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.

US NOAA Fisheries and UK SAHFOS CPR surveys: comparison of methods and data

The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries Continuous Plankton Recorder (CPR) Survey has sampled four routes: Boston–Nova Scotia (1961–present), New York toward Bermuda (1976–present), Narragansett Bay–Mount Hope Bay–Rhode Island Sound (1998–present) and eastward of Chesapeake Bay (1974–1980). NOAA involvement began in 1974 when it assumed responsibility for the existing Boston–Nova Scotia route from what is now the UK's Sir Alister Hardy Foundation for Ocean Science (SAHFOS). Training, equipment and computer software were provided by SAHFOS to ensure continuity for this and standard protocols for any new routes. Data for the first 14 years of this route were provided to NOAA by SAHFOS. Comparison of collection methods; sample processing; and sample identification, staging and counting techniques revealed near-consistency between NOAA and SAHFOS. One departure involved phytoplankton counting standards. This has since been addressed and the data corrected. Within- and between-survey taxonomic and life-stage names and their consistency through time were, and continue to be, an issue. For this, a cross-reference table has been generated that contains the SAHFOS taxonomic code, NOAA taxonomic code, NOAA life-stage code, National Oceanographic Data Center (NODC) taxonomic code, Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS) serial number and authority and consistent use/route. This table is available for review/use by other CPR surveys. Details of the NOAA and SAHFOS comparison and analytical techniques unique to NOAA are presented.

The emergence of automated high-frequency flow cytometry: revealing temporal and spatial phytoplankton variability

Phytoplankton observation is the product of a number of trade-offs related to sampling processes, required level of diversity and size spectrum analysis capabilities of the techniques involved. Instruments combining the morphological and high-frequency analysis for phytoplankton cells are now available. This paper presents an application of the automated high-resolution flow cytometer Cytosub as a tool for analysing phytoplanktonic cells in their natural environment. High resolution data from a temporal study in the Bay of Marseille (analysis every 30 min over 1 month) and a spatial study in the Southern Indian Ocean (analysis every 5 min at 10 knots over 5 days) are presented to illustrate the capabilities and limitations of the instrument. Automated high-frequency flow cytometry revealed the spatial and temporal variability of phytoplankton in the size range 1−∼50 μm that could not be resolved otherwise. Due to some limitations (instrumental memory, volume analysed per sample), recorded counts could be statistically too low. By combining high-frequency consecutive samples, it is possible to decrease the counting error, following Poisson’s law, and to retain the main features of phytoplankton variability. With this technique, the analysis of phytoplankton variability combines adequate sampling frequency and effective monitoring of community changes.