Abundance and spatial distribution of neustonic copepodits of Microsetella rosea (Harpacticoida: Ectinosomatidae) along the western Magellan coast, southern Chile.
While harpacticoid copepods are primarily benthic crustaceans, a small proportion (<0.5%) of harpacticoid species inhabit the pelagic zone during their life cycle (Boxshall, 1979; Uye et al., 2002). These pelagic species, which include Microsetella spp. and Macrosetella spp., have relatively strong swimming abilities and unique structural features, such as an elongated worm-like body and long caudal setae that delay sinking velocity. These copepods also show a close resemblance to floating substrates (e.g., the colonial cyanobacterium Trichodesmium; Calef & Grice, 1966; Tokioka & Bieri, 1966; O'Neil, 1998), and suspended organic matter (Alldredge, 1972; Ohtsuka et al, 1993; Green & Dagg, 1997; Uye et al, 2002; Zaitsev, 2005).
Microsetella rosea is widely distributed in subantarctic waters (5-10[degrees]C), ranging from the southern end of South America to western Antarctica, in addition to inhabiting the warm, subtropical waters of the South China Sea, Mediterranean Sea, and Black Sea (Razouls et al., 2005-2014) (http://copepodes.obs-banyuls.fr). Adult females can reach a dry weight of 0.02 mg and a length of 800 [micro]m.
Compared to the vast information available on the population and production dynamics of marine planktonic calanoid copepods, there are relatively few studies that focus on marine and estuarine planktonic non-calanoid copepods, particularly for Microsetella species (Sabatini & Karboe, 1994; Uye & Sano, 1998; Uye et al, 2002). One study focusing on a non-calanoid copepod was conducted by Uye et al. (2002). Specifically, these authors researched the population and production dynamics of Microsetella norvegica in the Sea of Japan and found that reproductive activities of this species occur in the early fall and that brooding sacs contain a maximum of 16 eggs/sac. In the Magellan Strait, typical pelagic calanoid and cyclopoid copepods have been previously studied (Marin & Antezana, 1985; Mazzocchi et al., 1995; Hamame & Antezana, 1999; Marin & Delgado, 2001), and there are some references to pelagic harpacticoids (Aguirre et al, 2012). However, work on pelagic harpacticoid copepods is limited in regards to the waters of South America (Palma & Kaiser, 1993; Boltovskoy, 1999).
In addition to the lack of studies on non-calanoid species, there is also little available research regarding neustonic communities along the Chilean coast (Palma & Kaiser, 1993). In the neuston, especially in coastal waters, members of the Microsetella genus are numerically dominant and highly abundant (Anraku, 1975; Dugas & Koslow, 1984; Uye et al., 2002; Zaitsev, 2005). The community structure and biodiversity of the neuston, including copepodits of species such as M. rosea, are particularly relevant when considering the number of roles that neuston plays in the marine environment.
The neuston forms a boundary between the air and water that, although only of few centimeters thick (Hardy, 1991; Upstill-Goddard et al., 2003), covers 71% of the planet's surface. Moreover, in temperate zones the neuston plays an important trophic role as a food source for meso and macrozooplankton, in addition to being a key component in the production of marine snow and in the vertical transport of organic material from the ocean surface to greater depths (Conte et al., 1998; Hays et al., 2005; Zaitsev, 2005; Koski et al, 2007). The neuston is also important to the early and larval life cycle stages of a number of commercially valuable and/or ecologically significant species in Chile, particularly in regards to larval dispersion (Scheltema, 1986; Gallardo et al, 2012; Canete et al, 2012a).
Nevertheless, the impact of latitudinal differences on the functions of the neuston in the fragmentation and transport of organic matter to greater depths is not fully understood (Zaitsev, 2005; Koski et al, 2007). Further information is also needed to enhance the understanding on how the neuston is influenced by environmental and oceanographic factors, such as temperature, solar radiation, marine pollution, water salinity and density, UV radiation, acidification, and climate change, among others (Hardy, 1991; Rodriguez et al., 2000; Zaitsev, 2005). Therefore, the goals of the present study were to: i) record the abundance and spatial distribution of M. rosea neustonic copepodits along the western coast of the Magellan region; ii) connect these ecological observations with oceanographic parameters (temperature, salinity, and dissolved oxygen) in order to define the conditions under which the M. rosea population develops; and iii) compare M. rosea abundances against those of other collected neustonic taxa, thus determining their biological contributions as biotracers for processes associated with the aggregation of Magellan neustonic communities.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Sampling was conducted onboard the RV Abate Molina as part of the CIMAR 16 Fiordos cruise during the austral spring of 2010 (October 11 to November 19). Twenty six stations were used for sampling. These stations were located along the western mouth of the Magellan Strait (Sta. 7-15) to Navarino Island in the Beagle Channel (Sta. 37-43). At stations close to Dawson Island, samples were primarily collected from the Almirantazgo Sound, Whiteside Channel, and Inutil Bay (Sta. 51-60). Additionally, the sampling area included stations near channels and islands with proximity to the Pacific Ocean (Sta. 27-35) (Fig. 1). Sampling was originally planned to include stations along the eastern margin of the Magellan Strait; however, rough weather conditions did not allowed sample collection (Sta. 1-6, not shown).
At each station, sampling was done with a neuston net (80 cm wide and 30 cm deep) with a 50 [micro]m mesh size zooplankton net (Krsinic, 1998). The net was dragged along the surface at a speed of 0.77-1.03 m [s.sup.-1]. At stations 7-9, the net was dragged for 8 min, but given the high amount of plankton collected, this was reduced to 5 min for all subsequent sampling stations. According to the layer classification established by Hardy (2005), the sampled layers corresponded to the centilayer and surface layer (1-100 cm depth). Only one haul per station was collected. Samples were fixed with 5% neutralized formalin.
Vertical profile of oceanographic conditions for each stations were obtained by a rosette equipped with a Sea-Bird CTD deployed to different depths according to the bottom depth of each site (Data Report CIMAR 16 Fiordos cruise). Since the neuston is in the surface layer, data for temperature, salinity, and dissolved oxygen content were recorded as average of readings between 1 to 2 m depths.
Due to the lack of a flow-meter, abundance and biomass data were standardized to the number of individuals or biomass wet-weight (g) per 5 min drag. To determine biomass wet-weight, which included phytoneuston and zooneuston, samples were filtered on a 30 [micro]m sieve. Mainly micro- to mesoneuston (20 [micro][m.sup.2]0 mm) (Hardy, 2005) samples were collected. Folsom fractioning was used to further divide the collected biomass into 1/8th subsamples, thereby facilitating the counting of neuston holoplankton and M. rosea copepodits.
The copepod stages of M. rosea were identified following Uye et al. (2002). Abundance data only considered the copepodit stages of the M. rosea lifecycle, while nauplius and adult stages were excluded. Additionally, the methodology described by Davies & Slotwinski (2012) was used to discriminate individuals of M. rosea from M. norvegica. Other zooplankton components were identified based on Palma & Kaiser (1993) and Boltovskoy (1999). Samples were stored at the Austral Biological Oceanography Laboratory (LOBA), Department of Sciences & Natural Resources, Faculty of Sciences, Universidad de Magallanes, Punta Arenas, Chile.
The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to detect different trends in M. rosea abundance and differences in trends between the sampled stations, which were grouped into four geographic zones located along the Magellan and Fuegian channels (Antezana, 1999). The relationship between M. rosea copepodit abundance and the oceanographic parameters of temperature, salinity, and dissolved oxygen content were tested using Spearman's Rank-Order Correlation Coefficient (rs) (Zar, 1999; Daniel, 2000).
Magellan plankton can be used to establish distributional trends of bio-physical interactions in estuarine ecosystems. In relation to this study, assessing only the thin neuston layer reduced the number of spatial components (x, y) and prevented constraints associated with vertical water stratification. Additionally, the spatial area of sampling was sufficiently large to cover meso-scale patterns (10-1000 km; Mann & Lazier, 1991; Garcon et al., 2001). Finally, the sampled area, a heterogeneous coastal system, represents a natural laboratory for studying the population dynamics and topographic mechanism that could to produce the aggregation or clumping of the plankton (Downing, 1991).
To classify the type of spatial distribution presented by M. rosea copepodits within the study area, a dispersal index (Id) was applied. This index is based on the variance to mean ratio ([s.sub.2]/[bar.x]) and describes a trend of spatial distribution. If [I.sub.d] = 1.0, there is random distribution ([s.sub.2] = [bar.x]); if [I.sub.d] < 1, there is uniform or regular distribution ([s.sub.2] < [bar.x]); and if [I.sub.d] > 1, there is clumped distribution ([s.sub.2] > [bar.x]) (Ludwig & Reynolds, 1988; Hulbert, 1990).
The spatial variability of ocean temperature, salinity, and dissolved oxygen content were measured for the surface layer of the analyzed stations. Water temperature fluctuated between 6.16[degrees]C (St 52) and 8.42[degrees]C (St 56), with an average water temperature of 7.2 [+ or -] 0.6[degrees]C within the study area. The highest temperatures were detected in the Whiteside Channel and Inutil Bay, while the lowest temperatures were detected along the western side of the Magellan Strait and in Almirantazgo Sound, near the glacial discharge from the Darwin Ice Field.
Salinity was the most variable among all measured parameters. Salinities ranged from 26.4 (Sta. 10) to 32.78 (Sta. 15), with an average salinity of 30.7 [+ or -] 0.91. Based on the classification criteria proposed by Valdenegro & Silva (2003) for southern Chile, all samples in the study area were taken from estuarine (1-32) or modified subantarctic waters (32-33). Values corresponding to 32-33 were recorded for stations in the Magellan and Fuegian channels.
Dissolved oxygen content ranged from 6.65 mL [L.sup.-1] (Sta. 15) to 8.27 mL [L.sup.-1] (Sta. 55), with an average of 7.4 [+ or -] 0.4 mL [L.sup.-1]. The surface layer was oxygenated throughout the study area, with a maximum value recorded in a glacial area of the Almirantazgo Sound. According to Canete et al. (2012b), the surveyed area can be classified as an oximax or normoxic condition (maximum oxygen zone; values > 2 mL [O.sub.2] [L.sup.-1]).
Neuston biomass and abundance
The collected neuston biomass fluctuated by up to two orders of magnitude, ranging from 0.7 g 5 [min.sup.-1] of horizontal drag (Mhd) (Sta. 39) to 31.89 g 5 Mhd (Sta. 52), with an average of 8.55 [+ or -] 7.33 g 5 Mhd (Fig. 2). Neuston biomass was highest in wind protected areas, such as in Froward Cape, Almirantazgo Sound, and Inutil Bay (average = 12.3 g 5 [Mhd.sup.-1]) and along the western arm of the Magellan Strait, between Capitan Aracena Island and the western mouth of Magellan Strait (average = 11.1 g 5 [Mhd.sup.-1]). The lowest neuston biomass measurements were recorded along the Beagle Channel (average = 5.5 g [Mhd.sup.-1]; Table 1).
The spatial pattern of neuston abundance followed a trend similar to that of biomass, with maximum abundances in the Almirantazgo Sound and Inutil Bay (average = 18,350 ind 5 [Mhd.sup.-1]), and minimum abundances in the Beagle Channel (average = 3,358 ind 5 [Mhd.sup.-1]). The average abundances of stations located along the western arm of the Magellan Strait and between the western side of Dawson Island and the Pacific Ocean varied between 7,172 and 7,337 ind 5 [Mhd.sup.-1] (Table 1). Average neuston abundance for the entire study area was 9,179 [+ or -] 10,281 ind 5 [Mhd.sup.-1], which is indicative of clumped distribution with a variation coefficient of 112% (Fig. 3).
Abundance and spatial distribution of Microsetella rosea
Copepodits of M. rosea were collected at all studied stations (Fig. 3). However, there were evident differences between zones that indicated wide spatial variability along the western margin of the Magellan Region. Specifically, maximal abundance of M. rosea was recorded in the Almirantazgo Sound, Inutil Bay, the Paso Ancho zone, and Froward Cape (midMagellan Strait, average = 6307 [+ or -] 5993 ind 5 [Mhd.sup.-1]), while the lowest abundances were recorded at stations along the Beagle Channel and in open areas near Navarino Island (average = 362 ind 5 [Mhd.sup.-1]; Table 1).
M. rosea copepodits accounted for 30% of all recorded neustonic taxa (238,673 ind; Table 2). Almirantazgo Sound, Inutil Bay, the Paso Ancho zone, and Froward Cape accounted for 61.5% of total M. rosea abundance, while sites near the Beagle Channel accounted for <4%. The western margin of the Magellan Strait accounted for nearly 25% of total M. rosea abundance, and the zone west of Dawson Island accounted for 10% (Fig. 3). The abundance ofM. rosea copepodits showed a geographic trend in terms of abundance, with significant differences found mostly between the Paso Ancho microbasin and the Beagle and Fuegian Channels (Antezana, 1999) (Table 1).
The distribution pattern of M. rosea copepodits varied up to four orders of magnitude. Therefore, the spatial distribution pattern of copepodits along the western margin of Magellan Region was classified as clumped (Ludwig & Reynold, 1988; Hulbert, 1990; Downing, 1991) (Figs. 4a-4b). A similar trend was observed for total neuston abundance and biomass (Table 1).
Oceanographic conditions and habitat of Microsetella rosea copepodits
M. rosea copepodits were found inhabiting the neuston at ocean temperatures ranging between 6.5[degrees]C (Sta. 40) and 8.4[degrees]C (Sta. 56), but maximum abundance (1,000 to 10,000 ind 5 [Mhd.sup.-1]) was only detected at stations 7, 55, and 60, which presented surface temperatures between 6.79[degrees]C and 7.69[degrees]C. In turn, Spearman's Rank-Order Correlation Coefficient between surface temperature and M. rosea copepodit abundance produced a significant, negative trend between both parameters (rs = -0.36; P < 0.05; n = 26) (Table 1; Figs. 2-3). The average and standard deviation of M. rosea copepodit abundances was 2,761 [+ or -] 4,278 ind 5 [Mhd.sup.-1].
Additionally, M. rosea copepodits were found in salinity levels between 26.4 (Sta. 10) and 32.777 (Sta. 15) (average = 30.7 [+ or -] 0.9), with the highest M. rosea copepodit abundances found in waters with salinity levels between 30.37 (Sta. 55) and 30.53 (Sta. 7). The relationship between salinity and the copepodit abundance produced a significant, positive trend between both parameters ([r.sub.s] = 0.22; P < 0.05; n = 26).
Finally, the area inhabited by M. rosea copepodits was classified as an oxygenated estuary (mean = 7.4 [+ or -] 0.4 ml [O.sub.2] [L.sup.-1]) (Table 1). There was a significant, negative trend in the relationship between dissolved oxygen content and M. rosea copepodit abundance in Magellan waters ([r.sub.s] = -0.19; P < 0.05; n = 26).
Overall, the limited ranges of oceanographic variables at the stations where M. rosea was found indicate that this pelagic harpacticoid copepod is adapted to specific estuarine environmental conditions. This situation was evidenced along of the western margin of the Magellan Region and within the limits of the Magellan Strait, where much of the water is near Dawson Island or enclosed between the Paso Ancho microbasin and the Forward Cape Channel (Fig. 3).
Contribution of Microsetella rosea to the neuston
During the CIMAR 16 Fjords cruise, 238,673 ind were counted from the meroplankton and holoplankton taxa (41.3% and 51.0%, respectively; Table 2). Of the holoplankton, calanoide and harpacticoide copepods, including M. rosea, were the most abundant. The abundance of M. rosea copepodits was nearly twice that of calanoide copepods (Table 2). Additionally, an important percentage of juvenile appendicularians was collected (4.3%).
Among the collected meroplankton, the numerically dominant groups included mytilid larvae (21.12%), unidentified polychaete larvae (tentatively identified as a Polygordiid exolarvae; P. Ramey-Balci, com.pers. from the Polygordiidae family) (16.5%), and cyphonaute larvae (2.4%). Cypris of barnacle (0.6%) and pluteus of echinoderms (0.42%) were also detected (Table 2). Decapod crustacean larvae were scarce (<0.26%). A total of seven holo- and nine meroplankton taxa of the neuston could be used as biotracers in the western Magellan Region (Table 2).
In summary, holoplankton numerically dominated meroplankton in the neuston communities along the western margin of the Magellan Region during spring oceanographic conditions.
Presence of Microsetella rosea in western Magellan waters
Microsetella rosea was found inhabiting the surface waters of all studied stations along the western margin of the Magellan Region, Chile. This species was the most numerically dominant species of the identified copepods, in addition to being the most dominant taxa of the neuston. These findings have not been previously reported, possibly due to the use of large net meshes (generally >200 [micro]m) (Mazzocchi et al., 1995; Antezana, 1999; Defren-Janson et al., 1999; Marin & Delgado, 2001; Biancalana et al., 2007; Guglielmo et al. , 2014). M. rosea copepodits may only inhabit surface layers of the water column, which would be mostly missed by vertical tows (Krsinic & Grbeco, 2012). Additionally, population density of M. rosea in the neuston was greater than that of the detected calanoid pelagic copepods. Similar abundance magnitudes were found for M. norvegica in the Japan Sea (Uye et al., 2002), where M. norvegica biomass can reach up to 100 mg C [m.sup.-3] in the fall. In contrast, copepodit and adult Microsetella spp. in the Adriatic Sea were less abundant than calanoid and cyclopoid (oncaeids, oithonids) copepods (Krsinic & Grbeco, 2012). Altogether, these findings represent opportunities to study mesoscale spatial variabilities of important biological phenomena arising from interactions between the physical processes, physiology, and behavior of estuarine neuston organisms (Garcon et al., 2001) along southern Chile. Additionally, the typical morphological features of the M. rosea copepodits could ease the identification and justify their use as biotracer.
Microsetella rosea copepodits as biotracer of brackish estuaries
Neuston spatial distribution can be influenced by diverse environmental and oceanographic factors, such as temperature, solar radiation, marine pollution, ocean salinity and density, UV radiation, acidification, and climate change (Zaitsev, 2005). Therefore, understanding the physiological requirements of the neuston, particularly in regards to salinity, is key to explaining the spatial distribution of Magellan estuarine taxa.
The observed spatial distribution of M. rosea appears to be regulated by changes in salinity, with greater abundances at salinities between 29 and 31 and lower numbers at salinities >31. Similar tendencies have been found for other members of the Microsetella genus. For example, M. norvergica inhabits areas near bay mouths rather than sites close to river mouths or other freshwater inputs (Yamazi, 1956). Likewise, Uye & Liang (1998) found low M. norvegica densities at salinities <30, which is further supported by Uye et al. (2002), who indicated that M. norvegica is a stenohaline species intolerant to large salinity variations.
The wide surface salinity variations (0-32) recorded for the Magellan Region (Valdenegro & Silva, 2003; Palma et al., 2014b), together with the limited salinity range ([aproximadamente igual a]29-32) detected by the present study, suggest that M. rosea copepodits could be stenohaline organisms. Nevertheless, new experimental studies on the physiological responses to oceanographic and thermal parameters are needed to confirm.
Microsetella rosea copepodits as biotracer of neustonic aggregation
Abundant patches of small copepods could be influenced by a frontal zone (Zervoudaki et al., 2007). In the western Magellan, frontal zones are detected through the accumulation of ice, strings of detached macroalgae, such as of the kelp Macrocystis pyrifera; color changes in surface waters; and the accumulation of foam in the surface layer (Valle-Levinson et al., 2006). The high abundance of M. rosea copepodits (1,000-10,000 ind 5 [Mhd.sup.-1]) found at some stations of the present study, especially near Dawson Island, could be due to the presence of frontal zones, especially when considering the wide differences in abundances between stations or, as previously described, the deep sill in the Whiteside Channel (Palma et al, 2014b).
Analyses of other meteorological, oceanographic, and topographic variables are needed to fully explain the abundance and spatial distribution patterns of the Magellan neuston (Owen, 1989), knowledge which is relevant to determining the aggregation, dispersal, and transport of small plankton in this pelagic environment. The high concentration of neustonic biomass, and of M. rosea in particular, near Dawson Island, may be due to the island wake effect and a coast predominantly protected from spring winds (Mann & Lazier, 1991), and future neuston sampling programs should be established for this area. Further related to the importance of Dawson Island, temperature, salinity, and dissolved oxygen content data from the present study showed uniform spatial distributions, but total neuston biomass and abundance, as well as Microsetella abundance, showed a clumped spatial distribution around this island. These contrasting distributions between environmental factors and neuston communities indicate that around Dawson Island may dominate processes of planktonic aggregation.
Apart from depth, another aspect that could explain the spatial pattern of Microsetella copepodits is the spatial distribution of chlorophyll-a. Indeed, four stages of chlorophyll production have been detected along the western margin of the Magellan Strait (Hamame & Antezana, 1999) in relation to salinity, temperature, and water column stratification. These stages are as follows: i) the Paso Ancho microbasin and Magdalena Sound area, with a shallow chlorophyll maximum (=5 mg [m.sup.-3] at 0-20 m) in a vertically homogeneous cold and brackish water column; ii) the Magdalena, Cockburn, and Brecknock Channels area, with relatively low chlorophyll concentrations (2-3 mg [m.sup.-3] at 0-50 m), minor salinity stratification and a surface lens of warmer water directly influenced by the Pacific Ocean; iii) the Ballenero Channel and western arm of the Magellan Strait, with high chlorophyll concentration in the subsurface layer (>4 mg [m.sup.-3]) and a vertically stratified water column with two salinity layers and three temperature layers; and iv) the Beagle Channel area, with maximum subsurface chlorophyll concentrations (>4 mg [m.sup.-3]) extending to the ocean floor and vertically homogeneous salinity and temperature distribution. In the present study, maximum M. rosea abundance was recorded in the Paso Ancho microbasinMagdalena Sound area, including in the zone of Froward Cape (Fig. 3), where there is a shallow chlorophyll maximum, a vertically homogeneous cold and brackish water column.
Another aspect that should be considered is the ability of M. rosea and other members of the same genus to preserve the normal behaviors of harpacticoid copepods that inhabit the benthos. Recently, Pacheco et al. (2013) detected two Microsetella species in subtidal soft bottom zones of northern Chile. These species emerge from the sediment into the water column, a process defined as diel migration. Therefore, it is possible that spatial variations in the Magellan abundance of the copepod M. rosea could be affected by sampling time (day/night), wide of channels and bathymetry. Indeed, the M. rosea neuston population in Magellan waters could be supplied by shallower waters through horizontal transport due to the deepest of each microbasin (Valdenegro & Silva, 2003; Palma et al., 2014b).
Applications of the Magellan neustonic studies
In the present study, no direct relationship between salinity and M. rosea abundance was observed, a situation possibly associated with low local variability in temperature and salinity. Canete et al. (2013) demonstrated a positive and significant lineal relationship between neuston biomass and salinity (5-33 range) and abundance in southern Chile. Furthermore Johan et al. (2012) detected that the spatial distribution of copepods follows the salinity gradient in the tropical estuary of the Perai River, Malaysia. The neuston could be an important monitoring tool to track the flow of estuarine, brackish waters into the inner channels of southern Chile (Palma et al., 2014a).
The actual spatial pattern of the estuarine neuston communities from Magellan waters could be modified if global warming directly affects the rate of melting ice and rainy conditions along the southern Chilean coast, and specifically affect to stenohaline species such as M. rosea. Therefore, a permanent monitoring of subantarctic neustonic communities is highly recommended.
Received: 18 August 2015; Accepted: 5 May 2016
The authors would like to thank the Servicio Hidrografico y Oceanografico (SHOA), Chilean Navy, the financial support grant by CONA C16F 10-014, the assistance given by the crew of RVAbate Molina, and the Instituto de Fomento Pesquero, Chile (IFOP) for providing the facilities necessary for collecting neuston samples. We would also like to thank GAIA Antartica (MAG1203), Contract MINEDUC-UMAG, for assisting in the translation of the original manuscript. Special thanks are also given to the UMAG Research Grant N[degrees] PR-F2-01CRN-12, CIMAR 18 and CIMAR 20 Programs for providing partial funds supporting the publication of this study. We also thank Ms. Sc. Jaime Ojeda for collecting the neuston samples.
Aguirre, G.E., F.L. Capitanio, G.A. Lovrich & G.B. Esnal. 2012. Seasonal variability of metazooplankton in coastal sub-Antarctic waters (Beagle Channel). Mar. Biol. Res., 8: 341-353.
Alldredge, A.L. 1972. Abandoned larvacean houses: a unique food source in the pelagic environment. Science, 177: 885-887.
Anraku, M. 1975. Microdistribution of marine copepods in a small inlet. Mar. Biol., 30: 79-88.
Antezana, T. 1999. Hydrographic features of Magellan and Fuegian inland passages and adjacent SubAntarctic waters. Sci. Mar., 69(Suppl. 1): 23-34.
Biancalana, F., M.S. Barria de Cao & M.S. Hoffmeyer. 2007. Micro and mesozooplankton composition during winter in Ushuaia and Golondrina bays (Beagle Channel, Argentina). Braz. J. Oceanogr., 55: 83-95.
Boltovskoy, D. 1999. South Atlantic zooplankton. Backhuys, Publishers, Leiden, 1706 pp.
Boxshall, G.A. 1979. The planktonic copepods of the northeastern Atlantic Ocean: Harpacticoida, Siphonostomatoida, and Mormoniloida. Bull. Brit. Mus. Nat. Hist. (Zool.), 35: 201-264.
Calef, G.W. & G.D. Grice. 1966. Relationship between the blue-green alga Trichodesmium thiebautii and the copepod Microsetella gracilis in the plankton of South America. Ecology, 47: 855-856.
Canete, J.I., C.S. Gallardo, T. Cesped, C.A. Cardenas & M. Santana. 2012a. Encapsulated development, spawning and early veligers of the ranellid snail Fusitriton magellanicus (Roding, 1798) in the cold waters of the Magellan Strait, Chile. Lat. Am. J. Aquat. Res., 40(4): 914-928.
Canete, J.I., M. Palacios & C.A. Cardenas. 2012b. Presencia de Cistenides elhersi Hessle, 1917 (Polychaeta: Pectinariidae) en aguas someras magallanicas habitadas por praderas de Ruppiafilifolia: evidencia de euribatia, eurihalinidad y euritermia? An. Inst. Pat. Chile, 40: 125-139.
Canete, J.I., M.S. Romero, T. Figueroa & F. Ovando. 2013. Biodiversidad, abundancia y estructura comunitaria del neuston recolectado en el crucero Cimar 18 Fiordos (CONA C18F 12-04). Resumen Informes Preliminares, Comite Oceanografico Nacional, Valparaiso, pp. 47-62.
Conte, M.H., J.C. Weber & N. Ralph. 1998. Episodic particle flux in the deep Sargasso Sea: an organic geochemical assessment. Deep-Sea Res. I, 45: 1819-1841.
Daniel, W.W. 2000. Bioestadistica. Bases para el analisis de las ciencias de la salud. Editorial Uteha Noriega, Mexico, 3: 878 pp.
Davies, C.H. & A.S. Slotwinski. 2012. Microsetella norvegica (Boeck, 1865). IMOS-integrated marine observing system, CSIRO, Australia, Plate 1-2. [http://www.imas.utas.edu.au/zooplankton/references]. Reviewed: 5 March 2016.
Defren-Janson, K., S.B. Schnack-Schiel & C. Richter. 1999. Mesozooplankton communities in the Magellan region. Sci. Mar., 63: 43-50.
Downing, J.A. 1991. Biological heterogeneity in aquatic ecosystems. In: J. Kolasa & S.T.A. Pickett (eds.). Ecological heterogeneity. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 160-180.
Dugas, J.C. & J.A. Koslow. 1984. Microsetella norvegica: a rare report of a potentially abundant copepod on the Scotian shelf. Mar. Biol., 84: 131-134.
Gallardo, C.S., D. Haro, C. Wagner, O. Garrido & J.I. Canete. 2012. Egg laying behavior and intracapsular development of Argobuccinum pustulosum (Gastropoda: Ranellidae) in temperate waters at the south coast of Chile. Mar. Biol. Res., 8: 815-828.
Garcon, V., A. Oschlies, S. Doney, D. McGillicuddy & J. Waniek. 2001. The role of mesoscale variability on plankton dynamics. Deep Sea Res. II, 48: 2199-2226.
Green, E.P. & M.J. Dagg. 1997. Mesozooplankton association with medium to large marine snow aggregates in the northern Gulf of Mexico. J. Plankton Res., 19: 435-447.
Guglielmo, R., M.C. Gambi, A. Granata, L. Guglielmo & R. Minutoli. 2014. Composition, abundance and distribution of holoplanktonic polychaetes within the Strait of Magellan (southern America) in austral summer. Polar Biol., 37: 999-1015.
Hamame, M. & T. Antezana. 1999. Chlorophyll and zooplankton in microbasins along the Magellan Strait-Beagle Channel passage. Sci. Mar., 63(Suppl.1): 3542.
Hardy, J.T. 1991. Where the sea meets the sky. The ocean's skin is the richest, most extensive habitat of all. Nat. Hist., Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., pp. 1-3.
Hardy, J.T. 2005. Biological effects of chemicals in the sea-surface microlayer. In: P.S. Liss & R.A. Duce (eds.). The sea surface and global change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 339-370.
Hays, G.C., A.J. Richardson & C. Robinson. 2005. Climate change and marine plankton. Trends Ecol. Evol., 20: 337-344.
Hulbert, S.H. 1990. Spatial distribution of the montane unicorne. Oikos, 58: 257-271.
Johan, I., W.O. Wasnah, M. Mashhor, M.K. Abu Hena & S. M.N. Amin. 2012. Spatial distribution of copepods along the salinity gradient of Perai River Estuary, Penang, Malaysia. Pak. J. Biol. Sci., 15: 647-652.
Koski, M., E.F. M0ller, M. Maar & A.W. Visser. 2007. The fate of discarded appendicularian houses: degradation by the copepod, Microsetella norvegica, and other agents. J. Plankton Res., 29: 641-654.
Krsinic, F. 1998. Vertical distribution of protozoan and microcopepod communities in the South Adriatic Pit. J. Plankton Res., 20: 1033-1060.
Krsinic, F. & B. Grbeco. 2012. Spatial distribution of copepod abundance in the epipelagic layer of the south Adriatic Sea. Acta Adriat., 53: 57-70.
Ludwig, J.A. & J.F. Reynolds. 1988. Statistical ecology: a primer on methods and computing. John Wiley and Sons, New York, 354 pp.
Mann, K.H. & J.R. Lazier. 1991. Dynamics of marine ecosystems: biological-physical interactions in the oceans. Blackwell, Massachusetts, 466 pp.
Marin, V.H. & T. Antezana. 1985. Species composition and relative abundance of copepods in Chilean fjords. J. Plankton Res., 7: 961-966.
Marin, V.H. & L.E. Delgado. 2001. La taxocenosis de copepodos calanoideos en los canales magallanicos: un patron anidado. Cienc. Tecnol. Mar, 24: 81-89.
Mazzocchi, M.G., G. Zagami, A. Ianora, L. Guglielmo, N. Crescenti & J. Hure. 1995. Copepods. In: L.
Guglielmo & A. Ianora (eds.). Atlas of marine zooplankton straits of Magellan. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 253 pp.
O'Neil, J.M. 1998. The colonial cyanobacterium Trichodesmium as a physical and nutritional substrate for the harpacticoid copepod Macrosetella gracilis. J. Plankton Res., 20: 43-59.
Ohtsuka, S., S. Ohaye, A. Tanimura, M. Fukuchi, H. Hattori, H. Sasaki & O. Matsuda. 1993. Feeding ecology of copepodid stages of Eucalanus bungii in the Chukchi and northern Bering Seas in October 1988. Proceeding of the NIPR Symposium Polar Biology, 6: 27-37.
Owen, R.W. 1989. Microscale and finescale variations of small plankton in coastal and pelagic environments. J. Mar. Res., 47: 197-240.
Pacheco, A.S., G.E. Gomez & J.M. Riascos. 2013. First records of emerging benthic invertebrates at a sublittoral soft-bottom habitat in northern Chile. Rev. Biol. Mar. Oceanogr., 48: 387-392.
Palma, S. & K. Kaiser. 1993. Plancton marino de aguas chilenas. Ediciones Universitarias de Valparaiso, Valparaiso, 151 pp.
Palma, S., M.C. Retamal, N. Silva & C. Silva. 2014a. Horizontal and vertical distributions of siphonophores in relation to oceanographic conditions in Chilean Patagonian fjords. Sci. Mar., 78: 339-351.
Palma, S., P. Cordova, N. Silva & C. Silva. 2014b. Biodiversity and spatial distribution of medusae in the Magellan Region (Southern Patagonian Zone). Lat. Am. J. Aquat. Res., 42(5): 1175-1188.
Razouls, C., F. de Bovee, J. Kouwenberg & N. Desreumaux. 2005-2014. Diversity and geographic distribution of marine planktonic copepods. Available at [http://copepodes.obs-banyuls.fr/en]. Reviewed: 20 December 2014.
Rodriguez, C.A., H.I. Browman, J.-F. St-Pierre. 2000. High survival of neustonic zoea I larvae of american lobster Homarus americanus following short-term exposure to ultraviolet (280 to 400 nm). Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 193: 305-309.
Sabatini, M. & T. Kiorboe. 1994. Egg production, growth and development of the cyclopoid copepod Oithona similis. J. Plankton Res., 16: 1329-1351.
Scheltema, R.S. 1986. Long-distance dispersal by planktonic larvae of shoal-water benthic invertebrates among Central Pacific islands. Bull. Mar. Sci., 39: 241-256.
Tokioka, T. & R. Bieri. 1966. Juveniles of Microsetella gracilis (Dana) from the clumps of Trichodesmium in the vicinity of Seto. Publ. Seto Mus. Biol. Lab., 14: 275-282.
Upstill-Goddard, R.C., T. Frost, G.R. Henry, M. Franklin, J. Colin Murrell & N.J.P. Owens. 2003. Bacterioneuston control of air-water methane exchange determined with a laboratory gas exchange tank. Global Biogeochem. Cicle., 17: 19-15.
Uye, S. & D. Liang. 1998. Copepods attain high abundance, biomass and production in the absence of large predator but suffer cannibalistic loss. J. Mar. Syst., 15: 495-501.
Uye, S. & K. Sano. 1998. Seasonal variation in biomass, growth rate and production rate of the small cyclopoid copepod Oithona davisae in a temperate eutrophic inlet. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 163: 37-44.
Uye, S., I. Aoto & T. Onbe. 2002. Seasonal population dynamics and production of Microsetella norvegica, a widely distributed but little studied marine planktonic harpacticoid copepod. J. Plankton Res., 24: 143-153.
Valdenegro, A. & N. Silva. 2003. Caracterizacion oceanografica fisica y quimica de la zona de canales y fiordos australes de Chile entre el estrecho de Magallanes y cabo de Hornos (Cimar 3 Fiordos). Cienc. Tecnol. Mar, 26: 19-60.
Valle-Levinson, A., J.L. Blanco & M. Frangopulos. 2006. Hydrography and frontogenesis in a glacial fjord off the Strait of Magellan. Ocean Dynamics, 56: 217-227.
Yamazi, I. 1956. Plankton investigation in inlet waters along the coast of Japan. XIX Regional characteristics and classification of inlet waters based on the plankton communities. Publ. Seto Mar. Biol. Lab., 5: 24-64.
Zaitsev, Y. 2005. Neuston of seas and oceans. In: S.P. Liss & R.A. Duce (eds.). The sea surface and global change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 371-382.
Zar, J.H. 1999. Biostatistical analysis. Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 663 pp.
Zervoudaki, S., E.D. Christou, T.G. Nielsen, I. SiokouFrangou, G. Assimakopoulou, A. Giannakourou, M. Maar, K. Pagou, E. Krasakopoulou, U. Christaki & M. Moraitou-Apostolopoulou. 2007. The importance of small-sized copepods in a frontal area of the Aegean Sea. J. Plankton Res., 29: 317-338.
Juan I. Canete (1), Carlos S. Gallardo (2), Carlos Olave (3), Maria S. Romero (4) Tania Figueroa (1) & Daniela Haro (5)
(1) Laboratorio de Oceanografia Biologica Austral (LOBA), Facultad Ciencias Universidad de Magallanes, Punta Arenas, Chile
(2) Instituto Ciencias Marinas y Limnologicas, Facultad de Ciencias Universidad Austral de Chile, Valdivia, Chile
(3) Centro Regional de Estudios, CEQUA, Punta Arenas, Chile
(4) Departamento de Biologia Marina, Facultad Ciencias del Mar Universidad Catolica del Norte, Coquimbo, Chile
(5) Laboratorio Ecologia Molecular, Facultad Ciencias, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile
Corresponding author: Juan I. Canete (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Corresponding editor: Sergio Palma
Caption: Figure 1. Geographical position of neuston sampling stations in the Magellan Region, CIMAR 16 Fjords cruise (October-November 2010).
Caption: Figure 2. Neustonic biomass (g 5 [Mhd.sup.-1]) and neustonic abundance (ind 5 [Mhd.sup.-1]) in the western Magellan coast. Both measurements are expressed in log scale and include phytoneuston and zooneuston together. The average and standard deviation of neustonic biomass and abundance were 8.55 [+ or -] 7.33 g 5 [Mhd.sup.-1] and 9,179 [+ or -] 10,281 ind 5 [Mhd.sup.-1], respectively. The function log (x+1) was applied to the original abundance data to obtain only values >0 in the axis. Mhd: minutes of horizontal dragging.
Caption: Figure 3. Spatial distribution of Microsetella rosea copepodits collected along the western margin of the Magellan coast. Abundances are expressed as ind 5 [Mhd.sup.-1] (minutes of horizontal dragging). The average and standard deviation of M. rosea copepodit abundances were 2,761 [+ or -] 4,278 ind 5 [Mhd.sup.-1].
Caption: Figure 4. Temperatures and salinities recorded for the neustonic layer along the western Magellan coast. These data were used to determine the oceanographic requirements of Microsetella rosea copepodits. Abundances are expressed as ind 5 [Mhd.sup.-1] (minutes of horizontal dragging). The average temperature and salinity of the neustonic layer in the study area were 7.2 [+ or -] 0.6[degrees]C and 30.7 [+ or -] 0.9, respectively.
Table 1. Total neustonic biomass and abundance and Microsetella rosea abundance collected from four macrozones along the western margin of the Magellan Region during the CIMAR 16 Fjord cruice (Oct-Nov 2010). Average values [+ or -] standard deviation. Mhd: minutes of horizontal drag. Significant differences (*) were detected between macrozones using the Kruskal -Wallis test (F3, 25 = 8.63; P < 0.05). Macrozones Neuston biomass Neuston abundance (g 5 [Mhd.sup.-1]) (ind 5 [Mhd.sup.-1]) Almirantazgo Sound 12.4 [+ or -] 9.4 18,350 [+ or -] 11,594 to Inutil Bay (7 stations; 29.6 [+ or -] 1.64) Western arm of the 6.7 [+ or -] 8.2 7,172 [+ or -] 3,888 Magellan Strait (8 stations; 30.6 [+ or -] 0.46) Western islands 4.7 [+ or -] 2.7 7,337 [+ or -] 5,263 between Dawson Island and the Pacific Ocean (4 stations; 30.7 [+ or -] 0.17) Southern branch of 5.8 [+ or -] 3.2 3,358 [+ or -] 4,321 the Beagle Channel and Navarino Island (7 stations; 31.1 [+ or -] 0.92) Macrozones Microsetella rosea abundance (ind 5 [Mhd.sup.-1]) Almirantazgo Sound 6,307 [+ or -] 5,993 * to Inutil Bay (7 stations; 29.6 [+ or -] 1.64) Western arm of the 2,225 [+ or -] 3,693 * Magellan Strait (8 stations; 30.6 [+ or -] 0.46) Western islands 1,210 [+ or -] 1,226 * between Dawson Island and the Pacific Ocean (4 stations; 30.7 [+ or -] 0.17) Southern branch of 342 [+ or -] 264 * the Beagle Channel and Navarino Island (7 stations; 31.1 [+ or -] 0.92) Table 2. Comparative analysis of neustonic zooplankton collected along the western margin of the Magellan Region during the CIMAR 16 Fjord cruise (Oct-Nov 2010). A: Total abundance (%; n = 238.673 individuals). Larval type refers to the number of different families or orders for polychaetes and crustaceans, respectively. The total percentage of abundances is less than 100% as some larval types were unidentified or scarce. TAXA A (%) Frequency Holoneuston (number of cases) Cnidaria 0.200 5 Ctenophora 0.002 1 Pelagic Polychaeta 0.008 1 Calanoid copepods 16.395 26 M. rosea copepodits 29.993 26 Appendicularia 4.291 13 Fishes eggs 0.082 5 Meroneuston (larvae) Nemertea (Muller) 0.002 1 Polychaeta (11 types) 16.446 24 Sipunculida (pelagosphaera) 0.002 1 Barnacles (nauplius + cypris) 0.606 11 Decapod crustaceans 0.258 11 Bryozoa(cyphonaute) 2.410 19 Gastropoda (bilobed larvae) 0.007 2 Bivalvia (right charnel 21.118 18 + umbonated) Echinodermata (pluteus) 0.419 11 Total 92.243 %
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Title Annotation:||Research Article|
|Author:||Canete, Juan I.; Gallardo, Carlos S.; Olave, Carlos; Romero, Maria S.; Figueroa, Tania; Haro, Daniel|
|Publication:||Latin American Journal of Aquatic Research|
|Date:||Jul 1, 2016|
|Previous Article:||The effect of different feeding and starvation frequencies on growth utilization and nutrients, for Piaractus brachypomus (Cuvier, 1818).|
|Next Article:||Long term storage and the compensatory growth of white shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei in aquaculture ponds.|