How well does the Continuous Plankton Recorder (CPR) sample zooplankton? A comparison with the Longhurst Hardy Plankton Recorder (LHPR) in the northeast Atlantic

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.

Using continuous plankton recorder data

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.