4.0 Article

Microhabitats, macro-differences: a survey of temperature records in Victoria Land terrestrial and freshwater environments

Journal

ANTARCTIC SCIENCE
Volume 34, Issue 3, Pages 256-265

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0954102022000050

Keywords

Acari; Antarctica; Collembola; microclimate; Rotifera; Tardigrada

Funding

  1. 'Progetto Nazionale Ricerche in Antartide' (PNRA) [PNRA16_00234]
  2. Natural Environment Research Council (NERC)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigated the temperature conditions experienced by microorganisms in the microhabitats along the Victoria Land coast in Antarctica. The results showed that ponds had the highest temperatures, with a significant difference compared to air temperature, due to their greater thermal capacity, which also influenced their freeze-thaw cycles and daily temperature variations.
The temperature experienced by micro-invertebrates in extreme environments (such as those of Antarctica) is a pivotal parameter regarding these animals' ecology and physiology. However, at present, detailed knowledge of microhabitat physical conditions in Antarctica is limited, as well as being biased towards sub-Antarctic and Maritime Antarctic regions. To better understand the temperature conditions experienced in the microhabitats of Continental Antarctica by the native microfauna, we recorded temperatures year round in ponds and soils in an area of the Victoria Land coast and compared these measurements with air temperature data from the closest automatic weather station. We identified an important difference in temperature dynamics between the air, soil and pond datasets. Ponds were the warmest sites overall, differing by up to 7.5 degrees C in comparison with the air temperature due to their greater thermal capacity, which also drove their patterns of freeze-thaw cycles and mean daily thermal excursion.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available