed at offshore sites during the P1 survey (July 2015) consisted of

mostly flat, bare, sand with shell grit and sparse epifauna including filamentous algae, occasional bryozoans,

stalked ascidians, sponges, sea fans, sea whips, hydroids and hard corals1 (Table 4-1, Figure 4-1). The

substratum at sites within the Spoil Disposal Area consisted of very fine sand with little epifauna in

comparison to the ZoIN and ZoIF, apart from filamentous algae. The exception to this was at Site 2 (which

contained hard corals, bryozoans and ascidians) and at Site 5, where there was a relatively high percent

cover of hydroids (Appendix B). The substratum within the ZoIN and ZoIF was also sandy in composition

but appeared to be coarser with evidence of bioturbation caused by burrowing invertebrates (Appendix B).

The overall percent cover of epifauna recorded in photoquadrats within the ZoIN and ZoIF also appeared to

be greater than within the SDA (Appendix B, Appendix D).

Similar to B1 (May 2012 to July 2012) and D1 (May 2013 to July 2013), bare sand (including fine sand and

silt) was the most frequently recorded category, on average occurring in excess of 91% mean cover across

all locations during P1. Filamentous algae, hydroids, burrows and bioturbated sand accounted for 2.31%,

0.78%, 0.58% and 0.39% of mean cover respectively. The average percent cover of bare sand, burrows,

hydroids, bryozoans, ascidians, bioturbated sand and filamentous algae occurring across all locations has

generally increased from B1 through to P1 across all locations, whereas the percent cover of shell grit,

rubble, gravel, sponge, sea fan and soft coral has decreased (Table 4-1).

Epifauna and benthic flora, including sponges, hydroids, bryozoans, ascidians, macroalgae, hard and soft

coral and cnidarians (sea whips and sea fans) accounted for 1.47% of mean cover in photoquadrats taken

across all locations during P1, which was greater than in B1 (0.78%) and in D1 (1.17%). Overall the total

number of taxa recorded in P1 was the same as in B1 (19), but less than in D1.

1 Hard corals for the purpose of subtidal epifauna may refer to potentially dead or alive coral as well as coral fragments/rubble



Table 4-1 Mean percentage cover of subtidal epifauna and habitats recorded at locations in Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015)

Phase B1 D1 P1

Location SDA ZoIN ZoIF SDA ZoIN ZoIF SDA ZoIN ZoIF

Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE

Hard Coral 0.06 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.09 0.08 0.15 0.15 0.27 0.11 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.42 0.38 0.06 0.03

Hydroid 0.11 0.07 0.14 0.08 0.43 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.36 0.13 0.72 0.24 1.43 1.03 0.69 0.22 0.23 0.05

Sea Fan 0.10 0.08 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00

Sea Whip 0.04 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.08 0.23 0.14 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01

Algal Mat on Sand 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.11 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.10 0.05 0.03 0.64 0.29 0.39 0.14

Filamentous Algae 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.20 0.35 0.08 0.32 0.12 1.47 0.95 3.31 1.59 2.15 0.82

Macroalgae 0.06 0.03 0.07 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.03 0.21 0.10 0.07 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.09 0.04

Wrack 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01

Burrow 0.29 0.07 0.38 0.09 0.59 0.13 0.10 0.06 0.40 0.08 0.49 0.12 0.10 0.04 1.09 0.49 0.55 0.09

Gravel 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.02 1.19 0.44 0.42 0.16 0.06 0.04 0.23 0.07 0.14 0.05 0.07 0.05 0.07 0.02

Rubble 1.07 0.32 1.03 0.16 0.81 0.18 0.84 0.29 0.22 0.04 0.51 0.16 0.37 0.15 0.37 0.11 0.09 0.03

Sand 91.09 1.43 87.24 1.90 80.47 1.72 84.48 3.18 82.47 2.44 72.97 2.58 93.10 1.95 87.99 2.37 93.11 1.58

Shell Grit 2.50 0.64 5.58 1.35 11.60 1.68 0.10 0.06 0.47 0.09 3.75 0.96 0.11 0.06 0.56 0.09 0.26 0.08

Bioturbated Sand 2.42 0.47 3.76 0.80 3.13 0.74 2.64 0.80 3.62 0.77 10.55 1.99 0.10 0.04 1.00 0.54 0.08 0.06

Sponge 0.30 0.14 0.15 0.06 0.15 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.25 0.10 0.15 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.08 0.03 0.01

Bryozoan 0.10 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.18 0.09 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.04 0.10 0.03 0.09 0.07 0.40 0.11 0.12 0.06

Ascidian 0.03 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.12 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.20 0.05 0.19 0.08 0.04 0.02 0.20 0.05 0.03 0.02

Soft Coral 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Wormlike Phyla 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Fish Mobile 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Organic Debris 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.10 0.08 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.02

Algal mat on shell grit 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Unid leafy algae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Coral Recruit2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.10 0.04 0.03 0.02

Total Number of Categories 15 18 14 16 18 19 16 19 18

2 Coral recruit is defined as hard coral smaller than 20 mm



Figure 4-1 Photographs of representative epibenthic flora, fauna and habitats identified from Darwin Outer during P1 (July 2015)

Bryozoans: a) and b); hydroids: c) and d); seafan (Mopsella sp.): e); hard coral

(Acroporidae): f); cup sponge: g) and h) stalked ascidian (Sigillina sp.)

a) b)

c) d)

e) f)

g) h)



4.1.2 Analyses of Habitat Characteristics

Epibenthic habitat characteristics (including physical and biotic categories) varied significantly between and

among Phases (i.e. B1, D1 and P1) at the scale of Location and Site (Table 4-2 and Appendix E).

4.1.2.1 Locational Changes between Phases

Pairwise comparisons showed that at the SDA, significant differences in epibenthic habitat characteristics

were only detected between B1 and P1 (Appendix F). SIMPER analyses showed that this was mainly due to

an increase in the mean percent cover of sand and hydroids and a decrease in mean percent cover of shell

grit and bioturbated sand and rubble. It was also noted that the change in mean percent cover of sand

between D1 and P1 was much larger than the net change between B1 and P1 (Appendix G). This is also

reflected in the results of the sediment particle size distribution (Section 4.3.1).

Similarly, within the ZoIN, B1 and P1 were significantly different (Appendix F) due to an increase in the

mean percent cover of sand, hydroids and filamentous algae and a decrease in mean percent cover of shell

grit and bioturbated sand (Appendix G). Between B1 and D1, however, there was a significant reduction in

the mean percent cover of sand and shell grit.

Within the ZoIF, epibenthic habitat characteristics at all locations were significantly different from one another

(Appendix F) due to differences in the mean percent cover of sand, shell grit and bioturbated sand

(Appendix G). The mean percent cover of sand decreased between B1 and D1, then increased from D1 to

P1 and increased overall between B1 and P1. The percentage cover of shell grit decreased from B1 to D1

and from D1 to P1. The mean percent cover of bioturbated sand increased from B1 to D1, decreased from

D1 to P1 and decreased overall between B1 and P1.

4.1.2.2 Locational Differences within Phases

Pairwise comparisons showed that during both B1 and D1 there were significant locational differences

between the SDA and ZoIF and between the ZoIN and ZoIF, but not between the SDA and ZoIN. However,

during P1, no significant differences were detected among any of the three locations (Appendix F).

SIMPER analyses indicated that during both B1 and D1, locational differences between the SDA and ZoIN

were related to a greater mean percent cover of sand and smaller percent cover of shell grit and bioturbated

sand at the SDA than at the ZoIF. Differences observed between the ZoIN and ZoIF were attributed to an

increase in sand and decrease in shell grit (Appendix G).

Locational differences between and within Phases are illustrated in the PCoA plot in Figure 4-2. The two

axes shown represent 75.8% of the total variation among photoquadrats (Figure 4-2) which provides a fair

representation of the epifaunal data in two dimensions. Variation in the dispersion of samples did not appear

to be a factor in driving differences between and among phases at the scale of location, as indicated in the

non-significant PERMDISP result (Appendix H).

4.1.2.3 Site-Level Changes between Phases

Pairwise comparisons did not show any significant differences among sites within the SDA during B1, D1 or

P1, however, significant variation among sites was detected at the ZoIN and ZoIF (Appendix F).

4.1.2.4 Site-Level Differences within Phases

Epibenthic habitat characteristics were similar throughout all sites within locations during B1. During D1 and

P1, however, variability was detected among Sites within the SDA and ZoIN, but not within the ZoIF.



Table 4-2 PERMANOVA results of epibenthic habitat characteristics for the B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) surveys. Significant results in bold, RED = Redundant term

Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P(perm)

Phase 2 2844.6 1422.3 15.42 0.0001 RED

Location 2 1075.9 537.95 5.6454 0.0008 RED

Site(Location) 15 1429.4 95.291 2.702 0.0001 RED

Phase x Location 4 1162.1 290.53 3.1497 0.0037

Phase x Site(Location) 30 2767.2 92.24 2.6155 0.0001

Res 54 1904.4 35.267

Total 107 11184

Figure 4-2 Principle Coordinates Analyses (PCoA) of epibenthic habitat characteristics sampled during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015).



4.1.3 Analyses of Epibenthic Assemblages

Further statistical analyses were carried out to investigate variability in biotic components of the epibenthos

only (excluding substratum categories) in relation to detecting potential effects of spoil disposal. Results

showed that epibenthic assemblages differed significantly among locations during all Phases. Significant

differences among phases were also detected at the scale of sites (Table 4-3 and Appendix E).

4.1.3.1 Locational Differences

Pairwise comparisons showed a significant difference in the epifaunal assemblages associated with SDA

and ZoIN and between the SDA and ZoIF (Appendix F and Figure 4-3). SIMPER analysis showed that this

was due to differences in the mean percentage cover of filamentous algae, hydroids, sponges, bryozoans,

algal mat, hard coral and sea whips. These differences were broadly attributed to a smaller mean percent

cover of these epifaunal groups at the SDA compared with at the ZoIN and ZoIF with the exception of

hydroids which were greater in mean percent cover within the SDA than at the ZoIN or ZoIF (Appendix G).

Locational differences between the SDA, ZoIN and ZoIF are illustrated in the PCoA plot in Figure 4-3. The

two axes shown represent 50.7% of the total variation among photoquadrats (Figure 4-3). This means that

approximately only half of the variability among samples is being captured in the two-dimensional

representation. Variation in the dispersion of samples did not appear to be a factor in driving differences

between locations, as indicated in the non-significant PERMDISP result (Appendix H).


Significant temporal differences in epifaunal assemblages were detected at sites within the SDA, ZoIN and

ZoIF. Within the SDA, changes were detected between B1 and P1 at Site 1 only. Within the ZoIN, changes

were detected between B1 and P1 at Sites 2, 5 and 6 and between D1 and P1 at Site 6 only. Within the

ZoIF changes were also evident between B1 and P1 at Sites 2, 3, 4 and 6 and between D1 and P1 at Site 6

only (Appendix F).


During B1, epifaunal assemblages varied among Sites 1, 2 and 5 within the SDA only. During D1, Sites 1

and 6 within the ZoIF also differed significantly, however, during P1 there was significant variability among

several sites within the SDA, ZoIN and ZoIF.

Table 4-3 PERMANOVA results for epibenthic assemblages for the B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) surveys. Significant results in bold, RED = Redundant term


Phase 2 18520 9260.1 5.4894 0.0001 RED

Location 2 7738 3869 2.2685 0.0162

Site(Location) 15 25583 1705.5 2.4746 0.0001 RED

Phase x Location 4 10661 2665.3 1.58 0.0635

Phase x Site(Location) 30 50607 1686.9 2.4476 0.0001

Res 54 37217 689.21

Total 107 1.5033E5



Figure 4-3 Principle Coordinates Analyses (PCoA) of epibenthic habitat characteristics sampled during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015)



Infauna


A total of 12,118 individual animals comprising 168 taxa were recorded from 18 sites across Darwin Outer

during the P1 survey (July 2015).

Total abundance (across all locations) initially decreased by 31% between B1 (May 2012 to July 2012) and

D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) but increased by 164% between D1 and P1 with an overall increase of 82%

overall between B1 and P1.

The number of taxa identified across Darwin Outer also increased from 139 taxa in B1, to 148 in D1 and 168

in the P1 survey (Table 4-4).

As was the case for B1 and D1, the taxa recorded in P1 were diverse, including 70 families of crustaceans

(including amphipods, isopods, tanaids, cumaceans, penaeids, copepods, ostracods, shrimp, hermit crabs

and brachyuran crabs), 43 families of polychaete worms, 33 families of molluscs (including gastropods,

bivalves and opisthobranchs), four families of echinoderms (including ophiuroids, holothurians, echnoids and

crinoids) and seven families of other worm phyla (including nematodes, nemerteans, oligochaetes,

phoronids, platyhelminthes, sipunculids and chaetognaths). Other taxa recorded but identified to broader

taxonomic groups included anemones, ascidians, brachiostomes, bryozoans, hydrozoans, sponges,

pycnogonids (sea spiders) and juvenile fish (gobies). Several families that had not been recorded in

previous surveys were identified. These included polychaetes of the families Euphrosinidae and

Sphaerodoridae, fairy shrimp (Nebalidae), amphipods from the families Amaryllididae, Amphilochidae,

Atylidae, Calliopidae, Eusiridae, Platyischnopidae and Ochlesidae, isopods from the families Arcturididae

and Whitleggidae and crabs from the family Ocypocidae.

Various families of gastropod molluscs including the families Cylichnidae and Lottidae were also recorded as

well as echinoderms from the class Crinoidea (also known as feather stars) and holothuroidea (sea

cucumbers).

In terms of percentage contribution, polychaetes (46%) were the most numerically abundant of the major

taxonomic groups in the P1 survey, followed by crustaceans (38%), other worm phyla (10%), molluscs (4%),

echinoderms (1%) and other phyla (1%) (Table 4-4, Figure 4-4). This was a similar result to that of B1,

where polychaetes were also the most numerically abundant group, but different from D1 where crustaceans

were the most numerically abundant.

Taxonomic diversity in the P1 survey was very similar to that of B1 and D1, with Crustacea being the most

diverse group in terms of number of families, followed by Polychaeta and Mollusca, other phyla, other worm

phyla and the Echinodermata (Table 4-4, Figure 4-4).

Amphipod crustaceans from the Aoridae/Isaeidae/Photidae group were the most numerically abundant taxa

recorded during P1 contributing to 9% of total abundance. This was followed by polychaetes of the family

Syllidae (7.5%), Ampharetidae (6.8%) and Spionidae (5.4%), tanaid crustaceans of the family Apseudidae

(5%), amphipod crustaceans of the family Ampeliscidae (4.2%), nematode worms (3.5%), polychaetes of the

families Glyceridae (3.2%) and Capitellidae (2.9%) and Nemerteans (2.7%). With the exception of

nematodes, nemerteans and polychaete worms of the family Glyceridae, similar taxa were represented in the

ten most abundant taxa recorded in both B1 and D1. Example photomicrographs of numerically abundant

and representative taxa recorded during the P1 survey are presented in Figure 4-5 and Figure 4-6.

Raw sample data are presented in Appendix I.



Table 4-4 Abundance and taxon richness of subtidal infauna assemblages collected during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015)

Phase B1 D1 P1

Abundance Taxon

Richness Abundance Taxon

Richness Abundance Taxon

Richness

Polychaeta 3286 40 1833 39 5607 43

Crustacea 2502 52 1907 56 4599 70

Mollusca 300 30 288 31 505 33

Echinodermata 144 2 75 2 103 4

Other Worm Phyla 348 7 299 9 1186 7

Other Phlya 88 8 184 11 118 11

Total 6668 139 4586 148 12118 168



Figure 4-4 Percentage contribution of subtidal infauna abundance and taxa richness for major taxonomic groups collected at all sites in Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015)

49%

38%

5%2% 5% 1%

B1

40%

42%

6%2%

6% 4%

D1

46%

38%

4%1%

10% 1%

P1

Total

Abundance

26%

38%

21%

1% 6%8%

D1

29%

37%

22%

1%5% 6%

B1

26%

42%

20%

2%4% 6%

P1

Total Taxa



Figure 4-5 Photomicrographs of numerically abundant subtidal infauna taxa identified during P1 (July 2015) Crustaceans: a) Aoridae group, b) Apseudidae and c) Ampeliscidae; Polychaetes d) Spionidae; e) Ampharetidae f) Syllidae; g) Glyceridae; h) Nematode

a) b)

c) d)

e) f)

g) h)



Figure 4-6 Photomicrographs of other representative subtidal infauna taxa identified during P1 (July

2015) Crustaceans: a) Callianassidae and Leucosiidae b); Polychaetes: c) Sabellidae and d) Eunicidae; Molluscs: e) Nuculidae and Olividae f); Echinoderm: g) Class Crinoidea; Cnidarian: h) Order Actiniaria

a) b)

c) d)

e) f)

g) h)



4.2.2 Analyses of Abundance

Infaunal abundance varied significantly between and within Phases at the scale of Location and Site (Table

4-5 and Appendix E).


Between B1 and D1 there was a significant decrease in the mean abundance of benthic infauna within the

SDA, but no significant changes between B1 and D1 at the ZoIN or ZoIF. Between D1 and P1, however,

there was a significant increase in mean abundance at all three locations. While there was an overall

decrease in abundance between B1 and P1 within the SDA, this was not statistically significant. Between B1

and P1 there has also been an overall significant increase in mean infaunal abundance within the ZoIN and

ZoIF (Table 4-6, Figure 4-7 and Appendix F).


During B1, mean infaunal abundance was similar across all locations, however, during D1 abundance was

significantly lower within the SDA, compared to within the ZoIN or ZoIF. During P1, mean abundance within

the SDA remained significantly lower than within the ZoIN or ZoIF, while mean abundances within the ZoIN

and ZoIF remained similar to one another (Table 4-6, Figure 4-7 and Appendix F).


At the site-level, pairwise tests showed decreases in mean abundance at five sites within the SDA between

B1 and D1 which was statistically significant for Sites 3, 5 and 6. Between B1 and D1, decreases in

abundance were also evident at Sites 2, 5 and 6 within the ZoIN and Sites 1, 2, 3 and 5 within the ZoIF,

although these decreases were only statistically significant at Sites 5 and 6 within the ZoIN. Increases in

mean abundance were also observed at Site 1 within the SDA, Sites 1 and 3 within the ZoIN and Sites 4 and

6 within the ZoIF during the same time period (Table 4-6, Figure 4-8, and Appendix F).

Between D1 and P1 there was a significant increase in mean abundance at all sites within the SDA, ZoIN

and ZoIF which was also statistically significant at Sites 2 and 5 within the SDA, at Sites 1,2,4,5 and 6 within

the ZoIN and at Sites 1,2,3,5 and 6 within the ZoIF (Table 4-6, Figure 4-8, and Appendix F).

Between B1 and P1 there was a net increase in mean abundance across all sites within the ZoIN and ZoIF

and at Sites 1 and 2 within the SDA, whereas there was a net decrease in mean abundance at Sites 3, 4, 5

and 6 within the SDA, which was significant lower at Site 6 (Table 4-6, Figure 4-8, and Appendix F).


During B1, site level variability was evident between Sites 1 and 3 within the SDA and Sites 2, 3, 4 and 6

within the ZoIF only. During B1 and P1, however, variability among sites was evident across all locations

and at several sites within locations (Table 4-6, Figure 4-8, and Appendix F).

Table 4-5 PERMANOVA results for infaunal abundance for the B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) surveys. Significant results in bold, RED = Redundant term.


Phase 2 3.3618E5 1.6809E5 35.523 0.0001 RED

Location 2 1.2455E5 62276 11.378 0.0018 RED


Phase x Location 4 1.6007E5 40017 8.4571 0.0002

Phase x Site(Location) 30 1.4195E5 4731.8 3.0224 0.0001

Res 216 3.3817E5 1565.6

Total 269 1.183E6



Table 4-6 Mean infaunal abundance (± SE) at sites in the SDA, ZoIN and ZoIF in Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=5)

B1 D1 P1

Location Site Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE

SDA

1 46.2 9.5 47.4 4.0 64.0 21.3

2 52.6 18.1 27.0 7.1 87.2 9.2

3 103.4 16.3 30.4 5.2 62.0 14.4

4 64.6 18.6 29.6 7.9 52.0 9.3

5 115.4 31.5 7.0 1.5 82.0 22.4

6 105.6 30.3 10.8 2.1 25.0 7.3

ZoIN

1 48.8 9.5 102.2 12.9 215.8 13.4

2 56.6 7.5 39.0 5.7 220.0 44.2

3 63.4 15.2 103.2 12.8 137.0 12.3

4 89.2 19.5 51.2 4.1 228.8 50.9

5 71.2 14.4 22.4 5.3 158.6 14.5

6 64.8 11.3 32.6 6.1 152.0 10.0

ZoIF

1 67.8 17.1 39.4 11.2 145.4 13.6

2 77.4 11.1 37.8 13.4 92.0 15.9

3 98.4 12.2 45.4 10.6 150.2 8.2

4 92.8 15.5 155.4 38.6 176.2 31.5

5 73.6 26.5 67.6 5.8 224.0 18.8

6 41.8 7.1 68.8 9.6 151.4 15.9



Figure 4-7 Mean abundance (± SE) for infauna samples collected at locations from Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=6)

0

50

100

150

200

250

B1 D1 P1 B1 D1 P1 B1 D1 P1

SDA ZoIN ZoIF

Mean Abundance B1, D1 and P1

Mean

Ab

un

dan

ce ±

S. E

. (n

=6)

Location



Figure 4-8 Mean abundance (± SE) for infauna samples collected at sites from Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=5)

Site /Location)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

SDA ZoIN ZoIF

Mean

Ab

un

dan

ce ±

S.E

. (n

=5)

Mean Abundance B1, D1 and P1



4.2.3 Analyses of Taxon Richness

A similar pattern to that observed for infaunal abundance was evident for taxon richness with significant

differences between and within Phases at the level of Location and Site (Table 4-7 and Appendix E).


Between B1 and D1 there was a significant decrease in the mean taxon richness of benthic infauna within

the SDA, but no significant changes between B1 and D1 at the ZoIN or ZoIF. Between D1 and P1, however,

there was an increase in mean taxon richness at all three locations and which was statistically significant

within the ZoIN and ZoIF. Overall, there has been a net decrease in mean taxon richness between B1 and

P1 within the SDA (not statistically significant), while there has been a significant overall increase between

B1 and P1 at the ZoIN and ZoIF (Table 4-8, Figure 4-9 and Appendix F).


During B1, mean taxon richness was similar across all locations, however, during D1 taxon richness was

significantly lower within the SDA, compared to the ZoIN or ZoIF. During P1, mean taxon richness within the

SDA remained significantly lower than within the ZoIN or ZoIF, while mean taxon richness within the ZoIN

and ZoIF remained similar to one another (Table 4-8, Figure 4-9 and Appendix F).


Between B1 and D1, there were significant decreases in taxon richness at Sites 3, 5 and 6 within the SDA,

while there were either increases or no significant differences at all sites within the ZoIN and ZoIF. The

exception to this was Site 5 within the ZoIN where there was a significant decrease in taxon richness.

Between D1 and P1 there was an overall trend of increasing taxon richness at all sites apart from at Sites 1

and 4 within the SDA. Between B1 and P1, there was also a net increase at all sites within the ZoIN and

ZoIF which was statistically significant at Sites 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 within the ZoIN and Sites 1, 3, 5 and 6 within

the ZoIF. Within the SDA, there were also significant increases in taxon richness between B1 and P1, but

also significant declines at Sites 3 and 4 (Table 4-8, Figure 4-10 and Appendix F).

4.2.3.4 Site-Level Changes within Phases

During B1, site level variability was evident between Sites 1 and 3 within the SDA, Sites 1 and 4 within the

ZoIN and Sites 3 and 6 within the ZoIF. During D1, however, variability among sites was evident across all

locations and at several sites within locations. During P1 significant variation was evident between several

sites within the SDA and between Sites 2 and 5 within the ZoIF, but between any sites within the ZoIN

(Table 4-8, Figure 4-10 and Appendix F).

Table 4-7 PERMANOVA results for infauna taxon richness for the B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015). Significant results in bold, RED = Redundant term.


Phase 2 8694.5 4347.2 19.171 0.0001 RED

Location 2 9425.5 4712.7 26.887 0.0003 RED

Site(Location) 15 2629.2 175.28 3.0938 0.0001 RED

Phase x Location 4 7277.6 1819.4 8.0236 0.0003

Phase x Site(Location) 30 6802.7 226.76 4.0024 0.0001

Res 216 12238 56.656

Total 269 47067



Table 4-8 Mean infaunal abundance (± SE) at sites in the SDA, ZoIN and ZoIF in Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=5)

B1 D1 P1


SDA

1 22.2 2.3 22.8 2.3 20.6 4.2

2 24.0 4.8 16.8 2.6 30.0 2.1

3 35.2 4.2 16.4 2.2 23.0 2.9

4 26.2 4.0 15.0 3.9 14.2 2.2

5 35.8 6.1 6.2 1.4 22.0 3.2

6 33.2 5.0 7.8 1.0 13.0 2.8

ZoIN

1 22.0 2.7 41.2 3.2 46.4 2.8

2 26.4 1.8 21.8 1.7 45.2 1.4

3 26.0 3.0 42.4 1.9 44.4 2.1

4 33.8 4.2 27.0 1.9 50.8 2.7

5 29.0 3.4 15.4 2.7 47.8 3.6

6 30.2 3.2 20.4 2.8 47.2 1.9

ZoIF

1 24.2 4.0 23.0 3.2 46.6 2.3

2 28.2 1.9 21.0 4.9 35.6 5.3

3 33.2 2.0 23.2 4.5 45.6 1.7

4 32.8 4.0 40.6 5.0 43.8 3.0

5 29.0 6.6 30.8 1.8 52.6 3.9

6 19.4 4.4 31.2 2.3 41.0 3.9



Figure 4-9 Mean taxon richness (± SE) for infauna samples collected at locations from Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=6).

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

B1 D1 P1 B1 D1 P1 B1 D1 P1

SDA ZoIN ZoIF

Mean Taxon Richness B1, D1 and P1

Mean

Ab

un

dan

ce ±

S. E

. (n

=6)

Location



Figure 4-10 Mean taxon richness (± SE) for infauna samples collected at sites from Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=5)

Site/Location

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

SDA ZoIN ZoIF

Mean

Taxo

n R

ich

ness ±

S.E

. (n

=5)

Mean Taxon Richness B1, D1 and P1



4.2.4 Analyses of Assemblages

Infaunal assemblages varied significantly between and within Phases at the scale of Location and Site

(Table 4-9 and Appendix E).


Significant location scale differences in the infaunal assemblage were evident between all Phases within the

SDA, ZoIN and ZoIF (Figure 4-11 and Appendix F). Within the SDA, SIMPER analysis showed that

differences in assemblages between B1 and D1 were largely due to a decrease in mean abundance of

amphipod crustaceans of the Aoridae/Isaeidae/ Photidae (AIP) group and tanaid crustaceans (family

Apseudidae). Differences between D1 and P1 were due to increases in mean abundance of glycerid and

spionid polychaetes and increases in amphipod crustaceans of the AIP group. Significant differences

between B1 and P1 phases were mainly driven by the decrease in mean abundance of the AIP group and an

increase in polychaetes of the family Glyceridae.

Within the ZoIN, differences in infaunal assemblages between B1 and D1 were driven by decreases in mean

abundance of the AIP group, whereas differences between D1 and P1 were driven by increases in the mean

abundance of the AIP group and polychaetes of the families Syllidae and Ampharetidae

Within the ZoIF, differences in infaunal assemblages between B1 and D1 were driven by decreases in mean

abundance of tanaid crustaceans (families Apseudidae and Leptocheilidae) but increases in the AIP group.

From D1 to P1 there was an increase in the mean abundance of syllid and ampharetid polychaetes as well

as apseudid tanaids and the AIP group. These same taxa also increased in mean abundance overall from

B1 to P1 (Figure 4-11 and Appendix G).


During B1, no significant differences in assemblage were detected between the SDA compared with that of

the ZoIN, although the assemblage associated with the ZoIF was significantly different to that of both the

SDA and ZoIN. Differences between the ZoIF and SDA were due to a greater mean abundance of tanaiad

crustaceans (Apseudidae and Leptocheilidae) and lower abundance of the AIP amphipod group within the

ZoIF compared to the SDA.

During both D1 and P1, the assemblage associated with the SDA was significantly different from that of the

ZoIN and ZoIF, whereas the ZoIN and ZoIF were no longer comparatively different from one another.

Differences between the SDA and ZoIN/ZoIF (during D1 and P1) were attributed to lower mean abundances

of amphipods of the AIP group, amphipods of the family Ampeliscidae and polychaetes of the family

Ampharetidae and Syllidae recorded within the SDA (Figure 4-11 and Appendix G).

Variation in the dispersion of samples (based on the distances of each replicate sample from their group

centroid) also contributed to locational differences (Appendix H). This is illustrated in the PCoA plot (Figure

4-11), although only 24.4% of the total variation was explained by differences among samples represented

by the two axes (i.e. there are a number of different factors driving variability at this level).


Site-level changes between Phases occurred at all Sites within the SDA, ZoIN and ZoIF. The general

pattern showed that between B1 and D1 there were declines in mean abundance of various taxa at Sites 3,

4, 5 and 6 within the SDA and Sites 2, 4, 5 and 6 within the ZoIN and at Sites 1, 2 and 3 within the ZoIF.

Between D1 and P1 there was an overall pattern of increasing abundance of various taxa of across most

sites with the exception of Sites 1 and 3 within the SDA, Site 3 within the ZoIN and Site 4 within the ZoIF.

SIMPER analysis showed that the main taxa that increased in abundance included amphipods of the AIP

group, Apseudids and polychaetes of the families Ampharetidae, Glyceridae, Spionidae and Syllidae

(Appendix G).

A pattern of increasing abundance in several taxa was evident between B1 and P1 overall, at all sites within

the ZoIN and at Sites 2, 5 and 6 within the ZoIF, whereas abundance at sites within the SDA were more

variable i.e. some taxa increased in abundance while others decreased at the same site (Appendix G).




Significant differences in the infaunal assemblage among sites was evident within all locations during the B1,

D1 and P1 surveys, but did not show any consistent or obvious patterns. Variability between sites within the

SDA did, however, appear to be greater at all locations during D1 and P1 in comparison to during B1.

Variation in the dispersion of samples also contributed to site-level differences, as indicated in Appendix H.

Univariate analyses were undertaken to further understand the patterns in abundance of populations of taxa

contributing these differences at the scale of location and site (Section 4.2.5).



Table 4-9 PERMANOVA results for infaunal assemblages for the B1 (May 2012 to July 2013), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015). Significant results in bold, RED = Redundant term.


Phase 2 74897 37449 11.642 0.0001 RED

Location 2 32338 16169 4.682 0.0001 RED


Phase x Location 4 33526 8381.4 2.6055 0.0003

Phase x Site(Location) 30 96505 3216.8 1.709 0.0001

Res 216 4.0658E5 1882.3

Total 269 6.9565E5

Figure 4-11 Principal Coordinates Analyses (PCoA) of infaunal assemblages sampled at Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015)



4.2.5 Analyses of Populations

Univariate analyses were undertaken to further investigate populations of taxa contributing the most to

Locational and Site scale differences between and within Phases. The three taxa contributing the most to

total dissimilarities between and within Phases at the scale of Location and Site included amphipod

crustaceans of the Aoridae/Isaeidae/Photidae (AIP) group, polychaetes of the family Ampharetidae and

polychaetes of the family Syllidae. The patterns in mean abundance of these populations are described

below.

Populations of amphipods of the AIP group varied between and within Phases at the scale of Location but

not Site (Appendix E). Between B1 and D1, the mean abundance of these amphipods decreased

significantly within the SDA but not within the ZoIN or ZoIF. Between D1 and P1, there were slight increases

in abundance within the SDA and ZoIF and a significant increase within the ZoIN. Between B1 and P1,

however, there was a net decline in mean abundance of AIP amphipods within the SDA (although not

statistically significant), while there were significant increases in abundance within the ZoIN and ZoIF (Figure

4-12 and Appendix F). This general pattern was reflected at the site level where there was a net increase in

abundance between B1 and P1 within the ZoIN and ZoIF, but not at Sites 3, 4, 5 and 6 within the SDA

(Figure 4-13). During B1 the mean abundance of AIP amphipods was similar across all three locations and

slightly greater within the SDA. During D1 and P1, however, abundances became lower within the SDA than

in the ZoIN or ZoIF (Figure 4-12).

Populations of ampharetid polychaetes varied between and within Phases at the scale of Location but not

Site (Appendix E). Between B1 and D1, the mean abundance of these polychaetes did not change

significantly across any of the three locations although there was a general decline within the SDA while

there were increases within the ZoIN and ZoIF. Between D1 and P1 there was an overall pattern of

increasing abundance across all locations, which was statistically significant within the ZoIN and ZoIF but not

within the SDA. Between B1 and P1 there was no overall significant difference in abundance of ampharetids

within the SDA, while there was a significant net increase in abundance within the ZoIN and ZoIF. During

B1, the abundance of ampharetids was similar between the ZoIF and SDA/ZoIN but was significantly greater

within the SDA than at the ZoIN. During D1, abundance within the SDA was lower than in the ZoIN or ZoIF

but not significantly so. During P1, the abundance of ampheretids within the SDA were significantly lower

than in either the ZoIN or ZoIF (Figure 4-12 and Appendix F). At the site level, there was a net increase in

mean abundance between B1 and P1 across all sites within the ZoIN and ZoIF, while there were overall net

declines at Sites 1, 3, 4 and 6 within the SDA (Figure 4-13).

Populations of polychaetes from the family Syllidae varied between and within Phases at the scale of

Location and Site (Appendix E) and followed a similar pattern to that of the ampharetid polychates.

Between B1 and D1, the mean abundance of these polychaetes did not change significantly across any of

the three locations although there was a general decline within the SDA while there were increases within

the ZoIN and ZoIF. Between D1 and P1 there was an overall significant increase in abundance across all

locations. Between B1 and P1 there was no overall significant difference in abundance of ampharetids

within the SDA, while there was a significant net increase in abundance within the ZoIN and ZoIF. During

B1, the abundance of syllids was similar across all locations. During D1, abundance within the SDA was

lower than in the ZoIN or ZoIF and significantly lower than in the ZoIN. During P1, the abundance of syllids

within the SDA was significantly lower than in either the ZoIN or ZoIF while the abundance within the ZoIN

and ZoIF were similar to one another (Figure 4-12 and Appendix F). At the site level, there was a net

increase in mean abundance between B1 and P1 across all sites within the SDA, ZoIN and ZoIF apart from

at Sites 3, 4 and 5 within the SDA (Figure 4-13).



Figure 4-12 Mean abundance (± SE) of infaunal families sampled at Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) contributing to 5% or more to dissimilarities between and within Phases at the scale of Location (n=6).

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

B1 D1 P1 B1 D1 P1 B1 D1 P1

SDA ZoIN ZoIF

Aoridae/Isaeidae/Photidae

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

B1 D1 P1 B1 D1 P1 B1 D1 P1

SDA ZoIN ZoIF

Ampharetidae

0

5

10

15

20

25

B1 D1 P1 B1 D1 P1 B1 D1 P1

SDA ZoIN ZoIF

Syllidae

Mean

Ab

un

dan

ce ±

S.E

. (n

=6

)



Figure 4-13 Mean abundance (± SE) of infaunal families sampled at Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) contributing to 5% or more to dissimilarities between and within Phases at the scale of Site (n=5)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

SDA ZoIN ZoIF

Aoridae/Isaeidae/Photidae

0

5

10

15

20

25

1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

SDA ZoIN ZoIF

Ampharetidae

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

SDA ZoIN ZoIF

Syllidae

Mean

Ab

un

dan

ce ±

S.E

. (n

=5)



Particle Size Distribution

4.3.1 Mean Percentage Contribution

During the P1 survey (July 2015), sediments within the SDA were characterised by high (77.5% on average)

proportions of sand (0.06 mm to 2 mm) with smaller proportions (7%, 9.5% and 6% on average) of gravel (>2

mm), silt (0.002 mm to 0.06 mm) and clay (<0.002 mm) respectively. Site 3 was comprised almost entirely of

sand (98%). Sediments at sites sampled within the ZoIN and ZoIF also consisted mostly of sand (between

37.5% and 52%) but with relatively larger proportions of gravel, silt and clay (Figure 4-14, Table 4-10).

Between B1 and D1, sediment composition at sites within the SDA became increasingly sandy and silty with

a decrease in the proportion of gravel. Between D1 and P1, sediment composition at Site 1 changed very

little in composition, while Site 3 became sandier and Sites 4, 5 and 6 became less silty and substantially

sandier. The proportion of silt at Site 2 also decreased, while the proportion of gravel increased (Table 4-

10).

Sediment composition at sites within the ZoIN and ZoIF remained relatively similar from B1 to D1 and from

D1 to P1, although there was a notable increase in the proportion of gravel at Site 3 within the ZoIN

approximately doubled from B1/D1 to P1 (Table 4-10).



Figure 4-14 Mean PSD of sediment samples collected at sites in Darwin Outer during the P1 survey (July 2015) (n=2)



Table 4-10 Mean percentage contribution and median grain size collected during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=2)

B1

Location

Site 1 2 3 4 5 6

Clay (<2 µm) 13.0 17.5 17.0 22.0 11.0 10.5

Silt (2-60 µm) 4.0 7.5 12.0 11.5 8.5 6.0

Sand (0.06-2.00 mm) 65.0 63.0 50.5 55.0 60.0 61.5

Gravel (>2mm) 18.0 12.0 20.5 11.5 20.5 22.0

Median Grain Size (mm) 0.394 0.325 0.257 0.188 0.595 0.450

Sediment Description Sand, shell and clay Sand, shell and clay Sand, shell and silty clay Sand, silty clay and shell Sand, shell and silty clay Sand, shell and silty clay

D1

Location

Site 1 2 3 4 5 6

Clay (<2 µm) 6.0 14.5 2.0 8.0 6.5 5.5

Silt (2-60 µm) 13.0 48.0 2.0 37.0 38.5 40.0

Sand (0.06-2.00 mm) 80.0 37.5 86.0 54.5 52.0 54.0

Gravel (>2mm) 1.0 0.0 10.0 0.5 3.0 0.5


Sediment DescriptionMedium fine sand, shell and

silt

Fine sand. medium fine

sand and silty claySand and shell Medium fine sand and silt Fine sand, sand and silt Medium fine sand and silt

P1

Location

Site 1 2 3 4 5 6

Clay (<2 µm) 6.0 20.5 0.5 1.0 2.5 7.0

Silt (2-60 µm) 8.0 23.5 1.5 1.0 2.0 21.0

Sand (0.06-2.00 mm) 83.0 44.5 98.0 92.0 86.5 61.0

Gravel (>2mm) 3.0 11.5 0.0 6.0 9.0 11.0


Sediment Description Sand, stone, fines Sand, fines Sand Sand, shell Sand, shell Sand, shell, fines

SDA

SDA

SDA



B1

Location

Site 1 2 3 4 5 6

Clay (<2 µm) 15.0 14.5 17.5 24.0 16.5 18.0

Silt (2-60 µm) 11.0 7.0 15.5 13.5 9.5 7.5

Sand (0.06-2.00 mm) 54.5 59.0 47.0 54.0 55.0 60.0

Gravel (>2mm) 19.5 19.5 20.0 8.5 19.0 14.5


Sediment Description Sand, silty clay and shell Sand, shell and clay Sand, silty clay and shell Sand and silty clay Sand, silty clay and shell Sand, shell and clay

D1

Location

Site 1 2 3 4 5 6

Clay (<2 µm) 6.5 5.5 8.0 21.0 10.5 6.0

Silt (2-60 µm) 6.0 4.0 9.0 16.0 6.0 6.0

Sand (0.06-2.00 mm) 57.0 73.0 63.5 54.5 66.5 73.5

Gravel (>2mm) 30.5 17.5 19.5 8.5 17.0 14.5


Sediment Description Sand, shell and silty clay Sand and shell Sand, shell and silt Sand, silty clay and shell Sand, silty clay and shell Sand, shell and clay

P1

Location

Site 1 2 3 4 5 6

Clay (<2 µm) 13.5 18.0 13.0 21.5 17.5 22.0

Silt (2-60 µm) 7.5 10.5 9.0 17.0 16.5 18.0

Sand (0.06-2.00 mm) 52.0 45.0 37.5 46.0 46.0 44.0

Gravel (>2mm) 27.0 26.5 40.5 15.5 20.0 16.0


Sediment Description Sand, shell, fines Sand, shell, fines Sand, shell, fines Sand, shell, fines Sand, shell, fines Sand, shell, fines

ZoIN

ZoIN

ZoIN



B1

Location

Site 1 2 3 4 5 6

Clay (<2 µm) 26.0 18.0 18.0 15.5 12.5 11.0

Silt (2-60 µm) 12.0 4.0 10.5 9.0 2.5 1.5

Sand (0.06-2.00 mm) 58.0 69.5 65.0 51.5 66.0 79.5

Gravel (>2mm) 4.0 8.5 6.5 24.0 19.0 8.0


Sediment Description Sand and silty clay Sand, clay and shell Sand and silty clay Sand, silty clay and shell Sand, shell and clay Sand and clay

D1

Location

Site 1 2 3 4 5 6

Clay (<2 µm) 17.5 6.5 12.0 11.0 5.5 4.5

Silt (2-60 µm) 15.5 8.5 9.5 6.5 4.5 3.0

Sand (0.06-2.00 mm) 61.5 78.0 71.0 58.0 77.5 85.5

Gravel (>2mm) 5.5 7.0 7.5 24.5 12.5 7.0


Sediment Description Sand, silty clay and shell Sand, shell and siltSand, shell, clay and silty

claySand, shell and clay Sand and shell Sand and shell

P1

Location

Site 1 2 3 4 5 6

Clay (<2 µm) 26.5 18.0 22.5 7.0 8.0 8.5

Silt (2-60 µm) 17.0 16.5 16.0 4.0 2.0 4.5

Sand (0.06-2.00 mm) 45.0 52.5 52.5 65.5 63.0 70.5

Gravel (>2mm) 11.5 13.0 9.0 23.5 27.0 16.5


Sediment Description Sand, shell, fines Sand, shell, fines Sand, shell, fines Sand, shell, fines Sand, shell Sand, shell

ZoIF

ZoIF

ZoIF



4.3.2 Median Particle Size

Statistical analyses showed that median particle size varied significantly among and between Phases at the

scale of Location and Site (Appendix E). Pairwise tests indicated that between B1 and D1 there was a

significant decrease in median particle size within the SDA, whereas there was a significant increase within

the ZoIN and ZoIF (Figure 4-15 and Appendix F). Between D1 and P1, median particle size then increased

within the SDA while it decreased within the ZoIN and ZoIF (although these differences were not statistically

significant). Overall there was a significant net reduction in median particle size between B1 and P1 within

the SDA, while there was a marginal (but not significant) increase within the ZoIN and ZoIF (Figure 4-15 and

Appendix F).

Significant differences in median particle size were not evident between locations during B1 or P1, however,

median particle size at the SDA did differ significantly from both the ZoIN and ZoIF during D1 (Figure 4-15).

Overall, no obvious or consistent patterns in median particle size were evident at the scale of Site, apart from

between B1 and D1 where there was a general increase in median particle size at all sites within the ZoIN

and ZoIF but a decrease at all other sites within the SDA, with the exception of Site 3 (Figure 4-16).

Mean median particle size and percentage contribution data are summarised in Table 4-10. Raw PSD data

are also summarised in Appendix J.



Figure 4-15 Mean median sediment particle size (mm) (± SE) for samples collected at locations in Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015)

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

B1 D1 P1 B1 D1 P1 B1 D1 P1

SDA ZoIN ZoIF

Median Particle Size B1, D1 and P1

Mean

Med

ian

Part

icle

Siz

e (

mm

) ± S

E (

n=

6)

Location



Figure 4-16 Mean median sediment particle size (mm) (± SE) for samples collected at sites in Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=2).

0.0

0.5

1.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

SDA ZoIN ZoIF

Med

ian

Part

icle

Siz

e ±

S.E

. (n

=2)

Median Particle Size B1, D1 and P1

Site/Location



4.3.3 Percentage Contribution of Fines

The overall pattern in the percent composition of fines (silt and clay <0.06 mm) was for an increase from B1

to D1, followed by a decrease from D1 to P1 within the SDA, whereas the opposite pattern occurred within

the ZoIN and ZoIF (Figure 4-17).

Statistical analyses showed that the percent composition of fines varied significantly among and between

Phases at the scale of Location and Site (Appendix E). Pairwise tests indicated that between B1 and D1

there was an increase in percent fines within the SDA, although this was not significant, while there were

significant decreases in the percent fines at both the ZoIN and ZoIF. Between D1 and P1 there was a

significant decrease in percent fines back to levels similar to that of B1 within the SDA, whereas there was a

significant increase from D1 to P1 within the ZoIN. An increase from D1 to P1 was also recorded within the

ZoIF, although not significant. Overall, there was no significant net change to the percent fines across any of

the three locations from B1 through to P1 (Figure 4-17 and Appendix F). No significant differences were

detected between locations within Phases although during D1, the percentage of fines was approximately

53% higher within the SDA than at the ZoIN or ZoIF (Figure 4-17 and Appendix F).

Site level changes in the percent fines strongly followed the patterns observed at the locational scale,

although there were significant net changes between B1 and P1 at some sites overall. These included Sites

3 and 4 within the SDA (where there was a net decrease in percent fines between B1 and P1), Site 6 within

the ZoIN, (where there was a net increase in percent fines) and Site 2 within the ZoIF, where there was also

a net increase in percent fines (Figure 4-18 and Appendix F).



Figure 4-17 Mean percentage contribution of fines (silt and clay <0.06 mm) ± SE sampled at locations in Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=6)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

B1 D1 P1 B1 D1 P1 B1 D1 P1

SDA ZoIN ZoIF

Percent Fines B1, D1 and P1

Mean

% F

ines ±

SE

(n

=6)

Location



Figure 4-18 Mean percentage contribution of fines (silt and clay <0.06 mm) (± SE) for samples at sites in Darwin Outer collected during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=2)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

SDA ZoIN ZoIF

Mean

% F

ines ±

S.E

. (n

=2)

Percent Fines B1, D1 and P1

Site/Location



pH

During the P1 survey (July 2015), mean pH values ranged between 7.02 (± 0.01 SE) at Site 1 (SDA) and

7.43 (± 0.06SE) at Site 1 (ZoIF). Overall, pH decreased marginally (between 3.7% and 6.6%) between B1

and P1 at all locations (Table 4-11, Figure 4-19).

Statistical analyses showed that pH varied significantly among and between Phases at the scale of Location

and Site (Appendix E). Pairwise tests indicated that between B1 and D1 there was a significant decrease in

pH within the SDA, while there were significant increases within the ZoIN and ZoIF. Between D1 and P1

there was then a significant increase in pH within the SDA whereas there was a significant decrease within

the ZoIN and ZoIF. Overall, there was a significant net decrease in pH across all three locations between B1

and P1 (Table 4-11, Figure 4-19 and Appendix F). Results also showed that pH was similar across all

locations during B1, but was significantly lower within the SDA than at the ZoIN or ZoIF during both D1 and

P1 (Table 4-11, Figure 4-19 and Appendix F).

The overall pattern of decreasing pH between B1 and P1 was also strongly reflected at the site level (Table

4-11, Figure 4-20 and Appendix F).

Table 4-11 Mean pH (± SE) for locations sampled during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=7)

B1 D1 P1


SDA

1 7.78 0.06 7.15 0.09 7.20 0.05

2 7.60 0.03 7.01 0.18 7.04 0.01

3 7.70 0.04 No Data No Data 7.21 0.06

4 7.66 0.03 7.46 0.15 7.28 0.01

5 7.76 0.04 7.51 0.09 7.32 0.05

6 7.87 0.06 7.43 0.12 7.27 0.06

ZoIN

1 7.67 0.06 7.88 0.07 7.41 0.03

2 7.64 0.05 7.96 0.04 7.35 0.03

3 7.66 0.06 7.79 0.06 7.42 0.03

4 7.62 0.04 7.78 0.03 7.39 0.02

5 7.61 0.04 7.67 0.03 7.22 0.04

6 7.65 0.04 7.92 0.08 7.31 0.04

ZoIF

1 7.50 0.01 7.74 0.10 7.43 0.06

2 7.63 0.06 7.93 0.05 7.38 0.02

3 7.61 0.06 7.67 0.19 7.40 0.06

4 7.66 0.09 7.82 0.06 7.34 0.03

5 7.69 0.04 7.86 0.05 7.34 0.03

6 7.81 0.06 7.95 0.05 7.30 0.03



Figure 4-19 Mean pH (± SE) for locations sampled at Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=6).

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

B1 D1 P1 B1 D1 P1 B1 D1 P1

SDA ZoIN ZoIF

pH B1, D1 and P1

Location

Mean

pH

(-l

og

[H+

]) ±

SE

(n

=6)



Figure 4-20 Mean pH (± SE) for sites sampled at Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=7). No data at Site 3 (SDA)

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

SDA ZoIN ZoIF

Mean

pH

±S

.E.

(n=

7)

pH B1, D1 and P1

Site/Location

*



ORP

Mean ORP values for the P1 survey (July 2015) ranged from -125.4 (± 11.5 SE) mV at Site 1 (ZoIN) to 197.0

(± 11.7 SE) mV at Site 5 (ZoIF). Sites 4, 5 and 6 within the SDA and Sites 4, 5, and 6 within the ZoIF were

generally oxidising, whereas the majority of sites were reducing (Table 4-12, Figure 4-21).

At the locational scale there was a net reduction in ORP across all locations from B1 to P1, although

locational level changes were not resolved in the statistical analysis (Table 4-12, Figure 4-21 and Appendix

F). Values were, however, shown to vary significantly between and within Phases at the scale of Site,

although this did not indicate any obvious or consistent patterns (Table 4-12, Figure 4-22 and Appendix F).

Table 4-12 Mean ORP (± SE) for locations sampled at Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=7)

B1 D1 P1


SDA

1 -43.0 7.5 42.4 23.6 -82.3 17.1

2 9.4 23.7 -85.4 11.6 -50.6 41.6

3 70.1 8.4 108.0 22.1 -50.1 52.0

4 144.0 7.8 -26.6 28.6 161.3 7.0

5 175.0 2.4 -101.6 8.7 159.7 10.4

6 164.3 7.4 -106.0 15.4 27.1 56.1

ZoIN

1 85.1 13.9 82.6 14.9 -125.4 11.5

2 78.0 10.1 227.7 20.1 -18.6 43.8

3 113.7 8.1 16.1 23.2 -107.3 19.2

4 21.3 2.2 -96.3 13.3 -120.4 3.2

5 42.1 17.7 -64.3 37.5 -111.4 9.0

6 44.3 9.7 -69.1 32.5 -91.9 11.4

ZoIF

1 68.9 11.7 -126.3 6.4 -60.0 25.7

2 52.7 17.3 -85.1 20.7 -114.0 5.6

3 37.6 18.8 -76.1 22.0 -111.6 7.6

4 128.9 6.2 43.9 23.4 11.0 41.2

5 65.6 15.8 -59.6 29.1 197.0 11.7

6 82.9 21.1 52.0 30.8 45.1 62.5



Figure 4-21 Mean ORP (± SE) for sites sampled at Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=7)

-150

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

B1 D1 P1 B1 D1 P1 B1 D1 P1

SDA ZoIN ZoIF

ORP B1, D1 and P1

Mean

OR

P ±

S. E

. (n

=6)



Figure 4-22 Mean ORP (± SE) for sites sampled at Darwin Outer during B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015) (n=7)

-200

-150

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

SDA ZoIN ZoIF

Mean

OR

P ±

S.E

. (n

=7)

ORP B1, D1 and P1

Location



Relationship of Physical and Biological Variables

Examination of the distance-based linear model (including data from all Phases) indicated that very little of

the variation of the Darwin Outer infaunal assemblage could be attributed to the physical variables measured

(median grain size, percent fines and ORP). Cumulatively, these variables explained only 10.8% of the total

variation (R2 for each individual variable against the infaunal data cloud = <0.1). This is illustrated in the

distance-based redundancy analyses ordination (dbRDA) (Figure 4-23). Statistical results are presented in

Appendix K.

Figure 4-23 Distance-based redundancy analysis (dbRDA) ordination of infauna assemblage data compared with median grain size, percent fines and ORP for B1 (May 2012 to July 2012), D1 (May 2013 to July 2013) and P1 (July 2015).



5 Discussion

This report outlines the findings of the SBMP Post Dredging (P1) survey (24 to 28 July 2014) for Darwin

Outer which took place approximately 13 months following the completion of EA dredging on 11 June 2014.

The P1 Phase report aims to assess changes in the abundance and diversity of infaunal and epifaunal

assemblages relative to that measured in the Baseline (B1; May 2012 to July 2012) and Dredging Phase

(May 2013 to July 2013). It also aims to investigate the relationship between the physico-chemical

characteristics of the sediment and the potential drivers of any changes observed. As predicted in the EA

DSDMP Rev 4 (INPEX 2013) and GEP DSDMP Rev 6 (INPEX 2014), the disposal of dredged material at the

offshore Spoil Disposal Area (SDA) was expected to have direct impacts on subtidal infauna and epifauna

either by direct smothering and/or indirectly via changes to the physico-chemical composition of the

sediments. The two locations to the east of the SDA, (Zone of Influence Near (ZoIN) and Zone of Influence

Far (ZoIF) were located on the basis of model predictions presented in the DSDMP Rev 1 (INPEX 2012).

Indirect effects of re-suspension and deposition of finer sediment particles released during spoil disposal

activities may also influence the subtidal assemblages at these locations. As demonstrated in several other

examples of dredging investigations, and discussed in previous SBMP Reports (Cardno 2013, 2014a and

2015a) some degree of recovery following the completion of spoil placement is also expected although the

timeframe and extent of recovery is less predictable.

Epibenthic Habitats

Epifauna and benthic flora were relatively sparse during all survey phases and across locations, although

several groups of taxa (including sponges, hydroids, bryozoans, ascidians, macroalgae, gorgonians and

corals) were recorded within the SDA, ZoIN and ZoIF. Overall, the percent cover of epifauna within the SDA

was lower than that within the ZoIN or ZoIF, which would be expected as a result of spoil disposal, however,

as this pattern was consistent for all survey phases (B1, D1 and P1), these spatial differences cannot be

directly attributed to spoil disposal. The fact that epifauna was present at all sites within the SDA during P1

such as hydroids at Sites 1, 2, 5 and 6, suggests that approximately 13 months post spoil disposal, there has

either been recovery and/or growth following spoil placement and/or, that some of the epifauna sampling

sites were not directly affected by the spoil placement. Specific information on the quantity, timing, depth

and location of the material placement within the spoil ground would be required to verify this further.

Given the relatively dynamic tidal conditions that can be experienced offshore of Darwin Harbour, it is also

likely that the epibenthic species recorded (which included predominantly sessile taxa), are tolerant of

intermittent elevated turbidity and suspended sediments within the water column. The significant tidal

exchange and exposure to ocean currents is also likely to be conducive to immigration and recruitment of

larvae and fragments of flora or fauna within the SDA and facilitate relatively fast recolonisation.

Infauna

The overall temporal and spatial patterns of abundance and taxon richness observed during the SBMP

indicate that as expected, spoil disposal within the SDA during D1 had a significant impact on the infaunal

assemblage. However, in the 13 months following completion of spoil disposal, there has also been recovery

back to within baseline levels. The effects of spoil disposal between B1 and D1 were evident from the

significant decreases in the mean abundance and taxon richness that occurred within the SDA, but not within

the ZoIN or ZoIF. Similarly, mean abundance and taxon richness during D1 was significantly lower within the

SDA, than during the Baseline phase, when compared to within the ZoIN or ZoIF. These effects were likely

due to the direct impact of smothering and burial and potentially indirect effects of resuspension and

deposition of finer sediments within the water column which may result in deficiencies in feeding and

respiration.

Between D1 and P1 however, there was a significant increase in abundance and taxon richness across all

locations. This resulted in net increases (in both abundance and taxon richness) from the Baseline through

to the Post Dredging phase within the ZoIN and ZoIF and apparent recovery back to baseline levels within

the SDA. The broad scale increases in abundance and taxon richness across the survey area is likely to be

a result of long term natural variability potentially related to climatic changes in temperature, migration



patterns or unknown factors (De Goeij et al. 2003 cited in Connell and Gillanders 2007; Morrisey et al. 1992;

Wildsmith et al. 2005). Such long-term temporal fluctuations in benthic populations and communities at the

scale of seasons or over several years have been documented to occur in other parts of tropical Australia

(De Goeij et al. 2003 cited in Connell and Gillanders 2007; Morrisey et al. 1992; Wildsmith et al. 2005) and

were also evident within the Intertidal Benthos Monitoring Program (IBMP), which was undertaken at a

similar temporal scale as the SBMP (Cardno 2015b).

These patterns in abundance and taxon richness were also reflected in the results of the multivariate

analysis which showed that the effects of spoil disposal and subsequent recovery were largely driven by the

changes in numbers of amphipod crustaceans of the Aoridae/Isaeidae/Photidae group, polychaetes of the

families Ampharetidae and Syllidae among several other taxa. The overall composition of the infaunal

assemblage within the SDA sampled during P1 was, however, different in composition from that recorded

during the Baseline phase. This was largely due to a shift from an assemblage characterised by relatively

high percent contributions of Aoridae/Isaeidae/Photidae amphipods, spionid polychaetes and taniads of the

family Apseudidae to one characterised by a high percent contribution of polychaetes of the families

Spionidae and Glyceridae.

This shift in assemblage composition may be due to the changes in the physical environment at the SDA in

terms of depth and sediment composition (discussed in Section 5.3), and/or a result of chance colonisation

by new recruits following the completion of spoil disposal. Although infaunal biomass was not measured as

part of this program, it was also noted that the animals collected during P1 were relatively small-bodied,

suggesting that they may be in an early stage of development and further supports the idea that they are

new recruits. As discussed in the SBMP EoD report (Cardno 2015a), relatively small bodied animals with

short lifespans, fast growth rates and high fecundity are likely to be faster to recover than those with a long

life span and slower growth rate. Furthermore, animals with a longer planktonic larval phase are also likely

to colonise rapidly from outside of a disturbed area compared with those with short or no larval planktonic

phase (MESL 2008). This is known to be the case for the main species colonising the SDA post dredging.

Spionid polychaetes, for example are often small-bodied and may have planktonic phases of up to eight

weeks in the water column (MESL 2008). Polychaetes of the family Glyceridae have relatively long lifespans

(making them slow to reach maturity), however, some species are also highly fecund releasing several

millions of eggs into the water column in one spawning event and have larvae that may spend up to four

weeks in a planktonic phase (MESL 2008).

Physical Indicators

Results of sediment particle size analysis showed significant changes in median grain size and the percent

contribution of fines within the SDA, which were consistent with the placement of dredged material within the

SDA. This was evident from the significant decrease in median grain size within the SDA between B1 and

D1, while there was an increase in median grain size within the ZoIN and ZoIF. This corresponded with a

distinct (but non-significant) increase in the percentage of fines within the SDA between B1 and D1 while

there was a decrease in the percent composition of fines within the ZoIN and ZoIF. Within the SDA, the

decreases in median grain size (and increases in percent fines) also corresponded with decreases in the

abundance and taxon richness of infauna and therefore may support the hypothesis of smothering and burial

via spoil placement being the main cause and effect pathway impacting benthic infauna within the SDA.

Overall, there was a significant net reduction in median particle size between B1 and P1 within the SDA,

although an increase in median grain size between D1 and P1 suggests partial recovery towards baseline

conditions. In terms of the percent composition of fines, there was no net change within the SDA between

B1 and P1 which suggests a recovery of this indicator back to baseline conditions.

Levels of pH within the SDA also appeared to be affected by the placement of dredged material to some

degree. This was evident by the significant decrease in pH within the SDA, between B1 and D1 while there

were significant increases in pH within the ZoIN and ZoIF. Overall, however, there was a significant net

decrease in pH within the SDA, ZoIN and ZoIF, (potentially a result of natural broad scale variability) and it is

therefore unclear as to whether there has been a complete recovery back to baseline levels within the SDA

at the time of sampling in P1. Statistical analysis did not show any obvious or consistent patterns in ORP

indicative of an impact from spoil disposal. Despite the strong corresponding patterns in median grain size

with abundance and taxon richness of infauna, results of the distance-based redundancy analyses did not



show any obvious correlation between physical parameters measured and patterns observed in the infaunal

assemblages.

As part of the Water Quality and Subtidal Sedimentation Monitoring Program (WQSSMP) composite surface

Total Suspended Sediment (TSS) was estimated from MODIS satellite imagery for the month of May 2014

which was during Season Two Dredging (1 November 2013 to 11 June 2014). The patterns of surface TSS

observed at the SDA during this period indicated that surface suspended sediment concentrations

decreased at a gradient away from the SDA (Cardno 2015c). The sampling locations selected were

therefore considered to be broadly representative of a gradient of TSS from the SDA to the ZoIF. While the

sediment plume associated with the spoil ground during this period varied in the direction of dispersal

(according to natural hydrodynamic conditions), results suggest that both the direct and indirect effects of

spoil disposal on subtidal benthos are likely to have been relatively localised to sites within the SDA. It is

also likely that comparable levels of recovery (in terms of subtidal benthos) would have occurred at any

areas adjacent to the SDA (i.e. not sampled as part of this program), experiencing elevated levels of TSS,

similar to that recorded within the SDA.



6 Conclusion

The SBMP was designed to detect potential changes in infaunal and epibenthic assemblages living in

subtidal, soft sediment habitats and infer whether any changes observed are a result of dredging and spoil

disposal activities associated with the Project. The aim of this Post Dredging (P1) survey (July 2015) was

specifically to assess the extent of recovery in relation to spoil disposal at the offshore Spoil Disposal Area

(SDA) by comparing the abundance and diversity of infauna and epifauna assemblages with that measured

in the previous Baseline (B1) survey (May 2012 to July 2012) and Dredging (D1) survey (May 2013 to July

2013).

Overall, results have shown that the distribution of epibenthic fauna and flora at locations throughout Darwin

Outer was relatively sparse and patchy during all phases of the SBMP, although a variety of taxa (including

sponges, hydroids, bryozoans, ascidians, macroalgae, gorgonians and corals) were recorded within the

SDA, ZoIN and ZoIF. Approximately 13 months following completion of spoil disposal, there did not appear

to have been any net effects on the percent cover of epifauna at any of the locations surveyed within Darwin

Outer.

In terms of benthic infauna, the overall temporal and spatial patterns of abundance, taxon richness and

assemblage composition observed indicated that as expected, spoil disposal within the SDA did have a

significant impact on the infaunal assemblage as measured during D1. Within the SDA, the changes in

median grain size and percent composition of fines also support the hypothesis of smothering and burial via

spoil placement being the main cause and effect pathway impacting benthic infauna. However, following

completion of spoil disposal, there has also been significant recovery in both the abundance and taxon

richness of these indicators back to baseline levels. Based on the locations monitored, these results also

indicated that the impacts observed were limited to within the boundaries of the SDA and did not have any

indirect net effects on benthic assemblages within the ZoIN and ZoIF.



7 Acknowledgements

This report was written and compiled by Kate Reeds and reviewed by Christopher Holloway. Field work was

carried out by Kate Reeds, Isabel Jimenez-Denis and Yesmin Chickhani. Laboratory work was carried out

by Kate Reeds, Rick Johnson, Dr Rad Nair, Greig Campbell, Yesmin Chikhani and Dr Andrea Nicastro.

Thanks to Broadsword Marine for providing crew and vessel.



8 References

Anderson, M. J., Gorley, R. N. and Clarke, K. R. (2008). PERMANOVA+ for PRIMER: Guide to Software and Statistical Methods. PRIMER-E: Plymouth, UK.

Brown, A. C. and McLachlan, A. (2006). The Ecology of Sandy Shores. Academic Press, Burlington, Massachusetts.

Cardno (2013). Subtidal Benthos Monitoring Baseline Report, Ichthys Nearshore Environmental Monitoring Program. Prepared for INPEX. Cardno (NSW/ACT) Pty Ltd, Sydney.

Cardno (2014a). Subtidal Benthos Monitoring Dredging Report, Ichthys Nearshore Environmental Monitoring Program. Prepared for INPEX. Cardno (NSW/ACT) Pty Ltd, Sydney.

Cardno (2014b). Ichthys Project: Nearshore Environmental Monitoring Plan (NEMP). Prepared for INPEX. Cardno (NSW/ACT) Pty Ltd, Sydney.

Cardno (2015a). Subtidal Benthos Monitoring End of Dredging Report, Ichthys Nearshore Environmental Monitoring Program Prepared for INPEX. Cardno (NSW/ACT) Pty Ltd, Sydney

Cardno (2015b). Intertidal Benthos Monitoring End of Dredging Report, Ichthys Nearshore Environmental Monitoring Program. Prepared for INPEX. Cardno (NSW/ACT) Pty Ltd, Sydney.

Clarke, K. R. and Gorley, R. N. (2006). Primer V6: User Manual/Tutorial. Primer-E, Plymouth.

Coleman, N., Cuff, W., Drummond, M and Kudenov, J. D. (1978). A Quantitative survey of the macrobenthos of Western Port, Victoria. Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research. 29:445-466.

Connell, S. D and Gillanders, B. M. (2007). Marine Ecology. Oxford University Press. Melbourne, Victoria.

Currie, D. R. and Small, K. J. (2006). The influence of dry-season conditions on the bottom dwelling fauna of an east Australian sub-tropical estuary. Hydrobiologia, 560, pp. 345–361.

De Goeij, P., Lavaleye, M., Pearson, G. B. and Piersma, T. (2003). Seasonal changes in macrozoobenthos of a tropical mudflat. NIOZ Report 200-43, Texel. Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research, Den Burg. Cited in Connell and Gillanders 2007.

Eyre, B. D. and Ferguson, A. J. P. (2005). Benthic metabolism and b=nitrogen cycling in a subtropical east Australian estuary (Brunswick): Temporal variability and controlling factors. Limnology and Oceanography, 50, pp. 81–96.

INPEX (2011). Ichthys Gas Field Development Project − Supplement to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Prepared by INPEX Browse, Ltd.

INPEX (2013). Dredging and Spoil Disposal Management Plan Rev 4 – East Arm. INPEX Operations Australia Pty Ltd.

INPEX (2014). Dredging and Spoil Disposal Management Plan Rev 6 – Gas Export Pipeline. INPEX Operations Australia Pty Ltd

Kohler, K. E. and Gill, S. M. (2006). Coral Point Count with excel extensions (CPCe): A visual basic program for the determination of coral and substrate coverage using random point count methodology. Comparative Geoscience, 32, pp. 1259–1269.

Long, B. G., Dennis, D. M., Skewes, T. D. and Poiner, I. R. (1996). Detecting an environmental impact of dredging on seagrass beds with a BACI sampling design. Aquatic Botany, 53, pp. 235–243.

Maurer, D., Keck, R. T., Tinsman, J. C., Leatham, W. A., Wethe, C., Lord, C., and Church, T. M. (1986). Vertical migration and mortality of marine benthos in dredged material: A synthesis, Internationale. Revue der gesamten, Hydrobiologie und Hydrographie, 71, 49–63.

Marine Ecological Surveys Limited (MESL) (2008). Marine Macrofauna Genus Trait Handbook. Marine Ecological Surveys Ltd. Bath, UK.

Miller, D. C., Muir, C. L. and Hauser, O. A. (2002). Detrimental effects of sedimentation on marine benthos: what can be learned from natural processes and rates? Ecological Engineering, 19, 211–232.

Morrisey, D. J., Underwood, A. J. Howitt and Stark, J. S. (1992). Temporal variation in soft sediment benthos. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology. 164:233-245.

Newell, R. C., Seiderer, L. J., Simpson, N. M. and Robinson, J. E. (2004). Impacts of marine aggregate dredging on benthic macrofauna off the south coast of the United Kingdom. Journal of Coastal Research, 20, pp. 115–125.

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

Pennifold, M. and Davis, J. (2001). Macrofauna and nutrient cycling in the Swan River Estuary, Western Australia: experimental results. Hydrological Processes, Vol 12 (13), pp. 2537–2553.



Post, A. L. Wasserberg, T. J. and Passlow, V. (2006). Physical surrogates for macrofaunal distributions and abundance in a tropical gulf. Marine and Freshwater Research 57: 469-483.

Sarda, R., Pinedo, S., Gremare, A. and Taboada, S. (2000). Changes in the dynamics of shallow sandy-bottom assemblages due to sand extraction in the Catalan Western Mediterranean Sea. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57, pp. 1446–1453.

Schwinghamer, P. (1981). Characteristic size distributions of integral benthic communities. Canadian Journal of Fish and Aquatic Sciences, 38, pp. 1255–1263.

Semeniuk, V. and Wurm, P.A.S (2000). Molluscs of the Leschenault Inlet Estuary: Their diversity distribution and population dynamics. Journal of the Royal Society of Western Australia 83: 377-418. In Connell and Gillanders (2007).

Tillin, H. M., Houghton, A. J., Saunders, J. E. and Hull, S. C. (2011). Direct and Indirect Impacts of Marine Aggregate Dredging. Marine ALSF Science Monograph Series No. 1. MEPF 10/P144. (Edited by R. C. Newell & J. Measures). 41pp. ISBN: 978 0 907545 43 9.

Underwood, A. J. (1991). Beyond BACI: experimental designs for detecting human environmental impacts on temporal variations in natural populations. Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research, 42, pp. 569–587.

Underwood, A. J. (1992). Beyond BACI: the detection of environmental impacts on populations in the real, but variable, world. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 161, pp. 145–178.

URS Australia Pty. Ltd. (2009). Ichthys Gas Field Development Project: Nearshore Marine Ecology and Benthic Assemblages Study. Prepared for INPEX, Browse Ltd. Perth, Western Australia.

van Dalfsen, J. A., Essink, K., Toxvig Madsen, H., Birklund, J., Romero, J. and Manzanera, M. (2000). Differential response of macrozoobenthos to marine sand extraction in the North Sea and Western Mediterranean. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 57, pp. 1439–1445.

Wildsmith, M. D., Potter, I. C., Valesini, F. J. and Platell, M. E. (2005). Do the assemblages of benthic macroinvertebrates in nearshore waters of Western Australia vary among habitat types, zones and seasons? Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 85, pp. 217–232.



Ichthys Nearshore Environmental Monitoring Program

APPENDIX A FIELD DATA



Appendix A. Field data collected during P1 (July 2015)

Field data collected from Darwin Offshore with remote drop camera during P1 (July 2015)

Site 1

Zone Transect A Date Start Finish Comments

Sp

oil

Dis

po

sal A

rea

A 28.07.15 Time on Bottom: 14:24 14:25

Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.25603902 130.797556 -12.25546603 130.797722

171

173

Depth: 19.4 Depth: 18.5

Transect B Date Start Finish Comments

B 28.07.15 Time on Bottom: 14:30 Time on Deck: 14:38

Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.25580298 130.797574 -12.25546603 130.797722

172

173


Site 2

Sp

oil

Dis

po

sal A

rea

Transect A Date Start Finish Comments

A 28.07.15 Time on Bottom: 14:49 Time on Deck: 14:58

Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.2496676 130.8077661 -12.24912403 130.807852

as per site 2

174

Depth: 19 Depth: 19.1



Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.24961798 130.807716 -12.24914499 130.807715

175

176


Site 3


Sp

oil

Dis

po

sal A

rea


Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.24517498 130.800751 -12.24496501 130.800819

177

178




Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.24521798 130.800832 -12.24455204 130.800995

179

180

Depth: 19.1 Depth 19.1

Site 4


Sp

oil

Dis

po

sal

Are

a


Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.24111001 130.809474 -12.24119701 130.809666

181

182






Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.24114597 130.80953 -12.24115703 130.809548

183

184

Depth: 18 Depth: 18

Site 5


Sp

oil

Dis

po

sal A

rea

A 28.07.15 Time on Bottom: 16:18 Time on Deck: 16:22 Boat not moving very fast so some photoquadrats may be in same position

Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.23206904 130.809604 -12.23224204 130.809776

185

186




Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.23206099 130.809671 -12.232235 130.809757

187

188


Site 6


Sp

oil

Dis

po

sal A

rea


Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.23487304 130.818888 -12.23502902 130.818688

189

190

Depth: 18.2 Depth: 18



Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.23487304 130.818888 -12.23483599 130.818358

189

191


Site 1


Zo

ne

of

Imp

act

(Nea

r)


Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.24543901 130.841387 -12.24524698 130.840338

150

151

Depth: 17.7 Depth: 18



Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.24558502 130.84107 -12.24530197 130.84036

152

153




Site 2


Zo

ne

of

Imp

act

(Ne

ar)


Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.25613801 130.837974 -12.25611596 130.836667

146

147




Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.25599602 130.837872 -12.25434101 130.836301

148

149


Site 3


Zo

ne

of

Imp

act

(Nea

r)


Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.250054 130.848273 -12.24961404 130.847748

154

155




Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.25004696 130.84841 -12.25001704 130.847937

156

157

Depth: 18 Depth: 18

Site 4


Zo

ne

of

Imp

act

(Nea

r)


Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.24144604 130.850234 -12.24129198 130.849573

158

159




Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.24131604 130.850073 -12.24101404 130.849594

160

161


Site 5


Zo

ne

of

Imp

act

(Nea

r)


Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.23232402 130.850592 -12.23229401 130.850518

162

163




Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.23247799 130.850178 -12.23240498 130.850143



164

165


Site 6


Zo

ne

of

Imp

act

(Ne

ar)


Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.23536698 130.859364 -12.23483599 130.85933

166

167




Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.23547502 130.859365 -12.23496599 130.859477

168

169


Site 1


Zo

ne

of

Imp

act

(Fa

r)


Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.25751197 130.878362 -12.25786703 130.87855

125

126




Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.25751197 130.878362 -12.25786703 130.87855

125

126


Site 2


Zo

ne

of

Imp

act

(Fa

r)


Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.24696603 130.881635 -12.24718303 130.881744

127

128




Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.24696603 130.881635 -12.24764999 130.881646

127

129


Site 3


Zo

ne

of

Imp

act

(Fa

r) A 27.07.15 Time on Bottom: 15:23 Time on Deck: 15:30

Weather too rough and davit arm broken so suspend work for the day.

Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.25147398 130.888643 -12.25168596 130.888416

131

132






Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.25151899 130.888335 -12.25129 130.887225

133

134

Depth: 16 Depth: 16

Site 4


Zo

ne

of

Imp

act

(Fa

r)


Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.24282403 130.890059 -12.24256201 130.889517

135

136

Depth: 16 Depth: 16.1



Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.24282403 130.890059 -12.24261104 130.889438

135

137


Site 5


Zo

ne

of

Imp

act

(Fa

r)


Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.23386897 130.890604 -12.233601 130.889673

138

139




Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.23387601 130.890236 -12.23352204 130.889319

140

141


Site 6


Zo

ne

of

Imp

act

(Fa

r)


Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.23677799 130.899588 -12.23674597 130.899375

142

143




Lat: Long Lat: Long

-12.236751 130.899565 -12.23653098 130.898578

144

145





APPENDIX B CPCE HABITAT DESCRIPTIONS



Appendix B. Habitat Descriptions during P1 (July 2015)

Location Site

1

2

3

4

5

6

General Habitat Description Example of Representative Photoquadrat

Very fine bare sand and shell grit



Very fine bare sand with abundant hydroids

Sp

oil D

isp

osa

l A

rea


Bare fine sand, occasional hard coral,

sponge, ascidian and bryozoan



Location Site

1

2

3

4

5

6

Habitat Description

Bare, fine, bioturbated sand with shell grit

and some coral rubble. Occasional

hydroids, bryozoans, stalked ascidians,

sponges and filamentous algae.

Mostly bare, fine, bioturbated sand and

occasional hard coral present.

Bare, fine, bioturbated sand with shell grit.

Occasional hard coral (Acroporidae),

bryozoans, stalked ascidians, sponges and

hydroids

Bare, fine, bioturbated sand with shell grit.

Filamentous algae, occasional stalked

ascidians, seafans, sponges and hydroids .



bryozoans, hydroids, stalked ascidians and

filamentous algae.



bryozoans, hydroids, stalked ascidians and

filamentous algae.

Zo

ne

of Im

pa

ct (N

ea

r)



Location Site

1

2

3

4

5

6

Sand with shell grit and bryozoan and hard

coral rubble. Filamentous algae and

occasional bryozoans, stalked ascidians

and sponges present.

Bare, bioturbated sand with occasional

hydroids present.

Zo

ne

of Im

pa

ct (F

ar)

Bare sand with shell grit and some

bioturbation. Filamentous algae, occasional

hydroids, stalked ascidians and sea whips

present.

Bare sand with shell grit and some

bioturbation. Filamentous algae, occasional

stalked ascidians present.

Bare bioturbated sand with shell grit and

coral rubble. Bryozoans, hard corals,

sponges, hydroids and stalked ascidians

present

Bare sand with shell grit and hard coral

rubble. Bryzoan, and stalked ascidians

present.

Habitat Description




APPENDIX C CPCE SUMMARY DATA



Appendix C. CPCe summary data collected for P1 (July 2015)

Location

Site

Transect

Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE

CORAL

Hard Coral 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Hydroid 0.32 0.32 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.63 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.24 4.04 3.76 2.28 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00

Sea Fan 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Sea Whip 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.21 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

ALGAE

Algal Mat on Sand 0.10 0.10 0.21 0.21 0.31 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Filamentous Algae 0.94 0.94 1.58 0.71 11.46 2.34 3.33 1.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.23 0.00 0.00

Macroalgae 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00

Wrack 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

SUBSTRATUM

Burrow 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.52 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10

Gravel 0.21 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.42 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.42 0.28 0.42 0.24

Organic Debris 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.15 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Rubble 1.48 0.67 1.16 0.42 0.10 0.10 0.94 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.21 0.14 0.21 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.14 0.00 0.00

Sand 95.59 2.83 95.27 1.18 77.81 3.02 85.31 2.19 99.03 0.57 99.37 0.30 98.75 0.50 96.35 0.71 84.75 5.41 95.59 2.66 94.90 1.37 94.27 1.51

Shell Grit 0.10 0.10 0.73 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00

Silt 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Bioturbated Sand 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.17 0.42 0.24 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00

SPONGE

Sponge 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

BRYOZOAN

Bryozoan 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.83 0.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

ASCIDIAN

Ascidian 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

QUALITY

Poor Quality 1.04 0.64 0.21 0.14 9.38 1.68 6.56 1.04 0.86 0.47 0.52 0.29 0.63 0.30 3.02 0.60 1.94 0.90 0.32 0.23 3.65 0.92 5.21 0.71

OTHER

Other Biota 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

TAPE, WAND, SHADOW

Shadow 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Tape 0.83 0.30 1.35 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.10 0.64 3.33 0.63 0.31 0.17 0.00 0.00 2.40 0.48 2.71 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Wand 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

BA B A B A B A B A B A

SDA

1 2 3 4 5 6



Location

Site

Transect


CORAL

Hard Coral 4.58 4.14 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Hydroid 0.52 0.42 1.88 0.95 2.11 1.31 1.71 0.95 0.32 0.32 0.31 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.14 0.53 0.33 0.53 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.14

Sea Fan 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Sea Whip 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

ALGAE

Algal Mat on Sand 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.83 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.14 1.36 0.67 0.53 0.43 3.50 1.12 0.11 0.11 0.94 0.37 0.00 0.00


Macroalgae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Wrack 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

SUBSTRATUM

Burrow 1.67 0.52 0.42 0.24 0.53 0.20 0.32 0.17 0.31 0.23 0.53 0.20 0.52 0.29 0.52 0.25 0.11 0.11 6.25 5.47 0.52 0.25 1.35 0.50

Gravel 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.52 0.20

Organic Debris 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Rubble 0.52 0.42 0.21 0.21 0.32 0.17 0.31 0.17 0.42 0.19 0.52 0.20 1.46 0.54 0.11 0.11 0.22 0.15 0.31 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Sand 90.21 4.26 75.83 8.68 93.85 3.20 93.84 4.25 95.26 2.00 96.10 3.06 93.53 1.91 94.66 3.44 79.39 2.55 72.51 8.00 84.93 6.37 85.73 1.35

Shell Grit 0.31 0.17 0.52 0.25 0.11 0.11 0.32 0.17 0.63 0.34 0.21 0.21 0.73 0.26 0.63 0.30 0.87 0.31 0.42 0.24 0.74 0.34 1.25 0.44

Silt 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00


SPONGE

Sponge 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.23 0.95 0.95 0.42 0.24 0.10 0.10 0.22 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.21 0.14 0.31 0.31

BRYOZOAN

Bryozoan 0.42 0.42 1.04 0.52 0.74 0.43 1.17 0.71 0.52 0.36 0.21 0.14 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.21 0.14 0.21 0.14

ASCIDIAN

Ascidian 0.63 0.33 0.21 0.14 0.43 0.25 0.11 0.11 0.21 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.21 0.21 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.17

QUALITY

Poor Quality 1.15 0.62 18.13 7.83 0.32 0.17 0.43 0.25 1.15 0.58 1.37 0.51 2.19 0.94 2.40 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.67 6.67 0.00 0.00

OTHER

Other Biota 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.15 0.42 0.24 0.22 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

TAPE, WAND, SHADOW

Shadow 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.02 1.24 0.42 0.18 0.52 0.29 0.00 0.00

Tape 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.60 0.58 2.08 0.45 1.35 0.37 1.56 0.53 0.31 0.17 0.52 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Wand 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00


ZoIN

1 2 3 4 5 6



Location

Site

Transect


CORAL

Hard Coral 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.22 0.21 0.14 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Hydroid 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.42 0.28 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.23 0.53 0.33 0.10 0.10 0.42 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.14 0.21 0.14

Sea Fan 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Sea Whip 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

ALGAE

Algal Mat on Sand 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 1.67 0.77 0.86 0.57 0.64 0.34 0.21 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.64 0.38 0.21 0.21 0.31 0.17


Macroalgae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.14 0.42 0.42 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31

Wrack 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

SUBSTRATUM

Burrow 0.11 0.11 0.74 0.30 0.73 0.26 0.94 0.26 0.65 0.26 1.06 0.34 0.42 0.19 0.52 0.29 0.54 0.26 0.54 0.26 0.10 0.10 0.31 0.23

Gravel 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.14 0.10 0.10 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Organic Debris 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Rubble 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.32 0.23 0.21 0.14 0.21 0.14

Sand 99.48 1.44 94.02 3.10 96.25 1.59 89.48 3.16 93.90 3.18 96.50 1.49 92.37 3.57 94.78 2.25 97.43 1.67 94.92 2.16 89.79 1.97 78.44 6.16

Shell Grit 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.21 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.28 0.54 0.37 0.54 0.20 0.73 0.34 0.52 0.20

Silt 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00


SPONGE

Sponge 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00

BRYOZOAN

Bryozoan 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.32 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.64 0.30 0.10 0.10 0.21 0.21

ASCIDIAN

Ascidian 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00

QUALITY

Poor Quality 0.10 0.10 4.72 2.50 0.10 0.10 5.63 2.29 3.95 1.22 0.75 0.38 3.33 1.92 0.52 0.33 0.64 0.44 0.76 0.45 0.52 0.25 10.73 6.13

OTHER

Other Biota 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

TAPE, WAND, SHADOW

Shadow 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Tape 1.04 0.29 1.04 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.02 0.54 0.83 0.55 0.31 0.23 0.10 0.10 3.13 0.59 3.23 0.47 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00

Wand 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00


ZoIF

1 2 3 4 5 6




APPENDIX D CPCE SUMMARY GRAPHS



Appendix D. CPCE Summary graphs for P1 (July 2015)




APPENDIX E PERMANOVA RESULTS



Appendix E. Permutational Analysis of Variance. P-values highlighted in bold are significant

(p=<0.05). RED = Redundant term. A term becomes redundant if a lower order interaction including

that term is significant. Res = Residual. This term is a measure of the variation in the data not

explained by the variation attributed to the main factors in the experimental model (i.e. Location and

Site)

1a. Epifauna

PERMANOVA table of results


Phase 2 2844.6 1422.3 15.4200 RED

Location 2 1.08E+03 537.95 5.6454 RED

Site(Location) 15 1429.4 95.291 2.7020 RED

PhasexLocation 4 1.16E+03 290.53 3.1497 0.0037

PhasexSite(Location) 30 2.77E+03 92.24 2.6155 0.0001

Res 54 1.90E+03 35.267

Total 107 11184

1b. Epifauna (Biota Only)



Phase 2 18520 9260.1 5.4894 RED

Location 2 7738 3869 2.2685 0.0162

Site(Location) 15 25583 1705.5 2.4746 RED

PhasexLocation 4 10661 2665.3 1.5800 0.0635

PhasexSite(Location) 30 50607 1686.9 2.4476 0.0001

Res 54 37217 689.21

Total 107 150330

2a. Infauna (Abundance)



Phase 2 3.36E+05 1.68E+05 35.5230 RED

Location 2 1.25E+05 62276 11.3780 RED


PhasexLocation 4 1.60E+05 40017 8.4571 0.0002

PhasexSite(Location) 30 1.42E+05 4731.8 3.0224 0.0001

Res 216 3.38E+05 1565.6

Total 269 1.18E+06

2b. Infauna (Taxon Richness)



Phase 2 8694.5 4347.2 19.1710 RED

Location 2 9425.5 4712.7 26.8870 RED


PhasexLocation 4 7277.6 1819.4 8.0236 0.0003

PhasexSite(Location) 30 6802.7 226.76 4.0024 0.0001

Res 216 12238 56.656



Total 269 4.71E+04

2c. Infauna (Assemblage)



Phase 2 74897 37449 11.6420 RED

Location 2 32338 16169 4.6820 RED


PhasexLocation 4 33526 8381.4 2.6055 0.0003

PhasexSite(Location) 30 96505 3216.8 1.7090 0.0001

Res 216 4.07E+05 1882.3

Total 269 6.96E+05

3. Median Grain Size



Phase 2 0.012689 0.0063445 0.22233 0.8037

Location 2 0.44046 0.22023 2.464 0.1241


PhasexLocation 4 0.7125 0.17813 6.2421 0.0008


Res 54 0.88705 0.016427

Total 107 4.2495

4. Percentage (%) Fines



Phase 2 32.722 16.361 8.93E-02 0.9143

Location 2 280.39 140.19 0.24757 0.7797


PhasexLocation 4 4285.7 1071.4 5.851 0.0015


Res 54 5453.5 100.99

Total 107 24040

5. pH



Phase 2 10.31 5.1552 106.17 RED

Location 2 2.8436 1.4218 10.396 RED


PhasexLocation 4 4.5499 1.1375 23.421 0.0001

PhasexSite(Location)** 29 1.4104 0.048635 1.6381 0.0229

Res 314 9.3225 0.029689

Total 366 31.08



6. ORP



Phase 2 773170 386590 9.2487 RED

Location 2 73134 36567 0.5242 0.5981

Site(Location) 15 1046400 69757 18.131 RED

PhasexLocation 4 357640 89411 2.1391 0.1042

PhasexSite(Location) 30 1254000 41799 10.864 0.0001

Res 324 1246500 3847.3

Total 377 4750800




APPENDIX F PAIRWISE TEST RESULTS



Appendix F. Pairwise Test results. Bold values indicate P=<0.05

1a. Epifauna (for the significant term '(PhasexLocation)Phase')

Within level 'SDA' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(perm)

B1, D1 1.9722 0.0505

B1, P1 1.7406 0.0454

D1, P1 1.6363 0.1002

Within level 'ZI NEAR' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(perm)

B1, D1 2.3135 0.0070

B1, P1 1.7941 0.0380

D1, P1 1.2161 0.2423

Within level 'ZI FAR' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(perm)

B1, D1 2.9337 0.0004

B1, P1 4.8196 0.0012

D1, P1 4.0241 0.0020

1b. Epifauna (for the significant term '(PhasexLocation)Location')

Within level 'B1' of factor 'Phase' Groups t P(perm)

SDA, ZI NEAR 1.7493 0.0947

SDA, ZI FAR 3.5562 0.0054

ZI NEAR, ZI FAR 2.2864 0.0272

Within level 'D1' of factor 'Phase' Groups t P(perm)

SDA, ZI NEAR 0.8457 0.4336

SDA, ZI FAR 2.5045 0.0100

ZI NEAR, ZI FAR 2.1722 0.0179

Within level 'P1' of factor 'Phase' Groups t P(perm)

SDA, ZI NEAR 1.2227 0.2452

SDA, ZI FAR 0.6659 0.5452

ZI NEAR, ZI FAR 1.0880 0.3297

1c. Epifauna (for the significant term '(PhasexSite(Location)Phase')

Within level 'SDA' of factor 'Location' Within level '1' of factor 'Site' Groups t P(MC)

B1, D1 0.7865 0.5766

B1, P1 1.5180 0.2346

D1, P1 0.8936 0.4892


B1, D1 1.0093 0.4338

B1, P1 2.2360 0.1055

D1, P1 1.8596 0.1522

Within level 'SDA' of factor 'Location'



Within level '3' of factor 'Site' Groups t P(MC)

B1, D1 1.8431 0.1536

B1, P1 2.4491 0.0861

D1, P1 2.6922 0.0771


B1, D1 1.4448 0.2576

B1, P1 1.5242 0.2396

D1, P1 1.8359 0.1923


B1, D1 2.2453 0.0945

B1, P1 1.6774 0.1500

D1, P1 2.3813 0.0686


B1, D1 1.7091 0.1855

B1, P1 3.0902 0.0729

D1, P1 3.0585 0.0677

Within level 'ZI NEAR' of factor 'Location' Within level '1' of factor 'Site' Groups t P(MC)

B1, D1 1.4039 0.2589

B1, P1 1.1189 0.3709

D1, P1 1.4337 0.2542


B1, D1 2.2519 0.1163

B1, P1 7.0015 0.0096

D1, P1 2.9493 0.0812


B1, D1 1.0860 0.3941

B1, P1 1.2525 0.3353

D1, P1 4.0958 0.0247


B1, D1 1.8975 0.1390

B1, P1 2.9489 0.0700

D1, P1 6.3020 0.0091


B1, D1 1.0978 0.3840



B1, P1 2.3994 0.0864

D1, P1 2.2602 0.0966


B1, D1 0.9522 0.4532

B1, P1 1.0709 0.4006

D1, P1 2.8831 0.0551

Within level 'ZI FAR' of factor 'Location' Within level '1' of factor 'Site' Groups t P(MC)

B1, D1 3.5063 0.0372

B1, P1 6.3463 0.0152

D1, P1 6.6007 0.0118


B1, D1 3.0917 0.0484

B1, P1 3.0504 0.0759

D1, P1 4.6881 0.0286


B1, D1 2.4666 0.1023

B1, P1 6.7928 0.0085

D1, P1 4.2885 0.0367


B1, D1 2.1415 0.1073

B1, P1 3.2444 0.0619

D1, P1 4.8938 0.0207


B1, D1 1.1778 0.3388

B1, P1 1.6734 0.2259

D1, P1 2.9605 0.0704


B1, D1 1.2672 0.3036

B1, P1 2.8439 0.0600

D1, P1 1.9679 0.1134

1d. Epifauna (for the significant term '(PhasexSite(Location)Site')

Within level 'B1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'SDA' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(MC)

1, 2 0.6934 0.6186

1, 3 0.6141 0.6858



1, 4 0.7940 0.5871

1, 5 1.6483 0.1717

1, 6 1.8750 0.1382

2, 3 0.6407 0.6977

2, 4 0.9650 0.4390

2, 5 2.3146 0.0800

2, 6 2.6243 0.0900

3, 4 0.7782 0.5379

3, 5 2.0906 0.1125

3, 6 2.3577 0.1099

4, 5 0.9350 0.4775

4, 6 1.0818 0.3950

5, 6 0.4623 0.8458

Within level 'B1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'ZI NEAR' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(MC)

1, 2 0.6452 0.6648

1, 3 0.7462 0.5740

1, 4 0.6287 0.7177

1, 5 1.4989 0.2479

1, 6 0.3029 0.8832

2, 3 1.0867 0.3891

2, 4 1.0294 0.4149

2, 5 2.7308 0.0748

2, 6 0.3150 0.8398

3, 4 0.9560 0.4515

3, 5 0.5930 0.6507

3, 6 0.5716 0.6499

4, 5 1.9592 0.1615

4, 6 0.3352 0.8674

5, 6 0.8671 0.4753

Within level 'B1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'ZI FAR' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(MC)

1, 2 1.0297 0.4045

1, 3 0.8134 0.5767

1, 4 2.1261 0.1281

1, 5 1.6405 0.1875

1, 6 1.5009 0.2343

2, 3 1.1142 0.3729

2, 4 1.5174 0.2482

2, 5 1.5460 0.2196

2, 6 0.7117 0.5690

3, 4 2.5519 0.0787

3, 5 1.9089 0.1322

3, 6 1.6520 0.1859

4, 5 0.5105 0.7598

4, 6 1.6552 0.2026

5, 6 1.3614 0.2800

Within level 'D1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'SDA' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(MC)

1, 2 0.6784 0.6403

1, 3 0.8353 0.5425

1, 4 1.4948 0.2404

1, 5 2.3539 0.0748



1, 6 1.7566 0.1673

2, 3 1.0629 0.4028

2, 4 1.6932 0.2157

2, 5 3.1907 0.0363

2, 6 2.3375 0.0918

3, 4 1.4636 0.2673

3, 5 3.0897 0.0403

3, 6 2.1326 0.1197

4, 5 0.6379 0.6508

4, 6 0.6550 0.6282

5, 6 0.9855 0.4535

Within level 'D1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'ZI NEAR' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(MC)

1, 2 0.6829 0.6402

1, 3 1.6708 0.2117

1, 4 1.7160 0.1974

1, 5 2.3963 0.1083

1, 6 2.3395 0.1130

2, 3 1.1908 0.3475

2, 4 1.3976 0.2524

2, 5 2.1193 0.1431

2, 6 2.0460 0.1443

3, 4 2.1547 0.0878

3, 5 2.2773 0.0871

3, 6 2.3424 0.1015

4, 5 4.1292 0.0256

4, 6 3.9534 0.0251

5, 6 0.6696 0.6640

Within level 'D1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'ZI FAR' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(MC)

1, 2 2.5718 0.0961

1, 3 1.6680 0.1979

1, 4 2.0288 0.0978

1, 5 1.5749 0.1908

1, 6 1.9865 0.1180

2, 3 1.5730 0.2159

2, 4 2.8074 0.0660

2, 5 2.6937 0.0735

2, 6 3.0299 0.0533

3, 4 1.7568 0.1848

3, 5 1.7876 0.1718

3, 6 2.1698 0.1076

4, 5 0.4783 0.7991

4, 6 1.0070 0.4338

5, 6 0.8837 0.5264

Within level 'P1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'SDA' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(MC)

1, 2 2.0935 0.1256

1, 3 4.8794 0.0183

1, 4 2.5410 0.0760

1, 5 1.5983 0.2331

1, 6 2.6705 0.0753

2, 3 2.5093 0.0788



2, 4 2.3615 0.1014

2, 5 1.6267 0.1817

2, 6 2.1083 0.1294

3, 4 1.2559 0.3275

3, 5 1.7307 0.2274

3, 6 6.5853 0.0099

4, 5 1.5800 0.2494

4, 6 2.0519 0.1473

5, 6 1.3874 0.2892

Within level 'P1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'ZI NEAR' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(MC)

1, 2 0.9975 0.4343

1, 3 1.2074 0.3365

1, 4 1.1207 0.3770

1, 5 1.5406 0.2018

1, 6 1.3205 0.2916

2, 3 2.5110 0.0601

2, 4 2.3261 0.0804

2, 5 2.6479 0.0676

2, 6 4.7170 0.0187

3, 4 1.6000 0.1890

3, 5 2.6156 0.0709

3, 6 4.5141 0.0227

4, 5 2.5438 0.0778

4, 6 3.9821 0.0311

5, 6 1.3621 0.2650

Within level 'P1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'ZI FAR' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(MC)

1, 2 1.2223 0.3407

1, 3 0.8483 0.5216

1, 4 1.5769 0.2089

1, 5 0.8478 0.5307

1, 6 2.7651 0.0901

2, 3 0.8764 0.5011

2, 4 0.8479 0.5291

2, 5 1.0167 0.4254

2, 6 2.0031 0.1492

3, 4 1.4787 0.2131

3, 5 0.8805 0.5156

3, 6 2.7434 0.0859

4, 5 1.2722 0.2984

4, 6 2.1712 0.1302

5, 6 2.5699 0.0991

1e. Epifauna Biota (for the significant term 'Location')

Groups t P(perm)

SDA, ZI NEAR 1.6402 0.0285

SDA, ZI FAR 1.7463 0.0135

ZI NEAR, ZI FAR 0.9219 0.4984



1f. Epifauna Biota (for the significant term '(PhasexSite(Location)Phase')


B1, D1 1.7404 0.2076

B1, P1 3.9382 0.0306

D1, P1 1.0924 0.3807


B1, D1 1.2495 0.3205

B1, P1 2.6527 0.0568

D1, P1 1.2099 0.3284


B1, D1 0.8909 0.4806

B1, P1 0.9480 0.4476

D1, P1 1.0000 0.4247


B1, D1 1.5435 0.1785

B1, P1 1.7027 0.1804

D1, P1 0.9571 0.4711


B1, D1 1.4458 0.2243

B1, P1 2.4251 0.0715

D1, P1 2.2620 0.0780


B1, D1 1.0944 0.3899

B1, P1 0.8114 0.5531

D1, P1 0.9555 0.4537


B1, D1 1.0618 0.4098

B1, P1 1.2099 0.3275

D1, P1 1.1820 0.3339


B1, D1 1.8348 0.1467

B1, P1 5.3491 0.0126

D1, P1 2.4431 0.0763

Within level 'ZI NEAR' of factor 'Location'




B1, D1 2.5546 0.0701

B1, P1 1.3519 0.2684

D1, P1 2.2907 0.0663


B1, D1 1.3917 0.2285

B1, P1 1.2210 0.3184

D1, P1 1.5947 0.1736


B1, D1 1.1588 0.3470

B1, P1 3.4290 0.0306

D1, P1 2.5678 0.0558


B1, D1 0.8025 0.6135

B1, P1 2.9616 0.0426

D1, P1 3.0633 0.0367


B1, D1 1.5033 0.2227

B1, P1 1.6235 0.1931

D1, P1 3.4452 0.0501


B1, D1 1.3910 0.2555

B1, P1 3.1926 0.0407

D1, P1 1.4312 0.2265


B1, D1 1.2702 0.2898

B1, P1 2.9546 0.0452

D1, P1 1.8434 0.1333


B1, D1 0.7050 0.6799

B1, P1 2.5769 0.0475

D1, P1 1.8565 0.1303


B1, D1 0.9408 0.4749



B1, P1 0.9768 0.4548

D1, P1 0.6475 0.6837


B1, D1 1.1993 0.3341

B1, P1 3.5046 0.0339

D1, P1 5.6463 0.0120

1g. Epifauna Biota (for the significant term '(PhasexSite(Location)Site')


1, 2 4.1252 0.0311

1, 3 0.9490 0.4454

1, 4 1.9451 0.1228

1, 5 2.0489 0.1113

1, 6 1.0506 0.4112

2, 3 0.8558 0.5105

2, 4 2.0200 0.1092

2, 5 2.7378 0.0490

2, 6 1.9813 0.1194

3, 4 1.0617 0.4126

3, 5 1.1988 0.3258

3, 6 0.9928 0.4545

4, 5 1.1192 0.3753

4, 6 1.4066 0.2406

5, 6 1.0868 0.3955


1, 2 1.1419 0.3681

1, 3 0.5403 0.7300

1, 4 0.8006 0.5900

1, 5 1.0745 0.3912

1, 6 0.8408 0.5564

2, 3 0.7618 0.5713

2, 4 0.7688 0.5343

2, 5 1.1830 0.3479

2, 6 0.6972 0.6120

3, 4 0.8049 0.5651

3, 5 0.8977 0.4921

3, 6 0.6208 0.7176

4, 5 0.6937 0.6226

4, 6 0.5933 0.7330

5, 6 0.4224 0.8720


1, 2 1.5796 0.1796

1, 3 1.0968 0.3898

1, 4 1.1647 0.3411

1, 5 1.0815 0.3898

1, 6 1.1444 0.3554

2, 3 2.8594 0.0639



2, 4 1.2268 0.3152

2, 5 1.0752 0.3977

2, 6 1.4951 0.2073

3, 4 1.8763 0.1194

3, 5 1.4257 0.2279

3, 6 1.8647 0.1373

4, 5 0.5021 0.7945

4, 6 0.7188 0.6347

5, 6 0.5202 0.7433


1, 2 0.6590 0.6536

1, 3 1.7017 0.2217

1, 4 1.0340 0.4244

1, 5 1.3413 0.2837

1, 6 0.6433 0.6702

2, 3 0.9927 0.4230

2, 4 0.7968 0.5558

2, 5 0.9263 0.4723

2, 6 0.5875 0.6958

3, 4 0.7046 0.6029

3, 5 1.0000 0.4162

3, 6 1.1497 0.3673

4, 5 0.4529 0.7733

4, 6 0.8468 0.5285

5, 6 0.7843 0.5768


1, 2 1.2505 0.2981

1, 3 1.4629 0.2279

1, 4 1.2494 0.3308

1, 5 1.2285 0.3129

1, 6 1.5300 0.1826

2, 3 1.5796 0.1890

2, 4 1.2447 0.2962

2, 5 0.7612 0.6203

2, 6 0.9846 0.4582

3, 4 1.4278 0.2392

3, 5 1.3275 0.2709

3, 6 1.8485 0.1507

4, 5 1.1072 0.3783

4, 6 1.1413 0.3647

5, 6 1.0114 0.4325


1, 2 0.9012 0.5069

1, 3 1.4417 0.2522

1, 4 1.8361 0.1388

1, 5 1.0554 0.4114

1, 6 3.3050 0.0346

2, 3 1.0816 0.3979

2, 4 0.9385 0.4821

2, 5 0.7800 0.6129



2, 6 1.5861 0.1829

3, 4 0.9354 0.4917

3, 5 1.2141 0.3256

3, 6 2.0107 0.1027

4, 5 0.9883 0.4567

4, 6 0.9398 0.4800

5, 6 1.6659 0.1756


1, 2 1.7442 0.1516

1, 3 3.8200 0.0343

1, 4 3.3582 0.0469

1, 5 2.7256 0.0585

1, 6 2.3990 0.0910

2, 3 2.7038 0.0582

2, 4 2.6372 0.0692

2, 5 2.0473 0.0939

2, 6 2.4218 0.0734

3, 4 0.5798 0.6135

3, 5 3.0472 0.0541

3, 6 0.7529 0.5399

4, 5 2.9509 0.0491

4, 6 0.8935 0.4912

5, 6 2.7657 0.0569


1, 2 0.9928 0.4329

1, 3 1.2115 0.3208

1, 4 1.3885 0.2520

1, 5 1.9348 0.1070

1, 6 1.9402 0.1228

2, 3 2.2786 0.0798

2, 4 2.7534 0.0609

2, 5 3.4963 0.0299

2, 6 4.3004 0.0201

3, 4 1.6071 0.1889

3, 5 3.3150 0.0352

3, 6 3.6624 0.0274

4, 5 2.9469 0.0471

4, 6 3.0635 0.0577

5, 6 1.4160 0.2451


1, 2 2.9956 0.0443

1, 3 2.2783 0.0910

1, 4 4.1112 0.0250

1, 5 0.9394 0.4631

1, 6 10.8540 0.0031

2, 3 1.6953 0.1484

2, 4 1.3740 0.2568

2, 5 0.5771 0.7479

2, 6 3.1786 0.0443

3, 4 2.4923 0.0670



3, 5 0.6219 0.7014

3, 6 4.5275 0.0191

4, 5 0.9374 0.4719

4, 6 3.3886 0.0358

5, 6 1.9273 0.1330

2a. Infauna Abundance (for the significant term '(PhasexLocation)Phase')


B1, D1 3.1980 0.0232

B1, P1 1.1268 0.3081

D1, P1 3.5727 0.0208


B1, D1 0.4110 0.6935

B1, P1 7.0018 0.0012

D1, P1 5.7768 0.0032


B1, D1 0.3478 0.7564

B1, P1 4.2592 0.0105

D1, P1 4.5739 0.0079

2b. Infauna Abundance (for the significant term '(PhasexLocation)Location')


SDA, ZI NEAR 1.1511 0.2868

SDA, ZI FAR 0.4045 0.6807

ZI NEAR, ZI FAR 0.9661 0.3534


SDA, ZI NEAR 2.1059 0.0567

SDA, ZI FAR 2.2869 0.0102

ZI NEAR, ZI FAR 0.4577 0.6808


SDA, ZI NEAR 6.5338 0.0018

SDA, ZI FAR 4.7646 0.0023

ZI NEAR, ZI FAR 1.1947 0.2840

2c. Infauna Abundance (for the significant term '(PhasexSite(Location)Phase')


B1, D1 0.1162 0.9104

B1, P1 0.7624 0.4651

D1, P1 0.7660 0.4718


B1, D1 1.3180 0.2281



B1, P1 1.7069 0.1254

D1, P1 5.2036 0.0008


B1, D1 4.2755 0.0038

B1, P1 1.9059 0.0998

D1, P1 2.0655 0.0705


B1, D1 1.7300 0.1224

B1, P1 0.6053 0.5563

D1, P1 1.8378 0.1022


B1, D1 3.4352 0.0089

B1, P1 0.8644 0.4159

D1, P1 3.3477 0.0101


B1, D1 3.1224 0.0077

B1, P1 2.5870 0.0249

D1, P1 1.8720 0.0972


B1, D1 3.3292 0.0089

B1, P1 10.1470 0.0001

D1, P1 6.0906 0.0003


B1, D1 1.8650 0.0956

B1, P1 3.6437 0.0064

D1, P1 4.0601 0.0060


B1, D1 2.0003 0.0861

B1, P1 3.7625 0.0055

D1, P1 1.9049 0.0904


B1, D1 1.9089 0.0951

B1, P1 2.5614 0.0072

D1, P1 3.4774 0.0086




B1, D1 3.1895 0.0138

B1, P1 4.2795 0.0028

D1, P1 8.8226 0.0001


B1, D1 2.5060 0.0371

B1, P1 5.7846 0.0006

D1, P1 10.2060 0.0001


B1, D1 1.3884 0.2071

B1, P1 3.5475 0.0083

D1, P1 6.0028 0.0076


B1, D1 2.2806 0.0545

B1, P1 0.7545 0.4761

D1, P1 2.6130 0.0304


B1, D1 3.2761 0.0116

B1, P1 3.5148 0.0069

D1, P1 7.8287 0.0087


B1, D1 1.5048 0.1747

B1, P1 2.3763 0.0466

D1, P1 0.4175 0.6830


B1, D1 0.2210 0.8286

B1, P1 4.6266 0.0144

D1, P1 7.9517 0.0091


B1, D1 2.2588 0.0494

B1, P1 6.2788 0.0004

D1, P1 4.4387 0.0031



2d. Infauna Abundance (for the significant term '(PhasexSite(Location)Site')


1, 2 0.3130 0.7635

1, 3 3.0329 0.0153

1, 4 0.8791 0.4142

1, 5 2.1013 0.0718

1, 6 1.8705 0.0964

2, 3 2.0882 0.0648

2, 4 0.4622 0.6609

2, 5 1.7281 0.1234

2, 6 1.5023 0.1685

3, 4 1.5688 0.1548

3, 5 0.3383 0.7467

3, 6 0.0640 0.9491

4, 5 1.3875 0.1993

4, 6 1.1530 0.2511

5, 6 0.2242 0.8289


1, 2 0.6444 0.5460

1, 3 0.8136 0.4333

1, 4 1.8649 0.1013

1, 5 1.3007 0.2309

1, 6 1.0840 0.3066

2, 3 0.4005 0.6980

2, 4 1.5622 0.1556

2, 5 0.9006 0.3960

2, 6 0.6044 0.5595

3, 4 1.0438 0.3310

3, 5 0.3726 0.7204

3, 6 0.0738 0.9393

4, 5 0.7438 0.4737

4, 6 1.0838 0.3128

5, 6 0.3501 0.7298


1, 2 0.4710 0.6423

1, 3 1.4548 0.1854

1, 4 1.0835 0.3163

1, 5 0.1838 0.8621

1, 6 1.4035 0.2015

2, 3 1.2716 0.2357

2, 4 0.8086 0.4456

2, 5 0.1322 0.8952

2, 6 2.7027 0.0274

3, 4 0.2837 0.7853

3, 5 0.8489 0.4285

3, 6 3.9972 0.0043

4, 5 0.6251 0.5463

4, 6 2.9923 0.0164

5, 6 1.1579 0.2760




1, 2 2.5156 0.0369

1, 3 2.6071 0.0302

1, 4 2.0165 0.0798

1, 5 9.5330 0.0001

1, 6 8.1840 0.0001

2, 3 0.3876 0.7140

2, 4 0.2453 0.8161

2, 5 2.7629 0.0284

2, 6 2.1956 0.0597

3, 4 0.0847 0.9405

3, 5 4.3333 0.0024

3, 6 3.5090 0.0070

4, 5 2.8127 0.0227

4, 6 2.3037 0.0516

5, 6 1.4747 0.1826


1, 2 4.4707 0.0033

1, 3 0.0550 0.9551

1, 4 3.7569 0.0065

1, 5 5.7175 0.0005

1, 6 4.8670 0.0014

2, 3 4.5771 0.0021

2, 4 1.7281 0.1207

2, 5 2.1367 0.0684

2, 6 0.7646 0.4713

3, 4 3.8632 0.0048

3, 5 5.8358 0.0006

3, 6 4.9748 0.0011

4, 5 4.3028 0.0032

4, 6 2.5195 0.0343

5, 6 1.2650 0.2332


1, 2 0.0917 0.9283

1, 3 0.3892 0.7051

1, 4 2.8851 0.0172

1, 5 2.2321 0.0600

1, 6 1.9908 0.0830

2, 3 0.4459 0.6709

2, 4 2.8783 0.0179

2, 5 2.0447 0.0734

2, 6 1.8835 0.0974

3, 4 2.7478 0.0316

3, 5 1.8397 0.1044

3, 6 1.6379 0.1404

4, 5 2.2488 0.0724

4, 6 2.1767 0.0738

5, 6 0.1069 0.9136

Within level 'P1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'SDA' of factor 'Location'



Groups t P(MC)

1, 2 1.0005 0.3435

1, 3 0.0778 0.9400

1, 4 0.5163 0.6073

1, 5 0.5829 0.5728

1, 6 1.7317 0.1235

2, 3 1.4774 0.1748

2, 4 2.6994 0.0272

2, 5 0.2153 0.8374

2, 6 5.3153 0.0011

3, 4 0.5837 0.5803

3, 5 0.7523 0.4736

3, 6 2.2929 0.0500

4, 5 1.2394 0.2451

4, 6 2.2860 0.0515

5, 6 2.4243 0.0381


1, 2 0.0909 0.9287

1, 3 4.3277 0.0035

1, 4 0.2469 0.8081

1, 5 2.8912 0.0175

1, 6 3.8111 0.0052

2, 3 1.8088 0.1143

2, 4 0.1305 0.7930

2, 5 1.3195 0.2201

2, 6 1.5003 0.1724

3, 4 1.7531 0.0489

3, 5 1.1361 0.2843

3, 6 0.9481 0.3825

4, 5 1.3262 0.2268

4, 6 1.4805 0.1759

5, 6 0.3748 0.7210


1, 2 2.5528 0.0361

1, 3 0.3016 0.7732

1, 4 0.8974 0.3966

1, 5 3.3854 0.0160

1, 6 0.2860 0.7792

2, 3 3.2589 0.0108

2, 4 2.3877 0.0184

2, 5 5.3679 0.0082

2, 6 2.6415 0.0294

3, 4 0.7989 0.4511

3, 5 3.5992 0.0077

3, 6 0.0669 0.9468

4, 5 1.3033 0.2149

4, 6 0.7026 0.4933

5, 6 2.9464 0.0198

2e. Infauna Taxon Richness (for the significant term '(PhasexLocation)Phase')




B1, D1 3.2698 0.0289

B1, P1 2.3217 0.0733

D1, P1 2.1326 0.0859


B1, D1 0.0233 0.9841

B1, P1 17.0370 0.0002

D1, P1 3.7562 0.0063


B1, D1 0.1453 0.8787

B1, P1 5.7858 0.0042

D1, P1 4.7472 0.0070

2f. Infauna Taxon Richness (for the significant term '(PhasexLocation)Location')


SDA, ZI NEAR 0.5186 0.6081

SDA, ZI FAR 0.5005 0.6138

ZI NEAR, ZI FAR 0.0368 0.9829


SDA, ZI NEAR 2.6383 0.0248

SDA, ZI FAR 3.5918 0.0041

ZI NEAR, ZI FAR 0.0484 0.9746


SDA, ZI NEAR 9.7821 0.0016

SDA, ZI FAR 6.8767 0.0026

ZI NEAR, ZI FAR 1.1049 0.3140

2g. Infauna Taxon Richness (for the significant term '(PhasexSite(Location)Phase')


B1, D1 0.1827 0.8640

B1, P1 0.3336 0.7546

D1, P1 0.4577 0.6626


B1, D1 1.3225 0.2205

B1, P1 1.1526 0.2821

D1, P1 3.9198 0.0037


B1, D1 3.9372 0.0045

B1, P1 2.3771 0.0446

D1, P1 1.7990 0.1105




B1, D1 2.0103 0.0793

B1, P1 2.6261 0.0277

D1, P1 0.1787 0.8596


B1, D1 4.7532 0.0012

B1, P1 2.0121 0.0807

D1, P1 4.4978 0.0019


B1, D1 5.0221 0.0011

B1, P1 3.5576 0.0096

D1, P1 1.7589 0.1161


B1, D1 4.5714 0.0024

B1, P1 6.3085 0.0005

D1, P1 1.2123 0.2550


B1, D1 1.8625 0.1013

B1, P1 8.3248 0.0001

D1, P1 10.5930 0.0001


B1, D1 4.6648 0.0031

B1, P1 5.0153 0.0016

D1, P1 0.7062 0.5030


B1, D1 1.4686 0.1793

B1, P1 3.3811 0.0094

D1, P1 7.0989 0.0001


B1, D1 3.1151 0.0143

B1, P1 3.7874 0.0048

D1, P1 7.1213 0.0001




B1, D1 2.3163 0.0518

B1, P1 4.5963 0.0023

D1, P1 7.8351 0.0002


B1, D1 0.2347 0.8225

B1, P1 4.8535 0.0013

D1, P1 5.9448 0.0006


B1, D1 1.3597 0.2089

B1, P1 1.3123 0.2309

D1, P1 2.0100 0.0839


B1, D1 2.0464 0.0779

B1, P1 4.7552 0.0015

D1, P1 4.6912 0.0018


B1, D1 1.2137 0.2654

B1, P1 2.1835 0.0618

D1, P1 0.5488 0.6028


B1, D1 0.2641 0.7961

B1, P1 3.0919 0.0163

D1, P1 5.1241 0.0009


B1, D1 2.3743 0.0474

B1, P1 3.6689 0.0059

D1, P1 2.1467 0.0625

2h. Infauna Taxon Richness (for the significant term '(PhasexSite(Location)Site')


1, 2 0.3399 0.7402

1, 3 2.7001 0.0276

1, 4 0.8671 0.4121

1, 5 2.0965 0.0672

1, 6 2.0123 0.0773

2, 3 1.7590 0.1181

2, 4 0.3539 0.7342

2, 5 1.5305 0.1662



2, 6 1.3385 0.2136

3, 4 1.5485 0.1597

3, 5 0.0812 0.9362

3, 6 0.3072 0.7652

4, 5 1.3227 0.2181

4, 6 1.1002 0.2998

5, 6 0.3321 0.7476


1, 2 1.3737 0.2052

1, 3 1.0000 0.3488

1, 4 2.3676 0.0465

1, 5 1.6231 0.1401

1, 6 1.9865 0.0836

2, 3 0.1152 0.9100

2, 4 1.6187 0.1450

2, 5 0.6791 0.5099

2, 6 1.0499 0.3257

3, 4 1.5112 0.1696

3, 5 0.6642 0.5195

3, 6 0.9676 0.3655

4, 5 0.8877 0.4002

4, 6 0.6843 0.5173

5, 6 0.2592 0.8016


1, 2 0.9086 0.3972

1, 3 2.0236 0.0751

1, 4 1.5160 0.1654

1, 5 0.6242 0.5505

1, 6 0.8102 0.4372

2, 3 1.8282 0.1082

2, 4 1.0317 0.3336

2, 5 0.1169 0.9082

2, 6 1.8430 0.1079

3, 4 0.0888 0.9318

3, 5 0.6111 0.5638

3, 6 2.8651 0.0211

4, 5 0.4921 0.6393

4, 6 2.2458 0.0579

5, 6 1.2137 0.2572


1, 2 1.7053 0.1311

1, 3 1.9846 0.0827

1, 4 1.7211 0.1253

1, 5 6.0696 0.0008

1, 6 5.8926 0.0005

2, 3 0.1160 0.9152

2, 4 0.3834 0.7234

2, 5 3.5373 0.0087

2, 6 3.1860 0.0132

3, 4 0.3126 0.7570



3, 5 3.8552 0.0050

3, 6 3.5109 0.0085

4, 5 2.1256 0.0632

4, 6 1.7922 0.1128

5, 6 0.9117 0.3907


1, 2 5.2839 0.0006

1, 3 0.3207 0.7526

1, 4 3.7630 0.0056

1, 5 6.0643 0.0002

1, 6 4.8359 0.0016

2, 3 8.1429 0.0001

2, 4 2.0180 0.0776

2, 5 1.9751 0.0832

2, 6 0.4241 0.6742

3, 4 5.7553 0.0006

3, 5 8.1334 0.0001

3, 6 6.5101 0.0003

4, 5 3.4569 0.0075

4, 6 1.9328 0.0926

5, 6 1.2692 0.2387


1, 2 0.3390 0.7395

1, 3 0.0364 0.9716

1, 4 2.9640 0.0198

1, 5 2.1276 0.0581

1, 6 2.0669 0.0691

2, 3 0.3300 0.7538

2, 4 2.7869 0.0232

2, 5 1.8640 0.1049

2, 6 1.8641 0.0984

3, 4 2.5967 0.0334

3, 5 1.5820 0.1530

3, 6 1.5880 0.1518

4, 5 1.8487 0.0989

4, 6 1.7049 0.1225

5, 6 0.1366 0.8968


1, 2 2.0014 0.0835

1, 3 0.4692 0.6490

1, 4 1.3463 0.2164

1, 5 0.2648 0.7953

1, 6 1.5092 0.1601

2, 3 1.9490 0.0878

2, 4 5.1699 0.0013

2, 5 2.0866 0.0688

2, 6 4.8872 0.0017

3, 4 2.4004 0.0426

3, 5 0.2306 0.8232

3, 6 2.4845 0.0349



4, 5 1.9980 0.0848

4, 6 0.3375 0.7488

5, 6 2.1213 0.0632


1, 2 0.3833 0.7069

1, 3 0.5675 0.5930

1, 4 1.1212 0.3048

1, 5 0.3055 0.7638

1, 6 0.2349 0.8130

2, 3 0.3138 0.7663

2, 4 1.8188 0.0968

2, 5 0.6695 0.5221

2, 6 0.8392 0.4357

3, 4 1.8399 0.1004

3, 5 0.8082 0.4391

3, 6 0.9719 0.3569

4, 5 0.6597 0.5278

4, 6 1.0719 0.3213

5, 6 0.1460 0.8905


1, 2 1.8943 0.0957

1, 3 0.3467 0.7412

1, 4 0.7353 0.4808

1, 5 1.3278 0.2219

1, 6 1.2261 0.2546

2, 3 1.7926 0.1092

2, 4 1.3426 0.2124

2, 5 2.5859 0.0334

2, 6 0.8172 0.4392

3, 4 0.5218 0.6023

3, 5 1.6582 0.1333

3, 6 1.0765 0.3112

4, 5 1.7963 0.1128

4, 6 0.5664 0.5883

5, 6 2.1053 0.0719

2i. Infauna (for the significant term '(PhasexLocation)Phase')


B1, D1 2.1774 0.0038

B1, P1 1.8320 0.0030

D1, P1 1.8997 0.0012


B1, D1 1.6340 0.0109

B1, P1 3.9797 0.0007

D1, P1 3.0871 0.0008


B1, D1 1.9631 0.0030



B1, P1 2.7507 0.0010

D1, P1 2.6990 0.0028

2j. Infauna (for the significant term '(PhasexLocation)Location')


SDA, ZI NEAR 1.1680 0.1567

SDA, ZI FAR 1.6603 0.0021

ZI NEAR, ZI FAR 1.4635 0.0137


SDA, ZI NEAR 1.6697 0.0195

SDA, ZI FAR 1.9707 0.0063

ZI NEAR, ZI FAR 0.8932 0.5978


SDA, ZI NEAR 2.6768 0.0019

SDA, ZI FAR 2.3561 0.0026

ZI NEAR, ZI FAR 1.3050 0.0685

2k. Infauna (for the significant term '(PhasexSite(Location)Phase')

Within level 'SDA' of factor 'Location' Within level '1' of factor 'Site' Groups t P(perm)

B1, D1 1.2927 0.0064

B1, P1 1.5324 0.0077

D1, P1 1.7352 0.0079


B1, D1 1.2934 0.0236

B1, P1 1.4455 0.0150

D1, P1 1.8332 0.0088


B1, D1 2.5837 0.0080

B1, P1 1.7789 0.0081

D1, P1 2.0637 0.0075


B1, D1 1.4019 0.0082

B1, P1 1.9098 0.0074

D1, P1 1.6722 0.0079


B1, D1 2.2768 0.0070

B1, P1 1.1656 0.2028

D1, P1 1.9503 0.0083




B1, D1 1.8752 0.0085

B1, P1 1.7698 0.0077

D1, P1 1.3630 0.0491

Within level 'ZI NEAR' of factor 'Location' Within level '1' of factor 'Site' Groups t P(perm)

B1, D1 1.3702 0.0231

B1, P1 2.1679 0.0080

D1, P1 1.8632 0.0086


B1, D1 1.4674 0.0078

B1, P1 2.2924 0.0083

D1, P1 2.2440 0.0056


B1, D1 1.3286 0.0716

B1, P1 1.7938 0.0084

D1, P1 1.4304 0.0095


B1, D1 1.2258 0.1221

B1, P1 1.6962 0.0074

D1, P1 2.2453 0.0085


B1, D1 1.4940 0.0157

B1, P1 1.9187 0.0067

D1, P1 2.0221 0.0076


B1, D1 1.3662 0.0171

B1, P1 1.7739 0.0084

D1, P1 2.1514 0.0083

Within level 'ZI FAR' of factor 'Location' Within level '1' of factor 'Site' Groups t P(perm)

B1, D1 1.7345 0.0088

B1, P1 1.6187 0.0086

D1, P1 1.9393 0.0083

Within level 'ZI FAR' of factor 'Location' Within level '2' of factor 'Site'



Groups t P(perm)

B1, D1 1.5423 0.0170

B1, P1 1.5978 0.0089

D1, P1 1.4345 0.0311


B1, D1 1.5979 0.0095

B1, P1 1.9704 0.0085

D1, P1 1.7460 0.0087


B1, D1 1.2061 0.0811

B1, P1 1.9188 0.0093

D1, P1 1.2391 0.0379


B1, D1 1.2185 0.0856

B1, P1 2.0477 0.0093

D1, P1 2.5765 0.0085


B1, D1 1.5094 0.0083

B1, P1 1.9278 0.0070

D1, P1 2.0849 0.0065

2l. Infauna (for the significant term '(PhasexSite(Location)Site')


1, 2 1.0219 0.4182

1, 3 1.3959 0.0238

1, 4 1.1313 0.1073

1, 5 1.2262 0.0640

1, 6 1.3026 0.0609

2, 3 1.4611 0.0178

2, 4 1.0722 0.2737

2, 5 1.2879 0.0629

2, 6 1.2046 0.0792

3, 4 1.4135 0.0294

3, 5 0.8838 0.7445

3, 6 1.1301 0.2584

4, 5 1.0913 0.2136

4, 6 1.2429 0.0966

5, 6 1.0037 0.4146

Within level 'B1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'ZI NEAR' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(perm)

1, 2 0.9646 0.5753

1, 3 0.9544 0.5806



1, 4 1.1078 0.1999

1, 5 1.0682 0.3147

1, 6 0.8356 0.8966

2, 3 1.2039 0.1453

2, 4 1.1430 0.1616

2, 5 1.1621 0.2066

2, 6 1.0285 0.3534

3, 4 1.1388 0.1661

3, 5 1.1340 0.2120

3, 6 0.8156 0.8593

4, 5 1.1308 0.1614

4, 6 1.0919 0.2230

5, 6 0.8695 0.8195

Within level 'B1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'ZI FAR' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(perm)

1, 2 0.9867 0.5224

1, 3 1.3181 0.0221

1, 4 1.1416 0.1762

1, 5 1.0049 0.4591

1, 6 1.4062 0.0165

2, 3 0.9275 0.7254

2, 4 1.0862 0.2927

2, 5 1.0501 0.3213

2, 6 1.4191 0.0081

3, 4 1.3303 0.0086

3, 5 1.1656 0.1179

3, 6 1.7056 0.0091

4, 5 1.0178 0.4276

4, 6 1.4853 0.0178

5, 6 1.1639 0.1232

Within level 'D1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'SDA' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(perm)

1, 2 1.6255 0.0101

1, 3 1.9504 0.0089

1, 4 1.1606 0.0315

1, 5 2.1260 0.0085

1, 6 1.8245 0.0080

2, 3 1.7650 0.0080

2, 4 0.9550 0.6240

2, 5 1.3672 0.0219

2, 6 1.0006 0.4698

3, 4 1.5758 0.0081

3, 5 1.9999 0.0081

3, 6 1.8062 0.0085

4, 5 1.3385 0.0567

4, 6 1.1463 0.1393

5, 6 0.8451 0.7765

Within level 'D1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'ZI NEAR' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(perm)

1, 2 1.7519 0.0090

1, 3 1.2215 0.0319

1, 4 1.7593 0.0079

1, 5 1.6298 0.0076



1, 6 1.7533 0.0067

2, 3 1.5670 0.0092

2, 4 1.2076 0.0471

2, 5 1.1839 0.1018

2, 6 1.1470 0.1280

3, 4 1.2728 0.0246

3, 5 1.5426 0.0071

3, 6 1.5189 0.0078

4, 5 1.1995 0.1006

4, 6 1.1081 0.1958

5, 6 0.9496 0.6350

Within level 'D1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'ZI FAR' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(perm)

1, 2 0.9890 0.4721

1, 3 0.9294 0.6782

1, 4 1.7017 0.0156

1, 5 1.4734 0.0329

1, 6 1.6053 0.0157

2, 3 0.8412 0.7115

2, 4 1.4291 0.0237

2, 5 1.2236 0.0629

2, 6 1.3656 0.0314

3, 4 1.2637 0.0815

3, 5 0.8966 0.8217

3, 6 1.1280 0.1500

4, 5 1.3582 0.0753

4, 6 1.3924 0.0449

5, 6 0.9635 0.5991

Within level 'P1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'SDA' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(perm)

1, 2 1.4264 0.0295

1, 3 1.3320 0.0250

1, 4 1.5107 0.0339

1, 5 1.1827 0.2224

1, 6 1.3187 0.1015

2, 3 1.6450 0.0101

2, 4 2.0466 0.0052

2, 5 1.2445 0.1585

2, 6 1.8028 0.0072

3, 4 1.9321 0.0067

3, 5 1.4333 0.0091

3, 6 1.6940 0.0079

4, 5 1.4249 0.0583

4, 6 1.1072 0.2719

5, 6 1.2520 0.1010

Within level 'P1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'ZI NEAR' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(perm)

1, 2 1.0397 0.2793

1, 3 1.2418 0.0398

1, 4 0.9914 0.4858

1, 5 1.2251 0.0429

1, 6 1.3210 0.0080

2, 3 1.3100 0.0161



2, 4 0.9279 0.6422

2, 5 1.1941 0.0775

2, 6 1.2332 0.0828

3, 4 1.1861 0.0964

3, 5 0.9828 0.5488

3, 6 1.1598 0.0929

4, 5 1.0483 0.3309

4, 6 1.1032 0.1512

5, 6 1.0467 0.3528

Within level 'P1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'ZI FAR' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(perm)

1, 2 1.1481 0.1293

1, 3 1.1523 0.1368

1, 4 1.3703 0.0167

1, 5 1.7095 0.0087

1, 6 1.4142 0.0152

2, 3 1.2776 0.0225

2, 4 1.4528 0.0081

2, 5 2.0009 0.0073

2, 6 1.5616 0.0088

3, 4 1.1425 0.1959

3, 5 1.6657 0.0087

3, 6 1.4283 0.0175

4, 5 1.2840 0.0650

4, 6 1.1293 0.1705

5, 6 1.2553 0.0327

3a. Median Grain Size (for the significant term '(PhasexLocation)Phase')


B1, D1 3.2374 0.0256

B1, P1 2.8696 0.0301

D1, P1 2.1707 0.0835


B1, D1 2.8547 0.0297

B1, P1 0.6399 0.5692

D1, P1 1.7186 0.1543


B1, D1 3.3541 0.0263

B1, P1 0.5765 0.6120

D1, P1 0.6196 0.5820

3b. Median Grain Size (for the significant term '(PhasexLocation)Location')


SDA, ZI NEAR 1.0315 0.3382

SDA, ZI FAR 0.8910 0.4131

ZI NEAR, ZI FAR 0.0974 0.9215




SDA, ZI NEAR 4.1854 0.0057

SDA, ZI FAR 4.2075 0.0072

ZI NEAR, ZI FAR 1.2947 0.2270


SDA, ZI NEAR 1.5562 0.1466

SDA, ZI FAR 1.1296 0.3226

ZI NEAR, ZI FAR 0.1806 0.8546

3c. Median Grain Size (for the significant term '(PhasexSite(Location)Phase')


B1, D1 5.7857 0.0295

B1, P1 3.3257 0.0819

D1, P1 1.7730 0.2160


B1, D1 2.7598 0.1063

B1, P1 1.6517 0.2377

D1, P1 1.2515 0.3391


B1, D1 0.2955 0.7938

B1, P1 0.5915 0.6044

D1, P1 1.4562 0.2772


B1, D1 3.1614 0.0851

B1, P1 1.1908 0.3587

D1, P1 4.6788 0.0428


B1, D1 1.7794 0.2093

B1, P1 0.8398 0.4927

D1, P1 5.2858 0.0352


B1, D1 2.5691 0.1291

B1, P1 1.4076 0.2900

D1, P1 0.9110 0.4580


B1, D1 1.5374 0.2730

B1, P1 3.7914 0.0633



D1, P1 1.1643 0.3694


B1, D1 3.0422 0.0896

B1, P1 0.2966 0.7937

D1, P1 2.0307 0.1840


B1, D1 8.6800 0.0145

B1, P1 3.5961 0.0724

D1, P1 1.3755 0.2982


B1, D1 0.3333 0.7660

B1, P1 2.1538 0.1671

D1, P1 0.0839 0.9405


B1, D1 0.3656 0.7456

B1, P1 1.2712 0.3451

D1, P1 1.0118 0.4146


B1, D1 3.8409 0.0610

B1, P1 20.4290 0.0039

D1, P1 7.0028 0.0195


B1, D1 1.4142 0.2970

B1, P1 0.2272 0.8425

D1, P1 1.8503 0.2035


B1, D1 1.4142 0.2959

B1, P1 3.2046 0.0925

D1, P1 4.7418 0.0397


B1, D1 0.2094 0.8596

B1, P1 0.4250 0.7123

D1, P1 0.8176 0.5009

Within level 'ZI FAR' of factor 'Location'



Within level '4' of factor 'Site' Groups t P(perm)

B1, D1 0.7363 0.5307

B1, P1 0.6833 0.5648

D1, P1 0.2777 0.8174


B1, D1 0.0000 1.0000

B1, P1 4.6618 0.0431

D1, P1 4.6618 0.0423


B1, D1 2.5410 0.1252

B1, P1 0.4812 0.6800

D1, P1 1.9003 0.1943

3d. Median Grain Size (for the significant term '(PhasexSite(Location)Site')


1, 2 0.6591 0.5804

1, 3 1.2396 0.3486

1, 4 4.2442 0.0546

1, 5 0.6776 0.5703

1, 6 0.3656 0.7487

2, 3 0.4689 0.6826

2, 4 1.2875 0.3171

2, 5 0.8668 0.4763

2, 6 0.6934 0.5624

3, 4 0.6111 0.5991

3, 5 1.0793 0.3968

3, 6 1.0518 0.4101

4, 5 1.3703 0.3036

4, 6 1.6977 0.2373

5, 6 0.4381 0.7047


1, 2 1.4142 0.2837

1, 3 2.9403 0.1021

1, 4 5.7619 0.0288

1, 5 1.4142 0.2898

1, 6 1.0000 0.4203

2, 3 4.2442 0.0498

2, 4 7.8710 0.0166

2, 5 0.0000 1.0000

2, 6 3.0323 0.0960

3, 4 1.0000 0.4212

3, 5 4.2442 0.0502

3, 6 3.0000 0.0964

4, 5 7.8710 0.0170

4, 6 Denominator is 0

5, 6 3.0323 0.0937




1, 2 4.4717 0.0461

1, 3 0.7157 0.5485

1, 4 1.1817 0.3593

1, 5 6.1665 0.0267

1, 6 4.4717 0.0479

2, 3 0.7632 0.5289

2, 4 0.0000 1.0000

2, 5 2.5410 0.1273

2, 6 0.0000 1.0000

3, 4 0.4856 0.6715

3, 5 1.6603 0.2357

3, 6 0.7632 0.5212

4, 5 0.7363 0.5405

4, 6 0.0000 1.0000

5, 6 2.5410 0.1291


1, 2 1.6043 0.2519

1, 3 2.3112 0.1495

1, 4 1.2492 0.3358

1, 5 1.1234 0.3726

1, 6 1.2492 0.3323

2, 3 3.4640 0.0742

2, 4 0.8409 0.4860

2, 5 1.1862 0.3568

2, 6 0.8409 0.4855

3, 4 3.2951 0.0760

3, 5 3.2379 0.0816

3, 6 3.2951 0.0774

4, 5 0.5183 0.6483

4, 6 0.0000 1.0000

5, 6 0.5183 0.6464


1, 2 0.8623 0.4820

1, 3 1.0000 0.4181

1, 4 1.8724 0.1961

1, 5 1.0843 0.3908

1, 6 1.1222 0.3775

2, 3 1.0000 0.4256

2, 4 3.0593 0.0944

2, 5 0.6819 0.5610

2, 6 1.4142 0.2887

3, 4 2.8933 0.1006

3, 5 0.4200 0.7160

3, 6 1.0000 0.4192

4, 5 1.4000 0.2936

4, 6 2.3303 0.1435

5, 6 0.1216 0.9106

Within level 'D1' of factor 'Phase'



Within level 'ZI FAR' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(MC)

1, 2 4.2442 0.0497

1, 3 0.6111 0.6082

1, 4 4.8692 0.0404

1, 5 4.8692 0.0402

1, 6 4.8692 0.0385

2, 3 1.2396 0.3424

2, 4 1.3934 0.2978

2, 5 1.3934 0.3051

2, 6 1.3934 0.2983

3, 4 1.8441 0.2102

3, 5 1.8441 0.2036

3, 6 1.8441 0.2020

4, 5 0.0000 1.0000

4, 6 0.0000 1.0000

5, 6 0.0000 1.0000


1, 2 1.1084 0.3867

1, 3 0.4884 0.6708

1, 4 0.6243 0.5920

1, 5 1.8971 0.1998

1, 6 0.2937 0.7947

2, 3 1.0074 0.4181

2, 4 1.6348 0.2401

2, 5 2.5986 0.1159

2, 6 0.3475 0.7607

3, 4 1.5054 0.2692

3, 5 2.9114 0.1010

3, 6 0.1376 0.9034

4, 5 1.4308 0.2828

4, 6 0.5798 0.6131

5, 6 1.2481 0.3329


1, 2 1.0878 0.3938

1, 3 1.7670 0.2215

1, 4 16.4420 0.0036

1, 5 2.0404 0.1786

1, 6 23.0860 0.0023

2, 3 2.0844 0.1755

2, 4 2.2885 0.1465

2, 5 0.7803 0.5103

2, 6 2.5638 0.1212

3, 4 3.7776 0.0610

3, 5 2.6064 0.1143

3, 6 3.9408 0.0608

4, 5 1.0447 0.4018

4, 6 1.4223 0.2872

5, 6 1.2850 0.3159




1, 2 2.4780 0.1355

1, 3 0.6022 0.5977

1, 4 11.2790 0.0091

1, 5 13.8630 0.0044

1, 6 5.2632 0.0384

2, 3 0.5946 0.6043

2, 4 8.1249 0.0148

2, 5 11.7030 0.0081

2, 6 3.2653 0.0820

3, 4 3.9902 0.0544

3, 5 7.0190 0.0187

3, 6 2.4235 0.1356

4, 5 6.9708 0.0209

4, 6 2.3212 0.1448

5, 6 6.9923 0.0187

4a. Percentage Fines (for the significant term '(PhasexLocation)Phase')


B1, D1 1.4471 0.2096

B1, P1 0.9173 0.3835

D1, P1 2.9819 0.0352


B1, D1 4.8314 0.0054

B1, P1 0.6345 0.5419

D1, P1 3.2541 0.0279


B1, D1 13.4160 0.0002

B1, P1 0.4178 0.6811

D1, P1 1.8792 0.1196

4b. Percentage Fines (for the significant term '(PhasexLocation)Location')


SDA, ZI NEAR 1.3057 0.2220

SDA, ZI FAR Negative

ZI NEAR, ZI FAR 1.0780 0.2990


SDA, ZI NEAR 2.0228 0.0777

SDA, ZI FAR 2.0535 0.0759

ZI NEAR, ZI FAR Negative


SDA, ZI NEAR 1.9318 0.0839

SDA, ZI FAR 0.9958 0.3232

ZI NEAR, ZI FAR 0.7863 0.4415

4c. Percentage Fines (for the significant term '(PhasexSite(Location)Phase')





B1, D1 0.2341 0.8328

B1, P1 0.5145 0.6462

D1, P1 0.5300 0.6443


B1, D1 2.2686 0.1565

B1, P1 3.7262 0.0683

D1, P1 1.0730 0.3972


B1, D1 4.1100 0.0541

B1, P1 4.5000 0.0458

D1, P1 2.0000 0.1846


B1, D1 0.7022 0.5571

B1, P1 9.0000 0.0127

D1, P1 2.6875 0.1163


B1, D1 1.7421 0.2225

B1, P1 1.0290 0.4048

D1, P1 16.2000 0.0047


B1, D1 2.2475 0.1563

B1, P1 0.4406 0.7038

D1, P1 0.6454 0.5882


B1, D1 1.6462 0.2355

B1, P1 0.8575 0.4813

D1, P1 1.1873 0.3633


B1, D1 3.3941 0.0741

B1, P1 1.9799 0.1930

D1, P1 5.3740 0.0323


B1, D1 3.5777 0.0683



B1, P1 2.4597 0.1347

D1, P1 0.8839 0.4718


B1, D1 0.0518 0.9645

B1, P1 0.2828 0.8047

D1, P1 0.1664 0.8811


B1, D1 0.8700 0.4845

B1, P1 1.1926 0.3457

D1, P1 1.4471 0.2750


B1, D1 5.4000 0.0319

B1, P1 8.0432 0.0168

D1, P1 12.5220 0.0065


B1, D1 0.6402 0.5874

B1, P1 0.8176 0.4959

D1, P1 1.4000 0.2999


B1, D1 3.5000 0.0747

B1, P1 5.0000 0.0354

D1, P1 13.0000 0.0052


B1, D1 0.3627 0.7567

B1, P1 0.5181 0.6492

D1, P1 2.1856 0.1596


B1, D1 0.8458 0.4792

B1, P1 1.8000 0.2128

D1, P1 1.8571 0.2100


B1, D1 1.0000 0.4204

B1, P1 1.0000 0.4200

D1, P1 Denominator is 0




B1, D1 0.7670 0.5216

B1, P1 0.0735 0.9439

D1, P1 2.6679 0.1121

4d. Percentage Fines (for the significant term '(PhasexSite(Location)Site')


1, 2 2.5298 0.1190

1, 3 1.7889 0.2141

1, 4 3.5794 0.0713

1, 5 0.1688 0.8824

1, 6 0.0619 0.9590

2, 3 0.6576 0.5711

2, 4 2.3351 0.1426

2, 5 0.3784 0.7288

2, 6 1.1234 0.3761

3, 4 0.6478 0.5864

3, 5 0.6054 0.6114

3, 6 1.3014 0.3199

4, 5 0.9386 0.4493

4, 6 2.0540 0.1790

5, 6 0.1838 0.8728


1, 2 0.8050 0.5044

1, 3 1.2999 0.3205

1, 4 1.8842 0.2066

1, 5 0.0000 1.0000

1, 6 0.0958 0.9364

2, 3 3.5920 0.0699

2, 4 3.7199 0.0648

2, 5 1.1523 0.3676

2, 6 1.3720 0.3043

3, 4 1.1163 0.3784

3, 5 1.9415 0.1875

3, 6 3.0000 0.0986

4, 5 2.4947 0.1272

4, 6 3.1514 0.0853

5, 6 0.1491 0.9010


1, 2 2.9711 0.0970

1, 3 0.4957 0.6751

1, 4 1.4977 0.2734

1, 5 3.2527 0.0867

1, 6 3.1095 0.0867

2, 3 0.3493 0.7536

2, 4 0.3221 0.7787

2, 5 1.2999 0.3193

2, 6 1.3969 0.3017



3, 4 0.2004 0.8606

3, 5 0.7045 0.5650

3, 6 0.8160 0.4985

4, 5 1.0539 0.3989

4, 6 1.2091 0.3478

5, 6 0.3049 0.7869


1, 2 2.3722 0.1424

1, 3 1.8605 0.2059

1, 4 1.4534 0.2905

1, 5 3.1530 0.0850

1, 6 2.0075 0.1800

2, 3 3.5390 0.0674

2, 4 0.7614 0.5272

2, 5 1.0529 0.4094

2, 6 0.8692 0.4784

3, 4 2.5575 0.1273

3, 5 18.3360 0.0038

3, 6 3.9346 0.0611

4, 5 0.0000 1.0000

4, 6 0.0261 0.9813

5, 6 0.0468 0.9655


1, 2 0.4308 0.7093

1, 3 0.5896 0.6081

1, 4 2.2068 0.1546

1, 5 0.3239 0.7721

1, 6 0.0735 0.9472

2, 3 1.5900 0.2592

2, 4 2.9441 0.0965

2, 5 0.6485 0.5836

2, 6 0.7809 0.5224

3, 4 2.0307 0.1866

3, 5 0.0445 0.9652

3, 6 1.1180 0.3762

4, 5 1.4824 0.2716

4, 6 2.7116 0.1169

5, 6 0.4210 0.7132


1, 2 3.0000 0.0908

1, 3 1.4129 0.2961

1, 4 2.2314 0.1558

1, 5 3.8333 0.0642

1, 6 4.2353 0.0521

2, 3 1.1818 0.3606

2, 4 0.7143 0.5503


2, 6 15.0000 0.0038

3, 4 0.6136 0.5967

3, 5 2.0909 0.1763



3, 6 2.5350 0.1302

4, 5 2.1429 0.1631

4, 6 2.8284 0.1026

5, 6 5.0000 0.0397


1, 2 4.2426 0.0496

1, 3 2.4000 0.1383

1, 4 2.4000 0.1381

1, 5 1.8199 0.2078

1, 6 0.5491 0.6344

2, 3 8.4000 0.0154

2, 4 8.4000 0.0136

2, 5 7.5668 0.0173

2, 6 0.6276 0.6087


3, 5 1.6667 0.2451

3, 6 1.0400 0.4081

4, 5 1.6667 0.2384

4, 6 1.0400 0.4073

5, 6 0.9383 0.4447


1, 2 1.9206 0.1940

1, 3 0.2000 0.8671

1, 4 5.7540 0.0298

1, 5 1.9379 0.1946

1, 6 6.0083 0.0276

2, 3 1.3780 0.3060

2, 4 3.9223 0.0635

2, 5 0.8462 0.4897

2, 6 4.2710 0.0495

3, 4 4.0931 0.0551

3, 5 1.6641 0.2365

3, 6 4.3656 0.0520

4, 5 0.7474 0.5267

4, 6 1.3416 0.3071

5, 6 0.9864 0.4303


1, 2 1.8974 0.1954

1, 3 0.7036 0.5550

1, 4 7.2222 0.0184

1, 5 7.4444 0.0203

1, 6 6.1936 0.0268

2, 3 0.7017 0.5498

2, 4 15.6670 0.0039

2, 5 16.3330 0.0048

2, 6 8.6000 0.0146

3, 4 5.0000 0.0378

3, 5 5.1818 0.0347

3, 6 4.3572 0.0470




4, 6 1.0000 0.4188

5, 6 1.5000 0.2721

5a. pH (for the significant term '(PhasexLocation)Phase')


B1, D1 4.9607 0.0045

B1, P1 14.3480 0.0003

D1, P1 1.7575 0.1543


B1, D1 4.7214 0.0012

B1, P1 11.8090 0.0001

D1, P1 11.2720 0.0008


B1, D1 5.3177 0.0063

B1, P1 4.6434 0.0062

D1, P1 7.5628 0.0017

5b. pH (for the significant term '(PhasexLocation)Location')


SDA, ZI NEAR 2.1589 0.0603

SDA, ZI FAR 1.3711 0.2041

ZI NEAR, ZI FAR 0.2096 0.8011


SDA, ZI NEAR 5.1399 0.0021

SDA, ZI FAR 5.0258 0.0023

ZI NEAR, ZI FAR 0.0574 0.9741


SDA, ZI NEAR 2.5296 0.0237

SDA, ZI FAR 3.3009 0.0043

ZI NEAR, ZI FAR 0.5356 0.6245

5c. pH (for the significant term '(PhasexSite(Location)Phase')


B1, D1 5.8271 0.0005

B1, P1 7.1659 0.0006

D1, P1 0.4465 0.6723


B1, D1 3.1657 0.0150

B1, P1 18.8920 0.0005

D1, P1 0.1329 0.9442




B1, D1

B1, P1 6.7327 0.0008

D1, P1


B1, D1 1.5148 0.1744

B1, P1 10.0820 0.0005

D1, P1 1.4311 0.2091


B1, D1 2.4976 0.0217

B1, P1 6.9951 0.0013

D1, P1 1.8700 0.0881


B1, D1 3.4463 0.0064

B1, P1 7.6339 0.0010

D1, P1 1.2021 0.2728


B1, D1 2.3729 0.0388

B1, P1 4.1456 0.0016

D1, P1 6.1669 0.0005


B1, D1 5.0918 0.0012

B1, P1 4.9909 0.0009

D1, P1 11.1730 0.0006


B1, D1 1.4279 0.1727

B1, P1 3.7041 0.0027

D1, P1 5.4635 0.0006


B1, D1 3.0413 0.0119

B1, P1 4.8644 0.0009

D1, P1 10.3130 0.0001




B1, D1 1.1899 0.2568

B1, P1 7.5723 0.0010

D1, P1 9.1694 0.0006


B1, D1 3.2357 0.0077

B1, P1 5.7877 0.0006

D1, P1 7.1339 0.0006


B1, D1 2.4334 0.0314

B1, P1 1.0426 0.3230

D1, P1 2.6539 0.0251


B1, D1 3.8813 0.0037

B1, P1 4.1012 0.0022

D1, P1 10.7510 0.0002


B1, D1 0.3142 0.8242

B1, P1 2.4057 0.0343

D1, P1 1.3525 0.2139


B1, D1 1.3732 0.2164

B1, P1 3.3796 0.0077

D1, P1 7.5034 0.0016


B1, D1 2.6398 0.0240

B1, P1 7.3059 0.0005

D1, P1 9.2556 0.0003


B1, D1 1.7214 0.1118

B1, P1 7.4686 0.0005

D1, P1 10.8500 0.0005

5d. pH (for the significant term '(PhasexSite(Location)Site')


1, 2 2.6676 0.0188



1, 3 1.0639 0.3046

1, 4 1.6068 0.1352

1, 5 0.2971 0.7705

1, 6 1.0603 0.3095

2, 3 2.0683 0.0637

2, 4 1.5639 0.1426

2, 5 3.3573 0.0057

2, 6 4.4533 0.0008

3, 4 0.6450 0.5262

3, 5 1.0087 0.3334

3, 6 2.4510 0.0304

4, 5 1.7718 0.1006

4, 6 3.1527 0.0079

5, 6 1.6312 0.1219


1, 2 0.4560 0.6577

1, 3 0.0524 0.9588

1, 4 0.6604 0.5206

1, 5 0.9100 0.3782

1, 6 0.3332 0.7482

2, 3 0.3758 0.7067

2, 4 0.2066 0.8320

2, 5 0.4635 0.6539

2, 6 0.1625 0.8764

3, 4 0.5649 0.5751

3, 5 0.7931 0.4388

3, 6 0.2553 0.8030

4, 5 0.2596 0.8058

4, 6 0.3927 0.7059

5, 6 0.6845 0.5001


1, 2 2.2655 0.0453

1, 3 1.7010 0.1150

1, 4 1.8059 0.0977

1, 5 4.6091 0.0008

1, 6 4.8853 0.0005

2, 3 0.2952 0.7703

2, 4 0.2165 0.8332

2, 5 0.8023 0.4439

2, 6 2.0544 0.0642

3, 4 0.4477 0.6730

3, 5 1.0975 0.3027

3, 6 2.2594 0.0530

4, 5 0.3563 0.7246

4, 6 1.4313 0.1821

5, 6 1.6112 0.1290


1, 2 0.7018 0.5068

1, 3 1, 4 1.9063 0.0940



1, 5 2.8355 0.0167

1, 6 1.8668 0.0886

2, 3 2, 4 1.7899 0.1107

2, 5 2.4397 0.0366

2, 6 1.9059 0.0833

3, 4 3, 5 3, 6 4, 5 0.2764 0.7832

4, 6 0.2032 0.8494

5, 6 0.5676 0.5739


1, 2 0.9303 0.3739

1, 3 1.0078 0.3350

1, 4 1.3659 0.1981

1, 5 2.7834 0.0125

1, 6 0.4009 0.6900

2, 3 2.2820 0.0428

2, 4 3.4789 0.0044

2, 5 5.4414 0.0003

2, 6 0.4106 0.6938

3, 4 0.1475 0.8881

3, 5 1.7574 0.1068

3, 6 1.3965 0.1877

4, 5 2.5904 0.0226

4, 6 1.8044 0.0931

5, 6 3.1420 0.0101


1, 2 1.7182 0.1255

1, 3 0.3208 0.8165

1, 4 0.6025 0.5538

1, 5 1.0738 0.3088

1, 6 1.9008 0.0885

2, 3 1.3161 0.2043

2, 4 1.4334 0.1827

2, 5 1.0227 0.3290

2, 6 0.3566 0.7354

3, 4 0.6285 0.7142

3, 5 0.9560 0.4678

3, 6 1.4353 0.1466

4, 5 0.5168 0.6205

4, 6 1.6399 0.1308

5, 6 1.3087 0.2141


1, 2 3.1655 0.0082

1, 3 0.0924 0.9298

1, 4 1.6423 0.1290

1, 5 1.7225 0.1122

1, 6 0.9651 0.3573



2, 3 2.7632 0.0186

2, 4 12.5560 0.0001

2, 5 5.6138 0.0003

2, 6 4.0990 0.0014

3, 4 1.2589 0.2342

3, 5 1.4556 0.1667

3, 6 0.7913 0.4489

4, 5 0.6828 0.5112

4, 6 0.2252 0.8265

5, 6 0.6436 0.5231


1, 2 1.1925 0.2550

1, 3 0.2030 0.8422

1, 4 0.4786 0.6358

1, 5 3.9600 0.0012

1, 6 1.9442 0.0761

2, 3 1.4080 0.1909

2, 4 0.8505 0.4146

2, 5 2.7868 0.0163

2, 6 0.9112 0.3792

3, 4 0.7142 0.4799

3, 5 4.1948 0.0020

3, 6 2.1326 0.0551

4, 5 3.8696 0.0020

4, 6 1.6976 0.1137

5, 6 1.5709 0.1417


1, 2 0.8195 0.4251

1, 3 0.3485 0.7369

1, 4 1.3172 0.2127

1, 5 1.4283 0.1734

1, 6 1.9666 0.0718

2, 3 0.3906 0.7079

2, 4 1.0612 0.3111

2, 5 1.3156 0.2164

2, 6 2.4673 0.0312

3, 4 0.9477 0.3705

3, 5 1.0599 0.3083

3, 6 1.6307 0.1283

4, 5 0.1409 0.8918

4, 6 1.0126 0.3326

5, 6 0.9174 0.3801

6a. ORP (for the significant term '(PhasexSite(Location)Phase')


B1, D1 3.4455 0.0131

B1, P1 2.1045 0.0572

D1, P1 4.2787 0.0049




Within level '2' of factor 'Site' Groups t P(perm)

B1, D1 3.5901 0.0046

B1, P1 1.2537 0.2226

D1, P1 0.8079 0.4404


B1, D1 1.6008 0.1340

B1, P1 2.2827 0.0305

D1, P1 2.7977 0.0171


B1, D1 5.7453 0.0005

B1, P1 1.6543 0.1230

D1, P1 6.3720 0.0006


B1, D1 30.7040 0.0007

B1, P1 1.4323 0.1765

D1, P1 19.2880 0.0005


B1, D1 15.8090 0.0012

B1, P1 2.4231 0.0291

D1, P1 2.2876 0.0614


B1, D1 0.1263 0.8942

B1, P1 11.6710 0.0005

D1, P1 11.0530 0.0005


B1, D1 6.6445 0.0007

B1, P1 2.1483 0.0554

D1, P1 5.1083 0.0009


B1, D1 3.9756 0.0034

B1, P1 10.6150 0.0007

D1, P1 4.1015 0.0032


B1, D1 8.7420 0.0007



B1, P1 36.5570 0.0009

D1, P1 1.7710 0.1086


B1, D1 2.5650 0.0273

B1, P1 7.7320 0.0011

D1, P1 1.2223 0.3035


B1, D1 3.3478 0.0119

B1, P1 9.0934 0.0008

D1, P1 0.6605 0.5230


B1, D1 14.5930 0.0007

B1, P1 4.5527 0.0020

D1, P1 2.4985 0.0100


B1, D1 5.1202 0.0010

B1, P1 9.1928 0.0011

D1, P1 1.3475 0.2211


B1, D1 3.9282 0.0043

B1, P1 7.3658 0.0005

D1, P1 1.5206 0.0946


B1, D1 3.5061 0.0061

B1, P1 2.8313 0.0143

D1, P1 0.6937 0.5020


B1, D1 3.7838 0.0051

B1, P1 6.6950 0.0009

D1, P1 8.1915 0.0010


B1, D1 0.8259 0.4697

B1, P1 0.5717 0.5773

D1, P1 0.0984 0.9156



6b. ORP (for the significant term '(PhasexSite(Location)Site')

Within level 'B1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'SDA' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(perm)

1, 2 2.1049 0.0697

1, 3 10.0330 0.0009

1, 4 17.2500 0.0003

1, 5 27.5590 0.0008

1, 6 19.6760 0.0008

2, 3 2.4114 0.0367

2, 4 5.3860 0.0008

2, 5 6.9391 0.0003

2, 6 6.2306 0.0005

3, 4 6.4513 0.0005

3, 5 12.0190 0.0006

3, 6 8.4362 0.0007

4, 5 3.8021 0.0027

4, 6 1.8925 0.0847

5, 6 1.3839 0.1930

Within level 'B1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'ZI NEAR' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(perm)

1, 2 0.4159 0.7004

1, 3 1.7783 0.0874

1, 4 4.5370 0.0048

1, 5 1.9089 0.0855

1, 6 2.4085 0.0405

2, 3 2.7634 0.0217

2, 4 5.4831 0.0007

2, 5 1.7574 0.1078

2, 6 2.4042 0.0353

3, 4 11.0380 0.0008

3, 5 3.6743 0.0055

3, 6 5.4925 0.0007

4, 5 1.1671 0.2642

4, 6 2.3031 0.0567

5, 6 0.1060 0.9325

Within level 'B1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'ZI FAR' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(perm)

1, 2 0.7734 0.4615

1, 3 1.4125 0.1759

1, 4 4.5142 0.0020

1, 5 0.1670 0.8797

1, 6 0.5793 0.6032

2, 3 0.5939 0.5619

2, 4 4.1524 0.0011

2, 5 0.5499 0.5953

2, 6 1.1054 0.2895

3, 4 4.6153 0.0015

3, 5 1.1415 0.2657

3, 6 1.6025 0.1340

4, 5 3.7309 0.0017

4, 6 2.0895 0.0230

5, 6 0.6556 0.5313




1, 2 4.8586 0.0033

1, 3 2.0266 0.0731

1, 4 1.8583 0.0850

1, 5 5.7220 0.0011

1, 6 5.2606 0.0016

2, 3 7.7466 0.0009

2, 4 1.9043 0.0812

2, 5 1.1141 0.3179

2, 6 1.0656 0.3336

3, 4 3.7186 0.0060

3, 5 8.8224 0.0005

3, 6 7.9366 0.0004

4, 5 2.5055 0.0347

4, 6 2.4410 0.0264

5, 6 0.2501 0.7907

Within level 'D1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'ZI NEAR' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(perm)

1, 2 5.7946 0.0009

1, 3 2.4113 0.0384

1, 4 8.9709 0.0004

1, 5 3.6386 0.0064

1, 6 4.2490 0.0021

2, 3 6.8897 0.0006

2, 4 13.4350 0.0010

2, 5 6.8577 0.0005

2, 6 7.7718 0.0011

3, 4 4.2102 0.0008

3, 5 1.8239 0.0867

3, 6 2.1385 0.0586

4, 5 0.8042 0.4439

4, 6 0.7742 0.4654

5, 6 0.0979 0.9208

Within level 'D1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'ZI FAR' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(perm)

1, 2 1.9016 0.0940

1, 3 2.1858 0.0067

1, 4 7.0052 0.0008

1, 5 2.2419 0.0512

1, 6 5.6639 0.0034

2, 3 0.2979 0.7719

2, 4 4.1283 0.0036

2, 5 0.7170 0.4735

2, 6 3.6953 0.0070

3, 4 3.7308 0.0055

3, 5 0.4544 0.6601

3, 6 3.3822 0.0116

4, 5 2.7703 0.0178

4, 6 0.2103 0.8492

5, 6 2.6336 0.0287

Within level 'P1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'SDA' of factor 'Location'



Groups t P(perm)

1, 2 0.7059 0.4795

1, 3 0.5870 0.5307

1, 4 13.2070 0.0008

1, 5 12.1030 0.0006

1, 6 1.8655 0.0913

2, 3 0.0064 0.9959

2, 4 5.0283 0.0008

2, 5 4.9091 0.0012

2, 6 1.1129 0.2757

3, 4 4.0283 0.0056

3, 5 3.9557 0.0077

3, 6 1.0100 0.3831

4, 5 0.1256 0.9097

4, 6 2.3722 0.0344

5, 6 2.3228 0.0439

Within level 'P1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'ZI NEAR' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(perm)

1, 2 2.3594 0.0307

1, 3 0.8107 0.4462

1, 4 0.4189 0.6899

1, 5 0.9602 0.3506

1, 6 2.0744 0.0627

2, 3 1.8550 0.0938

2, 4 2.3193 0.0253

2, 5 2.0769 0.0766

2, 6 1.6193 0.1592

3, 4 0.6757 0.5533

3, 5 0.1956 0.8666

3, 6 0.6915 0.5017

4, 5 0.9480 0.3681

4, 6 2.4196 0.0396

5, 6 1.3519 0.1987

Within level 'P1' of factor 'Phase' Within level 'ZI FAR' of factor 'Location' Groups t P(perm)

1, 2 2.0493 0.0319

1, 3 1.9213 0.0491

1, 4 1.4624 0.1742

1, 5 9.0901 0.0006

1, 6 1.5555 0.1606

2, 3 0.2579 0.8058

2, 4 3.0093 0.0073

2, 5 24.0250 0.0008

2, 6 2.5363 0.0517

3, 4 2.9287 0.0133

3, 5 22.1710 0.0007

3, 6 2.4893 0.0595

4, 5 4.3475 0.0016

4, 6 0.4563 0.6432

5, 6 2.3885 0.0286




APPENDIX G SIMPER RESULTS



Appendix G: SIMPER results. Location level results only are presented

1a. Epifauna All Habitats (for the significant term 'PhaseLocation') Groups B1SDA & B1ZoIF Average dissimilarity = 13.67

Group B1SDA Group B1ZoIF

Species Av. Abund. Av. Abund. Av.Diss Diss/SD Contrib% Cum.%

Sand 91.09 80.47 5.72 1.78 41.82 41.82

Shell Grit 2.50 11.60 4.70 1.63 34.40 76.22

Bioturbated Sand 2.42 3.13 1.16 1.19 8.50 84.72

Gravel 0.03 1.19 0.60 0.81 4.36 89.08

Rubble 1.07 0.81 0.47 1.13 3.47 92.55

Groups B1ZoIN & B1ZoIF Average dissimilarity = 11.71

Group B1ZoIN Group B1ZoIF


Sand 87.24 80.47 4.60 1.52 39.30 39.30

Shell Grit 5.58 11.60 3.80 1.35 32.48 71.79


Gravel 0.04 1.19 0.59 0.81 5.05 89.18

Rubble 1.03 0.81 0.34 1.40 2.91 92.08

Groups B1ZoIN & D1ZoIN Average dissimilarity = 10.84

Group B1ZoIN Group D1ZoIN


Sand 87.24 82.47 4.74 1.11 43.71 43.71

Shell Grit 5.58 0.47 2.76 1.17 25.47 69.17


Rubble 1.03 0.22 0.44 1.54 4.04 87.57

Hydroid 0.14 0.36 0.20 0.94 1.89 89.45

Filamentous Algae 0.01 0.35 0.18 1.27 1.67 91.12

Groups B1ZoIF & D1ZoIF Average dissimilarity = 16.39

Group B1ZoIF Group D1ZoIF




Sand 80.47 72.97 5.14 1.09 31.32 31.32

Shell Grit 11.60 3.75 4.47 1.49 27.29 58.61


Gravel 1.19 0.23 0.58 0.79 3.53 87.50

Hydroid 0.43 0.72 0.39 1.08 2.38 89.88

Rubble 0.81 0.51 0.36 1.29 2.21 92.09

Groups D1SDA & D1ZoIF Average dissimilarity = 17.39

Group D1SDA Group D1ZoIF


Sand 84.48 72.97 8.09 1.40 46.53 46.53


Shell Grit 0.10 3.75 2.00 1.17 11.52 84.77

Rubble 0.84 0.51 0.44 0.97 2.53 87.31

Hydroid 0.00 0.72 0.40 0.92 2.33 89.63


Groups D1ZoIN & D1ZoIF

Average dissimilarity = 15.31



Sand 82.47 72.97 6.97 1.38 45.49 45.49


Shell Grit 0.47 3.75 1.81 1.06 11.85 84.54

Hydroid 0.36 0.72 0.39 1.04 2.55 87.09

Rubble 0.22 0.51 0.26 1.08 1.68 88.77

Burrow 0.40 0.49 0.22 1.34 1.42 90.19

Groups B1SDA & P1SDA


Group B1SDA Group P1SDA


Sand 91.09 93.10 3.39 1.29 39.51 39.51

Shell Grit 2.50 0.11 1.25 1.15 14.53 54.04





Hydroid 0.11 1.43 0.75 0.43 8.70 85.61

Rubble 1.07 0.37 0.50 1.02 5.85 91.45

Groups B1ZoIN & P1ZoIN


Group B1ZoIN Group P1ZoIN


Sand 87.24 87.99 4.19 1.37 33.40 33.40

Shell Grit 5.58 0.56 2.61 1.16 20.81 54.21



Burrow 0.38 1.09 0.45 0.57 3.59 84.82

Rubble 1.03 0.37 0.39 1.48 3.12 87.94

Hydroid 0.14 0.69 0.34 0.97 2.74 90.68

Groups B1ZoIF & P1ZoIF


Group B1ZoIF Group P1ZoIF


Sand 80.47 93.11 6.74 2.01 39.16 39.16

Shell Grit 11.60 0.26 5.78 2.02 33.56 72.72



Gravel 1.19 0.07 0.59 0.80 3.42 91.63

Groups D1ZoIF & P1ZoIF


Group D1ZoIF Group P1ZoIF


Sand 72.97 93.11 10.88 1.96 51.20 51.20


Shell Grit 3.75 0.26 1.83 1.12 8.63 86.24




1b. Epifauna Biota Only (for the significant term 'PhaseLocation')

Groups SDA & ZoIN


Group SDA Group ZoIN

Species Av.Abund Av.Abund Av.Diss Diss/SD Contrib% Cum.%


Hydroid 0.51 0.4 15.88 0.73 17.67 41.26

Sponge 0.11 0.22 10.99 0.70 12.23 53.49

Bryozoan 0.1 0.18 7.70 0.61 8.57 62.06

Algal Mat on Sand 0.05 0.24 6.55 0.48 7.29 69.35

Hard Coral 0.08 0.23 6.17 0.47 6.86 76.21

Sea Whip 0.06 0.08 5.33 0.39 5.93 82.14

Ascidian 0.02 0.14 5.15 0.71 5.73 87.87

Macroalgae 0.04 0.05 3.62 0.46 4.03 91.90

Groups SDA & ZoIF


Group SDA Group ZoIF



Hydroid 0.51 0.46 21.50 0.87 24.18 49.23

Algal Mat on Sand 0.05 0.24 9.58 0.60 10.78 60.01

Sponge 0.11 0.11 7.78 0.59 8.75 68.76

Bryozoan 0.1 0.13 6.93 0.60 7.80 76.56

Macroalgae 0.04 0.11 4.84 0.54 5.44 82.00

Ascidian 0.02 0.11 4.32 0.65 4.85 86.85

Hard Coral 0.08 0.05 3.62 0.39 4.07 90.92

Groups ZoIN & ZoIF


Group ZoIN Group ZoIF





Hydroid 0.4 0.46 15.21 0.93 19.10 45.18

Algal Mat on Sand 0.24 0.24 9.31 0.68 11.69 56.88

Sponge 0.22 0.11 6.71 0.81 8.42 65.30

Bryozoan 0.18 0.13 6.00 0.75 7.53 72.83

Hard Coral 0.23 0.05 5.35 0.44 6.72 79.56

Ascidian 0.14 0.11 4.74 0.88 5.96 85.52

Macroalgae 0.05 0.11 3.65 0.55 4.58 90.10

2a. Infauna (for the significant term 'PhaseLocation'). Note: Only species contributing to 5% or more to total dissimilarity included Groups B1SDA & B1ZoIF


Group B1SDA Group B1ZoIF


Aoridae/Isaeidae/Photidae 10.53 6.83 5.64 1.16 8.47 8.47

Apseudidae 4.83 8.23 4.76 0.88 7.15 15.62

Leptocheliidae 0.57 7.40 4.71 0.99 7.06 22.68

Groups B1ZoIN & B1ZoIF Average dissimilarity = 63.11

Group B1ZoIN Group B1ZoIF

Species Av, Abund. Av. Abund. Av.Diss Diss/SD Contrib% Cum.%

Leptocheliidae 1.70 7.40 4.53 1.01 7.18 7.18

Apseudidae 4.47 8.23 4.50 0.87 7.13 14.31


Groups B1SDA & D1SDA Average dissimilarity = 80.34

Group B1SDA Group D1SDA



Apseudidae 4.83 0.97 4.06 1.23 5.05 14.88

Groups B1ZoIN & D1ZoIN




Group B1ZoIN Group D1ZoIN



Groups D1SDA & D1ZoIN Average dissimilarity = 79.92

Group D1SDA Group D1ZoIN



Ampharetidae 1.93 4.33 4.24 1.32 5.31 12.03

Groups B1ZoIF & D1ZoIF Average dissimilarity = 70.02



Apseudidae 8.23 5.33 6.18 0.92 8.82 8.82


Leptocheliidae 7.40 2.60 5.32 1.06 7.59 24.38

Groups D1SDA & D1ZoIF Average dissimilarity = 80.27




Ampeliscidae 0.77 4.53 4.37 1.06 5.44 15.37

Groups B1SDA & P1SDA Average dissimilarity = 75.67




Glyceridae 1.03 6.03 4.87 0.50 6.43 14.91

Groups D1SDA & P1SDA Average dissimilarity = 84.67





Glyceridae 0.30 6.03 8.36 0.56 9.87 9.87

Spionidae 0.97 5.20 5.61 1.06 6.62 16.49


Groups B1ZoIN & P1ZoIN Average dissimilarity = 67.97

Group B1ZoIN Group P1ZoIN



Syllidae 1.67 13.37 4.52 0.86 6.65 15.19

Ampharetidae 2.57 13.50 4.47 1.75 6.58 21.77

Groups D1ZoIN & P1ZoIN Average dissimilarity = 72.89

Group D1ZoIN Group P1ZoIN



Syllidae 2.00 13.37 4.65 0.86 6.37 14.79

Ampharetidae 4.33 13.50 4.24 1.50 5.81 20.60

Groups P1SDA & P1ZoIN Average dissimilarity = 74.39

Group D1ZoIN Group P1ZoIN



Ampharetidae 3.40 13.50 4.91 1.73 6.59 15.30

Syllidae 1.23 13.37 4.78 0.89 6.42 21.72

Groups B1ZoIF & P1ZoIF Average dissimilarity = 68.05

Group B1ZoIF Group P1ZoIF


Syllidae 2.33 15.83 5.97 1.43 8.77 8.77

Ampharetidae 3.17 10.63 3.78 1.18 5.55 14.32



Apseudidae 8.23 8.40 3.75 0.99 5.51 19.84


Groups D1ZoIF & P1ZoIF Average dissimilarity = 70.25

Group D1ZoIF Group P1ZoIF


Syllidae 4.30 15.83 6.32 1.44 9.00 9.00


Apseudidae 5.33 8.40 3.94 0.91 5.61 20.23

Ampharetidae 3.80 10.63 3.55 1.05 5.06 25.29

Groups P1SDA & P1ZoIF Average dissimilarity = 75.15

Group P1SDA Group P1ZoIF


Syllidae 1.23 15.83 6.78 1.51 9.02 9.02




APPENDIX H PERMDISP RESULTS



Appendix H: PERMDISP Results

Darwin Harbour (Outer) 1a. Epibenthos (for the significant term 'PhaseLocation')

Group factor: PhaseLocation

Number of permutations: 9999

Number of groups: 9 Number of samples: 108

DEVIATIONS FROM CENTROID

F: 2.7723 df1: 8 df2: 99 P(perm): 0.0641

MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS Group Size Average SE

B1SDA 12 4.6724 0.45324

B1ZoIN 12 6.1956 0.99705

B1ZoIF 12 6.9615 0.96379

D1SDA 12 7.2451 1.3215

D1ZoIN 12 6.1199 0.99085

D1ZoIF 12 9.5697 1.4497

P1SDA 12 5.1266 1.1163

P1ZoIN 12 8.04 1.1749

P1ZoIF 12 3.7856 0.83207

1b. Epibenthos (Biota Only) (for the significant term 'PhaseLocation') Group factor: Location


Number of groups: 3 Number of samples: 108

DEVIATIONS FROM CENTROID

F: 1.8855 df1: 2 df2: 105 P(perm): 0.3066


SDA 36 30.953 2.7332

ZoIN 36 36.802 1.9864

ZoIF 36 34.206 1.4995

2a. Infauna (for the significant term 'PhaseLocation') Group factor: PhaseLocation


Number of groups: 9

Number of samples: 270

DEVIATIONS FROM CENTROID F: 21.672 df1: 8 df2: 261

P(perm): 0.0001




B1SDA 30 44.249 1.2886

B1ZoIN 30 40.987 1.0198

B1ZoIF 30 42.821 1.4832

D1SDA 30 53.055 1.1399

D1ZoIN 30 48.071 1.3743

D1ZoIF 30 45.914 1.9279

P1SDA 30 52.122 1.2074

P1ZoIN 30 34.331 1.2176

P1ZoIF 30 37.819 1.1416

2b. Infauna (for the significant term 'PhaseSite') Group factor: PhaseSite


Number of groups: 18

Number of samples: 270 DEVIATIONS FROM CENTROID

F: 3.8922 df1: 17 df2: 252 P(perm): 0.0001


B11 15 43.948 1.8169

B12 15 43.134 1.8588

B13 15 39.589 1.5560

B14 15 39.778 1.7249

B15 15 42.013 2.0145

B16 15 46.071 1.5510

D11 15 45.140 1.0637

D12 15 47.293 1.9837

D13 15 49.774 2.0253

D14 15 49.043 2.5774

D15 15 53.019 1.6304

D16 15 51.071 2.0374

P11 15 44.456 2.3120

P12 15 39.799 1.7947

P13 15 40.822 1.8706

P14 15 48.353 2.9031

P15 15 41.126 2.8842

P16 15 47.421 3.1305




APPENDIX I INFAUNA RAW DATA

Job: INPEX Subtidal Benthos - Offshore

Job No: EL12047062

Sieve Size: 0.5 mm Location SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR

Site 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 1 1 1 1 1

Rep 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5

POLYCHAETES Class Polychaeta Ampharetidae 7 10 1 2 6 6 3 21 5 1 4 3 1 3 2 26 1 16 15 19 14 20

Amphinomidae 1 1

Capitellidae 3 2 2 6 5 3 5 8 8 3 5 4 1 1 2 5 2 1 6 7 10 2 6

Chaetopteridae 2 1 1 1

Chrysopetalidae 1 1 4

Cirratulidae 2 2 2 4 2 4 2 2 2 2 4 1 6 2 8 1 3

Dorvilleidae 1 2 2 1 3 1 2 1

Eunicidae 1 2 1 1 1 4 1 3 2 8 4 2 4

Euphrosinidae

Flabelligeridae 1 1

Glyceridae 1 3 2 6 4 3 2 1 5 1 34 61 16 4 1 10 2 2 2 1 7 4 1 1 7 3 2 8 1 4

Goniadidae 1

Hesionidae 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2

Lumbrineridae 3 2 1 1 1 1 4 2 2 4 5 3 2 1 1 1 5 11 2 4 8 3 1 1

Magelonidae 2 1 1

Maldanidae 1 1 2 1 6 3 6 1 1 1 7 4 5 3 3

Nephtyidae 2 1 1 5 3 1 3 1 1 2 4 3 7 7 6 4 3 2 6 3 5

Nereididae 1 2 2 1 3 2 1 1 1 4 1 3

Oenonidae 1

Onuphidae 1 1 6 3 1 1 3 2

Opheliidae 2 1 1 1 1 2

Orbiniidae 2 1 1 1 1 3

Oweniidae 4

Paraonidae 1 2 1 1 1 1 4 1 2 1 2

Pectinariidae

Phyllodocidae 2 1 2 4 2 1 4 2 1 2 1 5

Pilargidae 1 3 1 1 1 1

Pisionidae 2 1

Poecilochaetidae 1 1

Polynoidae

Questidae

Sabellariidae 2 1 1

Sabellidae 2 1 3 2 1 1 3 3 4

Scalibregmatidae 1 1 1

Serpulidae 1 1 2

Sigalionidae 1 1 1 1 1 2 1

Sphaerodoridae

Spionidae 8 8 8 7 5 2 4 12 1 2 7 11 5 6 3 1 2 1 6 7 9 1 6 19 1 12 2 15 10 4 8 19

Sternaspidae 1 1

Syllidae 3 1 3 2 1 5 3 1 2 1 1 2 1 3 4 1 3 14 16 8 89 16

Terebellidae 1 1 3 3 2 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 5 8 6 9 1

Trichobranchidae 1 1 1

Unidentified polychaete

CRUSTACEANS Order: Leptostraca Nebaliidae 1 1

Order: Stomatopoda Squillidae

Order: Mysidacea Mysidae 5 1 1 7 1 2 2

Order: Amphipoda Amaryllididae 1

Order: Amphipoda Ampeliscidae 11 12 1 3 2 2 8 3 2 1 2 1 6 41 14 5 5 11 3 4

Amphilochidae 15 32 9 20

Aoridae/Isaeidae/Photidae/Unciolidae 14 7 1 3 10 20 5 12 5 1 1 1 1 2 1 14 1 4 10 13 7 1 45 2 11 11

Atylidae

Calliopiidae 1

Caprellidae 1 4

Corophiidae

Eusiridae

Iciliidae 1

Ischyroceridae 1 1

Leucothoidae 1 1 3

Liljeborgiidae 7 1 1 1 5

Lysianassidae 1 3

Melitidae 1

Melphidippidae

Ochlesidae

Oedicerotidae 1 1 1 2 2 1 1

Pachynus Group

Phoxocephalidae 6 2 1 1 1 1 3 2 1

Platyischnopidae 2 2

Podoceridae 1 1 1

Synopiidae 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 2

Urohaustoriidae 1 3 32 4 4 1 1 1 11 3 1 4 5 2

Order: Isopoda Anthuridae 2 3 3 4 2 2 2 1 3 4 4 16 3 6

Arcturidae 7 1 1 1

Arcturididae

Austrarcturellidae

Cirolanidae 2 2 1

Gnathiidae 1 5 3 1

Janiridae 1 3

Joeropsididae 3

Leptanthuridae 1 3 4 2 1 5 6

Serolidae 1 1 1

Sphaeromatidae 12 1 2 1 1 1

Order: Tanaidacea Apseudidae 2 3 1 8 2 8 1 1 4 5 2 1 3 13 2 5 4 4 2 6 8 10 17 11

Kalliapseudidae

Leptocheliidae 1 1 4 3 1 1 2

Paratanaidae 2 3

Whiteleggiidae


Job No: EL12047062

Sieve Size: 0.5 mm Location SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA SDA ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR

Site 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 1 1 1 1 1

Rep 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5

Order: Cumacea Bodotriidae 4 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 3 1 3 5 1 1

Diastylidae/Gynodiastylidae 1 2 1 2 2 3 1 2 4 12

Nannastacidae 1 1 1 1 3 1 1

Order: Decapoda IOrder Penaeidea Luciferidae 1 1 1

Penaeidae 2

IOrder Caridea Alpheidae 5 2 3 1 4

Crangonidae

Palaemonidae 3 2

Pasiphaeidae 1

IOrder Thalassinidea Callianassidae 1

Upogebiidae 1

Galatheidae 1

Paguridae

IOrder Anomura Porcellanidae 1

IOrder Brachyura Goneplacidae 5 1 1 1 1 1

Grapsidae

Hymenosomatidae

Leucosiidae

Majidae

Ocypocidae

Xanthidae

Crab Larvae (megalopa, zoea) 1 1 1

SubClass Copepoda Copepoda 5 5 1 3 9 6 3 4 1 1 1 1

SubClass Ostracoda Order: MyodocopidaCylindroleberidae 1 1 1 4 2 2

Cypridinidae/Rutidermatidae 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 2 3 1 3 2 1 1

Sarsiellidae 1 1 3 2 2 6

Order: Podocopida Podocopida 1 1

MOLLUSCS Class Aplacophora Pruvotinidae

Class Scaphopoda Laevidentaliidae 3

Cylichnidal 1

Lottiidae

Marginellidae

Nassariidae 1

Naticidae

Olividae 1 1 1

Rissoidae 1

Skeneidae

Haminoeidae

Onchidiidae 1

Philinidae

Carditidae 1

Crassatellidae

Corbulidae

Cuspidariidae 1

Galeommatidae 2 2 5 4 2 2 1 1 2 1 7 3

Laternulidae

Lucinidae 1

Mactridae 5

Myochamidae

Mytilidae 1 1 1 1

Nuculanidae 2 1

Nuculidae 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2

Pectinidae 1

Psammobiidae

Solemyidae

Solenidae 1

Tellinidae 7 3 1 6 2 3 2 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 3 3 1

Thyasiridae

Trigonidae

Veneridae 14 1 1

Crinoidea

Echinoidea 2 1 1

Holothuroidea

Ophiuroidea 1 1 8 4 2 1 1 1 6 1 1 3 3 1 1

OTHER WORM PHYLA Chaetognatha 1 1 1 1

Nematoda 2 1 1 3 1 3 1 1 6 13 18 5 6

Nemertea 3 1 5 6 1 2 1 6 4 1 3 10 1 1 1 2 7 5 4 3

Oligochaeta 1 2 4 8 4 1 5 4 3 3 1 4 2 1 3 13 5 6 4

Phoronida

Platyhelminthes 1

Sipuncula 8 10 5 1 4 2 7 2 1 2 1 4 1 1 1 3 3

OTHER PHYLA Anthozoa: Actinaria 1 1

Anthozoa: Alcyonacea

Ascidiacea 1 7

Branchiostomidae 2 2 1 1 1

Bryozoa 1 1

Foraminifera

Hydrozoa

Porifera 1 1 1 1

Pycnogonida 1 3 1 3

Fish: Gobiidae 1 1 1

Fish: juvenile or unidentified 2 1


Job No: EL12047062

Sieve Size: 0.5 mm

POLYCHAETES Class Polychaeta Ampharetidae

Amphinomidae

Capitellidae

Chaetopteridae

Chrysopetalidae

Cirratulidae

Dorvilleidae

Eunicidae

Euphrosinidae

Flabelligeridae

Glyceridae

Goniadidae

Hesionidae

Lumbrineridae

Magelonidae

Maldanidae

Nephtyidae

Nereididae

Oenonidae

Onuphidae

Opheliidae

Orbiniidae

Oweniidae

Paraonidae

Pectinariidae

Phyllodocidae

Pilargidae

Pisionidae

Poecilochaetidae

Polynoidae

Questidae

Sabellariidae

Sabellidae

Scalibregmatidae

Serpulidae

Sigalionidae

Sphaerodoridae

Spionidae

Sternaspidae

Syllidae

Terebellidae

Trichobranchidae


CRUSTACEANS Order: Leptostraca Nebaliidae


Order: Mysidacea Mysidae

Order: Amphipoda Amaryllididae

Order: Amphipoda Ampeliscidae

Amphilochidae

Aoridae/Isaeidae/Photidae/Unciolidae

Atylidae

Calliopiidae

Caprellidae

Corophiidae

Eusiridae

Iciliidae

Ischyroceridae

Leucothoidae

Liljeborgiidae

Lysianassidae

Melitidae

Melphidippidae

Ochlesidae

Oedicerotidae

Pachynus Group

Phoxocephalidae

Platyischnopidae

Podoceridae

Synopiidae

Urohaustoriidae

Order: Isopoda Anthuridae

Arcturidae

Arcturididae

Austrarcturellidae

Cirolanidae

Gnathiidae

Janiridae

Joeropsididae

Leptanthuridae

Serolidae

Sphaeromatidae

Order: Tanaidacea Apseudidae

Kalliapseudidae

Leptocheliidae

Paratanaidae

Whiteleggiidae

ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR

2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3

1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2

10 6 26 13 14 23 10 6 16 2 10 19 19 16 11 4 21 21 12 8 4 18 10 16 6 4 6 9 7 11 5 10 10 1 9 11 31

2 4 1 2 1 1 2 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1

4 5 8 6 5 3 5 2 9 9 7 24 4 8 3 6 2 7 5 5 4 5 8 9 8 3 6 7 3 1 3 5 8

2 2 5 5 1 4 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 3 3 1 1 2

3 1 2 1 1 2 3 2 1 1 1

9 2 4 3 4 1 3 1 5 1 8 4 4 3 5 3 4 4 4 7 5 3 2 6 1 6 4 1 1 1 4 1 2

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 6 4 8 4 4 6 4 2 7 6 5 8 6 3 3 3 5 4 7 1 4 3 3 6 1 4 3 5 1 1 2 3 1 6 2

1 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 4

7 1 5 3 1 4 5 1 5 2 3 4 3 1 4 4 3 2 12 9 3 7 10 6 2 7 5 5 1 5 4 4

1

4 2 2 1 1 2 6 2 1 3 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 3 2 3 4 1 1 1

4 7 4 3 5 3 3 8 3 2 3 1 3 4 3 1 6 11 2 6 3 2 4 5 4 4 2 2 3 6 4 1 4

1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 2

3 2 2 5 5 6 4 3 3 8 3 6 6 6 5 2 5 7 6 3 1 2 4 1 2 4 3 6 2 4 2 1 4

3 1 1 1 1 2 4 1 3 5 3 1 4 2 2 4 1 1 1 1 3 3 1 1 6 2 4 1 2 5

2 2 1 3 1 4 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 12 1 1 2 3 4 6 3

1 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 1 1 1

2 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1

1 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 3 2 3 1 3

3 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 5 1 1

1 1

3 1 1 6 2 5 2 7 1 4 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 2 3 1 1 1

1 1 1

2 2 1 1 2 3 2 2 4 4 3 1 2 1 4 2 1 2 2 4 1 3 1 1 1 3 2 1

1 1 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 1 1 1

1 2 1 1 1

1 3 2 1 1 1

2

1 2 1 2 1 1 1

1 1 1 4 1 3 2 3 4 1 2 3 2 1 2 3 1 1 2 1 2

1 1 1 1 2

1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 3 1 1

22 13 11 7 3 11 8 8 8 5 5 4 19 7 10 3 9 6 4 7 1 7 19 12 5 5 7 6 2 3 4 2 2 4 3 10

1 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 1

32 15 10 17 27 7 4 5 4 10 11 7 26 3 15 3 6 6 7 9 5 12 4 4 9 7 3 10 5 5 4 6 8 21 14

2 4 4 9 5 11 2 4 2 2 8 4 9 7 3 5 3 1 2 2 1 9 4 9 7 4 5 5 1 3 2 8 3 4

3 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 1

1

1 1

1 2 5 5 3 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1

6 8 9 9 5 9 2 3 4 5 7 24 7 8 2 5 3 10 6 5 11 10 7 6 3 7 8 1 8 4 11 6 4 5 3 4

1

29 16 207 6 24 16 2 4 11 6 7 5 64 27 25 9 26 11 22 13 10 22 7 4 8 20 4 16 3 8 10 11 7 5 4 9 6

2 5 5 2 2 4 15 3 2 3 2 6 1 2 1 1 4 3 1 5 1 2 3 5 1

1 7

2

1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 4

1 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 3

3 1 1 2 1 5 1 2 1 1

3 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 3 1 1 1

1

1 1

1 1 2 3 2 1 3 1 1 1 2

1

1 1 1 1 1

6 1 7 5 5 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 3 5

1 1 2 1 3 5 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 5 1

3 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2

2 7 5 8 2 2 5 1 2 2 2 6 1 2 2 2 3 8 3 1 7 1 1 1 1 1 3

2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1

1 1 2 1 1 2

1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1

3 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1

3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2

1 1 1 1

2 1 1 6 6 6 3 1 2 7 3 2 1 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 1 2

1 1 1 2 4 1 3 2

2 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 4 1

5 7 3 3 3 5 5 2 5 6 4 2 92 5 10 32 5 6 3 7 6 3 7 2 2 1 7 3 4 4 1 6 2 1 1

1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1 3 6 3 1 1 1 1 1 5 4 1 8 2 3 2 1 2 2 1 2

1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 4 1


Job No: EL12047062

Sieve Size: 0.5 mm

POLYCHAETES Class Polychaeta AmpharetidaeOrder: Cumacea Bodotriidae

Diastylidae/Gynodiastylidae

Nannastacidae

Order: Decapoda IOrder Penaeidea Luciferidae

Penaeidae

IOrder Caridea Alpheidae

Crangonidae

Palaemonidae

Pasiphaeidae

IOrder Thalassinidea Callianassidae

Upogebiidae

Galatheidae

Paguridae

IOrder Anomura Porcellanidae

IOrder Brachyura Goneplacidae

Grapsidae

Hymenosomatidae

Leucosiidae

Majidae

Ocypocidae

Xanthidae

Crab Larvae (megalopa, zoea)

SubClass Copepoda Copepoda

SubClass Ostracoda Order: MyodocopidaCylindroleberidae

Cypridinidae/Rutidermatidae

Sarsiellidae

Order: Podocopida Podocopida


Class Scaphopoda Laevidentaliidae

Cylichnidal

Lottiidae

Marginellidae

Nassariidae

Naticidae

Olividae

Rissoidae

Skeneidae

Haminoeidae

Onchidiidae

Philinidae

Carditidae

Crassatellidae

Corbulidae

Cuspidariidae

Galeommatidae

Laternulidae

Lucinidae

Mactridae

Myochamidae

Mytilidae

Nuculanidae

Nuculidae

Pectinidae

Psammobiidae

Solemyidae

Solenidae

Tellinidae

Thyasiridae

Trigonidae

Veneridae

Crinoidea

Echinoidea

Holothuroidea

Ophiuroidea

OTHER WORM PHYLA Chaetognatha

Nematoda

Nemertea

Oligochaeta

Phoronida

Platyhelminthes

Sipuncula

OTHER PHYLA Anthozoa: Actinaria


Ascidiacea

Branchiostomidae

Bryozoa

Foraminifera

Hydrozoa

Porifera

Pycnogonida

Fish: Gobiidae

Fish: juvenile or unidentified

ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI NEAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR

2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3

1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2

2 3 3 1 4 6 10 1 3 1 1 3 2 11 4 2 1 1 2 1 1 1

2 3 8 3 2 3 1 7 9 1 3 6 1 2 1 2 1 4 3 10 2 2 2 5 2 1

1 1 1 7 1 6 4 1 1

1 1

1 1 1 1 1 3 3 1 1 1 3 1 3 1 1 1

1

2

1 2 1 1

1 1 1 1 1

1

1 1

2 2 1

1 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 2

1 1 1 1 1

1

1 1 1

1

1

55

1 1 1 4 8 1 2 3 1 5 3 6 5 1 2 1 1

4 4 1 3 1 3 2 3 3 4 1 1 1 2 1 5 1 4

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 5 2 1 1 1 5 1 1 3 2 1

7 2 3 3 1 6 2 3 4 6 3 2 1 4 12 3 2 2 3 1

2 2

1 2 1

10 6 1 4 1 1 4

1

2

1

1 1 1

1

5

2 2 2 1

7 15 6 3 5 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 6 2 1 1 2 1

1 1 1

1

1 1 1 2 2 2 1

1 5 2 3 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1

1 1 1 2 1

1 1 1 1 1 5

2 1 1

1 1 1

1

1 3

5 2 3 1 1 3 2 1 1 3 4 4 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 3 1 3 4

1 5 1 2 6 1 3 1 2

1 1 1

1

1 3 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1

1 1 1 1 1

5 16 4 3 2 3 10 5 9 4 3 6 1 10 1 15 7 5 20 2 11 3 1 5 8 2 1 4 3 1 5 2 4 3 16 2

2 11 9 3 5 6 4 2 4 4 4 8 14 3 2 9 8 10 3 5 1 3 9 1 4 10 1 5 3 1 1 1 6 5

1 7 4 7 1 7 3 1 8 2 7 3 9 4 9 1 13 7 8 8 2 8 15 3 7 5 1 4 8 1

1

1

5 4 3 4 2 3 1 3 2 3 4 1 1 4 4 3 1 3 3 1 2 1 4 2 1 1

1

1 1 1 1

1

1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 1 1

1 1 1 1


Job No: EL12047062

Sieve Size: 0.5 mm

POLYCHAETES Class Polychaeta Ampharetidae

Amphinomidae

Capitellidae

Chaetopteridae

Chrysopetalidae

Cirratulidae

Dorvilleidae

Eunicidae

Euphrosinidae

Flabelligeridae

Glyceridae

Goniadidae

Hesionidae

Lumbrineridae

Magelonidae

Maldanidae

Nephtyidae

Nereididae

Oenonidae

Onuphidae

Opheliidae

Orbiniidae

Oweniidae

Paraonidae

Pectinariidae

Phyllodocidae

Pilargidae

Pisionidae

Poecilochaetidae

Polynoidae

Questidae

Sabellariidae

Sabellidae

Scalibregmatidae

Serpulidae

Sigalionidae

Sphaerodoridae

Spionidae

Sternaspidae

Syllidae

Terebellidae

Trichobranchidae


CRUSTACEANS Order: Leptostraca Nebaliidae


Order: Mysidacea Mysidae

Order: Amphipoda Amaryllididae

Order: Amphipoda Ampeliscidae

Amphilochidae

Aoridae/Isaeidae/Photidae/Unciolidae

Atylidae

Calliopiidae

Caprellidae

Corophiidae

Eusiridae

Iciliidae

Ischyroceridae

Leucothoidae

Liljeborgiidae

Lysianassidae

Melitidae

Melphidippidae

Ochlesidae

Oedicerotidae

Pachynus Group

Phoxocephalidae

Platyischnopidae

Podoceridae

Synopiidae

Urohaustoriidae

Order: Isopoda Anthuridae

Arcturidae

Arcturididae

Austrarcturellidae

Cirolanidae

Gnathiidae

Janiridae

Joeropsididae

Leptanthuridae

Serolidae

Sphaeromatidae

Order: Tanaidacea Apseudidae

Kalliapseudidae

Leptocheliidae

Paratanaidae

Whiteleggiidae

ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR

3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6

3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5

4 24 23 5 17 8 10 21 9 14 9 10 4 2 6 28 3 8

1 1 1 1 1

2 2 3 8 5 3 14 2 10 3 1 2 3 4

1 2 1 1 6 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 5

2 3 1 3 4 1

3 2 1 3 1 4 1 6 5 2 3 2 2 2 5 5

1 5 3 2 3 1 1

3 1 1 2 2 2 3 2 3 4 1 6 8 6 1

1

1 1 1

4 1 1 1 4 2 1 2 5 6 6 4 5 7 2 1 3

2 2 2 2 2 1 4 1 4 4 3 1 1

1 1 8 7 6 1 4 7 1 2 3 1 4 4 7

1 1 1

2 7 6 2 2 2 5 3 5 5 3 4

3 4 2 2 5 3 3 1 3 1 2 2 2 1

4 2 2 5 3 20 22 1 1 6 6 2 2 4 4

4 1 2

1 1 1

1 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 2

2 2 1 1 3 1 1 1

1 1 4 4 2 4 2 3 1 1 3 4 2 2 5

2 3 3 2 1 2 1 4 2 1 1

1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1

1 1

1 3 1

1 3 2 1 1

2 2 3 4 1 3 1 1

1

2

2 1 2 1

1

11 5 4 2 16 2 5 3 17 14 8 18 23 17 6 12 8 5

1 1 1 1 1

13 5 16 14 22 33 24 21 32 27 23 22 28 6 23 29 32 22

2 1 11 1 5 1 4 2 1 4 10 2 6 1 2 3

1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1

1

1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 4

1 15 1

9 2 2 8 20 13 2 6 4 5 5 15 3 4 6 12 11 4

9

8 25 2 8 11 16 24 32 14 12 7 12 3 6 2 6 14

7 1

2 1 1 6 3 2 1 1 1 2

2

1

2 18 2 2 6 1 1 1 1 2 2 2

1 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 1

1 2 2 3 1 1 1 3

1 3 3 2 1 8 1

1

1 1

1 2 1 2 3 1

1 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 2

1

15 2

1 3 2 2 2

2 1 2 2 1

1 8 2 3 2 1 1 1 1 3

1 1 3 1 3

1

1 3

2 1 1

1 1 1 1 1

1 3 2 1

3 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 2

1 1 1 1 1

1 1 3 1 1 1 1 5 1 5 3

3 9 3 8 4 7 1 9 16 17 16 16 19 23 32 28 5 6

1 2 1

3 4 13 4 2 5 2 8 6 3 6 1 1 8

7 5 1 1 5

1


Job No: EL12047062

Sieve Size: 0.5 mm

POLYCHAETES Class Polychaeta AmpharetidaeOrder: Cumacea Bodotriidae

Diastylidae/Gynodiastylidae

Nannastacidae

Order: Decapoda IOrder Penaeidea Luciferidae

Penaeidae

IOrder Caridea Alpheidae

Crangonidae

Palaemonidae

Pasiphaeidae

IOrder Thalassinidea Callianassidae

Upogebiidae

Galatheidae

Paguridae

IOrder Anomura Porcellanidae

IOrder Brachyura Goneplacidae

Grapsidae

Hymenosomatidae

Leucosiidae

Majidae

Ocypocidae

Xanthidae

Crab Larvae (megalopa, zoea)

SubClass Copepoda Copepoda

SubClass Ostracoda Order: MyodocopidaCylindroleberidae

Cypridinidae/Rutidermatidae

Sarsiellidae

Order: Podocopida Podocopida


Class Scaphopoda Laevidentaliidae

Cylichnidal

Lottiidae

Marginellidae

Nassariidae

Naticidae

Olividae

Rissoidae

Skeneidae

Haminoeidae

Onchidiidae

Philinidae

Carditidae

Crassatellidae

Corbulidae

Cuspidariidae

Galeommatidae

Laternulidae

Lucinidae

Mactridae

Myochamidae

Mytilidae

Nuculanidae

Nuculidae

Pectinidae

Psammobiidae

Solemyidae

Solenidae

Tellinidae

Thyasiridae

Trigonidae

Veneridae

Crinoidea

Echinoidea

Holothuroidea

Ophiuroidea

OTHER WORM PHYLA Chaetognatha

Nematoda

Nemertea

Oligochaeta

Phoronida

Platyhelminthes

Sipuncula

OTHER PHYLA Anthozoa: Actinaria


Ascidiacea

Branchiostomidae

Bryozoa

Foraminifera

Hydrozoa

Porifera

Pycnogonida

Fish: Gobiidae

Fish: juvenile or unidentified

ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR ZI FAR

3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6

3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5

3 6 3 1 12 1 1 2 6 2 1 1 2

1 1 1 6 2 6 5 8 10 2 2 1 3 5

3 2 3 1 1

2 1

1 1 1 2 1

1

1

1 1 1

1

1 1 1 1 1 2

1

1

1

1

1 1 2 3 6 1 2 1 1

1 11 3 2 2 4 3 5 3 2

11 3 2 1 2 3 3 1 1 1 1 2

2 1 2 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 2 1 3

2

1 1

1 2 1

1

1

1

1

1 1

2

1

2 1 3 2 2 3 5 4 2 2 4

2

1 1 2

1 2 1 1 1 2 1

1

1 1 1 1 1 1

1

3 5 2 3 1 1 1 6 1 6 2 2

1

1

1 1 2 2 4

2

2 3 3 2 1 3 2 4 1 1 1 1 1

4 4 4 9 16 5 10 9 17 15 22 18 4 2 10 2 11

1 8 4 2 7 1 5 3 3 13 8 10 2 2 10 5 3 2

2 6 5 7 1 1 4 6 1 4 1 4 5

1

4 3 2 1 1 4 2 1

1

1 1

1 1

1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1

1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1




APPENDIX J PSD RAW DATA



Appendix J: Particle Size Distribution Data for P1 (July 2015)

Location SDA

Site 1 2 3 4 5 6

Rep 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2

EA150: Particle Sizing +75µm 90 76 45 58 97 98 97 97 91 95 95 39

+150µm 74 57 22 52 68 68 78 90 85 92 83 19

+300µm 40 8 8 45 5 4 10 47 48 66 50 6

+425µm 27 4 6 39 2 1 5 32 29 45 40 3

+600µm 17 2 4 33 <1 <1 3 22 17 29 32 2

+1180µm 6 <1 2 22 <1 <1 2 11 7 11 22 <1

+2.36mm 1 <1 <1 12 <1 <1 <1 2 2 3 12 <1

+4.75mm <1 <1 <1 5 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 6 <1

+9.5mm <1 <1 <1 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 2 <1

+19.0mm <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

+37.5mm <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

+75.0mm <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

EA150: Soil Classification based on Particle Size Clay (<2 µm) 3 9 18 23 <1 1 1 1 3 2 2 12

Silt (2-60 µm) 6 10 31 16 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 41

Sand (0.06-2.00 mm) 85 81 49 40 98 98 96 88 87 86 76 46

Gravel (>2mm) 6 <1 2 21 <1 <1 2 10 7 11 21 1

Cobbles (>6cm) <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1



ZoIN

Site 1 2 3 4 5 6

Rep 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2


+150µm 66 74 67 60 68 76 51 53 65 52 50 51

+300µm 58 63 57 49 59 68 41 42 54 43 40 40

+425µm 51 53 51 42 54 63 35 34 46 36 33 34

+600µm 43 41 44 35 49 56 28 26 37 28 26 27

+1180µm 31 24 32 22 40 43 17 15 24 18 15 18

+2.36mm 20 12 19 12 32 29 8 6 12 10 8 9

+4.75mm 11 7 9 3 26 19 2 2 5 4 4 5

+9.5mm 3 3 <1 1 23 9 <1 <1 4 <1 <1 2

+19.0mm 2 <1 <1 <1 22 <1 <1 <1 4 <1 <1 <1

+37.5mm <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

+75.0mm <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

EA150: Soil Classification based on Particle Size Clay (<2 µm) 15 12 15 21 15 11 25 18 15 20 23 21

Silt (2-60 µm) 9 6 11 10 11 7 14 20 13 20 18 18

Sand (0.06-2.00 mm) 46 58 43 47 35 40 45 47 49 43 44 44

Gravel (>2mm) 30 24 31 22 39 42 16 15 23 17 15 17

Cobbles (>6cm) <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1



ZoIF

Site 1 2 3 4 5 6

Rep 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2


+150µm 41 48 52 58 42 57 85 84 86 86 85 77

+300µm 30 38 37 43 28 42 65 69 80 82 63 52

+425µm 24 32 29 36 21 33 51 54 71 74 46 36

+600µm 18 25 21 28 14 24 39 39 55 59 34 24

+1180µm 9 15 10 16 6 12 27 22 26 29 21 13

+2.36mm 4 8 3 9 2 5 17 11 10 9 12 6

+4.75mm 1 5 <1 5 <1 2 10 5 2 2 8 2

+9.5mm <1 3 <1 3 <1 <1 4 <1 <1 <1 5 2

+19.0mm <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

+37.5mm <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

+75.0mm <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

EA150: Soil Classification based on Particle Size Clay (<2 µm) 31 22 20 16 25 20 6 8 8 8 7 10

Silt (2-60 µm) 17 17 16 17 19 13 5 3 2 2 4 5

Sand (0.06-2.00 mm) 43 47 54 51 50 55 63 68 64 62 68 73

Gravel (>2mm) 9 14 10 16 6 12 26 21 26 28 21 12

Cobbles (>6cm) <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1




APPENDIX K DISTLM RESULTS



Appendix K: DIST LM Results

VARIABLES 1 Median Grain Size 2 Percentage (%) Fines 3 pH

4 ORP

Total SS(trace): 2.81E+05

MARGINAL TESTS Variable SS(trace) Pseudo-F P Prop.

Median Grain Size 5103.1 1.9574 0.0157 1.81E-02

% Fines 4203.7 1.6072 0.0444 1.49E-02

pH 12254 4.8252 0.0001 4.35E-02

ORP 5107.8 1.9592 0.0131 1.81E-02

res.df: 142 Specified solution

Adj R^2 R^2 7.30E-02

1.08E-01

Percentage of variation explained by individual axes % explained variation out of

fitted model % explained variation out of

total variation Axis Individual Cumulative Individual Cumulative

1 51.16 51.16 5.51 5.51

2 26.51 77.67 2.85 8.36

3 12.63 90.3 1.36 9.72

4 9.7 100 1.04 10.77

Subtidal Benthos Monitoring Post Dredging Report - …€¦ · Subtidal Benthos Monitoring Post...

Documents

Transcript of Subtidal Benthos Monitoring Post Dredging Report - …€¦ · Subtidal Benthos Monitoring Post...