This article was downloaded by: [Temple University Libraries]

On: 22 April 2015, At: 07:24

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tgnh20

Phytoplankton bloom over the

Northwest Shelf of Australia after the
Montara oil spill in 2009
a b c a b c b
Yanling Sheng , Danling Tang & Gang Pan
a
Yantai Institute of Coastal Zone Research, Chinese Academy of
Sciences , Yantai, 264003, China
b
Research Center of Remote Sensing on Marine Ecology/
Environment (RSMEE), LED, South China Sea Institute of
Oceanology, Chinese Academy of Sciences , Guangzhou, 510301,
China
c
Graduate University of Chinese Academy of Sciences , Beijing,
100049, China
Published online: 14 Jul 2011.

To cite this article: Yanling Sheng , Danling Tang & Gang Pan (2011) Phytoplankton bloom over the
Northwest Shelf of Australia after the Montara oil spill in 2009, Geomatics, Natural Hazards and
Risk, 2:4, 329-347, DOI: 10.1080/19475705.2011.564213

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2011.564213

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
 Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 07:24 22 April 2015
 Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk
Vol. 2, No. 4, December 2011, 329–347

Phytoplankton bloom over the Northwest Shelf of Australia

after the Montara oil spill in 2009

YANLING SHENG{{x, DANLING TANG*{{x and GANG PAN{

{Yantai Institute of Coastal Zone Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Yantai,
264003, China
{Research Center of Remote Sensing on Marine Ecology/Environment (RSMEE), LED,
South China Sea Institute of Oceanology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou,
510301, China
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 07:24 22 April 2015

xGraduate University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100049, China

(Received 17 November 2010; in final form 24 January 2011)

Temporal variations of chlorophyll a (Chl a) concentration before and after the

Montara oil spill in August 2009 in the Timor Sea were analysed using MODIS-
derived Chl a data. Time series data suggested a decrease in Chl a concentration
following the oil spill, but an increase occurring in May 2010. A 4000 km2 patchy
phytoplankton bloom with a high concentration of 13.8 mg m73 occurred
southeast of the platform, which coincided with the location the residual oil spill
finally moved to. The Chl a was usually high in that area in May, but reached a
peak in May 2010: the monthly Chl a for May 2010 was one and a half times
higher than that of the average value for May between 2003 and 2009. The
present study also analysed as many as 15 cases of major marine oil spills in the
world and discussed their impacts on phytoplankton. The results suggested that
the increase of Chl a may have relations with the oil spill incident. Natural
seasonal variability is also an important factor for the formation of the
phytoplankton bloom.

1. Introduction
Oil spillage has become one of the biggest concerns of the world because it can
have great impacts on marine ecosystems. As Mei and Yin (2009) proposed, the
marine ecological damages caused by oil spills could be summarized as direct to
marine resources including biomass production and indirect to marine ecosystem
services such as biotope landscape, greenhouse gas regulation, nutrient cycling.
An understanding of the impacts of oil spills is useful for realizing not only the
deleterious effects of such accidental occurrences but also for assessing how
the autotrophic processes are affected. This paper was developed based on the
analysis of Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) derived
chlorophyll a (Chl a) images before and after the Montara oil spill in the
Timor Sea.

*Corresponding author. Email: lingzistdl@126.com. URL: http://lingzis.51.net/

Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk
ISSN 1947-5705 Print/ISSN 1947-5713 Online ª 2011 Taylor & Francis
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2011.564213
 330 Y. Sheng et al.

1.1 General information on the Montara oil spill

A well of the Montara offshore oil platform in the Timor Sea, 250 km north of
Truscott, (Western Australia) and 690 km west of Darwin (Northern Territory,
Australia) operated by the Thai-owned PTTEP Australasia, blew on 21 August 2009
and continued leaking until 3 November 2009 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Montara_oil_spill). The leak was composed of gas, condensate and crude oil from
3500 m depth. The Australian Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism
estimated that the Montara oil leak could be as high as 2000 barrels every day, five
times the 400 barrels every day estimated by PTTEP Australasia (from ABC news).
On 23 August a Hercules aircraft carrying 10 000 litres of chemical dispersant
sprayed part of the slick (http://www.webcitation.org/5l3SE0SZD). On 1 November
2009, a fire broke out on the West Atlas drilling rig. The first four attempts to plug
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 07:24 22 April 2015

the oil leak by PTTEP failed, but the fifth attempt succeeded on 3 November 2009,
when PTTEP pumped approximately 3400 barrels of mud into a relief well to stop
the leak (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montara_oil_spill). Once the leak was killed,
the main fire on the Montara Wellhead platform was extinguished. Dispersant
spraying operations commenced on 23 August 2009 and continued until 1 November
2009 (from the Australian Maritime Safety Authority website www.amsa.gov.au).

1.2 Previous results of impacts of oil spills on phytoplankton

Some studies have found that Chl a concentration first decreased and then increased
after an oil spill, but there was no clear demonstration whether the change was the
result of a direct effect of the oil spill (Banks 2003, Kim 2008, Lee et al. 2009).
Upwelling events started earlier in the spring of 2003 (i.e. following the Prestige oil
spill) and this could cause relatively high values of Chl a (Ruiz-Villarreal et al. 2006).
The increase in phytoplankton may be caused by the mass supply of organic matter
released by the oil weathering process or a decrease in predators such as zooplankton
(Lee et al. 2009). But in the southern Irish Sea, the Sea Empress oil spill had no
significant effects on the plankton (Batten et al. 1998). A few occasional variations
observed in phytoplankton biomass following the Prestige oil spill were related to a
temporal scale of oceanographic process (upwelling of East North Atlantic Central
Waters) and the phytoplankton community structure did not exhibit any significant
differences before and after the spill. However, very few studies have been carried out
related to oil spill and ocean Chl a associated with phytoplankton.

1.3 Existing problems and defects of the various methods

It is difficult to quantify the direct and indirect impacts caused by oil pollution. The
main problem in analysing the influence of spilled oil on phytoplankton may be the
lack of relevant field data. Because people do not know when and where the oil spill
occurs it is therefore difficult to obtain in situ data in a particular area before the oil
spill (Varela et al. 2006). Moreover, if the spilled oil is a great quantity and lasts for a
long time, such as the Montara oil spill, field observations for Chl a in the seriously
affected area cannot be carried out. Survey data are too sparse in spatial and
temporal coverage to find certain regional phenomenon. In addition, in situ Chl a
measurements are limited and it is impossible to cover all of the study area. Some
studies argued that cultures of single species and mesocosms with natural
 Phytoplankton bloom 331
phytoplankton assemblage methods were often inconsistent and difficult to
extrapolate to the natural environment (Varela et al. 2006). However, satellite data
can obviously solve the above drawbacks, due to both the wide-ranging spatial and
temporal coverages. Satellite data have been used to estimate Chl a concentration as
an indicator of phytoplankton abundance (Tang et al. 1999, 2004b, 2006) and to
estimate Sea Surface Temperature (SST) change as one of the typical upwelling
indicators (Tang et al. 2002, 2004a). Nevertheless, a certain number of Chl a images
after the oil spill are hard to obtain because of heavy cloud cover.
The objectives of the present study are to investigate the phytoplankton bloom
after the Montara oil spill, find common features of blooms occurring after oil spills
and give some possible reasons for the formation of the bloom. This study examined
the following aspects. What is the variation of Chl a before and after the spill? What
are the changes in the SST before and after the phytoplankton bloom in 2010? Why
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 07:24 22 April 2015

did the phytoplankton bloom not appear in the place where the oil spill occurred? Is
there any relation between the phytoplankton bloom and the oil spill? In order to
answer these questions, satellite ocean colour data (2002–2010) and QuikScat wind
fields were used to analyse the changes in SST, Chl a and wind vectors before and
after the oil spill.

2. Material and methods

2.1 Study area
The study area is Timor Sea, lying off the north-west coast of Australia, extending
between 58 to 208 S and 1208 and 1358 E (figure 1).
The Timor Sea is relatively shallow in the south but deep in the north. It is
bounded by the island of Timor to the north, by the Arafura Sea to the east, by
Australia to the south and by the Indian Ocean to the west. It is adjacent to two
substantial inlets on the north Australian coast, the Joseph Bonaparte Gulf and the
Van Diemen Gulf. The Cambridge Gulf is an inlet of the Joseph Bonaparte Gulf.
Many rivers flow into the gulf including the Ord River, Pentecost River, Durack
River and the Forrest River. Rivers that ultimately flow into the Joseph Bonaparte
Gulf are Fish River, King River, Dry River and Victoria River. Alligator Rivers
finish in the Van Diemen Gulf. The deepest point of the Timor Sea is the Timor
Trough, located in the northern part of the sea, which reaches a depth of 3300 m.

2.2 Data for oil spill detection and Chl a

The Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) is a scientific
instrument onboard the Terra and Aqua satellites that capture visible and infrared
(IR) data from 36 channels at varying spatial resolutions from 250 m to 1 km. The
Aqua satellite passes the Earth from south to north over the equator in the afternoon
and views the entire Earth’s surface every 1 to 2 days. MODIS data were found to
show a good correlation with the detection of the oil spill (Chen and Zhao 2009). By
using the Environment for Visualizing Images (ENVI) software, we obtained the oil
spill detection images from the MODIS L1B data (http://ladsweb.nascom.nasa.
gov/data/).
The present study is conducted on differences in Chl a concentration before
and after the Montara oil spill. MODIS Aqua level-3 monthly, 8-day interval
 332 Y. Sheng et al.
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 07:24 22 April 2015

Figure 1. (a) Map of the study area. (b) Aerial photograph of the Montara offshore oil
platform and West Atlas mobile drilling rig. Outflow of spilled oil from the oil rig area into the
Timor Sea. (Photograph by Chris Twomey/Australian Greens. Courtesy of WA Today.)

(spatial resolution 4 km) data and level-2 daily data (1 km) were obtained from the
OceanColor Home Page (oceancolor/gsfc.nasa.gov). The time frames that these
three types of data covered are May 2003–2010, from July 2002 to June 2010 and 9
May 2010.
The Montara Platform is located at 12840.330 S, 124832.370 E and the leak lasted
for more than two months (http://www.aims.gov.au/docs/publications/marine-
science-info/montara-oil-statement.html). Considering the location of the Montara
Platform and the duration of the leak, a sampling area for 8-day composite Chl a
values was established (12–138 S, 124–1258 E). Chl a values from all 8-day composite
images were selected to calculate a mean value for the sampling area by SeaDAS VA
6.1 (SeaWiFS Data Analysis System Virtual Appliance) software.
The chlorophyll estimates were processed under the Ocean Color Reprocessing
2009 protocols. This reprocessing substantially improved the agreement with in situ
chlorophyll measurements in turbid and highly productive waters and rectified some
instrumental instabilities in Sea-viewing Wide Field-of-view Sensor (SeaWiFS) and
MODIS Aqua retrievals.
Chl a concentrations detected from satellites do not directly represent concentra-
tions at the sea surface but rather Chl a concentrations within the euphotic zone, i.e.
from the sea surface to a depth sufficiently exposed to sunlight for photosynthesis to
occur (Lee et al. 2009). The satellite data can satisfy our demand because we have
focused on the trend of the Chl a variation rather than its absolute values.
 Phytoplankton bloom 333

2.3 SST data

Eight-day composite and daily SST data were also obtained from MODIS Aqua
provided by the OceanColor Home Page. These 8-day composite level 3 SST-4
micron products (night-time) at 4 km spatial resolution were collected from 30
March to 25 June 2003–2010 but the daily level 2 SST-11 micron data at 1 km spatial
resolution were from 9 May 2010. Based on the location of the phytoplankton bloom
we selected the rectangular region (12.52–13.568 S, 124.271–125.1888 E) for 8-day
composite SST data sampling. The averaged SSTs have been calculated for the area
and changes have been analysed before and after the phytoplankton bloom.

2.4 Sea surface winds

Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 07:24 22 April 2015

Daily information on level-3 QuikScat sea surface winds (m s71) (spatial resolution
0.258) was obtained via the Physical Oceanography Distributed Active Archive
Center (PODAAC) of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, NASA (http://podaac.jpl.na-
sa.gov). To present the spatial-temporal variation of wind during the spill, daily sea
surface wind vectors (from 21 August to 2 November 2009) were processed to obtain
the two ascending and descending pass images.

3. Results
3.1 Variation in Chl a
The Chl a concentration was approximately 0.1 mg m73 after the oil spill (from 21
August 2009 to 30 April 2010), but a sudden increase after 8 May 2010 (figure 2) was

Figure 2. Eight-day composite depicting variations of Chl a concentration around the

Montara offshore oil platform. The white arrow represents the date, 21 August 2009, when a
large quantity of crude oil spilled into the Timor Sea. The solid black arrow indicates the
maximum Chl a concentration during 9–16 May 2010. Discontinuity shown in figure 2 is due
to missing values.
 334 Y. Sheng et al.
observed. Chl a concentration increased slightly from 24 October, decreased from 25
November and attained a peak value of 0.62 mg m73 between 9 and 16 May 2010
(figure 2). After that, Chl a suddenly declined to 0.124 mg m73 and then gradually
went up but were still lower compared to the other years (figure 3). Moreover, the
Chl a concentration was much higher during the period from 9 May to 16 May 2010
than that for other years (figure 3). The Chl a variation from the end of December in
2009 to the beginning of February in 2010 cannot be inferred as there were no data
for this period. Monthly Chl a for May 2010 was one and a half times higher than
that of the average value for May between 2003 and 2009.
We found high Chl a concentration indicating a phytoplankton bloom (indicated
by a white arrow in figure 4(a)). The belt-shaped bloom covered an area of about
4000 km2 and had very high Chl a concentrations (13.8 mg m73 in figure 4(a))
occurring southeast of the platform for less than a month.
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 07:24 22 April 2015

By comparing Chl a concentration images of May in different years, we found a

peak value (red colour indicated by the white arrow in figure 5(h)) in 2010, which did
not appear in other years (figure 5(a–g)).
Satellite Chl a data might be affected by the presence of an oil slick, especially
immediately following the oil spill. But this effect was minor and could be ignored in
our study.

3.2 Changes in SST

The temperature in previous years showed a declining trend (figure 6), the lowest
SST value tended to appear in the period 18–25 June. However, SST values in
2010 fluctuated with the time and attained the lowest value (27.4668C) in the
period 25 May–1 June. There are two low-SST points in the 2010 SST at two
different periods (25 May–1 June, 18–25 June). The SST values during 7–14 April,
2010 dropped dramatically to 27.838C , a degree or two below that of the past
years. In the period 9–16 May 2010, the SST was much lower than the former

Figure 3. Comparison of Chl a (8-day composite) during three different periods.

 Phytoplankton bloom 335
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 07:24 22 April 2015

Figure 4. (a) Spatial distribution of Chl a in the Timor Sea on 9 May 2010 (MODIS image).
The solid white square enclosed by a white circle denotes the location of the Montara
Platform. Phytoplankton bloom is indicated by the arrow. Black colour represents non-
availability of data and dark yellow colour represents land. The colour bar indicates Chl a
concentration (mg m73). (b) MODIS image of SST on 9 May 2010 in the Timor Sea. The
colour bar represents the SST values. Available in colour online.

Figure 5. (a–h) Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) derived images of

monthly mean Chl a values for May from 2003 to 2010. The Montara Platform area is shown in
the small white square within the circle. The phytoplankton bloom is indicated by the arrow.
Available in colour online.
period but a little higher than the following period. Moreover, the SST values did
not show a high-low-high variation trend during this period except in 2003, 2004
and 2008.
 336 Y. Sheng et al.
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 07:24 22 April 2015

Figure 6. Eight-day composite of sea surface temperature (SST) during different years. The
period of phytoplankton bloom occurrence is indicated by the black arrow.

There were low temperature areas lying in the southwest and southeast of the
platform, which were caused by the cloud cover rather than the real sea surface
temperature (figure 4(b)).

3.3 Time series changes in wind fields

From 21 August to 17 September southwesterly and southeasterly winds frequently
occurred (figure 7). But northwesterly winds occurring close to the Australian
continent on 7 and 14 September had a tendency to push the slick towards the coast.
However, the wind direction changed to northeasterly on 10 and 11 September.
Southwesterly winds prevailed from 18 September to 3 October, northwesterly winds
occurred on 4 October and then easterly and northeasterly winds prevailed again.
But after 10 October northwesterly and northeasterly winds prevailed.
In short, southwesterly winds prevailed close to the oil rig before 10 October but
after that the wind direction changed to northeasterly and northwesterly.

3.4 Oil spill displacements

A north-eastwards movement of the slicks was observed in the 30 August image
(figure 8(a)). On 17 September, however, the leak appeared to show a convoluted
area to the north, east and west of the platform (figure 8(b)). After 7 days, the slicks
moved northeastwards again (figure 8(c)). However, on 10 October, a bean-shaped
slick appeared near the platform that was quite different from the former in
appearance and position with some possible slick remnants appearing near the coast
of Australia (figure 8(d)). It was reported that a fire broke out on the West Atlas
drilling rig on 1 and 2 November 2009 so there was a smoke plume whose direction
was northeast-southwestward in the 2 November image. But the residual oil slick
moved towards the northwestern coast of Australia and located to the southeast of
the platform (figure 8(e)).
 Phytoplankton bloom 337
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 07:24 22 April 2015

Figure 7. Daily QuikScat surface wind vectors (d: descending pass; a: ascending pass;
location of the Montara platform is shown by a red triangle). Available in colour online.

Figure 8. Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) images of 250-m

resolution illustrating the oil slicks in the Timor Sea. Location of the Montara platform is
indicated by a red dot enclosed by a white triangle. Available in colour online.
 338 Y. Sheng et al.
4. Discussion
4.1 Change in wind field and oil spill displacements
Throughout the year, the Timor Sea experiences a southwestward surface current,
the Timor Current, averaging 0.8–1.6 km per hour. It is an oceanic current that runs
south-west in the Timor Sea between the Indonesia archipelago and Australia. It is a
major contributor to the Indonesian Throughflow that transports water from the
Pacific Ocean to the Indian Ocean (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timor_Sea). During
the months of November to March, the northwest monsoon occurs, while the
southeast monsoon develops in the month of May and continues through
September. So April and October are transition months (Cresswell et al. 1993).
The satellite wind data in figure 7 agree well with these properties.
According to the results of time series changes in wind fields and oil spill
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 07:24 22 April 2015

displacements, we found that the slicks movement direction (figure 8) coincided

completely with the wind direction (figure 7). There are other factors such as currents
that can also have an effect on the movement of the oil spill, but in terms of the
displacement of oil on the surface, the wind forcing seems to play an important role.
In general, the area affected by oil changed over time.

4.2 Phytoplankton bloom and the Montara oil spill

The variation in Chl a concentration is influenced by many factors, such as
prevailing wind, upwelling water, circulation, river discharges. This explains why
there are slight changes in Chl a concentration in other years (figure 5(a–g)).
Upwelling is usually reflected by cold sea surface temperature, low dissolved
oxygen (DO) concentration, high salinity, high nutrient concentration, as well as high
plankton concentration. As can be inferred from the previous analysis, the Chl a
concentration and SST in upwelling zones are distinctly different from adjacent
waters (Shaw et al. 1996, Tang et al. 2002, Martin and Villanoy 2008). Phytoplankton
blooms induced by upwelling, monsoonal winds and ocean currents occur almost
every year in the same location and these blooms often last for a period of time (Tang
et al. 1999, 2004b, 2006). However, this phytoplankton bloom over the Northwest
shelf of Australia lasted for only a few days based on the Chl a image observation. In
the present study, we do not see upwelling occurring in the bloom area (figure 4(b)),
and there are no rivers flowing into this area either (figure 1(a)). Moreover, by
analysing Chl a images from the same month in previous years, this phenomenon
existed only in 2010 (figure 5), which suggests that the bloom is probably related to
some factor that happened suddenly.
In addition, in the last oil spill detection image (figure 8(e)), the residual oil slick
was located to the southeast of the Montara Platform (13–148 S, 125–1268 E). The
bloom also lay to the southeast of the platform (12–148 S, 124–1258 E) (figure 4(a)). It
is reasonable that the bloom relatively lagged behind the residual spill, because the oil
spill in the sea surface, influenced by the wind forcing, moved faster than that in the
subsurface, which might be biodegraded and served as nutrients to phytoplankton.
The increase in phytoplankton biomass after oil spills was not just an accidental
phenomenon. By investigating the impacts of 15 cases of marine oil spills on phyto-
plankton, we found that blooms occurred after 5 of them. Moreover, these blooms
happened almost about 6 months after the oil spills and lasted for a short duration
(table 1).
 Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 07:24 22 April 2015

Table 1. Summary of major marine oil spills reported and their implicit effects on phytoplankton.
Oil spill Effects on phytoplankton

Time
interval
between
the spill
Volume and the
Duration spilled Phytoplankton bloom Bloom Effect
No. Name Start time (days) location (tonnes) Oil type variation trend (months) duration degree References

1 Argo 15 December 30 Southeast of 28 000 No.6 fuel Decreased at first þþþ Kerr 1977
Merchant 1976 Nantucket oil and then
shoals, USA followed by a
bloom
2* Amoco Cadiz 16 March 15 Portsall, France 250 000 Light Chl a bloom and 7 þþþ Riaux-Gobin
1978 Arabian then a 1985
and light decrease,
Iranian finally a slow
crude increase again
3 Ixtoc I 3 June 1979 294 Bay of 457 000– Crude oil Blooms occurring 3 and 7 þþþ Jernelöv and
Phytoplankton bloom

Campeche, 1 400 000 at different Lindén

Mexico places in 1981
different time
4* Exxon Valdez 24 March Prince William 35 000 Alaska First decreased About 8 þþþ Peterson
1989 Sound, North and then 2000,
Alaska, USA Slope followed by Peterson
crude blooms; yet et al. 2003
there was
reduced
eelgrass
density for
about 4 years;

(continued)
339
 Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 07:24 22 April 2015

340

Table 1. (Continued).
Oil spill Effects on phytoplankton

Time
interval
between
the spill
Volume and the
Duration spilled Phytoplankton bloom Bloom Effect
No. Name Start time (days) location (tonnes) Oil type variation trend (months) duration degree References

5* Montara 21 August 74 Timor Sea 23 680 Crude oil First went down 6 Very þþþ Present
2009 and then short study
suddenly time
increased to
form a
phytoplankton
bloom
6 Bravo 22 April 8 Ekofisk, 263 000 Crude oil Increase of þþ Lännergren
Y. Sheng et al.

1977 Norway phytoplankton 1978

biomass
7 Tsesis 26 October 8 Swedish More No. 5 fuel Increase of the Short þþ Linden et al.
1977 archipelago than 1000 oil phytoplankton duration, 1979; J
biomass and less than ohansson
primary a month et al. 1980
production
8 M/T Haven 11 April 1991 12 years Genoa, Italy 145 000 Crude oil Seagrass bed þþ Martinelli
declined by et al. 1995
100 ha one
year after the
spill

(continued)
 Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 07:24 22 April 2015

Table 1. (Continued).
Oil spill Effects on phytoplankton

Time
interval
between
the spill
Volume and the
Duration spilled Phytoplankton bloom Bloom Effect
No. Name Start time (days) location (tonnes) Oil type variation trend (months) duration degree References

9 Jessica 16 January 13 Galapagos 240 000 Fuel oil Chlorophyll þþ Banks 2003
2001 Islands declined in the
week directly
following the
spill, yet rose
in the
successive
month to
levels
analogous to
preceding years
10* Hebei Spirit 7 December 2 Korea’s West 15 000 Crude oil Chl a þþ Lee et al.
Phytoplankton bloom

2007 Sea concentrations 2009

suddenly
decreased
immediately
after the spill
and this
decrease
continued for
about 2 weeks
11* Torrey 18 March 12 Off the Scilly 123 000 Crude oil Little biological þ Smith 1968
Canyon 1967 Isles, UK effect apart
from the tragic
destruction of
sea birds
341

(continued)
 Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 07:24 22 April 2015

342

Table 1. (Continued).
Oil spill Effects on phytoplankton

Time
interval
between
the spill
Volume and the
Duration spilled Phytoplankton bloom Bloom Effect
No. Name Start time (days) location (tonnes) Oil type variation trend (months) duration degree References

12* Castillo De 6 August 1983 7 Saldanha Bay, 252 000 Crude oil Environmental þ Moldan
Bellver South Africa damage was et al.
minimal 1985
13* Braer 5 January 1993 12 Off Shetland, 85 000 Crude Environmental þ International
UK impacts were Tanker
surprisingly Owners
limited Pollution
Federation
(ITOPF)
Y. Sheng et al.

14* Sea Empress 15 February 1996 7 Milford Haven, 72 000 Crude oil Spill had no þ Batten et al.
Wales significant 1998
effects on the
plankton of
the southern
Irish Sea
15 Prestige 13 November 2002 148 Off the Galician 63 000 Heavy No noticeable þ Varela et al.
coast, Spain fuel oil changes in 2006
phytoplankton
primary
production
and
phytoplankton
biomass

*Dispersants were used; þ minimal effects; þþ moderate effects; þþþ phytoplankton bloom.
 Phytoplankton bloom 343
Some studies found that low concentrations of crude oil could stimulate the
growth among some phytoplankton species (Gordon and Prouse 1973, Dunston
et al. 1975, Parsons et al. 1976, Goutx et al. 1984). The crude oil concentration
was very high in the vicinity of the Montara Platform, which probably brought
inhibitory action to the growth of the phytoplankton. Therefore, the bloom
occurred at a certain distance away from the platform rather than in immediate
proximity to it.

4.3 Effects of some major marine oil spills on phytoplankton

4.3.1 The affecting factors. The study has summarized the influences of oil spills
on phytoplankton (table 1) to show the related factors: oil location, occurrence time,
sea situation, oil type, oil amount and duration, oil clean-up situation (use of
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 07:24 22 April 2015

dispersant or not).
Oil spillage had minimal effects in open coastal waters, but might persist and
remain toxic for many years in protected coves and bays (Kerr 1977, Banks
2003). For example, case no. 4 (table 1) happened in a wilderness area and
caused a substantial impact on intertidal communities. If the spill happened at the
time when biological activity and productivity were relatively low, it would have
little effect.
Strong wind and wave energy help to disperse the oil. If the winds are almost
offshore during the spill, it can prevent the oil from coming to the beaches. This
would greatly reduce the harm brought by the spill. Cases 2, 4 and 8 (table 1) did
come ashore eventually so their impacts were relatively more serious.
By analysing cases 1, 7 and 9 (table 1), the fuel oil had a higher potential toxicity
than the crude oil as concluded from some experimental results. In theory, the larger
and longer the duration of the oil spill, the greater impacts it would have (case no. 3
in table 1).
Effective clean-up operations after the oil spill are very important. Although a
large amount of oil was spilled in a particularly sensitive area, the impact of case no.
14 was far less severe. Sometimes dispersant had higher toxicity than the oil, as in
case no. 11. The cause of the mortality observed after it was uncertain, as large
amounts of toxic dispersants were used.
Laboratory experiments have shown that some types of oil might affect 14C-
carbon fixation in phytoplankton at 300–500 mg l71 (Corner 1979). The degree to
which oil influences phytoplankton growth varies with concentration, compound
and species of algae. For example, a concentration of 104 mg l71 appears to be a
toxicity or inhibition threshold for benzene, toluene and xylene hydrocarbons
in most organisms except the green algae, which were capable of good growth in
solutions at the upper limit of 105 mg l71 (Dunston et al. 1975). Based on
information about the Montara oil spill from the AMSA website, such concentra-
tions (105 mg l71) could not occur in the Timor Sea except possibly in the vicinity of
the rig during the oil leak. Different pollutants, different seasons and temperature
would produce different experimental results. Oil pollution may be less harmful to
ecosystems in temperate climates than in the cold, partially due to evaporation of
volatile components of crude oil at relatively high temperatures (Dahl et al. 1983).
It is difficult to determine which factor is the most important one. The above
factors should be comprehensively considered when dealing with the effects of oil
spill on phytoplankton.
 344 Y. Sheng et al.
4.3.2 The time interval between the spill and the bloom. By analysing the effects of
major marine oil spills on phytoplankton (table 1), this study found that the bloom
often occurred about 6 months after the spill. These blooms were characterized as
paroxysmal, of short duration and by the absence of a distinct development
process.
Elevated total phytoplankton abundance and chlorophyll concentration were
also observed after No. 2 fuel oil–sea water dispersions were added to three large
scale microcosms twice weekly for a 5 and a half month-period in 1977 and a 4-
month period in 1978 (Vargo et al. 1982). About 5 months after the start of the
oil addition (14 February 1977 and 6 March1978), Chl a concentration reached a
peak (figures 1 and 2). Moreover, the results showed that the oiled tanks
displayed greater homogeneity in species presence or absence than the controls.
Vargo et al. thought that the reduction in predation pressure combined with
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 07:24 22 April 2015

species selection by the low level concentration of No. 2 fuel oil led to the
elevated biomass.
However, there were few studies about phytoplankton bloom after oil spills.
Referring to previous research results and combined with our satellite data, we could
only give some possible reasons for the formation of the bloom. In addition, because
the marine environment is complex and dynamic, it is difficult for us to simulate the
real situation and give the specific explanation.

4.4 Possible reasons for the formation of phytoplankton bloom after oil spill
In general, water temperature, light radiation and the availability of nutrients are
three key factors limiting the development and growth of phytoplankton. The SST
was about 278C in this area, which was favourable for phytoplankton growth. At
the beginning of the oil spill, oil floated on top of the water, less sunlight
penetrated into the water, limiting the photosynthesis of phytoplankton (http://
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_spill). Then the increased anaerobic bacterial plankton
incorporated the increased nitrogen as a result of their metabolism of the
hydrocarbons. If nutrients had been limiting, bacteria would have competed with
phytoplankton for this often limiting nutrient (Banks 2003). This would result in
reducing the amount of the phytoplankton. But increased bacteria can also
accelerate the decomposition of the crude oil. The process made sunlight penetrate
into the water again.
In an attempt to determine the reason for the formation of the phytoplankton
bloom, previous studies were reviewed. Many studies found that zooplankton
biomass declined obviously after the oil spill (Johansson et al. 1980). One study
noted that phytoplankton production was apparently stimulated as a result of
nutrient released from dead organisms (Cabioch et al. 1981). So the dead
zooplankton can serve as a source of nutrients for the phytoplankton. By consulting
lots of documentation some studies indicated that a reduction in grazing by
herbivores after the oil spill could cause a plankton bloom (Linden et al. 1979,
Johansson et al. 1980, Teal and Howarth 1984, Peterson 2000, Peterson et al. 2003).
Nevertheless, some studies were uncertain whether the phytoplankton bloom was
due to stimulation by oil pollution or decreased grazing (Lännergren 1978, Riaux-
Gobin 1985).
In all probability, a combined effect of reduced predation pressure, decomposition
of dead fauna and flora, selection of some tolerant and competing phytoplankton
 Phytoplankton bloom 345
species in the oil environment and stimulation of the spilled crude oil to some types
of phytoplankton seemed to be the reason for the short-lived phytoplankton bloom
as a consequence of elevated Chl a concentration.

5. Conclusion
Many studies on the influence of oil on phytoplankton communities have been
carried out (table 1). Seven out of fifteen major oil spills show that the
phytoplankton biomass increased or even formed the bloom after the spill. The
phytoplankton bloom is discussed comprehensively in the present study by taking
advantage of a remote sensing technique that has the ability to obtain adequate and
sufficient historical data for consistent assessment. Based on our analysis, the Chl a
concentration after the Montara oil spill decreased initially but reached its peak in
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 07:24 22 April 2015

May 2010. Oil spillage seems to be an important cause that contributes to the
changes in Chl a concentration. Chl a concentration was always high in May of
previous years but did not form a phytoplankton bloom in this region. To what
extent could the oil spill affect the variation of Chl a, we cannot give a quantitative
measurement. It is difficult to determine whether natural variability or oil spill effects
are the more important factor.

Acknowledgments
This work was supported jointly by research projects awarded to Dr DanLing Tang.
(1) National Natural Sciences Foundation of China (40976091, 31061160190,
40811140533); (2) Key Project of Knowledge Innovation Program, Chinese
Academy of Sciences (KZCX2-YW-226) and SCSIO (SQ200912); (3) The CAS/
SAFEA International Partnership Program for Creative Research Teams (KZCX2-
YW-T001, KZCX2-YW-213). Thanks to Dr XinFeng Zhang, Dr Hui Zhao, Dr
SuFen Wang, JiuJuan Wang and colleagues in our Laboratory of Remote Sensing of
Marine Ecology and Environment (RSMEE) for their help in this study. We thank
NASA’s Ocean Color Working Group for providing MODIS data, the Physical
Oceanography Distributed Active Archive Center (PODAAC) for QuikScat wind
stress. We gratefully acknowledge Professor Nagappa Ramaiah for his help in
editing the manuscript and give thanks to the referees for their valuable comments.

References
BANKS, S., 2003, SeaWiFS satellite monitoring of oil spill impact on primary production in the
Galapagos Marine Reserve. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 47, pp. 325–330.
BATTEN, S., ALLEN, R. and WOTTON, C., 1998, The effects of the Sea Empress oil spill on the
plankton of the southern Irish Sea. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 36, pp. 764–774.
CABIOCH, L., DAUVIN, J.C., GENTIL, F., RETIERE, C. and RIVAIN, V., 1981, Perturbations
induites dans la composition et le fonctionnement des peuplements benthiques
sublittoraux, sous I’effet des hydrocarbures de I’Amoco Cadiz. In Proceedings of
International Symposium on Amoco Cadiz, 19–22 November 1979, CNEXO Brest,
France, pp. 513–525.
CHEN, H. and ZHAO, C.F., 2009, A study for detecting marine oil spills by using MODIS multi-
spectral data. Transactions of Oceanology and Limnology, 3, pp. 46–52.
CORNER, E.D.S., 1979, Pollution studies with marine plankton. Part I Petroleum hydrocarbons
and related compounds. Advances in Marine Biology, 15, pp. 289–380.
 346 Y. Sheng et al.
CRESSWELL, G., FRISCHE, A., PETERSON, J. and QUADFASEL, D., 1993, Circulation in the Timor
Sea. Journal of Geophysical Research, 98, pp. 14379–14389.
DAHL, E., LAAKE, M., TJESSEM, K., EBERLEIN, K. and BØHLE, B., 1983, Effects of Ekofisk crude oil
on an enclosed planktonic ecosystem. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 14, pp. 81–91.
DUNSTON, W.M., ATKINSON, L.P. and NATOLI, J., 1975, Stimulation and inhibition of plankton
growth by low molecular weight hydrocarbons. Marine Biology, 31, pp. 305–310.
GORDON, D. and PROUSE, N., 1973, The effects of three oils on marine phytoplankton
photosynthesis. Marine Biology, 22, pp. 329–333.
GOUTX, H., BERLAND, B., LEVEAU, M. and BERTRAND, J., 1984, Effects of petroleum
biodegradation products on phytoplankton growth. In Second Colloquium on Marine
Bacteriology, IFREMER, Paris, France, pp. 621–627.
JERNELÖV, A. and LINDÉN, O., 1981, Ixtoc I: A case study of the world’s largest oil spill. Ambio,
10, pp. 299–306.
JOHANSSON, S., LARSSON, U., BOEHM, P., 1980, The Tsesis oil spill impact on the pelagic
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 07:24 22 April 2015

ecosystem. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 11, pp. 284–293.

KERR, R., 1977, Oil in the ocean – circumstances control its impact. Science, 198, pp. 1134–
1136.
KIM, C., 2008, Temporal variation in the chlorophyll a concentration of the coastal waters of
Spain following the ship Prestige oil spill. Journal of Fisheries Science and Technology,
11, pp. 212–218.
LÄNNERGREN, C., 1978, Net-and nanoplankton: effects of an oil spill in the North Sea.
Botanica Marina, 21, pp. 353–356.
LEE, C., KIM, M. and KIM, H., 2009, Temporal variation of chlorophyll a concentration in the
coastal waters affected by the Hebei Spirit oil spill in the West Sea of Korea. Marine
Pollution Bulletin, 58, pp. 496–502.
LINDEN, O., ELMGREN, R. and BOEHM, P., 1979, The Tsesis oil spill: its impact on the coastal
ecosystem of the Baltic Sea. Ambio, 86, pp. 244–253.
MARTIN, M.C. and VILLANOY, C.L., 2008, Sea surface variability of upwelling area northwest of
Luzon, Philippines. In Dynamic Planet, P. TREGONING and C. RIZOS (Eds), pp. 84–87.
MARTINELLI, M., LUISE, A., TROMELLINI, E., SAUER, T., NEFF, J. and DOUGLAS, G., 1995, The
M/C Haven oil spill: environmental assessment of exposure pathways and resource
injury. In Proceedings of the 1995 Oil Spill Conference American Petroleum Institute,
Washington, DC, pp. 679–685.
MEI, H., YIN, Y.j., 2009, Studies on Marine Oil Spills and Their Ecological Damage. Journal
of Ocean University of China (English Edition), 8, pp. 312–316.
MOLDAN, A., JACKSON, L., MCGIBBON, S., VAN DER WESTHUIZEN, J., 1985, Some aspects of the
Castillo de Bellver oil spill. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 16, pp. 97–102.
PARSONS, T., LI, W. and WATERS, R., 1976, Some preliminary observations on the
enhancement of phytoplankton growth by low levels of mineral hydrocarbons.
Hydrobiologia, 51, pp. 85–89.
PETERSON, C., 2000, The Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska: acute, indirect and chronic effects on
the ecosystem. Advances in Marine Biology, 39, pp. 3–84.
PETERSON, C., RICE, S., SHORT, J., ESLER, D., BODKIN, J., BALLACHEY, B. and IRONS, D., 2003,
Long-term ecosystem response to the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Science, 302, pp. 2082–
2086.
RIAUX-GOBIN, C., 1985, Long-term changes in microphytobenthos in a Brittany estuary after
the Amoco Cadiz oil spill. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 24, pp. 51–56.
RUIZ-VILLARREAL, M., GONZÁLEZ-POLA, C., DIAZ DEL RIO, G., LAVIN, A., OTERO, P.,
PIEDRACOBA, S. and CABANAS, J., 2006, Oceanographic conditions in North and
Northwest Iberia and their influence on the Prestige oil spill. Marine Pollution Bulletin,
53, pp. 220–238.
SHAW, P., CHAO, S., LIU, K., PAI, S. and LIU, C., 1996, Winter upwelling off Luzon in the
northeastern South China Sea. Journal of Geophysical Research, 101, pp. 16435–16448.
 Phytoplankton bloom 347
SMITH, J. (Ed.), 1968, ‘Torrey Canyon’ Pollution and Marine Life (Cambridge: Plymouth
Laboratory of the Marine Biological Association).
TANG, D.L., NI, I.-H., KESTER, D.R. and MÜLLER-KARGER, F.E., 1999, Remote sensing
observations of winter phytoplankton blooms southwest of the Luzon Strait in the
South China Sea. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 191, pp. 43–51.
TANG, D.L., KAWAMURA, H. and LUIS, A., 2002, Short-term variability of phytoplankton
blooms associated with a cold eddy in the northwestern Arabian Sea. Remote Sensing
of Environment, 81, pp. 82–89.
TANG, D.L., KAWAMURA, H. and GUAN, L., 2004a, Long-time observation of annual variation
of Taiwan Strait upwelling in summer season. Advances in Space Research, 33, pp.
307–312.
TANG, D.L., KAWAMURA, H., VAN DIEN, T. and LEE, M., 2004b, Offshore phytoplankton
biomass increase and its oceanographic causes in the South China Sea. Marine
Ecology Progress Series, 268, pp. 31–41.
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 07:24 22 April 2015

TANG, D.L., KAWAMURA, H., SHI, P., TAKAHASHI, W., GUAN, L., SHIMADA, T., SAKAIDA, F. and
ISOGUCHI, O., 2006, Seasonal phytoplankton blooms associated with monsoonal
influences and coastal environments in the sea areas either side of the Indochina
Peninsula. Journal of Geophysical Research, 111, pp. 1–9.
TEAL, J. and HOWARTH, R., 1984, Oil spill studies: a review of ecological effects. Environmental
Management, 8, pp. 27–44.
VARELA, M., BODE, A., LORENZO, J., ÁLVAREZ-OSSORIO, M.T., MIRANDA, A., PATROCINIO, T.,
ANADÓN, R., VIESCA, L., RODRIGUEZ, N., VALDÉS, L., CABAL, J., URRUTIA, Á., GARCÍA-
SOTO, C., RODRÍGUEZ, M., ÁLVAREZ-SALGADO, X.A. and GROOM, S., 2006, The effect of
the ‘Prestige’ oil spill on the plankton of the N-NW Spanish coast. Marine Pollution
Bulletin, 53, pp. 272–286.
VARGO, G.A., HUTCHINS, M. and ALMQUIST, G., 1982, The effect of low, chronic levels of No. 2
fuel oil on natural phytoplankton assemblages in microcosms: 1. species composition
and seasonal succession. Marine Environmental Research, 6, pp. 245–264.