Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Haury, L. R.
Right arrow Articles by Yamazaki, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Haury, L. R.
Right arrow Articles by Yamazaki, H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

JOURNAL OF PLANKTON RESEARCH | VOLUME 17 | NUMBER 1 | PAGES 191-197 | 1995
© Oxford University Press

other

The dichotomy of scales in the perception and aggregation behavior of zooplankton

Loren R. Haury and Hidekatsu Yamazaki1,2

Marine Life Research Group, Scripps Institution of Oceanography La Jolla, CA 92093-0218, USA 1Deparment of Marine Science and Technology, Tokyo University of Fisheries 4-5-7 Konan, Minato-ku, Tokyo 108, Japan 2Centre for Earth and Ocean Research, University of Victoria Victoria, BC V8W 2Y2, Canada

Received on April 8, 1994; accepted on August 29, 1994 Except at high numerical densities (>106 m-3, nearest-neighbor distances in monospecific aggregations of copepods are much greater than known perception distances (usually <2–4 body lengths). Most copepod aggregations are several orders of magnitude less dense, with nearest-neighbor distances much greater than three body lengths. Biological mechanisms for the formation and maintenance of aggregation require recognition of, and appropriate behavioral response to, conspecifics. While it appears obvious that such mechanisms are responsible, invoking them to explain most aggregations has little support from either laboratory/field evidence or theory. More research is needed on zooplankton behavior, sensory modalities and learning to reconcile the difference in scales between known perception distances and spacing in aggregations.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J PLANKTON RESHome page
A. Ludovisi, C. Todini, P. Pandolfi, and M. I. Taticchi
Scale patterns of diel distribution of the copepod Cyclops abyssorum Sars in a regulated lake: the relative importance of physical and biological factors
J. Plankton Res., May 1, 2008; 30(5): 495 - 509.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J PLANKTON RESHome page
J. D. Wiggert, A. G. E. Haskell, G.-A. Paffenhofer, E. E. Hofmann, and J. M. Klinck
The role of feeding behavior in sustaining copepod populations in the tropical ocean
J. Plankton Res., October 1, 2005; 27(10): 1013 - 1031.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J PLANKTON RESHome page
H. Jiang, T. R. Osborn, and C. Meneveau
Hydrodynamic interaction between two copepods: a numerical study
J. Plankton Res., March 1, 2002; 24(3): 235 - 253.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J PLANKTON RESHome page
E. A. Widder and S. Johnsen
3D spatial point patterns of bioluminescent plankton: a map of the ‘minefield’
J. Plankton Res., March 1, 2000; 22(3): 409 - 420.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.