How well does the Continuous Plankton Recorder (CPR) sample zooplankton? A comparison with the Longhurst Hardy Plankton Recorder (LHPR) in the northeast Atlantic

Richardson, A.J. and John, E.H. and Irigoien, X. and Harris, R.P. and Hays, G.C. (2004) How well does the Continuous Plankton Recorder (CPR) sample zooplankton? A comparison with the Longhurst Hardy Plankton Recorder (LHPR) in the northeast Atlantic. Deep Sea Research I, 51 (9). pp. 1283-1294. ISSN 0967-0637

Full text not available from this archive.

DOI: 10.1016/j.dsr.2004.04.002

Official URL: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/dsr

Abstract

The Continuous Plankton Recorder (CPR) survey has collected data on basin- scale zooplankton abundance in the North Atlantic since the 1930s. These data have been used in many studies to elucidate seasonal patterns and long-term change in plankton populations, as well as more recently to validate ecosystem models. There has, however, been relatively little comparison of the data from the CPR with that from other samplers. In this study we compare zooplankton abundance estimated from the CPR in the northeast Atlantic with near-surface samples collected by a Longhurst-Hardy Plankton Recorder (LHPR) at Ocean Weather Station India (59 degree N, 19 degree W) between 1971 and 1975. Comparisons were made for six common copepods in the region: Acartia clausi, Calanus finmarchicus, Euchaeta norvegica, Metridia lucens, Oithona sp. and Pleuromamma robusta. Seasonal cycles based on CPR data were similar to those recorded by the LHPR. Differences in absolute abundances were apparent, however, with the CPR underestimating abundances by a factor of between 5 and 40, with the exception of A. clausi. Active avoidance by zooplankton is thought to be responsible. This avoidance is species specific, so that care must be taken describing communities, as the CPR emphasises those species that are preferentially caught, a problem common to many plankton samplers.

NMBL Staff Only: edit this record