Skip Navigation


JPR Advance Access originally published online on May 2, 2008
Journal of Plankton Research 2008 30(8):857-872; doi:10.1093/plankt/fbn049
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
30/8/857    most recent
fbn049v1
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 Zarauz, L.
Right arrow Articles by Fernandes, J. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Zarauz, L.
Right arrow Articles by Fernandes, J. A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Modelling the influence of abiotic and biotic factors on plankton distribution in the Bay of Biscay, during three consecutive years (2004–06)

Lucia Zarauz1,*, Xabier Irigoien2 and Jose A. Fernandes2

1 Marine Research Division, AZTI Foundation, Txatxarramendi Ugartea, z/g 48395, Sukarrieta (Bizkaia), Spain 2 Marine Research Division, AZTI Foundation, Herrera Kaia Portualdea, z/g 20110, Pasaia (Guipuzkoa), Spain

* CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: lzarauz{at}suk.azt.es

Received on November 21, 2007; revised on February 27, 2008; accepted on April 9, 2008


  Abstract

Three surveys were carried out in the Bay of Biscay during the springs of 2004, 2005 and 2006. Hydrographic, nano–microplankton (diatoms, ciliates and unidentified particles) and mesozooplankton biomass data were collected at mesoscale spatial resolution. Generalized additive models (GAMs) based on a combination of hydrographic, geographic and biological terms were used to understand the factors affecting distribution. The final models accounted for 66% of the variability in the biomass distribution of unidentified particles, 60% for diatoms, 44% for mesozooplankton and 23% for ciliates. The contribution of hydro-geographical terms was greater than the information described by the biological variables. Geographical location (latitude and longitude) was the main explanatory factor for all of the plankton groups identified, revealing that the presence of mesoscale fronts related to geographical structures is more relevant than the hydrographic variables per se, to describe plankton distribution.

Corresponding editor: Roger Harris


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
L. Santoferrara and V. Alder
Abundance trends and ecology of planktonic ciliates of the south-western Atlantic (35-63{degrees}S): a comparison between neritic and oceanic environments
J. Plankton Res., August 1, 2009; 31(8): 837 - 851.
[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.