Modeling What We Sample and Sampling What We Model: Challenges for Zooplankton Model Assessment

Abstract

Zooplankton are the intermediate trophic level between phytoplankton and fish, and are an important component of carbon and nutrient cycles, accounting for a large proportion of the energy transfer to pelagic fishes and the deep ocean. Given zooplankton's importance, models need to adequately represent zooplankton dynamics. A major obstacle, though, is the lack of model assessment. Here we try and stimulate the assessment of zooplankton in models by filling three gaps. The first is that many zooplankton observationalists are unfamiliar with the biogeochemical, ecosystem, size-based and individual-based models that have zooplankton functional groups, so we describe their primary uses and how each typically represents zooplankton. The second gap is that many modelers are unaware of the zooplankton data that are available, and are unaccustomed to the different zooplankton sampling systems, so we describe the main sampling platforms and discuss their strengths and weaknesses for model assessment. Filling these gaps in our understanding of models and observations provides the necessary context to address the last gap-a blueprint for model assessment of zooplankton. We detail two ways that zooplankton biomass/abundance observations can be used to assess models: data wrangling that transforms observations to be more similar to model output; and observation models that transform model outputs to be more like observations. We hope that this review will encourage greater assessment of zooplankton in models and ultimately improve the representation of their dynamics.Keywords: plankton net, bioacoustics, optical plankton counter, Continuous Plankton Recorder, size-spectra, ecosystem model, observation model, model assessment Everett et al. Challenges for Zooplankton Model Assessment THE IMPORTANCE OF ZOOPLANKTONAll marine phyla are part of the zooplankton-either permanently as holoplankton (e.g., copepods or arrow worms) or temporarily as meroplankton (e.g., crab or fish larvae). In this review we define zooplankton as all organisms drifting in the water whose locomotive abilities are insufficient to progress against ocean currents (Lenz, 2000). Their sizes range from flagellates (about 20 µm) to siphonophores up to 30 m long. Zooplankton are the intermediate trophic level between phytoplankton and fish and are an important component of carbon and nutrient cycles in the ocean. They account for a large proportion of the energy transfer to fish on continental shelves (Marquis et al., 2011), temperate reefs (Kingsford and MacDiarmid, 1988;Champion et al., 2015), seagrass meadows (Edgar and Shaw, 1995), and coral reefs (Hamner et al., 1988;Frisch et al., 2014). Zooplankton are also key in the transfer of energy between benthic and pelagic domains (Lassalle et al., 2013). Zooplankton are responsible for transferring energy to deep water through the sinking of fecal pellets and moribund carcases (Stemmann et al., 2000;Henschke et al., 2013Henschke et al., , 2016 or through diel vertical migration (Ariza et al., 2015) and can play...

Quantifying spatiotemporal variability in zooplankton dynamics in the Gulf of Mexico with a physical-biogeochemical model

“…To our knowledge, this study provides the first quasi regional zooplankton biomass model-data comparisons in the GoM along with the first model-data comparisons of size-specific zooplankton biomass and grazing rates. Such comparisons provide the first insights into the potential biases of traditional biogeochemical models pertaining to zooplankton dynamics (Everett et al, 2017). While the PBM shows broad agreement with zooplankton observations, some model-data mismatch occurs, particularly for LZ grazing rates.…”

“…accuracy of zooplankton abundance estimates from numerical models, such as three-dimensional physical-biogeochemical ocean models (PBMs), has been a major challenge in previous modeling studies as a result of sparse ship-based observations in most regions (Everett et al, 2017).…”

“…The importance of this validation is further witnessed when considering the impact zooplankton have on the behavior of biogeochemical models (Everett et al, 2017). Differences in simulated zooplankton communities expressed through the number of functional types, various mathematical grazing functional responses, and the arrangement of transfer linkages have been shown to have substantial impacts on simple and complex biogeochemical model solutions (Gentleman et al, 2003;Gentleman and Neuheimer, 2008;Mitra et al, 2014;Murray and Parslow, 1999;Sailley et al, 2013).…”

Optimality-Based Non-Redfield Plankton-Ecosystem Model (OPEMv1.0) in the UVic-ESCM 2.9. Part II: Sensitivity Analysis and Model Calibration

“…On long timescales it regulates atmospheric CO 2 on the basis of biotic uptake of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) over vast oceanic regions and due to the export of photosynthetically fixed carbon into the deep ocean, which affects 20 the Earth's climate (Reid et al, 2009;Sigman and Boyle, 2000). Plankton ecosystem models are widely applied to understand marine biogeochemical cycles, by estimating fluxes of major elements, e.g., nitrogen, phosphorus, and carbon, as well as the sources and sinks of marine oxygen (Maier-Reimer et al, 1995;Six and Maier-Reimer, 1996;Schmittner et al, 2005;Bopp et al, 2013;Vallina et al, 2017;Everett et al, 2017;Ward et al, 2018). other models, e.g., Aumont et al, 2015), which we also employ for the OPEM configuration, limits both growth and N 2 fixation of diazotrophs to above 15 • C, f dia (T )_OPEM = max(1.066 T − 2.6, 0)/2…”

Resolving the role of zooplankton in the marine ecosystem with functional size spectra

“…The relationship between phytoplankton and higher trophic levels is not straightforward, as zooplankton are the main energy pathway from phytoplankton to fish (Carlotti and Poggiale, 2010;Mitra and Davis, 2010;Everett et al, 2017). Zooplankton are any animals that float in the water and cannot progress against currents.…”