2006
DOI: 10.1007/s10750-006-0331-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Distribution of Pelagic Invertebrates Near a Thermal bar in Lake Baikal

Abstract: In Lake Baikal, frontal zones are a factor forming the pelagic structure, including area limits of pelagic communities. The spacial distribution of Baikal micro-organisms and diatom algae is known to be influenced by the vertical circulation of Lake Baikal deep waters during the spring thermal bar. In June 2001, we studied the distribution of plankton invertebrates and ways in which it depends on physico-chemical and biological parameters of water in the vicinity of spring thermal bars. Samples were taken thro… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

1
0
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 4 publications
1
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…food web) effects, to an extent that temperature may be more descriptive of crustacean abundance than are proxies for system productivity (Patalas, 1990; Patalas & Salki, 1992;). Correspondence of cladocerans with regions of warmer water in Lake Baikal has been demonstrated previously, for this plankton assemblage in which endemic species, such as the copepod Epischura baicalensis , are characteristically cold stenotherms (Melnik et al , 1998, 2006). Overall, the MAR results (Fig.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 57%
“…food web) effects, to an extent that temperature may be more descriptive of crustacean abundance than are proxies for system productivity (Patalas, 1990; Patalas & Salki, 1992;). Correspondence of cladocerans with regions of warmer water in Lake Baikal has been demonstrated previously, for this plankton assemblage in which endemic species, such as the copepod Epischura baicalensis , are characteristically cold stenotherms (Melnik et al , 1998, 2006). Overall, the MAR results (Fig.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 57%