OCS Study

BOEM 2012-106

Exploration and Research of Northern Gulf 

of Mexico Deepwater Natural and Artificial 

Hard-Bottom Habitats with Emphasis on 

Coral Communities: Reefs, Rigs, and 

Wrecks—“Lophelia II”

Interim Report

U.S. Department of the Interior

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

Gulf of Mexico OCS Region
ii

OCS Study

BOEM 2012-106

Exploration and Research of Northern Gulf of 

Mexico Deepwater Natural and Artificial HardBottom Habitats with Emphasis on Coral 

Communities: Reefs, Rigs, and Wrecks—

“Lophelia II”

Interim Report

James M. Brooks

Charles Fisher

Erik Cordes

Harry Roberts

Iliana Baums

Bernie Bernard

Sandra Brooke

Robert Church

Amanda Demopoulos

Peter Etnoyer

Chris German

Elizabeth Goehring

Christina Kellogg

Ian MacDonald

Cheryl Morrison

Martha Nizinski

Steve Ross

Tim Shank

Dan Warren

Susan Welsh

Gary Wolff

Prepared under BOEM Contract

M08PC20028

by

TDI-Brooks International Inc.

14391 S. Dowling 

College Station, TX 77845

Published by

U.S. Department of the Interior

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

Gulf of Mexico OCS Region

New Orleans, LA

March 2013
iii

DISCLAIMER

This report was prepared under contract between the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 

(BOEM, previously the Minerals Management Service [MMS], then the Bureau of Ocean 

Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement [BOEMRE]) and TDI-Brooks International,

Inc. (TDI-BI). This report has been technically reviewed by BOEM, and it has been approved for 

publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies 

of BOEM, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or 

recommendation for use. It is, however, exempt from review and compliance with BOEM

editorial standards.

REPORT AVAILABILITY

This report is available on CD from the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Gulf of 

Mexico OCS Region, for $15.00, and free of charge as a pdf file downloaded from the BOEM 

website. Copies can also be viewed at selected Federal Depository Libraries. The addresses are 

listed below.

To order a CD, use the Gulf of Mexico OCS Region contact information below and reference 

OCS Study BOEM 2012-106. To download a pdf copy, use the Environmental Studies Program 

Information System (ESPIS) and search on the study report number. In the near future, you will 

also be able to get this report also from the National Technical Information Service.

U.S. Department of the Interior

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

Gulf of Mexico OCS Region

Public Information Office (GM 217G)

1201 Elmwood Park Blvd.

New Orleans, Louisiana 70123-2394

Phone: (504) 736-2519, 1-800-200-GULF

Fax: (504) 736-2620

U.S. Department of Commerce

National Technical Information Service

5301Shawnee Rd.

Springfield, Virginia 22312

Phone: (703) 605-6000,1-800-553-6847

Fax: (703) 605-6900

Web site: http://www.ntis.gov/

CITATION

Brooks, J.M., C. Fisher, H. Roberts, E. Cordes, I. Baums, B. Bernard, S. Brooke, R. Church, A. 

Demopoulos, P. Etnoyer, C. German, E. Goehring, C. Kellogg, I. McDonald, C. Morrison, 

M. Nizinski, S. Ross, T. Shank, D. Warren, S. Welsh, G. Wolff. 2012. Exploration and 

research of northern Gulf of Mexico deepwater natural and artificial hard-bottom habitats 

with emphasis on coral communities: Reefs, rigs, and wrecks—“Lophelia II” Interim report. 

U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Gulf of Mexico OCS 

Region, New Orleans, LA. OCS Study BOEM 2012-106. 126 p.
v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents............................................................................................................................ v

List of Figures................................................................................................................................ ix

List of Tables ...............................................................................................................................xiii

1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Overview ........................................................................................................................ 1

1.2 Background .................................................................................................................... 1

1.3 Objectives of the Project ................................................................................................ 2

1.3.1 Biological Objectives........................................................................................ 3

1.3.2 Other Objectives ............................................................................................... 3

2 Cruise Overviews...................................................................................................................... 5

2.1 Cruise 1........................................................................................................................... 5

2.2 Cruise 2........................................................................................................................... 8

2.3 Cruise 3......................................................................................................................... 11

3 Oil Platform ROV Survey ....................................................................................................... 15

3.1 Platforms ...................................................................................................................... 16

3.1.1 Virgo Fixed Platform...................................................................................... 16

3.1.2 Pompano ......................................................................................................... 16

3.1.3 Petronius ......................................................................................................... 17

3.1.4 Baldpate .......................................................................................................... 17

3.2 Pompano Oceaneering ROV Survey Conclusions....................................................... 18

4 Site Selection........................................................................................................................... 19

4.1 Current Status............................................................................................................... 19

4.2 Site Selection Criteria................................................................................................... 20

5 SITE EXPLORATION RESULTS OVERVIEW: MACROBIOLOGY ................................ 23

5.1 Site Overview............................................................................................................... 30

5.1.1 West Florida Slope.......................................................................................... 30

5.1.2 DC583............................................................................................................. 31

5.1.3 VK826............................................................................................................. 32

5.1.4 VK862/906...................................................................................................... 33

5.1.5 MC751 ............................................................................................................ 34

5.1.6 MC855 ............................................................................................................ 35

5.1.7 Gulfoil............................................................................................................. 36

5.1.8 GC852: (1,400m)............................................................................................ 37

5.1.9 Shallower GC sites (140, 234, 235, 338):....................................................... 38

5.1.10 GB299............................................................................................................. 39

5.1.11 GB535............................................................................................................. 40
vi

5.2 Site characterization overview: Maps, Temp, pH, Oxygen ......................................... 42

5.2.1 Multibeam and Physical Oceanography ......................................................... 42

5.2.2 Aragonite Saturation States............................................................................. 43

5.2.3 Live Lophelia Experiments............................................................................. 43

6 Animal distributions at Basin scale ......................................................................................... 45

6.1 Lophelia and associate population genetics ................................................................. 45

6.2 Antipatharian and Callogorgia spp population genetics.............................................. 49

6.2.1 Octocoral Collections...................................................................................... 49

6.2.2 Preliminary Phylogenetic Analyses................................................................ 51

6.2.3 Future Work.................................................................................................... 53

6.3 Genetics Studies of Deep Corals and Associated Communities.................................. 53

6.3.1 Antipatharians................................................................................................. 53

6.3.2 Lophelia .......................................................................................................... 55

6.4 Galatheid and Other Distribution and Phylogenetics................................................... 55

6.4.1 Objectives ....................................................................................................... 56

6.4.2 Taxonomy ....................................................................................................... 57

6.4.3 Abundance and Distribution ........................................................................... 57

6.4.4 Galatheid phylogeny ....................................................................................... 57

6.4.5 Shrimps........................................................................................................... 58

6.4.6 Echinoderms ................................................................................................... 58

6.4.7 Future Directions ............................................................................................ 58

7 Coral and community Ecology................................................................................................ 59

7.1 Within-Site Scale Coral/Community Distribution ....................................................... 59

7.1.1 Goals............................................................................................................... 59

7.2 Coral Aggregation Scale Community Ecology............................................................ 62

7.3 Meiofauna and Trophodynamics.................................................................................. 62

7.3.1 Background..................................................................................................... 62

7.3.2 Progress........................................................................................................... 64

7.3.3 Trophodynamics ............................................................................................. 66

7.3.4 Stable Isotope Review..................................................................................... 66

7.3.5 Trophodynamics in GOM: Questions and Objectives.................................... 67

7.4 Coral Growth, Reproduction and Larval Ecology........................................................ 67

7.4.1 Objectives ....................................................................................................... 67

7.4.2 Summary......................................................................................................... 69

8 Associated studies ................................................................................................................... 71

8.1 Coral Community Microbiology.................................................................................. 71

8.2 Paleoecology of Corals................................................................................................. 72

8.3 Landers and Other Long-term Deployments................................................................ 73

8.3.1 ALBEX and BOBO Landers .......................................................................... 73

8.3.2 Stationary Digital Still Camera....................................................................... 75

8.3.3 Stationary Moorings........................................................................................ 77

8.3.4 Time Series Analysis of Particulate Organic Input & Larvae ........................ 78

8.4 Education and Outreach: Summary of Activities, Plans, Discussion........................... 80

8.4.1 Lophelia II Outreach Summary ...................................................................... 80
vii

8.5 Video Production.......................................................................................................... 81

8.5.1 Video Production Summary............................................................................ 81

9 Archaeology ............................................................................................................................ 85

9.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 85

9.2 Field Operations-Archaeology ..................................................................................... 85

9.2.1 Summary: Season I (2008).............................................................................. 85

9.2.2 Summary: Season II (2009) ............................................................................ 86

9.2.1.1 C & C AUV Survey (June 2009) .................................................... 86

9.2.1.2 WHOI Sentry AUV Survey (June 2009) ........................................ 86

9.2.1.3 WHOI Jason II ROV Survey (September 2009)............................. 87

9.3 Methodologies.............................................................................................................. 87

9.3.1 ROV Investigation Methods........................................................................... 87

9.3.1.1 Reconnaissance Transects............................................................... 87

9.3.1.2 Biology Transects ........................................................................... 87

9.3.1.3 Mosaic Transects............................................................................. 87

9.3.1.4 Close-Up Transects......................................................................... 88

9.3.2 Artifact Recovery............................................................................................ 88

9.4 Conservation Methods.................................................................................................. 88

9.4.1 Field Conservation.......................................................................................... 88

9.4.2 Laboratory Conservation ................................................................................ 88

9.5 Shipwreck Sites............................................................................................................ 89

9.5.1 Viosca Knoll (VK) Wreck (Site 15303) ......................................................... 89

9.5.1.1 Overview and History ..................................................................... 90

9.5.1.2 Previous Investigations................................................................... 90

9.5.1.3 Season I Cruise (2008).................................................................... 90

9.5.1.4 Season II Cruise (2009)................................................................... 90

9.5.1.5 Analysis........................................................................................... 93

9.5.1.6 Conservation ................................................................................... 93

9.5.2 7,000-ft Wreck (Site 15373) ........................................................................... 94

9.5.2.1 Overview and History ..................................................................... 94

9.5.2.2 Previous Investigations................................................................... 94

9.5.2.3 Season I Cruise (2008).................................................................... 95

9.5.2.4 Season II Cruise (2009)................................................................... 96

9.5.2.5 Analysis........................................................................................... 98

9.5.2.6 Conservation ................................................................................... 99

9.5.3 Ewing Bank (EW) Wreck (Site 15401) ........................................................ 101

9.5.3.1 Overview and History ................................................................... 101

9.5.3.2 Previous Investigations................................................................. 101

9.5.3.3 Season I Cruise (2008).................................................................. 101

9.5.3.4 Season II Cruise (2009)................................................................. 103

9.5.3.5 Analysis......................................................................................... 106

9.5.3.6 Conservation ................................................................................. 106

9.6 Green Lantern Wreck (Site 337)................................................................................ 109

9.6.1 Overview and History................................................................................... 109

9.6.2 Previous Investigations................................................................................. 109

9.6.2.1 2004............................................................................................... 109
viii

9.6.2.2 2007............................................................................................... 110

9.6.3 Season I Cruise (2008).................................................................................. 111

9.6.4 Season II Cruise (2009) ................................................................................ 111

9.6.4.1 Analysis......................................................................................... 114

9.6.4.2 Conservation ................................................................................. 114

9.7 Tanker Gulfpenn Wreck (Site 15265) ........................................................................ 120

9.7.1 Overview and History................................................................................... 120

9.7.2 Previous Investigations................................................................................. 120

9.7.3 Season I Cruise (2008).................................................................................. 120

9.7.4 Season II Cruise (2009) ................................................................................ 122

9.7.5 Analysis......................................................................................................... 122

9.7.6 Conservation ................................................................................................. 122

9.8 Tanker Gulfoil Wreck (Site 430)................................................................................ 122

9.8.1 Overview and History................................................................................... 122

9.8.2 Previous Investigations................................................................................. 124

9.8.3 Season I Cruise (2008).................................................................................. 124

9.8.4 Season II Cruise (2009) ................................................................................ 124

9.8.5 Analysis......................................................................................................... 124

9.8.6 Conservation ................................................................................................. 124

9.9 Conclusions................................................................................................................ 124

References................................................................................................................................... 125
ix

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1. Program organization. .............................................................................................. 4

Figure 2-1. Sites of interest–Cruise 1.......................................................................................... 6

Figure 2-2. Cruise tracks for Leg 1 and Leg 2. ........................................................................... 7

Figure 2-3. The AUV Sentry being recovered onto the R/V Brooks McCall following a 

successful dive.......................................................................................................... 8

Figure 2-4. Sites visited, Cruise 2. ............................................................................................ 10

Figure 2-5. Illustration of the Jason II/Medea ROV (WHOI). ................................................. 11

Figure 2-6. Lophelia II Cruise 3 track of Ronald H. Brown ..................................................... 13

Figure 3-1. Platforms. ............................................................................................................... 15

Figure 3-2. Still images from BP’s Pompano compliant tower platform. ROV survey by 

Oceaneering, Inc..................................................................................................... 18

Figure 4-1. Seafloor reflectivity anomalies as observed with 3D-seismic data........................ 19

Figure 4-2. Surface reflectivity (correlation to seabed). ........................................................... 20

Figure 5-1. Active sites. ............................................................................................................ 24

Figure 5-2. Site images. ............................................................................................................ 25

Figure 5-3. Lophelia observations............................................................................................. 26

Figure 5-4. Leiopathes observations. ........................................................................................ 27

Figure 5-5. Callogorgia observations. ...................................................................................... 28

Figure 5-6. Species abundance.................................................................................................. 29

Figure 5-7. West Florida Slope. ................................................................................................ 30

Figure 5-8. DC583. ................................................................................................................... 31

Figure 5-9. VK826. ................................................................................................................... 32

Figure 5-10. VK862/906. ............................................................................................................ 33

Figure 5-11. MC751.................................................................................................................... 34

Figure 5-12. MC855.................................................................................................................... 35

Figure 5-13. The location of Gulfoil. .......................................................................................... 36

Figure 5-14. GC852. ................................................................................................................... 37

Figure 5-15. Shallower Green Canyon(GC) sites. ...................................................................... 38

Figure 5-16. Garden Banks (GB) 299. ........................................................................................ 39

Figure 5-17. Garden Banks (GB) 535. ........................................................................................ 40

Figure 5-18. Species abundance.................................................................................................. 41
x

Figure 5-19. Temperature values for Lophelia in the GoM........................................................ 43

Figure 5-20. Garden Banks (GB) 535. Live Lophelia experiments............................................ 44

Figure 6-1. Lophelia II sampling: natural reefs. ....................................................................... 47

Figure 6-2. Mobile fauna associated with Lophelia.................................................................. 48

Figure 6-3. Octocoral collections 2008-2009............................................................................ 49

Figure 6-4. Bayesian tree of all GoM Paramuriceidae.............................................................. 52

Figure 6-5. Bayesian tree of Callogorgia spp........................................................................... 52

Figure 7-1. The AUV Sentry..................................................................................................... 59

Figure 7-2. The RV Brooks McCall/WHOI AUV Sentry cruise. ............................................. 60

Figure 7-3. The R/V Brooks McCall/WHOI AUV Sentry cruise, Viosca Knoll. ..................... 60

Figure 7-4. The R/V Brooks McCall/WHOI AUV Sentry cruise, 2,700m shipwreck.............. 61

Figure 7-5. Coral habitat terrain classification.......................................................................... 61

Figure 7-6. Branching coral substrate. ...................................................................................... 63

Figure 7-7. Meiofauna associated with deep-sea corals............................................................ 64

Figure 7-8. Pushcores and sub-sampling. ................................................................................. 65

Figure 7-9. Macrofaunal composition compared with substrate............................................... 65

Figure 7-10. Stable N isotopes and trophic level. ....................................................................... 66

Figure 7-11. Lophelia pertusa and vestimentiferans................................................................... 67

Figure 7-12. Lophelia pertusa reproduction in the GoM............................................................ 68

Figure 7-13. Comparison of the gametogenic cycles of L. pertusa from Trondheim Fjord and 

GoM........................................................................................................................ 69

Figure 8-1. Corresponding linear “growth rate” is ~120μm/year. Sample is ~75 years old.... 73

Figure 8-2. ALBEX lander........................................................................................................ 74

Figure 8-3. BOBO lander.......................................................................................................... 75

Figure 8-4. Digital still camera. ................................................................................................ 76

Figure 8-6. 102-m tall mooring with 2 RCM-8 current meters................................................. 77

Figure 8-7. 9-m tall mooring with ADCP at top and RCM-8 below. ....................................... 78

Figure 8-8. PARAFLUX sediment traps................................................................................... 79

Figure 8-9. Video tour on Google Earth. .................................................................................. 82

Figure 9-1. Site map of the Viosca Knoll (VK) Wreck site...................................................... 89

Figure 9-2. Copper sheathing on the Viosca Knoll (VK) Wreck’s port side hull..................... 91

Figure 9-3. Damaged area on the VK Wreck’s port stern area................................................. 91

Figure 9-4. An image of the VK Wreck’s ship stove................................................................ 92
xi

Figure 9-5. Jason II recovering a stoneware container from the VK Wreck............................ 92

Figure 9-6. Stoneware water filter recovered from VK Wreck (top view)............................... 93

Figure 9-7. Decoration and writing on stoneware water filter from the VK Wreck................. 94

Figure 9-8. Site map of the 7,000-ft Wreck Site....................................................................... 95

Figure 9-9. The beak remains on the 7,000-ft Wreck. .............................................................. 96

Figure 9-10. The windlass and anchors visible on the 7,000-ft Wreck....................................... 97

Figure 9-11. The intact steering mechanism on the 7,000-ft Wreck........................................... 97

Figure 9-12. Using the high-resolution digital camera to document the 7,000-ft Wreck. .......... 98

Figure 9-13. Navigational compass being recovered from the 7,000-ft Wreck.......................... 98

Figure 9-14. Navigational compass recovered from the 7,000-ft Wreck (top view). ................. 99

Figure 9-15. Copper sheathing sample from the 7,000-ft Wreck. ............................................ 100

Figure 9-16. Wood and copper sheathing fragments from the 7,000-ft Wreck. ....................... 100

Figure 9-17. Site map of the Ewing Bank (EW) Wreck Site. ................................................... 102

Figure 9-18. The EW Wreck sternpost showing the pintle and gudgeon remnants.................. 104

Figure 9-19. The starboard hull of the EW Wreck.................................................................... 104

Figure 9-20. Damaged sheathing and fastener patterns on the EW Wreck’s starboard side. ... 105

Figure 9-21. View of the Lophelia colony growing on the EW Wreck’s stem post................. 105

Figure 9-22. Jason II recovering an ironstone vessel from the EW Wreck.............................. 106

Figure 9-23. Ironstone vessel from the EW Wreck before conservation.................................. 107

Figure 9-24. Ironstone vessel from the EW Wreck after conservation..................................... 107

Figure 9-25. Copper sheathing and fastener sample from the EW Wreck................................ 108

Figure 9-26. Ballast stone from the EW Wreck........................................................................ 108

Figure 9-27. Net sample from the EW Wreck. ......................................................................... 109

Figure 9-28. Site map of the Green Lantern Wreck site........................................................... 110

Figure 9-29. The sternpost on the Green Lantern Wreck. ........................................................ 112

Figure 9-30. Debris field off starboard stern of the Green Lantern Wreck. ............................. 112

Figure 9-31. Crab, coral, and hull remains on the Green Lantern Wreck. ............................... 113

Figure 9-32. Stem post and bow remains at the Green Lantern Wreck.................................... 113

Figure 9-33. Jason II recovering a navigation lantern from the Green Lantern Wreck. .......... 114

Figure 9-34. Lantern recovered from the Green Lantern Wreck site. ...................................... 115

Figure 9-35. Fork recovered from the Green Lantern Wreck site. ........................................... 116

Figure 9-36. Copper container from the Green Lantern Wreck site......................................... 116

Figure 9-37. X-Ray of copper container from the Green Lantern Wreck site.......................... 117
xii

Figure 9-38. Wooden sheave recovered from the Green Lantern Wreck site. ......................... 117

Figure 9-39. Ship’s bell from the Green Lantern Wreck site. .................................................. 118

Figure 9-40. Ceramic plate from the Green Lantern Wreck before conservation. ................... 119

Figure 9-41. Ceramic plate from the Green Lantern Wreck after conservation....................... 119

Figure 9-42. Site map of the Gulfpenn Wreck site.................................................................... 121

Figure 9-43. Site map of the Gulfoil Wreck site. ...................................................................... 123
xiii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2-1. Sites Occupied During Cruise 1 ............................................................................... 5

Table 2-2. Sites Occupied During Cruise 2 ............................................................................... 9

Table 2-3. Sites Characterized Listed in Chronological Order................................................ 12

Table 4-1. Sites Visited: Lophelia Project............................................................................... 21

Table 4-2. New Prospects for Lophelia Sites .......................................................................... 22

Table 5-1. Species Abundance................................................................................................. 29

Table 6-1. Collection Summary............................................................................................... 46

Table 6-2. Community Genetics Collection ............................................................................ 47

Table 6-3. Octocoral Diversity and Abundance ...................................................................... 50

Table 6-4. Diversity and Abundance of Octocorals ................................................................ 54

Table 8-1. Lophelia II Tour in Google Earth........................................................................... 83
1

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 OVERVIEW

This document represents TDI-Brooks' Interim Report for the Lophelia II Project, Contract 

M08PC20038, issued by the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy 

Management, Regulation and Enforcement (now the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management 

[BOEM]) “Exploration and Research of Northern Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Natural and 

Artificial Hard Bottom Habitats with Emphasis on Coral Communities: Reef, Rigs, and Wrecks. 

This report provides detailed information regarding field sampling, sampling activity, and

sample analyses. Results will possibly be revised. This report is a preliminary product of

Contract M08PC20038.

1.2 BACKGROUND

Over the last half century, offshore exploration for hydrocarbons in the northern Gulf of 

Mexico (GoM) has advanced from the bay and inner shelf to the continental slope/continental 

rise transition. Geophysical and geotechnical data collected in support of both exploration and 

production have been largely responsible for the foundation of our present understanding of 

slope geology. This database emphasizes the extremely complex geological framework of the 

northern GoM’s continental slope and the surprisingly important role that the expulsion of 

subsurface fluids and gases has in shaping surficial geology and biology of the modern seafloor. 

Regional topography of the slope consists of basins, knolls, ridges, and mounds derived from the 

dynamic adjustments of salt to the introduction of large volumes of sediment over long time 

scales. Superimposed on this underlying topography is a smaller class of mounds, flows, and 

hard grounds that are the products of the transport of fluidized sediment, mineral-rich formation 

fluids, and hydrocarbons to the present sediment-water interface. The geologic response to the 

expulsion process is related both to the products being transported and the rate at which they 

arrive at the seafloor. Mud volcanoes and mudflows are typical of rapid flux settings where 

fluidized sediment is involved. Slow flux settings are mineral-prone. Authigenic carbonate 

mounds, hard grounds, crusts, and nodules are common to settings where hydrocarbons are 

involved. 

Recent manned submersible and remotely operated vehicle (ROV) dives to the middle and 

lower continental slope confirm the existence of these hard substrates to the deepest parts of the 

slope. Direct observation and sampling of expulsion sites started in the mid-1980s on the upper 

slope. We now know from analysis of 3D-seismic data and submersible-ROV dives that 

numerous expulsion sites with hard substrates provide habitat for deep water corals over the 

slope’s full depth range.

In the context of this study, deep hardground communities of the GoM comprise all of the 

biological communities inhabiting natural or artificial hard substrates, excluding the 

chemosynthetic seep communities. These communities consist of foundation species, those 

species that form large complex habitats at these sites, and their associated fauna ranging in size 

from large mobile fishes to microscopic meiofauna. The most prominent foundation species in 

these communities are the deep-water (“cold-water”) corals. The terms “deep-water corals” and

“cold-water corals” include relatives of the tropical reef-forming scleractinian corals, but also 

refer to a variety of other cnidarian taxa, including antipatharians (black corals), gorgonians 

(including bamboo corals), alcyonaceans (soft corals), andstylasterine hydrocorals. Other taxa, 
2

including anemones and sponges, are also significant contributors to the biogenic framework of 

these deep-water reef systems. 

In the GoM, deep-water corals are commonly found on seep-related authigenic carbonates, 

but have also been observed on anthropogenic structures, ship wrecks and oil platforms in 

particular. The most common species of reef-forming deep-water coral in the GoM is Lophelia

pertusa (=prolifera). This species was first recovered in the late 1800s by the United States

Coast and Geodetic Survey Steamer Blake.

Increasing industry activity in deepwater has resulted in the creation of numerous platforms 

in water depths exceeding 300m. In areas where hard substrates are limiting, these platforms may 

significantly increase the potential range of corals and other hardground fauna. Growth of 

Lophelia pertusa has been noted on the Pompano platform in VK 989. In addition, the Joliet 

platform in GC 184 near Bush Hill and the Neptune platform near the large L. pertusa site in VK 

826 are very likely to host coral populations. This study will focus on the exploration and 

characterization of these communities and examination of their potential connection to other 

coral populations and surrounding deep-water communities.

1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT

A primary goal of this study is to obtain a robust predictive capability for the occurrence of 

rich cnidarian (primarily scleractinian coral) hard ground communities in the deep GoM. To 

achieve this long-term goal, this study will accomplish three interrelated and interdependent 

objectives:

• Discover and describe new locations at greater than 300m depth in the GoM 

with extensive coral community development, particularly including Lophelia

pertusa.

• Gain a more comprehensive understanding of the fundamental processes that 

control the occurrence and distribution of Lophelia and other extensive coral 

communities at depths greater than 300 m in the GoM through both laboratory 

experiments and field data collection.

• Document and understand the relationship between coral communities on 

artificial and natural substrates with respect to community composition and 

function, phylogeographic and population genetics, and growth rates of the 

key cnidarian foundation fauna. 

Upon meeting these three interrelated objectives, we will have obtained an understanding of 

the biology and biogeography of Lophelia in the GoM that will result in a quantum increase in 

our ability to predict the occurrence of Lophelia at additional sites, based on data such as 

bathymetry, current models, 3D seismic profiles, and known occurrence of source populations. 
3

1.3.1 Biological Objectives

• To discover and characterize new sites 

— Characterize key sites at the largest scale with HR bathymetry, SSS, 

3D seismic data and current models

— Characterize the coral density at the 10-m to 100-m scale with 

randomized photo transects and general site descriptions

— Characterize the community composition at the 1m- to 10-m scale at 

significant coral sites (human-made and natural) with analysis of 

close-up imagery, replicate photomosaics and quantitative community 

collections 

• Analyze connectivity among humanmade and natural sites with comparative 

community, phylogeographic and population genetic analysis

• Compare the structure, species richness and diversity of communities tightly 

associated with Lophelia at humanmade and natural sites

• Experimentally determine the tolerance and growth response of Lophelia to 

temperature, pH/alkalinity, dissolved oxygen, and current

• Characterize and constrain growth rates of key species of colonial cnidarinans 

(pioneer colonies) using analysis of images on human-made structures of 

known age

• Characterize key variables (temperature, currents, larval seasonal distribution 

development and sediment quality) at sites with the most significant coral 

communities over one year at two to four sites 

1.3.2 Other Objectives

• Historical shipwreck component. Study of up to six shipwrecks to determine 

their identity, site boundaries, National Register eligibility, preservation state 

and stability, associated biological communities and artificial reef effects.

— Determine the rate of deterioration of test coupons at platforms or 

shipwrecks 

• Coordination with USCG

• Deepwater commercial fisheries review that impact hardbottom communities 
4

Figure 1-1. Program organization.
5

2 CRUISE OVERVIEWS

The Lophelia II project involves exploration and research of the northern GoM deepwater 

natural and artificial hard bottom habitats with emphasis on coral communities with 

archeological studies of 4–6 shipwrecks. To date, there have been three cruises completed. The 

first Lophelia II cruise took place in September 2008, and the second cruise in June 2009. Cruise 

3, August–September 2009, returned to known sites and the newly-discovered sites targeted by 

Cruise 1 and 2 for further exploration.

2.1 CRUISE 1

The Lophelia II Cruise 1 was conducted on the NOAA Ship Nancy Foster from September 2, 

2008 to October 2, 2008, and was the first cruise conducted for this contract. The cruise 

mobilized and embarked from Galveston, Texas, and returned to Gulfport, Mississippi, for the 

second leg. The second leg concluded on 2 October 2008, and demobilized in Pascagoula, 

Mississippi.

Table 2-1 lists sites that were visited during Legs 1 and 2 (Figures 2-1, 2-2).

Table 2-1.

Sites Occupied During Cruise 1

Leg 1 Sites Leg 2 Sites

EW1008, EW Wreck AT47

MC497, Gulfpenn EB478

MC796, Gulfoil EW 1009

GC245, Green Lantern GB201

GB535

GC140

GC201

GC234

GC246

MC539

MC751

MC885

VK906
6

Figure 2-1. Sites of interest–Cruise 1.
7

Figure 2-2. Cruise tracks for Leg 1 and Leg 2.

!.

!.

!.

!. .!

!. !.

!. #0

#0

#0

#0

50

500 250

100

3000

2000

1000

1000

250

2000

2000

2000

1000

2000

1000

2000

2000

2000

500

50

2000

100

2000

1000

1000

2000

2000

500

100

3000

2000

1000

2000

2000

100

2000

GC140

VK826 VK786

MC539 MC588

GC297 GC245

MC796 MC497

EW1008

GB area

MC area

94 30'0" W

94 30'0" W

93 0'0" W

93 0'0" W

91 30'0" W

91 30'0" W

90 0'0" W

90 0'0" W

88 30'0" W

88 30'0" W

87 0'0" W

87 0'0" W

85 30'0" W

85 30'0" W

240'0" N

240'0" N

2530'0" N

2530'0" N

270'0" N

270'0" N

2830'0" N

2830'0" N

300'0" N

300'0" N

3130'0" N

3130'0" N

Cruise 1

LEG

!. 1

#0 2

0 25 50 100

Lophelia II Proposed Cruise Tracks

Nautical Miles 

Cruise 1 - Legs 1 and 2

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

Galveston

Gulfport Pascagoula
8

2.2 CRUISE 2

The Lophelia II Cruise 2 was conducted on the TDI-BI Ship Brooks McCall from 17 June–1 

July, 2009, and was the second cruise conducted for this contract. The cruise mobilized and 

embarked from Freeport, Texas, and demobilized in Gulfport, Mississippi. The primary objective 

was to conduct exploratory surveys of suspected deep-sea coral communities with the WHOI 

AUV Sentry (Figure 2-3).

Figure 2-3. The AUV Sentry being recovered onto the R/V Brooks McCall following a successful dive.

Table 2-2 lists sites that were occupied during Cruise 2. The cruise track and site locations 

are shown in Figure 2-4. Surveys have been completed at targeted features in the following lease 

blocks: GB837, GB535, and GC600.
9

Table 2-2.

Sites Occupied During Cruise 2

Dive Site Lat Lon Depth m Photographs Comments

017 test Self-terminate above bottom

018 test 49 Strobe not synched with camera shallow test West 

Flower Gardens

019 GB837 27.11967 93.89694 865.6 Weight fell off on 3rd line

020 GB837 27.11967 93.89694 865.6 Camera did not work

021 GB535 27.43115 93.59861 585.0 691 Phins (INS) inoperable compass substituted

022 GC600 27.36639 90.56417 1,248.8 Self-terminate above bottom 450m

023 GC600 27.36639 90.56417 1,248.8 163 Camera stopped after 10 min.

024 GC246 27.71133 90.67600 755.0 570 Camera took ~800 pics then quit weight fell at start of 

multibeam

025 MC885 28.08250 89.71850 3800

Photo-survey complete showing gorgonians and small 

Lophelia colonies. Unprogrammed weight drop before 

multibeam started

026 MC657 28.34364 87.93010 ~2,000 5160 Completed dense mosaic of shipwreck site with 

multibeam data. Ship was clearly and completely 

i d

027 MC339 28.63251 88.44917 1,398.5 ~4000

Completed multibeam and photo survey of mound 

slopes. No problems or delays with vehicle. No coral or 

sea fans noted.

028 VK826 29.14200 88.03783 610.0 >5000

Completed multibeam and photo survey of most of knoll 

area. All systems functional to end of dive. Anticipate 

good coverage.
10	

Figure 2-4. Sites visited, Cruise 2. 

!. !.!. !.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!. !.

!.

!.

!.

Gulfport

n

n Freeport

AT47

V

MC885

MC339

MC118 MC1

GC852

GC600

GC246

GB837

GB535

GB138

GB315 GB225

96°0'0"W96°0'0"W

94°30'0"W94°30'0"W

93°0'0"W93°0'0"W

91°30'0"W91°30'0"W

90°0'0"W90°0'0"W

88°30'0"W88°30'0"W

27°0'0"N28°30'0"N30°0'0"N31°30'0"N

0 40 80 120 160 20

Nautical Miles

Lophelia II - Cruise 2

16 - 30 June 2009

TDI-BI RV BROOKS McCALL

Area 224

«
11

2.3 CRUISE 3

Cruise 3 was completed on NOAA Ship Ronald H. Brown19 August–12 September 2009. 

The cruise mobilized in Key West, Florida. One mid-cruise personnel transfer took place on 5 

September. The cruise demobilized in Pensacola, Florida, on 12 September 2009.

This cruise employed the ROV Jason II to explore new sites, make a variety of deployments 

and collections, and conduct a variety of studies on natural deep water coral reefs and deep water 

shipwrecks (Figure 2-5). This was a 25-day cruise with 21 ROV dives and an at-sea personnel 

transfer.

Figure 2-5. Illustration of the Jason II/Medea ROV (WHOI).

Jason II was used to: explore 10 new sites(Table 2-3)for the occurrence of deep water coral 

reefs; make collections of Lophelia and other corals for genetic and physiological studies; make 
12

collections of communities associated with Lophelia and other corals for ecological studies; 

collect quantitative digital imagery for characterization of sites and coral communities; collect 

spatially explicit physical near bottom oceanographic data; deploy cameras and microbial arrays; 

reposition larval traps and current meters; collect push cores; and conduct a series of linked 

archeological and biological investigations on deep water shipwrecks. In addition to launching 

and recovering Jason II, elevators were deployed and recovered twice, four moorings (two larval 

traps and two current meters) were deployed, and Conductivity-Temperature-Depth (CTD) casts 

were conducted (Figure 2-6). 

Table 2-3.

Sites Characterized Listed in Chronological Order

Dive Site Dates Times Depth m Lat-D Long-D Comments

J2-453 Fla Slope-1 8/20-8/21 2130-1600 450 26.184100 -83.292583

J2-454 DC-583 8/22-8/23 1720-0745 2500 28.385493 -86.611932 Aborted but dive number 

unchanged

J2-456 MC-294 8/23-8/24 2140-0745 1360 28.674300 -87.518917

J2-457 AT-047 8/24-8/25 1630-0730 863 27.879200 -88.212217

J2-458 GC-235 25-Aug 1643-2230 530 27.737033 -90.812733 Aborted: Hydraulic Failure

J2-459 GB-299 8/26-8/27 0830-0740 410 27.692450 -91.777100

J2-460 GB-535 8/27-8/28 1636-1216 600 27.422880 -87.402863

J2-461 GC-852 29-Aug 0118-2020 1400 27.124667 -90.835833

J2-462 GC-338 30-Aug 0851-2030 900 27.670000 -89.520320 Aborted: OcTan Failure

J2-463 Aborted: jelly

J2-464 MC-751 8/31-9/1 1324-1206 460 28.189667 -88.202167

J2-465 VK-906 9/1-9/2 2031-2000 400 29.069000 -87.622833

J2-466 VK-826 9/3-9/4 1119-0805 510 29.156933 -87.989333

J2-467 VK-826

J2-468 VK-786 9/5-9/6 2030-0810 612 29.218833 -86.223667 VK Wreck

J2-469 MC-657 9/6-9/7 1714-0800 2256 28.343167 -86.069500 7,000ft Wreck

J2-470 EW1008 9/7-9/8 2025-0830 610 29.142000 -88.037833 EW Wreck

J2-471 GC245 9/8-9/9 1644-1210 627 27.389500 -93.600167 Green Lantern

J2-472 MC497 9/9-9/10 2108-0815 554 28.440333 -88.680000 Gulfpenn

J2-473 VK-906 9/10-9/11 1633-0815 490 29.065500 -87.618333

J2-474 VK-826 11-Sep 1259-2312 510 29.156933 -87.989333
13

Figure 2-6. Lophelia II Cruise 3 track of Ronald H. Brown
15

3 OIL PLATFORM ROV SURVEY

Early in this project the team chose four platforms to survey (Figure 3-1) for live coral 

colonization using the criteria: 1) arrangements can be made with the operators to conduct the 

necessary operations, 2) are located in areas determined to be of special interest to our studies of 

population connectivity among known and potential deep coral communities in the GoM, and 3) 

represent a range of ages in order to generate a range of growth rates for pioneer colonies. We 

found that most platform operators preferred that work on these platforms be conducted using 

their ROV capabilities.

Figure 3-1. Platforms.
16

3.1 PLATFORMS

Following are the four platforms and characteristics, as well as a record of data collection. 

3.1.1 Virgo Fixed Platform

The Virgo field, situated on Viosca Knoll Block 823, offshore of Louisiana, is located in 

1,132 feet of water (345 m) in the GoM. The field began production in 1997 and has produced 

roughly 23,000 barrels of oil since 2001. 

The Virgo Fixed Platform is located in 1,130 feet of water (344 m) on Viosca Knoll Block 

823. Elf Exploration, Inc., operator, has a 64% interest in association with Coastal Oil & Gas 

Corporation (16.2%), Pogo Producing Company (10.8%) and Nippon Oil and Gas Exploration 

USA (9%). 

The Virgo structure is a four leg 12-skirt pile. It has a 200 MMcf/d of gas and 15,000 barrels 

of oil condensate capacity. The platform, consisting of a four-leg jacket, weighs more than 

24,000 tons (21,772 tonnes) and features legs 60–120 inches in diameter. At the time of its 

construction, the Virgo fixed platform was the third largest structure of its size in the GoM and 

the fourth largest in the world.

Collection: corals collected 22 Jul 2009, DVD.

3.1.2 Pompano

• Operator: BP

• Water Depth: 393 m / 1,297 ft

Last Updated: Oct 9, 2009 (view update history)

One of the first deepwater projects in the GoM, Pompano is 

being used as a production hub for area fields. Located in 1,300 

feet (396 m) of water.

Collection: 14 July 2009, DVD.
17

3.1.3 Petronius

The Petronius field, discovered in 1995, is located in Viosca Knoll Block 786, 

approximately 130 miles (208 km) south-east of New Orleans and named after Petronius, the 

Roman writer. It lies in water depths of 1,754ft (535 m). The field was discovered in 1995 and 

contains estimated recoverable reserves of 80–100 million barrels of oil equivalent. Petronius is a 

deepwater compliant tower oil platform. The cost of the project has been put at $500 million. 

Texaco (the operator) owns 50% of the field and the remaining 50% is owned by Marathon.

A compliant piled tower design, it is 609.9 m (2,001 ft) high, 

and was arguably the tallest free-standing structure in the world, 

until surpassed by the Burj Khalifa Tower (Dubai) in 2008, 

although this claim is disputed since only 75 m of the platform are 

above water. The multi-deck topsides are 64 m by 43 m by 18.3 m 

high and hold 21 well slots, and the entire structure weighs around 

43,000 tons. The compliant tower design is more flexible than 

conventional land structures to cope better with sea forces. It can 

deflect (sway) in excess of 2% of height. Most buildings are kept 

to within 0.5% of height in order to have occupants not feel 

uneasy during periods of movement. Around 8,000 m3 (50,000 

barrels) of oil and 2,000,000 m3 (70 million cubic feet) of natural 

gas are extracted daily by the rig.

Collection: N/A

3.1.4 Baldpate

Baldpate is a 1,902 ft tall (579.7 

m) offshore compliant tower oil 

platform near the coast of 

Louisiana. 

Baldpate is located in 1,650ft of 

water, in Garden Banks (GB) block 

260, 120 miles off the Louisiana 

coast. This is the first free-standing 

offshore compliant tower ever, as 

well as one of the tallest freestanding structures in the world. 

The tip of the flare boom extends 

1,902ft above the seafloor.

Collection: 9-27-2008 DVD
18

3.2 POMPANO OCEANEERING ROV SURVEY CONCLUSIONS

Observations and conclusions are presented below (Figure 3-2) for the Pompano platform.

Conclusions - Distinct Biological Assemblages with increasing depth

• 75–250' dominated by Tubastrea coccinea, large predatory reef fishes 

(jacks, barracuda) and sharks.

• 250–400' dominated by black corals and gorgonians, and small yellow 

anemones. Few fishes.

• 400'–800' a mixed assemblage of anemones. Snowy grouper and jacks. 

Small midwater fishes.

• 800–1,000'- Lophelia pertusa and flytrap anemones first observed. 

Barrelfish, jacks, and snowy grouper.

• 1,000–1,200' - Lophelia pertusa increasingly abundant.

• 1,200–1,250' - Lophelia sparse.

• 1,200–1,280' - Flytrap anemones dominate.

• 800–1,280' - Barrelfish dominates fish community.

Figure 3-2. Still images from BP’s Pompano compliant tower platform. ROV survey by Oceaneering, 

Inc.
19

4 SITE SELECTION

Selection of sites for the study of natural and artificial hard bottom habitats that may support 

deep water coral communities is fundamental to the success of this proposed research program. 

Following the successful Alvin (2006) and Jason II (2007) dives associated with the Chemo III 

project, we now have increased our confidence of locating natural hard bottom areas associated 

with fluid-gas expulsion. These sites occur to the deepest parts of the continental slope. The 

manned submersible and ROV dives provided field verification of hard bottom conditions 

predicted from the analysis of seafloor reflectivity or surface amplitude derived from 3D-seismic 

data.

4.1 CURRENT STATUS

For the 3D-seismic analysis, reflection strength (amplitude) and phase were determined by 

using a 10-millisecond window from the sediment-water interface into the shallow subsurface. 

This window translates into an interval approximately 7.6 m (25 ft) thick. Phase is a seismic 

attribute related to amplitude and has a sawtooth appearance resulting from amplitude maxima 

and minima. Phase reversal may help indicate gas contained in near-surface sediments. As 

applied in the study, phase helps define “fast” (usually hard bottom) and “slow” (usually soft, 

gas charge bottom). Early appraisals of surface reflectivity (amplitude) from regional 3Dseismic data sets indicated that the continental slope of the northern GoM was punctuated with 

seafloor bright spots (Figure 4-1). Research conducted since the early 1990s indicates that 

seafloor bright spots can be correlated to localized surface areas of fluid-gas expulsion and hard 

bottom conditions (Figure 4-2).

Figure 4-1. Seafloor reflectivity anomalies as observed with 3D-seismic data.
20

Figure 4-2. Surface reflectivity (correlation to seabed).

4.2 SITE SELECTION CRITERIA

• Depth Range 1: Shelf Edge to 1,000 m

• Depth Range 2: 1,000 m to 2,000 m

• Hard Bottom (Surface Reflectivity Anomaly)

• Rough Bottom (Topographic Highs)

• Variable Bathymetric Configurations

• Special Steep Slope Settings (Concentration of Deep Ocean Currents)
21

Based on these criteria, the sites to study were formulated (Table 4-1) and resulted in new 

prospective sites (Table 4-2). 

Table 4-1.

Sites Visited: Lophelia Project
22

Table 4-2.

New Prospects for Lophelia Sites
23

5 SITE EXPLORATION RESULTS OVERVIEW: MACROBIOLOGY

At this point in the program, after three field efforts, we have collected additional 

information on 25 natural sites, six wrecks and four platforms (Figure 5-1) and have extensive 

imaging on a number of these (Figure 5-2). We had previous information concerning several of 

these sites from previous work in the region; however, the majority of these sites had not been 

imaged before this study. It should also be noted that there were additional sites discovered 

during the Lophelia I project with limited occurrence of corals that we have chosen not to study 

further as part of this project. 

Active Sites

• 25 natural

• 6 wrecks

• 4 rigs

Samples from

• 15 natural

• 5 wrecks

• 1 rig
24

Figure 5-1. Active sites.
25

Site Considerations:

• Depths (ranges)

• Geography

• Key species

— (Pop gen #s)

• Diversity

• Deeper “reefs”

• Special features

• Logistics

Figure 5-2. Site images.

There are three “species” that we have identified for in-depth population level analyses, 

Lophelia pertusa, Callogorgia spp, and Leiopathes spp, and we have discovered numerous 

additional sites where we can continue to make collections for this aspect of the project. 
26

Lophelia pertusa has been confirmed at 14 sites, ranging in depth from 317 to 627m and over 

a wide E-W distribution range (Figure 5-3). There are sufficient colonies present for population 

genetic sampling at seven sites, including sites at the far eastern and western ends of our 

explorations.

Figure 5-3. Lophelia observations.

• Lophelia

• Confirmed at 14 sites

• Pop gen #s at 7

• 317 to 627 m depths

• Great E-W distribution

• (missing middle)

Leiopathes sp. has been confirmed at eight sites over a depth range of 259 to 627m (Figure 5-

4). Like Callogorgia, it is known to occur at shallower sites, not included in the mandate for this 

study. We have identified six sites with sufficient colonies for population genetic sampling, 

including the eastern-most site with Lophelia. Co-occurrence of sufficient numbers of at least 
27

two of these species at seven of our study sites will facilitate efficient use of our 2010 

submersible assets for genetic studies.

Figure 5-4. Leiopathes observations.

Leiopathes

• Confirmed at 8 sites

• Pop gen #s at 6

• 259 to 627 m depths

• Nice E-W distribution

• (missing middle)

Callogorgia spp have been confirmed at 12 sites over a depth range of 259 to 939 m (Figure 

5-5). It is known to occur at shallower sites, not included in the mandate for this study. We have 

identified seven sites with sufficient colonies to sample for population genetic analyses; however 

we have not found Callogorgia spp on either the West Florida Slope, or in the western most 

Garden Banks sites.
28

Figure 5-5. Callogorgia observations.

Callogorgia

• Confirmed at 12 sites

• Pop gen #s at 7

• 259 to 939 m depths

• Mostly mid-Gulf dist.

At least two key species are abundant at many sites. All three are abundant at VK 826 and 

VK862/906 (Table 5-1, Figure 5-6).
29

Table 5-1.

Species Abundance

Loph. Leiop. Callag. Other 

soft

Site Depth

GC140 259 XXX XXX X

VK862 317 X XXX XX X

GB299 355 X XX XXX XX

VK906 380 XXX XXX X D

WFla 425 XX XX XX

MC751 450 XX XXX XX

VK826 457 XXX XX XX D

GC234 500 X XX X

GC235 530 XX

GB535 530 XX X D

GULFPENN 554 XX

GULFOIL 600 XX

MC885 627 X X XXX

Baldpate XX

Pompano XX Leiopathes

Figure 5-6. Species abundance.
30

5.1 SITE OVERVIEW

Although more dialog with BOEM and among investigators will be necessary to decide on 

the dive sites for the 2010 expedition, several sites have characteristics that suggest they will be 

seriously considered. These sites are discussed from east to west, not in order of priority, below.

5.1.1 West Florida Slope

Although the area visited by both the BOEM and USGS teams on the West Florida Slope

(Figure 5-7) is outside of the area of prime interest in this project, there are several reasons that 

another visit to this area is appropriate for this project. First, its geographic location, over 200 

miles to the east and south of our next eastern most site, suggests that it will provide important 

information about connectivity of the key populations we are studying using population genetic 

tools, and both Lophelia and Leiopathes are present in abundance in this area. Second, the 

preliminary results suggest that the associated communities may be intermediate to those in the 

central GoM and the West Atlantic, so this site will provide information on connectivity between 

the GoM and open Atlantic. 

Figure 5-7. West Florida Slope (multibeam data processing courtesy S. Ross lab).
31

The western-most site is important for population genetics and

• Community connectivity

• A fairly extensive area: Good for genetic analyses

• Both Lophelia and Leiopathes abundant: Callogorgia?

• Nice depth range and interesting occurrence patterns:

• Need a closer look at water chemistry, temperature patterns, etc.

5.1.2 DC583

Sites like DC583 on the Florida Escarpment have extensive deep hard ground communities 

and the presence of a new species of mussel here suggests they may be oceanographically 

isolated from better known portions of the Florida Escarpment and also from the deep water sites 

previously visited in Chemo III. This area may continue to provide access to new species of hard 

ground fauna (Figure 5-8).

Figure 5-8. DC583.
32

Deepest study site (2240m)

• Good diversity of soft corals

• Some dense soft coral aggregations

• New species of seep mussel:

• Oceanographically isolated

5.1.3 VK826

VK826 is perhaps the best known Lophelia reef site in the GoM and there is abundant data 

from this site on all scales. Currently two moorings are deployed at this site and other previous 

moorings have provided a wealth of oceanographic data for this site. The site was very well 

mapped by the AUV Sentry. All key species are present at this site (Figure 5-9).

Figure 5-9. VK826.
33

We have an excellent Sentry map with co-located pictures

• Lots of long term data: past present and future

• All three key species present and abundant

• Very good spatially constrained genetic collections

5.1.4 VK862/906

VK862/906 are two sites, separated by about a mile, with very different geology and water 

chemistry, but can be visited during a single dive. Although the 862 sites were previously 

known, the mounds in VK906 were discovered during the Jason II operations in 2009 and the 

abundance of key species, diversity of habitats, and rather unique water chemistry and geology 

make this one of the highest priority sites for continued study (Figure 5-10).

Figure 5-10. VK862/906.
34

Lophelia mounds

• All three key species are present and abundant

• Very good start on spatially-constrained genetic collections

• Nice depth range, includes shallowest natural Lophelia

5.1.5 MC751

MC751 harbors abundant Lophelia and Callogorgia colonies as well as a nice diversity of 

soft corals (Figure 5-11). It also has areas where Lophelia and chemosynthetic tube worms cooccur, making it an ideal site at which to further explore the nutritional and compositional links 

between the communities associated with these two types of foundation fauna. There is a 

sediment trap/larval trap mooring currently at this site.

Figure 5-11. MC751.
35

Have sediment trap mooring down

• Abundant Lophelia and Callogorgia and other soft corals

• Lophelia intermixed with tube worms on cm scale:

• Prime site to detect any input of seep productivity (if it exists)

5.1.6 MC855

Although we did not dive on MC885 during this study, it was visited as part of the Lophelia I 

project. This site (Figure 5-12) hosts the deepest currently-known occurrence of both Lophelia

and Leiopathes in the GoM, as well as Madrepora and abundant Callogorgia. Madrepora is also 

known from MC 118, in the area of the NOAA Hydrate Observatory site, where there may be 

additional oceanographic data available. Depending on success in discovery of other sites in this 

area and depth range, we will consider further work at one or both of these sites.

Figure 5-12. MC855.
36

Deepest abundant Callogorgia site (627m)

• Lophelia and Leiopathes also present;

— Deepest occurrence for both

• Madrepora also present

• Included in Lophelia I and visited by Sentry in 2009

5.1.7 Gulfoil

The Gulfoil wreck was confirmed during the first cruise of this project, but was not visited 

during the Jason II expedition in 2009 (Figure 5-13). It is a priority site for the wreck-related 

biological studies because it will provide replicate transects and push cores for the reef effect 

components and is the deepest site with abundant Lophelia currently known in the GoM. It is 

also a priority for the archeological component.

Figure 5-13. The location of Gulfoil.

• Deepest abundant Lophelia site (600 m)

• Good replicate site for reef effect studies:

• Infauna (cores) and megafauna (transects)
37

5.1.8 GC852: (1,400m)

Nice deep gorgonian and hard coral diversity (Figure 5-14)

• None of the key popgenetic species present

• We have good maps, collection, etc:

• No additional bottom work needed

• Have current meter deployed

• Additional water column work beneficial?

Iridogorgia sp.

Figure 5-14. GC852.
38

5.1.9 Shallower GC sites (140, 234, 235, 338):

A number of sites in the Green Canyon (GC) lease area are worth considering(Figure 5-15), 

and this area may also yield better sites with additional explorations. Although we have a 

current meter deployed at the GC852 site, it is unlikely we will need to conduct additional dives 

to this site as it has been well mapped, well explored, and sufficiently sampled. GC234 and 235 

have been visited either as part of previous studies or during this project or both. Both have 

scattered but sparse Lophelia and abundant Callogorgia and well-established seep communities. 

GC338 is the deepest currently known Callogorgia site and also hosts a diversity of soft corals. 

Of all of these, GC140 is perhaps the most potentially informative if additional work is done here 

for the current project. It is the shallowest site visited with sufficient Callogorgia and 

Leiopathes for genetic sampling and its proximity to Bush Hill (where Lophelia is known to 

occur), suggests that a depth transect covering nearby hard grounds could be informative, 

especially if correlated with water column work.

Figure 5-15. Shallower Green Canyon(GC) sites.
39

Characteristics:

• GC 234: Scattered Lophelia, Abundant Callogorgia

• GC 235: Abundant Callogorgia

• GC 338: Deepest Callogorgia (938m), diversity of soft corals

• GC 140: Shallowest Callogorgia and Leiopathes:

— Both abundant

— Perhaps can go down slope to first Lophelia occurrence?

— Interesting water column work site?

5.1.10 GB299

GB [Garden Banks] 299 is the furthest west site with abundant Callogorgia and Leiopathes.

Lophelia is rare but present (one small colony seen) but there are abundant other soft corals

present (Figure 5-16).

Figure 5-16. Garden Banks (GB) 299.
40

5.1.11 GB535

In the Garden Banks area, GB535 (Figure 5-17) stands out among the sites we have visited. 

It is the furthest west site with abundant Lophelia, and the reason for the apparent absence of 

Callogorgia or Leiopathes is not understood. There are additional areas of the site visible on the 

3D seismics that warrant exploration and additional sampling here for the population genetic 

study of Lophelia suggests this is a high priority site for additional submersible work. Another 

site in this region, GB299 has abundant Leiopathes and Callogorgia, but Lophelia is very rare

(Figure 5-18). In addition to its value for population genetic samples of these soft coral species, 

comparison of water chemistry between these two sites could be quite informative.

Figure 5-17. Garden Banks (GB) 535.

Characteristics:

• Deepest and furthest west abundant Lophelia

• No Callogorgia or Leiopathes: Why?

• More area to explore
41

Figure 5-18. Species abundance.

In summary, we have occupied and sampled sites over a wide depth and geographic range 

and they are spaced appropriately for an efficient and productive field effort in the fall of 2010. 

However, we will also need to seriously consider additional exploration in two depth ranges not 

well covered up to this point. The deepest known occurrence of both Leiopathes and Lophelia in 

the GoM is currently 627m. However, we have done very little exploration at depths between 

627m and 850m, and we will consider additional sites in this range both to document the depth 

range of these species and because we may find additional abundant Madrepora occurrence in 

this range. We have also done relatively little additional exploration for corals at depths below 

1,000m, and we will also consider additional exploration at logistically favorable sites at these 

greater depths to better understand the occurrence, density, and biodiversity of colonial 

cnidarians at these depths.
42

5.2 SITE CHARACTERIZATION OVERVIEW: MAPS, TEMP, PH, OXYGEN

CTD data was collected on the R/V Nancy Foster cruise in September-October 2008 and the 

Ronald H. Brown/Jason II cruise in August–September 2009. The CTD from the Brooks 

McCall/Sentry cruise did not yield any usable, realistic data–it was not working properly. 

Despite the overall success of the Jason II cruise, there were some issues with the agreement 

between the pH and DO probes on the CTD and some of our (and collaborators) previous data. 

We are currently working on a solution to this. Furthermore, no data was collected from the 

CTD on the Jason II cruise at sites West Florida Slope (J2-453) and GB535 (J2-460) due to 

technical issues with the CTD (Figure 5-19).

5.2.1 Multibeam and Physical Oceanography

Multibeam data: 22 sites

• Nancy Foster: 15 sites

— plus W. Florida slope (USGS and S. Ross lab processing))

• SENTRY: 4 sites

• Ronald H. Brown: 5 sites

• Jason II SM2K: VK906 (Roberts’ Reef)

CTD data: 15 total sites

• SeaView: 6 sites

• Jason II: 13 dives, 11 sites

• Ronald H. Brown: 3 casts

• Seward Johnson: 11 casts, 5 sites 

— plus 2 on subsequent cruise
43

Figure 5-19. Temperature values for Lophelia in the GoM.

5.2.2 Aragonite Saturation States

We took water samples to measure the total alkalinity and aragonite saturation state at nine 

sites in 2009. Seven of these sites were undersaturated with aragonite. Despite low saturation 

states, scleractinian corals (including Lophelia pertusa) are present at these sites. Saturation 

states ranged from 0.75 (at GB535) to 1.50 (at VK906). At VK906, the water sample that 

yielded the high saturation state (Ωarag = 1.50) came from Roberts’ Reef, the first cold-water 

coral carbonate mound found in the northern GoM. Subsequent water samples at Roberts’ Reef 

showed that this high saturation state is not ubiquitous over the Reef.

To couple the saturation state data, we measured skeletal density of live and dead Lophelia

pertusa skeletons collected from coral pots at GB535, MC751, VK826, and VK906. Skeletal 

densities ranged from 2.05 g/cc (at MC751) to 2.89 g/cc (at VK906). The density of pure 

aragonite is 2.93 g/cc. One-way ANOVA showed that live skeletons from VK906 were 

significantly different (p<0.05) from live and dead skeletons at MC751 and GB535. 

5.2.3 Live Lophelia Experiments

Lophelia pertusa tolerance and preference experiments

• approximately 30 colonies (~8 polyps/colony) available for experiments

• experienced ≤ 40 percent mortality from transport, initial transfer to aquaria, 

and 

• mechanical failures

The maintenance aquarium is fully installed at the Cordes lab (Figure 5-20). The setup 

includes a 120-gallon glass aquarium, 50-gallon sump (biological and mechanical filtration), and 

a back-up chiller to control temperature during cold-room malfunctions. There are 

approximately 30 live Lophelia colonies (>5 polyps) in the maintenance aquaria. The 

experimental aquaria (6) are installed in a separate cold-room. These are 20 gallon tanks 

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Temperature (°C)

DC583

EW1009

GC140

GB299

GC234GB201GC338

MC294

GC852

MC751aMC751b

VK906aVK906bVK906c

VK826aVK826bVK826cVK826d

VK826e

WFL slope

GB535

AT47
44

equipped with individual filtration and pH controls. The live coral experiments are set to begin 

in March 2010 following genotyping of the live coral samples. We will perform temperature 

tolerance experiments first.

Variable Treatments

High Temperature: 11, 12, 13, 14 0C

Low Temperature: 2, 3, 4, 5 0C

pH: 7.6,
7.8, 8.0, 8.4

Dissolved
Oxygen: 1, 3, 5, 7 mL/L

Electrical Current: 20, 50, 100, 200 mV

Figure 5-20. Garden Banks (GB) 535. Live Lophelia experiments.
45

6 ANIMAL DISTRIBUTIONS AT BASIN SCALE

6.1 LOPHELIA AND ASSOCIATE POPULATION GENETICS

Effective protection of deep reefs requires knowledge of the directions and distances that the 

mobile juvenile stage of corals (larvae) travel. However, larval movement (dispersal) can be 

influenced by various factors, including:

• Physical factors, such as topography and currents, which can promote or 

restrict dispersal

• Biological factors, such as larval duration and behavior. Generally, longer 

time spent by larvae in the water column is thought to translate to higher 

dispersal. 

• Little is known about any of these factors in the deep sea.

It is very difficult to directly measure larval dispersal. Indirect estimates of larval dispersal 

(or reef connectivity) can be obtained through comparisons of genetic profiles. Since dispersal 

homogenizes genetic signatures between reefs, highly connected reefs should be similar and 

isolated reefs will have unique genetic signatures

The 2009 field season was highly successful in terms of sample collection for each of four 

genetics study components. The majority of collections were taken during two at-sea missions: 

the Ronald H. Brown/Jason II cruise with Chuck Fisher and Erik Cordes as chief scientists, 

followed by the USGS R/V Seward Johnson/JSL cruise with Steve Ross as chief scientist. 

Sampling for Lophelia population genetics and reef connectivity was highly successful 

during the 2009 field season, with a total of 176 Lophelia samples from natural deep reef areas 

(Table 6-1, Figure 6-1). At the Viosca Knoll sites, the majority of new samples originated from 

areas of these Knolls that hadn’t been sampled previously. Given this additional sampling, we 

have adequate sampling to examine fine-scale spatial genetic structuring at each of the main sites 

(VK826 and VK862/906). These analyses will allow for more detailed estimates of both 

clonality and fine-scale relatedness among individuals. Several new Lophelia sites were visited 

during the 2009 season, allowing for broader sampling coverage of the GoM. Key new sites 

were the West Florida Slope in the southeastern quadrant of the GoM and GB-535 in the western 

GoM. The addition of numerous Lophelia samples from MC751 makes this the best sampled 

natural site centrally located in the GoM. This site is located near the Gulfoil wreck, which is a 

high sampling priority in the upcoming field season given extensive Lophelia coverage. 

Lophelia samples from the Gulfoil wreck will allow for comparisons to be made between wreck 

sites, such as the Gulfpenn and Ewing Bank wrecks. Four Lophelia samples from each of two oil 

rigs, the Pompano and Virgo rigs, were obtained by TDI-Brooks. These samples are very 

interesting given the proximity of the rigs to our best sampled Viosca Knoll sites. From the 

Lophelia I project, a total of 104 samples have been analyzed from the GoM. With the addition 

of samples from the 2009 field season, we have nearly tripled our genetics sample size of 

Lophelia from the GoM, with 302 samples in total (Table 6-1). Our improved sampling of 

Lophelia throughout the GoM will allow more accurate estimates of gene flow both within the 

basin as well as between the GoM and northwestern Atlantic Ocean. During the upcoming field 

season, additional Lophelia samples from the following natural sites would even sampling: 

GB535; GB299; MC751; and the West Florida slope. Additional Lophelia samples from oil rigs 
46

will be necessary before robust estimates of gene flow between natural and artificial Lophelia

reefs can be made.

Table 6-1.

Collection Summary

Site Lat Long Depth (m) Jason II Cruise Loph.

Jason II

Cruise

JSL 

cruise TDI-BI Lophelia I

VK862 29.10713 88.38459 317 x 0 2 17

GB299 27.68562 92.22344 355 x x 0 0 0

VK906 29.08513 88.38475 380 x xxx 33 22 0

Wfla 26.184105 84.70741 425 x xx 9 21 0

MC751 28.19113 89.80375 450 x xx 12 9 0

VK826 29.16112 88.01688 457 x xxx 32 23 74

GC234 27.74695 91.22447 500 x 0 0 5

GC354 27.60053 91.82379 515 x 0 0 2

GB535 27.42574 93.58819 530 x xx 13 0 0

MC885 28.06465 89.69509 627 x 0 0 0

VK Wreck 612 x 0 0 0

EW wreck 621 x 3 0 0

Gulfpenn 554 xx 11 0 6

GULFOIL 600 xx 0 0 0

Pompano 4

Virgo 4

Total 113 77 8 104

Grand 

Total 302
47

Figure 6-1. Lophelia II sampling: natural reefs.

Progress was made in sampling Lophelia-associated invertebrates for community genetics 

during the 2009 field season. Sixty Eumunida picta squat lobsters were collected from four sites 

in the GoM (Table 6-2). Twenty-four Echinus urchin and fifteen Eunice polycheate samples, 

were collected from the West Florida Slope and Viosca Knoll. Additional samples of each of 

these species from the southern and western GoM would be useful during the 2010 field season

(Figure 6-2).

Table 6-2.

Community Genetics Collection

Total Total

WFL VK826 VK906 MC751 GB535 Gulf W Atlantic

Eumunida picta 10 14 25 10 1 60 80

Echinus tyloides 2 14 8 0 0 24 53

Eunice sp. 5 8 2 0 0 15 55

Total 99 188
48

The scleractinian coral Madrepora oculata is not common in the GoM, but has been 

observed at four sites during several projects. Generally, M. oculata observations in the GoM do 

not overlap with sites at which Lophelia or Lophelia associates were sampled. On the Jason II

cruise, M. oculata samples were collected from AT047 (one sample) and GC852 (two samples). 

During previous projects, an additional six M. oculata samples were collected (three from 

Lophelia I at MC885 and three from Chemo III at MC462 and GC852). DNA sequences and 

microsatellites will be generated from GoM M. oculata samples for comparison with 44 samples 

from the North Atlantic Ocean. During the Jason II cruise, a scleractinian coral thought to be M. 

oculata was collected at GB299. Upon further examination, the initial field identification does 

not appear to be correct. This sample, along with several other solitary corals collected during 

the 2009 field season, await identification by Dr. Stephen Cairns at the Smithsonian Institution. 

Figure 6-2. Mobile fauna associated with Lophelia.

Numerous galatheid crab samples were also collected during the 2009 field season. These 

samples will be discussed in a report by Martha Nizinski. DNA extractions of tissue samples are 

underway and DNA sequences will be generated for phylogenetic and phylogeographic analyses.
49

6.2 ANTIPATHARIAN AND CALLOGORGIA SPP POPULATION GENETICS

6.2.1 Octocoral Collections

Octocorals were collected for genetic analyses from 16 sites during the 2008 and 2009 field 

seasons (Figure 6-3).The 2008 (20 Sep–2 Oct 2008) cruise with the ROV Seaview yielded 14 

specimens representing ca. four species collected from three authigenic carbonate sites. During 

the 2009 cruise (19 Aug–12 Sep 2009) with the ROV Jason II, 118 octocoral specimens 

representing ca. 28 species were collected from 11 authigenic carbonate sites. Five specimens 

were collected from two shipwreck (Green Lantern, Gulfpenn) sites, adding one extra species to 

the total list. During the cruise (15–24 Sep 2009) with the USGS personnel and the HOV JSL, an 

additional 37 specimens were collected from five sites. These collections yielded ca. eight

additional octocoral species. In total, 174 octocoral specimens representing ca. 37 species were 

collecting during the 2008–2009 field season. 

Figure 6-3. Octocoral collections 2008-2009.

We prioritized Callogorgia collections in 2008 and 2009, to obtain sufficient samples for 

population-level genetic analyses. Forty-four percent of our octocoral collections were 

Callogorgia. Seventy-six specimens were collected from 10 sites, with collections ranging from 

1-22 individuals per site. Although this is an adequate number of specimens to begin genetic 

analyses, more individuals (~ 30) are needed per site for appropriate population-level analyses. 

The diversity and abundance of octocorals varied across sites in the GoM, with the 

shipwrecks depauperate of octocorals (Table 6-3). Octocorals, particularly Callogorgia, were 

abundant at MC751. We collected the highest number of specimens at this site, with 22 

Callogorgia specimens out of a total of 35. Callogorgia was also abundant at GB299 and 

VK826, where we collected 15 and 17 specimens, respectively. Callogorgia also dominated the 

octocoral assemblage observed at the shallowest site visited, GC140. However, we were only 
50

able to collect 4 specimens with the ROV Seaview. In contrast to the northern GoM, Callogorgia

was absent from the West Florida Slope, but the octocoral assemblage appeared diverse at this 

site. We collected 22 specimens representing at least 12 species at the West Florida Slope.

Table 6-3.

Octocoral Diversity and Abundance

Site Lat Long Depth 

(m) Callogorgia Seaview Cruise

J II

Cruise

JSL 

Cruise

Other 

Octocorals

Seaview 

Cruise

J II

Cruise

JSL 

Cruise

GC140 27.82024 91.54463 259 xxx 4 0 0 x 7 0 0

VK862 29.10713 88.38459 317 xx 0 0 4 x 0 0 0

GB299 27.68562 92.22344 355 xxx 0 15 0 xx 0 6 0

VK906 29.08513 88.38475 380 x 0 1 0 x 1 1 3

Wfla 26.184105 84.70741 425 xx 0 10 12

MC751 28.19113 89.80375 450 xxx 0 14 8 xx 0 5 8

VK826 29.16112 88.01688 457 xx 0 15 2 x 0 6 0

GC234 27.74695 91.22447 500 xx 1 0 0 x 1 0 0

GC354 27.60053 91.82379 515 x 0 0 0

GC235 27.74278 91.19191 530 xx 0 7 0 x 0 0 0

GB535 27.42574 93.58819 530 x 0 8 0

MC885 28.06465 89.69509 627 xxx 0 0 0 x 0 0 0

AT047 27.88999 89.79425 835 x 0 3 0

GC338 27.64876 90.47948 939 x 0 4 0 x 0 3 0

GC852 27.11175 91.16488 1,410 xx 0 11 0

DC583 28.387143 87.38143 2,440 xx 0 9 0

VK Wreck 612

EW wreck 621

Gulfpenn 554 x 0 1 0

Gulfoil 600

Green 

Lantern 915 x 0 1 0 x 0 3 0

Pompano

Virgo

Total 5 57 14 9 66 23

Grand 

Total 76 98

J II = JASON II
51

6.2.2 Preliminary Phylogenetic Analyses

The 5-foot end of the mitochondrial msh gene was analyzed for 55 specimens to date. DNA 

was extracted following Phenol/ Chloroform/ IAA protocols. PCR was carried out in 25μl 

reactions with: 2.5μl template, 1mM dNTPs, 1μM of each primer (ND4-2599F, Mut-3458R), 

2.5mM MgCl2, 1X BSA, 1X TE, and 1.2 unit EconoTaq polymerase. The following temperature 

profile was employed: an initial denaturing step of 94° C (5 min), followed by 32 cycles of 94° C 

(45 sec), 50° C (45 sec), 72° C (1 min), and then a final elongation step of 72° C (10 min). 

Approximately 850 bp sequences were obtained (Genewiz, Sanger Sequencing). Sequences 

were then edited in BioEdit and aligned using ClustalX. The most similar msh sequences were 

downloaded from GenBank using BLAST and included in the alignment. Bayesian analyses 

(MrBayes v 3.1.2) were performed on four sets of octocoral sequences: 1) sub-order Holaxonia, 

2) sub-orders Calcaxonia-Scleraxonia, 3) family Paramuriceidae, and 4) Callogorgia clade. 

Outgroups for each clade were included in analyses. For each Bayesian analysis, we chose the 

GTR model with gamma-distributed rate variation across sites and a proportion of invariable 

sites. 1X106 generations were employed followed by a burnin of 2,000. Consensus trees were 

constructed in FigTree.

Phylogenetic analyses of 55 specimens yielded 10 calcaxonia taxa followed by eight

holaxonia and one scleraxonia. Higher genetic diversity was apparent among the deep (> 800 m) 

sites and the West Florida Slope. The octocoral assemblage at the West Florida Slope appears to 

differ from the octocoral assemblages at the other sites in the GoM. It is possible that the Loop 

Current serves as a biogeographic barrier between the eastern and northern GoM.

Bayesian analysis of the Paramuriceidae revealed seven species. Paramuricea cf. multispina 

and ?Acanthogorgia spp. were restricted to sites < 600 m (MC751, GB299, VK826, GB535). 

Either morphospecies or cryptic species are evident within the Paramuricea clade; additional 

analyses are warranted (Figure 6-4).
52

Figure 6-4. Bayesian tree of all GoM Paramuriceidae.

Bayesian analysis of the Callogorgia clade indicated two species of Callogorgia. One 

species was restricted to GB299 and the other species was found at sites throughout the GoM. 

Geographically restricted dispersal appears evident in these species. This may be due to habitat 

tolerances, small-scale oceanographic barriers, or reproductive strategies. Both morphological 

and population-level analyses are needed (Figure 6-5).

Figure 6-5. Bayesian tree of Callogorgia spp.
53

6.2.3 Future Work

We will continue to sequence the 5-foot end of the mitochondrial msh gene for the remaining 

specimens collected in 2009 and 2008. In addition, we will sequence the mitochondrial ND2 

gene region. Nuclear molecular markers will be explored and included as needed in phylogenetic

analyses. In addition, population-level analyses of Callogorgia will begin this year. We will 

develop appropriate molecular markers for Callogorgia that can resolve patterns of genetic 

differentiation within and among sites. Finally, (in cooperation with Peter Etnoyer) we will begin 

morphological examination of 2008–2009 octocoral specimens. 

6.3 GENETICS STUDIES OF DEEP CORALS AND ASSOCIATED COMMUNITIES

Corals were collected on three cruises in 2008 and 2009. Limited collections were made on 

the 2008 cruise with the Seaview systems ROV, while the 2009 field season was highly 

successful in terms of sample collection for each of the four genetics study components (Table 6-

4). The majority of collections were taken during two at-sea missions: the TDI-Brooks R/V 

Ronald H. Brown/Jason II cruise with Chuck Fisher and Erik Cordes as chief scientists, followed 

by the USGS R/V Seward Johnson/JSL cruise with Steve Ross as chief scientist. 

6.3.1 Antipatharians

A total of 83 Antipatharians were sampled in 2009, including 73 Leiopathes samples. 

Leiopathes was found from 259m–627m but was less abundant >500m. The Viosca Knoll sites 

yielded the most samples including several color morphs ranging from red, bright red, orange 

and white to salmon. The existence of this wide variety of color morphs might indicate the 

presence of several, as yet undescribed species of Leiopathes in the GoM. Before population 

genetic analysis is conducted, this question must be resolved. We are thus testing recently 

developed mitochondrial DNA sequence markers to aid in distinguishing species. Once the 

species question has been resolved, population genetic studies can proceed. For population 

genetic analysis to be successful, an estimated 30 individuals per population are needed. We 

have near adequate sample sizes of the red and the white color morph from Viosca Knoll for this 

purpose. Our main question is whether Leiopathes colonies from throughout the Gulf represent 

one interbreeding population or if significant population structure is observed. To detect 

population structure, we are developing highly polymorphic microsatellite markers. Preliminary 

results indicate that the Leiopathes genome has a high abundance of microsatellite loci of greater 

lengths than observed in scleractinian corals. Sequence lengths ranged from ca. 71–564 bp 

(basepairs) and 30% of searched sequences had microsatellites. The average length of the 

microsatellite loci was 299 bp. We are thus confident that we will be able to develop adequate 

markers for the population genetic study. During the upcoming field season, additional 

Leiopathes samples from the following natural sites would bring us to the required 30 samples 

per population: GB299 and GC140/234 in biogeographic region III, VK862/906 and VK826 in 

biogeographic region II; and the West Florida slope in biogeographic region I. Biogeographic 

region designation follows Cairns and Opresko (1993). 
54

Table 6-4.

Diversity and Abundance of Octocorals

Site Lat Long Depth Jason II

Cruise Loph. Jason II

Cruise

JSL 

Cruise TDI Lophelia I Callag. Seaview 

Cruise

Jason II

Cruise

JSL 

Cruise

Other 

Octos.

Seaview 

Cruise

Jason 

Cruise

JSL 

Cruise Galatheids JasonII

Cruise

JSL 

Cruise

GC140 27.82024 91.54463 259 xxx 4 0 0 x 7 0 0

VK862 29.10713 88.38459 317 x 0 2 17 xx 0 0 4 x 0 0 0

GB299 27.68562 92.22344 355 x x 0 0 0 xxx 0 15 0 xx 0 6 0

VK906 29.08513 88.38475 380 x xxx 33 22 0 x 0 1 0 x 1 1 3 xxx 3 24

Wfla 26.18411 84.70741 425 x xx 9 21 0 xx 0 10 12 xxx 1 11

MC751 28.19113 89.80375 450 x xx 12 9 0 xxx 0 14 8 xx 0 5 8 xxx 5 16

VK826 29.16112 88.01688 457 x xxx 32 23 74 xx 0 15 2 x 0 6 0 xxx 4 30

GC234 27.74695 91.22447 500 x 0 0 5 xx 1 0 0 x 1 0 0

GC354 27.60053 91.82379 515 x 0 0 2 x 0 0 0

GC235 27.74278 91.19191 530 x xx 0 7 0 x 0 0 0

GB535 27.42574 93.58819 530 x xx 13 0 0 x 0 8 0 x 6

MC885 28.06465 89.69509 627 x 0 0 0 xxx 0 0 0 x 0 0 0

AT047 27.88999 89.79425 835 x x 0 3 0 x 1

GC338 27.64876 90.47948 939 x x 0 4 0 x 0 3 0 x 1

GC852 27.11175 91.16488 1410 x xx 0 11 0 x 3

DC583 28.38714 87.38143 2440 x xx 0 9 0

VK Wreck 612 x 0 0 0

EW wreck 621 x 3 0 0 x 6

Gulfpenn 554 xx 11 0 6 x 0 1 0 x 2

Gulfoil 600 xx 0 0 0

Green Lantern 915 x 0 1 0 x 0 3 0

Pompano 4

Virgo 4

Total 113 77 8 104 5 57 14 9 66 23

Grand Total 302 76 98
55

6.3.2 Lophelia

Sampling for Lophelia population genetics and reef connectivity was highly successful 

during the 2009 field season, with a total of 176 Lophelia samples from natural deep reef areas. 

At the Viosca Knoll sites, the majority of new samples originated from areas of these knolls that 

hadn’t been sampled previously. Given this additional sampling, we have adequate sampling to 

examine fine-scale spatial genetic structuring at each of the main sites (VK826 and VK862/906). 

These analyses will allow for more detailed estimates of both clonality and fine-scale relatedness 

among individuals. Several new Lophelia sites were visited during the 2009 season, allowing for 

broader sampling coverage of the GoM. Key new sites were the West Florida Slope in the 

southeastern quadrant of the GoM and GB535 in the western GoM. The addition of numerous 

Lophelia samples from MC751 makes this the best sampled natural site centrally located in the 

Gulf. This site is located near the Gulfoil wreck, which is a high sampling priority in the 

upcoming field season given extensive Lophelia coverage. Lophelia samples from the Gulfoil

wreck will allow for comparisons to be made between wreck sites, such as the Gulfpenn and 

Ewing Bank wrecks. Four Lophelia samples from each of two oil rigs, the Pompano and Virgo 

rigs, were obtained by TDI-Brooks. These samples are very interesting given the proximity of 

the rigs to our best sampled Viosca Knoll sites. From the Lophelia I project, a total of 104 

samples have been analyzed from the GoM. With the addition of samples from the 2009 field 

season, we have nearly tripled our genetics sample size of Lophelia from the GoM, with 302 

samples in total. Our improved sampling of Lophelia throughout the GoM will allow more 

accurate estimates of gene flow both within the basin as well as between the GoM and 

northwestern Atlantic Ocean. During the upcoming field season, additional Lophelia samples 

from the following natural sites would even sampling: GB535; GB299; MC751; and the West 

Florida slope. Additional Lophelia samples from oil rigs will be necessary before robust 

estimates of gene flow between natural and artificial Lophelia reefs can be made.

6.4 GALATHEID AND OTHER DISTRIBUTION AND PHYLOGENETICS

USGS supports BOEM interests in deep-sea coral research efforts by funding a separate but 

integrated research group to conduct complimentary scientific sampling and work in cooperation 

and collaboration with the TDI Brooks team of Lophelia II investigators. A main component 

within the USGS group is the study of taxonomy, ecology, and phylogenetics of megafaunal 

invertebrates associated with both deep-sea coral and surrounding habitats. Accurate 

identification of species is fundamental and critical to all aspects of the Lophelia II project. 

Through extensive sampling during the 2008 and 2009 field seasons (Steve W. Ross, chief 

scientist), both on and adjacent to the coral habitats as well as off-reef habitats, we continue to 

add to our knowledge of the diversity and species composition of mega-invertebrates that utilize 

these habitats. The species accumulation curve is still ascending and has not reached an 

asymptote. Most collections continue to add species to the list of species that utilize these 

habitats. For example, in 2009, 15 species of galatheoid crabs were sampled on or adjacent to 

corals. Many of these species had not been collected previously. This is due in part to increased 

sampling efforts, use of new sampling methods (push cores, box cores, suction sampling at base 

of corals) and sampling new locations. At least four species new to science have been 

discovered. These include three new species of galatheid crabs and one new species of alpheid 

shrimp. More new species are expected in various phyla as identifications to the lowest 

taxonomic level possible continue. 
56

Sampling methodologies differed between the two sampling years. In 2008, the majority of 

collections were made away from deep coral habitats using various nets and trawls. These 

collections, taken from 45 stations (30 bottom, 13 mid-water, and two surface stations), yielded 

1873 specimens which represent seven phyla and 55 families. To date, 85 percent of individuals 

are identified to family and 60 percent are identified at least to genus. Additionally, 105 DNA 

tissue samples and 351 isotope samples were collected from this material. In 2009, collections 

of organisms on or adjacent to the coral habitat were made using the Johnson Sea Link. These 

collections, taken from 47 stations (21 bottom, 17 mid-water, 9 surface stations), yielded 647 

specimens which represent eight phyla and 45 families. To date, 90 percent of this material is 

identified to family, 85 percent at least to genus. Additionally, 267 DNA tissue samples and 175 

isotope samples were collected from this material.

Overall, species diversity was higher in collections taken on or adjacent to coral habitats, but 

the number of individuals collected per species was lower. In contrast, collections made in offreef habitats were less diverse, but consisted of larger numbers of individuals for each species 

collected. In both sampling years crustaceans were the dominant taxon collected both on and off 

the coral habitat. Crustaceans represented 66 percent and 45 percent of all individuals collected 

in 2008 and 2009, respectively.

An additional 23 samples were collected during the 2009 TDI-Brooks R/V Ronald H. Brown 

cruise (Chuck Fisher and Erik Cordes, chief scientists) for inclusion in this portion of the study. 

These samples consisted of 12 species of galatheoid crabs. Chirostylids (five species) were well 

represented in these collections. Of particular interest are two specimens of Uroptychus and two 

specimens of Gastroptychus. Members of these genera are poorly represented in samples 

previously collected on and adjacent to the coral habitats. Six species of Munidopsis (nine 

specimens) and one species of Munida (three specimens) were represented in the galatheoid 

collections also. Additionally, sea urchins (Echinus tylodes), a lithodid crab (Paralomis 

cubensis) and eunicid polychaetes were included in these collections. These samples were a 

valuable addition to the USGS collections, increasing the diversity of galatheoids sampled during 

the 2009 field season to approximately 20 species. DNA tissue samples were taken from each 

individual collected. 

Material collected continues to be processed and identified to the lowest taxonomic level 

possible. We continue to refine our knowledge of species abundances, geographic and 

bathymetric distributions. It appears that species thought to be rare may be more common than 

once thought based on observed differences between our data, published reports and material 

housed in museum collections. Two new records for the GoM have been identified. 

Additionally, data gleaned from these samples will be used in a variety of taxonomic and 

ecological investigations. Genetic sequences provided by Cheryl Morrison will be used in 

phylogenetic and phylogeographic studies. 

6.4.1 Objectives

• Provide accurate taxonomic identifications of associated megafaunal 

invertebrate assemblages observed on and around deep-sea coral habitats

• Assess levels of endemism at deep coral habitats

• Examine patterns of species diversity and geographic distribution of the megainvertebrate fauna between sites; comparisons with similar habitats in other 

locations
57

• Assess community structure, basic ecology and population dynamics of the 

invertebrate fauna

• Examine phylogenetic and phylogeographic relationships of these species 

assemblages

6.4.2 Taxonomy

Accurate identifications are fundamental and critical to all aspects of this research program. 

The following is a summary of taxonomic progress.

• 2008: 7 Phyla; 55 Families; 1,873 species

— 80% identified to Family; 60% to Genus

— 45 stations: 30 bottom; 13 mid; 2 surface

• 2009: 8 Phyla; 45 Families; 647 species

— 90% identified to Family; 85% to Genus

— 47 stations: 21 bottom; 17 mid; 9 surface

• Species new to science identified

— At least four new decapod crustaceans

— More expected from various phyla

— Endemic species minimal

• Patterns of diversity

• Species accumulation curve still ascending

• Increased sampling, new sampling methods, new sampling locations

6.4.3 Abundance and Distribution

• Large sample sizes provide data necessary to assess relative abundances and 

population dynamics of some species

• Species thought to be rare may actually be more common than once thought

• New records for the GoM

• Refining distributions for some species

• Geographic range

• Bathymetric range

6.4.4 Galatheid phylogeny

• Related groups of species occupy similar depths

• Closest relatives for some in Eastern Pacific
58

• Possible sister species 

• Opportunities to examine rates of speciation

• Regional perspectives

6.4.5 Shrimps

• Relationships among mid-water shrimps

• Relationships between mid-water and benthic shrimps

• Comparisons between chemo and coral habitats

6.4.6 Echinoderms

• Phylogeography of Novodinia antillensis

• Phylogeny of goniasterid starfishes

6.4.7 Future Directions

Taxonomic and ecological investigations continue

• Provide identifications; complete species descriptions

• Gathering abundance/distribution/biodiversity data

• Habitat use; community structure

• Coral versus non-coral habitat megainvertebrate assemblages

• Collaborative work with other aspects of USGS science plan (microbes, 

trophodynamics, residency, community genetics)

• Phylogenetic analyses of additional groups of organisms

• Comparative phylogeography

• Comparisons between SEUS and GoM associated faunal assemblages
59

7 CORAL AND COMMUNITY ECOLOGY

7.1 WITHIN-SITE SCALE CORAL/COMMUNITY DISTRIBUTION

Due to the exploratory component of this study, one first-order goal was as comprehensive a 

description of the species diversity and habitat characteristics present at each site visited as 

possible. Because we used very effective and efficient imagery and physical collection devices 

(Figure 7-1), we have developed an inventory of species present that is considerably more 

comprehensive that would be possible otherwise with the dive time available.

7.1.1 Goals

• Verify and document known or suspected deep-coral sites

• Inventory relative proportions of habitat and fauna

• Rank differences among sites to identify similar/dissimilar sites

• Identify causes of differences

• Assign confidence intervals to findings 

Figure 7-2 through Figure 7-5 present a variety of sites visited during the cruises and 

products produced.

Figure 7-1. The AUV Sentry.
60

Figure 7-2. The RV Brooks McCall/WHOI AUV Sentry cruise.

Figure 7-3. The R/V Brooks McCall/WHOI AUV Sentry cruise, Viosca Knoll.
61

Figure 7-4. The R/V Brooks McCall/WHOI AUV Sentry cruise, 2,700m 

shipwreck.

Figure 7-5. Coral habitat terrain classification.
62

7.2 CORAL AGGREGATION SCALE COMMUNITY ECOLOGY

On the most recent Jason II cruise on Ronald H. Brown, a total of 15 photomosaics were 

obtained at seven different sites. Lophelia pertusa colonies were imaged at GB535, MC751, 

VK906, and VK826. Madrepora oculata was imaged at AT047, and a stand of Callogorgia sp. 

gorgonians and associated community was imaged at GB299. The mosaic over the coral 

community at GC852 represents a time-series study as it was previously imaged in its entirety in 

2007 as part of the Chemo III project. Images were also obtained for one large-scale mosaic of 

the corals on the Gulfpenn and mosaics of the other wreck sites for use by the archaeology group. 

There has been some progress on the assembly of these mosaics, and results from the image 

analysis will be forthcoming. 

There have been a total of 14 coral-pot collections obtained at seven different sites. Five 

collections were of L. pertusa associated communities at five sites (West Florida slope, G535, 

MC751, VK906, VK826), one was from the wreck of the Gulfpenn, and one was of the M. 

oculata associated community from AT047. Thus far, 51 taxa have been identified from these 

collections. The vast majority of these identifications are to higher taxonomic levels, and we are 

in the process of sending off representative specimens to the taxonomic collaborators for further 

identification. The most common groups in the collections are primarily suspension feeders 

including hydroids, polychaetes, sponges, and anemones. Other common groups in the 

community collections include predatory polychaetes, shrimp, amphipods, and galatheid crabs. 

Many of these taxa were subsampled for stable isotope studies. A total of 193 samples of 49 

different taxa (including coral species and other collections) were obtained and are being 

processed in the lab at Penn State for further analysis. 

7.3 MEIOFAUNA AND TROPHODYNAMICS

Our study of trophic interactions in the communities uses a combination of tissue stable C, N, 

and S isotope determinations and the quantitative data for each species present.

7.3.1 Background

• 3D substrate with matrix of interstitial spaces providing habitat, more 

complex than a sediment flat 

• Sheltered cavities within colonies provide pockets for sediments to 

accumulate

• Branching coral supplies substrate for encrusting organisms (Figure 7-6)

• Discrete communities reside within coral relative to adjacent habitats 
63

Figure 7-6. Branching coral substrate.

• Most work has focused on larger macrofauna and megafauna (e.g., Fossa and 

Mortensen 1998; Cordes et al. 2008) 

• Very little is known regarding the smaller, meiofauna (Figure 7-7) associated 

with deep-sea corals (Jensen and Frederiksen 1992)

• Deep-sea corals enhance habitat complexity and promote nematode 

biodiversity 

• Depth-dependent pattern in meiofaunal abundance in deep GoM associated 

with steep gradient in chlorophyll a abundance (food availability)

Ecological Importance of Infauna 

• Alter sediment chemistry

• Breakdown organic matter 

• Transfer nutrients

• Link primary producers to higher consumers
64

Figure 7-7. Meiofauna associated with deep-sea corals.

7.3.2 Progress

• Sample collection sites: 

— GoM and SEUS Atlantic

• Community collections: 

— Push Cores: 33cm2 x 10 cm deep

— Coral/Mussel pots: < 1 mm, > 45 mm fraction

• Habitats:

— Live coral-Lophelia, Madrepora, Callogorgia

— Background sediments

— Five Wrecks, near and far core samples

• Subset of pushcores collected for sediment characterization: organic C/N, 

isotopes, particle size (Figure 7-8, Figure 7-9).
65

• Prioritized Lophelia samples from VK 826 and 906/862, > 300 mm fraction

— best representation in terms of previous work

— greatest number of samples near and far

— plus chemistry cores

Figure 7-8. Pushcores and sub-sampling.

Figure 7-9. Macrofaunal composition compared with substrate.
66

7.3.3 Trophodynamics

• Energy flow around deep-sea coral and hardground environments

• Defining directions of energy flow within and among deep-sea and midwater 

ecosystems

7.3.4 Stable Isotope Review

• Stable isotopes provide information on time-integrated diets of the consumer

• Stable C isotopes estimate possible food sources (you are what you eat)

• Stable N isotopes estimate trophic level (Figure 7-10)

Work to date:

• Deep-sea corals fueled by POM, various zooplankton prey, or mixed diet 

• Benthic food web reliant on phytoplanktonic production 

Figure 7-10. Stable N isotopes and trophic level.
67

7.3.5 Trophodynamics in GOM: Questions and Objectives

• To determine degree to which seep production is used by deep-sea corals and 

identify if this dependence increases with depth

• Broader question-what controls coral growth and development?

• To examine the food-web structure within coral communities, identify trophic 

relationships between individual species (Figure 7-11)

L. pertusa and associated communities show at most very little nutritional dependence upon 

seep production.

Figure 7-11. Lophelia pertusa and vestimentiferans.

7.4 CORAL GROWTH, REPRODUCTION AND LARVAL ECOLOGY

Very little is known about the reproductive ecology of deep sea species in general. The most 

well-studied deep sea corals are the structure-forming scleractinians: all are gonochoristic 

broadcast spawning species with seasonal reproductive cycles. Octocorals have a variety of 

reproductive strategies, with tendency towards brooding in gorgonians. There is no published 

literature on gorgonians or antipatharians from the deep GoM and factors driving reproductive 

cycles in deep sea corals have not yet been determined. Limited information is currently

available on environmental variation in the deep sea.

7.4.1 Objectives

We will provide comprehensive information on the reproductive biology of dominant habitat 

forming corals in the deep GoM and coordinate results with other study components 

L. 

pertusa

vestimentifera

ns
68

• Complete description of the gametogenic cycle of L. pertusa(Figures 7-12and

7-13)

• Describe embryology and larval biology of L. pertusa in the GoM

• Describe reproductive strategy and timing of gametogenesis in other dominant 

anthozoans (Leiopathes spp., Keratoisis spp., Callogorgia a. delta)

• Correlate variation in environmental factors with timing of gametogenesis in 

L. pertusa (and other taxa if data are sufficient) 

• Correlate quantity of food supply to the benthos with reproductive output and 

energy content of L. pertusa in different locations (and other taxa if possible) 

Figure 7-12. Lophelia pertusa reproduction in the GoM.
69

Figure 7-13. Comparison of the gametogenic cycles of L. pertusa from Trondheim Fjord and GoM.

7.4.2 Summary

• In the GoM, L. pertusa has early oocytes in November and was observed 

spawning in early October.

• Reproductive cycles of L. pertusa from the Trondheim Fjord begins in early 

January and terminates with spawning approximately one year later in late 

February.

• Spawning has been observed in L. pertusa from both eastern and western 

Atlantic ecosystems. 

• Embryogenesis took approximately 24 hours and larvae were long-lived in the 

laboratory (> 2 weeks). Timing may vary by region.

71

8 ASSOCIATED STUDIES

8.1 CORAL COMMUNITY MICROBIOLOGY

Microbes are now recognized to be an important part of the total biology of shallow-water 

corals. In the same way that human health is affected by the approximately quadrillion bacteria 

hosted by each person, coral health and biology also involve maintaining a normal microbiota. 

The goal of this study is to characterize the bacterial associates of Lophelia pertusa. The coral 

holobiont (metaorganism) is composed of the coral animal plus its associated microbiota, which 

includes bacteria, archaea, and fungi. The main umbrella questions to be answered in a coral 

microbial ecology study such as this are: (1) what microbes are present in the coral-associated 

community and (2) what functional or biogeochemical roles are the microbes involved in, as 

both related to the complex interactions between the symbionts and their host. The objectives of 

this study, under those umbrella questions, are as follows:

• identify and characterize the microbial communities associated with Lophelia

at multiple sites in the GoM

• study temporal changes in Lophelia-associated microbial communities 

(Viosca Knoll sites);

• determine if Lophelia-associated mobile fauna are acting as vectors (not 

necessarily disease vectors, but simply as a mechanism to connect deep reefs); 

and

• identify and characterize the microbial communities associated with other 

deep-sea coral species in conjunction with the population genetics task.

Key achievements to date include the design and construction of several versions of 

specialized sampling containers for the proper collection of deep-sea coral samples for 

microbiology. Important features of these containers are that they have multiple compartments 

so that samples do not contaminate each other, o-ring seals to prevent contamination from the 

water column during assent, and, most critically, they must be insulated to prevent thermal 

shock. Two groups of Lophelia-specific bacterial symbionts have been identified; one group 

includes novel mycoplasmas and the other novel sulfide-oxidizers. Dramatic difference in coralassociated bacterial communities between two geographic sites <50 km apart (Viosca Knoll 906 

versus 826) suggests physiological differences in the corals, which may be evidence of heat 

stress at the shallower site. 

Plans for the final field year of Lophelia II activities include the following:

• attempt to culture the Lophelia-specific bacteria (mycoplasmas and sulfideoxidizers) for further characterization while continuing to culture other 

bacteria on a variety of low-nutrient media;

• compare bacterial communities from Lophelia at multiple sites in the GoM to 

each other and to samples from the southeastern U.S. to fully characterize the 

variability on this side of the Atlantic (and overlay that with coral genetics);
72

• determine if mobile fauna (fish, crabs, snails) are transporting bacteria among

Lophelia reefs;

• look at temporal changes in Lophelia-associated bacteria (can site-differences 

still be detected between VK826 and VK862?); and

• 454 sequencing of the Lophelia metagenome (bacterial functional genes, 

archaea, fungi, viruses).

These plans effectively link this microbiology component to other components of the 

U.S.G.S. study, including fish and invertebrate taxonomy (via vector analysis) and population 

genetics (by comparing patterns of microbial community variability to connectivity patterns of 

the coral host). Future work will be considered that may also complement benthic ecology and 

coral reproduction efforts.

8.2 PALEOECOLOGY OF CORALS

Deep-sea corals can be spectacularly long-lived, which makes them critical contributors 

to our efforts to understand the past.

• Slow grow rates (7–8 μm/year) indicate a high vulnerability to harvesting

(Figure 8-1).

• Reproducibility between solution and laser ablation ICP-MS yields promising 

results for this rapid analytical technique of in situ elements at the micron 

level.

Preliminary results of redox-sensitive elements suggest wide scale sensitivity to low-oxygen 

levels in the GoM.
73

Figure 8-1. Corresponding linear “growth rate” is ~120μm/year. Sample is ~75 years old.

8.3 LANDERS AND OTHER LONG-TERM DEPLOYMENTS

Ships and other vehicles (ROV, HOV) can occupy a study area for only a relatively short 

time. Landers are multidisciplinary, multi-instrument tools for collecting data more relevant to 

deep-sea communities. 

• Provide long-term, high-intensity physical and biological data not otherwise 

available.

• Two Dutch landers deployed at Viosca Knoll 826 (GoM) - October 2008.

— Five-day test deployments 

— One-year deployments, retrieved September 2009 (data being 

analyzed)

• Landers moved to NC coral mound (December 2009).

8.3.1 ALBEX and BOBO Landers

The ALBEX (Figure 8-2) and BOBO (Figure 8-3) bottom landers have the following 

specifications:

• CTD

• Flourometer &turbidity
74

• Programmed sediment traps-12 bottles per sediment trap, sampling roughly at 

monthly intervals. Contents analyzed for: stable isotopes of C & N, organic C 

& N, mass flux, carbonate content, grain size & components, biota captured

• Video & still photos

• ADCP & Doppler current meters

• Acoustic monitor

• Settling plate

Figure 8-2. ALBEX lander.
75

Figure 8-3. BOBO lander.

8.3.2 Stationary Digital Still Camera

Objectives:

• Quantify encounters with mobile fauna

• Observe species interactions (e.g., predation or grazing on corals)

• Record bottom-water temperature time-series (potential for thermal stress to 

Lophelia)

• Potentially observe episodic events (e.g., hurricane, LCR, etc.)

The Nikon 990 with 250-watt sec strobe takes a 2048x1536 pixel image every three hours. A 

Hobo thermistor/logger inside camera housing records temperature every 30 min.VK906 is 

approximately 550m deep (Figure 8-5).
76

Figure 8-4. Digital still camera.
77

8.3.3 Stationary Moorings

The two types of stationary moorings that were employed are referred to by overall height: 

the 102-m mooring (Figure 8-6) and the 9-m mooring (Figure 8-7).

Figure 8-6. 102-m tall mooring with 2 RCM-8 current 

meters.
78

Figure 8-7. 9-m tall mooring with ADCP at top and RCM-8 

below.

8.3.4 Time Series Analysis of Particulate Organic Input & Larvae

Two PARFLUX Mk 78H-21 time series sediment traps (Figure 8-8) on 60-m moorings were 

deployed from the ship to collect two sets of 21 discrete samples for one year and were moved 

into final positions using an ROV. One trap each was deployed at VK826 and MC751

(coral/chemo sites). 

Sediment trap top surface is 5 m above the seabed. The recording thermistor is mounted 

below the trap and a current meter is 15 m above the sediment trap, to record current velocities 

across trap’s upper surface without “shadowing” of particle fluxes.
79

Each preservative (DMSO)-filled 250-ml sample cup will be analyzed for mineralogical, 

geochemical, microbial, and larval content (includes molecular investigations).

Figure 8-8. PARAFLUX sediment traps.

The following deployments were made:

• VK826

— Two benthic landers 

— Mooring 

— Sediment trap

• VK906

— Still camera 

• GC852

— Mooring 

• MC751

— Sediment trap 
80

8.4 EDUCATION AND OUTREACH: SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES, PLANS,

DISCUSSION

8.4.1 Lophelia II Outreach Summary

The project has several strands of outreach:

• NOAA Ocean Explorer Signature Cruises 

— http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/explorations/08Lophelia/welcome.html

— http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/explorations/09Lophelia/welcome.html

• Deep Wrecks and the Past Foundation education efforts

— http://www.pastfoundation.org/DeepWrecks/

• K-12 curriculum/unit on deep-sea coral ecology 

• USGS DISCOVRE Project

— http://fl.biology.usgs.gov/DISCOVRE/

• Video production and Google Ocean 

The Lophelia II project has been featured as a NOAA OER Signature Cruise twice (in June 

2008 and August 2009). Background essays on earlier reconnaissance efforts, coral population 

connectivity, archaeology, and potential impacts from climate change are featured, along with 

mission overviews and summaries. Log entries on the second cruise were chosen to feature the 

multiple aspects of the research including:

• Jason II Operations 

• Deep Water Corals Basics (Cheryl Morrison)

• First-Hand Observation (Santiago Herrera)

• Deep-Water Coral Associations (Tim Shank)

• Managing the Reefs, Rigs, & Wrecks (Bill Shedd)

• Meiofauna associated with Deep-Water Corals (Amanda Demopoulos)

• Careers Onboard a Research Vessel (Lt. Nicole Manning)

• Diversity of Octocorals (Peter Etnoyer)

• Photomosaics – Worth a Thousand Words (Liz Podowski)

• Connecting Corals and Chemistry (Jay Lunden)

• Larval/sediment traps and current meter deployments (Chris German)

• An Eye in the Water – Imaging the Deep Sea (Ian MacDonald)

• Shipwrecks (Sheli Smith)

• 18 videos and over 100 images were also posted
81

The archeology team and the Past Foundation worked with several Ohio schools to 

incorporate archeological research from Lophelia II into high school ROV design classes. 

Participating schools were provided materials on ROV technology and archeological sampling, 

and then followed the research through the NOAA Ocean Explorer website. School teams were 

challenged to develop low-cost ROV mechanical arms as their design project. 

The project team is developing a new Deep-Water Coral Unit. The problem-based unit 

features six lessons on deep-water coral ecology and is designed around a challenge scenario. 

The scenario mimics the real-life challenge of managing and developing oil/gas resources with 

minimal impact on coral ecosystems. The series of lessons (e.g., on Lophelia biology, coral 

skeletons and climate change, deep-water currents and movement of food and larvae, and coral 

community trophic relationships) provide the background necessary for students to address the 

challenge. Potential datasets and related resources needed for each lesson have been identified. A 

summer 2010 teacher workshop featuring the unit and research project has been proposed, with 

classroom testing in the fall 2010. 

A parallel website featuring Lophelia II research is provided through the USGS DISCOVRE 

project. The site features project summaries, cruise logs, blogs, factsheets, and articles, and 

cross-links with the NOAA Ocean Explorer website, and the www.Lophelia.org site. 

A Google Ocean tour of six Lophelia II sites has been created by Peter Etnoyer. The tour 

features a good representation of GoM study sites and is accompanied by text and external links 

where appropriate. Because the sites are incorporated into Google Ocean, the tour is 

automatically available to anyone viewing Google Ocean. 

8.5 VIDEO PRODUCTION

8.5.1 Video Production Summary

A massive amount of video was collected aboard Lophelia II 2009. In total, 1,200 hours of

were collected and archived. The ROV Jason II is equipped with four video cameras, and each

recorded more than 300 hours of compressed video (mpeg format) on DVD media. A total of 24 

hours of broadcast quality “Best of” video was collected on DVCam tape media from the threechip camera on Jason II. Additional broadcast quality footage of ship operations (three hours) 

was recorded to Mini-DV tape format using a Sony three-chip camera shooting standard

definition.

The “Best of” video was edited into two different output products: 1) moderate resolution 

(360 x240) videos in .mov format (240 minutes) showing highlights from all sites, suitable for

public lectures and presentations and 2) broadcast resolution (720 x 480) highlight videos (16 

minutes) from 10 select sites, suitable for broadcast media. The 10 selected sites were: West 

Florida Shelf, DeSoto Canyon, Viosca Knoll 826, Viosca Knoll 906, Mississippi Canyon 751, 

Green Canyon 852, and Garden Banks 535, the Gulfpenn wreck, a 7,000-ft wreck, and the Green 

Lantern wreck. Durations range from 1–3 minutes depending on the site. Videos include title 

cards, rights-free music, and logos from NOAA and BOEM. The broadcast quality highlights are 

ultimately intended for a 20-minute documentary about the Lophelia II project, but the short 

format also helps to accomplish interim tasks, such as public outreach and education. Currently, 

10 videos are uploaded to YouTube with text and metadata approved by project Principal 

Investigators. The clips are popular online. The average Lophelia II video was viewed 4,300 

times since March 2010. Videos from VK826 and VK906 were each viewed more than 6,400 

times.
82

The YouTube format has also proven useful in other ways. For example, clips were

previewed online by Dan Rather's news team for a June 22, 2010, broadcast on HDNet featuring 

Dr. Erik Cordes. The production quality and popularity of the highlight videos also gained an 

invitation for the collection to appear in Google Earth's new Ocean layer. A Google Earth tour 

has been rendered from these highlights, complete with text, metadata, and web links relevant to 

our research (Figure 8-9). (The tour can be downloaded from: http://db.tt/IwvW2d.) The 

Lophelia II tour in Google Earth is a narrative progression (with a beginning, middle, and end) 

that tells the story of Lophelia II using approved text with the best available footage (see Table 

8-1 for text and links). So, in a way, the tour functions as a storyboard for our final 20-minute 

documentary. The final documentary will include new elements, like voice-over narration, 

interviews, and other footage to help explicate our story, but the Google Earth tour provides a

preliminary working structure.

Figure 8-9. Video tour on Google Earth.

Additional venues may become available for the videos in the near future. There is potential

for the highlights to appear in the Smithsonian Hall of the Oceans as part of an “ocean kiosk.”

Another potential venue is the popular NOAA Ocean Explorer Channel at YouTube. These 

venues would require a Federal “stamp of approval” but the result would make Lophelia II video 

widely available for perpetuity, for public viewing and download to computers and smartphones 

around the world.
83

Table 8-1.

Lophelia II Tour in Google Earth

Location Lat Lon Depth RunT Description

West Florida 

Slope

26.20467 -84.7225 459 1:47 Submerged ridges near 500 meters depth on the West Florida 

slope were the first targets for the Lophelia II: Reefs, Rigs, and 

Wrecks 2009 Expedition. Many animals were seen, including the 

deep-sea coral Lophelia pertusa, our flagship species (white with 

zig-zag branches). Fish included a shark, silver dollar, sea robin, 

and an Atlantic roughy. Small Lophelia colonies grew on the 

twig-like skeletal axis of a black coral. Jason II collected 

Lophelia, and a yellow sea fan with a brittle star attached.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aa9yoUZYQp8

DeSoto Canyon 

583

28.38602 -87.3873 2455 1:49 Scientists peer through the lens of Jason II at 2,500 meters (8,200 

ft) depth near DeSoto Canyon. Submarine canyons are steepsided features that cut through the continental slope. At this site, 

an exposed rock bed juts from the abyssal plain, providing 

substrate for bamboo and black corals, a chemosynthetic mussel 

community, and a deep-sea octopus. This was the deepest dive of 

Lophelia II 2009 expedition.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2Q-a-nNoTI

Viosca Knoll

(VK) 826

29.15636 -88.01608 496 1:24 A school of alfonsino fish swims over Viosca Knoll 826 

(VK826), a natural deep reef, and an example of the kind of 

habitat scientists will study aboard the Lophelia II expeditions. 

VK826 refers to a BOEMRE leasing system for oil and gas. 

BOEMRE sponsored researchers aboard Lophelia II will 

compare the biota of natural reefs to biota on artificial reefs, like 

oil rigs and shipwrecks. Ocean chemistry is measured using a 

rosette of Niskin bottles and a Conductivity-Temperature-Depth 

(CTD) deployed over the side of the boat.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6dAS1ScmbA

Gulfpenn Wreck 28.44 -89.32 561 1:05 The USS Gulfpenn was transporting 90,000 barrels of gasoline 

when it was torpedoed by German submarine U-506 on May 13, 

1942. Twenty-five crewmembers survived the attack, but thirteen 

died. The ship now lies at 550 m in the Gulf of Mexico, 

encrusted by an amazing community of Lophelia pertusa coral, 

fish, and invertebrates.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ir6uJfvYwQ

Mississippi 

Canyon (MC) 751

28.19072 -89.79861 455 2:52 The Mississippi River continues below the sea surface in the Gulf 

of Mexico to 4000 m depth as a submarine canyon called the 

Mississippi Canyon. Nutrients from the river support abundant 

deep-sea coral communities. Callogorgia and Lophelia corals 

settle and grow on carbonate outcrops, feeding on suspended 

matter. Brittlestars, squat lobsters, and urchins occur on most 

colonies. Active methane seeps are in the immediate vicinity. 

The “infaunal” community is observed using sediment pushcores.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyMSvhx_r0A

7,000-ft Wreck 28.33 -87.93 2256 1:14 A 7,000-ft wreck is the deepest known shipwreck in the Gulf of 

Mexico. The original name is unknown, but archaeologists 

suspect the wooden-hulled vessel was a two-masted schooner. 

The bow and ships wheel are encrusted with rusticles and other 

signs of life. A date inscribed on the compass recovered from the 

wreck indicates the ship sank after June 1, 1875. The ship's wheel 

is prominent on the wreck.
84

Table 8-1. 

Lophelia II tour in Google Earth (continued)

Location Lat Lon Depth RunT Description

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kYOIBCbeVk

Viosca Knoll 906 29.09839 -88.40345 300 1:15 Viosca Knoll 906 is home to a Leiopathes black 

coral community. The number “906” identifies the 

oil and gas lease block that encompasses area. Black 

corals can be incredibly long lived. Living colonies 

are white, salmon, or orange. Only the skeleton is 

black. The branches are habitat for fishes and 

crustaceans. Barrelfish were one type of commercial 

fish that was present in the area. Geneticists aboard 

Lophelia II will decode the black coral DNA to 

determine whether we see one species or many.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6IqiLHT7nU

Garden Banks 

(GB) 535

27.42292 -93.59727 600 1:30 The westernmost aggregation of Lophelia pertusa

coral in the North Atlantic was discovered in an oil 

and gas lease block called Garden Banks 535 during 

Lophelia II 2009 Expedition. Lophelia colonies 

occurred on large carbonate outcrops near 500 m 

depth. Many squat lobsters and fishes were seen in 

and around the coral colonies, including slimeheads, 

tinselfish, and a chain catshark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85YtHgRAV3I

Green Lantern

Wreck

27.71667 -90.71667 915 1:13 C&C Technologies, Inc. found the Green Lantern

wreck during a deep-tow survey in 1996, and their 

archeologists investigated in 2004. The wreck is an 

unidentified copper-clad sailing vessel that measures 

approximately 20 meters in length. The wreck is 

named for one of the ships lanterns found lying just 

outside the stern. The lantern caught the attention of 

the archeologists. It was embossed with the word 

Estribor, Spanish for “starboard.” Just like modern 

ships, historic vessels ran a green light on the 

starboard side and a red lantern on the port side.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BermqpuVis

Green Canyon 

(GC) 852

3:08 Green Canyon is a submerged ridge at 1410 meters 

(4625 feet) depth in the Gulf of Mexico with high 

diversity of deep-sea corals. The ridge was explored 

by the science party of the Lophelia II 2009 

Expedition in August, 2009 using the Jason II ROV. 

The research was part of an ongoing initiative by 

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation 

and Enforcement (now BOEM) and National 

Oceanic Atmospheric Administration to understand 

deep-sea habitat in the Gulf. The project now 

provides important baseline information to the 

Natural Resource Damage Assessment resulting 

from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Lii6f5cd2M

Attribution: Videos by Aquanautix. Music is by Kevin MacLeod, 

www.incompetech.com. Lophelia II 2009: Reefs, 

Rigs, and Wrecks Expedition was sponsored by the 

Minerals Management Service (later BOEMRE, now 

BOEM) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA). 

Total 15:57 Description
85

9 ARCHAEOLOGY

9.1 INTRODUCTION

The historic shipwreck component of the Lophelia II study is planned around a four-year 

timeline and will detail investigations of six historic shipwrecks. Years one through three of the 

project will be dedicated to fieldwork, historical research, data collection and data analysis. The 

fourth year will involve additional research, data analysis and reporting. 

The shipwreck component is an important continuation of the MMS 2004 Deep Wrecks I 

Study. It will expand our knowledge base of how shipwrecks function as artificial reefs and 

allow scientists to compare findings and test hypotheses put forth in the first study findings. The 

inclusion of wooden hull shipwrecks in this study will provide new information on deepwater 

reef processes because these wrecks represent long-standing areas of hard substrate in a mostly 

barren seafloor environment. These studies and others like them will help researchers 

understand the processes and importance of deepwater shipwrecks as artificial reef 

environments. 

Archaeologically, the documentation, identification, and analysis of additional deepwater 

shipwreck sites will increase our understanding of deepwater wreck site formation processes, 

wreck corrosion rates, and the role of the GoM shipping in both regional and global maritime 

history. The study of these deepwater wrecks will assist BOEM in refining the avoidance criteria 

predictive model developed during the Deep Wrecks I Project by increasing the sample size of 

the studied shipwrecks and including non-steel wreck sites into the equation. Refinement of this 

predictive model will allow government agencies, such as BOEM and other archaeological 

researchers to accurately assess the potential limits of wreck sites, establish adequate avoidance 

areas around them, and develop comprehensive research designs. 

Archaeological objectives:

• To record each vessel through detailed imagery to establish its type, date of 

construction, and positive identification if possible.

• To establish nationality, ownership (past and present), use history, cause of 

loss, mission and cargo at time of loss through fieldwork and historical 

research.

• To determine the extent and condition of the artifact assemblage on each 

vessel and the presence of diagnostic artifacts.

• To determine potential eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places 

through archival research and the analysis of imagery and to prepare a 

National Register nomination form for potentially eligible vessels.

• To assess impacts of biofouling communities to these shipwrecks to determine 

the stability of these sites and rate of deterioration.

9.2 FIELD OPERATIONS-ARCHAEOLOGY

9.2.1 Summary: Season I (2008)

The shipwreck leg of the 2008 Lophelia II field season ran from September 5 to 17, 2008. 

This was the first part of a planned two-part cruise season. Operations were carried out from the 
86

NOAA Research Vessel Nancy Foster using a Saab-SeaEye Falcon DR ROV. The main 

objective of this leg was reconnaissance of eight shipwreck sites to assess their archaeological 

and biological potential for inclusion in the project. The planned sites for the reconnaissance 

include the Ewing Bank Wreck site, the Gulfpenn site, the tentatively-identified Gulfoil site, the 

Green Lantern Wreck site, the tentatively identified Holly Ann Vieser site, the Oval Shape site, 

the Steel Hull site, and the Viosca Knoll Wreck site. Planned objectives at these sites included 

photo mosaics, visual surveys of artifact scatters, detailed imaging of coral colonies, reexamining 

a microbial experiment placed at Gulfpenn in 2004 and setting microbiology experiments at two 

additional wreck sites.

Technical problems with the ROV and research vessel, severe weather (Hurricane Ike), and 

resulting adverse bottom conditions limited bottom time to 13 hours total for wreck site 

investigations and allowed investigations of only four of the eight planned wreck sites. Data was 

collected at three sites: Ewing Bank, Gulfoil, and Gulfpenn. The Ewing Bank Wreck site was 

confirmed to be an historic shipwreck that appears to date to the nineteenth century. More 

Lophelia was discovered growing at the site than on any other wooden wreck currently known in 

the GoM. A brief dive confirmed the identity of Gulfoil and revealed substantial coral colonies 

at the site. Preliminary examinations suggest the Lophelia coverage at Gulfoil may be more 

abundant than the colonies previously documented at Gulfpenn. The dive on Gulfpenn identified 

the stern section of the tanker, reexamined the microbial experiment placed on the site in 2004

and placed a temperature logger on the bow. Overall, only 10 to 15 percent of the cruise’s 

planned objectives were met. 

9.2.2 Summary: Season II (2009)

9.2.1.1 C & C AUV Survey (June 2009)

Shipwreck investigations for the 2009 field season used both AUV and ROV systems. Two 

of the AUV surveys supplemented the planned 2009 field investigations. They were carried out 

by C & C Technologies, Inc. (C & C) as part of internal AUV testing programs. The first survey 

was in May 2009 at the Gulfoil shipwreck site. It was carried out as part of a test program 

comparing the AUV’s dynamically focused and 410-kHz side scan sonar systems. During this 

survey, C-Surveyor IIITM ran eight transects over the GULFOIL at 75-m line spacing to image 

the site and associated debris fields. 

In June 2009, the second survey was carried out over the Ewing Bank Wreck as part of an 

internal testing program for a new AUV underwater photographic system. Launched from the 

support vessel M/V Miss Ginger, C-Surveyor IIITM ran five camera transects covering the site at 

5m lines spacing, collecting 64 images over the wreck site and surrounding area. On completion 

of the survey, the data was returned to the C & C Offices where the images were analyzed and 

mosaics produced. The C-Surveyor IIITM camera survey gave the scientists the first complete 

imagery of the Ewing Bank Wreck. Scientists used the mosaic created from this survey to plan 

the work for the September 2009 ROV investigations.

9.2.1.2 WHOI Sentry AUV Survey (June 2009)

The third AUV survey was scheduled as part of the 2009 field season. It was carried out 

between June 17 and July 1, 2009. The main objective of this survey was the investigation of 

suspected hard ground and potential coral sites, but investigations at the 7,000-ft Wreck site was 

also undertaken. Field investigations utilized the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute’s 
87

(WHOI) Sentry AUV system. The system was deployed from the TDI Brooks vessel R/V 

Brooks McCall. The AUV Sentry conducted the first visual survey of a site known as the 7,000-

ft Wreck on June 28, 2009. Sentry flew a survey grid of 40 lines centered over the wreck site. 

Each line was approximately 200 m long. Lines were spaced at 5-m intervals and flown at a 5-m 

altitude. A total of 5,160 photographic images and multibeam data were collected at and around 

the 7,000-ft Wreck site.

9.2.1.3 WHOI Jason II ROV Survey (September 2009)

The shipwreck leg of the 2009 Lophelia II field operations ran from September 4 to 12, 2009. 

This was the second leg of a two-part cruise season. Operations were carried out from the NOAA 

Research Vessel Ronald H. Brown using WHOI’s Jason II ROV. The main objective of this leg 

was the detailed archaeological and biological investigations of five shipwreck sites. Site 

investigations (detailed below) were carried out at the Viosca Knoll (VK) Wreck site (Figure 9-

1), Ewing Bank (EW) Wreck site, the 7,000-ft Wreck site, the Green Lantern Wreck site, and the 

Gulfpenn Wreck site. During the investigations, Jason II was used to document the sites with 

video and digital still imagery and recover limit material remains for diagnostic purposes.

9.3 METHODOLOGIES

9.3.1 ROV Investigation Methods

9.3.1.1 Reconnaissance Transects

After the ROV was deployed, the first task undertaken was a reconnaissance survey of the 

main wreckage. The reconnaissance allowed the science team to assess the current conditions of 

the wreck site and aided them in determining where to collect samples and place the microbial 

experiments. For the reconnaissance survey, the ROV slowly moved down each side of the hull 

(outboard of the gunwale) to inspect the outer hull (where applicable) and the material on the 

seafloor near, but outside of the hull. Then the ROV moved inboard to view the inner hull and 

contents (at some sites it was necessary to only make one pass along the side). Time was also 

spent thoroughly inspecting the bow and stern areas.

9.3.1.2 Biology Transects

Biology transects documented the sea life near and away from the wreck site. The survey 

consists of two sets of predetermined survey lines consisting of three parallel transects, 50 m 

long, and spaced 10 m apart (line spacing will depend on conditions at each site). One set ran 

over the long axis of the wreck at an altitude that allows good visual documentation of the wreck. 

The second set was run in the same pattern 100 m away from the wreck. 

Core samples were taken near the wreck site and away (100 m) from the wreck. The cores 

were taken in pairs for collection consistency and to expedite this task.

Microbial platforms were placed by the ROV at each site. These are long-term experiments 

to analyze the microbial activity and rate of hull deterioration at each site. 

9.3.1.3 Mosaic Transects

The mosaic transects were comprised of a series of closely spaced parallel ROV lines. They 

were designed to allow Jason II’s downward looking digital still camera to capture overlapping 
88

images of the wreck site. A mosaic of these images was produced to form a single image 

encompassing the entire wreck site.

9.3.1.4 Close-Up Transects

Close-up inspections of biological and archaeological areas of interest followed the photo 

mosaic operation. The close inspections included detailed photography and documentation of 

specific corals or other areas of biological interest (i.e., rusticle formations, etc.), and specific 

areas of archaeological interest (i.e., specific artifacts or areas of hull construction, etc.). The 

archaeologists and biologists conducted these operations in conjunction with each other or split 

the time depending on the varying interests at each site. 

9.3.2 Artifact Recovery

Limited diagnostic artifacts were recovered at each site upon instructions of the principal 

archaeologist and in consultation with the BOEM archaeologist. The materials recovered from 

the wreck sites for identification and dating purposes included copper sheathing, wood, ceramics, 

and shipboard equipment.

9.4 CONSERVATION METHODS

9.4.1 Field Conservation

The recovered artifacts were placed in plastic containers filled with seawater, and kept 

submerged in an environment similar to the one in which they had rested since the wrecking 

event. Some field photos were taken, but, with the movement of the ship, most details were 

blurry. All current photos were taken in the lab. Any of the objects that may have been light 

sensitive, such as the paper in the compass, were kept covered as much as possible to reduce 

damage. Artifacts were protected with foam mattress padding during transport from the ship to 

the University of West Florida Conservation Laboratory. 

9.4.2 Laboratory Conservation

For every artifact, the first step of the conservation process was to photograph and document 

the artifact. The next step was the removal of chlorides from the artifact. An object immersed in 

salt water absorbs salt chlorides from the water. If the chlorides are still in the artifact as it dries, 

serious damage can occur. Chlorides are removed by soaking artifacts in successive tap water 

baths until the chlorides have been lowered to below 100 parts per million. Once the chlorides 

have been removed, the conservation process, which is dictated by artifact type, can proceed.
89

9.5 SHIPWRECK SITES

9.5.1 Viosca Knoll (VK) Wreck (Site 15303)

Figure 9-1. Site map of the Viosca Knoll (VK) Wreck site.
90

9.5.1.1 Overview and History

This wreck, referred to as the Viosca Knoll Wreck (VK Wreck), measures 43 m long and 

approximately 36 m at beam. It is listing to starboard and has more than 2 m of relief. The 

wreck was discovered during a deep-tow survey in 2003 (Church 2003). A detailed AUV survey 

was conducted by C & C in May 2004. C & C conducted an ROV investigation of the site in 

July 2006 as part of an MMS study (Church and Warren 2008). The wreck is a copper-clad 

sailing vessel that appears to date from the nineteenth century. Small colonies of Lophelia are 

growing on several locations on the hull and outlying debris (Church and Warren 2008). This 

wreck is historically significant and potentially eligible for the National Register of Historic 

Places.

9.5.1.2 Previous Investigations

The MMS (later BOEMRE, now BOEM) sponsored investigations at the VK Wreck in July 

2006. The site was visually inspected with a Remotely Operated Vehicle (ROV) under the 

direction of C & C Technologies (C & C) marine archaeologist Robert Church and MMS marine 

archaeologists Jack Irion and David Ball. The findings of the ROV investigation suggested the 

wreck was possibly an early nineteenth-century brig. 

9.5.1.3 Season I Cruise (2008)

No investigations were undertaken at the VK Wreck Site in 2008.

9.5.1.4 Season II Cruise (2009)

Archaeological investigations of the VK Wreck took place on September 5 and 6, 2009. 

Jason II entered the water at 23:07 on September 5 and began the 611-m descent, arriving at the 

wreck site at 01:19. The reconnaissance survey began shortly after arrival on site. Beginning at 

the port bow, the port side of the wreck was imaged as Jason II moved towards the stern. 

Scientists examined the hull structure, view construction attributes, observe coral growths and 

identify potential targets for recovery (Figure 9-2). Sheathing fastener patterns were documented 

and it was noted that the copper sheathing showed evidence of considerable patching and repairs. 

Near the port stern in an area where the copper had deteriorated a 7- to 10-cm thick section of 

outer planking was exposed (Figure 9-3). At the wreck’s stern area, a dense debris zone occurs, 

including fragments of the disarticulated stern, sternpost, and artifacts associated with shipboard 

life. From the debris field, the reconnaissance work continued as Jason II moved up the 

starboard side imaging remnants of rigging and mast hardware. From the starboard 

investigations Jason II moved inboard documenting the wreck's interior before completing the 

reconnaissance survey.

With the reconnaissance completed, scientists used Jason II to mosaic the wreck site. The 

mosaic survey consisted of 19 transect lines spaced 1 m apart and run from the port side to the 

starboard side. For the mosaic transects, Jason II was flown at an altitude of 6 m. Following the 

completion of the mosaic survey, a series of soft sediment core samples were taken from areas 

adjacent to and away from the wreck site and the short and long term microbiological 

experiments were deployed. With these tasks accomplished, scientists next examined selected 

areas of the wreck in detail, including the ship's stove (Figure 9-4) located 77 m away from the 

main wreckage.
91

Figure 9-2. Copper sheathing on the Viosca Knoll (VK) Wreck’s port side hull.

Figure 9-3. Damaged area on the VK Wreck’s port stern area.
92

Before researchers left the wreck site, the short-term biological experiment and select 

artifacts were retrieved. The recovered artifacts included a sample of the copper sheathing from 

the port side and a stoneware ceramic jar from the starboard stern (Figure 9-5). At 11:47 on 

September 6, Jason II completed investigations on the VK Wreck site and returned to the 

surface.

Figure 9-4. An image of the VK Wreck’s ship stove.

Figure 9-5. Jason II recovering a stoneware container from the VK Wreck.
93

9.5.1.5 Analysis

Analysis of the VK Wreck is proceeding. Detailed reviews of the Jason II video and still 

imagery have begun and a site mosaic is being produced. Historical research is in progress on all 

aspects of the wreck. Emphasis is on locating information on the stoneware water filter and 

copper sheathing recovered from the wreck in hopes that it will help to not only date, but 

potentially assist in the identification of the VK Wreck.

9.5.1.6 Conservation

Conservation of the materials recovered from the VK Wreck is on schedule. A brief 

summary of the conservation status of each artifact is provided below.

Artifact: MMS09.15303.C.001 Salt Glazed Stoneware Water Filter

The first step in conserving the water filter (Figure 9-6 and Figure 9-7) was to remove all of 

the sediment that had accumulated within. Half of the sediment was removed and saved as a 

sample for later testing if needed; the other half was screened through a set of three copper 

stacking screens; the largest size was 2 mm, the middle 1 mm, and the smallest 0.5 mm. The 

screened sediment was examined under a microscope, where it was determined that the makeup 

of the sediment consisted of small pebbles of various size, shape, and color. Also contained in 

the mix are small fragments of wood and marine life. The filter is still desalinating in tap water, 

as porous objects absorb more chlorides, and in turn, it takes longer to remove those chlorides. It 

will likely be a few more months before the artifact is ready for conservation.

Figure 9-6. Stoneware water filter recovered from VK Wreck (top view).
94

Figure 9-7. Decoration and writing on stoneware water filter from the VK Wreck.

Artifact: MMS09.15303.M.002 Copper Sheathing

This piece of copper sheathing has just finished the desalination process, and is ready for 

conservation. Like the other pieces of sheathing, it will be mechanically cleaned with a wire 

brush with bristles gentle enough not to scratch the copper.

9.5.2 7,000-ft Wreck (Site 15373)

9.5.2.1 Overview and History

This site (Figure 9-8) was first identified from a 1986 deep-tow survey but was not reported 

as a shipwreck discovery until the data was re-analyzed in 2005 when the Mississippi Canyon 

Lease Area was declared a high probability area for historic shipwrecks. The target was 

described as an “elongated, apparently solid, oval sonar contact 27 m in length and 11 m in 

width.” In October 2006, an AUV survey was conducted over the site with C-Surveyor ITM. The 

survey data imaged what appeared to be a sailing vessel with a bowsprit and an elliptical stern. 

The subbottom profiler image suggests that a large portion of the hull is buried. There is a hard 

acoustic return in the middle of the hull, which could be cargo or ballast. This wreck is 

considered a historic wooden sailing vessel. No positive identification was possible based solely 

on the remote sensing records (Warren 2006).

9.5.2.2 Previous Investigations

No previous ROV investigations have been undertaken at this site. A survey in July 2009 

using WHOI’s Sentry AUV provided the first camera images of this site and confirmed that it 

was a historic shipwreck.
95

9.5.2.3 Season I Cruise (2008)

This site was not visited during the 2008 Field Season.

Figure 9-8. Site map of the 7,000-ft Wreck Site.
96

9.5.2.4 Season II Cruise (2009)

Archaeological investigations of the 7,000-ft Wreck took place on September 6 and 7, 2009. 

Jason II entered the water at 19:56 on September 6, and began the 2,270 m descent, arriving at 

the wreck site at 21:14. As at the VK wreck, the investigations commenced with a 

reconnaissance of the site. Beginning at 21:30 scientists used Jason II to image the beak 

remnants (Figure 9-9), then proceeded aft along the starboard side towards the stern. As Jason II

moved down the vessel’s starboard side, various debris and artifacts were noted including, wood 

and metal fragments, two anchors, and the ship's upside down windlass (Figure 9-10). 

Continuing aft near amidships, the team imaged part of the ship's water tank, main mast 

remnants, decking, and another anchor. Nearing the stern, the ship’s compass was observed near 

a hatchway. Further back of the hatchway, the remains of the ship's patent steering gear rise up 

from the wreckage (Figure 9-11). At the stern, the vessel's rudder was observed entangled with 

steering cables. After imaging the stern, Jason II was flown up the port side towards the bow, 

then down the interior of the vessel, imaging these sections of the wreck site. The research team 

completed the reconnaissance at approximately 22:36 and began the mosaic survey.

The wreck mosaic survey at the 7,000-ft Wreck was comprised of 12 lines at 1-m line 

spacing run at 6 m altitude. The research team finished mosaicing the wreck at 00:19 on 

September 7, 2009. At 00:22 the collection of push core samples, rusticle retrieval, and 

deployment of microbial experiments commenced. These operations were completed by 03:29 

when close up examinations and photography of wreck details began (Figure 9-12). At 09:07 

artifact retrieval began with recovery of the navigational compass (Figure 9-13). Next, the shortterm microbial experiment was retrieved. Finally, a sample of hull sheathing was collected at the 

stern before Jason II ascended to the surface at 10:56 on September 7.

Figure 9-9. The beak remains on the 7,000-ft Wreck.
97

Figure 9-10. The windlass and anchors visible on the 7,000-ft Wreck.

Figure 9-11. The intact steering mechanism on the 7,000-ft Wreck.
98

Figure 9-12. Using the high-resolution digital camera to document the 7,000-ft Wreck.

Figure 9-13. Navigational compass being recovered from the 7,000-ft Wreck.

9.5.2.5 Analysis

Analysis of the 7,000-ft Wreck is ongoing. Detailed reviews of the Jason II video and still 

imagery have begun and a site mosaic is being produced. Historical research is being carried out 

on all aspects of the wreck. Emphasis is on locating information about the navigational compass 
99

recovered from the wreck in hopes that it will help to not only date, but potentially assist in the 

identification of, the 7,000-ft Wreck.

9.5.2.6 Conservation

Conservation of the materials recovered from the 7,000-ft Wreck is on schedule. A brief 

summary of the conservation status of each artifact is provided below.

Artifact: MMS09.15373.CO.001 Compass

The compass (Figure 9-14) is a complex artifact, with moving parts and a composite 

structure. It was also filled with oil, which must be removed before conservation can begin. The 

oil has also made desalination difficult, which means the process will be greatly extended. It will 

be a few more months before conservation on the compass will begin.

Figure 9-14. Navigational compass recovered from the 7,000-ft Wreck (top view).
100

Artifact: MMS09.15373.M.002 Copper Sheathing with Tacks

This piece of copper sheathing (Figure 9-15) is almost finished with the desalination process, 

and will be ready for mechanical cleaning in the next few weeks. Since there is wood still 

attached to the sheathing, the wood will need to be conserved first to prevent deterioration as it 

dries.

Figure 9-15. Copper sheathing sample from the 7,000-ft 

Wreck.

Artifact: MMS09.15373.M.003 Wood Sample with Copper Sheathing

Originally intended as a wood sample (Figure 9-16) from the wreck, this artifact contains no 

wood, and is only sheathing. This artifact is still in the desalination process, and will likely be 

ready for conservation in the next few weeks. This artifact is very fragile, and will have to be 

gently cleaned with a wire brush so as not to scratch or damage the material.

Figure 9-16. Wood and copper sheathing fragments 

from the 7,000-ft Wreck.
101

9.5.3 Ewing Bank (EW) Wreck (Site 15401)

9.5.3.1 Overview and History

The Ewing Bank (EW) Wreck (Figure 9-17) was discovered during a 2006 oil and gas AUV 

survey with the C-Surveyor I TM. The acoustic signature suggested this was an historic shipwreck 

site. The wreck was estimated to be roughly 45 m long and 12 m wide, based on geophysical 

data. Processed multibeam imagery over the wreck showed an oval ship-like feature surrounding 

a central depression. Data indicated the wreck site is resting on a south trending slope with an 

average gradient of l°. Maximum seafloor relief occurs at the south end of the site where the 

remains are approximately 2 to 2.4 m above the ambient seafloor. The wreck appears to be 

leaning to the west at a maximum angle of 7o at the southern end. The multibeam data 

corroborated the findings of the side scan sonar. The outer materials shown in the acoustic 

imagery were thought to represent substantial portions of a wooden hull. The inner materials, 

shown as a hard return on the side scan sonar, and as a depression on the multibeam, were 

considered to be the vessel's cargo or ballast. As with the side scan sonar data, the multibeam 

resolution was not high enough to determine which ends represent the vessel's bow and stern 

(Warren 2006).

9.5.3.2 Previous Investigations

A high-frequency AUV survey, flown over the site in 2007, provided evidence suggesting 

the site was a historic shipwreck. 

9.5.3.3 Season I Cruise (2008)

The R/V Nancy Foster arrived at the site of the EW Wreck at 20:18 on September 6, 2008. 

The ROV was in the water about thirty minutes later at 20:50. A short dive was planned to 

check out the ROV systems and get a first look at the wreck to aid in planning the next day’s 

dives. The ROV was on the seafloor at 21:30. The ROV arrived at the wreck site approximately 

an hour and fifteen minutes later. Forty-five minutes were spent exploring the wreck site during 

this dive. The ROV reached the surface at 23:05, but was not recovered and on the deck of the 

R/V Nancy Foster until nearly 23:50. 

Second day of investigations on the EW Wreck began with the launch of the ROV at 09:30 

on September 7, 2008. The ROV descended to the bottom from 09:30 to 10:11. Once on the 

bottom, the ROV left the cage and nine minutes later was on the wreck site. From 10:20 until 

12:16, the science team conducted a reconnaissance of the wreck site. At 12:16, however, 

problems with the 3-chip camera system forced the suspension of the dive and the ROV 

ascended to the surface for repairs. The ROV was back on the deck of the R/V Nancy Foster at 

13:07. Between 1308 and 1714, the ROV crew retooled the ROV camera system, replacing the 

3-chip camera with the SeaEye low-light camera. During the retooling, the digital still camera 

was damaged and removed from the ROV system. Because of the length of time necessary to 

install the replacement camera, the next dive was without a digital still camera. By 17:55 all 

repairs were completed and the ROV was back on site, from 19:11 to 19:30, the R/V Nancy 

Foster was repositioned to insure that the ROV cage was in position for biological assessment 

and collection. At 19:39, the cage was set down on the seafloor on the east side of the wreck and 

preparations were made to collect biological samples. 
102

Figure 9-17. Site map of the Ewing Bank (EW) Wreck Site.

Coral colonies on the bow were imaged with scale. A ball on a T-handle was used for scale. 

The ROV was equipped with parallel lasers, but it is difficult to scale branching coral with the 

lasers. Then the operation moved to a small coral colony along the aft starboard side of the 

wreck for collection. It was discovered that the ROV could not reach the colony from the current 

location of the ROV cage (the tether was approximately one foot too short). The cage was 
103

moved 20feet closer to the wreck site and the collection attempt proceeded. An attempt was 

made to collect a small sample of the coral, but the entire colony fell to the seafloor upon 

contact. The colony had apparently not been well anchored to the side of the hull (the colony 

was growing along the copper sheathing and was likely attached to a small fastener rather than to 

the copper). The colony fell in a precarious location below the side of the hull. Numerous 

attempts were made to collect a sample of the coral, resulting in a small wood sample being 

collected, before coral collection was suspended and the team turned to sediment core collection.

The ROV also experienced problems collecting the core samples. From 19:50 to 22:20, 

several attempts were made to retrieve the core tubs from the core holsters, but due to a strong 

cross current, the ROV was able to successfully retrieve only one core tub and collect a sample. 

Operations were discontinued at 2220. The ROV was back on the surface at 23:19 and 

successfully transferred onto the deck of the ship by 23:20.

9.5.3.4 Season II Cruise (2009)

The 2009 archaeological investigations of the EW Wreck took place on September 7 and 8, 

2009. Jason II entered the water at 23:56 on September 7 and began the 622-m descent, arriving 

at the wreck site at 00:28 on September 8, 2009. At 00:56 the reconnaissance survey started at 

the stern of the wreck (Figure 9-18) and moved up the starboard side of the wreck towards the 

bow. Along the starboard side, the science team observed construction aspects of the wreck, as 

well as corals, vertebrates, and invertebrates (Figure 9-19). Moving amidships, several sections 

of damaged hull sheathing clearly showed sheathing fastener patterns (Figure 9-20). At the bow 

the team photographed the Lophelia colony on the stem post. The stem post extends 

approximately 2.4 m up from the seafloor and is home to the largest growth of Lophelia on the 

wreck (Figure 9-21). After imaging the bow, the survey was continued aft down the vessel's port 

side. Investigations revealed stratified hull and framing remnants along this side of the ship. 

Just forward of the stern, the team located the remnants of a shelf containing several ceramic 

vessels. At 02:08, Jason II was moved inboard of the stern to document the wrecks interior. By 

02:20, the science team finished the reconnaissance and began the mosaic survey.

Since the EW Wreck had been previously imaged using an AUV mounted camera system, 

only six combined biological and mosaic lines were surveyed over the wreck. These lines were 

flown at roughly 5.5 to 6.5 m altitude. The research team completed the mosaic survey at 03:50. 

Between 03:57 and 06:19 researchers collected nine cores and deployed the long and short-term 

microbial experiments. At 06:29 close up inspection and photography of wreck details was 

started. Because of the limited artifacts scheduled for recovery at this site, the team retrieved 

materials concurrently with the detailed inspections. Between 06:29 and 11:03, the crew took 

detailed images of wreck features and recovered four artifacts for study, including a sample of 

netting, a ballast stone, hull sheathing, and a part of a ceramic container (Figure 9-22). The shortterm microbiological experiment was also recovered during this period. Following the artifact 

recovery, rusticle and additional biological samples were collected before ending survey 

operations and returning to the surface at 12:08.
104

Figure 9-18. The EW Wreck sternpost showing the pintle and gudgeon remnants.

Figure 9-19. The starboard hull of the EW Wreck.
105

Figure 9-20. Damaged sheathing and fastener patterns on the EW Wreck’s starboard 

side.

Figure 9-21. View of the Lophelia colony growing on the EW Wreck’s stem post.
106

Figure 9-22. Jason II recovering an ironstone vessel from the EW Wreck.

9.5.3.5 Analysis

Analysis of the EW Wreck video and imagery is in its early stages and a site mosaic has been 

produced. Historical research on the wreck is in progress. Emphasis is on locating information 

related to the ceramic vessel and sheathing fragment recovered from the wreck in hopes that it 

will help to not only date but also potentially assist in the identification of the EW Wreck.

9.5.3.6 Conservation

Conservation of the materials recovered from the EW Wreck is on schedule. A brief 

summary of the conservation status of each artifact is provided below.

Artifact: MMS09.15401.C.001 Ceramic Vessel

After desalinating, the ceramic (Figure 9-23 and Figure 9-24) was first cleaned with a three 

percent solution of hydrogen peroxide and a soft toothbrush to remove the organic stains on the 

surface. Next, the artifact was cleaned with a five percent solution of oxalic acid to facilitate the 

removal of metallic stains that were on the surface. Once the ceramic was clean of stains, it was 

rinsed thoroughly to ensure any acid residue was removed. After being washed, the ceramic was 

allowed to air dry, and conservation of the artifact was complete. Post-conservation photographs 

and measurements were taken.
107

Figure 9-23. Ironstone vessel from the EW Wreck before conservation.

Figure 9-24. Ironstone vessel from the EW Wreck after conservation.

Artifact: MMS09.15401.M.002 Copper sheathing with tacks, wood, and felt attached

Due to the wood on the sheathing (Figure 9-25), the artifact is still undergoing desalination. 

After desalination, much care will be taken to preserve all of the elements of this artifact, 

especially the felt that is still attached.
108

Figure 9-25. Copper sheathing and fastener sample from the 

EW Wreck.

Artifact: MMS09.15401.I.003 Ballast

This ballast (Figure 9-26) was not sent to the University of West Florida lab to undergo 

conservation, but was sent to the Geology Department at Louisiana State University for analysis 

and sourcing. The ballast stone is currently at the C & C offices in Lafayette, Louisiana,

awaiting further analysis.

Figure 9-26. Ballast stone from the EW Wreck.

Artifact: MMS09.15401.O.004 Net Sample

This artifact (Figure 9-27) was photographed and later inspected under the microscope. It 

was constructed from synthetic-based fibers (i.e. nylon or polypropylene) and is considered 

intrusive to the wreck site. A miscommunication between the field PI and the conservator led to 

the net sample being inadvertently discarded.
109

Figure 9-27. Net sample from the EW Wreck.

9.6 GREEN LANTERN WRECK (SITE 337)

9.6.1 Overview and History

The vessel known as the Green Lantern Wreck (Figure 9-28) is an unidentified shipwreck 

dating to the mid-nineteenth century. The vessel was found during a deep-tow survey by C & C 

Technologies in June 1996 and resurveyed with the C-Surveyor I AUV in August 2004 (Church 

and Samuel 2004). An ROV investigation revealed that the wreck was a copper-clad sailing 

vessel measuring approximately 20 m in length. An area of debris, including chain, cable, and 

small remains, extends out from the bow section. The word estribor, Spanish for “starboard,” is 

embossed on one of the ship’s lanterns, indicating the vessel may be of Spanish or Latin 

American origin (Church 2004 and Horrell 2006). There is considerable biological growth 

associated with the wreck. Because of the vessel's age and state of preservation, it is considered 

historically significant and potentially eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. 

9.6.2 Previous Investigations

9.6.2.1 2004

A 2004 ROV survey was undertaken at this site as part of a BOEMRE oil and gas permit 

requirement to determine if the site represented a historic shipwreck. Fugro-Chance and 

Oceaneering conducted the ROV investigation using a Millennium VI ROV on board Ocean 

Service. C & C Marine Archaeologist Robert A. Church oversaw the investigation. The 

shipwreck site covers a 36.6 m x 11 m area and has approximately 1.5 m of relief. The vessel is 

oriented near north to south, with the bow pointing south-southeast. The ROV investigation 

revealed that the wreck is a sailing vessel measuring approximately 19.8 m in length. The vessel 

is sheathed with a greenish-tented metal, which is either copper or possibly Muntz metal. It is 

not possible to determine sheathing type without laboratory analysis. Large round copper bolts 

were used to fasten the main structural frame components of the vessel and many large copper 

spikes are visible across the wreck site. Smaller square nails with round heads were used to 

fasten the sheathing to the hull of the vessel. 
110

Figure 9-28. Site map of the Green Lantern Wreck site.

9.6.2.2 2007

In 2007 another investigation of the Green Lantern Wreck was undertaken under MMS

guidance. This survey verified the findings of the 2004 investigations and identified several 

components of the wreck, including a second navigation lantern and the ship’s bell. No 

materials were recovered as part of this investigation.
111

9.6.3 Season I Cruise (2008)

The R/V Nancy Foster arrived on the site at 02:22 on September 16, 2008 and the ROV was 

on by 05:02. As a result of poor visibility and strong currents hampering operations, the wreck 

site was not reached until nearly an hour later. At 05:50, the wreck was imaged on the scanning 

sonar. The ROV was slowly maneuvered to the stern facing into the current. The pilot found the 

ROV extremely difficult to control in the current without setting the ROV down on the seafloor. 

Each time the ROV pilot attempted to fly up to the wreck, he lost control of the vehicle in the 

current. At 06:59 the dive was aborted because of unsafe conditions and the decision was made 

to cease operations at the Green Lantern Wreck and move to a different location. By 08:20 the 

ROV was on deck and the R/V Nancy Foster was transiting to the next location. 

9.6.4 Season II Cruise (2009)

Archaeological investigations of the Green Lantern Wreck during the Season II Cruise took 

place on September 8 and 9, 2009. Jason II entered the water at 20:00 on September 8 and began 

the 914 m descent, arriving at the wreck site at 20:48. At 21:00 the reconnaissance survey 

commenced at the stern. The sternpost and rudder remains (Figure 9-29) were imaged before 

documenting remains along the vessels starboard side. Near the starboard stern a concentration 

of debris was observed. Within this debris was a large navigational lantern as well as rigging 

and hull remains (Figure 9-30). Continuing up the wreck's starboard side, the Jason II science 

crew imaged various biological species and ship-related materials (Figure 9-31). At 21:48 Jason

II arrived at the bow and documentation began on the forward hull. A key feature of the bow is 

the extant stem post with intact load level markings (Figure 9-32). By 21:53, imaging of the bow 

was completed and the Jason II crew continued the reconnaissance survey down the port side of 

the wreck. Along the port side, scientists noted a portion of hull ceiling planking, mast and spar 

rigging, and various personal artifacts. Following completion of the portside and centerline 

examinations, the reconnaissance survey was ended at 22:25.

At 22:36, Jason II was positioned at the bow to fly mosaic lines over the Green Lantern

Wreck. The mosaic survey consisted of 14 lines flown at 5-m altitude and spaced 1 m apart. 

Mosaic lines over the wreck were finished at 01:37 on September 9. Following the mosaic 

survey, photo transects, push core collection, and deployment of microbiological experiments 

were undertaken until 04:56. Following the biological transects, at 06: 29 close-up inspection 

and photography of the wreck were undertaken until approximately 10:48. Shortly thereafter, 

the short-term microbiological experiment was retrieved and artifact collection started. Six 

artifacts, the most from any site, were recovered from the Green Lantern Wreck, including an 

eating fork, rigging sheave, ceramic plate, the ship's bell, one of the ship's lanterns (Figure 9-33), 

and a sealed box initially thought to be a lantern cap. Once all the artifacts were secured in 

Jason II’s storage bins, the vehicle moved away from the wreck site and began its ascent to the 

surface at 15:36.
112

Figure 9-29. The sternpost on the Green Lantern Wreck.

Figure 9-30. Debris field off starboard stern of the Green Lantern Wreck.
113

Figure 9-31. Crab, coral, and hull remains on the Green Lantern Wreck.

Figure 9-32. Stem post and bow remains at the Green Lantern Wreck.
114

Figure 9-33. Jason II recovering a navigation lantern from the Green Lantern Wreck.

9.6.4.1 Analysis

Analysis of the Green Lantern Wreck has started. Detailed reviews of the Jason II video and 

still imagery are ongoing and a site mosaic is being produced. Historical research on the wreck 

is in progress. Emphasis is on locating information related to the ceramic vessels, navigational 

lantern, and wooden sheave fragment recovered from the wreck in hopes that it will help to not 

only date, but potentially assist in the identification of the Green Lantern Wreck.

9.6.4.2 Conservation

Conservation of the materials recovered from the Green Lantern Wreck is on schedule. A 

brief summary of the conservation status of each artifact is provided below.

Artifact: MMS09.373.CO.001 Lantern

The lens of the lantern (Figure 9-34) was manufactured as two sections that fit together in the 

lantern side by side. One of the sections, which had fallen out of the lantern during recovery, 

was broken into two pieces. The other half of the lens was still secured in the lantern during 

recovery, but was also broken into two pieces. During conservation, the two pieces of the lens 

still in the lantern were carefully removed, as they were unlikely to stay in the lantern. The 

lenses were gently scrubbed with a soft toothbrush, which removed much of the buildup that had 

accumulated. They were then cleaned with a five percent oxalic acid solution to remove the 

metallic stains, then washed repeatedly to remove any acid residue, and left to air-dry. After the 

lens pieces were completely dry, the broken pieces were reconstructed using Locktite Instamix 

Epoxy. Rubbings of the two halves of the lens were taken to document the patent marks and 

allow photographs to be taken.
115

The glass from the door of the lantern was discovered inside the lantern among the mud and 

various lantern fragments. Around the small rectangle of glass was a copper frame. The glass 

was cleaned with five percent oxalic acid solution to remove the metallic stains from the surface. 

The copper frame was mechanically cleaned with a wire brush. The frame was soaked in a one 

percent solution of benzotriazole (BTA) and water in order to prevent further corrosion. Once 

the BTA was dry, the frame was sprayed with Krylon to seal and protect it.

The lantern itself is being stabilized in a passive treatment of five percent sodium 

sesquicarbonate. The sodium sesquicarbonate will prevent further deterioration of the metal 

frame due to alkaline pH and remove copper chloride ions, until the lantern is ready for 

conservation.

Figure 9-34. Lantern recovered from the Green Lantern Wreck site.

Artifact: MMS09.373.M.002 Metal Fork

The fork (Figure 9-35) was partially cleaned with a wire brush to remove the corrosion and

encrustation. On the back of the fork an engraving can be made out [SIM... GEORGE H. 

ROGERS]. The fork is currently being stabilized in a five percent solution of sodium 

sesquicarbonate until the rest of the encrustation can be removed.
116

Figure 9-35. Fork recovered from the Green Lantern Wreck site.

Artifact: MMS09.373.M.003 Copper Container

The copper container (Figure 9-36 and Figure 9-37) is still undergoing the desalination 

process. Before any conservation treatment was started, x-rays were taken to determine the 

container’s contents. Radiography revealed that the round container is most likely empty of 

original contents and filled with sediments.

Figure 9-36. Copper container from the Green Lantern Wreck site.
117

Figure 9-37. X-Ray of copper container from the Green 

Lantern Wreck site.

Artifact: MMS09.373.W.004 Wood Sheave

The sheave (Figure 9-38) is still undergoing the desalination process because it still contains 

a high percentage of chlorides. Once the chlorides have been removed, the sheave will be 

conserved. 

Figure 9-38. Wooden sheave recovered from the Green Lantern

Wreck site.
118

Artifact: MMS09.373.M.005 Bell

After desalination, the bell (Figure 9-39) was placed in electrolysis in five percent sodium 

carbonate for about a week. After electrolysis, the bell was cleaned with a fiberglass brush to 

help scrub and polish the metal. The bell was then polished with baking soda, and is ready for a 

sealant to be applied to protect the metal.

Figure 9-39. Ship’s bell from the Green Lantern Wreck site.

Artifact: MMS09.373.C.006 Ceramic Plate

After desalination, the ceramic (Figure 9-40 and Figure 9-41) plate was cleaned with a 31

percent hydrochloric acid solution to remove the thick encrustation that had developed on its 

surface. After cleaning, the plate was rinsed in multiple fresh water baths to remove any acid 

residue. The plate was then set out to air dry and then was photographed, completing the 

conservation process. 
119

Figure 9-40. Ceramic plate from the Green Lantern Wreck before 

conservation.

Figure 9-41. Ceramic plate from the Green Lantern Wreck after 

conservation.
120

9.7 TANKER GULFPENN WRECK (SITE 15265)

9.7.1 Overview and History

Gulfpenn was built in 1921 as an 8,862-ton tanker (Figure 9-42). On May 13, 2003, she left 

Port Arthur, Texas, loaded with ninety thousand barrels of fuel oil. At mid-afternoon the same 

day, the tanker was struck in the engine room by a torpedo from U-506. Twenty-five of the crew 

survived the attack but thirteen perished (Berman 1971; and Wiggins 1995).

The vessel was located in 1994 and was investigated in 2004 as part of the Deep Wrecks I 

Study (Church et al. 2007). This site has extensive Lophelia coverage as well as deep reef fish 

and various other invertebrates. As part of the previous MMS study, Droycon Bioconcepts test 

coupons were left at the site to assess deterioration rates (Church et al. 2007). This wreck is 

considered historically significant and a National Register Nomination was prepared for this site 

as part of the Deep Wrecks I Study.

9.7.2 Previous Investigations

The Gulfpenn shipwreck site was investigated in 2004 as part of the Deep Wrecks I Project. 

Investigations at the site were carried out using a Triton XL11 ROV from August 4 to 5 and 

August 11–13, 2004 operated from the M/V HOS Dominator. As part of this project, the main 

hull and the surrounding area were investigated in detail. The examinations found the bow and 

forward sections of the main hull relatively intact, but with extensive deterioration of the 

superstructure. The aft section of the vessel was severely damaged and the stern had detached 

from the main hull. The missing stern section was found approximately 27 meters northwest of 

the bow. Debris fields surround the main hull structure, with the largest extending out nearly 

161 meters northwest of the primary hull remains. The investigation concluded that the damage 

noted on Gulfpenn was consistent with the historic accounts and surmised that following the 

torpedo attack the stern tore away from the main hull. 

The 2004 investigations also determined the site is in a moderate state of preservation. It is 

speculated that the aft section is deteriorating at a higher rate than the rest of the vessel as a result 

of the damaged sustained at the time of wrecking.

9.7.3 Season I Cruise (2008)

Archaeological investigations at Gulfpenn were undertaken on September 8, 2008 from the 

R/V Nancy Foster. At 10:41, the ROV was put in the water to check the trim after the camera 

changes (The macro-camera was added to the ROV to replace the WesTech SDS3030). 

Unfortunately, during the trim check the ROV was pulled under Nancy Foster and the tether 

fouled between the ship’s rudder and port Z-drive. At 11:05, the cage was launched in an effort 

to pull the ROV down and unfoul the tether, which was successful and at 11:10, the tether cable 

was pulled free. The ROV was safely on the deck of Nancy Foster at 12:20. The ROV was back 

in the water at 13:15. Between 13:15 and 13:58, the ROV descended to the Gulfpenn site. After 

a forty-three minute descent, the ROV was on the bottom. Progress across the seafloor was 

slow, because of strong current and poor visibility. At 14:39, the team began ROV 

investigations of the suspected stern section. They observed what appears to be the vessel’s rear 

flagpole, still standing after more than a half century on the seafloor. At 15:00, the ROV was 

moved to the cage for a brief inspection. At 15:05, the ROV headed to the wreck’s main section. 

The ROV maneuvered to inspect the abundant coral colonies on the bow. Significant amounts of 

coral, which had broken off and fallen from the hull above, were observed on the seafloor. From 
121

15:20 to 16:00, the team inspected Gulfpenn’s leeward (port) side where working conditions 

were more favorable. At the forward edge of the aft deckhouse, a large Lophelia colony, once 

attached to the lifeboat davit, was found in pieces scattered across the ship’s hull and a the 

surrounding seafloor. 

Figure 9-42. Site map of the Gulfpenn Wreck site.

Following the port side investigations, the ROV moved to the starboard side to inspect a 

microbial platform placed in 2004, but strong currents hampered ROV operations. Between 

17:57 and 18:03 a temperature logger was placed on the starboard bow. At 18:05, the main LED 
122

light on the ROV malfunctioned and the vehicle was recovered without collecting biological 

samples. 

During the ROV recovery, the tether was fouled in the port Z-drive and severed. The 

damaged tether forced the termination of further investigations on Gulfpenn. 

9.7.4 Season II Cruise (2009)

The 2009 investigation of Gulfpenn took place on September 10, 2009. This investigation 

focused on documenting the Lophelia colonies and biologic activity on the wreck, so 

archaeological investigations were limited. (For a complete description of the 2009 

investigations at Gulfpenn, please refer to the biological section of this report.) The limited 

archaeological investigations at the site focused on the superstructure near the middle of the 

wreck and on the previously place microbiological platform. Jason II was used to image areas of 

the bridge and take pictures of the engine order telegraph that was used to communicate between 

the bridge and the engine room. Near the aft deckhouse, the microbial experiment deployed in 

2004 was relocated. It had fallen over on its side, so the team picked it up with Jason II and 

stood it against one of the structures on the deck. An additional long-term microbiological 

experiment was set on Gulfpenn’s port bow along with a short-term experiment. The short-term 

experiment was unfortunately not recovered at the end of the dive. At 11:37, the investigations 

on Gulfpenn were finished and Jason II returned to the surface. 

9.7.5 Analysis

Gulfpenn was documented during the Deep Wrecks I project, so only limited analysis of the 

site is being conducted to better document the stern section, continue the deterioration rate 

analysis and expand the history of the vessel. 

9.7.6 Conservation

No artifacts were recovered from the Gulfpenn site.

9.8 TANKER GULFOIL WRECK (SITE 430)

9.8.1 Overview and History

Gulfoil was a 5,188-ton tanker built in 1912 (Figure 9-43). On May 16, 1942, she left Port 

Arthur, Texas with a cargo of petroleum headed for New York City. At 10:41 the same night a 

torpedo struck the tanker amidships on the starboard side. Minutes later a second torpedo hit the 

engine room. The ship began listing hard to starboard and went down fast, taking 21 of the crew 

with her (Wiggins 1995; Burch 1942; Browning 1996).
123

Figure 9-43. Site map of the Gulfoil Wreck site.

C & C researched Gulfoil in anticipation of visiting the site during the 2004 Deep Wrecks I 

Study. Before field investigations began, however, the wreck thought to be Gulfoil was 

determined to be a modern wreck and was not included in the study. Another vessel thought to 

be Gulfoil was located during a deep-tow survey conducted after Hurricane Katrina in 2005. The 

vessel has a length of 116 m and beam of 15.5 m. This shipwreck was visually inspected and so 

was not confirmed as Gulfoil. The wreck is located on the western slope of the Mississippi 

Canyon, opposite and 150 m deeper than Gulfpenn, which is located on the eastern slope of the 

Canyon. The wreck site will likely be of great interest biologically as well as historically.
124

9.8.2 Previous Investigations

No ROV investigations were carried out at the suspected Gulfoil site before the 2008 

fieldwork.

9.8.3 Season I Cruise (2008)

Investigations were carried out on the suspected Gulfoil site on September 15, 2005, from the 

R/V Nancy Foster. The ROV was in the water at 08:25 and nearing bottom at 09:10, when one 

of Nancy Foster’s generators broke down, sending the vessel adrift. At 09:50, the vessel 

regained her propulsion, but the ship had drifted off the wreck site. Nancy Foster was back on 

location by 10:38, and at 10:55 the ROV was on the bottom. Strong subsurface currents and low 

visibility, a result of Hurricane Ike, hampered operations and resulted in the loss of the microbial 

experiment intend to be placed on the wreck site. The ROV reached the wreck at 11:23 and 

began the reconnaissance survey. From 11:23 to 12:30, the ROV, although hampered by 

currents and low visibility, successfully surveyed a portion of the starboard side of the wreck 

site. The team found the wreck covered with Lophelia colonies and was able to positively 

identify the wreck as Gulfoil from the name on the bow. Although time constraints and the site 

conditions did not allow a detailed, systematic survey, approximately 150 feet of the starboard 

side of the hull was inspected (deck level from the bow to just past the superstructure) before the 

ROV was recovered between 13:40 and 14:40.

9.8.4 Season II Cruise (2009)

No investigations were carried out at the site during the 2009 field season cruise.

9.8.5 Analysis

Analysis of Gulfoil is underway using the limited imagery collected during the 2008 field 

season and a recent AUV testing survey over the site. The analysis is focusing on the orientation 

and distribution of the wreck and artifact scatters to ascertain where the wreck falls within the 

site avoidance predictive model developed during the Deep Wrecks I Project.

9.8.6 Conservation

No artifacts were recovered from the Gulfoil site.

9.9 CONCLUSIONS

Despite a tenuous beginning plagued by weather problems and equipment failures, the 

established 2008 and 2009 milestones for the Lophelia II Shipwreck Component have been 

achieved. Six shipwrecks were investigated for the first time or revisited during the 2008 and 

2009 field seasons. These investigations have led to the positive identification of one vessel 

(Gulfoil) and have garnered new intriguing information on the four wooden wrecks that are part 

of this study. Preliminary assessments from the field data suggest the wooden wrecks are of 

later dates than originally expected both in construction and sinking. Additionally, the artifacts 

recovered from the wooden wreck sites have the potential to help identify and further refine the 

chronology and understanding of these wrecks. Whether the preliminary assessments hold up to 

further scrutiny remains to be seen as continuing research begins to tell each wreck’s story.
125

REFERENCES

Browning, R. M., Jr. 1996. U.S. merchant vessel war casualties of World War II. Annapolis, 

MD: Naval Institute Press.

Burch, H.A. 1942. Summary of Statements by Survivors of the SS Gulf Penn, U.S. Tanker.US. 

Dept. of the Navy, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations. May 22. NOAA Technical

Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-535. 12 pp.

Cairns S.D., D.M. Opresko, T.S. Hopkins and W.W. Schroeder. 1993. New records of deepwater Cnidaria (Scleractinia & Antipatharia) from the Gulf of Mexico. Northeast Gulf 

Sci.13:1-11.

Church, R.A. 2003. Archaeological assessment for a proposed 6-inch gas and 6-inch oil pipeline 

routes from Block 962 to Block 786, Viosca Knoll Area. Prepared by C & C Technologies, 

Inc. for Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. on behalf of Mariner Energy. Report 

submitted to the U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico 

OCS Region, New Orleans, LA. 

Church, R. 2004. Shipwreck and sonar contact ROV investigation, Blocks 245 and 329,Green 

Canyon Area. Prepared by C & C Technologies, Inc. for GulfTerra Energy Partners, L.P. 

Report submitted to the U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of 

Mexico OCS Region, New Orleans, LA.

Church, R. and L. Samuel. 2004. Archaeological, engineering and hazard study for a proposed 

16-inch oil export pipeline from Block 680, Green Canyon Area to Block 332,Ship Shoal 

Area. Prepared by C & C Technologies, Inc. for GulfTerra Energy Partners, L.P. Report 

submitted to the U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico 

OCS Region, New Orleans, LA.

Church, R.A. and D.J. Warren. 2008. Viosca Knoll wreck: Discovery and investigation of an 

early nineteenth-century sailing ship in 2,000 feet of water. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, 

Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, New Orleans, LA. OCS Study 

MMS 2008-018.

Church, R., D. Warren, R. Cullimore, L. Johnston, W. Schroeder, W. Patterson, T. Shirley. M.

Kilgour, N. Morris, and J. Moore. 2007. Archaeological and biological analysis of World 

War II shipwrecks in the Gulf of Mexico: Artificial reef effect in deep water. U.S. Dept. of 

the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, New Orleans, LA. 

OCS Study MMS 2007-015. 387 pp.

Cordes E.E, M. McGinley, E.L. Podowski, E.L. Becker, S.L.-Pilon, S. Viada, and C.R. Fisher. 

2008. Coral communities of the deep Gulf of Mexico. Deep-Sea Research I. 

10.1016/j.dsr.2008.03.005

Fossa, J.H.,P.B. Mortensen, and D.M. Furevik.2002. The deep-water coral Lophelia pertusa in 

Norwegian waters: Distribution and fishery impacts. Hydrobiologia 471:1-12.
126

Horrell, C.E. 2006. 500 fathoms of water: The archaeological remains of a mid-late nineteenth 

century sailing vessel in the Gulf of Mexico. Proceedings of the Society for Historical 

Archaeology Conference, Sacramento, CA (January).

Jensen A. and R. Frederiksen. 1992. The fauna associated with the bank-forming deepwater coral 

Lophelia pertusa (Scleractinia) on the Faroe shelf. Sarsia 77:53-69.

Warren, D. 2006. Archaeological assessment report, “Shallow Coulomb” Prospect, Block 701 

and vicinity, Mississippi Canyon Area. Prepared by C & C Technologies, Inc. for Shell 

Exploration and Production. Report submitted to the U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Minerals 

Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, New Orleans, LA.

Wiggins, M. 1995. Torpedoes in the Gulf, Galveston and the U-boats, 1942-1943.College 

Station, TX.: Texas A&M Press.
The Department of the Interior Mission

As the Nation’s principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior 

has responsibility for most of our nationally owned public lands and natural 

resources. This includes fostering the sound use of our land and water 

resources, protecting our fish, wildlife and biological diversity; preserving the 

environmental and cultural values of our national parks and historical places; and 

providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The Department 

assesses our energy and mineral resources and works to ensure that their 

development is in the best interests of all our people by encouraging stewardship 

and citizen participation in their care. The Department also has a major 

responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who 

live in island communities.

The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) works to manage the 

exploration and development of the nation's offshore resources in a way that 

appropriately balances economic development, energy independence, and 

environmental protection through oil and gas leases, renewable energy 

development and environmental reviews and studies.