Research Article |
Corresponding author: Vladimir Dvoretskiy ( vdvoretskiy@mmbi.info ) Academic editor: Boris Filippov
© 2018 Vladimir Dvoretskiy, Alexander Dvoretskiy.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Dvoretsky VG, Dvoretsky AG (2018) Features of winter zooplankton assemblage in the Central Trough of the Barents Sea. Arctic Environmental Research 18(1): 28-36. https://doi.org/10.17238/issn2541-8416.2018.18.1.28
|
The Barents Sea is a highly productive shelf region. Zooplankton assemblages are a key component of the carbon cycle in Arctic marine ecosystems; they transfer energy from lower trophic levels to higher levels, including larval and young commercial fish. The winter state of the zooplankton community in the Central Through and their slopes (Barents Sea) was investigated in late November 2010. Vertical structure of water layer was characterised by pycnocline located below 80 m. The upper strata were occupied by transformed Atlantic Water, while winter Barents Sea Water with negative temperatures was in the bottom strata. Total zooplankton abundance varied from 162 to 1214 individuals/m3. Biomass ranged from 88 to 799 mg wet mass/m3. Copepods dominated in terms of total zooplankton abundance (average 99%) and biomass (92%). Maximum densities of Calanus finmarchicus and Calanus glacialis were registered in the frontal zone separating warm and cold water masses. Abundances of Metridia longa and O. similis were highest in cold waters. Three groups of stations differing in terms of the common copepod composition were delineated with cluster analysis. The age structure of Calanus finmarchicus and Metridia longa was characterised by a prevalence of copepodites IV–V. Total zooplankton abundance and biomass were correlated to water temperature and salinity, suggesting that hydrological conditions were the key driver of spatial variations of the zooplankton communities. High biomass of large copepods suggests potential significance of the investigated region for feeding of young and adult fish.
Plankton, copepods, pelagic ecosystem, Arctic shelf
The Barents Sea is the largest shelf sea with a surface area and biological productivity equal to or exceeding those of the most productive seas of the Far East. The region is populated by flora and fauna with an abundance of commercial species (
Zooplankton communities constitute an important element of marine ecosystems, since they ensure transport of energy from primary producers to higher trophic levels. The supply of zooplankton determines the food reserve for ichthyoplankton and young fish. Coastal regions are the major feeding areas for juvenile herring and capelin (
The purpose of this study was to investigate the taxonomic composition, quantitative distribution and biological features of certain dominant species of zooplankton in the central part of the Barents Sea at the beginning of the winter season.
Samples were collected during the voyage by the research vessel Viktor Buynitskiy in the Barents Sea at the end of November 2010, under polar night conditions (see Fig.
Location of zooplankton sampling stations in the Barents Sea in November 2010 and main currents diagram [9]. 1 – warm currents, 2 – cold currents, 3 – local coastal currents, 4 – spread of deep Atlantic waters, 5 – thermic frontal zones, 6 – thermohaline frontal zones, 7 – haline frontal zones, 8 – mild, unsteady frontal zones. Group 1 stations are marked by circles, group 2 stations – by triangles, and group 3 stations – by crosses
Characterisation of sampling stations and hydrological conditions (minimum / maximum / mean in sampling stratum) in the Barents Sea in November 2010
Station | Date | Time | Depth, m | Sampling stratum | Temperature, °С | Salinity, psu |
1 | 25.11.2010 | 9:36 | 295 | 280–0 | 0.02/3.62/2.12 | 34.94/35.02/34.97 |
2 | 25.11.2010 | 15:19 | 300 | 290–0 | 0.03/3.07/1.69 | 34.94/35.02/34.96 |
3 | 25.11.2010 | 22:29 | 362 | 350–0 | –0.02/2.26/0.93 | 34.89/34.98/34.94 |
4 | 26.11.2010 | 12:44 | 305 | 300–0 | 0.08/2.73/1.44 | 34.92/34.99/34.95 |
5 | 26.11.2010 | 23:37 | 375 | 350–0 | –0.17/1.16/0.41 | 34.8/34.97/34.92 |
6 | 27.11.2010 | 13:15 | 236 | 230–0 | 0.52/2.6/1.89 | 34.83/34.98/34.89 |
7 | 27.11.2010 | 15:35 | 209 | 200–0 | 0.76/2.12/1.62 | 34.8/34.93/34.86 |
8 | 27.11.2010 | 18:46 | 226 | 200–0 | 0.7/2/1.65 | 34.79/34.95/34.85 |
9 | 27.11.2010 | 20:55 | 196 | 200–0 | 1.04/1.98/1.68 | 34.8/34.92/34.84 |
10 | 28.11.2010 | 9:05 | 238 | 230–0 | 0.49/3.09/2.32 | 34.81/35/34.89 |
11 | 28.11.2010 | 11:05 | 250 | 240–0 | 0.49/3.22/2.36 | 34.83/35.01/34.92 |
12 | 28.11.2010 | 12:28 | 274 | 265–0 | 1.01/3.18/2.34 | 34.83/35.01/34.92 |
13 | 28.11.2010 | 16:39 | 265 | 260–0 | 1.02/3.14/2.45 | 34.82/35.01/34.91 |
14 | 28.11.2010 | 20:12 | 313 | 300–0 | 0.3/3.16/1.85 | 34.89/35.01/34.95 |
15 | 29.11.2010 | 9:22 | 273 | 260–0 | 0.31/2.67/1.66 | 34.92/35/34.95 |
The samples were treated in a laboratory on the shore using standard techniques (
The resulting data were processed using descriptive statistics methods with calculation of mean values and their standard errors. Similarity of individual stations in terms of the zooplankton count was assessed using the Bray-Curtis index (
Vertical structure of the water stratum was characterised by presence of pycnocline, typically at a depth of 120–180 metres. At three sampling stations in the south-western part of the study region (stations 3-5), pycnocline was found in the 90-110 m stratum in an area with chilled near-bottom waters of the trough. At station 5, pycnocline was found at a depth of 80 metres. The top boundary of pycnocline at all the stations matched the top boundary of thermocline and halicline. The top stratum up to the pycnocline boundary was occupied by transformed Atlantic waters; polar waters with a lower temperature were found at station 5. Winter Barents Sea waters with below-zero temperatures in the centre were found in the near-bottom stratum, at a depth of 200 m and below.
A total of 29 taxons of zooplankton were identified in the samples (see Table
Copepods prevailed in terms of abundance at all stations, their numbers varying from 161 to 1199 individuals/m3 with a mean of 454±28 individuals/m3, which accounted for 99–100% of the overall zooplankton abundance. The abundance of other groups combined was no more than 15 individuals/m3, on average (2±1%). Copepods also prevailed in terms of biomass (80–725, 377±54 mg/m3), accounting for 83-99 (92±1)% of the overall biomass of zooplankton. Subdominant species were represented by euphausiids (0–58, 21±4 mg/m3) and chaetognaths (0.3–13, 6±1 mg/m3), which accounted for 0–14 (6±1)% and 0.3–3 (1±0.2)% of the overall biomass, respectively.
Cluster analysis identified three groups of sampling stations that had a fairly similar abundance of dominant species, with a minimum similarity rate of 50% (see Fig.
Dendrogram of station similarity in terms of zooplankton count in the central part of the Barents Sea in November 2010
Composition, abundance (spec/m3) and total biomass (mg of wet mass/m3) of zooplankton among the groups identified by cluster analysis in the Barents Sea in November 2010
Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 | ||||
Taxon/descriptor | min–max | mean±SE | min–max | mean±SE | min–max | mean±SE |
Calanus finmarchicus | 79–199 | 145±12 | 12–53 | 34±10 | 25–212 | 119±93 |
Calanus glacialis | 21–67 | 45±6 | 5–14 | 8±2 | 5–66 | 35±30 |
Calanus hyperboreus | 0–14 | 3±2 | 0–1 | <0.1 | 1–5 | 3±2 |
Copepoda nauplii | – | – | 0–0.5 | 0.1±0.1 | 0–0.5 | 0.2±0.2 |
Heterorhabdus norvegicus | 0–0.5 | 0.2±0.1 | – | – | 0–0.4 | 0.2±0.2 |
Metridia longa | 44–107 | 70±8 | 50–111 | 67±15 | 123–219 | 171±48 |
Microcalanus pusillus | 6–31 | 19±4 | 1–22 | 10±5 | 10–10 | 10±0.2 |
Microcalanus pygmaeus | 12–58 | 29±6 | 1–27 | 9±6 | 17–27 | 22±5 |
Microsetella norvegica | 0–0.8 | 0.1±0.1 | 0–0.6 | 0.2±0.2 | 0–5 | 2.5±2.5 |
Oithona atlantica | 2–30 | 9±3 | 3–5 | 4±1 | 13–16 | 15±2 |
Oithona similis | 34–250 | 113±22 | 58–67 | 63±2 | 249–493 | 371±122 |
Paraeuchaeta norvegica | 0–0.1 | 0.1±0.01 | 0–0.1 | <0.1 | 0–0.1 | <0.1 |
Pseudocalanus spp. I–IV | 5–84 | 21±9 | 2–12 | 6±2 | 26–115 | 70±44 |
Pseudocalanus acuspes V–VI | 5–14 | 9±1 | 1–8 | 4±2 | 3–9 | 6±3 |
Pseudocalanus minutus V–VI | 3–30 | 13±3 | 3–8 | 4±1 | 11–32 | 21±11 |
Themisto abyssorum | 0–0.1 | <0.1 | 0–0.1 | <0.1 | – | – |
Thysanoessa inermis | 0–1.2 | 0.7±0.2 | 0–0.5 | 0.2±0.1 | 0.3–1.7 | 1.1±0.7 |
Meganyctiphanes norvegica | 0–0.1 | <0.1 | – | – | – | – |
Pandalus borealis | 0–0.047 | <0.1 | – | – | – | – |
Aeginopsis laurentii | – | – | – | – | 0–0.2 | 0.1±0.1 |
Aglantha digitale | 0–0.1 | <0.1 | 0–0.1 | <0.1 | 0–0.8 | 0.4±0.4 |
Beroe cucumis juv. | 0–0.1 | 0.1±0.01 | 0–0.1 | <0.1 | 0–0.4 | 0.2±0.2 |
Mertensia ovum juv. | 0–0.1 | 0.1±0.01 | 0–0.1 | <0.1 | 0.1–0.5 | 0.3±0.2 |
Gastropoda larvae | – | – | – | – | 0–1.2 | 0.6±0.6 |
Eukrohnia hamata | 0–0.2 | <0.1 | – | – | 0–0.3 | 0.1±0.1 |
Parasagitta elegans | 0.3–2.3 | 1±0.2 | 0.1–0.2 | 0.2±0 | 0.6–4.6 | 2.6±2 |
Limacina helicina juv. | 0–1 | 0.2±0.1 | – | – | 0–1.3 | 0.6±0.6 |
Oikopleura vanhoeffenni | 0–0.3 | 0.1±0.01 | 0–0.2 | 0.1±0.1 | 1.8–3.7 | 2.7±0.9 |
Pisces larvae | – | – | 0–0.03 | <0.1 | – | – |
Total | 266–681 | 477±46 | 162–259 | 209±20 | 497–1214 | 855±358 |
Copepods | 264–678 | 475±46 | 161–259 | 209±20 | 494–1199 | 846±353 |
Euphausiids | 0–1.2 | 0.7±0.1 | 0–0.4 | 0.3±0.1 | 0.3–1.7 | 1±0.7 |
Chaetognaths | 0.3–2.3 | 1±0.2 | 0.1–0.2 | 0.2±0.1 | 0.6–4.9 | 2.7±2.1 |
Others | 0.1–1.2 | 0.4±0.1 | 0.1–0.4 | 0.2±0.1 | 1.9–8 | 4.9±3.1 |
H’ | 1.79–2.09 | 1.88±0.03 | 1.54–1.88 | 1.71±0.08 | 1.54–1.77 | 1.66±0.12 |
J’ | 0.58–0.71 | 0.64±0.01 | 0.53–0.65 | 0.59±0.03 | 0.53–0.54 | 0.54±0.01 |
Biomass | 354–666 | 508±39 | 88–173 | 131±19 | 192–799 | 496±304 |
At the stations from the second group, water temperature was on average 0.5°С lower than at the first cluster stations. This group included 3 stations in the northern part of the studied aquatorium (stations. 6, 8, 9) and one station in the south (station 2). The predominant species in the community were M. longa (30±1%) and O. similis (30±3%) . The biomass was chiefly made up of three species – M. longa (33±5%), C. finmarchicus (32±5%) and C. glacialis (20±4%). The total biomass was, on average, 4 times smaller than at the stations of other clusters.
The third group included 2 deep-water stations (3 and 5). The mean water temperature at these stations was the minimum among all three clusters, since the stations were affected by the cold central current. The predominant species were O. similis (45±5%) and M. longa (22±3%) (see Table
Significant dissimilarities (Tukey-Kramer test, p<0.05) were identified in the overall abundance (group 2 - group 3) and biomass of zooplankton (group 1 - group 2, group 2 - group 3), as well as the abundance of C. finmarchicus (group 1– group 2), C. glacialis (group 1– group 2), M. longa (group 1–group 2, group 2–group 3), O. similis (group 1– group 2, group 2– group 3), Pseudocalanus spp. (group 2– group 3), P. elegans (group 2– group 3), copepods (group 2– group 3) and chaetognaths (group 2– group 3) (see Table
The horizontal distribution of the four species with the greatest abundance had the following pattern. The highest densities of C. finmarchicus (> 150 individuals/m3) were recorded at the frontal zone boundary dividing the warm and cold waters (stations 1, 3, 4, 11, 13, 15). The smallest abundance (< 30 individuals/m3) was found in the area affected by Arctic waters. Maximum abundance of C. glacialis (> 50 individuals/m3) was also found in the frontal zone, whereas minimum values (< 10 individuals/m3) were identified in the area affected by Atlantic waters (stations 6, 8, 9). The abundance of M. longa reached its maximum (> 100 individuals/m3) in the area affected by cold waters (stations 3, 5, 15), whereas minimum values (< 60 individuals/m3) were found in warm waters (stations 8–10, 12). The count of O. similis was at its maximum (> 200 individuals/m3) in the southern part of the study region affected by cold waters (stations 3–5), and the minimum count (< 60 individuals/m3) was in the region with warm waters (stations 8, 9, 12).
The age composition of C. finmarchicus had the following pattern: the majority were represented by senior (IV–V) copepodites stages that made up around half the entire population of the species. About a quarter of the entire population was represented by grown individuals. A similar situation was identified for M. longa, but presence of stage I copepodites in the samples is indicative of spawning of this species in the central part of the Barents Sea.
Regression analysis demonstrated that the total abundance and biomass of zooplankton were inversely related to the mean temperature of the water stratum and directly related to its salinity (see Table
Linear regression relationship of the abundance (n, individuals/m3) and biomass (b, mg of wet mass/m3) of zooplankton versus the length of the sampling stratum, time of sample collection and hydrological aspects in the central part of the Barents Sea in November 2010
Equation | R2 | r | F | p |
Lg[N] =0.003∙L+1.81 | 0.463 | 0.680 | 11.200 | <0.05 |
Lg[N] =0.0001∙t+2.60 | 0.000 | 0.002 | 0.000 | 0.995 |
Lg[N] =–0.307∙T1+2.74 | 0.288 | –0.537 | 5.260 | <0.05 |
Lg[N] =0.031∙T2+2.52 | 0.007 | 0.086 | 0.097 | 0.760 |
Lg[N] =–0.127∙T3+2.83 | 0.093 | –0.304 | 1.328 | 0.270 |
Lg[N] =1.836∙S1+–61.40 | 0.196 | 0.443 | 3.170 | 0.098 |
Lg[N] =2.027∙S2–68.31 | 0.077 | 0.278 | 1.087 | 0.316 |
Lg[N] =3.292∙S3–112.33 | 0.339 | 0.583 | 6.679 | <0.05 |
Lg[B] =0.003∙L+1.83 | 0.206 | 0.454 | 3.379 | 0.089 |
Lg[B] =–0.021∙t+2.82 | 0.105 | –0.324 | 1.523 | 0.239 |
Lg[B] =–0.212∙T1+2.62 | 0.079 | –0.281 | 1.115 | 0.310 |
Lg[B] =0.237∙T2+1.90 | 0.255 | 0.505 | 4.448 | 0.055 |
Lg[B] =0.095∙T3+2.36 | 0.030 | 0.172 | 0.396 | 0.540 |
Lg[B] =2.522∙S1–85.38 | 0.214 | 0.462 | 3.535 | 0.083 |
Lg[B] =5.323∙S2–183.92 | 0.308 | 0.555 | 5.793 | <0.05 |
Lg[B] =4.673∙S3–160.61 | 0.395 | 0.629 | 8.497 | <0.05 |
Hydrological conditions in the studied aquatorium of the Barents Sea were rather uniform and the gradients of meat water temperature and salinity in the sampling stratum did not exceed 1.73 ºС and 0.13 psu. Generally speaking, water temperature and salinity in the top quasi-uniform stratum during the study period were consistent with the long-time annual average values typical of the central part of the Barents Sea, allowing us to place the year 2010 in the category of normal years (
Assessment of the similarity of sampling stations in terms of the taxonomic composition of zooplankton revealed a very similar composition of the fauna at the stations, which was to be expected because similar waters were found to dominate at all the sampling stations. As a rule, the number of zooplankton species found in autumn-winter samples in the Barents Sea is rather small (
The distribution of dominant species of copepods was closely related to the arrangement of the water masses. As stated above, the boreal species C. finmarchicus is found across almost the entire aquatorium of the Barents Sea (
Evenness of fauna abundance (J) and the Shannon index (H’) are frequently used to assess the structure of zooplankton communities. The mean values we obtained (J=0.61, H’=1.88) were low, approximately 1.2 – 1.5 times smaller than in the south of the Barents Sea in autumn (
Copepods C. finmarchicus and M. longa are some of the most dominant species of zooplankton in the central sector of the Barents Sea. A review of the state of their populations enables assessment of the trophic resources of plankton-feeder fish in a specific research season and influence of the climate on the community’s biota. We discovered predominance of small crustaceans of senior age groups in the population of C. finmarchicus and M. longa. This ratio of different stages is typical of the autumn-winter season. As a rule, small crustaceans begin sinking into the depths of the Barents Sea as early as late July, and the wintering resource is represented by stage V copepods (
The study revealed that the quantity of zooplankton was correlated to the hydrological aspects. Relationsips of this sort are generally typical of the Barents Sea zooplankton in the winter season (see Table
Analysis of the quantitative distribution of zooplankton showed a close direct correlation between the abundance and biomass of the zooplankton and the depth of sampling (see Table
High biomass of large copepods might indicate that the study area potentially plays an important role in the nutrition of young and full-grown fish. In other words, the central part of the Barents Sea at the beginning of winter is characterised as an aquatorium with a high feeding potential for plankton-feeder fish. This is well demonstrated by a comparison with long-time data obtained in the summer season for standard strata of the Barents Sea (Atlantic waters): the biomass of feed zooplankton in June-July was 200–1000 mg wet mass/m3 (
The study was carried out by government assignment to Federal Publicly Funded Institution of Science – Murmansk Marine Biological Institute, Kola Scientific Centre of the Russian Academy of Sciences; subject of the study: Features of Arctic Plankton Communities in the Face of Current Climate Changes (Barents Sea, Kara Sea and Laptev Sea) (State Reg. No. 0228-2016-0001).