Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Summer distribution and community structure of surface water mesozooplankton from the eastern Mediterranean Sea Cover

Summer distribution and community structure of surface water mesozooplankton from the eastern Mediterranean Sea

Open Access
|Jan 2023

Full Article

1
Introduction

The eastern Mediterranean basin is one of the most oligotrophic regions in the world, and has been described as a ‘marine desert’ due to its very low chlorophyll concentrations (Azov 1991, Krom et al. 1991, Antoine et al. 1995). Nutrient content, phytoplankton and zooplankton biomass, primary production and fish stocks are known to be higher in the northern Aegean Sea (Stergiou et al. 1997, Siokou-Frangou et al. 2002). Moreover, the composition of the mesozooplankton community was found to significantly differ between the northern and southern parts of the Aegean Sea (Sever 2009, Mazzocchi et al. 2014). The open marine areas of the Aegean and Levantine Seas (Siokou-Frangou et al. 2002, Aktan 2011), the two largest basins surrounding Turkey, have also been documented as oligotrophic. Although the Aegean Sea, which is one of the important basins of the Mediterranean, has an oligotrophic structure in general, it shows important biochemical differences between its north and south. Biodiversity, nutrient content and fishing activities were found to be higher in the northern Aegean Sea than in the southern Aegean Sea (Stergiou et al. 1997, Mazzocchi et al. 2014, Sever 2009). Furthermore, coastal domestic and industrial waste from major cities (such as Muğla, Antalya or Adana) as well as freshwater inputs from numerous small rivers results in local increases in biological production (Polat 2002, Kontas et al. 2004, Polat-Beken et al. 2009).

Basic knowledge of the structure of the zooplankton community and changes in species composition in different marine environments is still needed to better understand the ecological functioning of this basin. In general, although there have been various local studies on zooplankton communities, including information regarding their spatial and temporal variations along the eastern Mediterranean coastline (Benli et al. 2001, Isinibilir 2009, Isari et al. 2006, Protopapa et al. 2020, Sever 2009, Siokou-Frangou et al. 2009, Tarkan 2000, Terbıyık Kurt and Polat 2013, Toklu-Alıçlı and Sarıhan 2016, Uysal and Shmeleva 2012, Zervoudaki et al. 2006), there is limited data from large-scale investigations in open waters (Mazzocchi et al. 1997, 2007, 2014; Molinero et al. 2009; Siokou-Frangou et al. 1997).

The fact that the area in question included various coastal areas as well as open sea made it ideal for studying the regional variation of zooplankton community composition. The aim of this research is to determine the main zooplankton distribution patterns and dominant species compositions in the eastern Mediterranean, especially Turkish coastal areas, and to expand our knowledge about the pelagic ecosystem.

2
Materials and methods
2.1
Sampling and analysis

The study was carried out at 70 stations between 11 August and 4 September 2006 and between 10 July and 13 August 2008 in the Mediterranean Sea around the Turkish peninsula with the help of R/V YUNUS-S (Figure 1, Table 1). The northern Aegean Sea (NA) group was represented by 11 stations, the southern Aegean Sea (SA) by 19 stations, the coastal waters of the Levantine Sea (LSC) by 31 stations and the open waters of the Levantine Sea (LSO) by 9 stations. Temperature and salinity were also measured at each station with a SEABIRD CTD probe. Chlorophyll-a concentrations were measured synchronously with zooplankton sampling by Altuğ et al. (2007) and Aktan (2011). All samples were vertically collected by using a WP2 net (mesh size: 200 μm) from a depth of 50 m to the surface of the water column or from near the bottom to the surface if the station depth was less than 50 m. The filtered volume was measured with a Hydro-Bios flowmeter. After the tow, the net was carefully washed, and the sample was split into two with a Folsom splitter. The first half was used fresh for biomass measurements as the wet weight; the other half of each sample was fixed and preserved in a seawater-buffered formaldehyde solution (4% final concentration) for later determination of composition and abundance. Specimens were identified under a dissecting microscope. Quantitative analyses of commonly found species were performed on subsamples taken with a 1 ml Stempel pipette (at least three times). Rare species were identified from the whole sample. Cladocerans and copepods were identified at the species or genus level. All other taxa were identified to the lowest possible taxa. The pIONeer 65 multi-probe was used to assess water temperature, salinity and dissolved oxygen using the practical salinity scale. Seawater was filtered via Whatman GF/C glass fiber filters for chlorophyll analysis and then frozen until spectrophotometric examination took place after acetone extraction.

Figure 1

Mesozooplankton stations sampled in the eastern Mediterranean Sea

Table 1

Stations data from the R/V YUNUS-S cruise in the eastern Mediterranean Sea

Station NumberStation NameRegionDateLatitude (N)Longitude (E)Total Depth (m)
1NA12NA09.07.200639°48.53426°05.55221
2NA14NA09.07.200639°57.30926°04.09518
3NA15NA14.07.200640°20.16626°11.921210
4NA16NA13.07.200640°28.11326°25.471500
5NA17NA13.07.200640°32.62426°40.386100
6NA18NA13.07.200640°35.34426°46.04166
7NA19NA13.07.200640°35.25926°28.50147
8NA21NA14.07.200640°15.22325°54.84069
9NA22NA10.07.200640°09.89025°39.30680
10NA23NA09.07.200640°05.77425°51.76233
11NA24NA14.07.200640°10.95426°01.93537
12SA2SA13.08.200638°08.15426°33.98529
13SA3SA13.08.200638°08.24426°36.98548
14SA4SA13.08.200637°45.86627°03.787175
15SA7SA14.08.200637°20.16727°19.73535
16SA8SA14.08.200637°23.14827°25.28110
17SA10SA14.08.200637°16.12127°22.47957
18SA11SA14.08.200637°09.93527°30.94940
19SA12SA14.08.200637°09.45627°30.70530
20SA19SA16.08.200636°59.90127°43.14342
21SA22SA16.08.200636°57.65028°12.23428
22SA25SA17.08.200636°37.12328°01.49830
23SA26SA17.08.200636°33.04128°12.59435
24SA90SA30.08.200637°15.91627°36.2639
25SA91SA30.08.200637°16.19727°34.24412
26SA92SA30.08.200637°15.04527°33.69516
27SA93SA30.08.200637°15.96827°29.06120
28SA94SA30.08.200637°14.46127°22.98057
29SA101SA03.09.200637°09.69727°22.61730
30SA102SA03.09.200637°19.10427°13.24549
31LSC30LSC17.08.200636°31.60829°07.38128
32LSC31LSC18.08.200636°15.58329°24.56040
33LSC32LSC18.08.200636°01.14129°30.1481600
34LSC33LSC18.08.200636°07.50029°57.0001009
35LSC37LSC19.08.200636°13.20032°18.53738
36LSC38LSC17.08.200636°03.57332°52.44515
37LSC44aLSC20.08.200636°1172233°4564314
38LSC59LSC22.08.200636°31.35036°01.45610
39LSC61LSC22.08.200635°57.67935°55.62770
40LSC65LSC23.08.200636°31.35035°25.33364
41LSC67LSC24.08.200636°46.39934°38.34813
42LSC68LSC24.08.200636°15.17533°48.80224
43LSC69LSC24.08.200636°18.13533°51.74622
44LSC79LSC26.08.200636°37.04130°36.04164
45LSC81LSC26.08.200636°27.44030°33.09165
46LSC11LSC16.07.200833°58.39035°26.4001430
47LSC12LSC16.07.200833°49.59335°27.400500
48LSC13LSC17.07.200834°14.90035°36.188210
49LSC14LSC17.07.200834°01.29535°35.487512
50LSC15LSC19.07.200834°26.60335°43.626264
51LSC16LSC19.07.200835°12.82335°09.1971500
52LSC17LSC21.07.200835°26.72935°31.1281397
53LSC18LSC22.07.200835°35.02335°19.1221200
54LSC19LSC22.07.200835°39.58234°54.0511050
55LSC20LSC22.07.200835°42.46334°35.265160
56LSC21LSC22.07.200835°55.44334°17.898840
57LSC22LSC22.07.200836°09.11733°58.34074
58LSC23LSC23.07.200836°03.74333°19.479214
59LSC24LSC23.07.200835°57.71832°47.35265
60LSC25LSC23.07.200836°24.64931°40.3712000
61LSC26LSC23.07.200836°43.41230°58.711350
62LSO2LSO12.07.200835°40.985430°30.19471430
63LSO3LSO13.07.200835°57.13330°30.3961200
64LSO4LSO13.07.200835°26.210230°1.79992500
65LSO5LSO13.07.200834°56.21531°17.7542500
66LSO6LSO13.07.200834°22.30031°49.502500
67LSO7LSO14.07.200834°17.51332°35.9142500
68LSO8LSO14.07.200834°08.55533°25.7512500
69LSO9LSO14.07.200834°03.06834°12.4652500
70LSO10LSO14.07.200833°58.57134°58.0462500

NA: northern Aegean Sea; SA: southern Aegean Sea; LSC: coastal waters of the Levantine Sea; LSO: open waters of the Levantine Sea

2.2
Data analysis

Species diversity and dominance were estimated using the Shannon–Weaver formula (Zar 1984). The differences in physical and biological data (total zooplankton abundance and biomass) between areas were evaluated with ANOVA (SPSS v. 22). Differences in the zooplankton community were evaluated for spatial variation with similarities and multidimensional scaling (MDS) analysis by calculating log (x + 1)-transformed abundance data on the basis of the Bray–Curtis similarity index. The differences between the samples were assessed by a one-way analysis of similarities (ANOSIM) permutation test. Using the similarities percentage procedure according to SIMPER was performed to determine the dominant species that contributed to the spatial differences in community structure. The MDS, ANOSIM and SIMPER procedures were performed using the software package PRIMER 6 (Clarke and Warwick, 1994).

3
Results
3.1
Environmental conditions

The data were collected over two summers from the Aegean and Levantine Seas. The overall means of the environmental parameters are presented in Table 2. The among-region differences were clear for temperature (F3;69 = 137.29, p < 0.05) and salinity (F3;69 = 35.22, p < 0.05). The highest temperatures were recorded in the coastal waters of the Levantine Sea, with an average of 27.21 ± 1.63°C. Surface salinity showed a north–south gradient, with mean values ranging from 37.38 ± 1.28 to 39.15 ± 0.08 PSU. The highest salinity value (39.6 ppm) was recorded in the Antalya Bay (in Station LSC37) in the coastal waters of the Levantine Sea. While lower chlorophyll-a levels were recorded in the northern Aegean Sea (0.23 ± 0.17 μg l−1), chlorophyll-a levels were higher in the coastal waters of the southern Aegean Sea (0.89 ± 0.76 μg l−1).

Table 2

Mean values and standard deviations of environmental parameters in each sub-region of the eastern Mediterranean Sea

SeaRegionWater temperature (°C)Water Salinity (PSU)Total Chlorophyll-a (μg.l−1)
Aegean SeaNorthern Aegean Sea (NA)17.09 ± 1.3737.38 ± 1.280.23 ± 0.16a
Southern Aegean Sea (SA)24.50 ± 1.8839.09 ± 0.180.89 ± 0.76b
Levantine SeaCoastal Waters of the Levantine Sea (LSC)27.21 ± 1.6139.36 ± 0.140.87 ± 0.69b
Open Waters of the Levantine Sea (LSO)22.26 ± 0.7639.15 ± 0.080.56 ± 0.40b
3.2
Zooplankton abundance and group and species composition

Taking all sampling stations into account, the zooplankton abundance values ranged between 123 and 23,931 ind m−3, while biomass values ranged between 80 and 3200 mg m−3 (Figure 2). The highest mean abundance (4562 ind m−3) and biomass (748 mg m−3) values were detected in the southern Aegean Sea (SA), especially in Station SA90, particularly due to Penilia avirostris and Centropages kroyeri, whereas the lowest mean abundance (307 ind m−3) and biomass (231 mg m−3) values were observed in the LSO (Table 4). A total of 157 taxa were registered in the study area, of which 112 were in Copepoda and 7 were in Cladocera. Copepods, cladocerans, doliolids, meroplankton and appendicularians represented the most important zooplankton groups in all stations. Among meroplankton, the most important groups were larvae of Decapoda, Polychaeta, Mollusca and Cirripedia, together comprising 2.7% of the total abundance. Salps and siphonophores were also abundant in some areas, especially in the Aegean Sea; however, their relative abundance never exceeded 5%.

Figure 2

Fluctuations in zooplankton abundance (ind m−3), biomass (mg m−3), number of species and dominance (D)

Generally, Copepoda was the most abundant group in the LSO area (Table 4), but the maximum abundance (11,757 ind m−3; Station SA90) was recorded in the southern Aegean Sea (Figure 3). Paracalanus parvus, Acartia clausi, Centropages kroyeri and Temora stylifera were very important in the Aegean Sea; Clausocalanus furcatus, Oithona plumifera, Calocalanus pavoninus, Farranula rostrata and Calanopia elliptica were dominant in the stations of the Levantine Sea (Table 4). Candacia giesbrechti (Station NA15) and Acartia (Hypoacartia) adriatica (Stations NA17, SA2 and SA3) were found only in the Aegean Sea, while Sapphirina bicuspidata was recorded only on the eastern coasts of the Levantine Sea (Stations LSC11, LSC13, LSC61, LSC65 and LSC81). Calonopia elliptica and Parvocalanus elegans were only present in the coastal waters of the Levantine Sea, where Calonopia elliptica reached extremely high abundance (506 ind m−3) at Station LSC59. A total of 19 copepod species were recorded for the first time in the Aegean (15 species) and Levantine (8 species) coasts of Turkey. Five copepod species (Corycaeus (Onychocorycaeus) ovalis, Goniopsyllus clausi, Oncaea scottodicarloi, Sapphirina bicuspidate and Scaphocalanus curtus) were recorded for the first time in the Turkish coastal region, three (Centropages bradyi, Goniopsyllus clausi and Oncaea scottodicarloi) for the Aegean Sea and one (Goniopsyllus clausi) among the eastern Mediterranean fauna (Table 3).

Figure 3

Fluctuations in dominant zooplankton groups in the sampling area

Table 3

Species first recorded in the present study.

SpeciesAegean SeaLevantine SeaStations
Calocalanus elegans Shmeleva, 1965*, ATL, LNA12, NA24
Candacia giesbrechti Grice & Lawson, 1977*, M, A-NA15
Centropages bradyi Wheeler, 1901+, *TL, LSA26
Clausocalanus jobei Frost & Fleminger, 1968*, M, ATL, LNA12, NA15, NA16, NA17, NA18, NA19, NA21, NA24, SA10, SA101, SA102, SA11, SA12, SA2, SA3, SA4, SA7, SA22, SA26, SA94
Clausocalanus mastigophorus (Claus, 1863)*, M, ATL, LSA102, SA25, SA26
Clausocalanus parapergens Frost & Fleminger, 1968*, M, ATL, LNA19, SA4
Clausocalanus pergens Farran, 1926*, M, ATL, LNA15, NA16, NA17, NA18, NA19, NA21
Corycaeus (Onychocorycaeus) latus Dana, 1849TA, A#, LLSC11, LSC12, LSC16, LSC17, LSC19, LSC20, LSC21, LSC22, LSC24, LSC25, LSC26, LSO2, LSO3, LSO4, LSO5, LSO6, LSO7, LSO8, LSO9,
Corycaeus (Onychocorycaeus) ovalis Claus, 1863*, A#, LNA16, NA22, SA4, SA25, SA102, LSC33, LSC79, LSO9
Goniopsyllus clausi Huys & Conroy-Dalton, 2000+, *#, μNA14, NA15, NA17, NA21, NA22, NA24, SA10, LSC11, LSC22, LSC30, LSC79, LSC81, LSO6
Oithona tenuis Rosendorn, 1917*, M, ATL, LSA19, SA25, SA26
Oithona vivida Farran, 1913*, ATL, LNA12, NA21, SA101
Oncaea curta Sars, 1916*, M, ATL, LNA12, NA14, NA15, NA16, NA17, NA18, NA21, NA22, NA23, NA24, SA3, SA4, SA7, SA10, SA11, SA12, SA22, SA26, SA92, SA93, SA94, SA101, SA102
Oncaea scottodicarloi Heron & Bradford-Grieve, 1995+, *#, LLSC12, LSC14, LSC16, LSC17, LSC18, LSC19, LSC20, LSC22, LSC31, LSC33, LSC65, LSC79, LSC81, LSO2, LSO3, LSO4, LSO5, LSO6, LSO7, LSO8, LSO10 NA12, NA15, NA17, NA18, NA19, NA21, NA23, NA24, SA10, SA101, SA2, SA3, SA4, SA11, SA19
Pareucalanus sewelli (Fleminger, 1973)*, ATL, LNA19, NA22, NA24, SA2, SA3, SA25, SA94
Sapphirina auronitens Claus, 1863TA, A#, LLSC12, LSC18, LSC79, LSO7, LSO10
Sapphirina bicuspidata Giesbrecht, 1891-#, LLSC11, LSC13, LSC61, LSC65, LSC81
Scaphocalanus curtus (Farran, 1926)*, A#, LNA18, LSC79, LSO6, LSO7
Scolecithricella dentata (Giesbrecht, 1892)TA, A#, LLSC79, LSO6

‘+’: first records for the Aegean Sea; ‘*’: first records for Turkey's Aegean coast; ‘#’: first records for the Turkish Levantine coasts; ‘μ’: first records for the Levantine Sea; ‘-’: not found in that location. Previous records of the species in the Marmara Sea, the Turkish Aegean coasts, the Aegean Sea, the Turkish Levantine coasts and the Levantine Basin are indicated with ‘B’, ‘M’, ‘TA’, ‘A’, ‘TL’ and ‘L’, respectively (Hajderi 1995, Gücü et al. 2000, Ünal et al. 2000, Özel and Aker 2001, Aker 2002, Uysal et al. 2002, Isari et al. 2006, Uysal and Shmeleva 2012, Bakır et al. 2014, Razouls et al. 2005–2022)

Cladocera, with maximum abundance of 11,757 ind.m−3 at Station SA90, had a higher percentage of mesozooplankton at the NA and SA stations (Table 4), but a much lower mean relative abundance was observed at the LSC and LSO stations (Figure 3). A total of 7 Cladocera species (Penilia avirostris, Pseudevadne tergestina, Evadne spinifera, Evadne nordmanni, Pleopis polyphemoides, Podon intermedius and Pleopis schmackeri) were identified in the present study. Among Cladocera Penilia avirostris was the dominant species, especially in coastal bays and areas in the sub regions of the study area, with a maximum abundance of 8778 ind m−3 (at Station NA23) and of 8203 ind m−3 (at Station SA90). Other Cladocera (in order of importance) followed: Pseudevadne tergestina and Evadne spinifera. Pleopis schmackeri was observed at both the SA and LSC stations, with a maximum abundance of 5.3 ind m−3 (at Station SA101).

Table 4

Mean relative abundance (%), total abundance (ind m−3) and biomass (mg m−3) of dominant taxa within the total zooplankton in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea (‘−’: not found). Only taxa with a general contribution of >0.5% to the total zooplankton abundance are reported here.

Eastern Mediterranean Sea
Aegean SeaLevantine Sea
Northern Aegean Sea (NA)Southern Aegean Sea (SA)Coastal Waters of the Levantine Sea (LSC)Open Waters of the Levantine Sea (LSO)
Copepods28.744.377.086.8
Acartia clausi7.820.430.10-
Acartia negligens-0.080.813.43
Calocalanus pavo0.010.180.681.25
Calocalanus pavoninus0.010.196.169.08
Calocalanus styliremis1.670.110.303.76
Calonopia elliptica--4.35-
Centropages kroyeri0.4113.702.060.01
Centropages typicus2.550.090.000.00
Clausocalanus furcatus0.000.5520.9228.80
Farranula rostrata0.430.440.7112.03
Lucicutia flavicornis0.010.000.081.56
Mecynocera clausi0.220.100.350.51
Paracalanus denudatus0.040.110.101.83
Paracalanus nanus0.040.090.102.64
Paracalanus parvus6.6019.0316.080.59
Temora stylifera0.535.382.882.51
Parvocalanus elegans--0.60-
Oithona nana0.340.501.290.21
Oithona plumifera2.931.4515.239.37
Oithona similis1.510.050.532.31
Oithona tenuis-0.030.680.41
Oncaea mediterranea0.210.030.031.37
Oncaea media0.170.330.530.02
Oncaea scottodicarloi0.200.030.102.64
Cladocera63.643.412.40.9
Penilia avirostris58.6533.074.60-
Pseudevadne tergestina3.106.953.050.11
Evadne spinifera1.532.674.770.69
Appendicularians2.13.62.81.4
Doliolida3.25.82.60.0
Chaetognaths0.70.51.22.6
Meroplankton1.52.95.43.2
Total abundance (ind m−3)32314562628307
Total biomass (mg m−3)300748316231

Although Doliolida species were also occasionally observed (a 50% occurrence), they did not significantly contribute to the total zooplankton abundance (Table 4, Figure 3). The abundance of meroplanktonic groups, including larvae of Bivalvia, Gastropoda, Polychaeta and Echinodermata, were higher in the gulfs and the coastal stations, whereas Appendicularia were an important group in SA, with a maximum abundance of 888 ind m−3 at Station SA90 (Figure 3).

With regard to regions, 96 species were found in the NA, 98 in the SA, 124 in the LSC and 91 in the LSO. The increasing number of species from NA to LSC was more evident, except in LSO. The variability in the number of species within areas was greater in the SA and LSC regions. The most species (65 species) was recorded at Stations SA3 and LSC79 (Figure 2). The diversity index values varied between 3.7 bits (Station SA3) and 2.1 bits (Station LSC59) (Figure 2). The dominant species from the coastal waters differed from those in open waters.

3.3
Spatial patterns of zooplankton composition and diversity

Cluster analysis (Figure 4) and MDS ordination (Figure 5) of the combined data from the subregions showed that the samples were clearly differentiated by region. The among-region differences were stronger when zooplankton abundance (F3;69 = 19.885; p < 0.05) and biomass (F3;69 = 7.629; p < 0.05) were considered. The Tukey test indicated a difference in total biomass between the southern Aegean Sea and all other areas, while the zooplankton community structure in the subregions (NA and SA) of the Aegean Sea had significantly higher values than those of the Levantine Sea (LSC and LSO). While the highest zooplankton abundance value was recorded in the SA region, with an average of 4562 ± 5523 ind m−3, lower values were recorded in LSO (307 ± 132 ind m−3) and LSC (628 ± 300). ANOSIM analysis (global R value = 0.517, p = 0.1%) showed significant correlations between the study sites regarding the zooplankton communities. It was determined that the structure of the zooplankton community in the LSO region differed from that of the NA region (ANOSIM R = 0.946). The within-group similarity (using SIMPER; Table 5) depending on the dominant species revealed a higher average similarity (more than 60%) within the LSO group, with Clausocalanus furcatus significantly contributing along with Farranula rostrata and Calocalanus pavoninus, due to their higher abundance. The lowest average similarity (49.84) was observed in the SA region. Paracalanus parvus, Temora stylifera and Penilia avirostris were relatively consistent species within SA.

Figure 4

Dendogram for the hierarchical clustering of the 70 stations using group-average linking of Bray–Curtis similarities calculated on log-transformed abundance data. NA: northern Aegean Sea; SA: southern Aegean Sea; LSC: coastal waters of the Levantine Sea; LSO: open waters of the Levantine Sea

Figure 5

MDS ordination plot of 70 stations in the study area. NA: northern Aegean Sea; SA: southern Aegean Sea; LSC: coastal waters of the Levantine Sea; LSO: open waters of the Levantine Sea

Table 5

Species contributing to within-group similarity as defined by SIMPER

Group and Average SimilaritySpeciesSimilarity-to-Standard Deviation RatioPer cent ContributionCumulative Per cent Contribution
NA, 56.96Paracalanus parvus7.5910.1110.11
Penilia avirostris2.5510.0920.20
Oithona plumifera3.177.6427.84
Appendicularia2.066.7334.57
Centropages typicus1.946.3840.95
Acartia (Acartiura) clausi1.676.3347.28
Doliolida1.645.7553.03
Pseudevadne tergestina1.445.5658.58
Evadne spinifera3.085.5564.13
Calocalanus styliremis1.253.968.03
SA, 49.84Paracalanus parvus4.1612.9712.97
Temora stylifera6.2810.3923.37
Penilia avirostris1.398.8832.25
Oithona plumifera1.957.2439.49
Evadne spinifera1.677.1946.68
Appendicularia1.967.1653.84
Pseudevadne tergestina1.706.8960.73
Clausocalanus furcatus0.813.564.23
Farranula rostrata0.913.1467.38
Chaetognatha0.912.8870.25
LSC, 50.03Oithona plumifera2.0912.7112.71
Clausocalanus furcatus1.8112.3025.01
Paracalanus parvus1.189.9734.98
Evadne spinifera1.698.8143.79
Calocalanus pavoninus1.758.7752.56
Pseudevadne tergestina1.225.8258.38
Temora stylifera1.064.8863.27
Appendicularia0.914.2967.55
LSO, 65.80Clausocalanus furcatus11.0112.5212.52
Farranula rostrata9.959.7222.24
Oithona plumifera7.089.4331.67
Calocalanus pavoninus4.708.6940.36
Calocalanus styliremis7.166.8847.24
Oithona similis3.705.4852.71
Chaetognatha1.634.3057.01
Siphonophora1.243.8660.87
Temora stylifera1.23.8664.73
Paracalanus denudatus1.853.8468.57

SIMPER analysis showed that Appendicularia, Doliolidae, some Copepoda (such as Paracalanus parvus, Acartia clausi, Centropages kroyeri and Centropages typicus) and Cladocera (such as Penilia avirostris, Pseudevadne tergestina and Evadne spinifera) mostly contributed to dissimilarity among groups (Table 6). The species contributing to the dissimilarities between pairs of station groups revealed that the LSO was significantly dissimilar to both the NA and SA (total average dissimilarity: 72.61% and 67.05%, respectively), due to the rarity and relative scarcity of some zooplankton species compared to those of other groups, including Penilia avirostris, Pseudevadne tergestina, Paracalanus parvus, Clausocalanus furcatus, Acartia clausi, Centropages typicus, Calocalanus pavoninus and Doliolidae. The average of the Bray–Curtis dissimilarities between all pairs of NA and SA groups was relatively lower (54.84%). The species that contributed the most to dissimilarity was A. clausi because of its high frequency (7.82%) and relatively higher abundance in the NA region, especially at stations NA23 (950 ind m−3) and NA18 (707 ind m−3). Additionally, the low-frequency species Oithona setigera (<1% occurrence in all regions) exhibited the highest abundance only in Station NA17 (154 ind m−3) of the northern Aegean Sea and Paracartia latisetosa was found only at two stations in the coastal waters of Levantine Sea (52 ind m−3 at Station LSC67 and 13 ind m−3 at Station LSC68), but there was no significant contribution to the dissimilarity (<1%) between regions.

Table 6

Zooplankton species characterising the station groups, identified by clustering, determined by similarity percentage analysis (SIMPER), based on log-transformed abundance data and the Bray–Curtis similarity measure

Groups and average dissimilaritySpeciesAverage dissimilarityDissimilarity to standard deviation ratioPercent contributionCumulative percent contribution
SA vs NA54.84Acartia (Acartiura) clausi2.231.574.074.07
Centropages typicus2.071.883.787.85
Penilia avirostris1.991.223.6311.48
Temora stylifera1.921.713.514.98
Doliolida1.781.423.2518.23
Centropages kroyeri1.710.823.1121.35
Oithona similis1.581.272.8824.22
Pseudevadne tergestina1.541.292.827.02
Clausocalanus furcatus1.51.272.7429.76
Calocalanus styliremis1.451.332.6432.41
Pteropoda1.271.072.3234.73
SA vs LSC58.01Penilia avirostris3.371.695.815.81
Centropages kroyeri2.130.883.679.48
Temora stylifera2.11.533.6213.1
Paracalanus parvus2.11.333.6216.72
Appendicularia1.961.513.3720.09
Clausocalanus furcatus1.911.313.2923.38
Pseudevadne tergestina1.891.143.2526.63
Doliolida1.881.123.2429.87
Calocalanus pavoninus1.821.593.1333
Pteropoda1.531.092.6335.63
SA vs LSO67.05Paracalanus parvus4.133.56.156.15
Penilia avirostris4.091.896.112.25
Pseudevadne tergestina31.644.4816.73
Evadne spinifera2.561.93.8220.55
Appendicularia2.291.673.4123.96
Temora stylifera2.272.13.3927.35
Centropages kroyeri2.060.773.0630.41
Doliolida1.891.112.8333.24
LSC vs NA64.20Penilia avirostris3.661.895.75.7
Clausocalanus furcatus3.132.424.8710.57
Acartia (Acartiura) clausi3.061.884.7715.34
Centropages typicus2.852.354.4419.78
Doliolida2.751.974.2924.07
Calocalanus pavoninus2.242.143.4827.55
Calocalanus styliremis1.841.412.8730.42
Oithona similis1.831.342.8533.27
LSC vs LSO 56.67Paracalanus parvus3.231.735.695.69
Evadne spinifera2.421.744.279.96
Farranula rostrata2.391.74.2114.17
Pseudevadne tergestina2.181.63.8518.02
Calocalanus styliremis1.821.753.2121.24
Paracalanus nanus1.681.82.9624.2
Gastropoda1.641.322.8927.08
Appendicularia1.61.32.8229.91
NA vs LSO72.61Penilia avirostris4.672.776.436.43
Paracalanus parvus3.434.134.7211.15
Clausocalanus furcatus3.426.924.7115.86
Acartia (Acartiura) clausi3.2324.4520.3
Centropages typicus2.92.413.9924.3
Doliolida2.852.093.9228.22
Pseudevadne tergestina2.721.93.7531.97
Calocalanus pavoninus2.383.333.2735.24
4
Discussion

This study provides information about the abundance and distribution of the main zooplankton species in the Aegean and Levantine Seas. In the study, Paracalanus parvus, Acartia clausi, Centropages kroyeri, Oithona plumifera, Temora stylifera, Clausocalanus furcatus, Penilia avirostris, Evadne spinifera, Pseudevadne tergestina, Doliolidae and Appendicularia represented the most common and most abundant zooplankton taxa. Moreover, a total of 15 species were recorded in the study area for the first time, including 3 for the Aegean Sea, 1 for the eastern Mediterranean and 5 for the Turkish coastal areas. Corycaeus (Onychocorycaeus) ovalis, Goniopsyllus clausi, Oncaea scottodicarloi, Sapphirina bicuspidata and Scaphocalanus curtus were recorded for the first time in Turkish coastal regions, while Centropages bradyi, Goniopsyllus clausi and Oncaea scoottodicarloi were recorded for the first time in the Aegean Sea with this study. Goniopsyllus clausi was the new species for the Eastern Mediterranean fauna.

Unlike in previous years (Sever 2009), a gradual increase in mesozooplankton abundance from the northern Aegean Sea towards the southern part was observed. Previous studies (Siokou-Frangou et al. 2002, Zervoudaki et al. 2006) found that the entry of Black Sea water into the Aegean Sea via the Dardanelles caused a significant increase in phytoplankton and mesozooplankton biomass and abundance in the region. However, aquaculture and terrestrial inputs make a significant contribution to higher picophytoplankton biomass and productivity in the coastal waters of the southern Aegean and Levantine Seas (Aktan 2011, Polat 2002, Polat and Terbıyık 2013). These factors are favourable for Cladocera, primarily P. avirostris (Isari et al. 2007). Penilia avirostris were found in very high numbers in these regions, often exceeding 2000 ind m−3. Swarms of this species can be seen in the surface coastal waters and in shallow locations during the summer (Christou and Stergiou 1998, Gülşahin and Tarkan 2012, Killi and Sağdıç 2018). Some authors have suggested that temperature may play an important role in the population dynamics of P. avirostris (Atienza et al. 2007, Gieskes 1971, Onbé and Ikeda 1995). However, environmental conditions such as photoperiod, food availability, turbulence, crowding and predation seem to be key factors in population size (Stross and Hill 1968, Frey 1982, Fofonoff 1994). Also, Christou and Stergiou (1998) reported that salinity influences the amount and distribution of P. avirostris, despite its high salinity tolerance. Playing a different role in the pelagic food chain, P. avirostris is a species commonly found in tropical and subtropical seas that mostly feeds on nanoplankton (<15 μm) (Lipej et al. 1997). Therefore, P. avirostris plays an important role among bacterioplankton and higher level consumers. Lipej et al. (1997) reported that pico and nanoplanktonic autotrophs are abundant in the water column in the Adriatic Sea during the summer months, and that an increase in P. avirostris population occurs because it feeds effectively on these organisms. In addition, Turner et al. (1988) stated that this species feeds on heterotrophic microflagellates, small diatoms and autotrophic flagellates. The presence of these organisms in the study area (Aktan 2011) may have contributed positively to the dominance of P. avirostris in the environment. The other Cladocera species were found in much lower numbers when compared with Penilia avirostris. E. spinifera, P. tergestina and E. nordmanni were present all across the study area in low numbers. These three species have been found in both coastal and pelagic areas of the eastern Mediterranean (Mazzocchi et al. 1997, Christou and Stergiou 1998, Gülşahin and Tarkan 2012, Killi and Sağdıc 2018, Killi 2020). In this study, while P. intermedius and P. schmackeri were observed in both the Aegean Sea and the coastal regions of the eastern Mediterranean, Podon polyphemoides was found only in the Aegean Sea. However, Pleopis polyphemoides has been reported among the dominant Cladocera in the coastal areas of the Mediterranean Sea (Siokou-Frangou 1996, Camatti et al. 2008, Gülşahin and Tarkan 2012, Terbiyik-Kurt and Yilmaz-Zenginer 2016, Killi and Sağdıc 2018, Killi 2020). Pleopis schmackeri was reported for the first time in İskenderun Bay, in the north-eastern Mediterranean in July 2012 (Terbıyık Kurt and Polat 2017) and later in August 2017 it was found in the entire Aegean coast of Turkey (Bariche et al. 2020). However, the present study demonstrates that Pleopis schmackeri (Poppe 1889) may have already existed in August 2006 along the coasts of both the Aegean Sea and the Mediterranean Sea of Turkey.

In the present study, a total of 112 copepod species were discovered, of which 97 were in the Levantine Sea and 88 in the Aegean Sea. The dominance of Clausocalanus furcatus, Oithona plumifera and Paracalanus parvus resulted in a comparable copepod species composition across practically the entire eastern Mediterranean. While C. furcatus has a global tropical/subtropical distribution (Frost and Fleminger 1968), O. plumifera is found mainly in warm waters as well as in temperate regions (Raymont 1983). C. furcatus and O. plumifera are the dominant species in a large area of the eastern Mediterranean (Toklu and Sarıhan 2003; Siokou-Frangou et al. 1997, 2004; Altuğ et al. 2011; Mazzocchi et al. 2014; Terbıyık Kurt and Yilmaz-Zenginer 2016). Furthermore, in late summer and autumn, C. furcatus and O. plumifera dominated in Mediterranean coastal areas, subjected to the influence of the open sea (Siokou-Frangou et al. 1998). They are thought to be typical of the Mediterranean epipelagic habitat, and populations have been found in both coastal and offshore regions (Siokou-Frangou et al. 1997, Ramfos et al. 2005, Altuğ et al. 2011, Aker 2015). These two species were found to be prevalent in a vast area between LSC and LSO, as well as in SA, according to our research. In temperate and warm seas, Paracalanus parvus has a remarkable range of distribution (Raymont 1983). The most important dominant species in the northern Aegean Sea are Paracalanus parvus, Acartia clausi and Penilia avirostris (Siokou-Frangou et al. 2009, Zervoudaki et al. 2006, Isari et al. 2005, Sever 2009, Isinibilir 2009, Altuğ et al. 2011, Aker 2015). These species are also found in high abundance and dominance in the Sea of Marmara (Isinibilir et al. 2008, 2011), and they could be transported into the northern Aegean Sea through the Black Sea outflow by the Çanakkale Strait (Altuğ et al. 2011).

The Aegean Sea, particularly the southern section, has larger relative abundances of Appendicularia, which are commonly linked with abundant particulate organic aggregates (Alldredge 1976), and thus play an essential role in pelagic food webs and carbon transfer downward (Gorsky et al. 1991). Their significant relative importance in the southern Aegean Sea suggests that the water column in these areas was richer in particulate organic material and, in general, smaller particles. The highest nutrient levels and the lowest transparency levels were found at several stations in the LSC region, due to local tourism, domestic sewage discharge, industrial wastewater and marina activities and marine traffic, as well as in the SA region, due to intensive aquaculture and limited water exchange with the sea (Aktan 2011).

Eutrophication may have an indirect effect on zooplankton species diversity through its effect on phytoplankton (Shiganova et al. 1998). The abundance of Noctiluca scintillans and herbivorous zooplankton species increases as phytoplankton biomass increases (Shiganova et al. 1998). Reduced chlorophyll-a and nutrients from inshore to open waters (Aktan, 2011) may have resulted in higher zooplankton species diversity in the research area. The coastal waters of the southern Aegean Sea and the Levantine Sea, which host mariculture and domestic inputs, had lower diversity values.

The cluster diagram (Figure 4) and MDS representation (Figure 5) showed that Stations NA17 and LSC59 were starkly different from the other sampling stations, mainly due to their low number of species and unique species composition. Both stations present very particular conditions, which most likely were responsible for their singularity in terms of the zooplankton. An interesting finding for Station NA17 was the registration of Acartia (Hypoacartia) adriatica, a species endemic to the Adriatic Sea and never recorded in other seas around the world (Belmonte and Potenza 2001). This species has also detected in the middle Aegean Sea (Aker 2002). LSC59 is located very close to the Iskenderun port, and it could be affected by high anthropogenic pressure; this seems to presuppose the existence of a relatively poor zooplankton community. Only some common and opportunistic taxa (for example, the well-known Paracalanus parvus or Calonopia elliptica) can form persistent populations in this disturbed environment. Calanopia elliptica, which is of Indo-Pacific origin, is present in the Levantine Sea (Lakkis 1976), but has not been observed in the western part of the Mediterranean Sea or the Atlantic Ocean (Uysal et al. 2002).

The current study provides information on broader forms of zooplankton community structure in the Eastern Mediterranean, ranging from coastal to open water areas. Detailed future investigations are required to better understand the impact of zooplankton on coastal ecosystems due to growing anthropogenic and climatic pressures. Furthermore, the ecological significance of zooplankton, both in the oligotrophic eastern Mediterranean Sea and in coastal environments with changing trophic status, should be investigated further.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.26881/oahs-2022.4.01 | Journal eISSN: 1897-3191 | Journal ISSN: 1730-413X
Language: English
Page range: 308 - 324
Submitted on: Mar 18, 2022
Accepted on: Oct 14, 2022
Published on: Jan 18, 2023
Published by: University of Gdańsk
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

© 2023 Melek Isinibilir, Vedat Aker, Ezgi E. Türkeri, published by University of Gdańsk
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.