School of Molecular and Life Sciences, Curtin University, Bentley, 6102, Western Australia, Australia.
Chevron Technical Center, 250 St Georges Tce, Perth, 6000, Western Australia, Australia.
Mar Environ Res. 2020 Dec;162:105198. doi: 10.1016/j.marenvres.2020.105198. Epub 2020 Oct 21.
We compared and contrasted fish assemblage data sampled by baited remote underwater stereo-video systems (stereo-BRUVs) and stereo-video remotely operated vehicles (stereo-ROVs) from subsea pipelines, reef and soft sediment habitats. Stereo-BRUVs sampled greater fish diversity across all three habitats, with the stereo-ROV sampling ~46% of the same species on pipeline and reef habitats. Larger differences existed in soft sediment habitats, with stereo-BRUVs recording ~65% more species than the stereo-ROV, the majority of which were generalist carnivores. These differences were likely due to the bait used with stereo-BRUVs attracting fish from a large and unknown area. Fish may have also avoided the moving stereo-ROV, an effect possibly magnified in open soft sediment habitats. As a result of these biases, we recommend stereo-ROVs for assessing fish communities on pipelines due to their ability to capture fish in-situ and within a defined sampling area, but caution is needed over soft sediment habitats for ecological comparisons.
我们比较和对比了通过诱饵远程水下立体视频系统(立体 BRUVs)和立体视频遥控潜水器(立体 ROVs)从海底管道、珊瑚礁和软底栖生物栖息地采集的鱼类群落数据。立体 BRUVs 在所有三种栖息地中都能采集到更多种类的鱼类,而立体 ROV 在管道和珊瑚礁栖息地中仅能采集到大约 46%的相同物种。在软底栖生物栖息地中存在更大的差异,立体 BRUVs 记录的物种比立体 ROV 多约 65%,其中大多数是肉食性广食性动物。这些差异可能是由于立体 BRUVs 中使用的诱饵吸引了来自大面积且未知区域的鱼类。鱼类也可能避开移动的立体 ROV,这种效应在开阔的软底栖生物栖息地中可能会被放大。由于这些偏差,我们建议在评估管道上的鱼类群落时使用立体 ROVs,因为它们能够在原位和定义的采样区域内捕获鱼类,但在进行生态比较时需要对软底栖生物栖息地保持谨慎。