Oceanic micronektonic/macrozooplanktonic community structure and feeding in ice covered Antarctic waters during the winter (AMERIEZ 1988)

Lancraft, Thomas M.; Hopkins, Thomas L.; Torres, Joseph J.; Donnelly, Joseph

doi:10.1007/bf00240204

Cited by 106 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Seasonally elevated summer surface layer densities of abundant species, such as Antarctic krill and T. macrura, agree well with the widely accepted paradigm that zooplankton is generally distributed higher in the water column in summer and shifts to greater depth in winter in Polar Regions (Cisewski et al, 2010;Lancraft et al, 1991). This perception, however, was challenged by Diphyes antarctica, C. limacina, and Eukrohnia hamata.…”

Section: Significance Of the Surface Layer Habitatsupporting

confidence: 77%

Seasonal changes in the vertical distribution and community structure of Antarctic macrozooplankton and micronekton

Flores

Hunt

Kruse

et al. 2014

Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution and sharing with colleagues.Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party websites are prohibited. b s t r a c tThe macrozooplankton and micronekton community of the Lazarev Sea (Southern Ocean) was investigated at 3 depth layers during austral summer, autumn and winter: (1) the surface layer (0-2 m); (2) the epipelagic layer (0-200 m); and (3) the deep layer (0-3000 m). Altogether, 132 species were identified. Species composition changed with depth from a euphausiid-dominated community in the surface layer, via a siphonophore-dominated community in the epipelagic layer, to a chaetognathdominated community in the deep layer. The surface layer community predominantly changed along gradients of surface water temperature and sea ice parameters, whereas the epipelagic community mainly changed along hydrographical gradients. Although representing only 1% of the depth range of the epipelagic layer, mean per-area macrofauna densities in the surface layer ranged at 8% of corresponding epipelagic densities in summer, 6% in autumn, and 24% in winter. Seasonal shifts of these proportional densities in abundant species indicated different strategies in the use of the surface layer, including both hibernal downward and hibernal upward shift in the vertical distribution, as well as year-round surface layer use by Antarctic krill. These findings imply that the surface layer, especially when it is ice-covered, is an important functional node of the pelagic ecosystem that has been underestimated by conventional depth-integrated sampling in the past. The exposure of this key habitat to climate-driven forces most likely adds to the known susceptibility of Antarctic pelagic ecosystems to temperature rise and changing sea ice conditions.

show abstract

Section: Significance Of the Surface Layer Habitatsupporting

confidence: 77%

Seasonal changes in the vertical distribution and community structure of Antarctic macrozooplankton and micronekton

Flores

Hunt

Kruse

et al. 2014

Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There, they exhibit vertical diel migrations as in the other localities of their range (Duhamel et al 2000). However, the daytime depth of distribution of E. antarctica and G. braueri is between 500 and 1000 m (Lancraft et al 1991), i.e. beyond the king penguin's diving range (maximal diving depth 440 m, J.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…The primary and secondary productions are generally greater at the pack ice than in open waters because of physical features such as a more stable water column and a decrease in turbulence (Knox 1994). In the MIZ, Electrona antarctica and Gymnoscopelus braueri constitute the dominant myctophid fish in the upper 500 m of the water column during winter (Lancraft et al 1991). There, they exhibit vertical diel migrations as in the other localities of their range (Duhamel et al 2000).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploitation of distant marginal ice zones by king penguins during winter

Bost

Charrassin

Clerquin³

et al. 2004

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigated the use of Antarctic waters by king penguins in a 2 yr study based on the satellite tracking of 10 penguins from the Crozet Islands (SW Indian Ocean). All the penguins travelled towards the pack ice, with 3 of them ending their journey at the edge between the marginal ice and the dense pack ice. The mean maximum foraging range and minimal distance travelled were 1620 and 4095 km, respectively. The effect of the satellite transmitter (PTT) attachment on foraging trip duration and colony attendance was much more important in winter in comparison to the summer. The penguins spent around 24% of their trip at sea in the marginal ice zone. They explored the ice-covered habitat non-randomly as revealed by compositional analysis. The marginal ice was more used than free ice and floes areas. The strategy of travelling towards the marginal ice zone during winter ensures that the penguins have access to predictable feeding areas at a time when food availability is very low in the polar frontal zone. The diet of king penguins when foraging in Antarctic waters is unknown but may be different to their summer food at the Polar Front. KEY WORDS: Feeding ecology · Satellite tracking · King penguins · Marginal ice zoneResale or republication not permitted without written consent of the publisher

show abstract

“…Reduced feeding activity of winter krill was shown by low stomach-and/or gut fullness (Morris and Priddle 1984;Kawaguchi et al 1986;Buchholz 1989;Lancraft et al 1991;Daly and Macaulay 1991;Nishino and Kawamura 1994;Ligowski 2000) and reduced digestive gland size compared with summer (Meyer et al 2010;O'Brien et al 2010). Moreover, reduced rates of faecal pellet production and ingestion of phytoplankton (less than 3% of summer rates) were observed .…”

Section: Reduction In Physiological Function In Adultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The overwintering of Antarctic krill, Euphausia superba, from an ecophysiological perspective

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A major aim of this review is to determine which physiological functions are adopted by adults and larvae to survive the winter season with low food supply and their relative importance. A second aim is to clarify the extent to which seasonal variation in larval and adult krill physiology is mediated by environmental factors with a strong seasonality, such as food supply or day light. Experimental studies on adult krill have demonstrated that speciWc physiological adaptations during autumn and winter, such as reduced metabolic rates and feeding activity, are not caused simply by the scarcity of food, as was previously assumed. These adaptations appear to be inXuenced by the local light regime. The physiological functions that larval krill adopt during winter (reduced metabolism, delayed development, lipid utilisation, and variable growth rates) are, in contrast to the adults, under direct control by the available food supply. During winter, the adults often seem to have little association with sea ice (at least until early spring). The larvae, however, feed within sea ice but mainly on the grazers of the ice algal community rather than on the algae themselves. In this respect, a miss-match in timing of the occurrence of the last phytoplankton blooms in autumn and the start of the sea ice formation, as has been increasingly observed in the west Antarctic Peninsula (WAP) region, will impact larval krill development during winter in terms of food supply and consequently the krill stock in this region.

show abstract

Oceanic micronektonic/macrozooplanktonic community structure and feeding in ice covered Antarctic waters during the winter (AMERIEZ 1988)

Cited by 106 publications

References 24 publications

Seasonal changes in the vertical distribution and community structure of Antarctic macrozooplankton and micronekton

Seasonal changes in the vertical distribution and community structure of Antarctic macrozooplankton and micronekton

Exploitation of distant marginal ice zones by king penguins during winter

The overwintering of Antarctic krill, Euphausia superba, from an ecophysiological perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About