Abundance and biomass of mesozooplankton collected from 1984-1986 allong the romanian littoral

The Longitudinale 1984-1986 dataset contains zooplankton data collected from May to October 1984-1986 in 14 station allong 2 transect paralel to the romanian littoral. Zooplankton sampling was undertaken at 14 stations where samples were collected using a Juday closing net in the 0-10, 10-20, 20-30 and 30-40 layer (depending also on the water masses). The dataset includes samples analysed for mesozooplankton species composition and abundance. Sampling volume was estimated by multiplying the mouth area with the wire length. Taxon-specific mesozooplankton abundance was count under microscope. Total abundance is the sum of the counted individuals. Total biomass Fodder, Rotifera , Ctenophora and Noctiluca was estimated using a tabel with wet weight for each species an stage.

Abundance of mesozooplankton in the western part of the Black Sea in autumn 1999 during the National Monitoring Programme

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).

Abundance of mesozooplankton in the western part of the Black Sea in spring 1997 during the National Monitoring Programme

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).

Oxygen and carbon isotope stratigraphy of ODP Holes 107-653A and 107-654A

Stable isotope analysis of two species (or groups of species) of planktonic foraminifers: Globigerinoides ruber (or G. obliquus and G. obliquus extremus) and Globigerina bulloides (or G. falconensis and G. obesa) from ODP Hole 653A and Site 654 in the Tyrrhenian basin, records the Pliocene-Pleistocene glacial history of the Northern Hemisphere. The overall increase in mean d18O values through the interval 4.6-0.08 Ma is 1.7 per mil for G. bulloides and 1.5 per mil for G. ruber. The time interval 3.1-2.5 Ma corresponds to an important phase of 18O enrichment for planktonic foraminifers. In this interval, glacial d18O values of both species G. bulloides and G. ruber increase by about l per mil, this increase being more progressive for G. ruber than for G. bulloides. The increase of interglacial d18O values is higher for G. bulloides (1.5 per mil) than for the Gruber group (1 per mil). These data suggest a more pronounced seasonal stratification of the water masses during interglacial phases. Large positive d18O fluctuations of increasing magnitude are also recorded at 2.25 and 2.15 Ma by G bulloides and appear to be diachronous with those of Site 606 in the Atlantic Ocean. Other events of increasing d18O values are recorded between 1.55 and 1.3 Ma, at 0.9 Ma, 0.8 Ma, and near 0.34 Ma. In the early Pliocene the d18O variability recorded by the planktonic species G. bulloides was higher in the Mediterranean than in the Atlantic at the same latitude. This suggests that important cyclic variations in the water budget of the Mediterranean occurred since that time. Step increases in the d18O variability are synchronous with those of the open ocean at 0.9 and 0.34 Ma. The higher variability as well as the higher amplitude of the peaks of 18O enrichment may be partly accounted for by increase of dryness over the Mediterranean area. In particular the high amplitude d18O fluctuations recorded between 3.1 and 2.1 Ma are correlated with the onset of a marked seasonal contrast and a summer dryness, revealed by pollen analyses. Strong fluctuations towards d13C values higher than modern ones are recorded by the G. ruber group species before 1.7 Ma and suggest a high production of phytoplankton. When such episodes of high primary production are correlated with episodes of decreasing 13C content of G. bulloides, they are interpreted as the consequence of a higher stratification of the upper water masses resulting itself from a marked seasonality. Such episodes occur between 4.6 and 4.05 Ma, 3.9 and 3.6 Ma, and 3.25 and 2.66 Ma. The interval 2.66-1.65 Ma corresponds to a weakening of the stratification of the upper water layers. This may be related to episodes of cooling and increasing dryness induced by the Northern Hemisphere Glaciations. The Pleistocene may have been a less productive period. The transition from highly productive to less productive surface waters also coincides with a new step increase in dryness and cooling, between 1.5 and 1.3 Ma. The comparison of the 13C records of G ruber and G. bulloides in fact suggests that a high vertical convection became a dominant feature after 2.6 Ma. Increases in the nutrient input and the stratification of the upper water masses may be suspected, however, during short episodes near 0.86 Ma (isotopic stage 25), 0.57-0.59 Ma (isotopic stage 16), 0.49 Ma (isotopic stage 13), 0.4-0.43 Ma (isotopic stage 11), and 0.22 and 0.26 Ma (part of isotopic stage 7 and transition 7/8). In fact, changes in the C02 balance within the different water masses of the Tyrrhenian basin as well as in the local primary production did not follow the general patterns of the open ocean.

Sea surface temperature reconstruction based on dinoflagellates from the North Atlantic

The application of quantitative and semiquantitative methods to assemblage data from dinoflagellate cysts shows potential for interpreting past environments, both in terms of paleotemperature estimates and in recognizing water masses and circulation patterns. Estimates of winter sea-surface temperature (WSST) were produced by using the Impagidinium Index (II) method, and by applying a winter-temperature transfer function (TFw). Estimates of summer sea-surface temperature (SSST) were produced by using a summer-temperature transfer function (TFs), two methods based on a temperature-distribution chart (ACT and ACTpo), and a method based on the ratio of gonyaulacoid:protoperidinioid specimens (G:P). WSST estimates from the II and TFw methods are in close agreement except where Impagidinium species are sparse. SSST estimates from TFs are more variable. The value of the G:P ratio for the Pliocene data in this paper is limited by the apparent sparsity of protoperidinioids, which results in monotonous SSST estimates of 14-26°C. The ACT methods show two biases for the Pliocene data set: taxonomic substitution may force 'matches' yielding incorrect temperature estimates, and the method is highly sensitive to the end-points of species distributions. Dinocyst assemblage data were applied to reconstruct Pliocene sea-surface temperatures between 3.5-2.5 Ma from DSDP Hole 552A, and ODP Holes 646B and 642B, which are presently located beneath cold and cool-temperate waters north of 56°N. Our initial results suggest that at 3.0 Ma, WSSTs were a few degrees C warmer than the present and that there was a somewhat reduced north-south temperature gradient. For all three sites, it is likely that SSSTs were also warmer, but by an unknown, perhaps large, amount. Past oceanic circulation in the North Atlantic was probably different from the present.

Diatom biostratigraphy of ODP Holes 191-1179B and 191-1179C

Although the objective of Ocean Drilling Program Leg 191 was to install a seismic monitoring station and to test a hard rock reentry drilling system, several good, near-continuous sedimentary core sequences were recovered during the cruise. Two holes, 1179B and 1179C, yielded an upper Miocene to Pleistocene diatom record through an expanded section with excellent recovery. Because diatom species included in both low-latitude and high-latitude biostratigraphies are present, zonations for the equatorial Pacific and northwest Pacific are applied to the sediments. The oldest zones from each zonation that are represented in the cores are the Nitzschia miocenica Zone and the Rouxia californica Zone, respectively. Only one zonal boundary is not observed within the diatom assemblage, that being the top of the Nitzschia jouseae Zone and base of the Rhizosolenia praebergonii Subzone A (equatorial Pacific). Preservation is good overall, and sample abundances vary from rare to abundant. This would be an excellent section for further biostratigraphic, paleoclimatic, and paleoceanographic study.

Abundance and biomass of zooplankton collected monthly from January 1980 to december 1980 in front of Constanta city, Black Sea

The Est Constanta 1980 dataset contains zooplankton data collected monthly from January 1980 to december 1980 allong a 5 station transect in front of the city Constanta (44°10'N, 28°41.5'E - EC1; 44°10'N, 28°47'E - EC2; 44°10'N, 28°54'E - EC3; 44°10'N, 29°08'E - EC4; 44°10'N, 29°22'E - EC5). Zooplankton sampling was undertaken at 5 stations where samples were collected using a Juday closing net in the 0-10, 10-25, 25-50m layer (depending also on the water masses). The dataset includes samples analysed for mesozooplankton species composition and abundance. Sampling volume was estimated by multiplying the mouth area with the wire length. Taxon-specific mesozooplankton abundance was count under microscope. Total abundance is the sum of the counted individuals. Total biomass Fodder, Rotifera , Ctenophora and Noctiluca was estimated using a tabel with wet weight for each species an stage.

Biomass of mesozooplankton in the western part of the Black Sea in 1997 during the Cooperative Marine Science Program for the Black Sea (CoMSBlack)

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).

Abundance 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 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). 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).