Environmental Drivers of Zooplankton Variability in the Coastal Eastern Adriatic (Mediterranean Sea)

ISSN: 0001-5113 ACTA ADRIAT., UDC: 574.583 (262) (262.3-11) AADRAY 53(2): 243 - 262, 2012 “2006/2009” 591.543.43

Environmental drivers of zooplankton variability in the coastal eastern Adriatic (Mediterranean Sea)

Olja viDJaK1*, Natalia BoJanić1, Slavica MatiJević1, Grozdan KUšPilić1, Živana ninČević glaDan1, Sanda sKeJić1, Branka grBec1 and Igor BraUtović2

1Institute of Oceanography and Fisheries, Šetalište I. Meštrovića 63, 21000 Split, Croatia

2Institute for Marine and Coastal Research, Kneza D. Jude 12, pp. 83, 20000 Dubrovnik, Croatia

*Corresponding author: [email protected]

The objectives of this paper were to determine the main environmental drivers of zooplankton variability in coastal waters adjacent to urban areas and to evaluate the differences in zooplankton abundance and population structure in relation to chemical and biological parameters in the water column. Samples were collected seasonally from May 2006 to January 2009 at 8 sampling sites in the bays and channels along the eastern Adriatic coast. Zooplankton population structure showed high similarity within the investigated region, especially evident in the homogeneity of copepod community composition, where relative importance of the individual species showed characteristic high ranking of small and medium-sized taxa. Zooplankton numerical variability primarily responded to seasonal variation in water temperature and spatial variation in salinity, but spatial distribution of the collected data showed that abundances were also linked to chemical and biological parameters generally used as descriptors of water quality. This indicates that zooplankton community size reflects the trophic status of an area and supports the use of zooplankton studies as an auxiliary method in the evaluation of the trophic state of coastal waters.

Key words: coastal zooplankton, copepods, trophic state, water quality, Adriatic Sea

INTRODUCTION influence the living resources and human health (MARCUS, 2004; DUARTE et al., 2009). Environmen- Coastal waters are among the most produc- tal degradation includes the loss of coastal water tive marine environments, where anthropogenic quality through, among others, the impact of inputs from rivers, runoff and sewage systems excess nutrients and the presence of organic pol- often result in more eutrophic conditions (LEV- lutants originating from the industrial discharge INTON, 1995). In recent decades urban coastal and domestic sewage (AVANzINI, 2009; BOISSERy, settlements exert strong pressures on the envi- 2009; JICkELLS, 2008). ronment, and coastal zones around the globe Direct and causal relationship between phy- are showing increasing evidence of degradation toplankton and bioavailable nutrients is read- due to human activities, which subsequently ily explored in monitoring programs aiming at 244 ACTA ADRIATICA, 53(2): 241 - 260, 2012 water quality evaluation or environmental status reduced biodiversity caused by the progressive assessment (e.g. EU Water framework Direc- eutrophication of the eastern Adriatic coastal tive and Marine Strategy framework Direc- areas (REGNER, 1989, 1991, 1992). Since recent tive, respectively, in BORJA (2005) and BORJA et results pointed at the significant improvement in al. (2010)). zooplankton are frequently used as the overall state of the Croatian coastal waters biotic indicators of water quality in freshwater (kUŠPILIĆ et al., 2009; ŠOLIĆ et al., 2010), in this where community size and relationships among study we present the analysis of the zooplankton copepods, cladocerans, ostracods and rotifers community in the 2006-2009 period. The main provide valuable information on the existing objectives are: (1) to determine the variability of physical and chemical conditions (SOUSA et al., zooplankton assemblages in the coastal waters 2008; PATUREJ, 2009), presence of different pol- in the vicinity of larger urban settlements in lutants (BALOGh, 1988; BONACINA & PASTERIS, relation to physical parameters of the marine 2001), trophic state (WhITMAN et al., 2004; PATUREJ environment and particularly, (2) to investigate & GOźDzIEJEWSkA, 2005) and environmental the potential impact of chemical and biological stress (PINTO-COELhO et al., 2005; hSIEh et al., descriptors of water quality such as nutrient con- 2011). however, although zooplankton has been centrations and phytoplankton biomass to zoo- extremely well studied in marine ecosystems, plankton abundance and population structure. its potential value as indicators of alterations in the marine environmental status still needs to be assessed. higher trophic levels in the MATERIAL AND METHODS marine plankton usually receive less attention in environmental monitoring (GISMERVIk et al., Study area 1996; PERRy et al., 2004), although changes in the abundance, distribution and succession of zoo- Samples were collected four times per year plankton organisms are indicative of changes in from May 2006 to January 2009, the chosen the environmental conditions (CAPRIULO et al., periods corresponding to spring (May), summer 2002; MARQUES et al., 2008; fALCãO et al., 2011). (July), autumn (September-October) and winter Therefore regular monitoring of zooplankton (December-January) conditions in the water communities in coastal waters adjacent to urban column. areas under increased threat or existing pressure The sampling stations are situated in coastal from decrease in water quality through eutrophi- waters in the vicinity of larger settlements cation or other adverse processes is a valuable along the eastern Adriatic coast (fig. 1). Sta- aid in developing effective strategies for ecosys- tions PG1 and PG2 are located in the waters tem management. surrounding the island of Pag, which belongs Within the frame of the “Coastal Sea Water to the northern Adriatic archipelago (fig. 1A). Quality Control Programme” conducted by the The island extends northwest-southeast along Institute of Oceanography and fisheries on the coast, forming the Velebit Channel. Station behalf of Croatian water management company PG1 (44o28’1’’N; 15o1’59’’E, max depth 10 m) (Croatian Waters), the state of marine biological is situated in the shallow part of the Bay of Pag communities, as well as physical and chemical which is deeply incised into the coast of the properties of the water column and sediment island of Pag, and connected through the narrow have been monitored in the coastal waters of Straits of Pag (width 780 m, depth 57 m) with the eastern Adriatic Sea since 1976 until present the wider area of the Velebit Channel, while sta- days (UJEVIĆ et al., 1998; BOGNER et al., 2004; tion PG2 (44o26’49’’N; 15o2’58’’E, max depth MILUN et al., 2006). During this period document- 52 m) is located in the Straits. The inner Bay ed important changes in the zooplankton com- area was the recipient of domestic effluents ponent, particularly those concerning copepod of the city of Pag and the neighbouring settle- crustaceans, included increased densities and ments until 2004, when the activation of the new viDJaK et al.: Environmental drivers of zooplankton variability in the coastal eastern Adriatic ... 245

Fig. 1. Study area with investigated stations sewage system transported the effluents in the max depth 10 m) are located in the lower part deeper area of the Straits of Pag. of the krka River estuary, the former in the Station z1 (44o6’36’’N; 15o12’30’’E, max central part of the Šibenik City harbour, and the depth 33 m) is located in the 4-7 km wide and latter in the Šibenik Channel (fig. 1C). Nutri- 20 km long zadar Channel, extending between ent enrichment in this area comes from natural the mainland and the island of Ugljan (fig. 1b). (krka River) and anthropogenic sources (local Maximum depth is 50 m. In the investigated sewage). Despite recently recorded decrease in period, the zadar Channel was the recipient of anthropogenic input of sewage and domestic the domestic and industrial effluents of the city waste waters, this is still one of the most produc- of zadar and some neighbouring settlements, tive coastal areas on the eastern Adriatic coast since the modern wastewaters treatment unit (kUŠPILIĆ et al., 2007). was not fully activated until April 2009. Station S2 (43o31’6’’N; 16o22’54’’E, max Stations Š1(43o44’3’’N; 15o53’31’’E, max depth 37 m) is located in the central part of the depth 35 m) and Š2 (43o43’7’’N; 15o51’31’’E, kaštela Bay, a semi-enclosed coastal bay in 246 ACTA ADRIATICA, 53(2): 241 - 260, 2012 the middle Adriatic Sea (fig. 1D). Due to the plankton samples at the same stations were rapid urbanization and industrialization in the performed using 5 L Niskin bottle at 0, 5, 10, 1970s, kaštela Bay has been receiving large 20 and 30 m depths (or to the stations’ bot- quantities of untreated municipal and industrial tom depth). The samples were preserved in effluents for decades, which adversely affected 2.5% formaldehyde-seawater solution, previ- water properties and biological communities ously buffered with CaCO3, since Lugol’s solu- (MARASOVIĆ et al., 1991). After the activation of tion stains detritus and would reduce visibility the modern sewage system in November 2004, (fONDA UMANI & BERAN, 2003). Preparation of disappearance of nutrient and oxygen extremes the samples for the microscopic analysis was as well as decrease in bacterial abundance and performed as described in BOJANIĆ et al. (2005). production were followed by the reduction of Counting and species identification were per- phytoplankton biomass and re-establishment of formed with an inverted microscope (Olympus) its regular seasonal cycle (BOJANIĆ & VIDJAk, at x100 and x400 magnifications. Abundances 2010; ŠOLIĆ et al., 2010). Station S1 (43o29’18’’N; were expressed as number of individuals per 16o26’12’’E, max depth 38 m) is located out of litre (ind. L-1). the entrance to the Bay, in the deeper area of the Split Channel (fig. 1D). Environmental parameters Station P1 (43o1’30’’N; 17o24’48’’E, max four abiotic parameters were obtained at the depth 21 m) is located in the Neretva Channel, time when zooplankton samples were collected, which extends between the mainland and the reflecting general environmental conditions and Pelješac peninsula in the southern part of the chemical water properties. Vertical temperature Adriatic Sea (fig. 1E). The coasts are scarcely and salinity profiles were measured with a CTD inhabited, with the low degree of industrializa- multiparameter probe (Sea Bird 25). Oxygen tion, and the area is influenced by the considera- concentrations were determined by the Winkler ble freshwater discharge from the Neretva River. method (GRASShOff, 1976). Nutrient concentrations (nitrate, nitrite, ammonia, orthophosphate SAMPLING METHODS and orthosilicate) were determined on the Auto- Analyzer III system, using modified automated Zooplankton methods (GRASShOff, 1976). Mesozooplankton was sampled using the Phytoplankton biomass was determined 125 μm mesh size Nansen net (total length 2.5 through chlorophyll a measurements, performed m, mouth area 0.25 m2), towed vertically from on the Turner 112 fluorometer following acetone near bottom to the surface. Net collections were extraction (STRICkLAND & PARSONS, 1972). preserved in 2.5% formaldehyde-seawater solution, previously buffered with CaCO3. Counting Data analysis and species identification were performed using Analysis of variance (kruskal-Wallis inverted microscope (Olympus). Abundances ANOVA) was used to test the significance of were expressed as the number of individuals per differences among means in several data sets cubic meter (ind. m-3). Taxonomic identification (nutrients concentrations, chlorophyll a, total was performed to the species or genus level. mesozooplankton abundance, copepod abun- Although current copepod taxonomy places dance) among the sampling sites, and pairwise former order Poecilostomatoda into Cyclopoida comparisons were obtained by applying Dunn’s (BOXShALL & hALSEy, 2004), in the present study post-hoc test. Spearman rank order correlations the term “poecilostomatoid” was retained to were used to asses inter-relationships between denote an ecologically distinct group of copepod environmental parameters and between zoo- families (Oncaeidae, Corycaeidae, Sapphirini- plankton groups. Evaluation of trophic status in dae) and not as a taxonomical unit. the investigated area was performed through cal- Consecutive collections of the microzoo- culation of trophic index (TRIX), representing viDJaK et al.: Environmental drivers of zooplankton variability in the coastal eastern Adriatic ... 247

a linear combination of the logarithms of four ent. A long environmental gradient has high beta variables: chlorophyll a concentration, dissolved diversity, which indicates that CCA could be inorganic nitrogen (DIN), total phosphorus (TP) used (zUUR et al., 2007). Each variable was stand- and the absolute percentage deviation from the ardised to zero mean and unit variance in order oxygen saturation (aD%O) (VOLLENWEIDER et to eliminate numerical differences between stud- al., 1998). ied parameters, leaving only relative station-to- Shannon diversity index was used to analyse station changes in parameters. The CCA was biodiversity changes in the copepod community. performed using the software XLS-Biplot 1.1 In order to reveal individual species contribu- (1999-2002) created in the Statistics Depart- tion to the dissimilarities among the sampling ment of Virginia Tech by E.P. Smith and I.A. stations and to identify the seasonal pattern in Lipkovich. the copepod population, Similarity Percentages Analysis (SIMPER) available in PRIMER5 sta- RESULTS tistical program (CLARkE & GORLEy, 2001) was performed on the species’ abundances log (x+1) Thermohaline properties transformed data matrix, with the cut off for low of the water column contributions fixed at 75%. This analysis also During the entire investigated period sea identified characteristic copepod species’ rank- surface temperature in the investigated area ing at particular sites or in particular seasons, varied between 8.8oC and 26.4oC. In May sam- along with their individual contributions based plings average water column temperature ranged on their averaged abundances. between 15.6oC and 18.7oC (fig. 2), with the Similarities between the sampling sites beginning of thermocline formation evident at were illustrated with the hierarchical Cluster deeper stations. highest average temperature analysis (CA) based on the group average clus- values (19.3oC - 23.6oC) in the water column tering from Bray-Curtis similarity matrix of were recorded in July (fig. 2), when further square root transformed abundances of the most heating of the surface layer led to the establish- abundant mesozooplankton groups (copepods, ment of thermocline, mostly between 5-10 m cladocerans, appendicularians, chaetognaths, or 10-20 m, depending on the stations’ depth. meroplankton larvae). Application of “Simi- In September-October period average water larity profile” (SIMPROOf) permutation test column temperature ranged between 17.2oC and available in PRIMER6 (CLARkE & GORLEy, 2006) 19.9 oC (fig. 2), the thermocline was set deeper allowed for the identification of the significant at deeper stations, while at shallow stations tem- internal structure within the constructed clusters, perature conditions became uniform throughout and this option was used to test the significance the water column. December-January period of the output dendrogram (at 1000 permuta- was characterized by the lowest average water tions). The test results are displayed by a colour column temperatures (11.4oC - 14.1oC), and iso- convention on the dendrogram plot (the samples thermal conditions (fig. 2). connected by red lines cannot be significantly Large surface salinity oscillations were differentiated) and by the test statistics (π value), recorded in the study area, ranging from 5.96- with a significance level set at 5%. 38.44. Salinity is mostly controlled by the vicin- Canonical Correspondence Analysis (CCA) ity of freshwater sources and the lowest average was used for relating community composition values in the water column were recorded at sta- to the known variation in the environment (TER tions Š1 and P1, both under direct riverine influ- BRAAk, 1986). CCA was used to evaluate the ences, while the highest average salinity values unimodal and cause-effect relations between the were generally recorded at station z1 (fig. 3). abundance of main mesozooplankton groups (as Seasonal fluctuations in average water column response variables) and environmental param- salinity were low at majority of the stations, eters (as explanatory variables) along the gradi- with the exception of station Š1 where the val- 248 ACTA ADRIATICA, 53(2): 241 - 260, 2012

Fig. 2. Seasonal variability of average temperature at the investigated stations (vertical bars denote minimum and maximum values)

Fig. 3. Seasonal variability of average salinity at the investigated stations (vertical bars denote minimum and maximum values) viDJaK et al.: Environmental drivers of zooplankton variability in the coastal eastern Adriatic ... 249

ues were noticeably lower in spring compared Nutrients concentrations and to other seasons, due to the increased inflow of phytoplankton biomass krka River. highest concentrations of nitrate and orthosilicate were determined at stations Š1, Š2 and Oxygen concentration and saturation P1 under the respective influences of rivers krka and Neretva, coinciding with maxima in Water column was well-oxygenated, with oxygen concentrations (fig. 4). At other stations concentration generally ranging over 4.27- -1 the concentrations of both nutrients did not vary 6.75 mL O2 L , corresponding to 85.74% and greatly. Spearman correlations between nutri- 121.59% O2 saturation, respectively. highest ent concentrations and temperature and salinity -1 value of 9.31 mL L was recorded at station Š1 confirmed the increased availability of nitrate (July 2006, 0 m) (fig. 4). Oxygen solubility was and orthosilicate in the water column during the strongly negatively influenced by temperature isothermal conditions and under the lower salin- (Table 1). ity regime (Table 1).

Table 1. Spearman rank order correlations between abiotic and biotic parameters in the environment (N=88 for orthophosphate, N=94 for DO, N=96 for all other data; P<0.05*; P<0.001**)

- 2- 4- TEMP SAL DIN NO3 hPO4 SiO4 DO Chl a SAL -0.073 DIN -0.419** -0.255* - NO3 -0.465** -0.318* 0.913** 2- hPO4 -0.048 0.145 0.188 0.104 4- SiO4 -0.462** -0.414** 0.574** 0.641** 0.053 DO -0.688** 0.180 0.196 0.307* -0.026 0.311* Chl a -0.173 -0.440** 0.351** 0.394** 0.043 0.495** 0.118 CIL -0.130 -0.090 0.291* 0.293* 0.237* 0.342** 0.066 0.331* (TEMP=temperature, SAL=salinity, DIN=total inorganic nitrogen, DO=dissolved oxygen, CIL=ciliates)

Fig. 4. Spatial distributions of oxygen and main nutrients concentrations at the investigated area 250 ACTA ADRIATICA, 53(2): 241 - 260, 2012

Fig. 5. Spatial distributions of a) phytoplankton biomass Fig. 6. Spatial distribution of mesozooplankton in the inves- and b) ciliate abundances in the investigated area tigated area: a) total mesozooplankton abundances; b) total copepods abundances

Absolute orthophosphate concentrations itively correlated with average concentrations of -3 were generally <0.2 mmol m , except at sta- nitrogen salts and orthosilicate, and significantly tions Š1, Š2 and S2 where they reached maxima negatively correlated with average water col- -3 -3 of 0.505 mmol m , 0.205 mmol m and 0.313 umn salinity. The correlation with the average -3 mmol m , respectively (fig. 4). Considering water column temperature was negative, but not that the Spearman correlations showed no sig- statistically significant (Table 1). nificant effect of either temperature or salinity on orthophosphate dynamics during the inves- Ciliates tigated period (Table 1), those maxima were presumably affected by the vicinity of the cities Total ciliate abundances per station ranged of Šibenik and Split, and their industrial and over 62-1389 ind. L-1 (column average), with domestic effluents. non-loricate ciliates (NLC) generally dominat- Chlorophyll a values at the investigated ing the assemblage. The column average abun- stations mostly ranged from 0.06-2.04 mg Chl dances of NLC fluctuated greatly during the a m-3. The exception was noted in September investigated period, ranging from 59-1099 ind. 2006, when 4.40 mg Chl a m-3 was recorded at L-1 (fig. 5B). Maximum value was recorded at the surface at station Š1 (fig. 5A). Apart from station PG1 in May 2006. The column average Š1, increased values of >1 mg Chl a m-3 were tintinnid abundances varied between 2-290 ind. occasionally recorded at stations S2 (kaštela L-1. Spearman correlations showed no signifi- Bay), at Š2 which is influenced by the krka cant relationship between total ciliates and either River, and at P1 influenced by the Neretva temperature or salinity, indicating the availabil- River. Spearman correlations showed that aver- ity of this prey group in all seasons and salinity age Chl a concentrations were significantly pos- conditions (Table 1). viDJaK et al.: Environmental drivers of zooplankton variability in the coastal eastern Adriatic ... 251

Fig. 7. Average abundances (seasonal average) of the dominant mesozooplankton groups at the investigated stations; M, March samplings; J, July samplings; S-0, September-October samplings; D-J, December-January samplings

Metazooplankton abundance (Bay of Pag), Š1 (Šibenik Bay) and S2 (kaštela and distribution Bay). Copepods represented on average 66.1% Average abundances of copepod nauplii in in all net samples, and were mostly responsi- the water column varied between 11-166 ind. ble for total zooplankton fluctuations (Spear- L-1. Increased values were generally recorded man R=0.889, p<0.001), with abundance values -3 in the warmer months, with maximum at station ranging between 826-21710 ind. m (fig. 6B P1 in July 2007. Total mesozooplankton abun- and 7). Larval assemblage ranked either second dances per station ranged between 2178-36244 or third in total mesozooplankton (Spearman ind. m-3 (fig. 6A). Totals were higher in the R=0.721; p<0.001) and were mostly dominated warmer part of the investigated period, especial- by bivalve larvae, followed by those of gas- ly at stations in the enclosed bays, such as PG1 tropods and decapod crustaceans. Cladocerans 252 ACTA ADRIATICA, 53(2): 241 - 260, 2012

Fig. 8. Asessment of the trophic status within the investigated area based on TRIX values

Fig. 9. Dendrogram of the hierarchical clustering (group average linking) of the investigated stations based on group average clustering from Bray-Curtis similarity matrix of square root transformed average abundances of mesozooplankton groups (copepods, cladocerans, appendicularians, chaetognaths, meroplankton larvae). π statistics resulting from the application of SIMPROOF test showed the only significant separation within the investigated area (π=1.66; p=1.4%) displayed by the bold line. Other resulting subgroups are represented by gray lines, as π statistics indicated Fig. 10. Canonical Correspondence Analysis (CCA) ordi- lack of significant internal structure in the cluster nation biplots of the a) scores of metazooplankton groups significantly contributed to total mesozooplank- (CALANO=calanoid copepods; ton abundances (Spearman R=0.366, p<0.001) POECI=poecilostomatoid copepods; in the warmer periods. Among other quantita- CYCLO=cyclopoid copepods; tively important mesozooplankton groups in HARPACT=harpacticoid copepods; NAUP= copepod nauplii; decreasing order were appendicularians (Spear- CLADO=cladocerans; man R=0.487; p<0.001), chaetognaths (Spear- APP=appendicularians; man R=0.342; p<0.001), and pteropods (Spear- CHAETO=chaetognaths; man R=0.300; p<0.05), while hydromedusae, BIVAL=bivalves; PTERO=pteropods) and ostracods, mysids, amphipods, euphausiids and b) site scores and environmental variables thaliaceans were present occasionally and in low (TEMP=temperature, SAL=salinity, DO=dissolved numbers. Spatial and seasonal distributions of oxygen, CIL=ciliates) the average abundances of dominant mesozooplankton groups are presented in figure 7. viDJaK et al.: Environmental drivers of zooplankton variability in the coastal eastern Adriatic ... 253

Spatial and seasonal variability of copepod cies at both seasonal and spatial scales. The abundance and taxonomic composition average abundances of this species ranked first -3 A total of 65 copepod species was recorded among adult copepods in spring (961 ind. m ), -3 during the investigated period. Shannon diver- summer (1194 ind. m ) and autumn samples -3 sity index ranged between 0.754 and 2.486 and (1546 ind. m ), and ranked second to Oncaea -3 was inversely related to average temperature waldemari only in winter samples (483 ind. m ). (Spearman R= –0.222; p<0.05; N=96), while Spatially, it dominated at PG1, Š1, Š2, S1 and positively related to average salinity (Spear- P1, and ranked second to Oncaea waldemari at man R= –0.221; p<0.05; N=96). Additionally, PG2, z1 and S2. Apart from Oithona nana and Shannon diversity showed significant positive Oncaea waldemari, among the top 5 species correlations with the average concentrations of throughout the investigated area were Para- nitrate and orthophosphate at p<0.05 (Spearman calanus parvus, Euterpina acutifrons, Mono- R=0.300; N=96 and 0.446; N=88, respectively), thula subtilis and Acartia clausi. Other recorded while the relationship with orthosilicate was not Acartiidae (e.g. Paracartia latisetosa, Acartia significant. adriatica and A. margalefi) were not among the from the analysis of the average similarity key copepod taxa and occurred sporadically and performed through SIMPER within the seasons in small abundances. and within the stations, Oithona nana emerged Average dissimilarity between stations based as the most successfully adapted copepod spe- on individual copepod species abundances com-

Table 2. Comparative analysis (Kruskall Wallis ANOVA) of significance of differences among means in abiotic and biotic data sets among the sampling sites. Pairwise comparisons were obtained by applying Dunn’s post-hoc test

kruskall-Wallis Dunn’s multiple Parameter P P h comparison test z1 vs Š1 P<0.05 - NO3 19.87 0.0059** Š1 vs Š2 P<0.05

- NO2 14.15 0.0486* z1 vs Š1 P<0.05

+ NH4 6.80 ns — — DIN 16.81 0.0186* z1 vs Š1 P<0.05 2- HPO4 7.976 ns — — PG1 vs Š1 P<0.05 z1 vs Š1 P<0.001 4- SiO4 34.87 P<0.001*** Š1 vs Š2 P<0.001 Š1 vs S1 P<0.01 Š1 vs S2 P<0.01

PG1 vs Š1 P<0.001 PG2 vs Š1 P<0.001 PG2 vs S2 P<0.05 Phytoplankton biomass 44.10 P<0.001*** z1 vs Š1 P<0.001 Š1 vs Š2 P<0.001 Š1 vs S1 P<0.05

z1 vs Š1 P<0.05 Mesozooplankton abundance 22.76 P<0.05** z1 vs S2 P<0.05

z1 vs Š1 P<0.01 Copepod abundance 25.82 P<0.001*** z1 vs S2 P<0.01

*p<0.05; **p<0.01; ***p<0.001; ns=not significant 254 ACTA ADRIATICA, 53(2): 241 - 260, 2012 puted through the SIMPER procedure ranged classes used for Adriatic coastal waters is avail- between minimum of 33.20% for stations Š1 able at www.izor.hr/azo). At all sampling sites and S2 (both located in enclosed bays) and max- mean TRIX values indicated oligotrophic con- imum of 46.95% for stations PG2 and Š2 with ditions. Occasionally mesotrophic conditions considerable difference in depth. further break- were evident at PG2 and P1, but the highest data ing of the averages down into separate contribu- scattering was found at station Š1, where values tions from each species showed that 12 copepod reached into eutrophic conditions. taxa combined accounted for 75% of the total hierarchical clustering of the investigated copepod abundance at all investigated sites. stations based on the abundances of mesozoo- Those were: Oithona nana, Oncaea waldemari, plankton groups separated bay stations Š1 and Paracalanus parvus, Acartia clausi, Oithona S2 from the rest of the investigated area at similis, Centropages krøyeri, Monothula sub- similarity level of >77.3% (fig. 9). Application tilis, Ctenocalanus vanus, Ditrichocorycaeus of the SIMPROOf test and the resulting π sta- brehmi, Temora stylifera, Microsetella spp. and tistics showed that this was the only significant Farranula rostrata. separation within the investigated area (π=1.66; Analysis based on the factor season within p=1.4%). In other resulting subgroups the π the same SIMPER routine showed that the aver- statistics indicated lack of significant internal age dissimilarity between the sampling periods structure in the clusters. varied in the narrow range between 40.89% (May, July) and 43.96% (May, September- Analysis of environmental influences on the October). Species identified as responsible for zooplankton community the 75% of the total copepod abundances in all The results of the CCA used to identify an seasons were Oithona nana, Oncaea waldemari, environmental basis for community ordination Paracalanus parvus, Acartia clausi, Oithona are presented on the biplot (fig. 10), showing similis, Centropages krøyeri, Monothula sub- that the first two ordination axes explained tilis, Ctenocalanus vanus, Ditrichocorycaeus 85.29% of the data variability of most abundant brehmi, Temora stylifera, Microsetella spp., zooplankton groups in the ordination of selected Farranula rostrata, Centropages typicus and environmental parameters. The most important Clausocalanus furcatus. environmental variables were temperature and salinity defining the first two axes. Dissolved Comparison of investigated sites based on oxygen and nitrate concentration were strongly chemical and biological parameters and correlated with the first axis, and taking into trophic index values account the determining effect of temperature Comparison of the chemical and biological on both latter parameters, we assumed that tem- water properties displayed in Table 2 showed perature is mainly responsible for the environ- significant differences among sampling sites, mental gradient along this axis. The abundances but the post-hoc test revealed that they were of cladocerans, copepod nauplii and pteropods generally induced by the conditions at station were significantly positively associated with Š1 which differed significantly from the rest of the first axis at channel stations z1, Š2, S1 and the sampling area in chemical (total inorganic P1 (fig. 10). The second axis was defined by nitrogen concentrations, nitrogen salts and sili- salinity and positively affected poecilostoma- cate content), as well as in biological properties toid copepods and appendicularians at stations (phytoplankton biomass, mesozooplankton and z1 and PG2, while negatively affecting bivalve copepod abundances). The differences were larvae at Š1 and S2. most consistently shown between Š1 and z1. Additional axes explained significantly less Values of TRIX and the trophic classes of the overall variability in the zooplankton attributed to the TRIX ranges are presented in dataset compared to the first two axes. Third fig. 8 (range and definition of depicted trophic and fourth axes (not displayed) were defined viDJaK et al.: Environmental drivers of zooplankton variability in the coastal eastern Adriatic ... 255

by chlorophyll a concentration and ciliate abun- Adriatic waters (hURE & kRŠINIĆ, 1998). dance, respectively, and can thus be regard- Conversely, intercomparisons of the sam- ed as the prey gradients. zooplankton groups pling stations based on the abundances of total related to the third axis included grazers such mesozooplankton and copepods as the most as calanoid copepods and pteropods as well abundant constituent, showed some differentia- as omnivores such as harpacticoid copepods. tion in the area. Differences in the abundance Strong relationship with the fourth axis was dis- means were generally induced by the distinction played by cyclopoid and harpacticoid copepods, between channel station z1 (zadar Channel) and bivalve larvae and copepod nauplii. bay stations Š1 (Šibenik Bay) and S2 (kaštela Bay), designating them as the extremes in the DISCUSSION community size, while in the rest of the sampling area a clear gradient in population magni- Despite some differences in depth and gen- tude could not be detected. eral hydrology, zooplankton population struc- The lack of the significant inner structure ture in the bays and channels of the eastern in the Š1-S2 subgroup displayed on the cluster middle Adriatic Sea showed high similarity dendrogram showed that there are still consider- within most of the investigated regions. Rela- able differences between the respective Bays. tive importance of the individual copepod spe- Besides enclosed positions and similar depths, cies showed characteristic high ranking of small the shared features between Šibenik Bay and and medium-sized taxa, such as Oithona nana, kaštela Bay include higher orthophosphate con- Oncaea waldemari, Paracalanus parvus, Euter- centrations and phytoplankton biomass com- pina acutifrons, Monothula subtilis and Acartia pared to the rest of the sampling stations, but clausi. This was not unexpected, considering both parameters were consistently lower in the that Oithona spp. are the most ubiquitous and kaštela Bay. All through the 1980s and at the abundant copepods in coastal environments beginning of 1990s, both locations were consid- worldwide (PAffENhÖfER, 1993; GALLIENNE & ered as „hot spots“ of the coastal eastern mid- ROBBINS, 2001), while others are among domi- dle Adriatic, subjected to the negative effects nant copepods in the Mediterranean (fERNÁN- of nutrients overload on the water column DEz DE PUELLES et al., 2003; RIBERA D’ALCALÁ properties and resident biological components et al., 2004) and Adriatic neritic communities (MARASOVIĆ et al., 1991, 2005). however, during (hURE & kRŠINIĆ, 1998; kRŠINIĆ et al., 2007). the last decade, kaštela Bay has gone through higher diversity in the copepod population dur- a significant decrease in the antropogenically ing the colder periods indicated by the Shannon forced eutrophication, which led towards the diversity index values is related to the eastern reinstatement of the more natural conditions Adriatic circulation pattern, characterized by the (kUŠPILIĆ et al., 2009). On the other hand, Šibenik increased inflow which reinforces currents along Bay is under considerable influence from the the eastern coast in winter (zORE-ARMANDA et krka River, and although it is one of the most al., 1999), and temporary presence of oceanic pristine European rivers characterized by low species is often recorded in eastern Adriatic bays concentrations of nutrients and extremely low and channels during the winter isothermia (REG- input of terrigeneous material (LEGOVIĆ et al., NER, 1985; VIDJAk et al., 2007). Biodiversity of the 1994), the combined nutrient load from the riv- copepod community was not adversely affected erine inflow and anthropogenic input from the by the differences in the average nutrient load in town of Šibenik (GRŽETIĆ et al., 1991; LEGOVIĆ et the investigated area. Despite their overall domi- al., 1994) still designate Šibenik Bay as an area of nance in mesozooplankton, copepod taxonomic intense productivity that is apparently reflected structure revealed very little of the underlying at higher trophic levels as well. differences in the area, stressing the relative uni- Analysis of the main environmental influ- formity of the copepod community in the coastal ences on zooplankton abundances showed that 256 ACTA ADRIATICA, 53(2): 241 - 260, 2012 zooplankton primarily responded to physical abundances of grazers such as calanoid cope- parameters, such as temperature and salinity. pods, cladocerans and pteropods were related Thus cladocerans, copepod nauplii and ptero- to the third axis determined by chlorophyll a pods responded positively to temperature at concentration. In addition, clear relationships group level, while for poecilostomatoid cope- emerged for copepod nauplii and bivalve lar- pods and bivalve larvae this relationship was vae with ciliated protozoans. The nature of this inverse. The conditioning effect of temperature relationship presumably includes predator-prey on zooplankton groups and species is document- interactions since copepod nauplii are able to ed in the large part of zooplankton investigations utilize non-loricate ciliates in their diet (BOJANIĆ (e.g. LICANDRO & IBANEz, 2000; fERNÁNDEz DE et al., 2006) and ciliates are also identified as PUELLES et al., 2004, 2004a; MARQUES et al., 2006). the significant prey for the bivalve mollusc Some groups were spatially controlled by local (kRŠINIĆ, 1987; NJIRE et al., 2004). Omnivorous salinity variations, with for instance, bivalve copepods, such as cyclopoids, mostly represent- larvae favouring lower salinity of Šibenik Bay, ed by Oithona nana, or harpacticoids, mostly while appendicularians and poecilostomatoid represented by Euterpina acutifrons, differed in copepods preferred higher salinities in zadar their response to the selected pray categories; Channel and Pag Straits. The CCA results while cyclopoid abundances were significantly suggested that chemical parameters measured determined by the availability of ciliates, for during this investigation had little direct influ- harpacticoids both ciliates and phytoplankton ence on the zooplankton variability, with the prey categories were highly important. This is exception of dissolved oxygen concentration. in accordance with numerous studies that cite however, considering that dissolved oxygen Oithona spp. as broadly omnivorous, but with concentrations throughout the investigated peri- preferential feeding for microzooplankton and od were favourable for zooplankton organisms, motile pray (NAkAMURA & TURNER, 1997; LONS- with no evidence of hypoxia (<2 mL-1) (STAL- DALE et al., 2000; ATIENzA et al., 2006), while Euter- DER & MARCUS, 1997; DECkER et al., 2004), strong pina acutrifrons mainly thrives on small phyto- association of this parameter with the first axis plankton cells, but oportunistically ingests other is presumably combined with the effect of tem- small-sized particles, particularly when at higher perature, which to a great extent determines the concentrations (SAUTOUR & CASTEL, 1993). It is oxygen solubility in the water column. Since important to notice that other higher ranking nitrate concentrations in the water column were copepods such as Oncaea waldemari, Acartia also strongly correlated with temperature, it was clausi and Monothula subtilis are also classified difficult to separate its particular influence on as omnivores (reviewed in TURNER, 2004), which zooplankton data variability. however, spatial supports the importance of heterotrophic prey distribution of the collected data showed that items in the nutrition of dominant copepods in concentrations of the main nutrients and accom- the coastal area (GISMERVIk, 2006). panying phytoplankton biomass, as well as ciliate and mesozooplankton abundances showed highest values in the Šibenik Bay, indicating CONCLUSIONS that increased nutrients availability could be beneficial to all examined components of the Mesozooplankton population structure and food web. taxonomic composition of copepods as the dom- Biotic parameters included in CCA such as inant group in the bays and channels of the east- available autotrophic biomass and ciliate prey, ern Adriatic Sea did not reveal significant dif- determined very little of the overall variability ferences within the area. Copepod communities in the zooplankton data, although a number of were dominated by small, ubiquitous copepods, zooplankton groups were related to CCA axes with Oithona nana, Oncaea waldemari, Paraca- defined by those parameters. for instance, the lanus parvus, Euterpina acutifrons, Monothula viDJaK et al.: Environmental drivers of zooplankton variability in the coastal eastern Adriatic ... 257

subtilis and Acartia clausi dominating at both the trophic status of an area and supports the spatial and seasonal scales. use of the zooplankton studies as an auxil- zooplankton numerical variability in the iary method in the environmental monitoring of investigated area was influenced principally by coastal areas. physical environmental factors such as seasonal variation in water temperature and spatial variation in salinity. however, abundances of total ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS mesozooplankton in general, and copepods in particular were also linked to the chemical and This study was supported by the Ministry of biological parameters generally used as descrip- Science, Education and Sports of the Republic tors of water quality. This was especially evident of Croatia, as a part of the research program in the Šibenik Bay, where nutrient enrichment ‘‘Role of plankton communities in the energy. coming from the krka River and anthropogenic and matter flow in the Adriatic Sea’’ (001- sources affected the main copepod prey catego- 0013077-0845). The authors express their grati- ries such as available autotrophic biomass and tute to crew and technicians of the RV ‘‘Bios’’ ciliated protozoans, and consequently mesozoo- involved in the fieldwork and sample collection. plankton and copepod abundances. This indi- The comments of the reviewers are greatly cates that zooplankton community size reflects appreciated.

REFERENCES

ATIENzA, D., A. CALBET, E. SAIz, M. ALCARAz andria, Egypt, 10-12 february 2009, pp. & I. TREPAT. 2006. Trophic impact, metabo- 57-59. lism, and biogeochemical role of the marine BOJANIĆ, N. & O. VIDJAk. 2010. Changes in the cladoceran Penilia avirostris and the codo- ciliate community of eutrophicated Vranjic minant copepod Oithona nana in NW Medi- Basin (middle Adriatic Sea) during 2004- terranean coastal waters. Mar. Biol., 150: 2005. Rapp. Comm. Int. Mer Médit., 39: 221–235. 445 pp. AVANzINI, C. 2009 . 30+ years of marine waste BOJANIĆ, N., M. ŠOLIĆ, N. kRSTULOVIĆ, S. water discharges – and related discussions ŠESTANOVIĆ, I. MARASOVIĆ & Ž. NINČEVIĆ. – for small and large Mediterranean cities. 2005. Temporal variability in abundance Impact of large coastal Mediterranean cities and biomass of ciliates and copepods in on marine ecosystems – Alexandria, Egypt, the eutrophicated part of the kaštela Bay 10-12 february 2009, pp. 37-46. (Middle Adriatic Sea). helgol. Mar. Res., BALOGh, k.V. 1988. Comparison of mussels 59:107–120. and crustacean plankton to monitor heavy metal pollution. Water Air Soil Pollut., 37 BOJANIĆ, N., O. VIDJAk & I. BRAUTOVIĆ. 2006. (3-4): 281-292. Spatial and temporal variability in abun- BOGNER, D., I. UJEVIĆ, T. zVONARIĆ & A. BARIĆ. dance and biomass of oligotrich ciliates in 2004. Distribution of selected trace metals in the kaštela Bay (Middle Adriatic Sea). Acta coastal surface sediments from the middle Adriat., 47(2): 93-109. and south Adriatic. fresenius Environ. Bull., BONACINA, C. & A. PASTERIS. 2001. zooplankton 13(11b): 1281-1287. of Lake Orta after liming: an eleven years BOISSERy, P. 2009. Contribution of coastal cities study. J. Limnol., 60(1): 101-109. to the alteration of the marine environment BORJA, A. 2005. The European water framework quality. Proceedings of the international directive: A challenge for nearshore, coastal workshop. Impact of large coastal Mediter- and continental shelf research. Cont. Shelf ranean cities on marine ecosystems – Alex- Res., 25: 1768–1783. 258 ACTA ADRIATICA, 53(2): 241 - 260, 2012

BORJA, A., M. ELLIOTT, J. CARSTENSEN, A.S. JANSÁ & A. MORILLAS. 2004a. hydrographical hEISkANEN & W. VAN DE BUND. 2010. Marine characteristics and zooplankton distribution management – towards an integrated imple- in the Mallorca channel (Western Mediter- mentation of the European Marine Strategy ranean): spring 2001. ICES J. Mar. Sci., 61: framework and the Water framework Direc- 654-666. tives. Mar. Pollut. Bull., 60: 2175-2186. fONDA UMANI, S. & A. BERAN. 2003. Seasonal BOXShALL, G.A. & S. hALSEy. 2004. An introduc- variations in the dynamics of microbial tion to copepod diversity. The Ray Society plankton communities: first estimates from Series. Ray Society, London, Uk, 966 pp. experiments in the Gulf of Trieste, Northern CAPRIULO, G.M., G. SMITh, R. TROy, G.h. WIk- Adriatic Sea. Mar. Ecol. Progr. Ser., 247: fORS, J. PELLET & C. yARISh. 2002. The plank- 1–16. tonic food web structure of a temperate zone fONDA UMANI, S., L. MILANI, D. BORME, A. estuary, and its alteration due to eutrophica- DE OLAzABAL, S. PARLATO, R. PRECALI, tion. hydrobiologia, 475/476: 263–333. R. kRAUS, D. LUČIĆ, J. NJIRE, C. TOTTI, T. CLARkE, k.R. & R.N. GORLEy. 2001. PRIMER ROMAGNOLI, M. POMPEI & M. CANGINI. 2005. v5: User Manual/Tutorial. PRIMER-E, Ply- Inter-annual variations of planktonic food mouth, p. 172. webs in the northern Adriatic Sea. Sci. Total CLARkE, k.R. & R.N. GORLEy. 2006. PRIMER Environ., 353: 218– 231. v6: User Manual/Tutorial. PRIMER-E, Ply- GALLIENNE, C.P. & D.B. ROBINS. 2001. Is Oithona mouth, 190 pp. the most important copepod in the world’s oceans? J. Plankton Res., 23: 1421-1432. DECkER, M.B., D.L. BREITBURG & J.E. PURCELL. GISMERVIk, I. 2006. Top-down impact by cope- 2004. Effects of low dissolved oxygen on pods on ciliate numbers and persistence zooplankton predation by the ctenophore depends on copepod and ciliate species Mnemiopsis leidyi. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., composition. J. Plankton Res., 28; 499-507. 280: 163–172. GISMERVIk, I, T. ANDERSEN & O. VADSTEIN. 1996. DUARTE, C.M., D.J. CONLEy, J. CARSTENSEN & M. Pelagic food webs and eutrophication of SÁNChEz-CAMAChO. 2009. Return to Nev- coastal waters: impact of grazers on algal erland: Shifting Baselines Affect Eutrophi- communities. Mar. Pollut. Bull., 33: 22-35. cation Restoration Targets. Estuar. Coasts, GRASShOff, k. 1976. Methods of seawater analy- 32:29–36. sis. Weinheim Verlag Chemie, Gmbh, Wein- fALCãO, J., S.C. MARQUES, M.A. PARDAL, J.C. heim, 307 pp. MARQUES, A.L. PRIMO & U.M. AzEITEIRO. GRŽETIĆ, z., R. PRECALI, D. DEGOBBIS & A. 2012. Mesozooplankton structural responses ŠkRIVANIĆ. 1991. Nutrient enrichment and in a shallow temperate estuary following phytoplankton response in an Adriatic restoration measures. Estuar. Coast. Shelf karstic estuary. Mar .Chem., 32: 313-331. Sci., 112: 33-30. hSIEh, C.h., y. SAkAI, S. BAN, k. IShIkAWA, T. fERNÁNDEz DE PUELLES, M.L., D. GRÁS & S. IShIkAWA, S. IChISE, N. yAMAMURA & M. hERNÁNDEz-LEÓN. 2003. Annual cycle kUMAGAI. 2011. Eutrophication and warm- of zooplankton biomass, abundance and ing effects on long-term variation on zoo- species composition in the neritic area of plankton in Lake Biwa. Biogeosciences, 8: the Balearic Sea, Western Mediterranean. 593-629. P.S.z.N.: Mar. Ecol., 24(2): 123–139. hURE, J. & f. kRŠINIĆ. 1998. Planktonic copepods fERNÁNDEz DE PUELLES, M.L., J. VALENCIA 8& L. of the Adriatic Sea. Spatial and temporal VICENTE. 2004. zooplankton variability and distribution. Nat. Croat., 7(Suppl. 2): 1-135. climatic anomalies from 1994 to 2001 in the JICkELLS, T.D. 1998. Nutrient biogeochemistry of Balearic Sea (Western Mediterranean) ICES the coastal zone. Science, 10: 217-222. J. Mar. Sci., 61: 492-500. kRSTULOVIĆ, N. & S. ŠOBOT. 1982. Proportion of fERNÁNDEz DE PUELLES, M.L., J. VALENCIA, J. bacteria in total plankton of the central Adri- viDJaK et al.: Environmental drivers of zooplankton variability in the coastal eastern Adriatic ... 259

atic. Acta Adriat., 23: 47-52. Adriatic. J. Sea Res., 54: 3-14. kRŠINIĆ, f. 1987. On the ecology of tintinnines in MARCUS, N. 2004. An overview of the impacts of the Bay of Mali Ston (Eastern Adriatic). Est. eutrophication and chemical pollutants on Coast. Shelf Sci., 24: 401-418. copepods of the coastal zone. zool. Stud., kRŠINIĆ, f., D. BOJANIĆ, R. PRECALI & R. kRAUS. 43: 211-217. 2007. Quantitative variability of the copepod MARQUES, S.C., M.U. AzEITEIRO, J.C. MARQUES, assemblages in the northern Adriatic Sea J.M. NETO & M.Â. PARDAL. 2006. zooplankton from 1993 to 1997. Est. Coast. Shelf Sci., and ichthyoplankton communities in a tem- 74: 528-538. perate estuary: spatial and temporal patterns. kUŠPILIĆ, G., S. MATIJEVIĆ, L. STOJANOSkI & J. Plankton Res., 28: 297-312. I. PEzO. 2007. Chemical parameters. (in MARQUES, S.C., M.U. AzEITEIRO, S.M. LEANDRO, Croatian) In: Coastal Sea Quality Assess- h. QUEIROGA, A.L. PRIMO, f. MARTINhO, I. ment (Project Pag-konavle). Institute of VIEGAS & M.Â. PARDAL. 2008. Predicting zoo- Oceanography and fisheries, Split, 276: plankton response to environmental changes 57-70. in a temperate estuarine ecosystem. Mar. kUŠPILIĆ, G., I. MARASOVIĆ, N. kRSTULOVIĆ, M. Biol., 155:531–541. DOI 10.1007/s00227- ŠOLIĆ, Ž. NINČEVIĆ GLADAN, N. BOJANIĆ, 008-1052-6. O. VIDJAk & S. MATIJEVIĆ. 2009. Restora- MILUN, V., D. BOGNER, A. BARIĆ & T. zVONARIĆ. tion potential of eutrophic waters adjacent 2006. Distribution of polychlorinated biphe- to large coastal cities: Lessons from the nyls (PCBs) in surface sediments from the coastal zone of Croatia. Proceedings of the Middle and South Adriatic waters. fresenius international workshop “Impact of large Environ. Bull., 15: 997-1002. coastal Mediterranean cities on marine eco- NAkAMURA, y. & J.T. TURNER. 1997. Predation systems”, Alexandria, Egypt, 10-12 febru- and respiration by the small cyclopoid cope- ary 2009, pp. 117-120. pod Oithona similis: how important is feed- LEGOVIĆ, T., V. ŽUTIĆ, z. GRŽETIĆ, G. CAUWET, R. ing on ciliates and heterotrophic flagellates? PRECALI & D. VILIČIĆ. 1994. Eutrophication in J. Plankton Res., 19: 1275–1288. the krka estuary. Mar. Chem., 46: 203-215. NJIRE, J., J. BOLOTIN & D. LUČIĆ. 2004. Importance LEVINTON, G.S. 1995. Marine biology. function, of ciliated protozoa to the culture of the biodiversity, ecology. Oxford University mussel Mytilus galloprovincialis L. in the Press, 1995, New york, 420 pp. Bay of Mali Ston, Croatia. Rapp. Comm. LICANDRO, P. & f. IBANEz. 2000. Changes of zoo- Int. Mer Médit., 37: 410. plankton communities in the Gulf of Tigullo PAffENhÖfER, G.A. 1993. On the ecology of (Ligurian Sea, Western Mediterranean) from marine cyclopoid copepods (Crustacea, 1985 to 1995. Influence of hydroclimatic Copepoda). J. Plankton Res., 15: 37–55. factors. J. Plankton Res., 22: 2225-2253. PATUREJ, E. 2009. A zooplankton study of coastal LONSDALE, D.L., D.A. CARON, M.R. DENNETT & R. lakes. Balt. Coast. zone, 13(II): 25-32. SChAffNER. 2000. Predation by Oithona spp. PATUREJ, E. & A. GOźDzIEJEWSkA. 2005. zoo- on protozooplankton in the Ross Sea, Ant- plankton-based assessment of the trophic arctica. Deep- Sea Res., II 47: 3273–3283. state of three coastal lakes – Łebsko, Gardno MARASOVIĆ, I, M. GAČIĆ, N. kRSTULOVIĆ, G. and Jamno. Bull. Sea fish. Inst., 3(166): kUŠPILIĆ, T. PUChER-PETkOVIĆ, N. ODŽAk 7-27. & M. ŠOLIĆ. 1991. Development of the red PERRy, R.I., h.P. BATChELDER, D.L. MACkAS, S. tide in the kaštela Bay (Adriatic Sea). Mar. ChIBA, E. DURBIN, W. GREVE & h.M. VERh- Chem., 32: 375-385. EyE. 2004. Identifying global synchronies MARASOVIĆ, I, Ž. NINČEVIĆ, G. kUŠPILIĆ, S. in marine zooplankton populations: issues MARINOVIĆ & S. SkEJIĆ. 2005. Long-term and opportunities. ICES J. Mar. Sci., 61: changes of basic biological and chemical 445-456. parameters at two stations in the middle PINTO-COELhO, R.M., J.f. BEzERRA-NETO & C.A. 260 ACTA ADRIATICA, 53(2): 241 - 260, 2012

MORAIS-JR 2005. Effects of eutrophication on ŠOLIĆ, M., N. kRSTULOVIĆ, G. kUŠPILIĆ, size and biomass of crustacean zooplankton Ž. NINČEVIĆ GLADAN, N. BOJANIĆ, S. in a tropical reservoir. Braz. J. Biol., 65(2): ŠESTANOVIĆ, D. ŠANTIĆ & M. ORDULJ. 2010. 325-338. Changes in microbial food web structure in REGNER, D. 1985. Seasonal and multiannual response to changed environmental trophic dynamics of copepods in the Middle Adri- status: A case study of the Vranjic Basin atic. Acta Adriat., 26: 11-99. (Adriatic Sea). Mar. Environ. Res., 70: 239- REGNER, D. 1989. Copepod communities in the 249. middle Adriatic as affected by different lev- TER BRAAk, C.J.f. 1986. Canonical Correspond- els of pollution. Toxicol. Environ. Chem., ence Analysis: A New Eigenvector tech- 20-21: 217-225. nique for Multivariate Direct Gradient Anal- REGNER, D. 1991. The progressive changes of the ysis. Ecology, 67(5): 1167-1179. copepod community from the eastern Adri- TURNER, J.T. 2004. The importance of small atic coast caused by eutrophication. Toxicol. planktonic copepods and their roles in pelag- Environ. Chem., 31-32: 433-439. ic marine food webs. zool. Stud., 43(2): REGNER, D. 1992. Eutrophication effects on the 255-266. copepods in the Adriatic Sea. fresenius UJEVIĆ, I., D. BOGNER, T. zVONARIĆ & A. BARIĆ. Environ. Bull., 1: 161-165. 1998. Trace metal distribution in coastal RIBERA D’ALCALÁ, M. f. CONVERSANO, f. CORA- sediment from the Adriatic Sea. fresenius TO, P. LICANDRO, O. MANGONI, D. MARINO, Environ. Bull., 7: 701-708. M.G. MAzzOCChI, M. MODIGh, M. MONTRE- VIDJAk, O., N. BOJANIĆ, G. kUŠPILIĆ, Ž. NINČEVIĆ SOR, M. NARDELLA, V. SAGGIOMO, D. SARNO GLADAN & V. TIČINA. 2007. zooplankton & A. zINGONE. 2004. Seasonal patterns in community and hydrographical properties of plankton communities in a pluriannual time the Neretva Channel (eastern Adriatic Sea). series at a coastal Mediterranean site (Gulf helgol. Mar. Res., 61: 267–282. of Naples): an attempt to discern recurrences VOLLENWEIDER, R.A., f. GIOVANARDI, G. MON- and trends. Sci. Mar., 68: 65-83. TANARI & A. RINALDI. 1998. Characteriza- SAUTOUR, B. & J. CASTEL. 1993. feeding behav- tion of the trophic conditions of marine iour of the coastal copepod Euterpina acu- coastal waters, with special reference to the tifrons on small particles. Cah. Biol. Mar., NW Adriatic Sea: proposal for a trophic 34: 239-251. scale, turbidity and generalized water qual- SOUSA, W., J.L. ATTAyDE, E. DA SILVA ROChA ity index. Environmentrics, 9: 329-357. & E.M. ESkINAzI-SANT’ANNA. 2008. The WhITMAN, R.L., M.B. NEVERS, M.L. GOODRICh, response of zooplankton assemblages to P.C. MURPhy & B.M. DAVIS. 2004. Characteri- variations in the water quality of four man- zation of Lake Michigan coastal lakes using made lakes in semi-arid northeastern Brazil. zooplankton assemblages. Ecol. Indic., 4: J. Plankton Res., 30(6): 699-708. 277–286. STALDER, L.C. & N.h. MARCUS. 1997. zooplankton zORE-ARMANDA, M., B. GRBEC & M. MOROVIĆ. responses to hypoxia: behavioral patterns 1999. Oceanographic properties of the Adri- and survival of three species of calanoid atic Sea – a point of view. Acta Adriat., 40: copepods. Mar. Biol., 127: 599–607. 39-54. STRICkLAND, J.D.h. & T.R. PARSONS. 1972. A prac- zUUR, A.f., E.N. IENO & G.M. SMITh. 2007. Analys- tical handbook of seawater analysis. Bull. ing ecological data. Springer, 672 pp. fish. Res. Board. Can., 167: 1-310. .

Received: 4 April 2012 Accepted: 20 July 2012 viDJaK et al.: Environmental drivers of zooplankton variability in the coastal eastern Adriatic ... 261

Utjecaj čimbenika okoliša na varijabilnost zooplanktona u priobalju istočnog Jadrana (Sredozemno more)

Olja viDJaK1*, Natalia BoJanić1, Slavica MatiJević1, Grozdan KUšPilić1, Živana ninČević glaDan1, Sanda sKeJić1, Branka grBec1 i Igor BraUtović2

1Institut za oceanografiju i ribarstvo, Šetalište I. Meštrovića 63, 21000 Split, Hrvatska

2Institut za more i priobalje, Kneza D. Jude 12, pp. 83, 20000 Dubrovnik, Hrvatska

*Kontakt adresa, e-mail: [email protected]

SAŽETAK

Ciljevi ovog rada su bili utvrditi glavne ekološke pokretače varijabilnosti zooplanktona u obal- nim vodama u blizini urbanih područja, te procijeniti razlike u brojnosti i strukturi zooplanktonske zajednice u odnosu na kemijske i biološke čimbenike vodenog stupca. Uzorci zooplanktona su saku- pljani sezonski od svibnja 2006. do siječnja 2009. godine, na 8 postaja u zaljevima i kanalima duž istočne obale Jadrana. Struktura populacija zooplanktonske zajednice pokazala je visoku sličnost unutar čitavog istraživanog područja, što je posebno vidljivo u homogenosti sastava kopepodne zajednice, gdje je relativna važnost pojedinih vrsta svuda ukazala na karakteristično visoki udio malih i srednjih taksona. Numerička varijabilnost zooplanktona prvenstveno je bila povezana sa sezonskim varijacijama temperature i prostornim varijacijama slanosti, ali je prostorna raspodjela prikupljenih podataka pokazala da je također povezana s kemijskim i biološkim parametrima kojima se opisuje kvaliteta vode. To ukazuje da je brojnost zooplanktona povezana s trofičkim stanjem područja i ide u prilog istraživanju zooplanktona kao pomoćnog parametra u procjeni trofičkog stanja obalnih voda.

Ključne riječi: obalni zooplankton, kopepodi, trofički status, kvaliteta vode, Jadransko more