Farah Naz, Naureen Aziz Qureshi, Noor Us Saher. Temporal variations of mesozooplankton abundance and biomass in the mangrove creek area along the Karachi coast, Pakistan[J]. Acta Oceanologica Sinica, 2014, 33(12): 222-230. doi: 10.1007/s13131-014-0548-9
Citation: Farah Naz, Naureen Aziz Qureshi, Noor Us Saher. Temporal variations of mesozooplankton abundance and biomass in the mangrove creek area along the Karachi coast, Pakistan[J]. Acta Oceanologica Sinica, 2014, 33(12): 222-230. doi: 10.1007/s13131-014-0548-9

Temporal variations of mesozooplankton abundance and biomass in the mangrove creek area along the Karachi coast, Pakistan

doi: 10.1007/s13131-014-0548-9
  • Received Date: 2013-05-22
  • Rev Recd Date: 2014-07-09
  • The temporal variations of mesozooplankton abundance and biomass (1-Volumetric method by settling volume and displacement volume and 2- Gravimetric method through wet weight, dry weight and ash-free dry weight) with relation to environmental parameters were studied in the mangrove creek area of Karachi coast, Pakistan. The data of mesozooplankton samples along with environmental parameters (temperature, salinity, pH, etc.) were collected during January 1998 to December 1998 from two creek stations. The abundance of mesozooplankton also exhibited seasonal trends at both stations. At Sta. S2, the highest and lowest abundance values were observed during post-monsoon and southwest monsoon respectively whereas, at Sta. S1, a clear trend of high abundance in pre-monsoon to low abundance in southwest monsoon was observed. Mesozooplankton abundance was also positively correlated with settling volume, displacement volume, wet weight and dry weight. The highest biomass value was observed in the northeast monsoon and pre-monsoon periods. The results of the canonical analysis of the output from the discriminate function was tested. Out of fifteen variables, only one was significantly different in single character ratios dry weight/ash free-dry weight (F3,23=4.78, P<0.005). The mesozooplankton community was collectively composed of 28 taxa. Among these groups, copepoda (66.3%), gastropod larvae (9.94%), evadne (4.60%), zoea (3.60%), cypris nauplii (2.56%), lemellibranch larvae (1.87%), chaetognaths (1.81%), ostracods (1.73%), lucifer (1.15%) and barnacles nauplii (1.35%) contributed the most to the similarities within Sta. S1, while copepoda (74.68%), cypris nauplii (5.29%), gastropods (4.87%), barnacles nauplii (4.81%), evadne (1.72%), zoea (1.53%) and caridean larvae (1.18%) at Sta. S2. The remaining mesozooplanktonic group were accounted for less than 5% and 6% at Sta. S1 and Sta. S2 respectively, of the total organisms. Similarity percentage (SIMPER) analysis revealed that copepoda, gastropod larvae and cyprus nauplii contributed most of the similarities within Sta. S2 along Sta. S1.
  • loading
  • Amjad S, Khan M E, Hashmi, et al. 1995. Impact of monsoon reversal on zooplankton abundance and composition in the northwestern Arabian Sea. In: Thomson M F, Tirmizi N M, eds. Proceeding of the International Conference on The Arabian Sea Living Marine Resources and the environment. Lahore, Pakistan: Vanguard Books (Pvt.) Ltd, 497-508
    Bode A, Alvarez-Ossorio T, Gonzalez N. 1998. Estimations of mesozooplankton biomass in a coastal upwelling area off NW Spain. J Plankton Res, 20(5): 1005-1014
    Bonecker C C, Aoyagui A S, Santos R M. 2009. The impact of impoundment on the rotifer communities in two tropical floodplain environments: interannual pulse variations. Braz J Biol, 69(2 Suppl): 529-537
    Baranova O K, Brie T, Boyer, et al. 2009. World Ocean Database 2009, Chapter 16: Plankton data. In: Levitus S, ed. NOAA Atlas NESDIS 66. Washington, DC: US Gov Printing Office, 1-216
    Birdsong R S, Marshall H G, Alden R W, et al. 1987. Lower Chesapeake Bay mainstem plankton monitoring program. Final Report: July 1985-June 1986. Norfolk, Virginia: Old Dominion University Research Foundation
    Birdsong R S, Marshall H G, Alden R W, et al. 1988. Chesapeake Bay plankton monitoring program. Final report: 1986-1987. Norfolk, Virginia: Old Dominion University Research Foundation
    Costa K G D, Pereira L C C, Costa R M D. 2008. Short and long-term temporal variation of the zooplankton in a tropical estuary (Amazon region, Brazil). Bol Mus Para Emílio Goeldi Ciências Naturais, Belém, 3(2): 127-141
    Cushing D H, Humphrey G F, Banse K, et al. 1958. Report of the committee on terms and equivalents. Rapports et Procès-verbaux des Réunions du Conseil Permanent International pour l'Exploration de la Mer, 14(1): 15-16
    Dagg M J, Orther P B, Yamani F A. 1987. Winter-time distribution and abundance of copepod nauplli in the Northern Gulf of Mexico. Fish Bulletin, 86(2): 319-330
    Dvoretsky V G, Dvoretsky A G. 2013. Summer mesozooplankton community of Moller Bay (Novaya Zemlya Archipelago, Barents Sea). Oceanologia, 55(1): 205-218
    Fabian H, Koppelmann R, Weikert H. 2005. Full-depths zooplankton composition at two deep sites in the western and central Arabian Sea. Indian J Mar Sci, 34(2): 174-187
    Fernández De Puelles M L, D Gra S S, Herna Ndez-Leo N. 2003. Annual cycle of zooplankton biomass, abundance and species composition in the neritic area of the Balearic Sea, Western Mediterranean. Mar Ecol, 24(2): 123-139
    Fraser W R, Hofmann E E. 2003. A predator’s perspective on causal links between climate change, physical forcing and ecosystem response. Mar Ecol Prog Ser, 265: 1-15
    George D G, White N J. 1985. The relationship between settled volume and displacement volume in samples of freshwater Zooplankton. J Plank Res, 7(3): 411-414
    Goswami S C. 1985. Secondary production and zooplankton abundance in the coastal waters from Vengurla to Malpe West coast of India. Indian J Mar Sci, 14(2): 85-92
    Halliday N C. 2001. A comparison of morphometric and geometric methods for the estimation of individual zooplankton volumes. Sarsia, 86(2): 101-105
    Harris R P, Wiebe P H, Lenz J, et al. 2000. ICES Zooplankton Methodology Manual. London: Academic Press, 1-684
    Huda I A, Ahmed J. 1988. Zooplankton production trends in the inshore waters of a mangrove ecosystem long the Karachi Coast. In: Thompson M F, Tirmizi N M, eds. Poceeding of the International Conference on Marine Science of the Arabian Sea. Washington, D C: American Institute of Biological Science, 407-415
    Huda I A. 1993. Zooplankton standing stock and composition in coastal waters of Arabian Sea (Sindh and Makran coasts of Pakistan). In: Tirmizi N M, Kazmi Q, eds. Proceeding of a National Seminar on Study and Management in Coastal Zones in Pakistan. Pakistan: Marine Reference Collection and Resources Centre, University of Karachi, 121-130
    Hwang J S, Kumar R, Hsieh C W, et al. 2010. Patterns of zooplankton distribution along the marine, estuarine, and riverine portions of the Danshuei ecosystem in northern Taiwan. Zoological Studies, 49(3): 335-352
    Kane J. 1993. Variability of zooplankton biomass and dominant species abundance on Georges Bank 1977-1986. Fish Bulletin, 91: 464-474
    Kibirige I, Perissinotto R. 2003. The zooplankton community of the Mpenjati Estuary, a South African temporarily open/closed system. Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science, 58(4): 724-741
    Khatoon Z, Hussain M. 2006. 瑓楯潭湥?潨晹?湲慯湧潲灡汰慨湩正琠潦湥?楴湵?瑥桳攠?敦瀠楋灯敲污慮杧楩挭?獨畩扴瑴物漠灃楲捥慥汫?琠牉潮灴椠捊愠求?潯灬攠湂??瑴氬愠渳琨椴挩?传挷攴愵渭?‵?漼畢牲渾慌汩?潋映?倬氠慙湩歮琠潊渠?刬攠獈敵慡牮捧栠????????????????????扡牴?兡慬猠楡浮?匠?婥????????佡捲敩慡湴潩杯牮慳瀠桯祦?潭晥?瑯桺敯?湰潬牡瑮桫整牯湮??牮愠扴楨慥渠?卥敡慲???敩敶灥?匠敥慳?創敡獲??㈠??????ㄠぅ????ひ???戠牃?兡畳牴攠獓桨楥?书???????????椺猠琵爴椳戭电琵椲漼湢? ̄慌扥畮湺搠慊渮挠攱?愷渳搮?摚楯癯数牬獡楮瑫祴?潮映?浩敯獭潡穳潳漠灡汮慤渠歩瑴潳渠?晥牬潡浴?獯畮爠晴慯挠数?睲慴瑩散牵獬?潴晥?瑭桡整?楥湲渠敩牮?捴潨湥琠極湰数湥瑲愠氲‰猰栠敭氠景?漠晴?乥漠牁瑲桡敢物湡??畓汥晡?潤晵??敮硧椠捎潅??偯慮歳楯獯瑮愮渠??漺甠牚湥慩汴?婣潨潯汬漠杂礬???????????????べ??扦爠?剨慥漠???乩??ㄠ??????愠湂来牲潬癩敮?攠捓潰獲祩獮瑧敥浲?潖晥??獡楧慥?愠渲搳?琭栲攴?值慢捲椾晍極捨???湥???愬渠杁牲潳癨敡?漠晍??猱椹愶?愮渠摐?瑥桬敩?偩慮捡楲晹椠捯??卥瑲慶瑡畴獩?慮渠摯?洠慴湨慥朠散浯敭湰瑯??呴敩捯桮?副敦瀠瑺?啯买?偡?啫乴?卮?佡?副敮獧攠慴牨捥栠?瑡牲慡楣湨楩渠杣?偡楳汴漮琠?偧牲潣杵???慲湥朠牐潡癫敩?整捡潮猬礠猱琷攺洠猲′椷渭′?猷椼慢?愾湍摵?偰慨捹椠晅椮挠??刹愵献????ぴど????側桲極汣楴灵灲楥渠敯獦??????偯牵整獨獥??ㄠ????扮爠?剣敯獳浹楳?卥??删数摲摥祤?剴?噲??噲敥湹欠慬瑩敮獫桡慧??漠潩牮琠桓祯???卥??攠瑏?慥污???は????婥潢潳瀮氠慊渠歁瑮潩湭?摅祣湯慬洬椠挶猴?椠渳″琳栭攳?挷漼慢獲琾慎污?睡慪瑩敭牡猠?漬映?慯摳畨扩楤摡爠楔???慴牨湭慡瑮愠歂愠???測搠楥慴????攠漲‰?愰爮?午捩楧???づ?????????????扬牡?剫楴穯癮椠?卯?????愠煩畮攠牮????卬慡汮敫整浯??????????偦牲潯摭甠捣瑯楲癡楬琠祲?潥晦??桡慴牥潲?倠桳楯瑵瑲楣??牯敦攠歯?獥祲猭瑥敳浴???湴???愠橩楮搠?????桡慮湫???夠???潭慡穳穳愠浢????敡瑳?慲汩???敳摥獳??偮爠潷捥敩敧摨楴渮朠?潬晡?乫愠瑂楥潮湴愠汒?即攬洠椵渨愲爩?漠渶??椷猳格敢牲椾敎獡?倠潆氬椠捑祵?慥湳摨?倠汎愠湁測椠湓条???愠牎愮挠栲椰?′?愠牔楥湭数??楡獬栠敡牮楤攠獳??整灩慡牬琠浶敡湲瑩???潯癮敳爠湩浮攠湴瑨?漠晳?健慣歩楥獳琠慣湯??????????扤物?剴潲扩楢湵?剩?卮??卮牤椠湡楢癵慮獤慡湮?????桤愠湣摯牰慥獰敯此慳爠?????ので????椠獣瑲牥楥扫甠瑡楲潥湡?潡晬?穮潧漠灴汨慥渠歋瑡潲湡?晨物漠浣??牳慴戬椠慐湡?卩敳慴??愮氠潉湮杤?卡潮甠瑊栠敇牥湯??敡牲愠汓慣??匠漴由琨栱眩攺猠琶??漶愹猼瑢?漾晎??湲搭楕慤??摮甮爠椱渹朶?瑡栮攠?据爠畡楣獣敯???甠牯牦?剴敨獥????楴潯汰?卡据楫????????????????扯牡?剴漠海慩湴???删???慥甠穯敮渠獴???????潡睳汯敮獡?吠??????????吠敦浬灵潣牴慵污?慩湯摮?猠灡慮瑤椠慤汩?捴桩慢湵杴敩獯?椮渠?敧灲楩灣攠汐慡杫楩捳?浡楮挬爠漱稸漺漠瀵氱愭游欳琼潢湲 ̄慎湯摯?洭敕獤潤穩潮漮瀠氱愹渶欷瑢漮渠?扮椠潡浣慣獯獵?楴渠?睦愠牴浨?挠潺牯敯??畡汮晫?卯瑮爠敯慦洠?牡楲湡杣??㈠?????攠敷灩?卨攠慡?剮敯獴???????????び???は???戠牶?卲瑩敡牴穩慯???????散牴湵慡湴摩敯獮???????どび???婢潵潴灩汯慮渮欠瑁潧湲?捣漠浐浡畫湩楳瑴祡?漬映?琸栺攠?嘹椷琭??名???爾楏慭??慩礠?攬猠瑉畫慥牤楡渠敔?猠礱猹琸攴洮??卥潴畨瑯桤敳愠獩瑮攠牍湡??牮慥稠楚汯????桮慫牴慯据琠故牣楯穬慯瑧楹漮渠?摥畷爠楙湯杲?愺?瑊桯牨敮攠?祩敬慥特?獡瑮畤搠祓???爬愠稱椭氳椳愲渼?? ̄佐捡敲慫渠潇朠牓??????????????????戰爰?匠瑅牳楴捵歡汲慩湮摥????????偮慳牨獩潰湳猠?呥?剷????????????倠牰慬捡瑮楫捴慯汮??慯湭摭扵潮潩歴?漠晳?卲敵慣睴慵瑲敥爠??湤愠汴祲獯楰獨???畧汲污敤瑩楥湮?乳漮??ㄠ????佫瑴瑯慮眠慒???愠渲愲搨愱???椱猲栱攭爱椳攵猼?割放獐敡慣牥挠桍??漮愠爱搹?漶昮??慮渠慥摭慰?扲物?坡楬攠扡敮?偬????ㄠ??????異湬捡瑮楫潴湯慮氠?牯敭杭牵敮獩獴楹漠湳?敺煥甠慳瑴楲潵湣獴?晲潥爠?穣潲潯灳汳愠湬歡瑫潥渠?摲楯獰灨汩慣挠敧浲敡湤瑩?癮潴汳甮洠敌??睮敯瑬?睏散楥条桮瑯??搬爠礳?眨攱椩机栠琴‵愭渵搵?换慲爾扐潡湦??慮?捯潦牥牲攠捇琠楁漬渠???楮獧栠??甠汈汲敩瑳楴湯?????????????????戠牁?坵楮敤扡敮?健?????潤祩摳?卲???漀砀????????????刀攀氀愀琀椀漀渀猀栀椀瀀?戀攀琀眀攀攀渀?稀漀漀瀀氀愀渀欀琀漀渀?搀椀猀瀀氀愀挀攀洀攀渀琀?瘀漀氀甀洀攀??眀攀琀?眀攀椀最栀琀??搀爀礀?眀攀椀最栀琀??愀渀搀?挀愀爀戀漀渀???椀猀栀??甀氀氀攀琀椀渀?????????????????戀爀?圀漀樀挀椀攀挀栀?圀??倀愀甀氀椀?????????????眀愀??????渀椀攀眀猀欀椀?匀??攀琀?愀氀???  ????椀猀琀爀椀戀甀琀椀漀渀??搀椀瘀攀爀猀椀琀礀?愀渀搀?戀椀漀洀愀猀猀?漀昀?猀甀洀洀攀爀?稀漀漀瀀氀愀渀欀琀漀渀?昀爀漀洀?琀栀攀?挀漀愀猀琀愀氀??愀渀愀搀椀愀渀??攀愀甀昀漀爀琀?匀攀愀??倀漀氀愀爀??椀漀氀漀最礀????????????????
  • 加载中

Catalog

    通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
    • 1. 

      沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

    1. 本站搜索
    2. 百度学术搜索
    3. 万方数据库搜索
    4. CNKI搜索

    Article Metrics

    Article views (1178) PDF downloads(1439) Cited by()
    Proportional views
    Related

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return