Advertisement

Marine Biology

, Volume 77, Issue 1, pp 19–27 | Cite as

Production of picoplankton and small nanoplankton in the Celtic Sea

  • I. R. Joint
  • A. J. Pomroy
Article

Abstract

A significant proportion of the total primary production in the Celtic Sea (50°30′N; 07°00′W) has been found to be due to picoplankton and small nanoplankton. In July, August and October, 1982, 20 to 25% of the 14C fixed in primary production was in organisms >5 μm, 35 to 40% was in organisms <5–1 μm and 20 to 30% was in organisms<1 μm. Bacterial production was estimated by the incorporation of 3H and would account for less than 10% of the production in the <1–>0.2 μm fraction; therefore, production in the <1–>0.2 μm fraction was the result of photosynthesis per se by picoplankton and could not have been due to heterotrophic bacteria utilizing exudates from larger phytoplankton. Time-course experiments demonstrated some transfer of label from the <1–>0.2μm fraction to the >5 μm fraction, presumably by grazing, but again most of the production in this fraction was the result of photosynthesis by organisms larger than 5 μm and was not due to grazing by heterotrophic microflagellates on smaller phytoplankton.

Keywords

Phytoplankton Photosynthesis Significant Proportion Heterotrophic Bacterium Bacterial Production 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature cited

  1. Aiken, J.: The undulating oceanographic recorder, Mark 2. J. Plankton Res. 3, 551–560 (1981a)Google Scholar
  2. Aiken, J.: A chlorophyll sensor for automatic remote operation in the marine environment. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 4, 235–239 (1981b)Google Scholar
  3. Boyd, C. M.: Selection of particle sizes by filter-feeding copepods: a plea for reason. Limnol. Oceanogr.. 21, 175–180 (1976)Google Scholar
  4. Brewer, P. G. and J. P. Riley: The automatic determination of nitrate in seawater. Deep-Sea Res. 12, 765–772 (1965)Google Scholar
  5. Chan, K. M. and J. P. Riley: The automatic determination of phosphate in seawater. Deep-Sea Res. 13, 467–471 (1966)Google Scholar
  6. Fenchel, T.: Ecology of heterotrophic microflagellates. I. Some important forms and their functional morphology. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 8, 211–223 (1982a)Google Scholar
  7. Fenchel, T.: Ecology of heterotrophic microflagellates. II. Bioenergetics and growth. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 8, 225–231 (1982b)Google Scholar
  8. Fuhrman, J. A., J. W. Ammerman and F. Azam: Bacterioplankton in the coastal euphotic zone: distribution, activity and possible relationships with phytoplankton. Mar. Biol 60, 201–207 (1980)Google Scholar
  9. Fuhrman, J. A. and F. Azam: Thymidine incorporation as a measure of heterotrophic bacterioplankton production in marine surface waters: evaluation and field results. Mar. Biol. 66, 109–120 (1982)Google Scholar
  10. Gieskes, W. W. C., G. W. Kraay and M. A. Baars: Current 14C methods for measuring primary production: gross under-estimates in oceanic waters. Neth. J. Sea Res. 13, 58–78 (1979)Google Scholar
  11. Herman, A. W., D. D. Sameoto and A. R. Longhurst: Vertical and horizontal distribution patterns of copepods near the shelf break of Nova Scotia. Can. J. Fish. aquat. Sciences 38, 1065–1076 (1981)Google Scholar
  12. Hobbie, J. E., R. Daley and S. Jasper: Use of Nuclepore filters for counting bacteria by fluorescence microscopy. Appl. envirl Microbiol. 33, 1225–1228 (1977)Google Scholar
  13. Johnson, P. W. and J. McN. Sieburth: Chroococcoid cyanobacteria in the sea: a ubiquitous and diverse phototrophic biomass. Limnol. Oceanogr. 24, 928–935 (1979)Google Scholar
  14. Johnson, P. W. and J. McN. Sieburth: In-situ morphology and occurrence of eucaryotic phototrophs of bacterial size in the picoplankton of estuarine and oceanic waters. J. Phycol. 18, 318–327 (1982)Google Scholar
  15. Joint, I. R. and A. J. Pomroy: Primary production in a turbid estuary. Estuar. cstl Shelf Sci. 13, 303–316 (1981)Google Scholar
  16. Larsson, U. and Å. Hagström: Fractionated phytoplankton primary production, exudate release and bacterial production in a Baltic eutrophication gradient. Mar. Biol. 67, 57–70 (1982)Google Scholar
  17. Le Corre, P. et P. Tréguer: Dosage de l'ammonium dans l'eau de mer: comparaison ente deux methodes d'analyse automatique. J. Cons. int. Explor. Mer 38, 147–153 (1978)Google Scholar
  18. Li, W. K. W., D. V. Subba Rao, R. G. Harrison, J. C. Smith, J. J. Cullen, B. Irwin and T. Platt: Autotrophic picoplankton in the tropical ocean. Science, N. Y. 219, 292–295 (1983)Google Scholar
  19. Marshall, S. M.: Respiration and feeding in copepods. Adv. mar. Biol. 11, 57–120 (1973)Google Scholar
  20. Moriarty, D. J. W. and P. C. Pollard: DNA synthesis as a measure of bacterial productivity in seagrass sediments. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 5, 151–156 (1981)Google Scholar
  21. Pingree, R. D., P. M. Holligan and G. T. Mardell: The effects of vertical stability on phytoplankton distributions in the summer on the northwest European Shelf. Deep-Sea Res. 25, 1011–1028 (1978)Google Scholar
  22. Platt, T., D. V. Subba Rao and B. Irwin: Photosynthesis of picoplankton in the oligotrophic ocean. Nature, Lond. 301, 702–704 (1983)Google Scholar
  23. Porter, K. G. and Y. S. Feig: The use of DAPI for identifying and counting aquatic microflora. Limnol. Oceanogr. 25, 943–948 (1980)Google Scholar
  24. Sheldon, R. W.: Size separation of marine seston by membrane and glass-fiber filters. Limnol. Oceanogr. 17, 494–498 (1972)Google Scholar
  25. Sieburth, J. McN., V. Smetacek and J. Lenz: Pelagic ecosystem structure: heterotrophic compartments of the plankton and their relationship to plankton size. Limnol. Oceanogr. 23, 1256–1263 (1978)Google Scholar
  26. Steele, J. H.: The structure of marine ecosystems, 128 pp. Oxford: Blackwell 1974Google Scholar
  27. Strickland, J. D. H. and T. R. Parsons. A practical handbook of seawater analysis. Bull. Fish Res. Bd Can. 167, 1–311 (1968)Google Scholar
  28. Waterbury, J. B., S. W. Watson, R. R. L. Guillard and L. E. Brand: Widespread occurrence of a unicellular, marine planktonic cyanobacterium. Nature, Lond. 277 293–294 (1979)Google Scholar
  29. Wiebe, W. J. and D. F. Smith: 14C labelling of the compounds excreted by phytoplanktion for employment as a realistic tracer in secondary productivity measurements. Microb. Ecol. 4, 1–8 (1977)Google Scholar
  30. Williams, P. J. Le B.: Incorporation of microheterotrophic processes into the classical paradigm of the planktonic food web. Kieler Meeresforsch. 5, 1–28 (1981)Google Scholar
  31. Williams, P. J. Le B.: Bacterial production in the marine food chain: the Emperor's new suit of clothes? In: Flows of energy and materials in marine ecosystems: theory and practice, Ed. by M. J. R. Fasham London Plenum Press (in press) 1983Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • I. R. Joint
    • 1
  • A. J. Pomroy
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Marine Environmental ResearchNatural Environment Research CouncilPlymouthEngland

Personalised recommendations