18XX; a small zooplankton net (B) with the same measurements as the preceding net and made of Swiss silk gauze n.Q 6XX; a pelagic net (O) 2.90m total lenght and with one meter square opening, the filtering portion of the net made of Swiss

ON THE UNEVEN DISTRIBUTION OF THE

aOPELAT A

OF THE FERNANDO DE NORONHA AREA

(With a map, two figures and a table)

T. K. S. Bjonberg & L. Forneris

*

INTRODUCTION

The region of Fernando de Noronha Island was visited by Dr. M. Vannucci and Dr. E . F. Nonato in January 1954. Plankton samples were coUected in nine stations (see map 1). Fernando de Noronha Island stands

at approximateJy 200 nau ti cal miles off the coast of Brazil at about 4.Q

Lat. 'S and is surrounded by the northern branch of the South Equatorial Ourrent, with waters of high salinity and high temperature. The island is situated within a weU limited region devoid of the typical maximum of salinity found in most of the tropical and subtropical zone of the Atlan-tic Ocean (Defant, 1936, p. 323, abb. · 62). The depth of the tropical thermoclyne is approximateJy 100m coinciding with the maximum of

ver-tical stability. It is therefore considered that the admixture of water

from deeper layers is insignificant and consequenUy the ocean in this region is poor in nutrients and accordingly also in plankton (Hentschel

1933, p. 15, figo 3 & 4).

METHODS

Hauls were made with three types of plankton nets: - a small

pbytoplankton net (A) 1m in length and an opening, the diameter of

which was 25cm, made of Swiss silk guaze n.Q 18XX; a small zooplankton

net (B) with the same measurements as the preceding net and made of

Swiss silk gauze n.Q 6XX; a pelagic net (O) 2.90m total lenght and with

one meter square opening, the filtering portion of the net made of Swiss

silk gauze n.Q 22GG and n! 368G.

TabIe 1 shows the number of stations, their position, other data, the

nets used and the number and percentage of Copelata found in each

sample. These were hauIed from surface layers always above the 50m depth line and in the northwestern and southwestern approaches of the isIand.

The differences in the methoc1s of collection and the want of sufficient

data made it difficult to convert the numbers of animaIs of each sample

into comparable terms. For this reason the percentages insteac1 of the absolute numbers were used.

Fig. 1 shows the percentage of species occurring in each station, and Fig. 2 shows the same per sample hauIed in each station.

SPEOIES OOOURRENOE

The population of the Copelata of the plankton of this area had the

foUowing general composition in decreasing percentage of each of the

more frequent species: Fritillaria boreaUs, Haplopleura longicauda,

Oikopleura fttsifonn'is, Fritillaria pellucida and Fritillaria formica. The majority of the species are eurythermic thermophiles, enryhaline and panthalassic. The observation of the populations of each station showed that there was a sharp difference between the northwestern and south-eastern population.

Among the stations at the southern side of the island we may dis-tinguish two groups based on approximately the same ration of species

percentages. They are group I, represented by stations 1 and 7 and group

lI, represented by stations 2, 8, ando 9. As may be seen in Fig. 1, stations

1 and 7 are characterized in decreasing frequencies by Haplopleura

longi-cauda, Fritillaria borealis (chiefly sargassi), F . pellucida and Oikopleura fusiformis (plus F. formica in station 7); and stations 2, 8 and 9 by F. borealis, H. longicauda, O. fusiformis, F. pellucida and F. formica.

There are onIy slight differences between the frequencies of H. longicauda

and F. boreaUs in the stations of groups I and lI.

In Fig. 2, which shows the percentages of the species per sample per station, we can observe that in samples M3 (station 1) and M5 (station 2) there is a correspondence of frequencies of the different species obtained

with the exception of F. pellucida. This species also appears in station 1

(M2). Therefore stations of group I and II of Fig. 1 are here considered

as being of the same general nature, with great abundance of F. borealis

and H. longicauda, and the presence in sl'naller numbers of O. fusiformis ,

F . pellucida and F. formica. This association was typical of the southern waters of the island at the time when the hauls were made.

The stations on the southern side of the island are generally also

characterized by a greater frequency of Fritillaridae than Oikopleuridae

(Table 1).

On the northern side of the isIand stations 3, 4, 5 and 6 form a group

here calIed III, characterized by O. fusiformis , F. borealis and H.

in decreasing percentage; and show a greater percentage of Oi1copl e~lT idae

than FTitillaTidae (Table 1).

Thus it can be said that the waters of the southeastern and of the northwestern approach of the island showed a different frequency

com-position of species of Copelata,there being a general characteristic picture

of frequencies for the southern waters and another for the northern. This is also true for the general amount of representatives of the families of Copelata present.

The hydrographical data available from the literature were alI taken at considerable distance from the island. Since the island is situated in the relatively strong South Equatorial Current, the prevailing hydrogra-phical conditions found in the region as stated above, ma,y have lJeen 10calIy

altered by the island and the islets around it so that a certain amount of waters from deeper layers may have risen to the surface northwest of the island thus explaining the difference in the populations. Our hydro-graphical data alI taken at zero meters show that the same salinity and temperature prevail on the northern and southern approaches of the island. This can be explained by the fact that the water from the deeper layer has already been mixed with the surface water and acquired its churacteristics through the influence of the atmosphere in contact with it. Most of the plankton hauls were made in subsurface layers, the waters of which not having yet reached the surface had not entirely acquired the surface

cha-racteristics. Another explanation for the difference in the Copelata

com-position observed in each station may be that it is not due to hydrographical

features but to different swarms of Copelata fished on the different hauls.

Patchiness of plankton organisms is a welI established fact (Cushing 1955,

p. 25-35; Rardy 1955, p. 7-11). Other speculations on the matter are

im-possible with the small amount of data available. In all the samples of superficial plankton colIected by net A (see Fig. 2) it can be observed

that H. longicauda shows a slight increase in percentage when compared

to that obtained at the same stations at greater depths (net B). This seems to explain the change suffered in the general percentages of species in

samples M-11 (station 6), M-12 (station 7) and M-1 (station 1), when

compared to the other samples collected at other depths.

O. dioica and F. ab.ioTnseni, usnally regarded as neritic species, were

registered in station 2 and F. ab.ioTnseni also occurred at station 7, both

stations situated on the island shelf. Lohmann (1896, p. 109) also observed

the occurrence of coastal animaIs in Fernando de Noronha waters and farther east from the island. Ris conclusions that there was influence from the Brazilian coast on the island does not seem to be acceptable because the South Equatorial Current flows northwesterly with sufficient strength to prevent any formation of coastal countercurrents flowing from the continent towards the east. The coas tal animaIs observed by Lohmann may have come from the African coast via the South Equatorial Current. Like Trindade Island, Fernando de Noronha, situated in oceanic waters, has the influence of a coast on the animaIs which live in the waters

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We are indebted to Dr. I. Emílsson for helpful suggestions and for

the revision of the hydrographical part; to Dr. M. Vannucci and Mr. J. P.

Oarvalho for criticism of the manuscript. We also thank Dr. lVI. VannuccL

and Dr. E. F. Nonato for collecting the material used in this study.

SUMARIO

Durante uma viagem à ilha Fernando de Noronha em Janeiro de 1954, a Dra. M. Vannucci e o Dr. E. F. Nonato coletaram amostras de plancton em várias estações ao norte e ao sul da ilha. A tabela 1 mostra o número das estações, sua posição geográfica, outros dados tais como salinidade, hora de coletá, profundidade local e

da coleta, tipos de rêdes usados , etc., a ssim como O número e a porcentagem de cada

espécie de Oopelata encontrada em cada amostra. Comparando a população de

Oopelata capturada ao norte e ao sul da ilha vcrificou·se que havia uma diferença

bem marcada nas porcentagens das diferentes espécies por amostra, e que as águas· do sul e do norte da ilha mostraram um quadro difer ente de freqüências (Fig. 1)

assim como foi diferente de cada lado da ilha a porcentagem das Famílias Oikopleuridae

e Fritillaridae. Estas predominaram ao sul enquanto aquelas predominaram ao

norte da ilha.

Para êstes fatos existem duas explicações possíveis: - ou a ilha funcionou como

obstáculo às águas da Corrente Sul Equatorial provocando no seu lado noroeste uma subida de água das camadas inferiores e modificando assim as condições hidrológicas características da região, ou as diferenças observadas de amostra para amostra (Fig. 2) foram devidas não a diferenças hidrológicas, mas, sim a diferentes " nuvens"

de Oopelata que ocorreram ao norte e ao sul da ilha, durante a época em que foi feita

a coleta.

H. longicauda mostrou ligeiro acréscimo na porcentagem relativa às outras

es-pécies, quando coletada com rêde pelágica (A) na superfície, quando comparada com as porcentagens em que ocorre em amostras coletadas por outras rêdes em profun-didades maiores.

A ocorrência de espécies neríticas (O. dioica e F. abjiirnseni) nas estações mais

próximas da costa (2 e 7) ambas situadas sôbre a plataforma insular, não vem con-firmar a idéia de Lohmann (1896, p. 109) de que haja influência da costa brasileira sôbre a ilha, pois a intensidade da corrente Sul Equatorial nessa região em direção NW torná·la-ia muito improvável, e sim confirma a teoria de Ekm an (1953, p. 313) de que as pequenas ilhas oceânicas agem como costas.

As estações ao norte da ilha mostraram como população de Copelata característica

nestas amostras, em porcentagem decrescente as espécies O. fusiformis, F. bO"ealis

e H. longicauda ou vice-versa, F . pellucida, e F. formica e S. magnum ou vice-versa;

as do sul da ilha, freqüências elevadas de F. borealis, H. longicauda e porcenta gens

menores de O. fusiformis, F. pellucida e F. fonnica.

REFERENOES

CUSHING, D. H. - 1955. Production and a Pelagic Fishery. Fishery

Invcsti-gations, Ser. lI, Vol. XVIII, n.· 7, I-VI

+

104 p. - Ministry of Agriculture,

Fisheries and Food.

DEFANT, A. - 1936. Die Troposphaere. Schichtung und Zirkulation des

."EKMAN, S. - 1953. Zoogeography of the Sea. XII

+

417 p., Sidwick & Jackson Ltd. London.

EARDY, A. C. - 1955. A further example of the patchiness of plankton dis-tribution. Papers in Mar. BioI. & Oceanography. Deep-Sea Research SuppI. to VoI. 3, p. 7-11.

EENTSCHEL, E. - 1933. AlIgemeine Biologie des Südatlantischen Ozeans. I

Das Pelagial der Obersten Wasserschicht. Wissensch. Ergeb. Deutsch. Atlantischen Exped. ("Meteor") 1925-27, Bd. XI, p. 1-168, 67 Abb. im text, 8 B eil. .LOHMANN, H. - 1896. Die Appendicularien der Plankton-Expedition. Ergeb.

Plankton-Exped., Bd. 2 E. C., p. 1-148, 20 taf., 30 Kart., 1 Diagr.

LOHMANN, H . & HENTSCHEL, E. - 1939. Die Appendicularien im Südatlan-tischen Ozean. 1 - Die Horisontal Verbreitung der Wichtigsten Arten. Wis-sensch. Ergeb. Deutsch. Atlantischen Exped. ("Meteor") 1925-27, Bd. XIII, p. 154-182, 95-117 Abb. im t exto

(J.5'IS

e$t6

d

.sl~

O

{}

N

1

.$13 ... '.

517

0511

,,'

...

IIl11l11mllllllllll

W'A

--S T A T

o

N S

SUBDIVIDED PERCENTAGE BAR- CHART OF SPECIES PER STATlON Hap I OP I eu ra I ong Icauda Friti lIaria formica

Oikopleura fusiformis stegosoma magnum

Fritillaria borealls _{Olkopleura rufescen.}

Fritil1aria pel1ucida _{Other Spec ies}

(Sp~cies' symbols as i n Fig.1)

til

~

1-4

~

el4

til

~

O

til

~

"

_~

Z

~

U

ll:t

~

...!:! u

~-E

Jl g

H

,

H 2 f--H 3 H 4

f--

_H 5 H 6

H

,

H 9 H 10 f--H 11 H ~ H 13 H Ih I---H 15 H

t

M

19 c • 0-"

. ~ §

'" c

Date

App,o,im,'c I

Posilion T

cmp""-I .. I

lure " Sahmly dep th Lo", 0CatOm ! ,,,, a t Om (m )

La t. 5, Long. W

Ê

. I]:;

,5 - g.

r- -o

·E1

r:

o o -o

c

~

9.30 1 O 15'

ZO-1- 541 3~ 54' 1320 2lJ' 27 . 0 ;,6.07 100 110 . 00 I 8 20 ' I E..sE

15 ' I E-SE

21 -1 - 5~ 311 52' 132" 22 ' 27 _1 )6.08 S4 I 9.30~ ZO'

l l -l- sUl 3°50' 132° 21 ' 28 . 0 )6 , 08 126 I n . 301 10-121 lS '

Zl-l-S41 30 49 ' I 320 Z7 ' 28 . 0 36 . 10 270 11.2 . 001 30 I 20 '

21-1- 5/J1 ,!lu8' 132928 ' 28 . 0 36 . 09 270 I 13. 1SI 30 I 22 ' I 52

21-1-Sli! 3° 48 ' 1320 25 ' 27 . 5 )6.Ih 90 I 1ll . 301 uo I 20 '

f

-21-1-Sll! 3 11 52 ' I 32 11 23 ' 28 . 0 36.09 90 11(, . 00~lzo ' I SE

27-1 - 5~ 30 5u ' I 320 2h ' 29 . 0 300 110.00 1 o 1 Zo '

f -50

f

-27-1-541 3Q 54 ' 1}2° 23 ' 29 . 0 300 112 . 00 1 20 15' E _SE

f -50

Note : M7 & M 17 were nol taken in conside ra lion for wan! of data. TOTAL

k:

O IK OPLEUR ID AE FR ITILL AR ID AE

~~

j.~ ~----,-~~~~~--

---1-.2

sp.

~

~ bo realis pellu-cida

FRITILLARlA

formica I

haplos-toma 11 (6li.7::t l 58 (33.1%) 16 (23.5%> 2 (ll . 7':>

26 2

0..4 . 8::;) (l. !:i)

5 ( 7. 3%)

Vi

(2.38':)

Ih

l '

1 33 1 " 1 2

I

Z

(8.0%) (0.5% ) (18 . 8j;) (18.8'; ) (1.1%) ( 1.1%)

3 (L! . l!.%)

44 (64 . 7%)

56z

(18.7:U ~~.6 ::: ) j (O . ~ ) I (0.~3:C) I ~~~O%) I (0:1:::) I (~~':o2$) I (6~~~) {~3%)1 (a~l:()

8J (28 . 6%)

97 (19.6%)

44

(lS. }% ) 1 (l.0 ::; )

181 7

<36.1:1> (1 . 4% )

718 103ll

(.:;>:7.1.1:') (39. 5% ) 1 (o. ':) 431

(30. 6%)

561 (29 . 9%>

68 (71 . 5:::>

30 (48 .3%)

65.

(28 .7%)

411

(27 . 6%)

,"

(12.1:n

"

(12.1%) 28 0.1%) 473 (17 . 8%)

4667

(~l1%) I (o~%)

651 25

OS.1%) (1. 3):)

(0.3:li)

17

(Z1.4%)

(i~ 9%) I (O: ~ )

(~~1 % ) I (O~ % )

197

(8.7%)

46

(8 .3%)

Ih ( lo S::;)

221 (e.3%)

4072

(0. 2$)

2 ( 0 . 3%)

( 0. 1:;: )

Z4

( 0.9%) 139

3

I

92

I

45

I

15

(1.0%) <:n.7%) (16.3%) (5.U)

7 1 "

5

1 "

(1. z::l ) 1 (l. ltO (Z3.3%) (13.9 %)1 (1 . Z!U

2.l3

I"

12941 '67 164

(ll . u.:c ) (z . 2.%) (ll. 2$ ) (6.3%) (z ./.$ 15 (O. S" >

'''' I

29

I

105

I

66

I ,., I "

(10 . 9%) (2. 0%) (1. 4% ) (L.. 6%) ( z.6%) (l.HD

Ih

I

63

I

384

I

77

I

60 17

(0 . 7:0 (3 . 3%) (20 . ú:;) (4.1%) O.z%) (0.9%)

1 (O. l %)

2 (0. 03;;;'

"I

3

(18 .8%) (3.1%)

(3.~ in I o . J, I (U~3 %)

50

I

13

I

7Z5

I

625

I

156

I

8

(1.6%) (o.l!%) (21i . LI%) (2.1.0::;) ( 5 . 2$ ) (0. 2% )

17

I

2

I

733

I

6"

I

66

(1.1 %1 (0 . 09;Z) (49.1%) (4.3%) (4. M>

221 3 11551 _{1 "}3₁ 66

(0.9%) (0.1%) (68 , 6::; ) (5.0%) ( 2. 9%)

12 _{1 2 1} 403 _{1 " 1 '0}

(2.1%) (0.3%) <73 . 8% ) (0.7%) (1.8%)

(O. ~ )

29

(L O:! )

844 ( O. ZO

190

787

(88 . 3%)

1672

(63 . UJ;) 65"

z8

0.1%)

106

(4 . !y'z)

1592 20

(2 . Z%)

99 (3.7%) 6t:4 (0. 1%) 65 mega-chile

(0 . 06~)

(0 . 1%)

' p.

i · ~~

j~.~

(2 . 2%)

(o~~:n I (o.i%)

3 (1. 3%)

4 I 1

(0.8%) (o.z%)

-" -;;; ~

õ ~

r "

li.

'7

175

68

~ji

_õ

13 101 Z4 g ~~ ~~ J 74 44

2, 999 1 l,13S 1 l,86li

290 133 157

493 298 195

S8<l

35

I

9 1 2 , 61S1 2, 031

(1.3%) (0 . 3%>

13

(O,9%) 1 (0.2%)

Ih

I

2

(0 . 7:t) (0 . 1:0

1

(0. 1%)

2

O . z:U

1, lL08l 1,167 Z4l

1 , 874 1 l,}20 552

95 72

62 49 13

lh 5 2, 989 I l, u56 1 1, 533

(O.U$) (0.1:')

1 , 487

13 Z 12 ,260

(0.5%) (0.08%)

7

(0 . 7%)

550

"8

z ,641. (0 . 03%)

127 (0.1~ I 21 ,218

623 I 864

515 I 1,745

133 1 lJJ.7

46' '42

753 I 1 , 8sa

10,ll3 ]ll. ,105