Ctenophora in the Arctic: the abundance, distribution and predatory impact of the cydippid ctenophore Mertensia ovum (Fabricius) in the Barents Sea

  • Neil Swanberg
  • Ulf Båmstedt

Abstract

The Ctenophora Mertensia ovum and Beroe cucumis, collected using both conventional sampling gear and scuba divers, were studied in the Barents Sea east of Bjørnøya and North Norway in spring 1987 and summer 1988. Among the gelatinous zooplankton, Mertensia ovum was the most consistently abundant copepod predator. Feeding experiments were conducted to evaluate the predation rate of M. ovum in various trophic regimes. This ctenophore can take prey varying in size from small copepods to amphipods and krill, but gut-content analyses from field-collected specimens as well as experimental results showed that the main food source for adults was large-sized copepods (e.g. Calanus finmarchicus, C. glacialis, C. hyperboreus, Metridia longa). The robust tentacle arrray of M. ovum makes this species effective as a predator on large prey. The high potential predation rate of this ctenophore relative to its estimated metabolic cost of only 1.7% of the body energy content d?1 suggests that M. ovum may be able to maintain a positive energy balance even in conditions of low prey abundance. It is suggested that a single exploitation of a zooplankton patch may provide energy for survival for a very long time. The potential impact of M. ovum on Barents Sea copepod populations is estimated on the basis of the minimal observed average daily ration in experiments and from field data on gut contents. Using abundances of copepods for the area, and the actual predator biomass collected, it was estimated that an average of 0.7% of the copepod fauna per day could fall prey to this predator.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Published
1991-01-12
How to Cite
Swanberg N., & Båmstedt U. (1991). Ctenophora in the Arctic: the abundance, distribution and predatory impact of the cydippid ctenophore Mertensia ovum (Fabricius) in the Barents Sea. Polar Research, 10(2), 507-524. https://doi.org/10.3402/polar.v10i2.6762