4.5 Article

Mesoscale physical variability affects zooplankton production in the Labrador Sea

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.dsr.2008.11.008

关键词

AARS; Bio-physical interaction; Calanus finmarchicus; Enzyme activity; Growth; Labrador Sea; Zooplankton; Production

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport [EX-2002-0456]
  2. NERC Marine Productivity Thematic Programme [NER/T/S/2001/01256, NE/C508418/1]
  3. European Social Fund
  4. NERC [pml010004] Funding Source: UKRI
  5. Natural Environment Research Council [pml010004] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Surface distribution (0-100 m) of zooplankton biomass and specific aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases (AARS) activity, as a proxy of structural growth, were assessed during winter 2002 and spring 2004 in the Labrador Sea. Two fronts formed by strong boundary currents, several anticyclonic eddies and a cyclonic eddy were studied. The spatial contrasts observed in seawater temperature, salinity and fluorescence, associated with those mesoscale structures, affected the distributions of both zooplankton biomass and specific AARS activity, particularly those of the smaller individuals. Production rates of large organisms (200-1000 mu m) were significantly related to microzooplankton biomass (63-200 mu m), suggesting a cascade effect from hydrography through microzooplankton to large zooplankton. Water masses defined the biomass distribution of the three dominant species: Calanus glacialis was restricted to cold waters on the shelves while Calanus hyperboreus and Calanus finmarchicus were widespread from Canada to Greenland. Zooplankton production was up to ten-fold higher inside anticyclonic eddies than in the surrounding waters. The recent warming tendency observed in the Labrador Sea will likely generate weaker convection and less energetic mesoscale eddies. This may lead to a decrease in zooplankton growth and production in the Labrador basin. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据