Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-24T06:56:25.519Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Coccolithophores and the Continuous Plankton Recorder Survey

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

G.C. Hays ,
A.J. Warner ,
A.W.G. John ,
D.S. Harbour  and
P.M. Holligan
G.C. Hays
Affiliation:
The Sir Alister Hardy Foundation for Ocean Science, The Laboratory, Citadel Hill, Plymouth, PL1 2PB.
A.J. Warner
Affiliation:
The Sir Alister Hardy Foundation for Ocean Science, The Laboratory, Citadel Hill, Plymouth, PL1 2PB.
A.W.G. John
Affiliation:
The Sir Alister Hardy Foundation for Ocean Science, The Laboratory, Citadel Hill, Plymouth, PL1 2PB.
D.S. Harbour
Affiliation:
Plymouth Marine Laboratory, Prospect Place, The Hoe, Plymouth PL1 3DH.
P.M. Holligan
Affiliation:
Plymouth Marine Laboratory, Prospect Place, The Hoe, Plymouth PL1 3DH.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Samples historically collected and analysed by the Continuous Plankton Recorder (CPR) survey were used to describe the distribution of coccolithophores (class Prymnesiophyceae) in the north-east Atlantic and the North Sea. In the routine CPR analysis, members of this group are simply identified as ‘coccolithophores’ and not to any further taxonomic level. From this analysis, the 200-m depth contour marked a point of distinct transition between high coccolithophore occurrence (off the shelf) and low coccolithophore occurrence (on the shelf). Thirty-three CPR samples that had been collected between 1979–1992, were re-examined and the coccolithophores identified to a more detailed taxonomic level. Among the species identified was the bloom-forming coccolithophore, Emiliania huxleyi. Thus archived CPR samples could potentially be re-analysed to assess regional, seasonal and decadal changes in the occurrence of this species.

Type
Short Communications
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 75 , Issue 2 , May 1995 , pp. 503 - 506
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Balch, W.M., Holligan, P.M., Ackleson, S.G. & Voss, K.J., 1991. Biological and optical properties of mesoscale coccolithophore blooms in the Gulf of Maine. Limnology and Oceanography, 36, 629–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braarud, T., Gaarder, K.R. & Grantved, J., 1953. The phytoplankton of the North Sea and adjacent waters in May 1948. Rapports et Procés-verbaux des Reunions. Conseil Permanent Internationale pour l'Exploration de la Mer. Copenhague, 133, 1–87.Google Scholar
Brown, C.W. & Yoder, J.A., 1993. Blooms of Emiliania huxleyi (Prymnesiophyceae) in surface waters of the Nova Scotian shelf and the Grand Bank. Journal of Plankton Research, 15, 1429–1438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colebrook, J.M., 1960. Continuous Plankton Records: methods of analysis, 1950–1959. Bulletin of Marine Ecology, 5, 51–64.Google Scholar
Gieskes, W.W.C. & Kraay, G.W., 1977. Continuous Plankton Records: changes in the plankton of the North Sea and its eutrophic Southern Bight from 1948 to 1975. Netherlands Journal of Sea Research, 11, 334–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Groom, S.B. & Holligan, P.M., 1987. Remote sensing of coccolithophore blooms. Advances in Space Research, 7, 73–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hays, G.C., 1994. Mesh selection and filtration efficiency of the Continuous Plankton Recorder. Journal of Plankton Research, 16, 403–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hays, G.C. & Warner, A.J., 1993. Consistency of towing speed and sampling depth for the Continuous Plankton Recorder. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 73, 967–970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heimdal, B.R., 1993. Modern coccolithophorids. In Marine phytoplankton. A guide to naked flagellates and coccolithophorids (ed. C.R., Tomas), pp. 147–249. San Diego Academic Press Inc.Google Scholar
Holligan, P.M. et al., 1993 a. A biogeochemical study of the coccolithophore, Emiliania huxleyi, in the North Atlantic. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 7, 879–900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holligan, P.M., Groom, S.B. & Harbour, D.S., 1993 b. What controls the distribution of the coccolithophore, Emiliania huxleyi, in the North Sea? Fisheries Oceanography, 2, 175–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holligan, P.M., Viollier, M., Harbour, D.S., Camus, P. & Champagne-Philippe, M., 1983. Satellite and ship studies of coccolithophore production along a continental shelf edge. Nature, London, 304, 339–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jahnke, J., 1992. Dominant species in phytoplankton blooms. 1. Emiliania huxleyi (Lohmann) Hay & Mohler. ICES Identification Leaflets for Plankton, 178, 1–4.Google Scholar
Okada, H. & Mclntyre, A., 1979. Seasonal distribution of modern coccolithophores in the western North Atlantic Ocean. Marine Biology, 54, 319–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar