AN INVESTIGATION OF VOLATILE ORGANIC AIR CONTAMINANTS IN THE INDOOR MANUFACTURED HOUSING ENVIRONMENT (TEXAS)

Manufactured housing has been found to have substantial levels of formaldehyde in the indoor air. Because mobile homes are more affordable than conventional housing, there has been a large increase in their use in the U.S. This increase in mobile home use has been substantial in the sunbelt regions such as Texas, where high temperatures and humidities may enhance out-gassing of formaldehyde and other volatile organic compounds from construction and furnishing materials and increase any potential health hazards.^ The influences of environmental, architectural and temporal factors on the presence of indoor formaldehyde and other organic compounds were investigated in conjunction with the Texas Indoor Air Quality Study of manufactured housing. A matched pair of mobile homes, one with electric heating and cooking utilities and the other with propane gas utilities, were used for a series of controlled experiments over a fourteen month period from October, 1982 through November, 1983.^ Over this fourteen month period formaldehyde levels decreased approximately 33%. Daily fluctuations of 20% to 40% were observed even with a constant indoor temperature. An increase in indoor temperature of 8(DEGREES)C doubled the measured formaldehyde concentration. Opening windows resulted in decreases of indoor formaldehyde levels of up to 50%. Studies of the impact of propane as a cooking source showed no increase in formaldehyde levels with stove use.^ The presence and concentration of selected volatile organic compounds is influenced greatest by occupancy. Occupants continually open and close windows and doors, vary the operation and settings (temperature) of air control systems, and vary in their selection of furnishings and use of consumer products, which may act as sources of indoor air contaminants. ^

Abundance of mesozooplankton in the western part of the Black Sea in summer 1998 during the National Monitoring Programme

The dataset is based on samples collected in the summer of 1998 in the Western Black Sea in front of Bulgaria coast. The whole dataset is composed of 69 samples (from 22 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. 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).

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

The dataset is based on samples collected in the summer of 2001 in the Western Black Sea in front of Bulgaria coast (transects at c. Kaliakra and c. Galata). The whole dataset is composed of 26 samples (from 10 stations of National Monitoring Grid) with data of mesozooplankton species composition abundance and biomass. Samples were collected in discrete layers 0-10, 10-20, 10-25, 25-50, 50-75, 75-90. 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 and 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 Lyudmila Kamburska and Kremena Stefanova using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972).

Grazing rate of microzooplankton measured experimentally in the North Atlantic during the Maria S. Merian cruise MSM26, spring 2013

The microzooplankton grazing dilution experiments were conducted at stations 126, 127, 131 and 133-137, following Landry & Hassett (1982). Seawater samples (whole seawater - WSW) were taken via Niskin bottles mounted on to a CTD Rosette out of the chlorophyll maximum at each station. Four different dilution levels were prepared with WSW and GF/F filtered seawater - 100% WSW, 75% WSW, 50% WSW and 25% WSW. The diluted WSW was filled in 2.4 L polycarbonate bottles (two replicates for every dilution level). Three subsamples (250 - 500 mL depending on in situ chlorophyll) of the 100% WSW were filtered on to GF/F filters (25 mm diameter) and chlorophyll was extracted in 5 mL 96% ethanol for 12-24 hours. Afterwards it was measured fluorometrically before and after the addition of HCl with a Turner fluorometer according to Jespersen and Christoffersen (1987) on board of the ship. In addition, one 250 mL subsample of the 100% WSW was fixed in 2% Lugol (final concentration), to determine the microzooplankton community when back at the Institute for Hydrobiology and Fisheries Science in Hamburg. Also, one 50 mL subsample of the 100% WSW was fixed in 1 mL glutaraldehyde, to quantify bacteria abundance. The 2.4 L bottles were put in black mesh-bags, which reduced incoming radiation to approximately 50% (to minimize chlorophyll bleaching). The bottles were incubated for 24 hours in a tank on deck with flow-through water, to maintain in situ temperature. An additional experiment was carried out to test the effect of temperature on microzooplankton grazing in darkness. Therefore, 100% WSW was incubated in the deck tank and in two temperature control rooms of 5 and 15°C in darkness (two bottles each). The same was done with bottles where copepods were added (five copepods of Calanus finmarchicus in each bottle; males and females were randomly picked and divided onto the bottles). In addition, two 100% WSW bottles with five copepods each were incubated at in situ temperature at 100% light level (without mesh-bags). All experiments were incubated for 24 hours and afterwards two subsamples of each bottle were filtered on to GF/F filters (25 mm diameter); 500 - 1000 mL depending on in situ chlorophyll. One 250 mL subsample of one of the two replicates of each dilution level and each additional experiment (temperature and temperature/copepods) was fixed in 5 mL lugol for microzooplankton determination. One 50 mL subsample of one of the two 100% WSW bottles as well as of one of the additional experiments without copepods was fixed in 1 mL glutaraldehyde for bacteria determination later on. Copepods were fixed in 4% formaldehyde for length measurements and sex determination.

Abundance of mesozooplankton in the Mediterranean Sea in August and September 2008 during SES_GR2

The SES_GR2_Mesozooplankton dataset is based on samples taken during August-September 2008 in Ionian Sea, Libyan Sea, Southern Aegean Sea and Northern Aegean Sea. Sampling volume was estimated by the net mouth surface and the towing distance for WP-2. The sample was split on board in two halves by using the beaker approach. The first sub-sample was immediately fixed and preserved in a seawater formalin solution containing about 4% buffered formaldehyde to allow the determination of species composition abundance. Pipette for the subsamples used in the taxonomic analysis of zooplankton under binocular microscope.

Abundance and biomass of mesozooplankton in the eastern Mediterranean Sea in March and April 2008 during SES_GR1

The dataset is based on samples taken during March-April 2008 in Libyan Sea, in Southern Aegean Sea and in Northern Aegean Sea. Sampling volume was estimated by the net mouth surface and the towing distance for WP-2. Taxon-specific mesozooplankton abundance and total abundance: The sample was split on board in two halves by using the beaker approach. The first sub-sample was immediately fixed and preserved in a seawater formalin solution containing about 4% buffered formaldehyde to allow the determination of species composition abundance. Pipette for the subsamples used in the taxonomic analysis of zooplankton under binocular microscope.

Abundance of mesozooplankton in the Marmara Sea collected during the Bilim 2 cruise in April 2008

The Sesame dataset contains mesozooplankton data collected during April 2008 in the Marmara Sea (between 40°15' - 34°00N latitude and 19°00 - 23°10'E longitude). Sampling was always performed in day hours (07:00-18:00 local time). Samples were taken at 6 stations in the Marmara Sea. Mesozooplankton samples were collected by using a WP-2 closing net with 200 µm mesh size. Sample was immediately fixed and preserved in a formaldehyde-seawater solution (4% final concentration) to be successively analyzed in the laboratory for species composition, abundance and total biomass. The algal organisms materials were then seperated from the mesozooplankton subsample at the dissecting microscope in the laboratory because of the contamination of the net samples with large-sized algae and mucilaginous organic matters. Afterwards, each samples were filtered on GF/C (pre combusted and weighed) for biomass measurements for dry weight. The dataset includes samples analyzed for mesozooplankton species composition, abundance and total mesozooplankton biomass. Sampling volume was estimated by multiplying the mouth area with the wire length. Sampling biomass was measured by weighing filters and then determined according to sampling volume. 1/2 sample or an aliquot was analyzed under the binocular microscope. Copepod species were identified and enumerated; the other mesozooplankters were identified and enumerated at higher taxonomic level (commonly named as mesozooplankton groups). Taxonomic identification was done at the METU-Institute of Marine Sciences by Tuba Terbiyik using the relevant taxonomic literatures.

Abundance of mesozooplankton in the SESAME Italian cruise S-IT2 in the Ionian Sea in March 2008

The "SESAME_IT2_ZooAbundance_0-50-100m_SZN" dataset contains data of mesozooplankton species composition and abundance (ind. m-3) from samples collected in the Ionian Sea in the late winter (2-8 March) of 2008 during the SESAME-WP2 cruise IT2. Samples were collected by vertical tows with a closing WP2 net (56 cm diameter, 200 ?m 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 of mesozooplankton in the western part of the Black Sea in 1995 during the Cooperative Marine Science Program for the Black Sea (CoMSBlack)

The "CoMSBlack-95" dataset is based on samples collected in the summer of 1995. The whole dataset is composed of 81 samples (28 stations) 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 - 36 cm, 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 and 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 Asen Konsulov and 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 summer 2002 during the National Monitoring Programme

The dataset is based on samples collected in the summer of 2002 in the Western Black Sea in front of Bulgaria coast. The whole dataset is composed of 47 samples (from 19 stations of National Monitoring Grid) with data of mesozooplankton species composition abundance and biomass. Sampling for 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 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).

Abundance of mesozooplankton in the western part of the Black Sea in summer 2005 during Phase 2: Leg1 from the GEF Project

The sampling area was extended to the Western-South area off the Black Sea coast from Kaliakra cape toward the Bosforous. Samples were collected along four transects. The whole dataset is composed of 17 samples (from 10 stations) with data of mesozooplankton species composition abundance and biomass. Sampling for zooplankton was performed from bottom up to the surface at depths depending on water column stratification and the thermocline depth. These data are organized in the "Control of eutrophication, hazardous substances and related measures for rehabilitating the Black Sea ecosystem: Phase 2: Leg I: PIMS 3065". Data Report is not published. 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).

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).

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).

Abundance of mesozooplankton in the western part of the Black Sea in spring 2002 during the National Monitoring Programme of the Bulgarian Institute of Oceanography

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).

Zooplankton abundance for two shelf stations off Galicia (NW Spain) from 1994 to 2006

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.