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 Schulze, P. C.
Right arrow Articles by Hargreaves, B. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Schulze, P. C.
Right arrow Articles by Hargreaves, B. R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

JOURNAL OF PLANKTON RESEARCH | VOLUME 17 | NUMBER 6 | PAGES 1233-1243 | 1995
© Oxford University Press

research-article

Evaluation of a remotely operated vehicle (ROV) as a tool for studying the distribution and abundance of zooplankton

Peter C. Schulze1, Craig E. Williamson and Bruce R. Hargreaves

Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Williams Hall, #37 Lehigh University Bethlehem, PA 18015–3188, USA 1Present address: Department of Biology, Austin College Sherman, TX 75090–4440, USA

Received on January 16, 1994; accepted on February 6, 1995 Conventional methods for measuring zooplankton distributions are too laborious and time consuming to permit sufficient temporal and spatial resolution in many instances. An ability to make more efficient and precise measurements would be useful. We evaluated the potential for using the video system of a commercially available remotely operated vehicle (ROV) to measure the distribution and abundance of zooplankton by calibrating ROV counts with counts based on a conventional sampling procedure (a Schindler trap), and by using an ROV to measure the density of zooplankton in a small lake. As configured here, this particular ROV was suitable for measuring the density of the cladocerans Daphnia and Holopedium. It was also suitable for assessing the distribution, but not absolute densities, of Chaoborus and Leptodora. Image quality was inadequate for quantitative estimates of copepod (Diaptomus minutus) abundance, and prevented us from studying behavioral responses of copepods to the vehicle. We conclude that the ROV has at least three useful features: it can be used to locate patches of those species that are imaged effectively; a large number of samples (videotapes) can be collected almost synoptically with high spatial resolution; the ROV enables in situ observation of zooplankton. The ROV also has three important limitations: the small image volume makes it difficult to study rare organisms; inadequate image resolution precludes studies of relatively small organisms (e.g. the calanoid copepod D.minutus); zooplankton respond to the presence of the ROV.


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
S. Masson, B. Pinel-Alloul, G. Methot, and N. Richard
Comparison of nets and pump sampling gears to assess zooplankton vertical distribution in stratified lakes
J. Plankton Res., October 1, 2004; 26(10): 1199 - 1206.
[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.