Ecological Condition of Coastal Ocean and Estuarine 

Waters of the U.S. South Atlantic Bight: 2000 – 2004

NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 114

EPA 600/R-10/046 | May 2010 | www.epa.gov/ord

NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 114

EPA/600/R-10/046

Ecological Condition of Coastal Ocean and Estuarine 

Waters of the U.S. South Atlantic Bight: 2000 – 2004

May 2010

Office of Research and Development 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Washington, DC 20460

U.S. Department of Commerce

National Oceanic and

 Atmospheric Administration

National Ocean Service

Silver Spring, MD 20910

Ecological Condition of Coastal Ocean and Estuarine 

Waters of the U.S. South Atlantic Bight: 2000 - 2004

May 2010

Prepared by

Cynthia Cooksey1, James Harvey2, Linda Harwell2, Jeffrey Hyland1, and 

J. Kevin Summers2

 

Author Affiliations

1 Center for Coastal Environmental Health and Biomolecular Research

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

219 Fort Johnson Road

Charleston, South Carolina 29412-9110

2 U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development

National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory

Gulf Ecology Division

1 Sabine Island Drive, Gulf Breeze, FL 32561
ii

Preface

This document provides an assessment of ecological condition in coastal ocean and estuarine 

waters of the U.S. South Atlantic Bight from Cape Henry, Virginia, through the southern end of 

the Indian River Lagoon along the east coast of Florida. Data are from sampling conducted in

open shelf waters during March-April 2004 and in estuaries each year from 2000 to 2004. The 

project was a large collaborative effort by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and Southeast U.S. Coastal States 

(Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia). It also represents one of a series of 

assessments conducted under EPA‘s National Coastal Assessment (NCA) program. The NCA is 

the coastal component of the nationwide Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program 

(EMAP). The NCA program is administered through the EPA and implemented through 

partnerships with a variety of federal and state agencies, universities, and the private sector. The 

2004 South Atlantic Bight (SAB) coastal ocean shelf assessment involved the participation and 

collaboration of NOAA, EPA, and the State of Florida/Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation 

Commission (FFWCC).

The appropriate citation for this report is:

Cooksey, C., J. Harvey, L. Harwell, J. Hyland, J.K. Summers. 2010. Ecological Condition of 

Coastal Ocean and Estuarine Waters of the U.S. South Atlantic Bight: 2000 – 2004. NOAA 

Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 114, NOAA National Ocean Service, Charleston, SC 

29412-9110; and EPA/600/R-10/046, U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development, National 

Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Gulf Ecology Division, Gulf Breeze FL, 

32561. 88 pp.

Disclaimer

This document has been subjected to review by the National Ocean Service of NOAA and the 

National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory of Environmental Protection 

Agency and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents reflect the 

official views of these agencies, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products 

constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
iii

Table of Contents

Preface............................................................................................................................................. ii

The appropriate citation for this report is: ...................................................................................... ii

Disclaimer....................................................................................................................................... ii

Table of Contents...........................................................................................................................iii

List of Figures................................................................................................................................. v

List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ vii

List of Appendix Tables............................................................................................................... viii

Executive Summary....................................................................................................................... ix

1.0 Introduction............................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Coastal Ocean .......................................................................................................... 2

1.2 Estuaries.................................................................................................................. 3

2.0 Methods..................................................................................................................................... 5

2.1 Sampling Design and Field Collections....................................................................... 5

2.1.1 Coastal Ocean .................................................................................................... 5

2.1.2 Estuaries............................................................................................................ 8

2.2 Water Quality Analysis ........................................................................................... 11

2.3 Sediment TOC and Grain Size Analysis.................................................................... 11

2.4 Contaminant Analysis ............................................................................................. 11

2.5 Toxicity Analysis.................................................................................................... 12

2.6 Benthic Community Analysis................................................................................... 14

2.7 Data Analysis......................................................................................................... 14

3.0 Results and Discussion ........................................................................................................... 20

3.1 Depth and Water Quality ......................................................................................... 20

3.1.1 Depth and General Water Characteristics: temperature, salinity, water-column 

stratification, DO, pH, water clarity ............................................................................ 20

3.1.2 Nutrients and Chlorophyll ................................................................................. 28

3.2 Sediment Quality .................................................................................................... 35

3.2.1 Grain Size and TOC.......................................................................................... 35

3.2.2 Chemical Contaminants in Sediments................................................................. 40

3.2.3 Sediment Toxicity (Estuaries Only)........................................................................ 50

3.3 Chemical Contaminants in Fish Tissues .................................................................... 51

3.4 Status of Benthic Communities ................................................................................ 55
iv

3.4.1 Taxonomic Composition ................................................................................... 55

3.4.2 Abundance and Dominant Taxa ......................................................................... 59

3.4.3 Diversity.......................................................................................................... 68

3.4.4 Non-Indigenous Species.................................................................................... 71

3.5 Potential Linkage of Biological Condition to Stressor Impacts..................................... 71

4.0 Acknowledgments................................................................................................................... 74

5.0 Literature Cited ....................................................................................................................... 74
v

List of Figures

Figure 2.1.1 – Map of South Atlantic Bight study area and station locations. Green dots indicate 

National Coastal Assessment estuarine stations (sampled 2000 – 2004; n = 747), and blue dots 

indicate coastal ocean stations (sampled 2004; n = 50).................................................................. 7

Figure 3.1.1 Percent area (solid lines) and 95% Confidence Intervals (dotted lines) of SAB 

coastal ocean depth and selected water-quality characteristics. ................................................... 22

Figure 3.1.2. Percent area (solid lines) and 95% Confidence Intervals (dotted lines) of SAB 

estuarine depth and selected bottom water-quality characteristics. .............................................. 24

Figure 3.1.3. Percent area of SAB estuarine waters within specified ranges of water clarity. ..... 25

Figure 3.1.4. Percent area of SAB coastal ocean and estuarine near-bottom waters within 

specified ranges of DO concentrations. ........................................................................................ 26

Figure 3.1.5. Spatial distribution of bottom dissolved oxygen levels in SAB coastal ocean and 

estuarine waters............................................................................................................................. 27

Figure 3.1.6. Percent area (solid lines) and 95% Confidence Intervals (dotted lines) of SAB 

coastal ocean waters for nurtients, chlorophyll a and TSS concentrations................................... 30

Figure 3.1.7. Percent area (solid lines) and 95% Confidence Intervals (dotted lines) of SAB 

estuarine surface water nutrients, chlorophyll a and TSS concentrations. ................................... 31

Figure 3.1.8. Percent area of SAB within specified ranges of DIN and DIP for near-surface 

estuarine waters only..................................................................................................................... 32

Figure 3.1.9. Percent area of SAB within specified ranges of chlorophyll a for near-surface 

estuarine waters only..................................................................................................................... 33

Figure 3.1.10. Spatial distribution of surface chlorophyll a levels in SAB coastal ocean and 

estuarine waters............................................................................................................................. 34

Figure 3.2.1. Percent area of SAB coastal ocean (blue line) and estuarine (green line) vs. percent 

silt-clay of sediment...................................................................................................................... 37

Figure 3.2.2. Percent area of SAB near-bottom waters within specified ranges of TOC levels... 38

Figure 3.2.3. Percent area of SAB coastal ocean (blue line) and estuarine (green line) area vs. 

TOC levels of sediment. ............................................................................................................... 38

Figure 3.2.4. Spatial distribution of total organic carbon (TOC) levels in SAB coastal ocean and 

estuarine sediments. ...................................................................................................................... 39

Figure 3.2.5. Percent area of SAB sediment contamination, expressed as mean ERM-Q, levels 

within specified ranges. ................................................................................................................ 45

Figure 3.2.6. Percent area of SAB sediment contamination levels, expressed as number of ERL 

and ERM values exceeded, within specified ranges..................................................................... 48

Figure 3.2.7. Spatial distribution of sediment contaminant levels in SAB coastal ocean and 

estuarine sediments. ...................................................................................................................... 49

Figure 3.2.8. Percent area of SAB estuarine toxicity levels within specified ranges. .................. 50
vi

Figure 3.3.1. Percent of sites of SAB fish tissue contamination levels within consumption 

guideline ranges. ........................................................................................................................... 54

Figure 3.4.1. Relative percent composition of major taxonomic groups expressed as (A) percent 

of total taxa and (B) percent of abundance for coastal ocean and estuarine waters. .................... 56

Figure 3.4.2. Percent area (solid lines) and 95% Confidence Intervals (dotted lines) of SAB 

coastal ocean benthic infaunal species richness (A), density (B), and H′ diversity (C). .............. 61

Figure 3.4.3. Percent area (solid lines) and 95% Confidence Intervals (dotted lines) of SAB 

estuarine benthic infaunal species richness (A), density (B), and H′ diversity (C). ..................... 67

Figure 3.4.4. Spatial distribution of benthic species richness in coastal ocean and estuarine 

sediments....................................................................................................................................... 69

Figure 3.4.5. Spatial distribution of benthic species richness in SAB sediments........................ 70

Figure 3.5.1. Summarized assessment of multiple indicators of ecosystem health for SAB 

coastal ocean region (A = Coastal Ocean, B = Estuarine). Refer to Table 2.7.1 for indicator 

threshold values. Note: There is no benthic index for offshore waters, thus the evaluation of 

benthic condition in this case was based on whether there were any co-occurrences of reduced 

values of key benthic attributes (i.e. diversity, richness, or density within lower 10th percentile of 

all observed values) and evidence of poor sediment or water quality (≥ 1 chemical in excess of 

ERMs, TOC > 50 mg/g, and DO in near-bottom water < 2 mg/L); there were no such cooccurrences. .................................................................................................................................. 73
vii

List of Tables

Table 2.2.1 Number of SAB stations sampled by resource category, institution, and year. ........ 10

Table 2.4.1. List of target contaminants analyzed in coastal-ocean and estuarine sediment and 

tissue samples................................................................................................................................ 13

Table 2.7.1 Thresholds used for classifying samples relative to various environmental indicators.

....................................................................................................................................................... 16

Table 2.7.2. ERM and ERL guidance values in sediments (Long et al. 1995)............................. 18

Table 2.7.3. Risk based EPA advisory guidelines for recreational fishers (US EPA 2000). 

Concentration ranges represent the non-cancer health endpoint risk for four 8-ounce fish meals 

per month. ..................................................................................................................................... 19

Table 3.1.1. Summary of depth and water-column characteristics for near-bottom and nearsurface SAB coastal ocean waters. ............................................................................................... 23

Table 3.1.2. Summary of depth and selected water column characteristics for SAB estuarine 

waters. ........................................................................................................................................... 25

Table 3.2.1. Summary of sediment characteristics for SAB coastal ocean waters (A) and 

estuarine waters (B). ..................................................................................................................... 37

Table 3.2.2. Summary of chemical contaminant concentrations in SAB coastal ocean sediments 

( ̳N/A‘ = no corresponding ERL or ERM available). ................................................................... 43

Table 3.2.3. Summary of chemical contaminant concentrations in SAB estuarine sediments 

( ̳N/A‘ = no corresponding ERL or ERM available). ................................................................... 46

Table 3.3.1 Summary of chemical contaminant concentrations (wet weight) measured in tissues 

of 20 fish (from 17 coastal ocean stations). Concentrations are compared to human health 

guidelines where available (from US EPA 2000, Table 2.7.3 here in).  ̳N/A‘ = no corresponding 

human health guideline available.................................................................................................. 52

Table 3.4.1. Summary of major taxonomic groups of benthic infauna and corresponding 

numbers of identifiable taxa in samples from SAB coastal ocean sites. ...................................... 57

Table 3.4.2 Summary of major taxonomic groups of benthic infauna and corresponding numbers 

of identifiable taxa in samples from SAB estuarine sites. ............................................................ 58

Table 3.4.3. Mean, range, and selected distributional properties of key benthic variables for (A) 

coastal ocean and (B) estuarine sediments.................................................................................... 62

Table 3.4.4. Fifty most abundant benthic taxa in the SAB coastal ocean survey. Mean density 

per m

2

and % frequency of occurrence based on 50 grabs. Classification: Native=native species, 

Indeter=Indeterminate................................................................................................................... 63

Table 3.4.5 Fifty most abundant benthic taxa in the SAB estuarine survey. Mean density per m2

and % frequency of occurrence based on 1039 grabs. Classification: Native=native species, 

Indeter=Indeterminate, Non-Ind =non-indigenous. ...................................................................... 65
viii

List of Appendix Tables

Appendix A. Locations (latitude, longitude), depths, sampling frame areas, and sediment 

characteristics of SAB coastal ocean sampling stations. .............................................................. 81

Appendix B. Near-bottom water characteristics by SAB coastal ocean station. .......................... 82

Appendix C. Near-surface water characteristics by SAB coastal ocean station........................... 84

Appendix D. Summary by station of mean ERM quotients and the number of contaminants that 

exceeded corresponding ERL or ERM values (from Long et al. 1995) for coastal ocean stations.

....................................................................................................................................................... 86

Appendix E. Summary by station of benthic macroinfaunal (> 0.5 mm) characteristics for 

coastal-ocean stations. One replicate benthic grab (0.04 m2) processed from each station. H′ 

derived using base 2 logs. * Values within lower 25th percentile of all values of a specific 

benthic variable; **values within lower 10th percentile. Also included are selected abiotic 

variables for assessing potential benthic-stressor linkages. Table shows that no stations with at 

least one benthic variable in lower 10th percentile coincided with indicators of poor sediment or 

water quality: ≥ 1 chemical in excess of ERMs, TOC > 50 mg/g, or DO in near-bottom water < 2 

mg/L.............................................................................................................................................. 87
ix

Executive Summary

In March-April 2004, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and State of Florida (FL) conducted a study to assess

the status of ecological condition and stressor impacts throughout the South Atlantic Bight 

(SAB) portion of the U.S. continental shelf and to provide this information as a baseline for 

evaluating future changes due to natural or human-induced disturbances. The boundaries of the 

study region extended from Cape Hatteras, North Carolina to West Palm Beach, Florida and 

from navigable depths along the shoreline seaward to the shelf break (~100m). The study 

incorporated standard methods and indicators applied in previous national coastal monitoring 

programs — Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP) and National Coastal 

Assessment (NCA) — including multiple measures of water quality, sediment quality, and 

biological condition. Synoptic sampling of the various indicators provided an integrative 

weight-of-evidence approach to assessing condition at each station and a basis for examining 

potential associations between presence of stressors and biological responses. A probabilistic 

sampling design, which included 50 stations distributed randomly throughout the region, was 

used to provide a basis for estimating the spatial extent of condition relative to the various 

measured indicators and corresponding assessment endpoints (where available).

Conditions of these offshore waters are compared to those of southeastern estuaries, based on 

data from similar EMAP/NCA surveys conducted in 2000-2004 by EPA, NOAA, and partnering 

southeastern states (Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia) (NCA database 

for estuaries, EPA Gulf Ecology Division, Gulf Breeze FL). Data from a total of 747 estuarine 

stations are included in this database. As for the offshore sites, the estuarine samples were 

collected using standard methods and indicators applied in previous coastal EMAP/NCA surveys

including the probabilistic sampling design and multiple indicators of water quality, sediment 

quality, and biological condition (benthos and fish). 

The majority of the SAB had high levels of DO in near-bottom water (> 5 mg L-1) indicative of 

―good‖ water quality. DO levels in bottom waters exceeded this upper threshold at all sites 

throughout the coastal-ocean survey area and in 76% of estuarine waters. Twenty-one percent of 

estuarine bottom waters had moderate levels of DO between 2 and 5 mg L-1and 3% had DO 

levels below 2 mg L-1. The majority of sites with DO in the low range considered to be hypoxic 

(< 2 mg L-1) occurred in North Carolina estuaries. There also was a notable concentration of 

stations with moderate DO levels (2 – 5 mg L-1) in Georgia and South Carolina estuaries.

Approximately 58% of the estuarine area had moderate levels of chlorophyll a (5-10 μg L-1) and 

about 8% of the area had higher levels, in excess of 10 μg L-1, indicative of eutrophication. The 

elevated chlorophyll a levels appeared to be widespread throughout the estuaries of the region. 

In contrast, offshore waters throughout the region had relatively low levels of chlorophyll a with 

100% of the offshore survey area having values < 5 μg L-1. 
x

Estuaries of the SAB displayed a wide range of sediment types from mud to sands, while the 

offshore environment consisted largely of sands with typically < 5% silt-clay. Total Organic 

Carbon (TOC) also exhibited a wide range of values across the region, with the highest levels 

occurring in estuaries. About 19% of the estuarine survey area had TOC at moderate levels (20-

50 mg g-1) and 7% had values in the high range (> 50 mg g-1) associated with a high risk of 

adverse effects on benthic fauna. In comparison, offshore sediments had moderate levels of 

TOC in about 10% of the survey area (only three of the 50 stations) and none of the stations had

TOC in the upper range. TOC levels tended to be highest in the upstream portions of estuaries 

and along the shelf break in the case of the offshore environment. All three offshore stations 

with TOC in excess of 20 mg g-1 were located along the shelf break. 

In general, sediment contaminants were at relatively low levels throughout most of the region. 

Chemical contaminants in offshore sediments were mostly at low, background levels and there 

were no chemicals in excess of Effects-Range Median (ERM) values and < 5 chemicals in excess 

of Effects-Range Low (ERL) values at all stations. Sediment contamination was more extensive 

in estuaries, though moderate levels (≥ 5 ERL values exceeded) to high levels (≥ 1 ERM value 

exceeded) were still limited to only 4% of the total estuarine survey area.

Previous surveys of the estuarine portions of the SAB in the 1990s found that Polychlorinated 

Biphenyls (PCB) and pesticides were the most pronounced contaminant groups for this region. 

The current study found that PCBs and pesticide contamination have become less pronounced 

since the earlier surveys. The most prevalent contaminants in the present estuarine survey area 

were three metals (arsenic, nickel, and cadmium) and total Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane 

(DDT). Though spatially extensive, all of these except nickel were present at only moderate 

levels between corresponding ERL and ERM guideline values. Nickel in addition to five other 

contaminants (mercury, silver, zinc, total PCBs, and 4,4′ Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene 

(DDE)) were present in estuarine sediments at concentrations above the corresponding ERM 

values though only at four of 747 stations. For the offshore environment, there were three 

metals (arsenic, cadmium, and silver) found at moderate concentrations between corresponding 

ERL and ERM values, but no chemicals were found in excess of the higher-threshold ERM 

values and none of the offshore stations had more than one chemical that exceeded its 

corresponding ERL value.

Of the 20 offshore samples of fish that were collected and analyzed for chemical contaminants,

only two had tissue contaminant concentrations (i.e., mercury) in the moderate range with 

respect to non-cancer human-health risks and there were none with contaminants in the upper 

range. In contrast, of the 166 fish samples from estuaries, three had total PCB concentrations 

that exceeded the lower non-cancer effects threshold, one had total PCBs in excess of the

corresponding higher threshold, and three had total PAHs that exceeded both the lower (1.6 ng g

-

1

) and upper (3.2 ng g

-1

) cancer effects thresholds (a non-cancer concentration range for PAHs 

does not exist) .

The relative proportions of major benthic taxonomic groups were fairly consistent between the 

offshore and estuarine habitats. Polychaete worms, followed by crustaceans, were the dominant 

taxa both by percent abundance and percent species throughout the region. However, the total 

number of species per unit of sampling effort was much higher for the offshore waters. For 
xi

example, while a total of 948 benthic taxa were identified from 746 estuarine sites, almost half 

that amount (462 taxa or 49%) was identified from only 50 offshore sites (6.7% of the estuarine 

sites). 

There was little overlap of dominant benthic taxa between the estuarine and coastal-ocean 

habitats. Specifically, only five taxa were common to both the offshore and estuarine lists of 

fifty most abundant taxa. These taxa were the amphipod Ampelisca abdita, the polychaete 

Mediomastus spp., Actiniaria, Nemertea, and Tubificidae. Diversity of benthic macroinfauna, as 

measured by species richness and the Shannon-Weiner diversity index H′, was higher in the 

offshore than in estuarine portions of the region. As an example, species richness averaged 38 

taxa grab-1in offshore waters and was less than half that number (16 taxa grab-1) in estuaries. 

Only three of the 50 offshore stations, representing about 10% of the offshore survey area, had ≤ 

16 taxa grab-1(the estuarine mean). 

Benthic species lists were examined for presence of non-indigenous species by comparison to the 

USGS Non-indigenous Aquatic Species database (nas.er.usgs.gov). There were no nonindigenous species found in benthic samples from any of the 50 offshore sites. Three nonindigenous species — Corbicula fluminea (Asian clam), Petrolisthes armatus (green porcelain 

crab), and Rangia cuneata (Atlantic rangia) — were identified in benthic samples from SAB 

estuaries sampled as part of the NCA efforts in 2000 – 2004. Still, these three species 

represented a relatively small proportion (< 0.01%) of the total 408 taxa that were identified to 

species level from the analysis of 1,039 estuarine grab samples (0.04-m

2

each). The SAB 

benthos appears to be less invaded than some other coastal regions such as the Pacific Coast 

benthos, where non-indigenous species are common in estuaries and occur offshore as well 

though in more limited numbers.

Multi-metric benthic indices are an important tool for detecting pollution-induced signals of a 

degraded benthos and have been developed for a variety of estuarine applications including SAB 

estuaries. Of the estuarine area represented in the present SAB study, 7% of the total area was 

rated as having poor benthic condition (index scores ≤ 1.5), 9% was rated fair (1.5 – 3.0), and 

84% was rated good (≥ 3.0) based on the Benthic-Index of Biological Integrity (B-IBI) for 

southeastern estuaries. No such index exists for the coastal-ocean portion of the SAB. However, 

because there were no major indications of poor sediment or water quality in the offshore 

environment (i.e., DO < 2 mg/L, TOC > 50 mg/g, or ≥ 1 chemical contaminant in excess of 

ERMs), there was no evidence of a linkage between such potential degraded environmental 

conditions and impaired benthic communities. Thus, lower values of key biological attributes 

(numbers of taxa, diversity, and abundance), defined as the lower 10th percentile of observed 

values, appeared to represent parts of a normal reference range controlled by natural factors.

Alternatively, it is possible that for some of these offshore sites the lower values of benthic 

variables reflect symptoms of disturbance induced by other unmeasured stressors, particularly 

those causing physical disruption of the seafloor (e.g., commercial bottom trawling, cable 

placement, minerals extraction), which may pose greater risks to offshore living resources and 

have not been adequately captured. Future monitoring efforts in these offshore areas should 

include indicators of such alternative sources of disturbance.
xii

Overall the SAB appears to be in fair to good ecological condition. However, this assessment 

also indicates that there are measurable portions, particularly in estuaries compared to the 

offshore environment, which are under some chemical or physical stress. It would be prudent to 

use such information as an early warning signal and justification for implementing effective 

coastal management practices in order to prevent potential growth of future environmental risks 

from increasing human activities in the region. In addition, the SAB region provides many 

important ecosystem goods and services across a variety of categories. As coastal development 

continues throughout the southeastern region, the component estuarine and coastal-ocean 

environments should be treated as a connected ecosystem if we are to better understand and 

manage these important resources and the functions they provide.
1

1.0 Introduction

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) both perform a broad range of research and monitoring activities to 

assess the status and potential effects of human activities on the health of coastal ecosystems and 

to promote the use of this information in protecting and restoring the Nation‘s coastal resources. 

Authority to conduct such work is provided through several legislative mandates including the 

Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1977 (33 U.S.C. §§ 1251 et seq.), National Coastal Monitoring Act 

(Title V of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act, 33 U.S.C. §§ 2801-2805), and 

the National Marine Sanctuary Act of 2000. Where possible the two agencies have sought to

coordinate related activities through partnerships with states and other institutions to prevent 

duplications of effort and bring together complementary resources to fulfill common research 

and management goals. Accordingly, in March-April 2004, NOAA, EPA, and the State of 

Florida combined efforts to conduct a joint survey of ecosystem condition in near-coastal waters 

of the U.S. South Atlantic Bight (SAB) using multiple indicators of ecological condition.

The study is an expansion of EPA‘s Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program 

(EMAP) which assesses condition of the Nation‘s environmental resources within a variety of 

coastal and terrestrial resource categories. The coastal component of EMAP along the 

southeastern U.S. began in 1994 and continued in subsequent years with a focus on estuaries

later becoming known as the National Coastal Assessment (NCA) (Hyland et al. 1996, 1998; 

U.S. EPA 2001, 2004, 2008). The current assessment expands this work to near-coastal shelf 

waters (depths of ~10 m -100 m), from Nags Head, North Carolina (NC) to West Palm Beach, 

Florida (FL) (see Figure 2.1.1 below), and includes comparisons with adjacent estuaries of the 

region, based on NCA data collected from 2000-2004 by EPA, NOAA and partnering 

southeastern states – FL, Georgia (GA), South Carolina (SC), NC, and Virginia (VA) (NCA 

database for estuaries, EPA Gulf Ecology Division, Gulf Breeze FL).

The SAB refers to coastal waters along the southeastern U.S., generally defined as extending 

from Cape Hatteras, NC to West Palm Beach, FL (e.g., Alegria et al. 2000) though some authors 

have used Cape Canaveral as the southern boundary (e.g., Allen et al. 1983), and encompassing

aquatic habitats from estuaries seaward to the outer edge of the continental shelf (delineated here 

by the 100-m isobath). This region is also roughly equivalent to the Southeast U.S. Continental 

Shelf Large Marine Ecosystem (LME), one of 10 LMEs of the U.S. that provide a framework for 

managing ocean resources at ecosystem scales (U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy 2004). The 

majority of the SAB continental shelf is a sandy environment with infrequent rock outcrops and 

other hard bottom habitats (Powles and Barans 1980, Parker et al. 1983). Inshore the SAB 

contains large riverine estuaries, bar-built sounds and lagoons, as well as extensive salt marshes

(Dame et al. 2000). SAB estuaries are dominated by un-vegetated soft-bottom habitats with 

higher proportions of silts and clays in lower-energy environments and sands in higher-energy 

environments (Dardeau et al. 1992). The estuaries of the SAB discharge vast quantities (66 km3

yr-1) of low-salinity water creating a coastal frontal zone along the inner shelf (Menzel et al. 

1993), while the Gulf Stream acts as a major influence on the middle and outer portions of the 

shelf (Verity et al. 1993).
2

The purpose of the present study was to assess the current status of ecological condition and 

stressor impacts throughout the SAB region and to provide this information as a baseline for 

evaluating future changes due to natural or human-induced disturbances. To address this 

objective, the study incorporated standard methods and indicators applied in previous coastal 

EMAP/NCA projects (U.S. EPA 2001c, 2004, 2008) including multiple measures of water 

quality, sediment quality, and biological condition (benthos and fish). Synoptic sampling of the 

various indicators provided an integrative weight-of-evidence approach to assessing condition at 

each station and a basis for examining potential associations between presence of stressors and 

biological responses. Another key feature was the incorporation of a probabilistic sampling 

design with stations positioned randomly throughout the study area. The probabilistic sampling 

design provided a basis for making unbiased statistical estimates of the spatial extent of 

condition relative to the various measured indicators and corresponding thresholds of concern.

Assessments of status relative to these various indicators are presented for both coastal-ocean 

and estuarine waters, thus providing a holistic account of ecological conditions and processes 

throughout the inshore and offshore resources of the region. Such information should provide 

valuable input for future National Coastal Condition Reports, which historically have focused on

estuaries (U.S. EPA 2001c, 2004, 2008). Results of this study should also provide valuable 

support to other growing environmental priorities, such as Ecosystem Based Approaches to 

Management (EAM) of coastal resources (Murawski 2007; Marine Ecosystems and Management 

2007) and relevant Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) actions, especially with respect to the 

Southeast U.S. Continental Shelf LME.

1.1 Coastal Ocean

Shelf waters of the SAB are valuable reservoirs of both living and mineral resources and include 

one of NOAA‘s marine sanctuaries, the Gray‘s Reef National Marine Sanctuary (GRNMS) off 

the coast of Georgia. In the spring of 2004, sampling was conducted at 50 stations in shelf 

waters throughout the SAB, using the random probabilistic sampling design of EMAP/NCA. 

Accordingly, the resulting data can be used to make unbiased statistical estimates of the spatial 

extent of the region‘s health with respect to the various measured indicators, and to provide this 

information as a baseline for determining how environmental conditions may be changing in the 

future. This is the first such baseline for the near-coastal (shelf) waters of the SAB region. 

Scientists involved in the present study also have conducted surveys, using similar protocols and 

indicators, to assess the status of ecological condition and stressor impacts within the boundaries 

of the GRNMS itself (Cooksey et al. 2004, Hyland et al. 2006, Balthis et al. 2007). Thus, 

condition and characteristics of sanctuary resources can be compared to those of the surrounding 

SAB ecosystem.

The offshore survey involved the cooperation of multiple organizations. NOAA/Office of 

Marine and Aviation Operations provided the research ship (NOAA ship Nancy Foster). Funds 

for the project were provided by NOAA‘s National Ocean Service (NOS) /National Centers for 

Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS) /Center for Coastal Environmental Health and Biomolecular 

Research (CCEHBR) (sampling supplies and equipment) and by EPA‘s National Health and 

Environmental Effects Research Laboratory (NHEERL)/Gulf Ecology Division (GED) (sample 

processing). Representatives from NOAA/NOS/NCCOS headquarters and two of its Centers 
3

(CCEHBR and Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment), EPA/NHEERL/GED, and the 

State of Florida (Florida Wildlife Research Institute) participated on the cruise as members of the 

scientific staff. Additional partners involved in the overall program included the 

NOAA/GRNMS Office, South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (SCDNR), and the 

Georgia Department of Natural Resources (GADNR). 

The present offshore survey is part of a series of Regional Ecological Assessments to evaluate 

condition of living resources and ecosystem stressors throughout coastal ocean waters of the U.S.

To date such surveys have been conducted throughout the western U.S. continental shelf, from 

the Straits of Juan de Fuca, WA to the U.S./Mexican border (see Nelson et al. 2008 for final 

report); shelf waters of the mid-Atlantic Bight (MAB) from Cape Hatteras to Cape Cod, MA 

(see Balthis et al. 2009 final report); the continental shelf off southern Florida, from West Palm 

Beach in the Atlantic Ocean to Anclote Key in the Gulf of Mexico (see Cooksey and Hyland 

2007 for cruise report); and shelf waters of the South Atlantic Bight (SAB) from Cape Hatteras, 

NC to West Palm Beach, FL (the present assessment). There are plans to complete similar 

surveys throughout the remaining portions of the Gulf of Mexico and North Atlantic coasts of 

the U.S. by 2012.

1.2 Estuaries

The estuaries addressed in the present study extend from Cape Henry, VA through the southern 

end of the Indian River Lagoon along the east coast of FL. These estuarine resources are diverse 

and extensive, covering an estimated 4,487 square miles and featuring a variety of habitats such 

as salt marshes, tidal rivers, coastal lagoons, and open-water embayments and sounds. They also 

provide a wealth of ecological and societal services including buffers against storms and sealevel rise; corridors for maritime transportation and trade, as exemplified by busy shipping ports 

in Miami, Jacksonville, Savannah, and Charleston; reservoirs of marine biodiversity; protected 

areas (e.g., National Estuarine Research Reserve System sites) to promote marine research, 

education, and conservation; habitat for various migratory birds and protected species; important 

commercial and recreational fisheries; and tourism. North Carolina contains the AlbemarlePamlico Estuarine System (APES), the second largest estuary in the U.S. APES represents North 

Carolina‘s key resource base for commercial fishing, recreational fishing, and tourism. Similarly, 

the coastal resources of other southeastern states support corresponding fishing and tourism 

industries and generate vast amounts of sales tax income for those states as well. There is an 

increasing need for effective management of these economically and ecologically valuable 

resources given the predicted influx of people and businesses to southeastern coastal states over 

the next few decades and the ensuing pressures on the coastal zone of this region. Culliton et al. 

(1990) estimated that the coastal population in the southeastern United States will have increased 

by 181% over the 50 -year period from 1960 to 2010.

Estuarine data used to support the present inshore-offshore comparisons are from NCA surveys 

conducted in 2000 to 2004 by EPA, NOAA, and partnering States of FL, GA, SC, NC, and VA

(NCA database for estuaries, EPA Gulf Ecology Division, Gulf Breeze FL). The data represent a 

total of 747 sampling sites (Figure 2.1.1). As for the offshore sites, the samples were collected 

using standard methods and indicators applied in previous coastal EMAP/NCA projects (U.S. 

EPA 2001c, 2004, 2008) including the probabilistic sampling design and multiple indicators of 
4

water quality, sediment quality, and biological condition (benthos and fish). The data were 

produced through funding provided principally by EPA (Office of Research and Development, 

National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory).
5

2.0 Methods 

At each station, samples were obtained for characterization of: (1) community structure and 

composition of benthic macroinfauna (fauna retained on a 0.5-mm sieve); (2) concentration of 

chemical contaminants in sediments (metals, pesticides, PCBs, PAHs); (3) sediment toxicity 

using the 10-day amphipod survival assay (estuarine samples only); (4) water clarity/turbidity

measured by light attenuation (estuaries only);(5) other general habitat conditions (water depth, 

dissolved oxygen, conductivity, temperature, chlorophyll a, water-column nutrients and total 

suspended solids, % silt-clay versus sand content of sediment, organic-carbon content of 

sediment); and (6) condition of targeted demersal fish and macroinvertebrate species 

(contaminant body burdens and visual evidence of pathological disorders). The following

section describes methods used for the collection, processing, and analysis of each of these 

sample types, which were adopted from the protocols developed for EPA‘s National Coastal 

Assessment (USEPA 2001a, 2001b).

2.1 Sampling Design and Field Collections

2.1.1 Coastal Ocean

Sampling was conducted March 30 - April 11, 2004 at 50 stations positioned randomly 

throughout shelf waters of the SAB, from about 1 nautical mile offshore (water depth of ~10 m) 

seaward to the shelf break (100 m isobath) between Nags Head, NC and West Palm Beach, FL 

(Figure 2.1.1). One of the 50 stations was located within GRNMS. The sampling frame for 

positioning stations was based on a generalized random-tessellation stratified (GRTS) design. 

The GRTS design represents a unified strategy for selecting spatially balanced probability 

samples of natural resources, in which sampling sites are more or less evenly dispersed over the 

extent of the resource (Stevens and Olsen 2004). Sampling for the survey was conducted on 

NOAA ship Nancy Foster, Cruise NF-04-08-CL. The cruise consisted of two legs: Leg 1 for the 

northern section of the sampling area (Charleston, SC to Nags Head, NC, March 30 - April 5); 

and Leg 2 for the southern section of the sampling area (Charleston, SC to West Palm Beach, FL, 

April 6 - April 11).

Bottom sediments were collected at each station with a 0.04m2, Young modified van Veen grab

and used for analysis of macroinfaunal communities, concentration of chemical contaminants, % 

silt-clay, and organic-carbon content. A grab sample was deemed successful when the grab unit 

was >75% full (with no major slumping). Two replicate grab samples were collected for benthic 

infaunal analysis. Each replicate was sieved onboard through a 0.5-mm screen and preserved in 

10% buffered formalin with rose bengal stain. The upper 2-3 cm of sediment from additional 

multiple grabs (usually at least two) were taken at each station, combined into a single station 

composite, and then sub-sampled for analysis of metals, organic contaminants (PCBs, pesticides, 

PAHs), total organic carbon (TOC), and grain size.

Both a Seabird 9/11 and Seabird 19 CTD unit, supplied by the NOAA Ship Nancy Foster, were 

used to acquire continuous profiles of salinity, temperature, dissolved oxygen, and depth during 

the descent and ascent through the water column. The Seabird 9/11 also was equipped with 12 

Nisken bottles to acquire discrete water samples at three designated water depths: 1 m below sea 
6

surface, mid-water column, and 1 m off seabed. The water samples were processed for nutrients, 

total suspended solids, and chlorophyll. 

Hook-and-line fishing methods (up to six fishing rods) were attempted at all 50 stations in an 

effort to capture demersal fishes for inspection of external pathologies and for subsequent 

analysis of chemical contaminants in tissues. Any captured fish were identified and inspected 

for gross external pathologies. A total of 20 fish collected among seven species from 17 of the 

50 stations were selected for analysis as follows:

7 sand perch (Diplectrum formosum)

6 black seabass (Centropristis striata)

3 dusky flounder (Syacium papillosum)

1 whitebone porgy (Calamus leucosteus)

1 red porgy (Pagrus pagrus)

1 lizardfish (Synodus foetens)

1 snake fish (Trachinocephalus myops)
7

Figure 2.1.1 – Map of South Atlantic Bight study area and station locations. Green dots 

indicate National Coastal Assessment estuarine stations (sampled 2000 – 2004; n = 747),

and blue dots indicate coastal ocean stations (sampled 2004; n = 50).
8

2.1.2 Estuaries

Similar to the off-shore component, the GRTS survey design strategy was used to select 

approximately 150 estuarine sites per year for sampling years 2000 to 2004 (Table 2.1.1) The 

southeastern estuarine target population represented all boatable areas from the head-of-tide 

upland out toward the open ocean encompassing all waters within coastal embayments, lagoons, 

tidal rivers and creeks, and intracoastal waterways. Stations were sampled once in the summer 

months between July and September when coastal conditions are expected to be under the 

greatest influence of environmental stress (Summers et al. 1995).

Bottom sediments were collected at each station with a 0.04m2, Young modified van Veen grab. 

Contents of each grab were used for analysis of macroinfaunal communities, concentration of 

chemical contaminants, % silt-clay, and organic-carbon content. Consistent with the offshore 

survey, a grab sample was deemed successful when the grab unit was >75% full and without

major slumping. A single grab was collected from the majority of sites for benthic infaunal 

analysis. Benthic sample sediments were sieved on site through a 0.5-mm screen and preserved 

in 10% buffered formalin with rose bengal stain. The upper 2-3 cm of sediment from additional 

grabs were subsequently taken at each station, homogenized into a single station composite, and 

then sub-sampled for analysis of metals, organic contaminants (PCBs, pesticides, PAHs), total 

organic carbon (TOC), and grain size.

A hand-held water column profiler, such as a Hydrolab®or YSI®sonde, was used at each site to 

collect instantaneous measures of temperature, salinity, pH, and dissolved oxygen (DO). The 

water column was measured from 0.5m below surface, at 1m intervals throughout the water 

column, and within 0.5m from bottom. Instruments were calibrated daily using known solutions, 

pre- and post-deployment comparisons, and weekly air-saturated water tests. Photosynthetically 

active radiation (PAR) readings were taken using a LICOR®datalogger equipped with both 

ambient and submersible 2pi light sensors just beneath the surface at 1m intervals through water 

column, and near the bottom. Secchi disk readings were also taken while on station. Water 

samples for nutrient and chlorophyll a analysis were collected at 3 prescribed depths (surface, 

mid-water, bottom) using horizontal water samplers. At some sites, only surface samples were 

collected. These samples were acquired by submerging a pre-cleaned 1-liter Nalgene®bottle 

upside down then inverting it to fill.

Fishes and shrimp were collected for analysis of tissue contaminants and visual evidence of 

pathological disorders. Tissue samples were typically collected using either a 6.1m high-rise 

otter trawl with a 2.5 cm mesh cod end or 21.3m center bag seine with a 0.31cm bar mesh. In 

South Carolina, a 15-foot four-seam trawl with 1.9 cm mesh was used to collect tissue samples. 

Trawl nets were towed for 10 minutes against the current between 0.7 and 1.0 m s-1. At sites too 

shallow to trawl, a seine net was deployed to acquire the necessary fish tissue samples. All 

organisms caught were counted and identified to species. As many as 30 individuals from each 

species caught were measured to the nearest millimeter. A prescribed list of target species was 

used to cull samples from the catch for contaminant analysis. Up to ten individuals of each target 

species were reserved for subsequent laboratory analysis. When no target species were available, 
9

species that best represented the catch were selected as surrogates for analysis. Specimens were 

labeled, frozen, and shipped to the appropriate processing laboratory where they were stored and 

frozen until analyses could be performed. For this assessment, 166 fish-only specimens were 

represented in the tissue contaminant results from the 2000-2004 estuarine surveys. Eighty-two 

percent of analyses results were based on target species. The complete list of tissue contaminant 

species follows (target species are identified with ―*‖):

70 Atlantic croaker (Micropogonias undulatus*)

47 spot (Leiostomus xanthurus*)

16 pinfish (Lagodon rhomboides*)

12 weakfish (Cynoscion regalis)

4 silver perch (Bairdiella chrysoura)

4 hogfish (Lachnolaimus maximus)

3 southern flounder (Paralichthys lethostigma*)

2 white perch (Morone americana)

2 striped mullet (Mugil cephalus)

2 pigfish (Orthopristis chrysoptera)

1 hardhead catfish (Ariopsis felis)

1 southern kingfish (Menticirrhus americanus)

1 white mullet (Mugil curema)

1 summer flounder (Paralichthys dentatus)
10

Table 2.2.1 Number of SAB stations sampled by resource category, institution, and year.

Resource 

Category Institution 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 All Years

Estuaries Florida Fish and Wildlife 

Research Institute 7 6 4 5 8 30

Georgia Department of 

Natural Resources

50 50 50 50 50 250

North Carolina Department 

of Environmental and 

Natural Resources

34 34 35 34 35 172

South Carolina Department 

of Natural Resources

60 55 60 60 60 295

Coastal 

Ocean

NOAA National Ocean 

Service, Charleston, SC 50 50

Totals 151 145 159 149 153 797
11

2.2 Water Quality Analysis

Preliminary processing of water samples for nutrients, chlorophyll, and TSS was conducted in 

the field at the end of each sampling day (estuaries) or immediately after collection onboard the 

research ship (coastal ocean). A portion of the water (~0.5 - 1.0 L) from each station was

vacuum-filtered using microfiltration glassware and a GF/F 47mm filter. The filtered water 

sample was then transferred to a polypropylene bottle, frozen (< -20°C), and analyzed within 30 

days for dissolved nutrients including ammonium (NH4- +), nitrate/nitrite (NO2/3), 

orthophosphate (PO4-

3-

), silicate (Si), total dissolved phosphorus (TDP), and total dissolved 

nitrogen (TDN)). The filter was folded and wrapped in a foil pouch, frozen, and analyzed within 

30 days for chlorophyll a. An additional sample of water (~0.5 – 1.0 L) was filtered on a preweighed GF/F 47mm filter for analysis of total suspended solids (TSS). Whole water samples 

were frozen in polypropylene bottles and later analyzed for total nitrogen (TN) and total 

phosphorus (TP). 

Water chemistry was measured with autoanalyzers using standard EPA methods (USEPA 

methods 349.0, 353.4, 365.5). Chlorophyll a samples were extracted using a modified 

Welshmeyer (buffered methanol) method and analyzed on a Turner Designs® fluorometer 

(USEPA method 445.0m). Total suspended solids was measured using the methods outlined in 

EMAP - Estuaries Laboratory Methods Manual Volume 1 - Biological and Physical Analyses, 

Section 6 - Residue, Non-Filterable (Suspended Solids) (USEPA 1995).

2.3 Sediment TOC and Grain Size Analysis

Sediment characterization included analyses for TOC and silt-clay content. TOC analysis 

followed USEPA Method 9060. A minimum of 5g (wet weight) of sediment was initially dried 

for 48 h. Weighed subsamples were ground to fine consistency and acidified to remove sources 

of inorganic carbon (e.g., shell fragments). The acidified samples were ignited at 950oC and the 

carbon dioxide evolved was measured with an infrared gas analyzer. Silt-clay samples were 

prepared by sieve separation followed by timed pipette extractions as described in Plumb (1981). 

Results for both analyses were reported as percent of sample.

2.4 Contaminant Analysis

Both offshore and estuarine sediment and tissue samples were examined for inorganic and 

organic contaminants. The list (Table 2.4.1) comprises 25 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons 

(PAHs), 21 polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), 20 chlorinated pesticides, and 15 metals.

2.4.1 Sample Preparation

2.4.1.1 Sediments

Samples were stored on ice while on station then shipped (overnight) to a laboratory where 

samples were kept at ≤ -20°C until analyzed. A 24-hour thawing period was used to bring sample 

temperature to approximately +4°C. Composited sediment samples were re-homogenized prior 

to obtaining sample aliquots. Separate aliquots were drawn for each of the contaminant tests 
12

(Table 2.4.1). For metals analysis, sediments were prepared using microwave-assisted extraction 

(EPA Method 3052) while organic samples were prepared using ultrasonic extraction (EPA 

Method 3550a). All results were reported in dry weight units.

2.4.1.2 Tissues

Fish samples were stored on ice while on station then shipped (overnight) to a laboratory where 

samples were kept at ≤-20°C until analyzed. Samples were partially thawed prior to dissection 

and individuals were filleted for muscle tissue with skin and scales intact. Fillets from a single 

species collected from a site were blended together to create a homogenate from which aliquots 

were retrieved. A separate aliquot was drawn for each contaminant group (Table 2.4.1). 

Microwave-assisted extraction was used for metals analysis preparation (EPA Method 3052).

Solvent extraction (EPA Method 3540c) was used to prepare samples for organic analysis. All 

results reported in wet weight units.

2.4.2 Analytical Methods

The same analytical methods were used to examine both tissue and sediment samples for 

contaminants. These were:

 Trace: Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry

 Heavy metals (except mercury): Inductively Coupled Plasma Emission

 Spectrometry or Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption Spectrometry

 Mercury: Graphite- or Cold-Vapor Atomic Absorption Spectrometry

 PAHs: Gas Chromatography/Mass-Spectrometry Selected Ion Monitoring

 PCBs and Pesticides: Gas Chromatography/Mass-Spectrometry or

 Electron Capture Detection

2.5 Toxicity Analysis

Sediment toxicity, measured only during the estuarine studies, was assessed using the standard

10-day, solid-phase test for survival of the marine amphipod Ampelisca abdita (ASTM, 1993). 

Tests were performed at each station using the same sediment homogenates on which analysis of 

chemical contaminants and other abiotic sediment variables were conducted. Tests were run on 

five replicate samples of sediment from each site under static conditions at 20oC and 30 ppt. 

Samples were considered toxic if mean survival relative to a corresponding negative control 

(sediment from a reference site) was < 80% and statistically different at = 0.05. 
13

Table 2.4.1. List of target contaminants analyzed in coastal-ocean and estuarine 

sediment and tissue samples.

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons 

(PAHs)

C.A.S. Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) C.A.S.

1-Methylnaphthalene 90-12-0 2,2',3,3',4,4',5,5',6-Nonachlorobiphenyl 40186-72-9

1-Methylphenanthrene 832-69-9 2,2',3,3',4,4'-Hexachlorobiphenyl 38380-07-3

2,3,5-Trimethylnaphthalene 2245-38-7 2,2',3,4,4',5,5'-Heptachlorobiphenyl 35065-29-3

2,6-Dimethylnaphthalene 581-42-0 2,2',3,4,4',5'-Hexachlorobiphenyl 35065-28-2

2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 2,2',3,5'-Tetrachlorobiphenyl 41464-39-5

Acenaphthene 83-32-9 2,2',4,4',5,5'-Hexachlorobiphenyl 35065-27-1

Acenaphthylene 208-96-8 2,2',5,5'-Tetrachlorobiphenyl 35693-99-3

Anthracene 120-12-7 2,2',5-Trichlorobiphenyl 37680-65-2

Benz[a]anthracene 56-55-3 2,3,3',4,4'-Pentachlorobiphenyl 32598-14-4

Benzo[a]pyrene 50-32-8 2,3',4,4'-Tetrachlorobiphenyl 32598-10-0

Benzo[b]fluoranthene 205-99-2 2,4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl 7012-37-5

Benzo[e]pyrene 192-97-2 3,3',4,4',5-Pentachlorobiphenyl 57465-28-8

Benzo[g,h,i]perylene 191-24-2 3,3',4,4'-Tetrachlorobiphenyl 32598-13-3

Benzo[k]fluoranthene 207-08-9 2,2',3,3',4,4',5,5',6,6'-Decachlorobiphenyl 2051-24-3

Biphenyl 92-52-4 PCB 110/77 38380-03-9

Chrysene 218-01-9 PCB congener 101/90 37680-73-2

Dibenz[a,h]anthracene 53-70-3 PCB congener 118/108/149 31508-00-6

Dibenzothiophene 132-65-0 PCB congener 170/190 35065-30-6

Fluoranthene 206-44-0 PCB congener 187/182/159 52663-68-0

Fluorene 86-73-7 PCB congener 195/208 52663-78-2

Indeno[1,2,3-c,d]pyrene 193-39-5 PCB congener 8/5 34883-43-7

Naphthalene 91-20-3

Perylene 198-55-0

Phenanthrene 85-01-8

Pyrene 129-00-0

Pesticides C.A.S. Metals C.A.S.

2,4'-DDD 53-19-0 Aluminum 7429-90-5

2,4'-DDE 3424-82-6 Antimony 7440-36-0

2,4'-DDT 789-02-6 Arsenic 7440-38-2

4,4'-DDD 72-54-8 Cadmium 7440-43-9

4,4'-DDE 72-55-9 Chromium 7440-47-3

4,4'-DDT 50-29-3 Copper 7440-50-8

Aldrin 309-00-2 Iron 7439-89-6

Alpha-chlordane 5103-71-9 Lead 7439-92-1

BHC-alpha 319-84-6 Manganese (sediment only) 7439-96-5

Endosulfan I 959-98-8 Mercury 7439-97-6

Endosulfan II 33213-65-9 Nickel 7440-02-0

Dieldrin 60-57-1 Selenium 7782-49-2

Endosulfan 115-29-7 Silver 7440-22-4

Endosulfan Sulfate 1031-07-8 Tin 7440-31-5

Endrin 72-20-8 Zinc 7440-66-6

Heptachlor 76-44-8

Heptachlor epoxide 1024-57-3

Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1

Lindane 58-89-9

Mirex 2385-85-5

Toxaphene 8001-35-2

Trans-nonachlor 39765-80-5
14

2.6 Benthic Community Analysis

Once in the laboratory, samples were transferred from formalin to 70% ethanol. Macroinfaunal 

invertebrates were sorted from the sample debris under a dissecting microscope and identified to 

the lowest practical taxon (usually species). Data were used to compute density (m-2) of total 

fauna (all species combined), densities of numerically dominant species (m-2), numbers of 

species, H' diversity (Shannon and Weaver 1949) derived with base-2 logarithms, and estimates 

of condition based on the Southeastern benthic index of biotic integrity for estuarine stations (BIBI, Van Dolah et al. 1999). Computation of the B-IBI was based on the procedures and habitat 

designations of Van Dolah et al. (1999). B-IBI scoring criteria are presented here in Table 2.7.1. 

A B-IBI has not been developed yet for the coastal ocean portion of the SAB. 

2.7 Data Analysis

A probabilistic, stratified-random sampling design was used in these surveys in order to provide 

a basis for making unbiased statistical estimates of the spatial extent of condition, with 95 % 

confidence intervals, of the coastal and estuarine waters of the SAB based on the status of 

various measured ecological indicators and corresponding thresholds of interest (Table 2.7.1). 

A similar approach has been applied throughout EPA‘s EMAP, related NCA programs, and other 

coastal-ocean surveys (e.g., Summers et al. 1995; Strobel et al. 1995; Hyland et al. 1996; USEPA 

2004, 2006; Nelson et al. 2008). Results of the above type of spatial estimates are presented 

throughout this report as the percent area of the SAB within specified ranges of a particular 

indicator. Thresholds defining such ranges (see Table 2.7.1) include, where possible, those 

having known biological significance (e.g., dissolved oxygen < 2 mg L

-1

). Additional data 

summaries presenting key distributional properties (e.g., mean, range) and other basic data 

tabulations are provided as well. Data presented graphically in this report are primarily in the 

form of cumulative distribution functions (CDFs) and pie charts. These are useful tools for 

portraying the percentage of coastal area corresponding to varying levels of a given indicator 

across the full range of its observed values and for estimating the percentage of area falling 

below or above some designated threshold of interest. This is a useful feature for management 

applications; for example, if valid thresholds can be defined for a particular indicator or suite of 

indicators, they could be used as ecosystem quality targets for tracking how well the system is 

doing and for triggering any necessary management actions.

The biological significance of sediment contamination was evaluated by comparing measured 

chemical concentrations in sediments to corresponding Effects Range-Low (ERL) and Effects 

Range-Median (ERM) sediment quality guideline (SQG) values developed by Long et al. (1995) 

and listed here in Table 2.7.2. The ERL values are lower-threshold bioeffect limits, below which 

adverse effects on sediment–dwelling organisms are not expected to occur. ERM values 

represent upper-threshold concentrations, above which bioeffects are likely to occur in some 

sediment-dwelling species. Overall sediment contamination from multiple chemicals was 

expressed as the mean ERM quotient (ERM-Q) (Long et al. 1998; Long and MacDonald 1998;

Hyland et al. 1999), which is the mean of the ratios of individual chemical concentrations in a 

sample relative to corresponding ERM values. Mean ERM-Qs ≤ 0.018 and > 0.057 have been 

associated with a low and high incidence of stress, respectively, in benthic communities of 

southeastern estuaries (Hyland et al. 2003).
15

The biological significance of fish and shrimp tissue contamination was evaluated from a 

human-health perspective using risk-based consumption limits for cancer and non-cancer 

(chronic systemic effects) endpoints derived by U.S. EPA (2000) for a variety of organic and 

inorganic contaminants (Table 2.7.3). Concentrations of contaminants measured in fish tissues 

were compared to the corresponding endpoints for cancer and chronic health risks associated 

with the consumption of four 8-ounce meals per month for the general adult population. Fish 

tissue contamination data were only available for a subset of stations; therefore, tissue 

contaminant data were not evaluated on a percent areal basis.

For estuarine data only, a water quality index was developed based on evaluations stemming 

from dissolved oxygen, DIN, DIP, and Chl a analysis and a sediment quality index was created 

by combining results from sediment contaminant, TOC, and toxicity data evaluations. Methods 

used for the development of these two indices are consistent with methods used in the National 

Coastal Condition Reports (USEPA 2001c, 2004, 2006, 2008).
16

Table 2.7.1 Thresholds used for classifying samples relative to various environmental indicators.

Indicator Estuaries Threshold Coastal Ocean 

Threshold Reference

Water Quality

Salinity (PSU) < 5 = Oligohaline

5 – 18 = Mesohaline

>18 – 30 = Polyhaline

> 30 = Euhaline

< 5 = Oligohaline

5 – 18 = Mesohaline

>18 – 30 = Polyhaline

> 30 = Euhaline

Carriker 1967

Chlorophyll a (μg/L)

Low: < 5.0

Moderate: 5.0 – 10.0

High: >10.0

Potentially Elevated:

≥ upper 90th percentile U.S.EPA 2008

Dissolved Oxygen 

(mg/L)

Good: >5.0

Moderate: 2.0 - 5.0

Poor: < 2.0

Good: >5.0

Moderate: 2.0 - 5.0

Poor: < 2.0

U.S. EPA 2008

Dissolved Inorganic 

Phosphorus (mg/L)

Low: < 0.01

Moderate: 0.01-0.05

High: > 0.05

Potentially Elevated:

≥ upper 90th percentile 

U.S. EPA 2008; 

Nelson et al. 2008

Dissolved Inorganic 

Nitrogen (mg/L)

Low: <0.1

Moderate: 0.1 - 0.5

High: >0.5

Potentially Elevated:

≥ upper 90th percentile

U.S. EPA 2008; 

Nelson et al. 2008

DIN/DIP Phosphorus Limitation: > 16

Nitrogen Limitation: < 16

Phosphorus Limitation: > 16

Nitrogen Limitation: < 16

Geider and LaRoche 

2002

Water Clarity

(light penetration @ 1 

m)

Less Turbid: >20%

Mod. Turbid: 10 – 20%

High. Turbid: <10%

Data not available Smith et al. 2007

ΔδT

Strong Vertical Stratification: 

> 2

Strong Vertical 

Stratification: > 2 Nelson et al. 2008

Sediment Quality

Overall Chemical 

Contamination of 

Sediments (ERM-Q):

Potential Benthic Risk 

Levels

Very High: > 0.196

High: >0.057-0.196

Moderate: > 0.018-0.057

Low: ≤ 0.018

Very High: > 0.196

High: >0.057-0.196

Moderate: > 0.018-0.057

Low: ≤ 0.018

Hyland et al. 2003
17

Indicator Estuaries Threshold Coastal Ocean 

Threshold Reference

Overall Chemical 

Contamination of 

Sediments (# ERL/ERM 

exceeded):

Probability of adverse 

biological affect

High: ≥ 1 ERM exceeded

Moderate: ≥ 5 ERLs exceeded 

and no ERMs exceeded

Low: < 5 ERLs and no ERMs 

exceeded

High: ≥ 1 ERM

Moderate: ≥ 5 ERLs

Low: < 5 ERLs

US. EPA 2008

Individual chemical 

contaminant 

concentrations in 

sediments

Bioeffects likely: > ERM

Bioeffects not likely: < ERL 

Bioeffects likely: > ERM

Bioeffects not likely: < ERL Long et al. 1995

Sediment Toxicity

(% A. abdita control 

corrected survival)

Not Toxic: > 80 Data not available U.S. EPA 2008

TOC (mg/g)

Low: < 20

Moderate: 20 - 50

High: > 50

Low: < 20

Moderate: 20 - 50

High: > 50

U.S. EPA 2008;

High: > 35 Hyland et al. 2005

Biological Condition

Benthic Community

(potential degraded 

condition)

SE Benthic Index

Healthy Benthos: ≥ 3.0

Some Stress: 1.5 – 3.0

Degraded Benthos: ≤ 1.5

Potentially Degraded 

Benthos: ≤ lower 10th

percentile for key benthic 

variables

U.S. EPA 2008; 

Nelson et al. 2008; 

Van Dolah et al. 

1999

Tissue Contaminants

(# guidelines exceeded)

Any contaminant 

concentration: 

High: Exceeded range

Moderate: within range

Low: below range

Any contaminant 

concentration: 

High: Exceeded range

Moderate: within range

Low: below range

U.S. EPA 2000
18

Table 2.7.2. ERM and ERL guidance values in sediments (Long et al. 1995).

ERL ERM ERL ERM

Metals (ppm) PAHs (ppb)

Arsenic*† 8.2 70 Acenaphthene* 16 500

Cadmium*† 1.2 9.6 Acenaphthylene* 44 640

Chromium* 81 370 Anthracene* 85.3 1100

Copper* 34 270 Benzo[a]anthracene* 261 1600

Lead * 46.7 218 Benzo[a]pyrene* 430 1600

Mercury * 0.2 0.71 Chrysene* 384 2800

Nickel* 20.9 51.6 Dibenz[a,h,]anthracene 63.4 260

Silver*† 1 3.7 Fluoranthene* 600 5100

Zinc* 150 410 Fluorene* 19 540

2-Methylnaphthalene* 70 670

Pesticides (ppb) Naphthalene* 160 2100

Phenanthrene* 240 1500

4,4'-DDE (p,p=-DDE)* 2.2 27 Pyrene* 665 2600

Total DDTs* 1.6 46.1 Total PAHs 4020 44800

PCBs (ppb)

Total PCBs* 22.7 180

ERL exceeded: *- Estuaries † - Coastal Ocean
19

Table 2.7.3. Risk based EPA advisory guidelines for recreational fishers (US EPA 2000). 

Concentration ranges represent the non-cancer health endpoint risk for four 8-ounce fish meals 

per month.

Lower Upper Lower Upper

Metals (ppm) Pesticides (continued)

Arsenic (inorganic)10.35 0.70 Heptachlor epoxide 15 31

Cadmium 0.35 0.70 Hexachlorobenzene 940 1900

Mercury 

(methylmercury)2

0.12 0.23 Lindane 350 700

Selenium 5.9 12.0 Mirex 230 470

Toxaphene 290 590

Pesticides (ppb)

Chlordane 590 1200 PCBs (ppb)

Total DDTs 59 120 Total PCBs 23 47

Dieldrin 59 120

Endosulfan 7000 14000 PAHs (ppb)

Endrin 350 700 Total PAHs31.6 3.2

1. Inorganic arsenic estimated as 2% of total arsenic.

2. Conservative assumption was made that all mercury is present as methylmercury because most 

mercury in fish and shellfish is present primarily as methylmercury.

3. Cancer concentration range used, a non-cancer concentration range for PAHs does not exist.
20

3.0 Results and Discussion 

3.1 Depth and Water Quality

3.1.1 Depth and General Water Characteristics: temperature, salinity, water-column 

stratification, DO, pH, water clarity

Coastal Ocean

Key bottom-water characteristics, as measured during the 2004 survey, throughout the coastal 

ocean waters of the SAB (Figure 3.1.1, Table 3.1.1, Appendix A, B, C) can be summarized as 

follows: (1) water depths ranging from 8.9 – 68.1 m and averaging 29.4 m (water depths were 

not corrected to Mean Low Low Water); (2) a narrow range of euhaline bottom salinity (PSU) 

values of 32.9 – 36.5 (overall mean of 35.6); (3) high bottom DO levels ranging from 6.8 – 9.9 

mg L-1and averaging 7.8 mg L-1; (4) bottom temperatures ranging from 6.4 – 23.7 °C and 

averaging 17.1 °C; (5) a narrow range of pH levels from 8.2 – 8.6 and averaging 8.4; and (6) low 

levels of surface-water total suspended solids (TSS) ranging from 0.97 – 15.93 mg L-1and 

averaging 3.64 mg L-1.

Water-column stratification expressed as Δσt, an index of the variation between surface and 

bottom water densities, was calculated from temperature and salinity data. The index is the 

difference between the computed bottom and surface σt values, where σt is the density of a parcel 

of water with a given salinity and temperature relative to atmospheric pressure (Nelson et al. 

2008). The Δσt index ranged from 0.003 to 1.715. One hundred percent of the area of waters of 

the SAB shelf had Δσt index values less than 2, indicating weak vertical stratification of the 

water column (Table 2.7.1). These results agree with previous assessments that have shown 

October through May to be periods of low vertical stratification for coastal-ocean waters of the 

SAB (Martins and Pelegri 2006).

Estuaries

A summary of key water-column characteristics is presented in Table 3.1.2 for estuarine waters 

of the SAB. Bottom-water salinities ranged from oligohaline (< 5 ppt) to euhaline (> 30 ppt), 

with the average salinity (23.5 ppt) falling in the polyhaline range of 18 – 30 ppt. Bottom DO 

varied widely from 0.2 to 11.6 mg L-1and averaged 4.9 mg L-1. Bottom-water pH also exhibited 

a wide range (4.8 – 9.2) and averaged 7.6. Water clarity as measured by the light attenuation 

coefficient ranged from 0.3 to 23.3 and averaged 2.3.

Seventy-four percent of southeast estuaries had low turbidity (indicative of high water clarity). 

Conversely, 12% of the area exhibited considerably higher turbidity. Twenty-six percent of the 

survey area did not meet the light-penetration threshold (≥ 20% transmissivity @ 1m) associated 

with optimum growth conditions of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) (Figure 3.1.3).
21

SAB Region-wide

The majority of the SAB had bottom-water DO levels in the high range (> 5 mg L-1) considered 

good for marine life (Figure 3.1.4, Table 2.7.1). DO levels in bottom-waters exceeded this upper 

threshold at all coastal-ocean stations and in 76% of the estuarine waters. Twenty-one percent of 

the estuarine bottom-waters had moderate levels of DO between 2 and 5 mg L-1and 3% had DO 

levels below 2 mg L-1. The majority of the lowest DO levels (< 2 mg L-1) occurred in North 

Carolina waters where low-DO conditions have previously been reported (Figure 3.1.4; Hyland 

et al. 2000). There is an interesting cluster of moderate DO levels (2 – 5 mg L-1) in the estuaries 

of Georgia and South Carolina, which corresponds to results of Verity et al. (2006) indicating a 

long-term trend of declining DO throughout Georgia estuaries.
22

Figure 3.1.1 Percent area (solid lines) and 95% Confidence Intervals (dotted lines) 

of SAB coastal ocean depth and selected water-quality characteristics.

pH: Surface

0.0 6.0 6.6 7.2 7.8 8.4

pH: Bottom

0.0 8.2 8.4 8.6

Cum. % Area

0

50

100

DO (mg/L): Surface

0 6 8 10

DO (mg/L): Bottom

0 6 8 10

Cum. % Area

0

50

100

Salinity (PSU): Surface

0 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

Salinity (PSU): Bottom

0 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

Cum. % Area

0

50

100

T (°C): Surface

0 6 12 18 24

T (°C): Bottom

0 6 12 18 24

Cum. % Area

0

50

100

Delta sigma-t

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

Depth (m)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Cum. % Area

0

50

100
23

Table 3.1.1. Summary of depth and water-column characteristics for near-bottom and near-surface SAB coastal ocean waters.

Near-Bottom Water Near-Surface Water

Mean Range CDF 

10th%

CDF 

50th%

CDF 

90th%

Mean Range CDF 

10th%

CDF 

50th%

CDF 

90th%

Depth (m) 29.4 8.9 - 68.1 14.3 25.7 44.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

ΔδT 0.472 0.003 - 1.715 0.097 0.275 1.048 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

DO (mg L

-1

) 7.8 6.8 - 9.9 7.1 7.6 8.9 7.7 6.8 - 9.8 6.9 7.5 8.7

Salinity (PSU) 35.6 32.9 - 36.5 33.5 36 36.4 35.3 31.2 - 36.6 33.2 35.8 36.3

Temperature (°C) 17.1 6.4 - 23.7 7.8 17.9 21.3 17.7 6.7 - 24.3 8.7 18.6 23.2

pH 8.4 8.2 - 8.6 8.2 8.3 8.5 8.2 5.8 - 8.6 7.3 8.3 8.5

DIN (mg L

-1

) 0.045 0.012 - 0.269 0.012 0.026 0.064 0.038 0.011 - 0.232 0.015 0.028 0.043

DIP (mg L

-1

) 0.024 0.010 - 0.080 0.011 0.017 0.031 0.028 0.010 - 0.110 0.011 0.017 0.037

DIN/DIP 4.01 1.07 - 8.46 2.74 3.75 6.01 3.69 0.53 - 9.00 1.92 3.81 5.23

Chl a (μg L

-1

) 0.67 0.15 - 2.83 0.23 0.41 1.39 0.44 0.09 - 2.02 0.15 0.26 1.08

TSS (mg L

-1

) 3.30 0.27 - 24.9 1.17 2.17 5.76 3.64 0.97 - 15.93 1.4 3.18 6.21
24

Figure 3.1.2. Percent area (solid lines) and 95% Confidence Intervals (dotted 

lines) of SAB estuarine depth and selected bottom water-quality characteristics.

pH: Bottom

0 5 6 7 8 9

Cum. % Area

0

50

100

DO (mg/L): Bottom

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Cum. % Area

0

50

100

Salinity (PSU): Bottom

0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42

Cum. % Area

0

50

100

Depth (m)

0 5 10 15 20

Cum. % Area

0

50

100
25

Table 3.1.2. Summary of depth and selected water column characteristics for SAB estuarine 

waters.

Mean Range CDF 

10th%

CDF 

50th%

CDF 

90th%

Depth (m) 3.5 0.1 - 16.7 0.9 2.7 5.7

Bottom DO (mg L

-1

) 4.9 0.2 - 11.6 3.9 6.3 8.1

Bottom Salinity (PPT) 23.5 0 - 42 0.9 20.2 31.7

Bottom pH 7.6 4.8 - 9.2 7.2 7.8 8.3

DIN (mg L

-1

) 0.099 0 - 1.388 0 0.022 0.131

DIP (mg L

-1

) 0.042 0 - 1.07 0.001 0.012 0.054

Chl a (μg L

-1

) 10.16 0.26 - 97.74 2.3 6.75 17.45

Water Clarity (light 

attenuation co-efficient) 2.3 0.3 - 23.3 0.7 1.3 2.5

 

Figure 3.1.3. Percent area of SAB estuarine waters within specified ranges of water 

clarity. 
26

Figure 3.1.4. Percent area of SAB coastal ocean and estuarine near-bottom waters 

within specified ranges of DO concentrations. 
27

Figure 3.1.5. Spatial distribution of bottom dissolved oxygen levels in SAB coastal 

ocean and estuarine waters. 
28

3.1.2 Nutrients and Chlorophyll

Coastal Ocean

Surface-water concentrations of total dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN: nitrate + nitrite + 

ammonium as nitrogen) ranged from 0.011 – 0.232 mg L-1and averaged 0.038 mg L-1(Figure 

3.1.6, Table 3.1.1, Appendix C). The 50th percentile of the surface-water sampling area 

corresponded to a DIN concentration of 0.028 mg L-1and the 90th percentile corresponded to a 

DIN concentration of 0.043 mg L-1. Surface-water concentrations of dissolved inorganic 

phosphate (DIP: orthophosphate as phosphate) ranged from 0.010 – 0.110 mg L-1and averaged 

0.028 mg L-1(Figure 3.1.6, Table 3.1.1). The 50th percentile of the surface-water sampling area 

corresponded to a DIP concentration of 0.017 mg L-1and the 90th percentile corresponded to a 

DIP concentration of 0.037 mg L-1.

The ratio of DIN concentration to DIP concentration (N/P ratio) was calculated as an indicator of 

which nutrient may be controlling primary production. A ratio above 16 is generally considered 

indicative of phosphorus limitation, and a ratio below 16 is considered indicative of nitrogen 

limitation (Geider and La Roche 2002). The N/P ratio in surface waters ranged from 0.53 to 9.0 

and averaged 3.69. One hundred percent of the offshore survey area had N/P ratios < 16, 

indicative of a nitrogen limited environment. The SAB coastal ocean has previously been 

reported as being primarily nitrogen limited (Pomeroy et al. 1993; Verity et al. 1993).

DIN and DIP thresholds developed for evaluation purposes in estuarine habitats are not 

applicable to the coastal-ocean environment and thus are not used in this report for evaluating the 

offshore nutrient data (Table 2.7.1). Estuaries experience a continuum of nitrogen and phosphate 

cycling and if the estuarine thresholds were applied to the nitrogen-limited offshore environment, 

the result might indicate erroneously that a large percentage of coastal ocean waters have ―high‖ 

levels of DIP. Specifically, nearly 100% of the coastal ocean area exceeded the moderate DIP 

threshold for estuarine waters (0.01 mg L

-1

) and approximately 8% of the coastal ocean area 

exceeded the high threshold for estuarine waters (0.05 mg L

-1

). In contrast, only 2% of the 

coastal-ocean area exceeded the moderate DIN threshold for estuarine waters (0.1 mg L

-1

) and 

none of the coastal-ocean area exceeded the high DIN threshold for estuarine waters (0.5 mg L

-

1

). The baseline data collected in the 2004 coastal-ocean survey may be used to develop 

applicable nutrient thresholds in the future.

Chlorophyll a (Chl a) levels in surface waters ranged from 0.09 – 2.02 μg L-1and averaged 0.44 

μg L-1(Figure 3.1.5, Table 3.1.1, Appendix C). The 50th percentile of the surface-water

sampling area corresponded to a Chl a concentration of 0.26 μg L-1and the 90th percentile 

corresponded to a Chl a concentration of 1.08 μg L-1. All offshore stations, representing 100% 

of the offshore survey area, had Chl a below the 5.0 μg L-1threshold used to denote the 

beginning of the high range for estuarine waters (U.S. EPA 2004). These data are in good 

agreement with prior studies of Chl a levels in coastal-ocean waters off South Carolina (Verity et 

al. 1998) and Georgia (Paffenhöfer et al. 1994).

The amount of TSS in the water column has a direct effect on turbidity (a measure of water 

clarity) by causing the attenuation or scattering of light, though TSS itself is not a measure of 
29

turbidity. Generally as TSS increases, the water becomes murkier or more turbid. Excessively 

high turbidity and TSS may be harmful to marine life (e.g., by reducing light penetration and 

photosynthesis, increasing biological oxygen demand of high organic content, interfering with 

normal respiratory and feeding activities) and distract from the aesthetic value of a coastal area. 

TSS levels in both surface- and bottom-waters of the coastal ocean portion of the SAB were 

relatively low (Figure 3.1.6, Table 3.1.1). The 50th percentile of the survey area had a TSS 

concentration of 3.18 mg L-1for surface-waters and 2.17 mg L-1for bottom-waters.

Estuaries

Surface water concentrations of total dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN: nitrate + nitrite + 

ammonium as nitrogen) ranged from 0.0 – 1.388 mg L-1and averaged 0.099 mg L-1(Figure 

3.1.7, Table 3.1.2). The 50th percentile of the surface water sampling area in estuaries

corresponded to a DIN concentration of 0.022 mg L-1and the 90th percentile corresponded to a 

DIN concentration of 0.131 mg L-1. Surface-water concentrations of dissolved inorganic 

phosphate (DIP: orthophosphate as phosphate) ranged from 0.0 – 1.07 mg L-1and averaged 0.042

mg L-1(Figure 3.1.7, Table 3.1.2). The 50th percentile of the surface-water sampling area 

corresponded to a DIP concentration of 0.012 mg L-1and the 90th percentile corresponded to a 

DIP concentration of 0.054 mg L-1. 

Less than 1% of the SAB estuarine area had DIN concentrations that exceeded 0.5 mg L-1, 

considered a high level of DIN, while 15% had moderate levels of DIN (0.1 – 0.5 mg L-1)

(Figure 3.1.8, Table 2.7.1). DIP concentrations exceeded 0.05 mg L-1, considered a high level of 

DIP, in 11% of the estuarine area and moderate levels of DIP (0.01 – 0.05 mg L-1) were detected 

in 45% of the estuarine area (Figure 3.1.8).

Chlorophyll a (Chl a) levels in SAB estuarine surface waters ranged from 0.26 – 97.74 μg L

-1

and averaged 10.16 μg L-1(Figure 3.1.7, Table 3.1.2). The 50th percentile of the surface-water 

sampling area corresponded to a Chl a concentration of 6.75 μg L

-1

and the 90th percentile 

corresponded to a Chl a concentration of 17.45 μg L-1. Sixty-six percent of the southeast coastal 

estuarine area had chlorophyll a concentrations in the moderate to high range in excess of 5 μg L1

(Figure 3.1.9, Table 3.1.2).

SAB Region-Wide

Estuaries throughout the SAB have shown symptoms of low to moderate eutrophication with 

some areas reported as being highly eutrophic (Mallin et al. 2000, Bricker et al. 2007). Such 

assessments are supported by the results presented here, which suggest that about 58% of the 

estuarine area is experiencing moderate levels of Chl a (5-10 μg L-1) and 8% of the area is 

experiencing higher levels in excess of 10 μg L-1(Figure 3.1.9). The elevated Chl a levels are 

widespread throughout the estuaries of the region (Figure 3.1.10). In contrast, at the time of 

sampling, coastal-ocean waters throughout the region had relatively low levels of Chl a with 

100% of the offshore survey area having values < 5 μg L-1(Figure 3.1.10). 
30

TSS: Surface

0 5 10 15

TSS: Bottom

0 5 10 15 20 25

Cum. % Area

0

50

100

CHL a: Surface

0 1 2 3

CHL a: Bottom

0 1 2 3

Cum. % Area

0

50

100

DIN/DIP: Surface

0 2 4 6 8

DIN/DIP: Bottom

0 2 4 6 8

Cum. % Area

0

50

100

DIP (mg/L): Surface

0.00 0.03 0.06 0.09 0.12

DIP (mg/L): Bottom

0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10

Cum. % Area

0

50

100

DIN (mg/L): Bottom

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3

Cum. % Area

0

50

100

DIN (mg/L): Surface

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3

Figure 3.1.6. Percent area (solid lines) and 95% Confidence Intervals (dotted lines) 

of SAB coastal ocean waters for nurtients, chlorophyll a and TSS concentrations.
31

Figure 3.1.7. Percent area (solid lines) and 95% Confidence Intervals (dotted 

lines) of SAB estuarine surface water nutrients, chlorophyll a and TSS

concentrations.

CHL a (μg/L): Surface

0 25 50 75 100

0

50

100

Cum. % Area

DIN (mg/L): Surface

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4

0

50

100

Cum. % Area

DIP (mg/L): Surface

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 1.1

0

50

100

Cum. % Area
32

Figure 3.1.8. Percent area of SAB within specified ranges of DIN and DIP for nearsurface estuarine waters only.
33

Figure 3.1.9. Percent area of SAB within specified ranges of chlorophyll a for nearsurface estuarine waters only.
34

Figure 3.1.10. Spatial distribution of surface chlorophyll a levels in SAB coastal

ocean and estuarine waters.
35

3.2 Sediment Quality

3.2.1 Grain Size and TOC

Coastal Ocean

The percentage of silt-clay in sediments ranged from 0.4% to 11.5% and averaged 1.9% 

throughout the survey area (Table 3.2.1, Appendix A). One hundred percent of the overall 

coastal-ocean survey area had sediments composed of sands (< 20% silt-clay). None of the 

stations were composed of muds (> 80% silt-clay; Figure 3.2.1).

Total organic carbon (TOC) in sediments exhibited a wide range (0.01 to 39.94 mg g

-1

) 

throughout the SAB region (Table 3.2.1). The majority of the coastal-ocean survey area (90%) 

had relatively low TOC levels of < 20 mg g

-1

and none had high levels (> 50 mg g

-1

) associated 

with a high risk of adverse effects on benthic fauna. About 10% of the offshore survey area, 

represented by three stations located consistently along the outer shelf, had intermediate levels of 

TOC (20-50 mg g

-1

) (Figure 3.2.3).

Estuaries

The percentage of silt-clay in sediments ranged widely from 0.1% to 98.8% and averaged 25.3% 

throughout the survey area (Table 3.2.1). Approximately 54% of the estuarine survey area had 

sediments composed of sands (< 20% silt-clay), 41% was composed of intermediate muddy 

sands (20-80% silt-clay), and 5% was composed of muds (> 80% silt-clay). 

TOC exhibited a wide range of 0 to 166.54 mg g

-1

and averaged 11.40 mg g

-1

(Table 3.2.1). 

Seventy-four percent of the estuarine survey area had low levels of TOC (< 20 mg g

-1 and only 

7% had high levels (> 50 mg g

-1

). These data are similar to those recorded for SAB estuaries 

during earlier surveys, although the maximum reported here (166.54 mg g

-1

) is slightly higher 

than the maximum (148 mg g

-1

) previously reported by Hyland et al. (1996, 1998).

SAB Region-Wide

Estuaries of the SAB are characterized by a wide range of sediment types from muds to sands, 

while the coastal-ocean environment consists largely of sands with typically < 5% silt-clay 

(Figure 3.2.1). TOC also exhibited a wide range of values across the SAB, with the highest 

levels occurring in estuaries (Table 3.2.1, Figure 3.2.2 and 3.2.3). About 19% of the estuarine 

survey area had TOC at moderate levels (20-50 mg g

-1

) and 7% had values in the high range (>

50 mg g

-1

) associated with a high risk of adverse effects on benthic fauna (U.S. EPA 2008). In 

comparison, offshore sediments had moderate levels of TOC in about 10% of the survey area and 

did not exhibit evidence of TOC in the upper range. The lower and upper thresholds of 20 and 

50 mg g

-1

used here for evaluating the biological significance of sediment TOC content are 

adopted from earlier EPA National Coastal Condition Reports (e.g., U.S. EPA 2004, 2008). 

Hyland et al. (2005) also identified TOC concentrations > 35 mg g

-1

as an upper range associated 

with a high risk of degraded benthic condition from multiple coastal areas around the world. The 

portion of the present offshore survey area with TOC in excess of this slightly more conservative 
36

cut point also was relatively small, 5%, represented by one station along the shelf break west of 

Cape Fear. For comparison, estuaries had TOC > 35 mg g

-1

in about 11% of the survey area.

TOC levels tended to be the highest in the upstream portions of estuaries and along the shelf 

break in the case of the offshore environment (Figure 3.2.4). All three offshore stations with 

TOC in excess of 20 mg g

-1

, inclusive of the one station off Cape Fear with TOC > 35 mg g

-1

, 

were located along the shelf break. The offshore pattern is consistent with results observed 

previously along a cross-shelf transect off the coast of Georgia (Hyland et al. 2006) and may be 

related to intrusions of deep, nutrient-rich water onto the continental shelf (Verity et al. 1993).
37

Table 3.2.1. Summary of sediment characteristics for SAB coastal ocean waters (A) and 

estuarine waters (B).

A.

Mean Range CDF 10th% CDF 50th% CDF 90th%

TOC (mg g

-1

) 3.53 0.01 - 39.94 0.07 0.53 18.2

% silt-clay 1.9 0.4 - 11.5 0.72 0.98 5.8

Mean ERM-Q 0.008 0.003 - 0.028 0.003 0.006 0.013

B. Estuaries

Mean Range CDF 10th% CDF 50th% CDF 90th%

TOC (mg g

-1

) 11.40 0 – 166.54 0.46 5.9 35.8

% silt-clay 25.3 0.1 – 98.8 1.2 13.3 73.7

Mean ERM-Q 0.019 0 – 0.968 0.003 0.013 0.076

Figure 3.2.1. Percent area of SAB coastal ocean (blue line) and estuarine (green line) 

vs. percent silt-clay of sediment.
38

Figure 3.2.2. Percent area of SAB near-bottom waters within specified ranges of TOC 

levels.

Figure 3.2.3. Percent area of SAB coastal ocean (blue line) and estuarine (green line) 

area vs. TOC levels of sediment.
39

Figure 3.2.4. Spatial distribution of total organic carbon (TOC) levels in SAB coastal 

ocean and estuarine sediments.
40

3.2.2 Chemical Contaminants in Sediments

Effects Range-Low (ERL) and Effects Range-Median (ERM) sediment quality guideline (SQG) 

values from Long et al. (1995) were used to help interpret the biological significance of observed 

chemical contaminant levels in sediments. ERL values are lower-threshold bioeffect limits, 

below which adverse effects of the contaminants on sediment-dwelling organisms are not 

expected to occur. In contrast, ERM values represent mid-range concentrations of chemicals 

above which adverse effects are more likely to occur. A list of 26 chemicals, or chemical groups, 

for which ERL and ERM guidelines have been developed is provided in Table 2.7.2 along with 

the corresponding SQG values (from Long et al. 1995). Any site with one or more chemicals 

that exceeded corresponding ERM values was rated as having poor sediment quality, any site 

with five or more chemicals between corresponding ERL and ERM values was rated as fair, and 

any site that had less than five ERLs exceeded and no ERMs exceeded was rated as good (sensu 

USEPA 2004).

Overall sediment contamination from multiple chemicals also was expressed as the mean ERM 

quotient (ERM-Q) (Long et al. 1998; Long and MacDonald 1998; Hyland et al. 1999), which is 

the mean of the ratios of individual chemical concentrations in a sample relative to 

corresponding ERM values (using all chemicals in Table 2.7.2 except nickel and total PAH). 

Mean ERM-Qs ≤ 0.018 and > 0.058 have been associated with a low and high incidence of 

stress, respectively, in benthic communities of southeastern estuaries (Hyland et al. 2003).

Coastal Ocean

Sediments throughout the coastal-ocean survey area were relatively uncontaminated with all 

stations (100%) having contaminant concentrations in the low range (Table 3.2.2, Figure 3.2.5, 

Appendix D). Three trace metals (arsenic, cadmium, and silver) were found at moderate 

concentrations between corresponding ERL and ERM values, but no chemicals were found in 

excess of the higher-threshold ERM values (Table 3.2.2). ERL values were exceeded by these 

metals only at nine of the 50 offshore stations and none of these stations had more than one ERL 

exceedance. Mean ERM-Q values were also low throughout SAB coastal ocean sediments, 

ranging from 0.003 to 0.028 and averaging 0.008 (Table 3.2.1, Appendix D). Values in the 

moderate range (> 0.018-0.057) were found at three stations representing approximately 5% of 

the offshore survey area (Figure 3.2.5). None of the offshore sediments had mean ERM-Qs in 

the high to very high range (i.e., >0.057). Arsenic, cadmium, and silver are naturally occurring 

trace metals in crustal rocks, thus it is likely that the moderately elevated levels are due to natural 

geological conditions (Kimbrough et al. 2008). 

Estuaries

Sediment contamination in estuaries was also fairly limited, although individual chemical 

contaminants exceeded their corresponding ERL values at many of the stations and ERM values 

at a few stations (Table 3.2.3). Overall, about 96% of the estuarine survey area had sediments 

with contaminants at low levels, 2% at moderate levels, and 2% at high levels based on numbers 

of ERL and ERM values exceeded (Figure 3.2.6). Three metals (arsenic, nickel, and cadmium) 

and total DDT were the predominant contaminants in estuarine sediments. Out of the 747 
41

estuarine stations where sediment contaminants were measured, lower-level ERL values were 

exceeded at 131 stations for arsenic, 70 stations for nickel, 35 stations for cadmium, and 30 

stations for total DDT. Arsenic, cadmium, and total DDT did not exceed their corresponding, 

higher-threshold ERM values at any of the estuarine sites. As with the offshore environment, 

arsenic, nickel, and cadmium are naturally occurring trace elements in crustal rocks, thus it is 

likely that the moderately elevated levels are due to natural geological conditions (Kimbrough et 

al. 2008). The higher-level ERM values were exceeded for six contaminants (mercury, nickel, 

silver, zinc, total PCBs, and 4,4′ DDE) at four of the estuarine stations. One station, FL04-0050, 

located in Doctors Lake, Florida on the St. John‘s River, accounted for the majority of this

contamination. For example, mercury, nickel, and 4,4′ DDE exceeded their corresponding ERM

values only at this station. Additionally, ERM levels for zinc and total PCBs were exceeded at 

Station FL04-0050. This area of the St. John‘s River, FL has been reported previously as 

containing high levels of chemical contaminants (Cooksey and Hyland 2007).

Mean ERM-Qs for estuarine sediments ranged from 0.0 to 0.968 and averaged 0.019 (Table 

3.2.1). Values in the low range (≤ 0.018) accounted for about 59% of the estuarine survey area, 

values in the moderate range (> 0.018-0.057) accounted for about 30% of the area, values in the 

high range (> 0.057-0.196) accounted for about 10% of the area, and values in the very high 

range (> 0.196) accounted for about 1% of the area (Figure 3.2.5). 

SAB Region-Wide

In general, sediment contamination across the majority of the SAB was at low levels. Chemical 

contaminants in offshore sediments were at low, background levels throughout the entire survey 

area. Sediment contamination, expressed as number of ERL and ERM values exceeded, was 

more extensive in estuarine sediments, though moderate to high levels were still limited to 4% of 

the total estuarine survey area (Figure 3.2.6). The spatial extent of sediment contamination in 

estuaries was somewhat higher, however, if expressed as mean ERM-Qs, with about 11% of the 

estuarine survey area having mean ERM-Qs in the high to very high range (Figure 3.2.5). 

Specific areas of high sediment contamination were located in Biscayne Bay and St. John‘s 

River, FL, and Winyah Bay, SC (Figure 3.2.7).

Hyland et al. (1996, 1998) previously completed surveys of environmental quality of estuaries of 

the SAB, in 1994 and 1995, using methodology nearly identical to that used in the current 

survey. They found that PCBs (1994) and pesticides (1995) were the most pronounced 

contaminant groups for this region. The current survey finds that PCBs and pesticide 

contamination have become less pronounced during the five to ten years between the earlier 

surveys and the data presented here. The most prevalent contaminants in the present estuarine 

survey area were three metals (arsenic, nickel, and cadmium) and total DDT. Though spatially 

extensive, all of these except nickel were present at moderate levels between corresponding ERL 

and ERM guideline values. Nickel and five other contaminants (mercury, silver, zinc, total 

PCBs, and 4,4′ DDE) were present in estuarine sediments at concentrations above the 

corresponding ERM values. However, areas with elevated chemical contaminant concentrations 

were spatially limited; ERM values were exceeded at only four of 747 stations. For the offshore 

environment, there were three metals (arsenic, cadmium, and silver) found at moderate 

concentrations between corresponding ERL and ERM values, but no chemicals were found in 
42

excess of the higher-threshold ERM values and none of the offshore stations had more than one 

chemical that exceeded its corresponding ERL value.
43

Table 3.2.2. Summary of chemical contaminant concentrations in SAB coastal ocean sediments

( ̳N/A‘ = no corresponding ERL or ERM available).

Concentration > 

ERL < ERM

Concentration 

> ERM

Analyte Mean Range # Stations # Stations

Metals (% dry wt.)

Aluminum 0.28 0 - 1.3 N/A N/A

Iron 0.41 0.11 - 2.1 N/A N/A

Trace Metals (μg/g)

Antimony 0.0318 0 - 0.48 N/A N/A

Arsenic 5.2 1.1 - 20.8 7 0

Cadmium 0.114 0 - 1.5 1 0

Chromium 11.17 1.6 - 24.9 0 0

Copper 1.0884 0 - 4.8 0 0

Lead 4.33 1.6 - 12.1 0 0

Manganese 98.15 26.1 - 603 N/A N/A

Mercury 0.00088 0 - 0.025 0 0

Nickel 2.0968 0.76 - 8.2 0 0

Selenium 0.4022 0 - 0.93 N/A N/A

Silver 0.06976 0.011 - 1.9 1 0

Tin 3.772 3 - 14.9 N/A N/A

Zinc 7.28 2.3 - 34.3 0 0

PAHs (ng/g)

Acenaphthene 0 0 - 0 0 0

Acenaphthylene 0 0 - 0 0 0

Anthracene 0 0 - 0 0 0

benz[a]anthracene 0 0 - 0 0 0

benzo[a]pyrene 0 0 - 0 0 0

benzo[b]fluoranthene 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Benzo[g,h,i]perylene 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Benzo[k]fluoranthene 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Biphenyl 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Chrysene 0 0 - 0 0 0

Dibenz[a,h]Anthracene 0 0 - 0 0 0

Dibenzothiophene (Synfuel) 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

2,6-Dimethylnaphthalene 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Fluoranthene 0 0 - 0 0 0

Fluorene 0 0 - 0 0 0

Indeno[1,2,3-c,d]Pyrene 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Naphthalene 0 0 - 0 0 0

2-Methylnaphthalene 0 0 - 0 0 0

1-Methylnaphthalene 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

1-Methylphenanthrene 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Phenanthrene 0 0 - 0 0 0

Pyrene 0 0 - 0 0 0

2,3,5-Trimethylnaphthalene 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Total PAHs 0 0 – 0 0 0

PCBs (ng/g)

Total PCBs 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Pesticides (ng/g)

2,4′-DDD 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A
44

Concentration > 

ERL < ERM

Concentration 

> ERM

Analyte Mean Range # Stations # Stations

2,4′-DDE 0 0 - 0 0 0

2,4′-DDT 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

4,4′-DDD 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

4,4′-DDE 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

4,4′-DDT 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Total DDT 0 0 – 0 0 0

Aldrin 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Alpha-Chlordane 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Atrazine 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Dieldrin 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Endosulfan I 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Endosulfan II 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Endosulfan Sulfate 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Endrin 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Gamma-BHC (Lindane) 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Heptachlor 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Heptachlor Epoxide 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Hexachlorobenzene 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Mirex 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Toxaphene 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Trans-Nonachlor 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A
45

Figure 3.2.5. Percent area of SAB sediment contamination, expressed as 

mean ERM-Q, levels within specified ranges.
46

Table 3.2.3. Summary of chemical contaminant concentrations in SAB estuarine sediments

( ̳N/A‘ = no corresponding ERL or ERM available).

Concentration > 

ERL < ERM

Concentration 

> ERM

Analyte Mean Range # Stations # Stations

Metals (μg/g)

Aluminum 21464.11 0 - 180000 N/A N/A

Iron 13846.71 0 - 100000 N/A N/A

Antimony 0.22161 0 - 5.4 N/A N/A

Arsenic 4.81 0 - 26.8 131 0

Cadmium 0.2221 0 - 4.85 35 0

Chromium 24.281 0 - 250 21 0

Copper 5.8 0 - 130 7 0

Lead 11.92 0 - 180 10 0

Manganese 197.59 0 - 1426.9 N/A N/A

Mercury 0.026676 0 - 1.2 15 1

Nickel 7.7511 0 - 90 70 1

Selenium 0.4543 0 - 46 N/A N/A

Silver 0.0647 0 - 5.8 4 1

Tin 3.087 0 - 248.2 N/A N/A

Zinc 31.66 0 - 628 7 2

PAHs (ng/g)

Acenaphthene 0.604 0 - 123.1 9 0

Acenaphthylene 0.782 0 - 96 4 0

Anthracene 2.075 0 - 442 4 0

Benz[a]anthracene 5.558 0 - 602 3 0

Benzo[a]pyrene 5.182 0 - 640 2 0

Benzo[b]fluoranthene 6.966 0 - 770 N/A N/A

Benzo[e]pyrene 4.307 0 - 389 N/A N/A

Benzo[g,h,i]perylene 3.236 0 - 700 N/A N/A

Benzo[j+k]fluoranthene 8.246 0 - 487 N/A N/A

Benzo[k]fluoranthene 3.231 0 - 690 N/A N/A

Biphenyl 0.809 0 - 97.9 N/A N/A

Chrysene 4.971 0 - 560 1

Dibenz[a,h]anthracene 0.125 0 - 5.9 0 0

Dibenzothiophene 0.285 0 - 91 N/A N/A

2,6-Dimethylnaphthalene 0.848 0 - 91 N/A N/A

Fluoranthene 13.044 0 - 1100 2 0

Fluorene 0.840 0 - 93 7 0

Indeno[1,2,3-c,d]pyrene 2.973 0 - 560 N/A N/A

1-Methylnaphthalene 1.033 0 - 92 N/A N/A

2-Methylnaphthalene 1.383 0 - 88 3 0

1-Methylphenanthrene 0.364 0 - 100 N/A N/A

Naphthalene 2.562 0 - 470 1 0

Perylene 45.119 0 - 1813.5 N/A N/A

Phenanthrene 4.355 0 - 330 2 0

Pyrene 12.860 0 - 1200 1 0

2,3,5-Trimethylnaphthalene 0.241 0 - 90 N/A N/A

Total PAHs 97.450 0 - 7580 2 0

PCBs (ng/g)

Total PCBs 4.640 0 - 2526 1 2
47

Concentration > 

ERL < ERM

Concentration 

> ERM

Analyte Mean Range # Stations # Stations

Pesticides (ng/g)

2,4'-DDD 0.015 0 - 1.7 N/A N/A

2,4'-DDE 0.004 0 - 0.66 N/A N/A

2,4'-DDT 0.003 0 - 0.82 N/A N/A

4,4'-DDD 0.058 0 - 5.7 N/A N/A

4,4'-DDE 0.173 0 - 35 4 1

4,4'-DDT 0.0308 0 - 5.8 N/A N/A

Total DDT 0.280 0 - 35 30 0

Aldrin 0.120 0 - 88 N/A N/A

Alpha-Chlordane 0.005 0 - 0.58 N/A N/A

Dieldrin 0.048 0 - 30.28 N/A N/A

Endosulfan I 0.002 0 - 0.69 N/A N/A

Endosulfan II 0.007 0 - 2.6 N/A N/A

Endosulfan Sulfate 0.026 0 - 8.5 N/A N/A

Endrin 0.0072899 0 - 1 N/A N/A

Gamma-BHC (Lindane) 0.011 0 - 1.2 N/A N/A

Heptachlor 0.002 0 - 0.34 N/A N/A

Heptachlor Epoxide 0.003 0 - 1 N/A N/A

Hexachlorobenzene 0.053 0 - 7.7 N/A N/A

Mirex 0.019 0 - 3.3 N/A N/A

Toxaphene 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Trans-Nonachlor 0.001 0 - 0.25 N/A N/A
48

Figure 3.2.6. Percent area of SAB sediment contamination levels, expressed 

as number of ERL and ERM values exceeded, within specified ranges.
49

Figure 3.2.7. Spatial distribution of sediment contaminant levels in SAB coastal 

ocean and estuarine sediments.
50

3.2.3 Sediment Toxicity (Estuaries Only)

Ninety-five percent of the estuarine survey area showed no signs of sediment toxicity based on 

the 10-day survival assay with the marine amphipod Ampelisca abdita, (Figure 3.2.6). This low 

incidence of sediment toxicity is consistent with results from previous surveys of sediment 

quality throughout the southeastern estuaries (Hyland et al. 1996, 1998).

Figure 3.2.8. Percent area of SAB estuarine toxicity levels within specified ranges.
51

3.3 Chemical Contaminants in Fish Tissues

Coastal Ocean

Analysis of chemical contaminants in fish tissues was performed on homogenized fillets 

(including skin) from 20 samples of seven fish species collected from 17 stations. The fish 

species were sand perch (Diplectrum formosum), black seabass (Centropristis striata), dusky 

flounder (Syacium papillosum), whitebone porgy (Calamus leucosteus), red porgy (Pagrus 

pagrus), lizardfish (Synodus foetens), and snake fish (Trachinocephalus myops). Many of the

measured contaminants in these samples were below corresponding minimum detection limits 

(MDL)(Table 3.3.1). However, 16 of the 22 inorganic trace metals that were measured (Al, As, 

Ba, Cr, Cu, Fe, Pb, Mn, Ni, Hg, Se, Ag, Sr, Ti, V, and Zn) were present at detectable levels and 

nine of the 26 measured PAHs were present at detectable levels. Additionally, there were 

several other organic contaminants that were present at detectable levels including total PCBs

and 4,4'-DDT.

USEPA (2000) developed human-health consumption limits for cancer and non-cancer (chronic 

systemic) health endpoints for a variety of contaminants (Table 2.7.3). Measured contaminant 

concentrations (Table 3.3.1) fell well below the non-cancer consumption limits for most 

chemicals. However, one red porgy (Station 42) and one sand perch (Station 2) had mercury 

levels that exceeded the lower threshold for non-cancer effects (0.12 μg g

-1

), but did not exceed 

the higher non-cancer effects threshold (0.23 μg g

-1

).

Estuaries

Analysis of chemical contaminants in fish issues was performed on whole bodies from 166

samples of 14 fish species collected from 153 estuarine stations. Nearly all of the measured 

contaminants were found at detectable levels in at least a portion of the samples (Table 3.3.2). 

However, most samples had contaminants below both the lower and upper thresholds for noncancer human-health risks. Four fish samples had mercury concentrations between the lower and 

upper thresholds (0.12 μg g

-1

and 0.23 μg g

-1

, respectively). Three fish samples had total PCB 

concentrations that exceeded the lower threshold (23 μg g

-1

) and one fish had total PCBs in 

excess of the corresponding higher threshold (47 ng/g). Three fish samples also had total PAHs 

that exceeded both the lower (1.6 μg g

-1

) and upper (3.2 μg g

-1

) cancer effects thresholds.

SAB Region-Wide

Of the seventeen coastal-ocean stations where fish were collected and analyzed for chemical 

contaminants, only two (12% of sites) had moderate levels of tissue contaminants, between 

lower and upper non-cancer effect thresholds, and none of the measured fish had high levels of 

tissue contaminants above the upper threshold (Table 2.7.1). At estuarine sites, in contrast, six

stations (4% of sites) had high levels of tissue contaminants, exceeding the upper end of the 

human-health guideline range, and eight stations (5% of sites) had moderate levels of tissue 

contaminants (Figure 3.3.1).
52

Table 3.3.1 Summary of chemical contaminant concentrations (wet weight) measured in tissues 

of 20 fish (from 17 coastal ocean stations). Concentrations are compared to human health 

guidelines where available (from US EPA 2000, Table 2.7.3 here in).  ̳N/A‘ = no corresponding 

human health guideline available.

No. of Fish Exceeding Non-Cancer 

Endpoints

Analyte Mean Range Lower Upper

Trace Metals (μg g

-1

)

Aluminum (Al) 2 1 - 5 N/A N/A

Antimony (Sb) 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Arsenic (As) 4.92 0.7 - 14.3 0 0

Inorganic Arsenic 0.098 0.014 - 0.286 N/A N/A

Cadmium (Cd) 0 0 - 0 0 0

Chromium (Cr) 0.82 0.1 - 1.7 N/A N/A

Copper (Cu) 0.3 0.2 - 0.67 N/A N/A

Iron (Fe) 7.35 3 - 10 N/A N/A

Lead (Pb) 0.029 0.01 - 0.09 N/A N/A

Manganese (Mn) 0.31 0.1 - 0.7 N/A N/A

Mercury (Hg) 0.068 0.025 - 0.158 2 0

Nickel (Ni) 0.1 0.1 - 0.1 N/A N/A

Selenium (Se) 0.415 0.3 - 0.8 0 0

Silver (Ag) 0.1 0.1 - 0.1 N/A N/A

Tin (Sn) 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Zinc (Zn) 5.2 4 - 7 N/A N/A

PAHs (ng g

-1

)

Total Detectable PAHs10.545 0 - 4.15 0 0

PCBs (ng g

-1

)

Total Detectable PCBs 0.06 0 - 1.19 0 0

Pesticides (ng g

-1

)

2,4'-DDD 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

2,4'-DDE 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

2,4'-DDT 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

4,4'-DDD 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

4,4'-DDE 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

4,4'-DDT 0.3 0.3 - 0.3 N/A N/A

Aldrin 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

BHC-alpha 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Chlordane-alpha 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Dieldrin 0 0 - 0 0 0

Endosulfan Sulfate 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Endosulfan-I 0 0 - 0 0 0

Endosulfan-II 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Endrin 0 0 - 0 0 0

Heptachlor 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Heptachlor Epoxide 0 0 - 0 0 0

Hexachlorobenzene 0 0 - 0 0 0

Lindane 0 0 - 0 0 0

Mirex 0 0 - 0 0 0

Toxaphene 0 0 - 0 0 0

trans-Nonachlor 0 0 - 0 N/A N/A

Total Detectable DDTs 0.015 0 - 0.3 0 0

1. Cancer concentration range used, a non-cancer concentration range for PAHs does not exist.
53

Table 3.3.2 Summary of chemical contaminant concentrations (wet weight) measured in tissues 

of 166 fish samples (from 153 estuarine stations). Concentrations are compared to human health 

guidelines where available (from US EPA 2000, Table 2.7.3 here in).  ̳N/A‘ = no corresponding 

human health guideline available.

No. of Fish Exceeding Non-Cancer 

Endpoints

Analyte Mean Range Lower Upper

Trace Metals (μg g

-1

)

Aluminum (Al) 9.934 0 - 121 N/A N/A

Antimony (Sb) 0.059 0 - 0.580 N/A N/A

Arsenic (As) 1.097 0 - 5.0 0 0

Inorganic Arsenic 0.02194 0 – 0.1 N/A N/A

Cadmium (Cd) 0.004 0 - 0.080 0 0

Chromium (Cr) 0.355 0 - 9.9 N/A N/A

Copper (Cu) 0.642 0.2 – 7.93 N/A N/A

Iron (Fe) 21.211 1.9 - 273 N/A N/A

Lead (Pb) 0.285 0 - 23.9 N/A N/A

Manganese (Mn) 3.409 0.27 - 37.3 N/A N/A

Mercury (Hg) 0.029 0 - 0.2 4 0

Nickel (Ni) 0.043 0 - 0.730 N/A N/A

Selenium (Se) 0.690 0.25 - 1.3 0 0

Silver (Ag) 0.003 0 - 0.085 N/A N/A

Tin (Sn) 1.555 0 - 17.2 N/A N/A

Zinc (Zn) 10.624 4.05 - 32 N/A N/A

PAHs (ng g

-1

)

Total Detectable PAHs113.934 0 - 460 0 3

PCBs (ng/g)

Total Detectable PCBs 4.789 0 - 54.0 3 1

Pesticides (ng g

-1

)

Aldrin 0.060 0 – 2.0 N/A N/A

Chlordane-alpha 0.060 0 - 2.0 N/A N/A

Dieldrin 0.076 0 - 2.0 0 0

Endosulfan 0.181 0 - 6.0 N/A N/A

Endrin 0.060 0 - 2.0 0 0

Heptachlor 0.060 0 - 2.0 N/A N/A

Heptachlor Epoxide 0.060 0 - 2.0 0 0

Hexachlorobenzene 0.069 0 - 2.0 0 0

Lindane 0.060 0 - 2.0 0 0

Mirex 0.076 0 - 2.0 0 0

Toxaphene 7.530 0 - 250 0 0

trans-Nonachlor 0.060 0 -2.0 N/A N/A

Total Detectable DDTs 1.379 0 - 16.00 0 0

1. Cancer concentration range used, a non-cancer concentration range for PAHs does not exist.
54

Figure 3.3.1. Percent of sites of SAB fish tissue contamination levels within 

consumption guideline ranges.
55

3.4 Status of Benthic Communities

Macrobenthic infauna (> 0.5 mm) were sampled at a total of 50 coastal ocean stations and 746 

estuarine stations throughout the SAB. A single grab (0.04 m

2

) was collected at all stations

except for South Carolina estuaries, at which duplicates were taken, thus resulting in a total of 

1,039 benthic grabs. The duplicate samples were averaged for the calculation of CDFs and other 

analysis purposes. The resulting data are used here to assess the status of benthic community 

characteristics (taxonomic composition, diversity, abundance and dominant species), 

biogeographic patterns, incidence of non-indigenous species, and potential linkages to ecosystem 

stressors.

3.4.1 Taxonomic Composition

Coastal Ocean

A total of 462 taxa were identified across the coastal ocean portion of the SAB, of which 313 

were identified to the species level. Polychaetes were the dominant taxa, both by percent 

abundance (47%) and percent taxa (47%; Figure 3.4.1, Table 3.4.1). Crustaceans were the 

second most dominant taxa, both by percent abundance (28%) and percent taxa (30%).

Collectively, these two groups represented 75% of the total faunal abundance and 77% of the 

taxa throughout these offshore waters. Crustaceans were represented mostly by amphipods (65

identifiable taxa, 14% of the total number of taxa). Mollusca accounted for 17% of taxa 

identified in coastal ocean samples, but only 9% of total faunal abundance. Echinoderms 

accounted for a small portion of total fauna by both percent abundance (2%) and percent taxa 

(2%).

Estuaries

A total of 948 taxa were identified across the estuarine portion of the SAB, of which 545 were 

identified to the species level. Polychaetes were the dominant taxa, both by percent abundance 

(58%) and percent taxa (37%; Figure 3.4.1, Table 3.4.2). Crustaceans were the second most 

dominant taxa, both by percent abundance (18%) and percent taxa (29%). Collectively, these two 

groups represented 76% of the total faunal abundance and 66% of the taxa throughout the 

estuaries of the SAB. Crustaceans were represented mostly by amphipods (124 identifiable taxa, 

13.1% of the total number of taxa). Mollusca accounted for 25% of taxa identified in coastal 

ocean samples, but only 9% of total faunal abundance.

SAB Region-Wide

Taxonomic composition, based on major taxonomic groups, was very consistent between the

coastal-ocean and estuarine portions of the SAB survey area (Figure 3.4.1). Polychaetes, 

followed by crustaceans, were the dominant taxa both by percent abundance and percent taxa 

across the region. However, the total number of taxa per unit of sampling effort was much 

higher for the offshore waters. For example, while a total of 948 benthic taxa were identified 

from 746 estuarine sites, almost half the number of taxa (462 or 49%) were identified from only 
56

50 offshore sites (6.7% of the estuarine sites). This observation is consistent with the observed 

patterns of species diversity discussed below.

Figure 3.4.1. Relative percent composition of major taxonomic groups expressed as (A) 

percent of total taxa and (B) percent of abundance for coastal ocean and estuarine waters.
57

Table 3.4.1. Summary of major taxonomic groups of benthic infauna and corresponding 

numbers of identifiable taxa in samples from SAB coastal ocean sites.

Taxonomic Group Number identifiable taxa % Total identifiable taxa

Phylum Cnidaria 1 0.2

 Class Anthozoa 1 0.2

Phylum Platyhelminthes 1 0.2

Phylum Nemertea 3 0.6

Phylum Sipuncula 6 1.3

Phylum Annelida

 Class Polychaeta 215 46.5

 Class Clitellata 2 0.4

Phylum Arthropoda

Subphylum Crustacea

 Class Malacostraca

 Order Stomatopoda 1 0.2

 Order Decapoda 18 3.9

 Order Mysidacea 1 0.2

 Order Cumacea 11 2.4

 Order Tanaidacea 9 1.9

 Order Isopoda 14 3.0

 Order Amphipoda 65 14.1

 Class Ostracoda 20 4.3

Subphylum Chelicerata

 Class Arachnida 1 0.2

Phylum Mollusca

 Class Polyplacophora 1 0.2

 Class Gastropoda 24 5.2

 Class Bivalvia 45 9.7

 Class Scaphopoda 7 1.5

Phylum Phoronida 1 0.2

Phylum Ectoprocta 1 0.2

Phylum Brachiopoda 1 0.2

Phylum Echinodermata

 Class Asteroidea 2 0.4

 Class Ophiuroidea 4 0.9

 Class Echinoidea 3 0.6

 Class Holothuroidea 2 0.4

Phylum Chordata 2 0.4

Total 462 100
58

Table 3.4.2 Summary of major taxonomic groups of benthic infauna and corresponding numbers 

of identifiable taxa in samples from SAB estuarine sites.

Taxonomic Group Number identifiable taxa % Total identifiable taxa

Phylum Porifera 1 0.1

Phylum Cnidaria 1 0.1

 Class Hydrozoa 5 0.5

 Class Anthozoa 3 0.3

Phylum Platyhelminthes 3 0.3

Phylum Nemertea 7 0.7

Phylum Sipuncula 2 0.2

Phylum Annelida 1 0.1

 Class Polychaeta 350 36.9

 Class Clitellata 11 1.2

Phylum Arthropoda 1 0.1

Subphylum Crustacea 1 0.1

 Class Malacostraca

 Order Leptostraca 1 0.1

 Order Stomatopoda 1 0.1

 Order Decapoda 74 7.8

 Order Mysidacea 13 1.4

 Order Lophogastridae 1 0.1

 Order Cumacea 15 1.6

 Order Tanaidacea 13 1.4

 Order Isopoda 35 3.7

 Order Amphipoda 124 13.1

Subphylum Hexapoda

 Class Insecta 18 1.9

Subphylum Chelicerata

 Class Pycnogonida 9 0.9

Phylum Mollusca

 Class Polyplacophora 3 0.3

 Class Gastropoda 108 11.4

 Class Bivalvia 122 12.9

 Class Scaphopoda 1 0.1

Phylum Phoronida 2 0.2

Phylum Brachiopoda 1 0.1

Phylum Echinodermata

 Class Asteroidea 2 0.2

 Class Ophiuroidea 9 0.9

 Class Holothuroidea 7 0.7

Phylum Chaetognatha 1 0.1

Phylum Hemichordata 2 0.2

Total 948 100
59

3.4.2 Abundance and Dominant Taxa

Coastal Ocean

A total of 6,236 individual specimens were collected across the 50 coastal-ocean stations (50,

0.04 m-2grab samples). Densities ranged from 275 to 23,650 m-2and averaged 3,118 m

-2

(Figure 

3.4.2, Table 3.4.3, Appendix E). Thus there were no offshore samples that were devoid of 

benthic fauna. Spatially, 90% of the shelf area had densities ≥ 635 m

-2

and 50% of the shelf area 

had densities ≥ 2350 m-2(Table 3.4.3). The average densities reported from this survey for the 

entire coastal-ocean portion of the SAB are similar to densities previously reported for the 

continental shelf off Georgia, inclusive of GRNMS, where inner-shelf densities averaged 4958 

m

-2

, middle-shelf densities averaged 5901 m-2, and outer-shelf densities averaged 1550 m-2

(Hyland et al. 2006). There were no apparent patterns of increasing or decreasing abundance in 

relation to depth or latitudinal variation in the current survey.

The 50 most abundant taxa found in shelf waters throughout the region are listed in Table 3.4.4. 

The 10 most abundant taxa on this list include the polychaetes Spiophanes bombyx, 

Protodorvillea kefersteini, Mediomastus spp., Synelmis ewingi, and Exogone lourei; the 

amphipods Ampelisca abdita and Protohaustorius wigleyi; tubificid oligochaetes; the chordate 

Branchiostoma spp.; and the Nemertea. Ampelisca abdita was the most abundant taxon overall, 

although it was only found at one station located north of Cape Hatteras (station 37) in very high 

numbers. The three taxa with the highest frequency of occurrence were the Nemertea, the 

Tubificidae, and the polychaete S. bombyx. Four of the top-five dominant taxa (S.bombyx, P. 

wigleyi; tubificid oligochaetes; and Branchiostoma spp.) found in the current survey were also 

among the dominant taxa previously reported at GRNMS and nearby shelf waters (Hyland et al. 

2006).

Estuaries

A total of 160,378 individual specimens were collected across 746 estuarine stations (1,039 0.04 

m

-2

grab samples). Densities ranged from 0 to 103,350 m-2and averaged 3,525 m-2(Figure 3.4.3, 

Table 3.4.3). Eleven stations, accounting for 1.9% of estuarine area, were devoid of benthic 

fauna. Spatially, 90% of the estuarine area had densities ≥ 180, and 50% of the estuarine area 

had densities ≥ 1610 m-2(Table 3.4.3). The overall mean density reported here for SAB 

estuaries during 2000-2004 is in good agreement with previously reported mean densities for the 

same region — 4,125 m-2in 1994 and 3,100 m-2in 1995 (Hyland et al. 1996; Hyland et al. 1998).

The fifty most abundant taxa found in SAB estuaries are listed in Table 3.4.5. The ten most 

abundant taxa on the list include several polychaetes: Streblospio benedicti, Mediomastus spp., 

Lumbrineris tenuis, Caulleriella spp., Tharyx acutus, and Exogone spp. Two oligochaete taxa, 

Tubificidae and Tubificoides wasselli, and two amphipod taxa, Ampelisca abdita and Ampelisca 

vadorum, are also among the top ten dominants. The most abundant taxon overall, S. benedicti, 

also had the highest frequency of occurrence (52%). Two of the current dominant taxa, S. 

benedicti and Mediomastus spp., were also among the top five dominant taxa during previous 

surveys of benthic fauna from southeastern estuaries (Hyland et al. 1996, 1998).
60

SAB Region-Wide

Mean densities were similar between the coastal-ocean and estuarine environments, i.e. 3,118 m2

and 3,525 m-2respectively (Table 3.4.3). Inner-quartile ranges (middle 25th to 75th percentile of 

observed values) were similar as well, i.e. 1400 m-2to 3725 m-2and 650 m-2 to 4250 m-2for 

offshore and estuarine waters respectively. However, the overall range of densities among 

stations was much larger for estuaries (0 to 103,350 m-2) than for the offshore waters (275 to 

23,650 m-2). The low end of the density range for estuaries included azoic conditions at 11 of the 

stations. 

There was little overlap of dominant benthic taxa between the estuarine and coastal-ocean 

environments. Specifically, only five taxa were common to both the offshore and estuarine lists 

of fifty most abundant taxa. These taxa were the amphipod Ampelisca abdita, the polychaete

Mediomastus spp., Actiniaria, Nemertea, and Tubificidae. As noted earlier, although A. abdita is 

the dominant taxon in the coastal-ocean environment, it was only collected at one station where 

it was found in very high numbers. No taxa identified to the species level, other than A. abdita, 

were among the fifty most abundant taxa in both the estuarine and coastal-ocean environments.
61

Figure 3.4.2. Percent area (solid lines) and 95% Confidence Intervals (dotted lines) of 

SAB coastal ocean benthic infaunal species richness (A), density (B), and H′ diversity 

(C).

H'/grab

0 2 4 6

Cum. % Area

0

50

100 C.

# Species/Grab

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Cum. % Area

0

50

100 A.

Density (#/m2)

0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000

0

50

100 B.
62

Table 3.4.3. Mean, range, and selected distributional properties of key benthic variables for (A) coastal ocean and (B) estuarine 

sediments.

A. Coastal Ocean

Overall 

Mean

Overall Range Areal-Based Percentiles1: Frequency-Based Percentiles2 

 

 

CDF 10th % CDF 50th % CDF 90th % 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

# Taxa per 

grab 38 10 - 114 15 34 64 16 23 34 48 67

Density 

(#/m2)

3118 275 - 23650 635 2350 5150 650 1400 2362 3725 5425

H′ per 

grab 4.17 1.98 – 6.13 2.88 4.07 5.43 2.92 3.50 4.12 4.84 5.50

B. Estuaries

Overall 

Mean

Overall Range Areal-Based Percentiles1: Frequency-Based Percentiles2 

 

 

CDF 10th % CDF 50th % CDF 90th % 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

# Taxa per 

grab

16 0 - 83 4 11 32 4 6 12 23 37

Density 

(#/m2)

3525 0 - 103350 180 1610 6638 225 650 1825 4250 8400

H′ per 

grab

2.60 0 – 5.32 1.17 2.60 3.86 1.09 1.91 2.65 3.44 3.99

1 Value of response variable corresponding to the designated cumulative % area point along the y-axis of the CDF graph.

2 Corresponding lower 10th percentile, lower quartile, median, upper quartile, and upper 10th percentile of all values for each of the 3 

benthic variables.
63

Table 3.4.4. Fifty most abundant benthic taxa in the SAB coastal ocean survey. Mean density 

per m2and % frequency of occurrence based on 50 grabs. Classification: Native=native species, 

Indeter=Indeterminate. 

Taxa Name Taxon Classification

Mean 

Density

% Frequency of 

Occurrence

Ampelisca abdita Amphipod Native 356.5 2

Tubificidae Oligochaete Indeter 123.5 62

Branchiostoma spp. Chordate Indeter 103.5 48

Spiophanes bombyx Polychaete Native 102 62

Protohaustorius wigleyi Amphipod Native 79.5 18

Nemertea Nemertean Indeter 57 66

Protodorvillea kefersteini Polychaete Native 54 44

Mediomastus spp. Polychaete Indeter 51.5 18

Synelmis ewingi Polychaete Native 51 26

Exogone lourei Polychaete Native 42.5 20

Solen viridis Bivalve Native 38 20

Prionospio spp. Polychaete Indeter 37.5 42

Cnidaria Cnidarian Indeter 36.5 10

Pisione remota Polychaete Native 36.5 30

Goniadides carolinae Polychaete Native 35.5 30

Chone spp. Polychaete Indeter 31 28

Glyceridae Polychaete Indeter 31 42

Lumbrineris verrilli Polychaete Native 30.5 6

Metharpinia floridana Amphipod Native 30.5 32

Apseudes sp. A Tanaid Native 30 10

Caecum johnsoni Gastropod Native 29.5 20

Maldanidae Polychaete Indeter 29 26

Polygordius spp. Polychaete Indeter 28.5 32

Ophiuroidea Ophiuroid Indeter 27.5 32

Unciola irrorata Amphipod Native 26 20

Caecum pulchellum Gastropod Native 25 12

Bathyporeia parkeri Amphipod Native 24.5 16

Apseudes olympiae Tanaid Native 23 26

Lumbrinerides dayi Polychaete Native 22 14

Bhawania goodei Polychaete Native 21.5 32

Nephtyidae Polychaete Indeter 21.5 46

Dentatisyllis carolinae Polychaete Native 20.5 30

Branchiomma nigromaculata Polychaete Native 19.5 4

Spionidae Genus F Spionid Indeter 19 14

Armandia maculata Polychaete Native 17.5 26

Bhawania heteroseta Polychaete Native 17.5 10

Cirrophorus lyra Polychaete Native 17.5 24

Euchone spp. Polychaete Indeter 17.5 16

Spionidae Spionid Indeter 17.5 36
64

Taxa Name Taxon Classification

Mean 

Density

% Frequency of 

Occurrence

Goniadella sp. A Polychaete Native 17 14

Terebellidae Polychaete Indeter 17 20

Cirratulidae Polychaete Indeter 15.5 34

Actiniaria Cnidarian Indeter 15 16

Notomastus latericeus Polychaete Native 15 10

Oxyurostylis smithi Cumacean Native 15 12

Phtisica marina Amphipod Native 15 16

Laevicardium spp. Bivalve Indeter 14.5 14

Scoloplos capensis Polychaete Native 14.5 8

Sphaerosyllis glandulata Polychaete Native 14.5 18

Acanthohaustorius millsi Amphipod Native 14 20
65

Table 3.4.5 Fifty most abundant benthic taxa in the SAB estuarine survey. Mean density per m2

and % frequency of occurrence based on 1039 grabs. Classification: Native=native species, 

Indeter=Indeterminate, Non-Ind =non-indigenous. 

Taxa Name Taxon Classification

Mean 

Density

% Frequency of 

Occurrence

Streblospio benedicti Polychaete Native 432.1 52

Mediomastus spp. Polychaete Indeter 193.5 49

Tubificidae Oligochaete Indeter 167.1 41

Lumbrineris tenuis Polychaete Native 153.5 35

Tubificoides wasselli Oligochaete Native 126.4 15

Ampelisca abdita Amphipod Native 124.8 19

Caulleriella spp. Polychaete Indeter 114.1 12

Ampelisca vadorum Amphipod Native 96.8 6

Tharyx acutus Polychaete Native 90.0 29

Exogone spp. Polychaete Indeter 81.4 17

Sabellaria vulgaris Polychaete Native 65.5 13

Parapionosyllis spp. Polychaete Indeter 57.8 7

Scoloplos rubra Polychaete Native 57.7 26

Polydora cornuta Polychaete Native 50.7 19

Actiniaria Actiniarian Indeter 50.2 13

Tubificoides brownae Oligochaete Native 49.9 19

Paraprionospio pinnata Polychaete Native 46.9 28

Mediomastus ambiseta Polychaete Native 45.9 21

Nemertea Nemertean Indeter 45.9 46

Cirratulidae Polychaete Indeter 45.8 23

Aphelochaeta spp. Polychaete Indeter 44.9 11

Ampelisca spp. Amphipod Indeter 37.5 7

Mulinia lateralis Bivalve Native 36.0 12

Heteromastus filiformis Polychaete Native 35.1 31

Acteocina canaliculata Gastropod Native 34.4 14

Tharyx spp. Polychaete Indeter 32.9 9

Protohaustorius deichmannae Amphipod Native 31.9 4

Neanthes succinea Polychaete Native 30.2 24

Batea catharinensis Amphipod Native 29.8 12

Aricidea wassi Polychaete Native 29.6 10

Streptosyllis spp. Polychaete Indeter 27.1 11

Spiochaetopterus costarum

oculatus Polychaete Native 26.7 13

Mediomastus californiensis Polychaete Native 26.1 10

Marenzelleria viridis Polychaete Native 26.0 7

Polydora socialis Polychaete Native 23.8 12

Polycirrus spp. Polychaete Indeter 23.0 4

Clymenella torquata Polychaete Native 22.0 10

Cirrophorus spp. Polychaete Indeter 21.5 11

Bivalvia Bivalve Indeter 21.3 23
66

Taxa Name Taxon Classification

Mean 

Density

% Frequency of 

Occurrence

Tellina agilis Bivalve Native 21.1 13

Carinomella lactea Nemertean Native 20.4 17

Thyone pawsoni Holothuroid Native 19.9 0

Unciola serrata Amphipod Native 18.2 4

Leptocheirus plumulosus Amphipod Native 17.6 3

Melita nitida Amphipod Native 17.2 10

Cyathura burbancki Isopod Native 17.0 9

Veneroida Bivalve Indeter 15.3 8

Rangia cuneata Bivalve Non-Ind 15.0 6

Paracaprella tenuis Amphipod Native 14.8 10

Ampelisca verrilli Amphipod Native 14.7 8
67

Figure 3.4.3. Percent area (solid lines) and 95% Confidence Intervals (dotted 

lines) of SAB estuarine benthic infaunal species richness (A), density (B), and H′ 

diversity (C).

# Species/Grab

0 20 40 60 80 100

Cum. % Area

0

50

100 A.

Density (#/m2)

0 5000 10000 15000 105000

0

50

100

Cum. % Area

B.

H'/grab

0 2 4 6

Cum. % Area

0

50

100 C.
68

3.4.3 Diversity

Coastal Ocean

Species richness, expressed as the number of taxa present in a 0.04 m2grab, was relatively high 

in the coastal-ocean assemblages. A total of 462 taxa were identified region-wide from the 50 

benthic grabs. Species richness ranged from 10 to 114 taxa/grab and averaged 38 taxa grab-1

(Table 3.4.3, Figure 3.4.2, Appendix E). Approximately 50% of the offshore survey area had ≥ 

34 taxa grab-1and 10% of the area had ≥ 64 taxa grab-1.

The high species richness, plus an even distribution of species abundance within stations, 

resulted in high values of the diversity index H′ (log base 2) for the coastal ocean portion of the 

SAB. Diversity values ranged from 1.98 to 6.13 grab-1and averaged 4.17 grab-1 (Table 3.4.3, 

Figure 3.4.2, Appendix E). Approximately 50% of the offshore survey area had H′ ≥ 4.07 grab-1

and 10% of the area had H′ ≥ 5.43 grab-1. 

Estuaries

Species richness values for estuarine waters, expressed as the number of taxa present in a 0.04 

m

2

grab, were consistent with previous reports of southeastern estuarine benthic assemblages 

(Hyland et al. 1996, Hyland et al. 1998). A total of 948 taxa were identified region-wide from 

the 1,039 benthic grabs. Species richness ranged from 0 to 83 taxa grab-1and averaged 16 taxa

grab-1(Table 3.4.3, Figure 3.4.3). Approximately 50% of the estuarine survey area had ≥ 11 taxa 

grab-1and 10% of the area had ≥ 32 taxa grab-1. 

Values for the diversity index H′ (log base 2) ranged from 0 to 5.32 grab-1and averaged 2.60

grab-1 (Table 3.4.3, Figure 3.4.3). Approximately 50% of the estuarine survey area had H′ ≥ 2.60

grab-1and 10% had H′ ≥ 3.86 grab-1. These values are very similar to results for estuaries 

sampled in this same region in the mid-1990s (Hyland et al. 1996; Hyland et al. 1998).

SAB Region-Wide

Diversity of benthic macroinfauna, as measured by species richness and the diversity index H′, 

was higher in the offshore than in estuarine portions of the region. As an example, species 

richness averaged 38 taxa grab-1in offshore waters and was less than half that number (16 taxa

grab-1) in estuaries. Only three of the 50 offshore stations, representing about 10% of the 

offshore survey area, had ≤ 16 taxa grab-1(the estuarine mean). A more detailed examination of 

species richness, using quartile ranges, across the SAB shows a general pattern of decreasing 

species richness with increasing latitude for the coastal ocean portion of the sampling area, 

though no such pattern was apparent for the estuarine portion of the region (Figure 3.4.4). Also, 

within the offshore environment, the highest species richness values tend to occur more in the 

outer shelf areas. When species richness is examined with the offshore and estuarine data 

combined, it is clear that the highest values occur primarily offshore while the lowest values 

occur inshore (Figure 3.4.5).
69

Figure 3.4.4. Spatial distribution of benthic species richness in coastal ocean and 

estuarine sediments.
70

Figure 3.4.5. Spatial distribution of benthic species richness in SAB sediments.
71

3.4.4 Non-Indigenous Species

The region-wide scale of the current survey, from estuaries seaward to the continental shelf 

break, provides a unique opportunity to examine the benthic macroinfauna data for the 

occurrence of non-indigenous species throughout the SAB region. Overall, based on coastalocean and estuarine data combined, there were a total of 1,168 taxa identified from 1,139 grabs. 

Of those 1,168 taxa, 721 were identified to the species level. Of the 721, three species were 

identified as non-indigenous based on a comparison with the USGS Non-indigenous Aquatic 

Species database (nas.er.usgs.gov). These were Corbicula fluminea (Asian clam), Petrolisthes 

armatus (green porcelain crab), and Rangia cuneata (Atlantic rangia). All three non-indigenous 

species were collected from estuarine stations; none were from coastal-ocean waters. These 

three non-indigenous species account for < 0.01% of the total species identified in the SAB

database. The SAB benthos appears to be less invaded than some other coastal regions such as 

the Pacific Coast benthos, where non-indigenous species are common in estuaries and occur 

offshore as well though in more limited numbers (e.g., 1.2% of the identified species in a survey 

of the western U.S. continental shelf by Nelson et al. 2008).

3.5 Potential Linkage of Biological Condition to Stressor Impacts

Multi-metric benthic indices are an important tool for detecting signals of degraded sediment 

quality and have been developed for a variety of estuarine applications (Engle et al. 1994, 

Weisberg et al. 1997, Van Dolah et al. 1999, Llanso et al. 2002a, 2002b). An important feature 

of a multi-metric benthic index is the ability to combine multiple benthic community attributes 

(e.g., numbers of species, diversity, abundance, relative proportions of groups of species) into a 

single measure that maximizes the ability to distinguish between degraded versus non-degraded 

benthic condition while taking into account biological variability associated with natural 

controlling factors (e.g. latitude, salinity, sediment particle size). Van Dolah et al. (1999) 

developed a Benthic-Index of Biological Integrity (B-IBI) for southeastern estuaries, which 

provides a sensitive tool for assessing adverse effects of degraded habitat quality on benthic 

communities. Of the estuarine area represented in the present SAB study, 7% was rated poor (≤

1.5), 9% was rated fair (1.5 – 3.0), and 84% was rated good (≥ 3.0) based on the B-IBI.

No such multi-metric benthic index exists for the coastal-ocean portion of the SAB. In the 

absence of a benthic index, potential stressor impacts in offshore waters were assessed by 

looking for obvious linkages between reduced values of key benthic characteristics (diversity, 

richness, density) and synoptically measured indicators of poor sediment or water quality. To be 

consistent with related offshore studies where multi-metric benthic indices have been lacking 

(Nelson et al. 2008, Balthis et al. 2009), low values of benthic attributes were defined as the 

lower 10th percentile of observed values and evidence of poor sediment or water quality was 

defined as: ≥ 1 chemical in excess of ERMs, TOC > 50 mg/g, or DO in near-bottom water < 2

mg/L. Because none of the offshore stations were rated as having poor sediment or water quality 

based on these latter guidelines, there was little evidence to suggest linkages between impaired 

benthic condition and measured stressors (Appendix E). One site, Station 41 on the outer shelf 

off North Carolina, had low values of species richness and abundance that co-occurred with a 

moderate level of sediment TOC (39.9 mg/g). This was the only site that came close to 
72

exceeding the above guidelines. The lack of such an association suggests that lower-end values 

of biological attributes represent parts of a normal reference range controlled by natural factors. 

Results of this study show that conditions throughout the SAB are predominantly fair to good 

with respect to many of the measured ecological indicators (Figure 3.5.1). However, this 

assessment also indicates that there are portions, particularly in estuaries compared to the 

offshore environment, which are under some chemical or physical stress. It would be prudent to 

use such information as an early warning signal and justification for implementing effective 

coastal management practices in order to prevent potential growth of future environmental risks 

from increasing human activities in the region. In addition, the SAB region provides many 

important ecosystem goods and services across a variety of categories: supporting (e.g., nutrient 

cycling, reservoirs of biodiversity, habitat for protected species and other natural populations), 

provisional (e.g., mineral extraction, alternative energy, food, corridors for maritime trade), 

regulating (e.g., pollutant sequestering, hurricane buffering), and cultural (e.g., swimmable and 

fishable waters for recreation; protected areas for research, education, and nature conservation). 

As coastal development continues throughout the southeastern region, the component estuarine 

and coastal-ocean environments should be treated as a connected ecosystem if we are to better 

understand and manage these important resources and the functions they provide.
73

Figure 3.5.1. Summarized assessment of multiple indicators of ecosystem health for SAB 

coastal ocean region (A = Coastal Ocean, B = Estuarine). Refer to Table 2.7.1 for indicator 

threshold values. Note: There is no benthic index for offshore waters, thus the evaluation of 

benthic condition in this case was based on whether there were any co-occurrences of reduced 

values of key benthic attributes (i.e. diversity, richness, or density within lower 10th percentile 

of all observed values) and evidence of poor sediment or water quality (≥ 1 chemical in 

excess of ERMs, TOC > 50 mg/g, and DO in near-bottom water < 2 mg/L); there were no 

such co-occurrences.
74

4.0 Acknowledgments

The coastal-ocean portion of this study was made possible through the coordination of resources 

and staff under a General Collaborative Agreement (MOA 2005-003/6764) between the NOAA 

National Ocean Service‘s (NOS) National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS) and the 

EPA Office of Research and Development (ORD)/National Health and Environmental Effects 

Research Laboratory (NHEERL). Funding was provided primarily by the NOAA/NCCOS 

Center for Coastal Environmental Health and Biomolecular Research (CCEHBR) to support 

field work and by EPA/NHEERL-Gulf Ecology Division for the processing of samples. Field 

work was conducted on the NOAA Ship Nancy Foster Cruise NF-04-08-CL by scientists from 

NOAA/NCCOS, EPA/NHEERL-Gulf Ecology Division, and Florida Fish and Wildlife Research 

Institute. Several institutions participated in the processing of samples. These included Barry 

Vittor and Associates (Mobile, AL) for the analysis of benthic samples; GPL Laboratories 

(Frederick, MD) for chemical contaminants in sediments; CRG Laboratories for chemical 

contaminants in tissues, and B&B Laboratories (College Station, TX) for nutrients and 

chlorophyll in water samples, and sediment grain size and TOC.

The estuarine portion of this study involved the participation of numerous representatives from a 

variety of federal and state agencies including EPA, NOAA, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina 

and North Carolina. Additional contributions were made by the following organizations:

Arthur D. Little, Inc. (Boston, MA) - Sediment and Tissue Contaminants

Barry A. Vittor & Associates, Inc (Mobile, AL) - Benthic Taxonomy

CRG Environmental Laboratories Inc (Torrance, CA) - Sediment and Tissue 

Contaminants

Environmental Research Institute (Storrs, CT) - Sediment and Tissue Contaminants, 

Nutrients, Total Suspended Solids, Sediment Grain Size, and Sediment Total Organic 

Carbon

GPL Laboratories (Frederick, MD) - Sediment and Tissue Contaminants

TAI Scientist - Division of Strand and Associates, Inc (Mobile, AL) -Benthic Taxonomy

TDI-Brooks Laboratories (College Station, TX) - Nutrients, Total Suspended Solids, 

Sediment Grain Size, and Sediment Total Organic Carbon

TRAC Laboratories (Pensacola, FL) - Amphipod Sediment Toxicity Assay

Technical reviews of this report were provided by Len Balthis with NOAA and Richard 

Devereux and John Kiddon with EPA. 

5.0 Literature Cited

Alegria HA, D‘Autel JP, Shaw TJ. 2000. Offshore transport of pesticides in the South Atlantic 

Bight: preliminary estimate of export budgets. Marine Pollution Bulletin 40(12): 1178-

1185.

Allen JS, Beardsley RC, Blanton JO, Boicourt WC, Butman B, Coachman LK, Huyer A, Kinder 

TH, Royer TC, Schumacher JD, Smith RL, Sturges W, Winant CD. 1983. Physical 
75

oceanography of continental shelves. Reviews of Geophysics and Space Physics 

21:1149-1181.

American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM). 1990. Standard guide for conducting 10-

day static sediment toxicity tests with marine and estuarine amphipods. Annual Book of 

ASTM Standards, 11(4), 1052.

Balthis, WL, Hyland JL, Fulton MH, Wirth EF, Kiddon JA, Macauley J. 2009. Ecological 

Condition of Coastal Ocean Waters Along the U.S. Mid-Atlantic Bight: 2006. NOAA 

Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 109, NOAA National Ocean Service, Charleston, 

SC 29412-9110. 63 pp.

Balthis WL, Hyland JL, Cooksey C, Fulton MH, McFall G. 2007. Long-Term Monitoring of 

Ecological Conditions In Gray‘s Reef National Marine Sanctuary: Comparison of SoftBottom Benthic Assemblages and Contaminant Levels in Sediments and Biota in Spring 

2000 and 2005. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 68. 29 pp. + Appendices. 

Bricker S, Longstaff B, Dennison W, Jones A, Boicourt K, Wicks C, Woerner J. 2007. Effects of 

Nutrient Enrichment In the Nation‘s Estuaries: A Decade of Change. NOAA Coastal 

Ocean Program Decision Analysis Series No. 26. National Centers for Coastal Ocean 

Science, Silver Spring, MD. 328 pp.

Cooksey C, Hyland J. 2007. Sediment quality of the Lower St. Johns River, Florida: An 

integrative assessment of benthic fauna, sediment-associated stressors, and general 

habitat characteristics. Marine Pollution Bulletin 54: 9-21.

Cooksey C, Hyland J, Balthis WL, Fulton M, Scott G, Bearden D. 2004. Soft-Bottom Benthic 

Assemblages and Levels of Contaminants in Sediments and Biota at Gray's Reef National

Marine Sanctuary and Nearby Shelf Waters off the Coast of Georgia (2000 and 2001). 

NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 6. 55 pp.

Culliton T, Warren MT, Goodspeed D, Remer C, Blackwell C, McDonough III J. 1990. 50 years 

of population changes along the nation‘s coasts, Coastal Trends Series, Report No. 2, 

NOAA, Strategic Assessment Branch, Rockville, MD.

Dame R, Alber M, Allen D, Mallin M, Montague C, Lewitus A, Chalmers A, Gardner R, Gilman

C, Kjerfve B, Pinckney J, Smith N. 2000. Estuaries of the South Atlantic Coast of North 

America: their geographical signatures. Estuaries 23 (6): 793–819.

Dardeau MR, Modlin RF, Schroeder WW, Stout JP. 1992. Estuaries. In: C.T. Hackney, S.M. 

Adams, and W.H. Martin (eds.). Biodiversity of the Southeastern United States: aquatic 

communities. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, New York.

Diaz-Ramos S, Stevens DL Jr, Olsen AR. 1996. EMAP Statistical Methods Manual. Rep. U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, NHEERLWED, Corvallis, Oregon. EPA/620/R-96/002
76

Engle VD, Summers JK, Gaston GR. 1994. A benthic index of environmental condition of Gulf 

of Mexico estuaries. Estuaries 17: 372-384.

Geider RJ, La Roche J. 2002. Redfield revisited: variability of C:N:P in marine microalgae and 

its biochemical basis. European Journal of Phycology 37(1):1-17.

Hyland, JL, Balthis L, Engle VD, Long ER, Paul JF, Summers JK, et al. 2003. Incidence of 

stress in benthic communities along the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico coasts within 

different ranges of sediment contamination from chemical mixtures. Environmental 

Monitoring and Assessment 81: 149–161.

Hyland JL, Balthis L, Hackney CT, McRae G, Ringwood AH, Snoots TR, Van Dolah RF, Wade

TL. 1998. Environmental quality of estuaries of the Carolinian Province: 1995. NOAA 

Tech. Memo. NOS ORCA 123, NOAA, Silver Spring, MD.

Hyland JL, Balthis L, Hackney CT, Posey M. 2000. Sediment quality of North Carolina 

estuaries: An integrative assessment of sediment contamination, toxicity, and condition of 

benthic fauna. Journal of Aquatic Ecosystem Stress and Recovery 8:107–124.

Hyland JL, Balthis L, Karakassis I, Magni P, Petrov A, Shine J, Vestergaard O, Warwick R. 

2005. Organic carbon content of sediments as an indicator of stress in the marine benthos. 

Marine Ecology Progress Series 295:91-103.

Hyland JL, Cooksey C, Balthis WL, Fulton M, Bearden D, McFall G, Kendall M. 2006. The 

soft-bottom macrobenthos of Gray‘s Reef National Marine Sanctuary and nearby shelf

waters off the coast of Georgia, USA. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and 

Ecology 330: 307-326.

Hyland JL, Herrlinger TJ, Snoots R, Ringwood AH, Van Dolah RF, Hackney CT, Nelson GA, 

Rosen JS, Kokkinakis SA. 1996. Environmental quality of estuaries of the Carolinian 

Province: 1994. NOAA Tech. Memo. NOS ORCA 97, NOAA, Silver Spring, MD.

Hyland JL, Van Dolah RF, Snoots TR. 1999. Predicting stress in benthic communities of 

southeastern U.S. estuaries in relation to chemical contamination of sediments. Envir. 

Toxicol. Chem. 18(11): 2557–2564.

Kimbrough KL, Johnson WE, Lauenstein GG, Christensen JD, Apeti DA. 2008. An Assessment 

of Two Decades of Contaminant Monitoring in the Nation‘s Coastal Zone. Silver Spring, 

MD. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 74. 105 pp.

Levin PS, Fogarty MJ, Matlock GC, Ernst M. 2008. Integrated ecosystem assessments. U.S. 

Department of Commerce, NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFSNWFSC-92, 20 pp.
77

Llanso RJ, Scott LC, Dauer DM, Hyland JL, Russell DE. 2002a. An estuarine benthic index of 

biotic integrity for the Mid-Atlantic region of the United States. I. Classification of 

assemblages and habitat definition. Estuaries 25:1219-1230.

Llansó RJ, Scott LC, Hyland JL, Dauer DM, Russell DE, Kutz FW. 2002b. An estuarine benthic 

index of biological integrity for the Mid Atlantic region of the United States. II. Index 

development. Estuaries 25:1231-1242.

Long ER, MacDonald DD, Smith SL, Calder FD. 1995. Incidence of adverse biological effects 

within ranges of chemical concentrations in marine and estuarine sediments. Environ. 

Manage. 19: 81–97.

Long ER, MacDonald DD. 1998. Recommended Uses of Empirically Derived, Sediment Quality 

Guidelines for Marine and Estuarine Ecosystems. Human and Ecological Risk 

Assessment 4: 1019-1039.

Long ER, Scott GI, Kucklick J, Fulton MH, Thompson B, Carr RS, Biedenbach J, Scott KJ, 

Thursby GB, Chandler GT, Anderson JW, Sloane GM. 1998. Magnitude and Extent of 

Sediment Toxicity in Selected Estuaries of South Carolina and Georgia. NOAA 

Technical Memorandum NOS ORCA 128. 299p.

Mallin MA, Burkholder JM, Cahoon LB, Posey MH. 2000. North and South Carolina Coasts. 

Marine Pollution Bulletin 41: 56-75.

Marine Ecosystems and Management. 2007. Experts describe challenges facing marine EBM 

(multiple related short papers included). Marine Ecosystems Management 1: 1-8.

Martins AM, Pelegri JL. 2006. CZCS chlorophyll patterns in the South Atlantic Bight during low 

vertical stratification conditions. Continental Shelf Research 26: 429-457.

Menzel DW, Pomeroy LR, Lee TN, Blanton JO, Alexander CR. 1993. Introduction. In: Menzel, 

D. W. (ed.) Ocean processes: U.S. southeast continental shelf, 112 p. Office of Scientific 

and Technical Information,Oak Ridge, TN.

Murawski SA. 2007. Ten myths concerning ecosystem approaches to marine resource 

management. Marine Pollution 31:681-690.

Nelson WG, Lee II H, Lamberson JO, Engle V, Harwell L, Smith LM. 2004. Condition of 

Estuaries of Western United States for 1999: A Statistical Summary. Office of Research 

and Development, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, 

EPA/620/R-04/200. 132 p.

Nelson WG, Hyland JL, Lee II H, Cooksey CL, Lamberson JO, Cole FA, Clinton PJ. 2008. 

Ecological Condition of Coastal Ocean Waters along the U.S. Western Continental Shelf: 

2003. EPA 620/R-08/001, U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development, National 

Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Western Ecology Division, 
78

Newport OR, 97365; and NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 79, NOAA 

National Ocean Service, Charleston, SC 29412-9110. 137 p.

U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy. 2004. An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st Century. Final 

Report. Washington, DC, 2004. ISBN#0–9759462–0–X. Available at: 

http://www.oceancommission.gov

Paffenhöfer GA, Atkinson LP, Lee TN, Blanton JO, Sherman BK, Stewart TB. 1994. Variability 

of particulate matter and abundant zooplankton off the southeastern United States during 

spring of 1984 and 1985. Continental Shelf Research 14(6): 629-654.

Parker Jr RO, Colby DR, Willis TD. 1983. Estimated Amount of Reef Habitat on a Portion of the 

U.S. South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Continental Shelf. Bull. Mar. Sci. 33(4): 935-

940.

Plumb RH. 1981. Procedure for handling and chemical analysis of sediment and water samples. 

Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/Corps of Engineers Technical 

Committee on Criteria for Dredge and Fill Material. Published by Environmental 

Laboratory, U.S. Army Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. Technical 

Report EPA/CE-81-1.

Pomeroy LP, Blanton JO, Paffenhöfer GA, Von Damm KL, Verity PG, Windom HL, Lee TH. 

1993. Inner Shelf Processes. In: Menzel DW. (ed.) Ocean processes: U.S. southeast 

continental shelf, 112 p. Office of Scientific and Technical Information, Oak Ridge, TN.

Powles H, Barans CA. 1980. Groundfish Monitoring in Sponge-Coral Area off the Southeastern 

United States. Marine Fish Review 42(5): 21-35.

Shannon CE, Weaver W. 1949. The Mathematical Theory of Communication. U. of Illinois 

Press, Urbana, Illinois. 117 pp.

Smith LM, Harvey JE, Harwell LC, Summers JK. 2007. The ecological condition of Gulf of 

Mexico resources from Perdido Key to Port St. Joe, Florida: Part II near-shelf coastal 

resources. Environ. Monit. Assess. 127: 189-207.

Stevens Jr. DL, Olsen AR. 2004. Spatially balanced sampling of natural resources. Journal of the 

American Statistical Association 99: 262-278. 

Strobel CJ, Buffum HW, Benyi SJ, Petrocelli EA, Reifsteck DR, Keith DJ. 1995. Statistical 

summary: EMAP - Estuaries Virginian Province - 1990 to 1993. U.S. EPA National 

Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Atlantic Ecology Division, 

Narragansett, R.I. EPA/620/R-94/026. 72 p. plus Appendices A–C.

Summers JK, Paul JF, Robertson A. 1995. Monitoring the ecological conditions of estuaries in 

the United States. Toxicol. Environ. Chem. 49: 93-108.
79

Swartz RC, DeBen WA, Jones JK, Lamberson JO, Cole FA. 1985. Phoxocephalid Amphipod 

Bioassay for Marine Sediment Toxicity, R. D. Cardwell, R. Purdy and R. C. Bahner 

(eds.), Aquatic Toxicology and Hazard Assessment: Seventh Symposium. American 

Society for Testing and Materials. Philadelphia, PA, pp. 284-307.

U.S. EPA. 1995. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP): Laboratory

Methods Manual – Estuaries, Vol. I: Biological and Physical Analyses. EPA/620/R/008, 

Office of Research and Development, Narragansett, RI.

U. S. EPA. 2000. Guidance for assessing chemical contaminant data for use in fish advisories, 

Volume 2: Risk Assessment and fish consumption limits. U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Water, Washington, D.C. EPA/823/B-00/008.

U. S. EPA. 2001a. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP): National 

Coastal Assessment Quality Assurance Project Plan 2001-2004. U. S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Health and 

Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Gulf Ecology Division, Gulf Breeze, FL. 

EPA/620/R-01/002.

U. S. EPA. 2001b. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP): National 

Coastal Assessment Field Operations Manual. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Research and Development, National Health and Environmental Effects 

Research Laboratory, Gulf Ecology Division, Gulf Breeze, FL EPA/620/R-01/003.

U.S. EPA. 2001c. National Coastal Condition Report. EPA-620/R-01/005. Office of Research 

and Development and Office of Water, Washington, DC. 204 p. Available at:

http://www.epa.gov/nccr

U.S. EPA. 2004. National Coastal Condition Report II. EPA/824-R-08-002. U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development and Office of Water, 

Washington, D.C. 286 p. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/nccr/

U.S. EPA. 2006. National Estuary Program Coastal Condition Report. EPA-842/B-06/001. U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, D.C. 445 p. Available 

at: http://www.epa.gov/nccr

U.S. EPA. 2008. National Coastal Condition Report III. EPA-620/R-03/002. U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development and Office of Water, 

Washington, D.C. 300 p. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/nccr/

Van Dolah RF, Hyland JL, Holland AF, Rosen JS, Snoots TR. 1999. A benthic index of 

biological integrity for assessing habitat quality in estuaries of the southeastern USA. 

Mar. Environ. Res. 48: 269–283.

Verity PG, Alber M, Bricker SB. 2006. Development of Hypoxia in Well-mixed Suptropical 

Estuaries in the Southeastern USA. Estuaries and Coasts 29(4): 665-673.
80

Verity PG, Blanton JO, Amft J, Barans C, Knott D, Stender B, Wenner E. 1998. Influences of 

physical oceanographic processes on chlorophyll distribution in coastal and estuarine 

waters of the South Atlantic Bight. Journal of Marine Research 56: 681-711.

Verity PG, Lee TN, Yoder JA, Paffenhöfer GA, Blanton JO, Alexander CR. 1993. Outer Shelf 

Processes. In: Menzel DW. (ed.) Ocean processes: U.S. southeast continental shelf, 112 

p. Office of Scientific and Technical Information, Oak Ridge, TN.

Weisberg SB, Ranasinghe JA, Dauer DM, Schaffner LC, Diaz RJ, Frithsen JB. 1997. An 

estuarine benthic index of biotic integrity (B-IBI) for Chesapeake Bay. Estuaries 20:149-

158.
81

Appendix A. Locations (latitude, longitude), depths, sampling frame areas, and sediment 

characteristics of SAB coastal ocean sampling stations.

Station

Latitude 

(DD)

Longitude 

(DD)

Depth 

(m)

Sampling Frame 

Area (km2)

TOC 

(mg/g)

% Coarse 

(sand/gravel)

% siltclay

SE04001 31.36625 -80.87812 20 57.26 0.78 98.75 1.25

SE04002 32.27212 -79.34330 41 110883.70 0.50 99.06 0.94

SE04003 33.06317 -78.99763 14 110883.70 0.30 99.51 0.49

SE04004 27.95232 -80.07897 40 110883.70 2.65 93.46 6.54

SE04005 31.63705 -80.57387 20 110883.70 0.13 99.10 0.90

SE04006 30.23263 -81.14682 21 110883.70 0.09 99.29 0.71

SE04007 31.57760 -79.71103 60 110883.70 0.39 98.38 1.62

SE04008 27.54257 -80.17257 18 110883.70 29.56 98.74 1.26

SE04009 33.52407 -78.34247 23 110883.70 0.37 98.90 1.10

SE04010 31.00938 -80.64163 25 110883.70 0.01 99.43 0.57

SE04011 32.19853 -80.29453 16 110883.70 0.30 99.16 0.84

SE04012 31.50058 -80.38985 29 110883.70 0.20 98.91 1.09

SE04013 33.87035 -77.51060 28 110883.70 0.20 99.13 0.87

SE04014 31.92925 -79.86140 35 110883.70 0.05 99.20 0.80

SE04015 32.12618 -79.52537 41 110883.70 0.09 99.07 0.93

SE04016 34.49895 -76.43633 13 110883.70 0.17 99.24 0.76

SE04017 29.04322 -80.83685 21 110883.70 3.00 92.33 7.67

SE04018 36.01737 -75.26730 33 110883.70 0.01 99.17 0.83

SE04019 29.82830 -80.78468 27 110883.70 0.49 99.17 0.83

SE04020 30.19302 -80.25955 53 110883.70 1.86 99.16 0.84

SE04021 33.95535 -76.53930 42 110883.70 0.88 99.24 0.76

SE04022 29.65300 -80.36010 43 110883.70 2.98 98.91 1.09

SE04023 33.22947 -77.44340 45 110883.70 0.54 98.97 1.03

SE04024 34.09792 -77.39780 26 110883.70 0.80 99.56 0.44

SE04025 33.78810 -78.08550 15 110883.70 3.98 90.97 9.03

SE04026 30.79113 -80.90655 25 110883.70 0.27 99.23 0.77

SE04027 34.36198 -77.09250 23 110883.70 0.76 98.72 1.28

SE04028 34.34528 -77.47862 16 110883.70 0.58 99.16 0.84

SE04029 28.27788 -80.49652 16 110883.70 3.31 88.53 11.47

SE04030 32.87658 -78.61013 43 110883.70 1.08 97.77 2.23

SE04031 30.79103 -81.19778 15 110883.70 0.20 99.16 0.84

SE04032 32.74693 -79.35072 19 110883.70 0.28 99.27 0.73

SE04033 31.77548 -80.14060 30 110883.70 0.24 98.93 1.07

SE04034 33.17650 -78.23268 33 110883.70 1.32 99.05 0.95

SE04035 35.85053 -75.42660 24 110883.70 0.30 98.73 1.27

SE04036 33.23763 -77.34313 47 110883.70 0.34 99.27 0.73

SE04037 35.98105 -74.89810 83 110883.70 4.74 99.09 0.91

SE04038 32.44360 -79.79097 16 110883.70 0.32 99.28 0.72

SE04039 34.98853 -75.56278 37 110883.70 0.18 92.04 7.96

SE04040 35.43008 -74.95900 41 110883.70 1.10 98.14 1.86

SE04041 33.58008 -77.06697 40 110883.70 39.94 99.01 0.99

SE04042 32.49767 -78.81927 50 110883.70 16.40 96.24 3.76

SE04043 33.78847 -78.33452 16 110883.70 2.16 94.28 5.72

SE04044 32.71425 -78.86517 33 110883.70 1.07 98.79 1.21

SE04045 29.48200 -80.37595 40 110883.70 26.48 98.56 1.44

SE04046 32.31815 -79.73765 25 110883.70 0.34 99.09 0.91

SE04047 31.10745 -81.27568 10 110883.70 0.37 98.91 1.09

SE04048 35.27827 -75.29312 23 110883.70 0.04 98.71 1.29

SE04050 33.48602 -77.92563 28 110883.70 0.75 98.53 1.47

SE04A11 27.99100 -80.28477 22 110883.70 17.28 98.48 1.52
82

Appendix B. Near-bottom water characteristics by SAB coastal ocean station.

Station

Temp. 

(°C)

Salinity 

(psu)

DO 

(mg/L) pH

DIN 

(mg/L)

Nitrite 

(mg/L)

Nitrate 

(mg/L)

Ammonia 

(mg/L)

DIP 

(mg/L) N/P

Silicate 

(mg/L)

Chlorophyll 

a (μg/L)

TSS 

(mg/L)

SE04001 16.9 34.4 7.9 8.5 0.013 0.003 0.01 0 0.02 2.5 0.28 0.37 4.90

SE04002 18.6 36.4 7.5 8.4 0.032 0.012 0.01 0.01 0.02 3.2 0.39 0.30 2.20

SE04003 13.9 34.7 8.3 8.2 0.012 0.002 0.01 0 0.02 2.8 0.5 0.49 3.47

SE04004 20.2 36.4 7.3 8.4 0.226 0.016 0.2 0.01 0.05 8.5 0.88 0.35 1.54

SE04005 16.6 35.1 7.9 8.5 0.032 0.002 0.02 0.01 0.02 3.9 0.66 0.20 1.77

SE04006 18.2 35.2 7.6 8.5 0.033 0.003 0.02 0.01 0.02 5.6 0.53 0.64 2.87

SE04007 18.5 36.0 7.5 8.4 0.046 0.006 0.03 0.01 0.03 5.0 0.91 0.22 1.89

SE04008 23.7 36.4 6.9 8.5 0.043 0.013 0.02 0.01 0.02 4.9 1.12 0.15 0.86

SE04009 14.3 35.9 8.2 8.3 0.022 0.002 0.02 0 0.01 3.4 1.23 0.59 5.60

SE04010 19.5 36.0 7.4 8.5 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 4.2 0.23 0.24 1.81

SE04011 15.7 35.5 8.0 8.4 0.025 0.005 0.02 0 0.02 3.3 0.85 0.23 1.87

SE04012 16.9 35.2 7.8 8.5 0.022 0.002 0.02 0 0.02 2.1 0.26 0.31 2.03

SE04013 16.2 36.4 7.9 8.3 0.012 0.002 0.01 0 0.03 1.1 0.27 0.50 5.31

SE04014 18.2 36.3 7.6 8.4 0.032 0.002 0.02 0.01 0.02 3.2 0.36 0.28 2.58

SE04015 19.3 36.4 7.4 8.4 0.034 0.004 0.02 0.01 0.02 3.0 0.56 0.27 1.51

SE04016 13.4 33.4 8.5 8.3 0.012 0.002 0.01 0 0.02 2.5 0.58 1.81 7.37

SE04017 19.8 35.8 7.4 8.4 0.034 0.004 0.02 0.01 0.03 2.9 0.55 1.37 4.46

SE04018 7.2 33.6 9.7 8.2 0.032 0.002 0.01 0.02 0.04 3.1 0.35 0.57 1.85

SE04019 20.0 36.2 7.3 8.5 0.032 0.002 0.02 0.01 0.02 4.0 0.32 0.36 1.89

SE04020 20.8 36.4 7.2 8.4 0.162 0.012 0.14 0.01 0.04 7.2 0.91 0.77 0.93

SE04021 22.8 36.3 7.0 8.4 0.034 0.004 0.02 0.01 0.02 4.4 0.54 0.37 1.85

SE04022 21.0 36.3 7.2 8.5 0.099 0.019 0.07 0.01 0.03 5.4 0.73 0.67 2.10

SE04023 20.7 36.4 7.2 8.4 0.035 0.005 0.03 0 0.02 3.5 0.48 0.45 2.40

SE04024 15.4 36.1 8.0 8.3 0.021 0.001 0.02 0 0.02 3.4 0.27 0.30 1.50

SE04025 13.9 35.0 8.3 8.2 0.033 0.003 0.02 0.01 0.02 6.2 0.51 2.41 7.50

SE04026 18.7 35.4 7.5 8.5 0.022 0.002 0.02 0 0.02 2.9 0.14 0.31 1.20

SE04027 14.6 35.4 8.2 8.3 0.021 0.001 0.01 0.01 0.02 3.4 0.3 0.84 4.90

SE04028 13.2 34.7 8.4 8.2 0.02 0 0.02 0 0.02 3.8 0.13 0.33 2.30

SE04029 21.4 36.5 7.1 8.5 0.029 0.009 0.01 0.01 0.02 3.2 1.05 1.09 4.30

SE04030 19.4 36.5 7.4 8.4 0.024 0.004 0.02 0 0.02 3.2 0.46 0.44 1.73

SE04031 17.6 34.8 7.7 8.5 0.032 0.002 0.02 0.01 0.02 3.9 0.34 0.63 6.83

SE04032 17.2 36.1 7.7 8.3 0.02 0 0.02 0 0.02 2.9 0.2 0.31 4.00

SE04033 17.4 36.2 7.7 8.6 0.035 0.005 0.02 0.01 0.02 4.1 0.27 0.38 1.23

SE04034 19.0 36.5 7.5 8.4 0.032 0.002 0.02 0.01 0.02 3.1 0.43 0.35 3.29

SE04035 7.4 33.0 9.7 8.2 0.033 0.003 0.02 0.01 0.03 1.6 0.43 1.26 25.00
83

Station

Temp. 

(°C)

Salinity 

(psu)

DO 

(mg/L) pH

DIN 

(mg/L)

Nitrite 

(mg/L)

Nitrate 

(mg/L)

Ammonia 

(mg/L)

DIP 

(mg/L) N/P

Silicate 

(mg/L)

Chlorophyll 

a (μg/L)

TSS 

(mg/L)

SE04036 20.5 36.4 7.3 8.3 0.099 0.009 0.08 0.01 0.03 6.1 0.52 0.24 1.43

SE04037 6.4 33.7 9.9 8.2 0.269 0.009 0.25 0.01 0.08 6.0 0.48 0.40 1.90

SE04038 16.7 36.2 7.8 8.4 0.032 0.002 0.02 0.01 0.02 4.0 0.45 0.19 0.27

SE04039 18.6 35.4 7.6 8.3 0.034 0.004 0.02 0.01 0.02 3.8 0.46 0.64 2.80

SE04040 7.7 33.7 9.6 8.3 0.05 0.03 0 0.02 0.04 3.8 0.24 0.85 1.20

SE04041 21.6 36.4 7.1 8.3 0.051 0.021 0.02 0.01 0.02 4.8 0.21 0.39 1.60

SE04042 20.0 36.4 7.3 8.4 0.036 0.016 0.01 0.01 0.02 5.0 0.25 0.48 1.43

SE04043 13.5 35.2 8.4 8.2 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 5.7 0.15 0.98 3.07

SE04044 19.3 36.5 7.4 8.4 0.031 0.001 0.02 0.01 0.02 5.2 0.23 0.28 3.18

SE04045 21.3 36.4 7.1 8.5 0.061 0.021 0.03 0.01 0.02 6.1 0.33 1.06 2.36

SE04046 17.6 36.3 7.7 8.4 0.03 0 0.02 0.01 0.01 5.4 0.18 0.25 1.91

SE04047 17.6 33.3 7.8 8.4 0.028 0.008 0.01 0.01 0.03 3.3 0.55 1.68 4.00

SE04048 7.8 32.9 9.6 8.2 0.041 0.001 0.02 0.02 0.03 3.9 0.51 2.83 6.20

SE04050 14.0 35.9 8.2 8.3 0.03 0 0.02 0.01 0.03 2.9 0.31 0.76 3.90

SE04A11 22.6 36.4 7.0 8.5 0.033 0.003 0.02 0.01 0.02 3.2 1.17 2.39 2.90
84

Appendix C. Near-surface water characteristics by SAB coastal ocean station.

Station

Temp. 

(°C)

Salinity 

(psu)

DO 

(mg/L) pH

DIN 

(mg/L)

Nitrite 

(mg/L)

Nitrate 

(mg/L)

Ammonia 

(mg/L)

DIP 

(mg/L) N/P

Silicate 

(mg/L)

Chlorophyll 

a (μg/L)

TSS 

(mg/L)

SE04001 18.3 33.7 7.7 8.5 0.027 0.007 0.02 0 0.02 3.0 0.78 0.20 3.00

SE04002 19.0 36.3 7.5 8.4 0.031 0.011 0.01 0.01 0.04 1.7 0.37 0.22 1.35

SE04003 14.0 34.6 8.3 6.7 0.033 0.003 0.02 0.01 0.02 5.2 0.42 0.28 3.93

SE04004 23.3 36.4 6.9 8.5 0.033 0.013 0.01 0.01 0.02 4.3 0.59 0.23 2.50

SE04005 17.3 35.3 7.8 8.6 0.032 0.002 0.02 0.01 0.02 4.4 0.89 0.14 2.14

SE04006 19.5 34.8 7.5 8.5 0.033 0.003 0.02 0.01 0.02 3.9 1.23 0.39 3.20

SE04007 24.3 36.3 6.8 8.4 0.039 0.009 0.02 0.01 0.03 4.0 0.68 0.09 2.13

SE04008 23.7 36.3 6.9 8.2 0.039 0.019 0.01 0.01 0.02 4.9 0.99 0.14 1.25

SE04009 14.4 35.8 8.2 7.4 0.052 0.002 0.03 0.02 0.02 9.0 1.12 0.22 3.53

SE04010 19.3 35.8 7.4 8.5 0.037 0.007 0.02 0.01 0.02 3.7 0.41 0.17 2.12

SE04011 15.9 35.5 8.0 8.4 0.036 0.006 0.02 0.01 0.03 3.5 1 0.26 3.16

SE04012 17.3 35.1 7.8 8.5 0.012 0.002 0.01 0 0.01 2.9 0.76 0.25 3.61

SE04013 18.6 36.3 7.5 8.2 0.023 0.003 0.02 0 0.03 2.2 0.5 0.15 1.75

SE04014 18.4 36.5 7.5 8.4 0.026 0.006 0.02 0 0.03 2.8 0.53 0.16 2.17

SE04015 19.5 36.4 7.4 8.4 0.038 0.008 0.02 0.01 0.04 1.9 0.64 0.26 4.35

SE04016 13.4 33.3 8.5 7.2 0.033 0.003 0.02 0.01 0.03 2.4 0.49 1.58 4.78

SE04017 20.0 35.8 7.4 8.4 0.033 0.003 0.02 0.01 0.02 3.1 1.06 1.07 5.04

SE04018 7.7 33.3 9.6 8.0 0.036 0.006 0.02 0.01 0.04 2.1 0.32 0.41 2.35

SE04019 20.7 36.0 7.2 8.4 0.034 0.004 0.02 0.01 0.02 4.8 0.84 0.23 1.38

SE04020 22.7 36.3 7.0 8.4 0.044 0.004 0.03 0.01 0.03 3.8 0.36 0.25 1.40

SE04021 23.6 35.8 6.9 8.3 0.033 0.003 0.03 0 0.02 3.1 0.48 0.19 1.50

SE04022 23.7 36.3 6.9 8.5 0.023 0.003 0.02 0 0.02 2.6 0.6 0.17 4.14

SE04023 20.8 35.8 7.2 8.0 0.044 0.004 0.03 0.01 0.02 3.6 0.71 0.48 4.08

SE04024 16.0 36.3 7.9 8.2 0.022 0.002 0.02 0 0.02 2.1 0.94 0.19 3.75

SE04025 14.0 33.6 8.4 7.8 0.032 0.002 0.02 0.01 0.02 4.3 0.32 1.44 9.20

SE04026 19.0 35.2 7.5 8.5 0.031 0.001 0.02 0.01 0.02 5.1 0.17 0.17 1.42

SE04027 14.9 35.5 8.1 8.3 0.032 0.002 0.02 0.01 0.02 4.2 0.28 0.20 3.15

SE04028 13.6 34.5 8.4 8.2 0.032 0.002 0.02 0.01 0.02 2.9 0.62 0.14 1.43

SE04029 21.6 36.5 7.1 8.4 0.033 0.003 0.02 0.01 0.02 4.3 0.73 0.60 6.20

SE04030 19.4 36.4 7.4 8.3 0.023 0.003 0.02 0 0.1 0.6 0.79 0.24 3.10

SE04031 18.8 34.2 7.6 8.5 0.024 0.004 0.02 0 0.02 3.8 0.52 0.41 2.95

SE04032 17.2 36.1 7.7 7.3 0.032 0.002 0.02 0.01 0.02 4.0 0.33 0.30 15.93

SE04033 18.6 36.2 7.5 8.6 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.02 4.9 0.26 0.23 2.54

SE04034 19.4 36.4 7.4 8.3 0.046 0.006 0.03 0.01 0.02 4.8 0.71 0.26 1.77

SE04035 8.5 31.4 9.6 8.2 0.047 0.007 0.03 0.01 0.03 3.9 0.64 1.36 6.46
85

Station

Temp. 

(°C)

Salinity 

(psu)

DO 

(mg/L) pH

DIN 

(mg/L)

Nitrite 

(mg/L)

Nitrate 

(mg/L)

Ammonia 

(mg/L)

DIP 

(mg/L) N/P

Silicate 

(mg/L)

Chlorophyll 

a (μg/L)

TSS 

(mg/L)

SE04036 21.5 35.7 7.2 8.1 0.045 0.005 0.03 0.01 0.02 3.9 0.64 0.29 5.68

SE04037 6.7 33.7 9.8 8.1 0.232 0.012 0.21 0.01 0.07 5.4 0.42 0.65 3.95

SE04038 16.6 36.1 7.8 8.4 0.063 0.003 0.04 0.02 0.03 5.6 0.39 0.17 4.83

SE04039 18.6 35.3 7.6 8.2 0.036 0.006 0.02 0.01 0.02 4.6 0.45 0.53 2.80

SE04040 8.0 32.8 9.6 7.5 0.036 0.006 0.02 0.01 0.03 2.5 0.21 0.62 4.35

SE04041 22.0 36.1 7.1 8.4 0.043 0.023 0.01 0.01 0.02 4.8 0.24 0.36 4.35

SE04042 20.4 36.4 7.3 8.3 0.026 0.016 0 0.01 0.06 1.4 0.19 0.55 1.77

SE04043 13.6 34.9 8.4 7.8 0.022 0.012 0 0.01 0.02 3.3 0.33 0.50 3.80

SE04044 19.3 36.4 7.4 8.4 0.03 0 0.02 0.01 0.11 0.5 0.44 0.32 5.17

SE04045 21.7 36.6 7.1 8.2 0.032 0.002 0.02 0.01 0.02 3.0 0.41 0.21 2.55

SE04046 17.5 36.3 7.7 8.4 0.011 0.001 0.01 0 0.02 2.6 0.43 0.23 0.97

SE04047 18.1 33.2 7.7 8.4 0.038 0.008 0.02 0.01 0.02 3.8 0.58 1.36 3.85

SE04048 8.7 31.2 9.5 5.8 0.041 0.001 0.03 0.01 0.02 5.1 0.38 2.02 7.00

SE04050 14.1 35.5 8.3 7.7 0.031 0.001 0.02 0.01 0.02 5.5 0.53 0.36 6.95

SE04A11 23.3 36.4 6.9 8.5 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.02 5.4 1.37 0.76 1.40
86

Appendix D. Summary by station of mean ERM quotients and the number of contaminants that 

exceeded corresponding ERL or ERM values (from Long et al. 1995) for coastal ocean stations.

Station

# of ERLs 

Exceeded

# of ERMs 

Exceeded

Mean 

ERM-Q

SE04001 0 0 0.006

SE04002 0 0 0.006

SE04003 0 0 0.004

SE04004 0 0 0.007

SE04005 0 0 0.004

SE04006 0 0 0.003

SE04007 0 0 0.005

SE04008 1 0 0.007

SE04009 0 0 0.004

SE04010 0 0 0.003

SE04011 0 0 0.004

SE04012 0 0 0.004

SE04013 0 0 0.008

SE04014 0 0 0.003

SE04015 0 0 0.004

SE04016 1 0 0.013

SE04017 0 0 0.007

SE04018 0 0 0.004

SE04019 0 0 0.003

SE04020 0 0 0.006

SE04021 0 0 0.008

SE04022 0 0 0.006

SE04023 1 0 0.028

SE04024 1 0 0.012

SE04025 0 0 0.012

SE04026 0 0 0.007

SE04027 0 0 0.007

SE04028 0 0 0.008

SE04029 0 0 0.012

SE04030 1 0 0.011

SE04031 0 0 0.003

SE04032 0 0 0.007

SE04033 0 0 0.005

SE04034 0 0 0.006

SE04035 0 0 0.006

SE04036 0 0 0.008

SE04037 0 0 0.019

SE04038 0 0 0.005

SE04039 0 0 0.008

SE04040 0 0 0.010

SE04041 1 0 0.014

SE04042 0 0 0.008

SE04043 0 0 0.010

SE04044 0 0 0.007

SE04045 0 0 0.006

SE04046 0 0 0.004

SE04047 0 0 0.007

SE04048 1 0 0.019

SE04050 1 0 0.012

SE04A11 1 0 0.015
87

Appendix E. Summary by station of benthic macroinfaunal (> 0.5 mm) characteristics for 

coastal-ocean stations. One replicate benthic grab (0.04 m2) processed from each station. H′ 

derived using base 2 logs. * Values within lower 25th percentile of all values of a specific 

benthic variable; **values within lower 10th percentile. Also included are selected abiotic 

variables for assessing potential benthic-stressor linkages. Table shows that no stations with at 

least one benthic variable in lower 10th percentile coincided with indicators of poor sediment or 

water quality: ≥ 1 chemical in excess of ERMs, TOC > 50 mg/g, or DO in near-bottom water < 2 

mg/L.

Station

# Taxa per 

Grab

Density 

(#/m2)

H′ per 

Grab

TOC 

(mg/g)

DO 

(mg/L)

# ERMs 

exceeded

SE04001 35 1700 4.56 0.78 7.9 0

SE04002 64 3725 5.26 0.50 7.5 0

SE04003 32 3100 4.07 0.30 8.3 0

SE04004 41 5150 3.80 2.65 7.3 0

SE04005 19* 1475 2.88** 0.13 7.9 0

SE04006 63 5700 5.10 0.09 7.6 0

SE04007 52 2575 5.22 0.39 7.5 0

SE04008 40 3225 4.58 29.56 6.9 0

SE04009 20* 1150* 3.34* 0.37 8.2 0

SE04010 39 2850 4.69 0.01 7.4 0

SE04011 18* 625** 4.00 0.30 8.0 0

SE04012 39 2325 4.60 0.20 7.8 0

SE04013 22* 650** 4.39 0.20 7.9 0

SE04014 73 4925 5.57 0.05 7.6 0

SE04015 38 1775 4.84 0.09 7.4 0

SE04016 10** 275** 3.28* 0.17 8.5 0

SE04017 35 3175 3.84 3.00 7.4 0

SE04018 18* 1425 3.46* 0.01 9.7 0

SE04019 32 1175* 4.79 0.49 7.3 0

SE04020 37 2400 3.88 1.86 7.2 0

SE04021 59 3800 4.86 0.88 7.0 0

SE04022 20* 1250* 3.29* 2.98 7.2 0

SE04023 44 1875 5.18 0.54 7.2 0

SE04024 29 1325* 4.52 0.80 8.0 0

SE04025 37 3450 3.97 3.98 8.3 0

SE04026 31 3075 2.96* 0.27 7.5 0

SE04027 15** 500** 3.72 0.76 8.2 0

SE04028 26 2325 3.70 0.58 8.4 0

SE04029 25 1150* 4.47 3.31 7.1 0

SE04030 114 8400 6.13 1.08 7.4 0

SE04031 27 1400* 4.39 0.20 7.7 0

SE04032 43 4250 3.29* 0.28 7.7 0

SE04033 24 1625 3.97 0.24 7.7 0

SE04034 91 7900 5.64 1.32 7.5 0

SE04035 19* 2525 2.55** 0.30 9.7 0

SE04036 31 1775 4.21 0.34 7.3 0

SE04037 48 23650 1.99** 4.74 9.9 0

SE04038 23 2250 3.50* 0.32 7.8 0

SE04039 11** 650** 3.14* 0.18 7.6 0

SE04040 17* 1900 2.59** 1.10 9.6 0

SE04041 14** 375** 3.77 39.94 7.1 0

SE04042 75 4450 5.69 16.40 7.3 0

SE04043 35 3000 3.97 2.16 8.4 0
88

Station

# Taxa per 

Grab

Density 

(#/m2)

H′ per 

Grab

TOC 

(mg/g)

DO 

(mg/L)

# ERMs 

exceeded

SE04044 70 3850 5.63 1.07 7.4 0

SE04045 52 2525 5.43 26.48 7.1 0

SE04046 27 1150* 4.16 0.34 7.7 0

SE04047 34 3150 3.72 0.37 7.8 0

SE04048 12** 1700 2.21** 0.04 9.6 0

SE04050 62 6450 5.07 0.75 8.2 0

SE04A11 50 4775 4.65 17.28 7.0 0

United States Department of Commerce 

Gary F. Locke

Secretary

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Jane Lubchenco

Administrator

National Ocean Service

David Kennedy

Assistant Administrator (Acting)