seafloor characterization in the great bay … · 2018-05-28 · indra budi prasetyawan, lilik...

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 868 [email protected]

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET) Volume 9, Issue 5, May 2018, pp. 868–881, Article ID: IJCIET_09_05_094

Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijciet/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=9&IType=5

ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316

© IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed

SEAFLOOR CHARACTERIZATION IN THE

GREAT BAY ESTUARY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Indra Budi Prasetyawan, Lilik Maslukah, Agus Anugroho Dwi Suryoputro, Gentur

Handoyo, Petrus Subardjo, Siddhi Saputro, Purwanto, Hariyadi, Jarot Marwoto,

Warsito Atmodjo, Heryoso Setiyono, Sri Yulina Wulandari, Muslim and Muh. Yusuf

Oceanography Department, Faculty of Fisheries and Marine Science,

Diponegoro University, Semarang, Indonesia

Indra Budi Prasetyawan

Center for Coastal Rehabilitation and Disaster Mitigation Studies (CoRem), Diponegoro

University, Semarang, Indonesia, Jl. Prof. H. Soedharto, SH, Tembalang Semarang. 50275

ABSTRACT

Great Bay Estuary is a tidal estuary located in Strafford and Rockingham counties in

eastern of New Hampshire, United States (43 ̊03' - 43 ̊08' N Latitude, 70 ̊40' - 70 ̊55' W

Longitude). Seafloor of Great Bay Estuary has a vary characteristic. This research

analyzed the seafloor characteristics for each station based on observation of sediment

(substrate type, size, color, etc.). In addition, this study explains how the seafloors are

differed at each station in response to changes in the physical environment such as

physical energy of the system. Sediments at station that are located at upper part of Great

Bay Estuary and shallower depth part in the horizontal longitudinal section are mud. This

is because energy at this area of the system is low. Stations that are located at the upper

part of Great Bay estuary, deeper depth part in the horizontal longitudinal section and in

the middle of the channel have bigger grain size of sediments. This condition affects tidal

current in the upper part of estuary and middle of channel (where the depth is deep)

becomes strong. Stations that were located in the middle of Great Bay Estuary had strong

tidal currents, thus at this station bigger sediments were found.

Keywords: estuary, depth, sediment, tidal, New Hampshire

Cite this Article: Indra Budi Prasetyawan, Lilik Maslukah, Agus Anugroho Dwi

Suryoputro, Gentur Handoyo, Petrus Subardjo, Siddhi Saputro, Purwanto, Hariyadi, Jarot

Marwoto, Warsito Atmodjo, Heryoso Setiyono, Sri Yulina Wulandari, Muslim and Muh.

Yusuf, Seafloor Characterization in the Great Bay Estuary of New Hampshire,

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 9(5), 2018, pp. 868–881.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=9&IType=5

Seafloor Characterization in the Great Bay Estuary of New Hampshire


1. INTRODUCTION

Seafloor characterization is essential to study especially in the environment that is

oceanographically controlled, such as in the estuary. There are some areas near estuary that

happen cross-shore and long-shore sediment movement and due to dynamic water levels at

the coastal area [1] [2]. Estuaries defined as those water bodies where the river meets the sea.

Estuarine are often classified as low-energy coasts and are, therefore, expected to undergo

little variation [3].

In the estuaries, sediments carried by estuarine waters typically encompass a range of

sizes from less than 2 m (0.002 mm) to more than 4 mm, but the finer sizes dominate most

estuaries. A very few estuaries transport gravel and larger size sediment. The bed and banks

of most estuaries, however, tend to be dominated by clays and silts, with sand and larger sizes

depositing either at the head of the estuary (from upstream sources) or at the sea or ocean

entrance (from downstream sources). Fine-grained sediments—clay sizes and some silts—

include both inorganic and organic materials and are almost universally called mud [4].

The research was conducted on the UNH RV Gulf Challenger on Saturday, September 13,

2014 in Great Bay Estuary (Figure 1). Great Bay Estuary is a tidal estuary located in

Strafford and Rockingham counties in eastern New Hampshire, United States (43 ̊03' - 43 ̊08'

N Latitude, 70 ̊40' - 70 ̊55' W Longitude). Great Bay lies at the confluence of tidally driven

seawater from the Gulf of Maine and fresh water from seven major river systems—the

Salmon Falls, Cocheco, Bellamy, Oyster, Lamprey, Squamscott, and Winnicut [5].

Figure 1 Great Bay Estuary [6]

The objective of the research is to characterize the seafloor in Great Bay estuary using (1)

previously collected multi-beam maps of bathymetry and backscatter [7] [8], and collecting

(2) single-beam echo-sounder profiles [9], (3) underwater video, and (4) bottom sediment

samples. It is expected to be able to analyze seafloor characteristics for each station based of

observation of sediment or substrate type, size, color, etc. and be able to explain how the

seafloor differed at each station in response to changes in the physical environment such as

physical energy of the system (currents or waves).

2. METHODOLOGY

2.1. Sampling Station Location

The sampling on this cruise was conducted in seven stations, i.e. Station 1, Station A, Station

B, Station C, Station D, Station E, and Station F. Detail description and sampling station map

showed on Table 1 and Figure 2.

Indra Budi Prasetyawan, Lilik Maslukah, Agus Anugroho Dwi Suryoputro, Gentur Handoyo,

Petrus Subardjo, Siddhi Saputro, Purwanto, Hariyadi, Jarot Marwoto, Warsito Atmodjo,

Heryoso Setiyono, Sri Yulina Wulandari, Muslim and Muh. Yusuf


Table 1 Sampling Station

Station

Name Lattitude Longitude Depth (m) Type

Time

EST

1 43.069 N 70.7045 W 12.8 Shipek Grab Sample 10:39:00

A 43.0870 N 70.8671 W 6.0 Shipek Grab and Core Gravity

Sample 12:53:00

B 43.0853 N 70.8641 W 15.7 Shipek Grab Sample 13:11:00

C 43.1099 N 70.8574 W 16.2 Shipek Grab Sample 13:46:17

D 43.1104 N 70.8633 W 3.6 Shipek Grab Sample 14:06:19

E 43.1064 N 70.7907 W 15.0 Shipek Grab Sample 14:54:00

F 43.1026 N 70.7887 W 10.7 Shipek Grab Sample 15:08:40

Figure 2 Sampling Station Map

2.2. Equipment

2.2.1. Single Beam Echosounder

The type of acoustic system on the boat that was used on the cruise was an Odom Echotrac

CV200 Single Beam Echo Sounder. This Echo sounders measure water depth by sending

acoustic pulses through a transducer and picks up the reflected echoes. The depth is calculated

from the two way travel time of the velocity of sound in water. As the vessel moves a single

beam echo sounder (SBES) repeatedly "ping" the seafloor with a sound pulse, producing a

discrete print of depths beneath the ship as shown in Figure 3 [10] [11].

Figure 3 Principle of Single Beam Sounding [12]

The single beam echo-sounder sends an acoustic pulse from the transducer down into the

water column towards the sea bottom. The travel time before the signal is received back will

give, together with the correct sound speed, the water depth under the transducer. This Odom

Echotrac CV200 Single Beam Echo Sounder used two frequency, i.e. 24 KHz and 200 KHz.

The frequency is directly related to the absorption in the medium. Typical SBES frequencies

range from 12 kHz to 300 kHz. High frequencies are therefore less suitable for measurements

in greater depths. Furthermore a low frequency will have a deeper penetration into the seabed

and therefore carries more information about deeper layers back to the receiver [12] [13].



2.2.2. Underwater Video

Underwater video systems are commonly used to collect video images of the deep seafloor for

a wide variety of purposes [14] [15]. Underwater video that was used for this cruise is showed

in Figure 4. All the connections of this tool are color coded and connect the CANOPUS: blue

– camera, red – PC interface, and yellow – CANOPUS power supply. The camera has

connectors. One connects to the CANOPUS and the other to a power supply. The power

outlets are required: CANOPUS, camera and the PC. This tool is used to record movie and

capture image of seafloor.

Figure 4 Underwater Video

2.2.3. Core Gravity Sampler

The gravity corer or core gravity sampler allows researchers to sample and study sediment

layers at the bottom of lakes or oceans (Figure 5) [16]. It got its name because gravity carries

it to the bottom of the water body. Recovering sediment cores allows scientists to see the

presence or absence of specific fossils in the mud that may indicate climate patterns at times

in the past. Scientists can then use this information to improve understanding of the climate

system and predict patterns and events in the future. Cores capture a time capsule that, in

some cases, can span the past hundreds of thousands and even millions of years. Because

sedimentation rates in some areas are quite slow, even a smaller corer a few meters in length

may represent thousands of years of particles. These particles are a historical record of

condition in the water column can be used to reconstruct past conditions on Earth [17] [18].

Figure 5 Core Gravity Sampler

2.2.4. Shipek Sediment Grab

Sediment samples were collected using a Shipek grab [19]. Shipek Sediment Grab (as seen on

Figure 6) is based upon the patented design of the late Carl J. Shipek, noted oceanographer,

and is manufactured by Wildco® under license. It consists of two concentric half cylinders,

the outer of which is the sampler body. A cocking wrench, included, is used for winding the

torsion springs. A safety hook prevents their premature release when held in the safety

position. Cast into each end of the frame are large stabilizing handles which, along with its

weight, hold the sampler upright during descent. This hefty center-pivot sampler is designed





to sample unconsolidated sediments from soft ooze to hard-packed silts from deep lakes and

near offshore. It brings up virtually un- disturbed, unwashed samples to the surface from any

depth. Its specialty is sampling benthic organisms living at or immediately below the

water/bottom interface and sediment containing a significant population of non-sessile forms

[20].

Figure 6 Shipek Sediment Grab

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The position of station 1 is 43.069 N Latitude and 70.7045 W Longitude. Station 1 is located at

lower estuary of Great Bay Estuary and in the middle of channel. Multi-beam echo-sounding

resulted as seen Figure 7. This multi-beam maps are mostly made from a Reson 8100 Multi-

beam Echo-sounder. A multi-beam echo-sounder is a device typically used to determine the

depth of water and the nature of the seabed. This system allowed survey vessels to produce

high-resolution coverage of wide swaths of the ocean bottom in far less ship time than would

have been required for a single-beam echo sounder. Figure 7 shows ocean floor map of the

station 1 and its surroundings. There are sand waves at the bottom at the station waves. The

existence of sand waves indicates a bottom current at that location is strong. Based on the

research of Wirasatriya et al. [22], the bigger size of sediment has more weight so that this

type of sediment could settle along the coastline where the longshore current was generated.

The smaller sizes of sediment settle away from the coastline in the more calm waters.

Figure 8 shows the depth from transect sounding (pier to station 1) using single beam

echo-sounder with 24 KHz frequency. This Figure gives profile of depth along transect route

of this boat. Station 1 is in red line, and from this single-beam echo-sounder, we can know

that the depth of station 1 is 12.8 m. The red scatter shows the strongest signal. Yellow is

weaker than red, green is weaker than yellow, and blue is the weakest then assumed as a

noise.

Figure 7 Seafloor of Station 1 from Multi Beam Echo-sounder (Courtesy: CCOM /JHC UNH, 2014)



Figure 8 Seafloor of Station 1 from Single Beam Echo-sounder

The Figure of bottom sediment that was captured by underwater video in 2013 shows that

bottom sediment at station 1 is coarse sand, see Figure 9.a. It can be confirmed with sediment

sample from shipek sediment grab (Figure 9.b.). Based on sediment sample observation in

September 17, 2014, we can know that sediment at station 1is coarse sand with grain size

estimation ± 600 µm. The color of that sediment is gray. Station 1 that is located in the lower

estuary dominated by coarse-grained sediment deposits and contains 50% of shell fragments.

The fact that tidal currents in this area are strong (thypically estuary) makes assumption that

there is limited sediment supply.

The position of station A is 43.0870 N Latitude and 70.8671 W Longitude. Station A is

located at upper estuary of Great Bay Estuary and shallower depth part in the horizontal

longitudinal section of the channel. It can be seen from multi-beam echo-sounding result in

Figure 10.a.Figure 10.b shows the depth from transect sounding (station A to station B) using

single beam echosounder with 24 KHz frequency. This Figure gives profile of depth along

transect route of this boat. Station A is in red line. The depth of station A is 6 m.

(a) (b)

Figure 9 a. Bottom Sediment at Station 1 (Captured by Underwater Video in July 3, 2013). b. Bottom

Sediment Sample at Station 1 (Shipek Sediment Grab)





(a) (b)

Figure 10 a. Seafloor of Station A from Multi Beam Echosounder. b. Seafloor of Station A – Station

B from Single Beam Echosounder (Courtesy: CCOM /JHC UNH, 2014)

Bottom sediment at station A is mud as seen Figure 11.b. and based on observation with

grain size estimation < 0.0625 mm and the color of that sediments is dark gray. The Figure of

bottom sediment that was captured by underwater video in 2013 shows that bottom sediment

at station A is mud with shell fragments, see Figure 11.a. Station A that is located in the upper

estuary and at the side of channel where the depth is shallow gives consequences that tidal

currents are not as strong as in the deeper depth (effect of bottom friction). Therefore station

A is dominated by mud deposits because at this area energy of the system is not high.

(a) (b)

Figure 11 a. Bottom Sediment at Station A (Captured by Underwater Video in July 3, 2013). b.

Bottom Sediment Sample at Station A (Shipek Sediment Grab)

Core gravity sampling also gives the same result that bottom sediment of station A is mud,

see Figure 12.

Figure 12 Core Gravity Sampler



The position of station B is 43.0853 N Latitude and 70.8641 W Longitude. Station B is

located at upper estuary of Great Bay Estuary and deeper depth part in the horizontal

longitudinal section and in the middle of the channel. It can be seen from multibeam

echosounding result in Figure 13.a. Figure 13.b shows the depth from transect sounding

(station A to station B) using single beam echosounder with 24 KHz frequency. Station B is

in blue line. The depth of station B is 15.7 m.

(a) (b)

Figure 13 a. Seafloor of Station B from Multi Beam Echosounder. b. Seafloor of Station A – Station

B from Single Beam Echosounder (Courtesy: CCOM /JHC UNH, 2014)

Bottom sediment at station B is granule gravel – pebble gravel with a few shell fragments

as seen Figure 14.b. and based on observation with grain size estimation ± 1 mm - 5cm and

the color of that sediment is red brown. This color could be due to oxidation. The Figure of


at station B is granule gravel – pebble gravel with a few shell fragments, see Figure 14.a.

Station B that is located in the upper estuary and in the middle of channel where the depth is

deep gives consequences that tidal currents are strong. Therefore station B is dominated by

granule gravel – pebble gravel deposits because at this area energy of the system is high. The

stronger currents can transport bigger size sediments.

.

(a) (b)

Figure 14 a. Bottom Sediment at Station B (Captured by Underwater Video in July 3, 2013). b.

Bottom Sediment Sample at Station B (Shipek Sediment Grab)

The position of station C is 43.1099 N Latitude and 70.8574 W Longitude. Station C is

located at upper estuary of Great Bay Estuary and deeper depth part in the horizontal

longitudinal section and in the middle of the channel. It can be seen from multibeam

echosounding result in Figure 15.a. Figure 15.b shows the depth from transect sounding

(station C to station D) using single beam echosounder with 24 KHz frequency. Station C is

in blue line. The depth of station C is 16.2 m.





(a) (b)

Figure 15 a. Seafloor of Station C from Multi Beam Echosounder. b. Seafloor of Station C – Station

D from Single Beam Echosounder (Courtesy: CCOM /JHC UNH, 2014)

Bottom sediment at station C is granule gravel – pebble gravel with shell fragments as

seen Figure 16.b. and based on observation with grain size estimation ± 2 mm – 6.4cm and

the color of that sediment is dark gray. The Figure of bottom sediment that was captured by

underwater video in 2013 shows that bottom sediment at station B is granule gravel – pebble

gravel with shell fragments, see Figure 16.a. Same thing with station B that is located in the

upper estuary and in the middle of channel where the depth is deep makes tidal currents are

strong. These strong currents can transport bigger size sediments. These fact give

consequences that at station C is dominated by granule gravel – pebble gravel deposits

because at this area energy of the system is high.

(a) (b)

Figure 16 a. Bottom Sediment at Station C (Captured by Underwater Video in July 3, 2013). b.

Bottom Sediment Sample at Station C (Shipek Sediment Grab)

The position of station D is 43.1104 N Latitude and 70.8633 W Longitude. Station D is


longitudinal section. It can be seen from multibeam echosounding result in Figure 17.a.

Figure 17.b shows the depth from transect sounding (station C to station D) using single beam

echosounder with 24 KHz frequency. Station D is in red line. The depth of station D is 3.6 m.



(a) (b)

Figure 17 a. Seafloor of Station D from Multi Beam Echosounder. b. Seafloor of Station C –Station D

from Single Beam Echosounder (Courtesy: CCOM /JHC UNH, 2014)

Bottom sediment at station D is mud as seen Figure 18.b. and based on observation with

grain size estimation < 0.0625 mm and the color of sediment is dark gray. The Figure of


at station D is mud, see Figure 18.a. Same thing with station A that is located in the upper

estuary and at the side of channel where the depth is shallow gives consequences that tidal

currents are not too strong. Therefore station D is dominated by mud deposits because at this

area energy of the system is low.

The position of station E is 43.1064 N Latitude and 70.7907 W Longitude. Station E is located

at middle estuary of Great Bay Estuary. It can be seen from multibeam echosounding result in

Figure 19.a. Figure 19.b. shows the depth from transect sounding (station E to station F) using

single beam echosounder with 24 KHz frequency. Station E is in blue line. The depth of

station E is 15 m.

Figure 18 a. Bottom Sediment at Station D (Captured by Underwater Video in July 3, 2013). b.

Bottom Sediment Sample at Station D (Shipek Sediment Grab)





(a) (b)

Figure 19 a. Seafloor of Station E from Multi Beam Echosounder. b. Seafloor of Station E -Station F


Bottom sediment at station E is granule gravel – pebble gravel with cobbles as seen Figure

20.b. and based on observation with grain size estimation varies and the color of that

sediments is light brown. The Figure of bottom sediment that was captured by underwater

video in 2013 shows that bottom sediment at station B is granule gravel – pebble gravel with

cobbles, see Figure 20.a. There are roots of plant. The middle of Great Bay Estuary system

has a high energy system, the tidal currents is suspected are strong. This strong current can

transport bigger size sediments thus we can find bigger size sediments at this station.

(a) (b)

Figure 20 a. Bottom Sediment at Station E (Captured by Underwater Video in July 3, 2013). b.

Bottom Sediment Sample at Station E (Shipek Sediment Grab)

The position of station F is 43.1026 N Latitude and 70.7887 W Longitude. Station F is located

at middle estuary of Great Bay Estuary. It can be seen from multibeam echosounder result in

Figure 21.a. Figure 21.b shows the depth from transect sounding (station E to station F) using

single beam echosounder with 24 KHz frequency. Station F is in red line. The depth of station

F is 10.7 m.



(a) (b)

Figure 21 a. Seafloor of Station F from Multi Beam Echosounder. b. Seafloor of Station E -Station F


Bottom sediment at station F has similarity with at station F. The sediments are medium to

coarse sand, granule gravel – pebble gravel with cobbles as seen in Figure 22.a and 22.b. The

factor that involves is high energy system. Tidal currents in the middle of Great Bay Estuary

system are strong.

(a) (b)

Figure 22 a. Bottom Sediment at Station F (Captured by Underwater Video in July 3, 2013). b.

Bottom Sediment Sample at Station F (Shipek Sediment Grab)

In order to gain better seafloor characterizations, this research needs to be developed and

improved. The gravel fractions tended to be under-sampled due to the methodology used.

Also, higher energy conditions were not sampled. Therefore, additional studies are needed to

fully understand the seasonal changes or changes related to calm (low energy) versus stormy

(high energy) conditions in sediment size, characteristics and verification of results.

4. CONCLUSION

Seafloor of Great Bay Estuary has a vary characteristic. Sediments at station A and D that are


longitudinal section are mud. Station B and C that are located at upper estuary of Great Bay

Estuary and deeper depth part in the horizontal longitudinal section and in the middle of the

channel have bigger grain size sediments, i.e. pebble gravel and cobble gravel. In the upper

estuary and at the side of channel where the depth is shallow give consequences tidal currents

are not too strong. Therefore station A and D is dominated by mud deposits because at this

area energy of the system is low. Otherwise station B and C are located in the upper estuary

and in the middle of channel where the depth is deep makes tidal currents are strong. These





strong currents can transport bigger size sediments. Therefore these stations are dominated by

granule gravel – pebble gravel deposits because at this area energy of the system is high.

Station E and F are located in the middle of Great Bay Estuary system that has strong tidal

currents, thus at this station bigger sediments were found.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We would like to thanks to Center for Coastal and Ocean Mapping/ Joint Hydrographic

Center (CCOM/JHC), University of New Hampshire for facilities during the research, Center

for Coastal Rehabilitation and Disaster Mitigation Studies (CoRem), Diponegoro University,

Semarang, Indonesia and to all of those who have assisted in the preparation of this research.

REFERENCES

[1] Sugianto, D. N., B. Rochaddi, S. Y. Wulandari, P. Subardjo, A. A. D. Suryoputro, W.

Atmodjo, A. Satriadi, C. A. Suryono and N. Soenardjo. 2017. Current Characteristics in

Demak Waters Based on Acoustic Measurement. International Journal of Civil

Engineering and Technology (IJCIET) 8 (9): 749–760.

[2] Sugianto, D. N. S. Widada, A. Wirasatriya, A. Ismanto, A. Darari and Suripin. 2017.

Modelling of Suspended Sediment Transport in Coastal Demak Indonesia by Using

Currents Analyzing. ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences 12 (16): 4666 –

4678.

[3] Vila-Concejo, A., G. H. Michael, A. D. Short and R. Ranasinghe. 2010. Estuarine

Shoreline Processes in a Dynamic Low-Energy System. Ocean Dynamics 60 (2): 285–

298.

[4] Mc Nally, W. H. and A. J. Mehta. 2013. Coastal Zones and Estuaries Sediment Transport

in Estuaries. Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS). Federico Ignacio Isla (Eds).

UNESCO – EOLSS.

[5] Mills, K. 2009. Ecological Trends in the Great Bay Estuary, 20 Year Report. Great Bay

National Estuarine Research Reserve. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Durham.

[6] Conservation Law Foundation (CLF). 2018. (https://www.clf.org/). Acessed on May 1,

2018.

[7] Schimel, A.C.G., J. Beaudoin, I. M. Parnum, T. Le Bas, V. Schmidt, G. Keith and D.

Ierodiaconou. 2018. Multibeam Sonar Backscatter Data Processing. Marine Geophysical

Research 39 (1-2): 121-137.

[8] Lucieer, V., M. Roche, K. Degrendele, M. Malik, M. Dolan and G. Lamarche. 2018. User

Expectations for Multibeam Echo Sounders Backscatter Strength Data-Looking Back into

the Future. Marine Geophysical Research 39 (1-2): 23-40.

[9] Eleftherakis, D., L. Berger, N. L. Bouffant, A. Pacault, J. M. Augustin and X. Lurton.

2018. Backscatter Calibration of High-Frequency Multibeam Echosounder using A

Reference Single-Beamsystem, on Natural Seafloor. Marine Geophysical Research 39 (1-

2): 55-73.

[10] Sathiskumar, R. 2013. Echo Sounder for Seafloor Object Detection and Classification.

Journal of Engineering, Computers & Applied Sciences (JEC&AS) 2 (1): 2319-5606.

[11] Llorens, S., I. Pérez-Arjona, E. Soliveres and V. Espinosa. 2017. Detection and Target

Strength Measurements of Uneaten Feed Pellets with a Single Beam Echosounder.

Aquacultural Engineering 78: 216-220.

[12] Brouwer, P. A. I. 2008. Seafloor Classification Using a Single Beam Echosounder. Thesis.

Delft University of Technology. Netherland.



[13] Ferretti, R., M. Bibuli, M. Caccia, D. Chiarella, A. Odetti, A. Ranieri, E. Zereik and G.

Bruzzone. 2017. Towards Posidonia Meadows Detection, Mapping and Automatic

recognition using Unmanned Marine Vehicles. IFAC-Papers on Line 50 (1): 12386-

12391.

[14] Purser, A., Y. Marcon, S. Dreutter, U. Hoge, B. Sablotny, L. Hehemann, J. Lemburg, B.

Dorschel, H. Biebow and A. Boetius. 2018. Ocean Floor Observation and Bathymetry

System (OFOBS): A New Towed Camera/Sonar System for Deep-Sea Habitat Surveys.

IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering (Article in press).

[15] Hemery, L.G., S.K. Henkel, and G. R. Cochrane. 2018. Benthic Assemblages of Mega

Epifauna on The Oregon Continental Margin. Continental Shelf Research 159: 24-32.

[16] Bajt, O. 2017. Aliphatic Hydrocarbons in Surface Sediments of the Gulf of Trieste

(Northern Adriatic)—Sources and Spatial and Temporal Distributions. Journal of Soils

and Sediments 17 (7): 1948-1960.

[17] Steele, J., S. Thorpe and K. Turekian (Eds.). Encyclopedia of Ocean Sciences. Academic

Press Volume 1. pp. 579-588

[18] Arai, H., T. Fukushima and Y. Onda. 2017. Assessment of Error in Sediment Core

Sampling in Lakes using Radiocesium Derived from The Fukushima Nuclear Accident.

Japanese Journal of Limnology 78 (1): 67-74.

[19] Moss, J.A., C. McCurry, P. Schwing, W.H. Jeffrey, I.C. Romero, D.J. Hollander and R.A.

Snyder. 2016. Molecular Characterization of Benthic Foraminifera Communities from the

Northeastern Gulf of Mexico Shelf and Slope Following the Deepwater Horizon Event.

Deep-Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers 115: 1-9.

[20] Wildco. 2018. (http://www.wildco.com/Shipek-Grab-Includes-crate-SS-134lbs.html).

Acessed on April 29, 2018.

[21] Ward, L. G., K. A. McPherran, Z.S. Mc Avoy and M. Vallee-Anziani. 2016. New

Hampshire Beaches: Sediment Characterization. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

(BOEM) Marine Minerals Branch, Herndon, VA.

[22] Wirasatriya, A., B. Rochaddi, A. N. Faizah, M. Zainuri, Muslim, H. Setiyono, Hariadi and

J. Marwoto. 2017. Study of Longshore Current in The Mouth of Tuntang River in

Morodemak Village, Demak Regency, Indonesia and Its Possible Effect on Forming The

Coastal Morphology. International Journal of Civil Engineering & Technology (IJCIET) 8

(11): 1-9.

seafloor characterization in the great bay … · 2018-05-28 · indra budi prasetyawan, lilik...

Documents