Marine Biology

, 164:183 | Cite as

Meiofaunal communities in hydrothermal vent and proximate non-vent habitats around neighboring seamounts on the Izu-Ogasawara Arc, western North Pacific Ocean

  • Yuki Uejima
  • Hidetaka Nomaki
  • Reina Senokuchi
  • Yuka Setoguchi
  • Tomo Kitahashi
  • Hiromi Kayama Watanabe
  • Motohiro ShimanagaEmail author
Original paper


The present study investigated spatiotemporal variations in meiofaunal abundance and composition at high taxonomic levels, and their associations with certain measures of food availability around hydrothermal vents on chimney structures and in adjacent non-vent fields in the calderas of three neighboring seamounts (Bayonnaise Knoll, Myojin Knoll, and Myojin-sho Caldera), in the Izu-Ogasawara Arc, western North Pacific Ocean. Total meiofaunal abundance in seafloor sediment at the bases of vent chimneys appeared to be greater than that in other non-vent habitats outside or inside the calderas of all seamounts, which was partly explained by temporal variations at the bases of the chimneys. There was no significant difference in the mean meiofaunal abundances among those habitats. A typical deep-sea meiofaunal composition (nematodes as the most abundant taxon, harpacticoid copepods as the second) was observed in the seafloor sediments in the non-vent fields, and even in the sediments at chimney bases. This was significantly different from the meiofaunal composition observed on the surfaces of vent chimneys, where copepods and their nauplii were most abundant. This spatial difference was significantly correlated with a difference in stable carbon isotope ratios (δ13C) of organic matter in sediment, suggesting that the availability of chemosynthetic food controls the spatial differences in meiofaunal composition around these hydrothermal vents, even at a high taxonomic level.



The authors are grateful to the crew and operation staff of the RV Natsushima and the ROV “Hyper-Dolphin” of the Japan Agency for Marine–Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC). Special thanks to Dr. D. Zeppilli and an undisclosed expert who kindly checked our manuscript. This study was partly funded by a grant from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research (KAKENHI) program (grant number 26440246).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest.

Informed consent

Consent was obtained from all participants in the study.

Ethical statements

All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. No collecting permits are required in Japan for collection of meiofaunal animals. No experiments concerning live animals were conducted in the present study. This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Supplementary material

227_2017_3218_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (86 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 85 kb)


  1. Anderson MJ, Gorley RN, Clarke KR (2008) PERMANOVA + for PRIMER: guide to software and statistical methods. PRIMER-E, PlymouthGoogle Scholar
  2. Berger WH (1989) Global maps of ocean productivity. In: Berger WH, Smetacek VS, Wefer G (eds) Productivity of the Ocean: Past and present. Wiley, New York, pp 429–455Google Scholar
  3. Clarke KR, Warwick RM (2001) Change in marine communities: an approach to statistical analysis and interpretation, 2nd edn. PRIMER-E, PlymouthGoogle Scholar
  4. Copley JTP, Flint HC, Ferrero TJ, Van Dover CL (2007) Diversity of meiofauna and free-living nematodes in hydrothermal vent mussel beds on the northern and southern East Pacific Rise. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 87:1141–1152Google Scholar
  5. Cuvelier D, Beesau J, Ivanenko V, Zeppilli D, Sarradin PM, Sarrazin J (2014) First insights into macro- and meiofaunal colonisation patterns on paired wood/slate substrata at Atlantic deep-sea hydrothermal vents. Deep-Sea Res I 87:70–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Danovaro R (2010) Methods for the study of deep-sea sediments, their functioning and biodiversity. CRC Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Danovaro R, Fraschetti S (2002) Meiofaunal vertical zonation on hard-bottoms: comparison with soft-bottom meiofauna. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 230:159–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Degen R, Riavitz L, Gollner S, Vanreusel A, Plum C, Bright M (2012) Community study of tubeworm-associated epizooic meiobenthos from deep-sea cold seeps and hot vents. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 468:135–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dinet A, Grassle F, Tunnicliffe V (1988) Premières observations sur la méiofaune des hydrothermaux de la dorsale Est-Pacifique (Guaymas, 21°N) et de l’Explorer Ridge. Oceanol Acta 85:7–14Google Scholar
  10. Flint HC, Copley JTP, Ferrero TJ, Van Dover CL (2006) Patterns of nematode diversity at hydrothermal vents on the East Pacific Rise. Cah Biol Mar 47:365–370Google Scholar
  11. Gaudron SM, Lefebvre S, Nunes Jorge A, Gaill F, Pradillon F (2012) Spatial and temporal variations in food web structure from newly-opened habitat at hydrothermal vents. Mar Environ Res 77:129–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. George KH (2013) Faunistic research on metazoan meiofauna from seamounts—a review. Meiofauna Mar 20:1–32Google Scholar
  13. Giere O (2009) Meiobenthology. The microscopic motile fauna of aquatic sediments, 2nd edn. Universität Hamburg, HamburgGoogle Scholar
  14. Gollner S, Zekely J, Govenar B, Le Bris N, Nemeschkal HL, Fisher CR, Bright M (2007) Tubeworm-associated permanent meiobenthic communities from two chemically different hydrothermal vent sites on the East Pacific Rise. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 337:39–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gollner S, Riemer B, Arbizu PM, Le Bris N, Bright M (2010a) Diversity of meiofauna from the 9º50′N East Pacific Rise across a gradient of hydrothermal fluid emissions. PLoS ONE 5:e12321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gollner S, Ivanenko VN, Arbizu PM, Bright M (2010b) Advances in taxonomy, ecology, and biogeography of Dirivultidae (Copepoda) associated with chemosynthetic environments in the deep sea. PLoS ONE 5(8):e9801. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009801 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gollner S, Govenar B, Fisher CR, Bright M (2015a) Size matters at deep-sea hydrothermal vents: different diversity and habitat fidelity patterns of meio- and macrofauna. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 520:57–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gollner S, Govenar B, Martinez Arbizu P, Mills S, Le Bris N, Weinbauer M, Shank TM, Bright M (2015b) Differences in recovery between deep-sea hydrothermal vent and vent-proximate communities after a volcanic eruption. Deep-Sea Research I 106:167–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hicks GRF, Coull BC (1983) The ecology of marine meiobenthic harpacticoid copepods. Oceanogr Mar Biol Ann Rev 21:67–175Google Scholar
  20. Higgins RP, Thiel H (1988) Introduction to the study of meiofauna. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  21. Itoh M, Kawamura K, Kitahashi T, Kojima S, Katagiri H, Shimanaga M (2011) Bathymetric patterns of meiofaunal abundance and biomass associated with the Kuril and Ryukyu trenches, western North Pacific Ocean. Deep-Sea Res I 58:86–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kitahashi T, Shimanaga M, Inoue K, Watanabe H (2010) Sampler bias in the quantitative study on meiofauna around hydrothermal vents: comparison of sediments collected using two types of handcorers with different diameters. JAMSTEC Rep Res Dev 10:33–39 (in Japanese with English abstract) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kouris A, Limén H, Stevens CJ, Juniper SK (2010) Blue mats: faunal composition and food web structure in colonial ciliate (Folliculinopsis sp.) mats at Northeast Pacific hydrothermal vents. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 412:93–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Limén H, Levesque C, Juniper SK (2007) POM in macro-/meiofaunal food webs associated with three flow regimes at deep-sea hydrothermal vents on Axial Volcano, Juan de Fuca Ridge. Mar Biol 153:129–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Limén H, Stevens CJ, Bourass Z, Juniper SK (2008) Trophic ecology of siphonostomatoid copepods at deep-sea hydrothermal vents in the northeast Pacific. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 359:161–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Plum C, Pradillon F, Fujiwara Y, Sarrazin J (2016) Copepod colonization of organic and inorganic substrata at a deep-sea hydrothermal vent site on the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. Deep-Sea Res II. doi: 10.1016/j.dsr2.2016.06.008 (Available online 18 June 2016) Google Scholar
  27. Portail M, Olu K, Dubois SF, Escobar-Briones E, Gelinas Y, Menot L, Sarrazin J (2016) Food-web complexity in Guaymas Basin hydrothermal vents and cold seeps. PLoS ONE 11(9):e0162263. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0162263 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sarrazin J, Legendre P, De Busserolles F, Fabri MC, Guilini K, Ivanenko VN, Morineaux M, Vanreusel A, Sarradin PM (2015) Biodiversity patterns, environmental drivers and indicator species on a high-temperature hydrothermal edifice, mid-Atlantic ridge. Deep-Sea Res II 121:177–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Setoguchi Y, Nomaki H, Kitahashi T, Watanabe H, Inoue K, Ogawa NO, Shimanaga M (2014) Nematode community composition in hydrothermal vent and adjacent non-vent fields around Myojin Knoll, a seamount on the Izu-Ogasawara Arc in the western North Pacific Ocean. Mar Biol 161:1775–1785CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Shirayama Y (1992) Studies of meiofauna collected from the Iheya Ridge during the dive 541 of the ‘‘SHINKAI 2000.’’ Proc JAMSTEC Symp Deep Sea Res, pp 287–290 (in Japanese with English abstract)Google Scholar
  31. Soltwedel T (2000) Metazoan meiobenthos along continental margins: a review. Prog Oceanogr 46:59–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tsurumi M, de Graaf RC, Tunnicliffe V (2003) Distributional and biological aspects of copepods at hydrothermal vents on the Juan de Fuca Ridge, north-east Pacific ocean. J Mar Biol Ass UK 83:469–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Van Dover CL, Biscoito M, Gebruk A, Hashimoto J, Tunnicliffe V, Tyler P, Desbruyères D (2006) Milestones in the discovery of hydrothermal-vent faunas. In: Desbruyères D, Segonzac M, Bright M (ed) Handbook of deep-sea hydrothermal vent fauna. Danisa 18:13–15Google Scholar
  34. Vanreusel A, Bossche IV, Thiermann F (1997) Free-living marine nematodes from hydrothermal sediments: similarities with communities from diverse reduced habitats. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 157:207–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Watanabe H, Kojima S (2015) Vent fauna in the Okinawa Trough. In: Ishibashi J, Okino K, Sunamura M (ed) Subseafloor biosphere linked to global hydrothermal systems; TAIGA concept, pp 449–459Google Scholar
  36. Watanabe H, Fujikura K, Kojima S, Miyazaki J, Fujiwara Y (2010) Japan: vent and seeps in close proximity. In: Kiel S (ed) The vent and seep biota. Springer, New York, pp 379–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Zekely J, Gollner S, Van Dover CL, Govenar B, Bris NL, Nemeschkal HL, Bright M (2006a) Nematode communities associated with tubeworm and mussel aggregations on the East Pacific Rise. Cah Biol Mar 47:477–482Google Scholar
  38. Zekely J, Van Dover CL, Nemeschkal HL, Bright M (2006b) Hydrothermal vent meiobenthos associated with mytilid mussel aggregations from the Mid-Atlantic Ridge and the East Pacific Rise. Deep-Sea Res Ι 53:1363–1378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Zeppilli D, Danovaro R (2009) Meiofaunal diversity and assemblage structure in a shallow-water hydrothermal vent in the Pacific Ocean. Aquat Biol 5:75–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Zeppilli D, Bongiorni L, Cattaneo A, Danovaro R, Santos RS (2013) Meiofauna assemblages of the Condor Seamount (North-East Atlantic Ocean) and adjacent deep-sea sediments. Deep-Sea Res II 98:87–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Zeppilli D, Vanreusel A, Pradillon F, Fuchs S, Mandon P, James T, Sarrazin J (2015) Rapid colonisation by nematodes on organic and inorganic substrata deployed at the deep-sea Lucky Strike hydrothermal vent field (Mid-Atlantic Ridge). Mar Biodiv 45:489–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Aitsu Marine StationKumamoto UniversityKumamotoJapan
  2. 2.Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC)YokosukaJapan

Personalised recommendations