Estuaries and Coasts

, Volume 35, Issue 5, pp 1261–1269 | Cite as

Impacts of Hypoxia on Zooplankton Spatial Distributions in the Northern Gulf of Mexico

  • M. R. RomanEmail author
  • J. J. Pierson
  • D. G. Kimmel
  • W. C. Boicourt
  • X. Zhang


The northern Gulf of Mexico (NGOMEX) was surveyed to examine the broad-scale spatial patterns and inter-relationships between hypoxia (<2 mg L−1 dissolved oxygen) and zooplankton biovolume. We used an undulating towed body equipped with sensors for conductivity, temperature, depth, oxygen, fluorescence, and an optical plankton counter to sample water column structure, oxygen, and zooplankton at high spatial resolution (1 m—vertical; 0.25–1 km—horizontal). We contrast the distribution of zooplankton during summer surveys with different freshwater input, stratification, and horizontal and vertical extent of bottom-water hypoxia. Bottom-water hypoxia did not appear to influence the total amount of zooplankton biomass present in the water column or the areal integration of zooplankton standing stock in the NGOMEX region surveyed. However, where there were hypoxic bottom waters, zooplankton shifted their vertical distribution to the upper water column during the day where they normally would reside in deeper and darker waters. When bottom waters were normoxic (>2 mg L−1 dissolved oxygen), the daytime median depth of the water column zooplankton was on average 7 m deeper than the median depth of zooplankton in water columns with hypoxic bottom waters. A reduction in larger zooplankton when there were hypoxic bottom waters suggests that if zooplankton cannot migrate to deeper, darker water under hypoxic conditions, they may be more susceptible to size-selective predation by visual predators. Thus, habitat compression in the northern Gulf of Mexico due to hypoxic bottom water may have implications for trophic transfer by increasing the contact between predators and prey.


Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia Spatial distributions Zooplankton 



We thank M. Brooks, C. Derry, K. Hozyash, D. Kennedy, B. Loveland, A. Spear, and T. Wazniak for technical assistance and Nancy Rabalais for facilitating the research. We thank the captain and crew of the R/V Pelican. This work was supported by NOAA Awards NA06NOS4780148 and NA09N0S4780198. This is UMCES Contribution #4677 and NGOMEX Contribution #161.


  1. Aku, P.M., L.G. Rudstam, and W.M. Tonn. 1997. Impact of hypolimnetic oxygenation on the vertical distribution of cisco (Coregonus artedi) in Amisk Lake, Alberta. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 54: 2182–2195.Google Scholar
  2. Bianchi, T.S., S.F. DiMarco, J.H. Cowan Jr., R.D. Hetland, P. Chapman, J.W. Day, and M.A. Allison. 2010. The science of hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of Mexico: a review. Science of the Total Environment 408: 1471–1484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Breitburg, D.L., T. Loher, C.A. Pacey, and A. Gerstein. 1997. Varying effects of low dissolved oxygen on trophic interactions in an estuarine food web. Ecological Monographs 67: 489–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Breitburg, D.L., L. Pihl, and S.E. Kolesar. 2001. Effects of low dissolved oxygen on the behavior, ecology and harvest of fishes: a comparison of the Chesapeake and Baltic systems. In Coastal hypoxia: consequences for living resources and ecosystems, ed. N.N. Rabalais and R.E. Turner, 241–267. Washington, DC: American Geophysical Union.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chin-Leo, G., and R. Benner. 1992. Enhanced bacterioplankton production and respiration at intermediate salinities in the Mississippi River plume. Marine Ecology Progress Series 82: 87–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cloern, J.E. 2001. Our evolving conceptual model of the coastal eutrophication problem. Marine Ecology Progress Series 210: 223–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Coutant, C.C. 1985. Striped bass, temperature, and dissolved oxygen: a speculative hypothesis for environmental risk. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 114: 31–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Craig, J.K. 2012. Aggregation on the edge: effects of hypoxia avoidance on the spatial distribution of brown shrimp and demersal fishes in the Northern Gulf of Mexico. Marine Ecology Progress Series 445: 75–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dagg, M.J. 1995. Copepod grazing and the fate of phytoplankton in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Continental Shelf Research 15: 1303–1317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dagg, M.J., and G.A. Breed. 2003. Biological effects of Mississippi River nitrogen on the northern Gulf of Mexico—a review and synthesis. Journal of Marine Systems 43: 133–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dagg, M.J., and T.E. Whitledge. 1991. Concentrations of copepod nauplii associated with the nutrient-rich plume of the Mississippi River. Continental Shelf Research 11: 1409–1423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Diaz, R.J., and R. Rosenberg. 1995. Marine benthic hypoxia: a review of its ecological effects and the behavioral responses of benthic macrofauna. Oceanography and Marine Biology Annual Review 33: 245–303.Google Scholar
  13. Diaz, R.J., and R. Rosenberg. 2008. Spreading dead zones and consequences for marine ecosystems. Science 321: 926–929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Elliott, D.T., J.J. Pierson, and M.R. Roman. 2012. Relationship between environmental conditions and zooplankton community structure during summer hypoxia in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Journal of Plankton Research. doi: 10.1093/plankt/fbs029.
  15. Graham, W.M. 2001. Numerical increases and distributional shifts of Chrysaora quinquecirrha (Desor) and Aurelia aurita (Linne) (Cnidaria: Scyphozoa) in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Hydrobiologia 451: 97–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hazen, E.L., J.K. Craig, C.P. Good, and L.B. Crowder. 2009. Vertical distribution of fish biomass in hypoxic waters on the Gulf of Mexico shelf. Marine Ecology Progress Series 375: 195–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Herman, A.W. 1988. Simultaneous measurement of zooplankton and light attenuance with a new optical plankton counter. Continental Shelf Research 8: 205–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Herman, A.W. 1992. Design and calibration of a new optical plankton counter capable of sizing small zooplankton. Deep Sea Research 39: 395–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Howarth, R.W., D. Anderson, T. Church, H. Greening, C. Hopkinson, W. Huber, N. Marcus, R. Naiman, K. Segerson, A. Sharpley, and W. Wiseman. 2000. Clean coastal waters—understanding and reducing the effects of nutrient pollution. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences. 405 pp.Google Scholar
  20. Huntley, M.E., M. Zhou, and W. Nordhausen. 1995. Mesoscale distribution of zooplankton in the California Current in late spring, observed by optical plankton counter. Journal of Marine Research 53: 647–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Keister, J.E., E.D. Houde, and D.L. Breitburg. 2000. Effects of bottom-layer hypoxia on abundances and depth distributions of organisms in Patuxent River, Chesapeake Bay. Marine Ecology Progress Series 205: 43–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kimmel, D.G., M.R. Roman, and X. Zhang. 2006. Spatial and temporal variability in factors controlling mesozooplankton dynamics in Chesapeake Bay: evidence from biomass size spectra. Limnology and Oceanography 51: 131–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kimmel, D.G., W.C. Boicourt, J.J. Pierson, M.R. Roman, and X. Zhang. 2009. A comparison of the mesozooplankton response to hypoxia in Chesapeake Bay and the northern Gulf of Mexico using the biomass size spectrum. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 381: S65–S73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kimmel, D.G., W. Boicourt, J. Pierson, M. Roman, and X. Zhang. 2010. The vertical distribution and diel variability of mesozooplankton biomass, abundance and size in response to hypoxia in the northern Gulf of Mexico, USA. Journal of Plankton Research 32: 1185–1202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Klumb, R.A., K.L. Bunch, E.L. Mills, L.G. Rudstam, G. Brown, C. Knauf, R. Burton, and F. Arrhenius. 2004. Establishment of a metalimnetic oxygen refuge for zooplankton in a productive Lake Ontario embayment. Ecological Applications 14: 113–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kolar, C.S., and F.J. Rahel. 1993. Interaction of a biotic factor (predator presence) and an abiotic factor (low oxygen) as an influence on benthic invertebrate communities. Oecologia 95: 210–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Liu, H., and M. Dagg. 2003. Interactions between nutrients, phytoplankton growth, and grazing by micro- and meso-zooplankton in the plume of a large river. Marine Ecology Progress Series 258: 31–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lohrenz, S.E., M.L. Dagg, and T.E. Whitledge. 1990. Enhanced primary production at the plume/oceanic interface of the Mississippi River. Continental Shelf Research 10: 639–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lohrenz, S.E., G.L. Fahenstiuel, D.G. Redalje, G.A. Lang, X. Chen, and M.J. Dagg. 1997. Variations in primary production of northern Gulf of Mexico continental shelf waters linked to nutrient inputs from the Mississippi River. Marine Ecology Progress Series 155: 45–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ludsin, S.A., X. Zhang, S.B. Brandt, M.R. Roman, W.C. Boicourt, D.M. Mason, and M. Costantini. 2009. Hypoxia-avoidance by planktivorous fish in Chesapeake Bay: implications for food web interactions and fish recruitment. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 381: S121–S131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Marcus, N.H., C. Richmond, C. Sedlacek, G.A. Miller, and C. Oppert. 2004. Impact of hypoxia on the survival, egg production and population dynamics of Acartia tonsa Dana. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 301: 111–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mauchline, J. 1998. The biology of calanoid copepods. Advances in Marine Biology 23: 710.Google Scholar
  33. Nixon, S.W. 1990. Marine eutrophication—a growing international problem. Ambio 19: 101–101.Google Scholar
  34. Ortner, P.B., L.C. Hill, and S.R. Cummings. 1989. Zooplankton community structure and copepod species composition in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Continental Shelf Research 9: 387–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pierson, J.J., M.R. Roman, D.G. Kimmel, W.C. Boicourt, and X. Zhang. 2009. Quantifying changes in the vertical distribution of mesozooplankton in response to hypoxic bottom waters. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 381: S74–S79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Prince, E.D., and C.P. Goodyear. 2006. Hypoxia-based habitat compression of tropical pelagic fishes. Fisheries Oceanography 15: 451–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Qureshi, N.A., and N.N. Rabalais. 2001. Distribution of zooplankton on a seasonally hypoxic continental shelf. In Coastal hypoxia: consequences for living resources and ecosystems, ed. N.N. Rabalais and R.E. Turner, 61–76. Washington, DC: American Geophysical Union.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rabalais, N.N., and R.E. Turner. 2001. Hypoxia in the northern Gulf of Mexico: description, causes and change. In Coastal hypoxia: consequences for living resources and ecosystems, ed. N.N. Rabalais and R.E. Turner, 1–36. Washington, DC: American Geophysical Union.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rabalais, N.N., R.E. Turner, D. Justic, Q. Dortch, W.J. Wiseman, and B.K. Sen Gupta. 1996. Nutrient changes in the Mississippi River and system responses on the adjacent continental shelf. Estuaries 19: 386–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rabalais, N.N., R.E. Turner, and W.J. Wiseman. 2002. Gulf of Mexico, aka “the dead zone”. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 33: 235–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Roman, M.R., A.L. Gauzens, W.K. Rhinehart, and J.R. White. 1993. Effects of low oxygen waters on Chesapeake Bay zooplankton. Limnology and Oceanography 38: 1603–1614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Roman, M., X. Zhang, C. McGilliard, and W. Boicourt. 2005. Seasonal and annual variability in the spatial patterns of plankton biomass in Chesapeake Bay. Limnology and Oceanography 50: 480–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sprules, W.G., E.H. Jin, A.W. Herman, et al. 1998. Calibration of an optical plankton counter for use in fresh water. Limnology and Oceanography 43: 726–733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Stow, C.A., S.S. Qian, and J.K. Craig. 2005. Declining threshold for hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico. Environmental Science and Technology 39: 716–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Taylor, J.C., P.S. Rand, and J. Jenkins. 2007. Swimming behavior of juvenile anchovies (Anchoa spp.) in an episodically hypoxic estuary: implications for individual energetics and trophic dynamics. Marine Biology 152: 939–957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Turner, R.E., and N.N. Rabalais. 1994. Coastal eutrophication near the Mississippi River delta. Nature 368: 619–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. U.S. Department of Commerce. 2008. Fisheries of the United States 2008. Current Fisheries Statistics, No. 2008, 103 pp.Google Scholar
  48. Wannamaker, C.M., and J.A. Rice. 2000. Effects of hypoxia on movements and behavior of selected estuarine organisms from the southeastern United States. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 249: 145–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wu, R.S. 2002. Hypoxia: from molecular responses to ecosystem responses. Marine Pollution Bulletin 45: 35–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Yentsch, C.S., and D.W. Menzel. 1963. A method for the determination of phytoplankton chlorophyll-a and phaeophytin by fluorescence. Deep Sea Research 10: 21–231.Google Scholar
  51. Zhang, X., M. Roman, A. Sanford, H. Adolf, C. Lascara, and R. Burgett. 2000. Can an optical plankton counter produce reasonable estimates of zooplankton abundance and biovolume in water with high detritus? Journal of Plankton Research 22: 137–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Zhang, X., M. Roman, D. Kimmel, C. McGilliard, and W. Boicourt. 2006. Spatial variability in plankton biomass and hydrographic variables along an axial transect in Chesapeake Bay. Journal of Geophysical Research—Oceans 111: C05S11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Zhang, H., S.A. Ludsin, D.M. Mason, A.T. Adamack, S.B. Brandt, X. Zhang, D.G. Kimmel, M.R. Roman, and W.C. Boicourt. 2009. Hypoxia-driven changes in the behavior and spatial distribution of pelagic fish and zooplankton in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 381: S80–S91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Coastal and Estuarine Research Federation 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. R. Roman
    • 1
    Email author
  • J. J. Pierson
    • 1
  • D. G. Kimmel
    • 1
    • 2
  • W. C. Boicourt
    • 1
  • X. Zhang
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Horn Point LaboratoryUniversity of Maryland Center for Environmental ScienceCambridgeUSA
  2. 2.Department of Biology/Institute for Coastal Science and PolicyEast Carolina UniversityGreenvilleUSA
  3. 3.NOAA/NMFS/SEFSC/SFD, Panama City LaboratoryPanama CityUSA

Personalised recommendations