https://commons.ufh.ac.za/vital/access/manager/Index en-us 5 https://commons.ufh.ac.za/vital/access/manager/Repository/vital:5790 0.05 in all cases). There was no evidence of enhanced biomass and abundance values at stations occupied in the immediate vicinity of the front. Total average carnivorous zooplankton abundance was dominated by chaetognaths (Eukrohnia hamata Möbius 1875, Sagitta gazellae Ritler-Záhony 1909 and S. zetesios Fowler 1905) and euphausiids (Nematoscelis megalops Sars 1883, Euphausia longirostris Hansen 1908 and E. spinifera Sars 1883), which contributed up to 86.58 ± 32.91% of the total counts. The total average biomass was dominated by euphausiids and amphipods (Themisto gaudichaudii Guérin-Méneville 1825, Phronima sedentaria Forsskål 1775 and Vibilia armata Bovallius 1887) which contributed up to 71.45 ± 34.85% of the total counts. In general the populations of both the euphausiids and amphipods were dominated by females while the chaetognaths were dominated by juveniles. Numerical analysis identified two major zooplankton groupings within the survey area which did not coincide with the water masses within the survey area. The SIMPER procedure of the PRIMER package indicated differences between the groups were mainly attributed to changes in the abundance of the numerically dominant species rather than the presence or absence of individual species. The absence of any significant spatial patterns in the distribution of the carnivorous zooplankton suggests that the STC did not act as a biogeographical barrier during the present study. The mean feeding rates of the chaetognaths E. hamata, S. gazellae and S. zetesios were 1.82 ± 0.85prey d-1, 3.63 ± 2.08prey d-1 and 2.18 ± 0.59prey d-1, respectively. These rates correspond to a combined predation impact equivalent to <5% of the mesozooplankton standing stock or <10% of the mesozooplankton secondary production. Mesozooplankton, comprising mainly copepods was the dominant prey in the guts of the three chaetognath species. Total predation impact of the euphausiids, chaetognaths and amphipods, estimated using published daily ration data, on the mesozooplankton standing stock and secondary production ranged from 0.01% to 1.53% and from 0.03% to 30.54%, respectively. Among the carnivorous zooplankton, chaetognaths were generally identified as the dominant predators of mesozooplankton. Low predation impact of selected carnivorous zooplankton suggested that these organisms contributed little to the vertical carbon flux within the region of investigation during the study.]]> Wed 12 May 2021 17:48:20 SAST ]]> https://commons.ufh.ac.za/vital/access/manager/Repository/vital:5653 2 cm; chaetognaths, medusae, ctenophores and mysids), with particular emphasis on the chaetognaths Eukrohnia hamata and Sagitta gazellae, were investigated during three surveys conducted in late austral summer (April/May) of 2001, 2004 and 2005 in the Polar Frontal Zone in the vicinity of the Prince Edward Islands (46º45’S, 37º50’E), Southern Ocean. The 2001 survey formed part of the Marion Offshore Variability Ecosystem Study (MOVES II), while the 2004 and 2005 surveys formed part of the Dynamics of Eddy Impacts on Marion’s Ecosystem study (DEIMEC III and IV respectively). Macrozooplankton samples were collected using WP-2, RMT-8 and Bongo nets. Results of the hydrographic survey indicated that the region of investigation, the Polar Frontal Zone (PFZ), is an area of high mesoscale variability. During the 2004 survey the Antarctic Polar Front (APF) and the Subantarctic Front (SAF) merged to form an intense frontal feature with subsurface temperature and salinity ranging from 8.5-7.5ºC and 34.15-33.88, respectively. A cyclonic cold core eddy, believed to have been spawned from the APF, was observed during the 2005 survey. Macrozooplankton abundance and biomass ranged from 0 to 43.731 ind. m⁻³, and from 0 to 41.55 mg wwt m⁻³ respectively, during the three surveys. Among the carnivorous macrozooplankton, chaetognaths (Eukrohnia hamata and Sagitta gazellae) were most prominent, contributing up to 85% of the total biomass during all three surveys. Elevated biomass values were found near and within the frontal feature during the 2004 survey, and also along the eddy edge during the 2005 survey. However, hierarchical cluster analysis did not reveal the presence of distinct zooplankton groupings associated with the various water masses encountered during the surveys and this is probably due to the high mesoscale variability in oceanographic conditions that are characteristic of the PFZ. The total average predation impact of the selected carnivorous macrozooplankton during the 2001, 2004 and 2005 surveys accounted for 4.93 ± 6.76%, 0.55 ± 0.51% and 4.88 ± 4.45 of the mesozooplankton standing stock, respectively. S. gazellae had the highest consumption rate in all three surveys, consuming up to 800 g Dwt 1000m⁻³d⁻¹ during the study. Of the two chaetognaths, E. hamata dominated the chaetognath standing stock. The combined abundance and biomass values of E. hamata and S. gazellae ranged from 0 to 43.73 ind. m⁻³ and from 0 to 41.551 mg wwt m⁻³ respectively, during the three surveys. Inter-annual variability in the chaetognath densities was apparent. Highest abundances and biomasses tended to be associated with specific water masses, confirming the existence of a relationship between zooplankton community structure and hydrographic conditions. Generally, about 90% of the chaetognaths contained no food in their guts. S. gazellae consumed a wider variety of prey. Oil droplets occurred in the guts of ≈ 51% of E. hamata. Cannibalism was low in both species, but greater in S. gazellae than E. hamata. During the three surveys, the feeding rate values of E. hamata and S. gazellae went up to 0.48 and 2.099 prey d⁻¹ respectively. S. gazellae also had a greater predation impact on the mesozooplankton standing stock than E. hamata. The mean predation impact of the chaetognaths combined was 0.31 ± 0.291%, 0.52 ± 0.28% and 0.53 ± 0.56% of the mesozooplankton standing stock during the 2001, 2004 and 2005 surveys, respectively. During all three surveys, the majority of individuals (≈ 76%) of the chaetognaths were at stage I maturity, suggesting that during the time of study the chaetognaths were not reproducing. In both species a significant difference (log-linear analysis, p < 0.05) in maturities between the years investigated was observed. In general, there were no differences in lengths and maturities between the different water masses encountered during the surveys. The lengths of E. hamata and S. gazellae ranged from 5 to 24 mm and from 9.4 to 63.6 mm, respectively.]]> Thu 13 May 2021 08:13:35 SAST ]]> https://commons.ufh.ac.za/vital/access/manager/Repository/vital:5696 0.05 in all cases). A key feature of the two investigations was the virtual absence of juveniles (total length < 15 mm) among the amphipod population, supporting the suggestion that they exhibit strong seasonal patterns in reproduction. Gut content analysis during both years indicated that for both the male and female amphipods’, copepods were the most prevalent prey species found in stomachs, followed by chaetognaths and pteropods. Results of electivity studies indicate that T. gaudichaudii is an opportunistic predator, generally feeding on the most abundant mesozooplankton prey. Results of in vitro incubations indicated that the total daily feeding rate of T. gaudichaudii during 2004 ranged from 11.45 to 20.90 ind. m⁻³ d⁻¹, which corresponds to between 0.12 and 1.64% of the total mesozooplankton standing stock. In 2005, the feeding rate ranged between 0.1 and 1.73% of the total mesozooplankton standing stock. The low predation impact of T. gaudichaudii during this study can be related to their low abundances and high interannual variability throughout the region of investigation.]]> Thu 13 May 2021 06:57:14 SAST ]]> https://commons.ufh.ac.za/vital/access/manager/Repository/vital:5791 0.05). Total integrated mesozooplankton abundance and biomass during the study ranged between 3934.9 and 308521.4 ind.m-2 (mean = 47198.19; SD±62411.4 ind.m-2) and between 239.8 and 4614.3 mg Dwt.m-2 (mean = 1338.58; SD ±1060.5), respectively. Again, there were no significant spatial patterns in the total mesozooplankton abundance or biomass within the region of study (p>0.05). No significant correlations were found between biological (chlorophyll-a concentrations and zooplankton abundance) and physico-chemical variables (temperature and salinity) (p>0.05). The total mesozooplankton community was numerically dominated by copepods of the genera Pleuromamma, Calanus, Oncaea and Oithona. Other important representatives of the mesozooplankton community included the tunicate, Salpa thompsoni, and the pteropod, Limacina retroversa. At the 40% similarity level, numerical analysis identified five distinct mesozooplankton groupings within the survey area. Differences between the groupings were associated with changes in the relative contribution of numerically dominant species rather than the presence or absence of individual species. No groupings were associated with any specific feature of the front within the survey area. The feeding rates of the six most numerically abundant mesozooplankton species (Calanus simillimus, Limacina retroversa, Pleuromamma abdominalis, Clausocalanus breviceps, Oncaea conifera, Salpa thompsoni) accounting for on average 39% of the total mesozooplankton counts, were investigated using the gut fluorescence technique. For all species, the total gut pigment contents during the night time were significantly higher than the daytime values (p<0.05 for all species). The gut evacuation rates (k) for selected mesozooplankton ranged between 0.14 and 0.81 h-1. The ingestion rates ranged between 147.8 and 5495.4 ng(pigm)ind-1.day-1 which corresponded to a daily ration of between 2.4 and 10.9% body carbon. The combined grazing impact of the selected species on the daily phytoplankton standing stock was highly variable and ranged between 1.2 and 174.1% with an average of 27.3% (SD±38.78%) within the survey area. The highest grazing impact (>60%) was typically associated with those stations where the pteropod, L. retroversa, and the tunicate, S. thompsoni, contributed more than 5% of the total mesozooplankton counts. No significant differences were found in the grazing impact of any or all selected species situated either north, south or in the immediate vicinity of the front (p>0.05 in all cases). The lack of defined spatial patterns in the mesozooplankton abundance and community structure suggests that the STC did not act as a significant biogeographic barrier to the distribution of mesozooplankton during the study. It is presumed that the large scale mixing event caused by a storm prior to this study was responsible for the observed lack of elevated biological activity within the region of the STC.]]> Thu 13 May 2021 03:30:47 SAST ]]> https://commons.ufh.ac.za/vital/access/manager/Repository/vital:5731 Thu 13 May 2021 02:58:05 SAST ]]>