Tintinnids of the western Arabian Sea

The results of an investigation of tintinnids from the western Arabian Sea are described. A total of 134 closing-net samples was obtained from 22 stations of the German "Meteor" expedition 1964/1965. Distribution charts of the dominant species of tintinnids from the study area are presented as well as a list of the world-wide distribution of these species as derived from the literature. Tintinnids were most abundant in the surface waters. The layer from 0 - 25 m yielded a maximum 94.3% and a minimum of 61.3% of the tintinnids present from 0 - 175 m; the mean was 80%. There was no significant difference in the vertical distribution between day and night stations nor was there any indication of the influence of the thermocline upon vertical distribution of tintinnids. TS-diagrams show different water types in the western Arabian Sea. Temperatur-salinity-tintinnid -diagrams indicate regional patterns in the distribution of various species of tintinnids. Some tintinnids can be used as indicator species: Climacocylis scalaria, Parundella lohmanni and Amphorella amphora were typical for the Somali Current whereas Rhabdonella apophysata and Branditella palliata indicated the presence of East African Coastal Current water. The concentration of tintinnids in the upper 25 m raged between 4,800 and 39,300 individuals/m**3 (mean 19,000/m**3). Plasma volume of tintinnids was calculated to permit comparison of different links in the food chain. There was a mean of 51 mm**3/m**2 in the upper layer, equivalent to a concentration of 2 mm**3/m**3. Carbon values were computed from the plasma volume of tintinnids, phytoplankton and larger zooplankton. The ratio of phytoplankton plus microzooplankton carbon to large zooplankton carbon was 1 : 0.8 in the Somali Current, 1 : 0.4 in the East African Coastal Current and 1 : 1.2 in the mixing zone of these current systems. Tintinnids are one of the first links in the food chain. It is very likely that a part of the organic detritus and of the nanoplankton is transfered to large herbivores or omnivores via tintinnids and other protozoans. This mechanism might be especially effective during seasons when large phytoplankters are not available in the ocean.

Abundance of mesozooplankton in the western part of the Black Sea during the 2001 National Monitoring Programme of the Bulgarian Institute of Oceanography

The dataset is based on samples collected in the autumn of 2001 in the Western Black Sea in front of Bulgaria coast. The whole dataset is composed of 42 samples (from 19 stations of National Monitoring Grid) with data of mesozooplankton species composition abundance and biomass. Samples were collected in the 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 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).

Biomass of mesozooplankton in the western part of the Black Sea in 1992 during the Cooperative Marine Science Program for the Black Sea (CoMSBlack)

The "CoMSBlack92" dataset is based on samples collected in the summer of 1992 along the Bulgarian coast including coastal and open sea areas. The whole dataset is composed of 79 samples (28 stations) with data of zooplankton species composition, abundance and biomass. Sampling for zooplankton was performed from bottom up to the surface at standard depths depending on water column stratification and the thermocline depth. Zooplankton samples were collected with vertical closing Juday net,diameter - 36cm, mesh size 150 ?m. 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. Sampling volume was estimated by multiplying the mouth area with the wire length. 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 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. 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. The biomass was estimated as wet weight by Petipa, 1959 ussing standard average weight of each species in mg/m**3.

Biomass of mesozooplankton in the western part of the Black Sea in summer 1991 during the NATO Programme Hydroblack

The "Hydroblack91" dataset is based on samples collected in the summer of 1991 and covers part of North-Western in front of Romanian coast and Western Black Sea (Bulgarian coasts) (between 43°30' - 42°10' N latitude and 28°40'- 31°45' E longitude). Mesozooplankton sampling was undertaken at 20 stations. The whole dataset is composed of 72 samples 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 materia 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 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. 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 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).

Abundance of mesozooplankton from the S-IT4 cruise in the Western Mediterranean Sea in March and April 2008

The "SESAME_IT4_ZooAbundance_0-50-100m_SZN" dataset contains data of mesozooplankton species composition and abundance (ind./m**3) from samples collected in the Western Mediterranean in the early spring of 2008 (20 March-5 April) during the SESAME-WP2 cruise IT4. Samples were collected by vertical tows with a closing WP2 net (56 cm diameter, 200 µm mesh size) in the following depth layers: 100-200 m, 50-100 m, 0-50 m. Sampling was always performed in light hours. A flowmeter was applied to the mouth of the net, however, due to its malfunctioning, the volume of filtered seawater was calculated by multiplying the the area by the height of the sampled layer from winch readings. After collection, each sample was split in two halves (1/2) after careful mixing with graduated beakers. Half sample was immediately fixed and preserved in a formaldehyde-seawater solution (4% final concentration) for species composition and abundance. The other half sample was kept fresh for biomass measurements (data already submitted to SESAME database in different files). Here, only the zooplankton abundance of samples in the upper layers 0-50 m and 50-100 m are presented. The abundance data of the samples in the layer 50-100 m will be submitted later in a separate file. The volume of filtered seawater was estimated by multiplying the the area by the height of the sampled layer from winch readings. Identification and counts of specimens were performed on aliquots (1/20-1/5) of the fixed sample or on the total sample (half of the original sample) by using a graduate large-bore pipette. Copepods were identified to the species level and separated into females, males and juveniles (copepodites). All other taxa were identified at the species level when possible, or at higher taxonomic levels. Taxonomic identification was done according to the most relevant and updated taxonomic literature. Total mesozooplankton abundance was computed as sum of all specific abundances determined as explained above.

Abundance and biomass of macrobenthos in the western part of the Black Sea during Mare Nigrum cruise S-RO2

Dataset containing macrobenthos data for samples collected during September 2008 in the North-West Black Sea (between 44°46' - 43°45' N latitude and 30° 11' - 29°35' E longitude). Macrobenthos sampling was done in 4 stations using a 0.14 m**2 Van Veen grab. Washing of the sample through two sieves - 1 mm and 0.25 mm mesh size; the material retained by the two sieves was examined at the binocular microscope; all animals were extracted, using fine tweezers and the species or group of species were identified and counted (in order to determine the density of populations); the larger organisms were measured and weighed (structure and biomass); for smaller organisms, the average wet weights inscribed in standard tables were used to calculate the biomass. Taxonomic identification was done at the GeoEcoMar by A. Teaca and T. Begun using the relevant taxonomic literature ( "Key-book for the identification of the Black Sea and Sea of Azov Fauna, 1968 -1972, Kiev - in Russian, V 1-4; BACESCU, M.C., MÜLLER, G. I., GOMOIU, M.-T., 1971). BACESCU, M.C., MÜLLER, G. I., GOMOIU, M.-T., 1971-Benthic ecological research to Black Sea. Comparative quantitative and qualitative analyse of pontic benthic fauna. Marine Ecology, 4, 1-357 (in Romanian). Key-book for the identification of the Black Sea and Sea of Azov Fauna, 1968 -1972, Kiev, V. 1-4 (in Russian).

Data compilation on the biological response to ocean acidification: environmental and experimental context of data sets and related literature

The exponential growth of studies on the biological response to ocean acidification over the last few decades has generated a large amount of data. To facilitate data comparison, a data compilation hosted at the data publisher PANGAEA was initiated in 2008 and is updated on a regular basis (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.149999). By January 2015, a total of 581 data sets (over 4 000 000 data points) from 539 papers had been archived. Here we present the developments of this data compilation five years since its first description by Nisumaa et al. (2010). Most of study sites from which data archived are still in the Northern Hemisphere and the number of archived data from studies from the Southern Hemisphere and polar oceans are still relatively low. Data from 60 studies that investigated the response of a mix of organisms or natural communities were all added after 2010, indicating a welcomed shift from the study of individual organisms to communities and ecosystems. The initial imbalance of considerably more data archived on calcification and primary production than on other processes has improved. There is also a clear tendency towards more data archived from multifactorial studies after 2010. For easier and more effective access to ocean acidification data, the ocean acidification community is strongly encouraged to contribute to the data archiving effort, and help develop standard vocabularies describing the variables and define best practices for archiving ocean acidification data.