Food utilisation of pelagic mysids, Mysis mixta and M. relicta , during their growing season in the northern Baltic Sea

2000 ◽  
Vol 136 (3) ◽  
pp. 553-559 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Viherluoto ◽  
H. Kuosa ◽  
J. Flinkman ◽  
M. Viitasalo
Keyword(s):  
Baltic Sea ◽  
Growing Season ◽  
Mysis Mixta ◽  
Food Utilisation

scholarly journals Sampling native and non-native mobile epifauna with baited traps and habitat collectors – Port of Gdynia case study (southern Baltic Sea, Poland)

2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 319-327
Author(s):  
Monika Normant-Saremba ◽  
Joanna Hegele-Drywa ◽  
Lena Marszewska
Keyword(s):  
Baltic Sea ◽  
Growing Season ◽  
Indigenous Species ◽  
Artificial Habitat ◽  
Southern Baltic Sea ◽  
North East ◽  
The North ◽  
Baited Traps ◽  
Southern Baltic ◽  
Mobile Epifauna

AbstractThe effectiveness of two artificial habitat collectors, crab condo (HC1) and habitat crate (HC2), providing a refuge for small mobile fauna, was tested along with two commercial baited traps, Chinese box trap (BT1) and Gee’s Minnow trap (BT2) recommended for only single deployments under a harmonized survey of the Baltic and the North-East Atlantic. Our objective was also to determine whether a multi-deployment of baited traps in the growing season increases the diversity and abundance of collected mobile epifauna. Nineteen species of benthic mobile epifauna, including six non-indigenous species (NIS), were collected between May and October 2014 using all tested types of traps in the Port of Gdynia (southern Baltic Sea). Crustaceans, represented by 16 taxa, constituted the group with the highest diversity and abundance. Our study showed that HC1 and HC2 are more effective gear than BT1 and BT2, as both species richness (including NIS) and abundance were higher. Furthermore, the double deployment of BT1 and BT2 increased the diversity and abundance of the captured fauna. The use of artificial habitat collectors as an additional method to the already recommended baited traps for mobile epifauna monitoring in ports should be considered and the number of baited trap deployments should be increased during the growing season.

Are marine planktonic invertebrates food limited? The case of Mysis mixta (Crustacea, Mysidacea) in the Baltic Sea

Oecologia ◽  
1990 ◽  
Vol 84 (3) ◽  
pp. 430-432 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sture Hansson ◽  
Lars G. Rudstam ◽  
Sif Johansson
Keyword(s):  
Baltic Sea ◽  
The Baltic Sea ◽  
Mysis Mixta ◽  
The Baltic

Diel vertical migration and feeding patterns of Mysis mixta (Crustacea, Mysidacea) in the Baltic Sea

1989 ◽  
Vol 101 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. G. Rudstam ◽  
K. Danielsson ◽  
S. Hansson ◽  
S. Johansson
Keyword(s):  
Baltic Sea ◽  
Vertical Migration ◽  
Diel Vertical Migration ◽  
The Baltic Sea ◽  
Feeding Patterns ◽  
Mysis Mixta ◽  
The Baltic

scholarly journals Extension of the growing season of phytoplankton in the western Baltic Sea in response to climate change

2019 ◽  
Vol 622 ◽  
pp. 1-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
N Wasmund ◽  
G Nausch ◽  
M Gerth ◽  
S Busch ◽  
C Burmeister ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Baltic Sea ◽  
Growing Season

scholarly journals Feeding preferences of herring (Clupea harengus) and sprat (Sprattus sprattus) in the southern Baltic Sea

2004 ◽  
Vol 61 (8) ◽  
pp. 1267-1277 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michele Casini ◽  
Massimiliano Cardinale ◽  
Fredrik Arrhenius
Keyword(s):  
Baltic Sea ◽  
Entire Range ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
Clupea Harengus ◽  
Feeding Preferences ◽  
Southern Baltic Sea ◽  
Mysis Mixta ◽  
Temora Longicornis ◽  
Southern Baltic ◽  
Autumn And Winter

Abstract No field studies have been performed on the selectivity of herring and sprat in the southern Baltic Sea in relation to their entire range of prey. Accordingly, we tested in the field the following hypotheses: (i) sprat and herring are selective feeders and (ii) sprat and herring selectivity is size- and season-dependent. The results show that (i) smaller herring and all size classes of sprat are strictly zooplanktivorous, selecting principally Temora longicornis and Bosmina maritima during the autumn and Pseudocalanus elongatus in winter; (ii) larger herring are essentially nektobenthos feeders, predating on Mysis mixta during the autumn and amphipods and polychaetes during the winter; and (iii) herring and sprat seem to avoid Acartia spp. in both autumn and winter. During the autumn, herring are zooplanktivorous up to 18–20 cm, whereas in winter herring feed on nektobenthos starting from 14–15 cm. Selectivity was not an absolute process but it was related to prey relative abundance in the sea and, possibly, to prey profitability (e.g. size, conspicuousness, and reaction time).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document