Zoobenthic communities of the Dagestan Region of the Caspian Sea

Guseinov, M. K.

doi:10.1007/s11179-005-0037-2

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although a lot of species of macrofauna were reported in the Caspian Sea (Birshtein et al , 1968; Kasymov, 1994), we did not find any communities of small forms such as Cumacea and Mysidacea in the study area. A similar result was obtained by Guseinov (2005) in Dagestan Region.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Community structure and biodiversity of shallow water macrobenthic fauna at Noor coast, South Caspian Sea, Iran

Taheri

Foshtomi

2010

J. Mar. Biol. Ass.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For studying community structure and biodiversity of macrofauna, seasonal samplings were carried out along three different depths (5, 15 and 30 m) in four transects (12 stations) at Noor coast during 2005. Four higher taxa were determined. Polychaeta was the dominant group comprising 96.61 of the total individuals, followed by Bivalvia 1.35%, Oligochaeta 1.15% and Amphipoda 0.87%. Of the six encountered species, the polychaete, Streblospio gynobranchiata accounted for 84.95 of the total population. Also, Tubificoides fraseri was observed in the Caspian Sea for the first time. During this study, density of macrofauna increased with depths, total organic matter and percentage of silt–clay. The highest density was obtained in winter and the lowest was observed in summer. Maximum diversity, richness, and evenness were obtained, 0.91, 1.05 and 0.88, respectively. Also, multivariate analysis separated differences of density between seasons and depths.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Community structure and biodiversity of shallow water macrobenthic fauna at Noor coast, South Caspian Sea, Iran

Taheri

Foshtomi

2010

J. Mar. Biol. Ass.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The northern sub-basin, which lacks deep-water habitats and is nutrient-rich, favors the biomass growth of the main prey of young sturgeons (Guseinov, 2005;Zinchenko, 2010, 2011). As a consequence, the respective ecoregions are subject to a high impact from poaching (Dmitrieva et al, 2013).…”

Section: Ecoregion-specific Differences In Anthropogenic Pressure Conmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differential impact of anthropogenic pressures on Caspian Sea ecoregions

Lattuada

Albrecht

Wilke

2019

Marine Pollution Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past decades, overall ecological conditions in the Caspian Sea have deteriorated. However, a comprehensive understanding of lake-wide spatial differences in anthropogenic pressures is lacking and the biological consequences of human impacts are poorly understood. This paper therefore aims at assessing the individual and combined effects of critical anthropogenic pressures on the Caspian Sea ecoregions. First, cumulative pressure scores were calculated with a cumulative environmental assessment (CEA) analysis. Then, the individual contribution of anthropogenic pressures was quantified. Finally, ecoregion-specific differences were assessed. The analyses show that both cumulative and individual pressure scores are unevenly distributed across the Caspian Sea. The most important individual pressures are invasive species, chemical pollution and poaching. This uneven distribution of pressure scores across Caspian Sea ecoregions creates new challenges for future conservation strategies, as different ecoregions usually require different conservation measures.

show abstract

“…The studies of macrobenthos from the western shelf are not representative unfortunately. Guseinov's (2005) data are from 2001, and thus, probably predate the possible A. aurita immigration from the Turkmen shelf, whereas Parr et al (2007) have few stations at depths \100 m where scyphistoma sightings may be anticipated. The southern shelf has decent station coverage (Roohi et al 2010;Taheri and Foshtomi 2011), and therefore, it seems likely that scyphistomae were absent or rare here until at least 2006, the last year for which the data are presented.…”

Section: The First Record Of Caspian Scyphistomaementioning

confidence: 99%

Invading Aurelia aurita has established scyphistoma populations in the Caspian Sea

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Caspian Sea has no endemic Scyphozoa. In 1999, a mass accumulation of Aurelia medusae was recorded, indicating that sometime earlier, jellyfish had invaded the basin, but since then no scyphozoans have been reported in the Caspian. In the fall of 2008, we found scyphistomae (scyphoid polyps) during a cruise to the eastern Middle Caspian. The scyphistomae were numerous (100-10,000 ind. m -2 ) and occupied a depth range of 30-73 m. Genetic data (18S rDNA, ITS-1 and COI) showed that the scyphistomae belonged to the species A. aurita. The current genetic data set is insufficient to determine the source region(s) of the invasive A. aurita. It remains unclear why no moon jellies have been recorded in the Caspian in the last 10 years. Because swarming scyphomedusae are often pests, the presence of scyphistomae should be considered as a warning of a possible outbreak of A. aurita medusae in the Caspian.

show abstract

Zoobenthic communities of the Dagestan Region of the Caspian Sea

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

Community structure and biodiversity of shallow water macrobenthic fauna at Noor coast, South Caspian Sea, Iran

Community structure and biodiversity of shallow water macrobenthic fauna at Noor coast, South Caspian Sea, Iran

Differential impact of anthropogenic pressures on Caspian Sea ecoregions

Invading Aurelia aurita has established scyphistoma populations in the Caspian Sea

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About