Comparison of an In Situ Imaging Device and Net-Based Method to Study Mesozooplankton Communities in an Oligotrophic System

• Published in: Frontiers in Marine Science Vol. 9
• Main Authors: Barth, Alexander, Stone, Joshua
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Frontiers Media S.A 21.06.2022
• Subjects: in situ; ocean optics; oceanography; plankton; sampling; Sargasso Sea
• ISSN: 2296-7745; 2296-7745
• DOI: 10.3389/fmars.2022.898057

In the past several years, the capabilities of optical tools and in situ imaging devices have greatly expanded and are now revolutionizing the field of plankton research. These tools have facilitated the discovery of new plankton and enhanced the understanding of populations of fragile and gelatinous zooplankton. Imaging devices are becoming more accessible and regularly deployed on oceanographic studies and monitoring efforts. However, despite the increasing use of these tools, there are few studies which offer direct comparisons between in situ imaging devices and traditional-net based methods, especially in open-ocean, oligotrophic systems where plankton are sparser and less intensively sampled. This study compares estimates of mesozooplankton abundance calculated by net-tows and an Underwater Vision Profiler 5 (UVP5HD-DEEP) imaging system. Net tows were conducted with a Multiple Opening and Closing Nets with Environmental Sensing System (MOCNESS) device equipped with 153µm mesh. In total, four tows, each sampling eight distinct depth bins, were conducted aboard two cruises in the Sargasso Sea. Along each cruise, in situ images were collected using an Underwater Vison Profiler 5 (UVP5HD-DEEP). Using these methods, we estimated abundance of different mesozooplankton groups (>0.5 mm). Using established biovolume-biomass conversions, we also estimated the dry mass of certain zooplankton taxa. Furthermore, we address two methods for calculating density and biomass concentration from UVP data. Estimates of mesozooplankton abundance and biomass concentration were generally higher from MOCNESS methods than the UVP estimates across all taxa. It was found that there is not a reliable relationship between UVP estimates and MOCNESS estimates when directly comparing similar depth bins. Nonetheless, when integrating density and biomass concentrations throughout the water column, estimates are not significantly different between the methodology. This study addresses several important considerations for using in situ imaging tools and how to reconcile findings with traditional net-based methods.