271 resultados para Plankton Expedition


Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The Continuous Plankton Recorder (CPR) survey was conceived from the outset as a programme of applied research designed to assist the fishing industry. Its survival and continuing vigour after 70 years is a testament to its utility, which has been achieved in spite of great changes in our understanding of the marine environment and in our concerns over how to manage it. The CPR has been superseded in several respects by other technologies, such as acoustics and remote sensing, but it continues to provide unrivalled seasonal and geographic information about a wide range of zooplankton and phytoplankton taxa. The value of this coverage increases with time and provides the basis for placing recent observations into the context of long-term, large-scale variability and thus suggesting what the causes are likely to be. Information from the CPR is used extensively in judging environmental impacts and producing quality status reports (QSR); it has shown the distributions of fish stocks, which had not previously been exploited; it has pointed to the extent of ungrazed phytoplankton production in the North Atlantic, which was a vital element in establishing the importance of carbon sequestration by phytoplankton. The CPR continues to be the principal source of large-scale, long-term information about the plankton ecosystem of the North Atlantic. It has recently provided extensive information about the biodiversity of the plankton and about the distribution of introduced species. It serves as a valuable example for the design of future monitoring of the marine environment and it has been essential to the design and implementation of most North Atlantic plankton research.

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The Continuous Plankton Recorder (CPR) survey has collected data on basin- scale zooplankton abundance in the North Atlantic since the 1930s. These data have been used in many studies to elucidate seasonal patterns and long-term change in plankton populations, as well as more recently to validate ecosystem models. There has, however, been relatively little comparison of the data from the CPR with that from other samplers. In this study we compare zooplankton abundance estimated from the CPR in the northeast Atlantic with near-surface samples collected by a Longhurst-Hardy Plankton Recorder (LHPR) at Ocean Weather Station India (59 degree N, 19 degree W) between 1971 and 1975. Comparisons were made for six common copepods in the region: Acartia clausi, Calanus finmarchicus, Euchaeta norvegica, Metridia lucens, Oithona sp. and Pleuromamma robusta. Seasonal cycles based on CPR data were similar to those recorded by the LHPR. Differences in absolute abundances were apparent, however, with the CPR underestimating abundances by a factor of between 5 and 40, with the exception of A. clausi. Active avoidance by zooplankton is thought to be responsible. This avoidance is species specific, so that care must be taken describing communities, as the CPR emphasises those species that are preferentially caught, a problem common to many plankton samplers.

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The continuous plankton recorder (CPR) survey is the largest multi-decadal plankton monitoring programme in the world. It was initiated in 1931 and by the end of 2004 had counted 207,619 samples and identified 437 phyto- and zooplankton taxa throughout the North Atlantic. CPR data are used extensively by the research community and in recent years have been used increasingly to underpin marine management. Here, we take a critical look at how best to use CPR data. We first describe the CPR itself, CPR sampling, and plankton counting procedures. We discuss the spatial and temporal biases in the Survey, summarise environmental data that have not previously been available, and describe the new data access policy. We supply information essential to using CPR data, including descriptions of each CPR taxonomic entity, the idiosyncrasies associated with counting many of the taxa, the logic behind taxonomic changes in the Survey, the semi-quantitative nature of CPR sampling, and recommendations on choosing the spatial and temporal scale of study. This forms the basis for a broader discussion on how to use CPR data for deriving ecologically meaningful indices based on size, functional groups and biomass that can be used to support research and management. This contribution should be useful for plankton ecologists, modellers and policy makers that actively use CPR data.