836 resultados para Copepoda.
Resumo:
The dataset is based on samples collected in the summer of 1999 in the Western Black Sea in front of Bulgaria coast. The whole dataset is composed of 59 samples (from 24 stations of National Monitoring Grid) with data of mesozooplankton species composition abundance and biomass. Samples were collected in discrete layers 0-10, 0-20, 0-50, 10-25, 25-50, 50-100 and from bottom up to the surface at depths depending on water column stratification and the thermocline depth. The collected material was analysed using the method of Domov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Lyudmila Kamburska using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972). The collected material was analysed using the method of Domov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Copepods and Cladoceras were identified and enumerated; the other mesozooplankters were identified and enumerated at higher taxonomic level (commonly named as mesozooplankton groups). Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Lyudmila Kamburska using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972).
Resumo:
The "15BO1997001" dataset is based on samples collected in the spring of 1997. The whole dataset is composed of 66 samples (from 27 stations of National Monitoring Sampling Grid) with data of zooplankton species composition, abundance and biomass. Samples were collected in discrete layers 0-10, 0-20, 0-50, 10-25, 25-50, 50-100 and from bottom up to the surface at depths depending on water column stratification and the thermocline depth. Zooplankton samples were collected with vertical closing Juday net,diameter - 36cm, mesh size 150 µm. Tows were performed from surface down to bottom meters depths in discrete layers. Samples were preserved by a 4% formaldehyde sea water buffered solution. Sampling volume was estimated by multiplying the mouth area with the wire length. Mesozooplankton abundance: The collected material was analysed using the method of Domov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Lyudmila Kamburska using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972). Taxon-specific abundance: The collected material was analysed using the method of Domov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Copepods and Cladoceras were identified and enumerated; the other mesozooplankters were identified and enumerated at higher taxonomic level (commonly named as mesozooplankton groups). Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Lyudmila Kamburska using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972).
Resumo:
The "15BO1997001" dataset is based on samples collected in the spring of 1997. The whole dataset is composed of 66 samples (from 27 stations of National Monitoring Sampling Grid) with data of zooplankton species composition, abundance and biomass. Samples were collected in discrete layers 0-10, 0-20, 0-50, 10-25, 25-50, 50-100 and from bottom up to the surface at depths depending on water column stratification and the thermocline depth. The collected material was analysed using the method of Dimov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Asen Konsulov using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972 ). The biomass was estimated as wet weight by Petipa, 1959 (based on species specific wet weight). Wet weight values were transformed to dry weight using the equation DW=0.16*WW as suggested by Vinogradov & Shushkina, 1987. The collected material was analysed using the method of Dimov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Copepods and Cladoceras were identified and enumerated; the other mesozooplankters were identified and enumerated at higher taxonomic level (commonly named as mesozooplankton groups). Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Asen Konsulov using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972 ). The biomass was estimated as wet weight by Petipa, 1959 ussing standard average weight of each species in mg/m3. WW were converted to DW by equation DW=0.16*WW (Vinogradov ME, Sushkina EA, 1987).
Resumo:
The dataset is based on samples collected in the spring of 2002 in the Western Black Sea in front of Bulgaria coast. The whole dataset is composed of 76 samples (from 27 stations of National Monitoring Grid) with data of mesozooplankton species composition abundance and biomass. Sampling on zooplankton was performed from bottom up to the surface at depths depending on water column stratification and the thermocline depth. Zooplankton samples were collected with vertical closing Juday net,diameter - 36cm, mesh size 150 µm. Tows were performed from surface down to bottom meters depths in discrete layers. Samples were preserved by a 4% formaldehyde sea water buffered solution. Sampling volume was estimated by multiplying the mouth area with the wire length. Mesozooplankton abundance: The collected material was analysed using the method of Domov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Kremena Stefanova using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972). Taxon-specific abundance: The collected material was analysed using the method of Domov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Copepods and Cladoceras were identified and enumerated; the other mesozooplankters were identified and enumerated at higher taxonomic level (commonly named as mesozooplankton groups). Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Kremena Stefanova using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972).
Resumo:
The relative importance of small forms of copepods has been historically underestimated by the traditional use of 200-300-µm mesh nets. This work quantified the distribution and abundance of copepods, considering two size fractions (<300 µm and >300 µm), in superficial waters (9 m deep) of the Drake Passage and contributed to the knowledge of their interannual fluctuations among three summers. Four types of nauplii and eleven species of copepods at copepodite and adult stages were identified, with abundance values of up to 13 ind/L and 28,300 µg C/m**3. The <300-µm fraction, composed of Oithona similis, small cyclopoids and nauplii, dominated the copepod communities in the 3 years; it accounted for more than 77% of the total number and for between 40 and 63% of the total biomass. Changes in density and biomass values among the three cruises differed according to copepod size fraction and water mass; the >300-µm fraction showed no changes among the 3 years, both in Antarctic (density and biomass) and in Subantarctic waters (density), whereas the <300-µm fraction showed higher (density and biomass) values in 2001 both in Subantarctic and in Antarctic waters. Sea surface temperature and its anomaly accounted for the largest proportion of variability in copepod density and biomass, particularly for the <300-µm fraction.
Resumo:
Zooplankton was sampled by project RADIALES at Vigo (E3VI) and A Coruña (E2CO) between 1994 and 2006. Samples were collected using 50-cm diameter Juday-Bogorov (A Coruña) or 40-cm diameter bongo plankton nets (Vigo) equipped with 200-µm mesh size. Tows were double oblique from surface to near bottom (90 and 70 m in Vigo and A Coruña, respectively). All samples were collected between 10:00 and 14:00 o'clock (local time). Samples were preserved in 2-4% sodium borate-buffered formaldehyde. For the purpose of this study, the original coastal time series were categorized in copepods representative of crustacean zooplankton) and gelatinous plankton (medusae and tunicates). Medusae included Hydrozoans and Scyphozoa, and tunicates included salps, pyrosomes, doliolids, and appendicularia. Plankton identification and counts were performed by Ana Miranda and M. Teresa Álvarez-Ossorio for samples from Vigo and A Coruña, respectively. Different trends were found for gelatinous plankton in the two coastal sites, characterized by increases in either medusae or tunicates. Multiyear periods of relative dominance of gelatinous vs. copepod plankton were evident. In general, copepod periods were observed in positive phases of the main modes of regional climatic variability. Conversely, gelatinous periods occurred during negative climatic phases. However, the low correlations between gelatinous plankton and either climatic, oceanographic, or fishery variables suggest that local factors play a major role in their proliferations.
Resumo:
In der Döberitzer Heide nördlich von Potsdam wurden vegetationsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen durchgeführt. Das Untersuchungsgebiet befindet sich im östlichen Teil der Nauener Platte, die bisher vegetationsgeschichtlich weitgehend unerforscht war. In sechs verschiedenen Mooren wurden acht Bohrungen niedergebracht. Die Bohrkerne wurden stratigraphisch und pollenanalytisch untersucht und für die Radiocarbondatierung beprobt. Die Pollendiagramme ermöglichen die Rekonstruktion der Vegetationsentwicklung der terrestrischen Standorte und der Moore in der Döberitzer Heide in den letzten 14.000 Jahren. Neben einer Revision der Gliederungsprinzipien der spätglazialen Vegetationsentwicklung Brandenburgs und einer vergleichenden Betrachtung der Moorentwicklung in der Döberitzer Heide wurde besonderes Augenmerk auf die Geschichte des Döberitzer Lindenwaldes gerichtet, der einen Sonderfall in der brandenburgischen Vegetation darstellt. Die Untersuchungen boten die Möglichkeit, die Ursachen seiner Entstehung zu klären, Aussagen zu den Perspektiven seiner Entwicklung zu treffen und mögliche Entwicklungspotentiale von Lindenwäldern im Land Brandenburg aufzuzeigen.