The benthoneuston of the Black Sea: Composition and environmental factors influencing its nocturnal dynamic

Vereshchaka, Alexander L.; Anokhina, L. L.

doi:10.1016/j.csr.2017.04.007

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1) from 4 June 1991 to 14 December 2017 with intervals of 10 days. This is an open bay characterised by typical environmental parameters for the northeast coast of the Black Sea (Lebedeva et al, 2003; Vinogradov et al, 2005; Vereshchaka & Anokhina, 2014, 2015, 2017a, 2017b). Under stormy conditions, which occurred mainly in the winter period, sampling was delayed 1–3 days.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1). We started with analysis of the benthopelagic and benthoneustonic fauna, have yielded regularities in diurnal dynamics of these plankton groups, and assessed environmental factors driving this dynamics (Vereshchaka & Anokhina, 2014, 2015, 2017a, 2017b). Here, we make the next step and analyse temporal variability of all plankton taxa with the focus on the holoplanktonic fauna.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Long-term studies reveal major environmental factors driving zooplankton dynamics and periodicities in the Black Sea coastal zooplankton

Vereshchaka

Anokhina

Lukasheva

et al. 2019

PeerJ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The development and management of shelf-sea ecosystems require a holistic understanding of the factors that influence the zooplankton structure and ecosystem functions. The Black Sea is an example of such areas influenced by eutrophication, overfishing, climate variability, invasions of the ctenophores Mnemiopsis leidyi followed by Beroe ovata. Thus, there is a set of principal factors which may influence and explain periodicities in the Black Sea ecosystem. Methods We analysed a total of 918 samples taken from 1991 to 2017 with intervals of 10 days. Taxa were identified to species, their abundance and biomass were calculated. We tested 12 environmental factors, which may explain zooplankton distribution: temperature, productivity-linked factors (surface chlorophyll as a proxi), wind, turbidity, lowest winter temperature, and concentration of the ctenophore M. leidyi. We used canonical correspondence analyses to find the dominant environmental factors and further regression analyses to retrieve dependences of plankton biomass on the major factors. Periodicities were assessed with the use of the Continuous wavelet transform and tested with use of One-way ANOSIM and PERMANOVA. The distances between ecosystem states in different years were assessed using non-metric multidimensional scaling. Results Currently, temperature and productivity are the major environmental factors driving zooplankton dynamics. Not long ago, before 1999, abundance of M. leidyi was one of the major factors explaining the zooplankton variance. Spectral analysis of species abundances revealed a 4-year transitional period in 1999–2002 (not reported before) when ecosystem adapted to a new invader B. ovata. Statistically robust 2- and 3-year periodicities were retrieved for most plankton taxa and some benthic larvae. We found robust correlations between temperature and surface chlorophyll concentration on one side and plankton abundances and biomass on the other, and retrieved multivariate regressions, which may have a prognostic value.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term studies reveal major environmental factors driving zooplankton dynamics and periodicities in the Black Sea coastal zooplankton

Vereshchaka

Anokhina

Lukasheva

et al. 2019

PeerJ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It was observed that samples of the Black Sea water contained microplastics in 30 cm depth layer with a maximum concentration 1200 particles/m 3 [87]. However, the thickness of the layer near airwater interphase is just about 10 µm [57], while the maximum concentration of floating microplastics can be ~3.6×10 6 particles/m 3 or 360 particles /m 2 of the water-air interphase layer.…”

Section: Potential Impacts Of Biofilm-coated Microplasticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental Safety and Security Investigations of Neustonic Microplastic Aggregates Near Water-Air Interphase

Vaseashta¹,

Ivanov²,

Stabnikov³

et al. 2021

Pol. J. Environ. Stud.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scientific and public concerns due to presence of microplastic debris in the marine and freshwater environment is fueling concerns of its impact on aquatic ecosystems and public health. Major sources of water-polluting microplastics are polyethylene and polypropylene, as they aggregate near the waterair interphase. Such neustonic hydrophobic cells attract spores of bacteria causing adverse impact on the environmental, health and food supply chain. The objectives of this review investigation were to (a): evaluate the concentration of microplastics with the sizes less 100 µm floating near the waterair interphase; (b): develop a phenomenological model to study fate and transport of microplastics; (c): analyze microbial coatings, and (d): assess potential impacts of biofilm-coated neustonic microplastics on environment. A thorough review of microplastic pollution in marine environment was conducted in terms of its size distribution, toxicity and toxicokinetic pathways. Since biofilms coated microplastics float near the surface, hydrophobic cells of bacteria typically concentrate within a few micrometers layer of water-air interphase. To develop a phenomenological model of neustonic floating biofilm-coated microplastics, samples with the size of less than 100 µm were collected from within a few millimeters near the water-air interphase and were subsequently concentrated using microfiltration of water samples for analysis. Results of the optical scan of hexadecane and bacterial cells formed on vertically submerged microscope slides near water-air interphase are presented. Additionally, microplastics near a thin layer of water-air interphase were investigated using scanning electron microscopy, fluorescent microscopy, flow cytometry, and particle analyzers. Since, hydrophobic and putative pathogenic bacteria are attached to water surface, which dominate near water-air interphase, biofilm-coated microplastics are more attractive for consumption by aquatic species than pure microplastics, which significantly increases negative impacts of microplastics on aquatic ecosystems and public health through foodchain supply. We conclude that it is critical to extend this investigation to include safety in terms of

show abstract

“…Most migrating zooplankton species ascent at night (“normal” migration pattern); however, a reversed movement (nighttime descent, inverted migrations) is known for some species 2 , 5 , 9 , 11 . There are also more complicated migrations with a double ascent at sunset and after midnight with a short intermediate descent to deeper waters at midnight 7 , 8 , 12 . In addition, different stages of the same species may have different migration patterns, as shown for Oithona and Oncaea copepods 13 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Southern Polar Front as a key to mesoplankton migratory behavior

Vedenin

Kulagin

Musaeva

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diel and seasonal vertical migrations of zooplankton represent a widespread phenomenon occurring in marine and freshwater environments. Diel migrations are panoceanic, while seasonal migrations usually occur in temperate and polar areas. This paper describes differences in the diel and seasonal vertical migrations in the Drake passage north and south of the polar front (pf). We analyzed material of 85 stations collected in spring of 2008 and 2010 (October-November) and in summer of 2010 and 2011 (January) within the 0-300 m depth range during various time of a day. At each station we sampled the upper mixed (UL), the middle (ML), and the deeper layers (DL) bounded by hydrological gradients. Diel migrations were significantly different south and north of the PF in terms of total abundance, biomass, diversity and individual taxa density. in both seasons, mesoplankton dielly migrated between the ML/DL and the UL north of the PF and between layers below 300 m and the DL and ML south of the pf. Deeper range of diel migrations south of the pf was coupled with a general mesoplankton descent in summer period compared to spring. conversely, north of the pf, mesoplankton ascended to upper layers in summer, which was mirrored in lesser depths of diel migrations. The differences in the plankton distribution on both sides of the PF are likely associated with variations of vertical distribution of phytoplankton. Some abundant taxa such as Aetideus sp. and Oithona plumifera showed both common (nighttime ascend) and inverted (nighttime descend) vertical migrations depending on season and position related to the pf. Diel and seasonal vertical migrations of zooplankton represent a well-known phenomenon observed for many species 1,2. Adaptive significance of the migrations is mainly linked to feeding, predator-avoiding and/or reproductive behavior 2-9. The amplitude of diel vertical migrations ranges from a few to hundreds of meters 2,9,10. Most migrating zooplankton species ascent at night ("normal" migration pattern); however, a reversed movement (nighttime descent, inverted migrations) is known for some species 2,5,9,11. There are also more complicated migrations with a double ascent at sunset and after midnight with a short intermediate descent to deeper waters at midnight 7,8,12. In addition, different stages of the same species may have different migration patterns, as shown for Oithona and Oncaea copepods 13. Diel migrations of mesoplankton are believed to be caused by the predator evasion during daytime and by feeding during nighttime 3,14-16. Seasonal migrations of zooplankton to the surface waters for feeding and reproduction take place in temperate and polar areas, and are usually driven by phytoplankton bloom 16. In autumn and winter, when the phytoplankton production is low, most species descend to deeper layers. In the Southern Ocean, phytoplankton spring and summer blooms occur in a rather thin upper mixed water layer < 100 m 17 , which results in an extensive ascent of the zooplankton to the upper waters with maximu...

show abstract

The benthoneuston of the Black Sea: Composition and environmental factors influencing its nocturnal dynamic

Cited by 7 publications

References 12 publications

Long-term studies reveal major environmental factors driving zooplankton dynamics and periodicities in the Black Sea coastal zooplankton

Long-term studies reveal major environmental factors driving zooplankton dynamics and periodicities in the Black Sea coastal zooplankton

Environmental Safety and Security Investigations of Neustonic Microplastic Aggregates Near Water-Air Interphase

The Southern Polar Front as a key to mesoplankton migratory behavior

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About