982 resultados para Bivalvia, larvae
Resumo:
Sampling was conducted from March 24 to August 5 2010, in the fjord branch Kapisigdlit located in the inner part of the Godthåbsfjord system, West Greenland. The vessel "Lille Masik" was used during all cruises except on June 17-18 where sampling was done from RV Dana (National Institute for Aquatic Resources, Denmark). A total of 15 cruises (of 1-2 days duration) 7-10 days apart was carried out along a transect composed of 6 stations (St.), spanning the length of the 26 km long fjord branch. St. 1 was located at the mouth of the fjord branch and St. 6 was located at the end of the fjord branch, in the middle of a shallower inner creek . St. 1-4 was covering deeper parts of the fjord, and St. 5 was located on the slope leading up to the shallow inner creek. Mesozooplankton was sampled by vertical net tows using a Hydrobios Multinet (type Mini) equipped with a flow meter and 50 µm mesh nets or a WP-2 net 50 µm mesh size equipped with a non-filtering cod-end. Sampling was conducted at various times of day at the different stations. The nets were hauled with a speed of 0.2-0.3 m s**-1 from 100, 75 and 50 m depth to the surface at St. 2 + 4, 5 and 6, respectively. The content was immediately preserved in buffered formalin (4% final concentration). All samples were analyzed in the Plankton sorting and identification center in Szczecin (www.nmfri.gdynia.pl). Samples containing high numbers of zooplankton were split into subsamples. All copepods and other zooplankton were identified down to lowest possible taxonomic level (approx. 400 per sample), length measured and counted. Copepods were sorted into development stages (nauplii stage 1 - copepodite stage 6) using morphological features and sizes, and up to 10 individuals of each stage was length measured.
Resumo:
The dataset is based on samples collected in the summer of 2000 in the Western Black Sea in front of Bulgaria coast. The whole dataset is composed of 84 samples (from 31 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 "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).
Resumo:
Meroplankton was sampled at 11 stations in the southern Kara Sea and the Yenisei Estuary in September 2000. Larvae of 29 benthic taxa representing 10 higher groups were identified. Meroplankton was present at almost all stations and most depth levels. The two most abundant groups were Echinodermata (68%) and Polychaeta (26%). Echinoderms dominated total meroplankton locally due to mass occurrences of Ophiopluteus larvae. The relative group composition was highly variable and seemed to depend mainly on the local hydrographic pattern. Comparison of meroplanktonic data with the distribution of the adults revealed for Spionida and Bivalvia a 'downstream' transport of the larvae whereas for other polychaete species and Ophiuroida 'upstream' transport into the estuary occurred. The distribution and concentration of the larvae within the estuary is explained by physical barriers established by hydrographic gradients, the prevailing mixing processes and the presence of a near-bottom counter current.