Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T17:28:36.756Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of the Different Methods of Estimating Nanoplankton

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

Dorothy Ballantine
Dorothy Ballantine
Affiliation:
From the Plymouth Laboratory
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Six methods for estimating the numbers of nanoplankton organisms in sea water have been compared. Of these, centrifugation of a living sample, followed by counts of the numbers of organisms in the concentrate, appears to be the most satisfactory method from all points of view. The method is rapid, simple to operate, and gives a result which is strictly comparable with results from counts made under dark-ground illumination of unconcentrated samples, and from counts after concentrating with niters. By this method the organisms counted can usually be assigned to the class and order to which they belong, even if their systematic position cannot be determined more definitely.

The use of species-pure cultures is a necessary adjunct to the direct examination of sea-water samples when studying the distribution, abundance, and annual fluctuations of nanoplankton, as so little is known of the systematics of these organisms.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 32 , Issue 1 , June 1953 , pp. 129 - 147
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1953

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Allen, E. J., 1919. A quantitative study of plankton. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. 12, pp. 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atkins, W. R. G. & Parke, M. W., 1951. Seasonal changes in the phytoplankton as indicated by chlorophyll estimations. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. 29, pp. 609–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruce, J. R., Knight, M. & Parke, M. W., 1940. The rearing of oyster larvae on an algal diet. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. 24, pp. 337–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, H. A. & Knight-Jones, E. W., 1949. Quantitative estimation of marine nanoplankton. Nature, Vol. 164, p. 694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, E. D., Baker, M. & Fox, D. L., 1952. Microfiltration in oceanographic research. 1. Marine sampling with the molecular filter. Journ. Mar. Res., Vol. 11, pp. 194–204.Google Scholar
Gran, H. H., 1929. Quantitative plankton investigations carried out during the expedition with the Michael Sars, July-September 1924. Cons. Int. Explor. Mer, Rapp. Proc Verb., Vol. 56, pp. 1–50.Google Scholar
Gross, F. & Zeuthen, E., 1948. The buoyancy of plankton diatoms, a problem of cell physiology. Proc Roy. Soc. Lond., Vol. 135, pp. 382–89.Google Scholar
Knight-Jones, E. W., 1951. Preliminary studies of nanoplankton and ultraplankton systematics and abundance by a quantitative culture method. Journ. Cons. Int. Explor. Mer, Vol. 17, pp. 140–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kofoid, C. A., 1897. On some important sources of error in the plankton method. Science, N.S., Vol. 6, pp. 829–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lohmann, H., 1908. Untersuchungen zur Festellung des vollständigen Gehaltes des Meeres an Plankton. Wiss. Meeresunters. Kiel, Bd. 10, pp. 129–370.Google Scholar
Nielsen, E. Steemann, 1933. ;ber quantitative Untersuchung von marinen Plankton mit Utermöhl's umgekehrtem Mikroscop. Journ. Cons. Int. Explor. Mer, Vol. 8, pp. 201–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, E. Steemann & Brand Th., V., 1934. Quantitative Zentrifugen-methoden zur Planktonbestimmung. Cons. Int. Explor. Mer, Rapp. Proc. Verb., Vol. 89, Part E, No. 12, pp. 99–100.Google Scholar
Swaroop, S., 1938. Numerical estimation of B. coli by dilution method. Ind. Journ. Med. Res., Vol. 26, pp. 353–78.Google Scholar
Utermöiil, H., 1927. Untersuchungen über den Gesamtplankton gehalt den Kanarenstromes. Archiv.f. Hydrobiol., Bd. 18, pp. 464–525.Google Scholar
Utermöhl, H., 1931. Neue Wege in der quantitativen Erfassung des Plankton. Verh. Internal. Vereing. Limnologie, Bd. 5, pp. 567–96.Google Scholar
Wulff, A., 1926. Nannoplankton-Untersuchungen in der Nordsee. Wiss. Meeresunters. Helgoland, Bd. 15, H. 3, Abh. No. 16, pp. 1–44.Google Scholar