<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <title>OAR@UM Collection:</title>
  <link rel="alternate" href="https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/120935" />
  <subtitle />
  <id>https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/120935</id>
  <updated>2026-04-20T16:48:21Z</updated>
  <dc:date>2026-04-20T16:48:21Z</dc:date>
  <entry>
    <title>Influence of tuna penning activities on soft bottom macrofaunal assemblages</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/121342" />
    <author>
      <name />
    </author>
    <id>https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/121342</id>
    <updated>2024-04-26T04:42:08Z</updated>
    <published>2018-01-01T00:00:00Z</published>
    <summary type="text">Title: Influence of tuna penning activities on soft bottom macrofaunal assemblages
Abstract: Aquaculture is an important food-producing industry that has often been criticised &#xD;
because of its potential adverse influence on water quality and benthic habitats present &#xD;
in the vicinity of a fish farm. A lucrative sector of the aquaculture industry is Atlantic &#xD;
Bluefin Tuna (ABT) ranching. The main source of pollution of the benthic &#xD;
environment at tuna farms is the uneaten feed-fish which accumulates on the seabed &#xD;
below the tuna pens, but the potential influence of ABT farming is expected to differ &#xD;
from those of other fish farm types such as those rearing sea bass and sea bream, &#xD;
because of the use of feed-fish instead of formulated feed and the large size of the &#xD;
farmed fish. Furthermore, differences in the characteristics of the tuna farms and of &#xD;
the receiving environment may result in varying levels of impact, if present. The &#xD;
present study investigated the influence of tuna penning activities on macrofaunal &#xD;
assemblages of the soft sediment habitat present in the vicinity of the fish pens. Grab &#xD;
samples for sediment physico-chemical attributes; namely mean sediment grain size &#xD;
(MSGS), and percent organic carbon content (POCC) and percent organic nitrogen &#xD;
content (PONC) in the sediment; and for macrofaunal studies, were collected from &#xD;
three tuna farms located c. 1 km off the northeastern to southeastern coast of Malta, at &#xD;
incremental distances from the sea cages (i.e., c. 0 m, 100 m, 1 km, and 2 km away) &#xD;
before initiation of the farming activities, and thereafter at six-monthly or annual &#xD;
intervals, over a period of ten years. &#xD;
The following study aspects were considered: (i) influence of the northeastern farm &#xD;
during its first year of operation on benthic habitat; (ii) use of polychaete, mollusc, &#xD;
amphipod and decapod taxocenes as indicators of the influence of ABT penning on &#xD;
macrobenthic assemblages; (iii) differences in the magnitude and spatial extent of &#xD;
influence of the three ABT farms that differed in size, stocking density, and location, &#xD;
on benthic habitat; (iv) spatial pattern in attributes of the macrofaunal assemblages &#xD;
present in the vicinity of a farm with incremental distance from the tuna pens; (v) &#xD;
suitability of benthic biotic indices (BBIs) AMBI, BENTIX, BOPA, BOPA-Fish &#xD;
farming (BOPA-FF) and M-AMBI, for monitoring the environmental impact of tuna &#xD;
farming; and (vi) temporal patterns in macrofaunal assemblages in the vicinity of three &#xD;
tuna farms over a ten-year period. &#xD;
Results from the study of the northeastern farm during its first year of operation&#xD;
indicated significantly elevated sediment POCC and PONC, and (albeit not &#xD;
significantly) higher abundance of capitellid polychaetes in the vicinity of the tuna &#xD;
cages, where uneaten feed-fish had accumulated on the seabed. The changes in benthic &#xD;
habitat were conspicuous in autumn towards the end of the tuna penning season, but &#xD;
some benthic recovery was observed after the fallow period. Of the considered &#xD;
taxoenes, polychaetes and amphipods appeared to be good benthic biotic indicators of &#xD;
the impact of tuna penning on macroinvertebrate assemblages. Results from the third &#xD;
study aspect indicated a higher magnitude of influence at the northeastern farm - the &#xD;
largest farm in terms of holding capacity - compared with the two southeastern farms, &#xD;
but a wider spatial extent of impact (1-2 km) was evident at one of the southeastern &#xD;
tuna farms. The spatial pattern in benthic macrofaunal assemblages was characterised &#xD;
by a high impact area directly below the cages, while a significant peak in diversity &#xD;
100 m away from the cages was observed at only one of the investigated tuna farms. &#xD;
Of the considered BBIs, the BOPA-FF and M-AMBI indices appeared more sensitive &#xD;
to the environmental influence of tuna penning, but variation in Ecological Quality &#xD;
Status (EQS) assignment among BBIs showed the importance of including &#xD;
multivariate data analyses that are traditionally used in aquaculture environmental &#xD;
impact monitoring studies. Results from the sixth study aspect showed that the benthic &#xD;
EQS changed from ‘Bad’ and ‘Poor’ to ‘Good’/‘High’ categorisations at the &#xD;
northeastern farm after the first years of operation, but ‘Moderate’ EQS at the two &#xD;
southeastern farms towards the end of the study period was indicative of a ‘press’ &#xD;
disturbance. It was concluded that the seasonal nature of ABT penning and often &#xD;
offshore location of the farms, together with reduction of feed wastage, can mitigate &#xD;
the potential adverse benthic influence of these activities, while multiple tuna farms &#xD;
located close to one another result in added loading on the marine environment, hence &#xD;
highlighting the importance of good spatial planning for coastal aquaculture activities. &#xD;
The high spatio-temporal variation in the influence of tuna penning on benthic &#xD;
macrofaunal assemblages in the vicinity of a farm showed the importance of including &#xD;
multiple impacted and reference areas, as well as replicated sampling times in &#xD;
environmental monitoring of tuna farms. The overall findings are discussed in light of: &#xD;
(i) current knowledge on the influence of aquaculture, in particular ABT ranching, on &#xD;
soft bottom macrofauna present in the vicinity of the activity; and (ii) implications for &#xD;
environmental monitoring and mitigation strategies of tuna penning activities in the &#xD;
Mediterranean, and, in a more local context, the Maltese Islands. Finally, proposals are &#xD;
made for potential further research on aspects of the environmental effects of tuna &#xD;
penning.
Description: PH.D.</summary>
    <dc:date>2018-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
</feed>

