Zooplankton Distribution in Four Western Norwegian Fjords

Gabriel, Garcia; Flood, Per R.; Youngbluth, Marsh J.; Picheral, Marc; Grisoni, Jean-Michel

doi:10.1006/ecss.1999.0540

Cited by 40 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It has been observed in some planktonic species that the bathymetric distribu-tion tends to favour the reproductive processes of some species (i.e. Sagitta tasmanica) (Villenas et al, 2009b), as it may also represent a strategy to reduce the mortality rates, thus decreasing predation and loss by planktonic species advection (Gorsky et al, 2000).…”

Section: Seasonal Distributions Patterns Of Jellyfishmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seasonal and vertical distribution of medusae in Aysen region, southern Chile

Bravo

Palma

Silva

2011

lajar

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Medusae collected in winter and spring 2007 were analyzed in a longitudinal transect made between the Boca de Guafo and Elefantes Fjord, southern Chile. A total of 30 species were identified, Hydromedusae (29) and Scyphozoa (1), where Bougainvillia macloviana, Hybocodon chilensis, Hydractinia tenuis, Laodicea pulcra, L. undulada, Modeeria rotunda and Chrysaora plocamia represent new records for the area. A significant increase in the jellyfish abundance was higher in spring than in winter (fourteen times higher), with 68% of common species in both seasons. The specific diversity was slightly higher in winter (3.4 bits) than spring (3.2 bits), the species richness instead was higher in spring than in winter, with a mean of 5 and 12 species, respectively. The vertical distribution showed the presence of surface (H. borealis), deep (A. apicata, C. peregrina and R. velatum) and wide bathymetric distribution (B. muscoides and B. muscus) species. Results from the area were compared with previous results (2002)(2003) thus proving that most species identified are common in southern Chilean fjords and channels.

show abstract

Section: Seasonal Distributions Patterns Of Jellyfishmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seasonal and vertical distribution of medusae in Aysen region, southern Chile

Bravo

Palma

Silva

2011

lajar

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Acuña et al 1995, Gorsky et al 2000. On the western Norwegian coast, O. dioica is one of the most widely distributed species (Gorsky et al 2000). In the Kattegat, appendicularians also represent an important component of the zooplankton community during the autumn and spring blooms (Nielsen & Hansen 1999).…”

Section: Resale or Republication Not Permitted Without Written Consenmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Acuña et al 1995, Gorsky et al 2000. On the western Norwegian coast, O. dioica is one of the most widely distributed species (Gorsky et al 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Importance of copepods versus appendicularians in vertical carbon fluxes in a Swedish fjord

Vargas¹,

Tönnesson²,

Sell³

et al. 2002

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examined and quantified the contributions of copepods and appendicularians to the vertical flux of carbon during autumn and spring in Gullmar Fjord (west coast of Sweden). Faecal pellet-production rate was determined for major copepod and appendicularian species. In addition, house-production rates were estimated for the appendicularian Oikopleura dioica. Vertical flux of pigments, faecal carbon and appendicularian houses were measured using short-term (24 h) deployments of sediment traps at 2 depths (15 and 30 m). Copepods dominated the community biomass in both spring and autumn and their pellets dominated the faecal carbon flux. O. dioica houses with attached detritus were an important component of the biogenic carbon flux in October (15.3 mg C m -2 d -1), equalling the contribution from copepods at 15 m and 50% of the flux at 30 m. At that time, we observed a loss rate of 70% d -1 of the houses produced in the water column. In the spring, although Fritillaria borealis dominated the appendicularians, its houses did not appear to contribute to the biogenic flux. Our results suggest that oikopleurids and fritillariids may not operate equivalently in biogeochemical cycles. Because of the significant contribution of appendicularians to carbon fluxes, they should be incorporated in future flow models of coastal oceans KEY WORDS: Carbon flux · Appendicularians · Copepods · Faecal pellet production · Marine snow Resale or republication not permitted without written consent of the publisherMar Ecol Prog Ser 241: [125][126][127][128][129][130][131][132][133][134][135][136][137][138] 2002 extruded in short time intervals as faecal pellets (López-Urrutia & Acuña 1999). Some of these faecal pellets, together with uneaten particles, eventually clog the house, which is then abandoned and replaced by a new house, approximately 4 to 6 times per day (Deibel 1988, Alldredge 1992, Hansen et al. 1996, Sato et al. 2001. Thus, appendicularian houses together with their faecal pellets may constitute an important component of marine snow (Alldredge & Gotschalk 1990, Hansen et al. 1996. Furthermore, due to the high efficiency with which appendicularians ingest nanoplankton and picoplankton (King et al. 1980, Deibel 1988, Deibel & Lee 1992, Acuña et al. 1996, they constitute a pathway through which small cells that otherwise do not sink may be transported out of the euphotic zone. Consequently, when appendicularians are abundant, small phytoplankton cells may contribute much more to the vertical flux than when the community is dominated by copepods (Urban et al. 1992, Hansen et al. 1996.Oikopleura and Fritillaria species are abundant pelagic tunicates in coastal waters (e.g. Acuña et al. 1995, Gorsky et al. 2000. On the western Norwegian coast, O. dioica is one of the most widely distributed species (Gorsky et al. 2000). In the Kattegat, appendicularians also represent an important component of the zooplankton community during the autumn and spring blooms (Nielsen & Hansen 1999). The abundance of copepods in these bo...

show abstract

“…It minimizes the problem of coincidence counting associated with the former Optical Plankton Counter (OPC) at high concentrations of small particles (Herman 1988;Herman 1992;Sprules et al 1998). Compared with sophisticated in situ imaging systems (Gorsky et al 2000;Davis et al 2004;Remsen et al 2004), which allow visual discrimination of plankton and marine snow, the LOPC may represent a robust alternative for zooplankton ecologists. Yet, it needs to be calibrated for the presence of fragile particles.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laser Optical Plankton Counter and Zooscan intercomparison in tropical and subtropical marine ecosystems

Schultes

Lopes

2009

Limnology & Ocean Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two recently developed instruments, the Laser Optical Plankton Counter (LOPC) and the Zooscan, have been applied to study zooplankton biomass size spectra in tropical and subtropical marine ecosystems off Brazil. Both technologies rely on optical measurements of particles and may potentially be used in zooplankton monitoring programs. Vertical profiles of the LOPC installed in a 200 µm ring net have been obtained from diverse environmental settings ranging from turbid and nearshore waters to oligotrophic open ocean conditions. Net samples were analyzed on the Zooscan and counted under a microscope. Particle biovolume in the study area estimated with the LOPC correlated with plankton displacement volume from the net samples, but there was no significant relationship between total areal zooplankton biomass determined with LOPC and the Zooscan. Apparently, normalized biomass size spectra (NBSS) of LOPC and Zooscan overlapped for particles in the size range of 500 to 1500 µm in equivalent spherical diameter (ESD), especially at open ocean stations. However, the distribution of particles into five size classes was statistically different between both instruments at 24 of 28 stations. The disparities arise from unequal flow estimates, from different sampling efficiencies of LOPC tunnel and net for large and small particles, and possibly from the interference of non-zooplankton material in the LOPC signal. Ecosystem properties and technical differences therefore limit the direct comparability of the NBSS slopes obtained with both instruments during this study, and their results should be regarded as complementary.

show abstract

Zooplankton Distribution in Four Western Norwegian Fjords

Cited by 40 publications

References 19 publications

Seasonal and vertical distribution of medusae in Aysen region, southern Chile

Seasonal and vertical distribution of medusae in Aysen region, southern Chile

Importance of copepods versus appendicularians in vertical carbon fluxes in a Swedish fjord

Laser Optical Plankton Counter and Zooscan intercomparison in tropical and subtropical marine ecosystems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About