Abundance and biomass of phytoplankton in the western part of the Black Sea during the R/V Akademik cruise Ak082001 in August 2001

The dataset is composed of 41 samples from 10 stations. The phytoplankton samples were collected by 5l Niskin bottles attached to the CTD system. The sampling depths were selected according to the CTD profile and the in situ fluorometer readings: surface, temperature, salinity and fluorescence gradients and 1 m above the bottom. At some stations phytoplankton net samples (20 µm mesh-size) were collected to assist species biodiversity examination. The samples (1l sea water) were preserved in 4% buffered to pH 8-8.2 with disodiumtetraborate formaldehyde solution and stored in plastic containers. On board at each station few live samples were qualitatively examined under microscope for preliminary analysis of taxonomic composition and dominant species. The taxon-specific phytoplankton abundance samples were concentrated down to 50 cm**3 by slow decantation after storage for 20 days in a cool and dark place. The species identification was done under light microscope OLIMPUS-BS41 connected to a video-interactive image analysis system at magnification of the ocular 10X and objective - 40X. A Sedgwick-Rafter camera (1ml) was used for counting. 400 specimen were counted for each sample, while rare and large species were checked in the whole sample (Manual of phytoplankton, 2005). Species identification was mainly after Carmelo T. (1997) and Fukuyo, Y. (2000). Total phytoplankton abundance was calculated as sum of taxon-specific abundances. Total phytoplankton biomass was calculated as sum of taxon-specific biomasses. The cell biovolume was determined based on morpho-metric measurement of phytoplankton units and the corresponding geometric shapes as described in detail in (Edier, 1979).

Location, intervals and thickness of Cretaceous sections in Indian Ocean DSDP and ODP sites (Table 2)

The Indian Ocean covers approximately 73.5 * 10**6 km**3 from 25°N to 67°S and from 20° to 120°E. Several legs of the Deep Sea Drilling Project (DSDP) and the Ocean Drilling Program (ODP) have operated in its waters, many penetrating the Cretaceous. Most of the scientific drill sites are DSDP related and thus pre-dated modern biostratigraphic conventions. Foraminifers and calcareous nannoplankton were by far the dominant fossil groups studied in the earlier work, supplemented occasionally by studies of other fossil groups, The results of the Ocean Drilling Project phase are yet too young to be fully integrated but have been based on a broader range of techniques and fossil groups. During most of the Cretaceous, the proto-Indian Ocean basin lay in middle to high latitudes. Thus, it is unrealistic to expect successful routine application of low-latitude zonations. No planktonic foraminifer zonal scheme has been developed for the Indian Ocean basin for several reasons. There are no sections with complete or even significant partial sections to allow development of such a zonation. Carbonate compensation depth (CCD) effects have been marked in most sections, and significant intervals are devoid of planktonic foraminifers. The Indian Ocean now covers a great latitudinal range from tropics to polar regions and, at first glance, no scheme can be expected to be applicable over that entire range. In the Cretaceous the area was much smaller, though expanding progressively, and the paleolatitude range was quite small. Calcareous nannoplankton have proved valuable in dating Indian Ocean Cretaceous sediments and have, perhaps in contrast with the foraminifers, been consistently a more reliable means of applying zonal schemes developed elsewhere. For the Albian-Aptian, zonations based on well-known benthic foraminifer lineages (Scheibnerova, 1974) have been useful when nothing else was available or effective. Palynology has been used little, but where used, has proved excellent. It has the added value of providing valuable information on nearby terrestrial vegetation as the fossils were resistant to dissolution. Normally, when different fossil groups have been applied to a section, the results have been compatible or compatible to an acceptable degree. There are a few instances where incompatibility is noteworthy, and Site 263 is a classic example, as even two calcareous nannoplankton studies show irreconcilable differences here. All groups gave different results, but one benthic foraminifer analysis agreed with one calcareous nannoplankton study.