Skip Navigation


JPR Advance Access originally published online on May 4, 2004
Journal of Plankton Research 2004 26(9):993-1003; doi:10.1093/plankt/fbh091
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
26/9/993    most recent
fbh091v1
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 Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gasca, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Gasca, R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of Plankton Research Vol. 26 No. 9 © Oxford University Press 2004; all rights reserved

Distribution and abundance of hyperiid amphipods in relation to summer mesoscale features in the southern Gulf of Mexico

Rebeca Gasca*

El Colegio de la Frontera sur (ECOSUR), Unidad Chetumal, Carr. Chetumal-Calderitas KM 5.5, APDO. Postal 424, CP 77000, Chetumal, Q. Roo, México and Research Associate, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, USA

* Corresponding Author: rgasca{at}ecosur-qroo.mx

Received on January 9, 2003; accepted on March 8, 2004; published online May 4, 2004

Seventy-one hyperiid species were identified from 97 zooplankton samples collected in the southern Gulf of Mexico during July 1988. About 91% of the adult individuals belonged to five species: Lestrigonus bengalensis (86.56% of total hyperiid numbers), Anchylomera blossevillei (1.20%), Phronimopsis spinifera (1.05%), Hyperioides longipes (1.00%) and Hyperietta vosseleri (0.99%). Overall, up to 74% of the hyperiids were collected at night, although a reverse migration was observed in the anticyclones. The mean abundance was 5-fold higher at the neritic stations than in the oceanic areas. This tendency was even more marked at night. Night samples yielded about the same number of species as during the daytime (56 taxa versus 61). Four mesoscale features (two anticyclones, one cyclone and one upwelling) characterized the oceanic mesoscale circulation in the surveyed area. The abundance of the oceanic hyperiid community showed significant differences related to some of the mesoscale features active in the area, i.e. the abundance in the Lazy Eddy anticyclone was lower than that in the cyclone (day and night). Overall, the upwelling areas showed a tendency to have higher abundances than the downwelling features (anticyclones). Cluster analysis indicated neritic–oceanic differences rather than mesoscale feature-related differences in the local hyperiid community. The neritic community showed differences that were attributed to the effect of upwelling. The summer and spring hyperiid communities had important differences in the same area, thus suggesting a seasonal succession of the gulf hyperiid community.


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.