What determines the likelihood of species discovery in marine holozooplankton: is size, range or depth important?

The relationship between date of first description and size, geographic range and depth of occurrence is investigated for 18 orders of marine holozooplankton (comprising over 4000 species). Results of multiple regression analyses suggest that all attributes are linked, which reflects the complex interplay between them. Partial correlation coefficients suggest that geographic range is the most important predictor of description date, and shows an inverse relationship. By contrast, size is generally a poor indicator of description date, which probably mirrors the size-independent way in which specimens are collected, though there is clearly a positive relationship between both size and depth (for metabolic/trophic reasons), and size and geographic range. There is also a positive relationship between geographic range and depth that probably reflects the near constant nature of the deep-water environment and the wide-ranging currents to be found there. Although we did not explicitly incorporate either abundance or location into models predicting the date of first description, neither should be ignored.

Depth gradients of benthic standing stock and diversity on the continental margin at a high-latitude ice-free site (off Spitsbergen 79 degrees N)

High-latitude seas are mostly covered by multi-year ice, which impacts processes of primary production and sedimentation of organic matter. Because of the warming effect of West Spitsbergen Current (WSC), the waters off West Spitsbergen have only winter ice cover. That is uncommon for such a high latitude and enables to separate effects of multiyear-ice cover from the latitudinal patterns. Macrofauna was sampled off Kongsfjord (79°N) along the depth gradient from 300 to 3000 m. The density, biomass and diversity at shallow sites situated in a canyon were very variable. Biomass was negatively correlated with depth (R=-0.86R=-0.86, p<0.001), and ranged from 61 g ww m−2 (212 m) to 1 g ww m−2 (2025 m). The biomasses were much higher than in the multiyear-ice covered High Arctic at similar depths, while resembling those from temperate and tropical localities. Species richness (expressed by number of species per sample and species–area accumulation curves) decreased with depth. There was no clear depth-related pattern in diversity measures: Hurbert rarefaction, Shannon–Wiener or Pielou. The classic increase of species richness and diversity with depth was not observed. Species richness and diversity of deep-sea macrofauna were much lower in our study than in comparable studies of temperate North Atlantic localities. That is related to geographic isolation of Greenland–Icelandic–Norwegian (GIN) seas from the Atlantic pool of species.

Feeding and overwintering of Antarctic krill across its major habitats: The role of sea ice cover, water depth, and phytoplankton abundance

Antarctic krill (Euphausia superba) were sampled in contrasting habitats: a seasonally ice-covered deep ocean (Lazarev Sea), ice-free shelves at their northern range (South Georgia) and the Antarctic Peninsula (Bransfield Strait), and shelf and oceanic sites in the Scotia Sea. Across 92 stations, representing a year-round average, the food volume in krill stomachs comprised 71 +/- 29% algae, 17 +/- 21% protozoans, and 12 +/- 25% metazoans. Fatty acid trophic markers showed that copepods were consistently part of krill diet, not a switch food. In open waters, both diatom and copepod consumption increased with phytoplankton abundance. Under sea ice, ingestion of diatoms became rare, whereas feeding on copepods remained constant. During winter, larvae contained high but variable proportions of diatom markers, whereas in postlarvae the role of copepods increased with krill body length. Overwintering differed according to habitat. Krill from South Georgia had lower lipid stores than those from the Bransfield Strait or Lazarev Sea. Feeding effort was much reduced in Lazarev Sea krill, whereas most individuals from the Bransfield Strait and South Georgia contained phytoplankton and seabed detritus in their stomachs. Their retention of essential body reserves indicates that krill experienced most winter hardship in the Lazarev Sea, followed by South Georgia and then Bransfield Strait. This was reflected in the delayed development from juveniles to adults in the Lazarev Sea. Circumpolar comparisons of length frequencies suggest that krill growth conditions are more favorable in the southwest Atlantic than in the Lazarev Sea or off East Antarctica because of longer phytoplankton bloom periods and rewarding access to benthic food.