Distinguishing and defining types
To ensure consistency across the classification in how types
are defined, a working definition as to what constitutes a biotope,
enabling its distinction from closely-related types, has been
developed. The following criteria are applied:
1. The entity
can be distinguished on the basis of a consistent difference in
species composition based on:
- different dominant species, some of which (e.g. mussels and
kelps) may be structurally important; and
- the co-occurrence of several species characteristic of the
particular habitat conditions (even though some of these may occur
more widely in other combinations).
A combination of both the presence and abundance of the most
'obvious' species in a community is used. Sub-biotopes are often
defined using less conspicuous species.
2. It occurs
in a recognisably different habitat (but acknowledging that
distinct communities may develop in the same habitat through change
with time). Sub-biotopes are often defined on the basis of more
subtle habitat differences. Some highly subtle differences may be
critical in determining community structure (e.g. water
circulation/exchange patterns in sealoch basins, oxygenation levels
in the water column/sediment, sediment structure other than grain
size composition). The separate divisions of habitat factors used
in field recording are not necessarily be reflected in the end
division of types.
3. It is a
recognisable entity in the field, i.e. it is not an artefact of
data analysis.
4. The
assemblage of species recurs under similar habitat conditions in
(at least several) widely-separate geographical locations.
Associations of species confined to a small geographical area are
considered unlikely to represent a recurrent community (unless the
habitat is considered unique), but should rather be treated as a
variation of a more widely occurring type.
5. As a
working guide the biotope extends over an area at least 5 m x
5 m, but can also cover many square kilometres, such as for
extensive offshore sediment plains. For minor habitats, such as
rockpools and overhangs on the shore, this 'minimum size' can be
split into several discrete patches at a site. Small features, such
as crevices in rock or the biota on kelp stipes, are described as
features of the main biotope rather than biotopes in their own
right. Some entities, by virtue of their extent around the coast,
may warrant description despite showing only minor differences in
species composition; such types are often treated as
sub-biotopes.
6. It is a
single entity in the field, although there may be some spatial
variation or patchiness from one square metre to the next.
Therefore each area of shore or seabed should correlate to only one
biotope defined in classification (a 1:1 relationship of field
units to classification units). Whenever possible, the surface
species characteristics of sediment habitats (their epibiota) are
described in association with the sediment infauna as a single
entity, rather than treated as separate communities. Note however
that the nature of available data has severely restricted the clear
association of these two aspects in the classification as they are
typically derived from differing survey techniques. Thus in the
present classification there remain units defined primarily on the
basis of their epibiota or their infauna but which, given further
research, will be shown to be the same biotope. Epibiota-derived
biotopes may also 'overlay' a number of infaunal biotopes, which
are differentiated by more subtle environmental differences, and
thus need to be referred to a higher unit in the
classification.
The following considerations are also taken into account in
deciding whether to establish a biotope:
- There is a need to recognise that it is commonplace to have no
distinct boundary between two different 'types', but a gradual
transition, such that distinction of types is somewhat arbitrary at
particular reference points or nodes along a continuum.
Additionally, some communities may be largely transitional (in a
temporal sense) in nature and whilst recognisable in the field
represent a stage between two or more 'stable' biotopes. In some
areas, e.g. due to periodic disturbance, a community may be held in
a transitional or sub-climactic state for prolonged periods and
certain habitats may be so variable that the position of a biotope
along a gradient cannot be accurately defined. These factors are of
critical importance when assessing typicality of a site to a
particular type or its quality or conservation importance.
- Where different associations are shown to occur within the same
habitat, they may be spatial or temporal mosaics caused by factors
such as grazing, disturbance or chance recruitment. These should be
linked together in the classification as, for conservation
purposes, it is important to manage or protect the habitat in which
several communities may occur over time.
- To produce a practicable working classification it has been
necessary at times to be general rather than specific in splitting
different types, so that an excessively and unnecessarily complex
classification is not developed (bearing in mind the end units that
are necessary for practical use).
- Separation of communities can be related to conservation value
- does the type add variety (of habitat or species) to a particular
stretch of coast. This relates to natural habitats and excludes
artificial, polluted or disturbed habitats which should not be
considered of high conservation value although they may support
distinct communities.