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

JOURNAL OF PLANKTON RESEARCH | VOLUME 5 | NUMBER 6 | PAGES 919-928 | 1983
© Oxford University Press

research-article

Assessing the utility of partitioning primary productivity by density gradient centrifugation

Peter B. Ortner, Susan M. Holzknecht and Shailer R. Cummings

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratories, Ocean Chemistry and Biology Division 4301 Rickenbacker Causeway, Miami, FL 33149, USA

Received on May 1, 1983; accepted on August 1, 1983 We assess here a method for determining what contribution various components of natural phytoplankton assemblages make to measured community primary productivity. Following incubation with 14C-bicarbonate-labelled plankton and unlabelled controls are physically separated into sets of parallel subpopulations by centrifugation in density gradients. The relative activity of the former subaliquots is determined by scintillation counting while the latter subaliquots are enumerated by a modified Utermohl inverted microscope method. Field and laboratory data are presented illustrating partitionings of coastal and oceanic plankton population carbon uptake. The described procedure could be used to partition the uptake of other isotopes or biomass parameters such as chlorophyll or ATP concentration. The advantages and disadvantages of the density gradient approach are discussed relative to available alternatives.


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




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.