US GLOBEC Collaborative Research: Pan-Regional Synthesis

—Comparative ecology of krill in

coastal and oceanic waters around the Pacific Rim

Bill Peterson and Hal Batchelder

E. pacifica and T. spinifera

• Our aim is to determine the unique aspects of the life history and adaptations that permit them not only to exist, but to prosper, in a wide variety of environments across the North Pacific

• Focus is on Euphausia

pacifica

• Distributed around Pacific Rim and across open ocean• Occupies a broad variety of habitats from cold subarctic waters to

warm subtropical waters. • A key species in food chains as grazer and prey for commercially-

important fishes, as well as many birds and mammal species. • What are the unique characteristics of the life history of this

cosmopolitan species that allows it to not only populate but dominate in such a wide variety of ecosystems?

• How might climate change affect distribution, population dynamics and production of this species in different regions of the Pacific?

T. spinifera

• Chiefly a coastal species in the northern California Current but broadly distributed in Gulf of Alaska and Central & Southern California Current

• Common only in cold years• Spawns in winter/spring as well as in summer

Objectives

• What are the seasonal variations in distribution, abundance, growth rates and brood sizes in krill populations, and how do they vary regionally around the Pacific Rim?

• Are growth rates and brood sizes related to seasonal cycles of primary production?

• How do populations in the eastern and western Pacific respond to ENSO and PDO cycles?

• How are individuals of the same species (Euphausia pacifica) adapted to survive year-around in the very warm water regions of the Yellow Sea, East China Sea and Japan/East Sea; what mechanisms enable individuals to survive the long winters in northern regions, e.g., the Gulf of Alaska, Sea of Okhotsk and northern California Current?

• What interactions between physical transport and life-stage dependent dynamics control the local-scale distributions of krill, and are similar interactions important at regional and basin-scales around the Pacific?

Progress

• PICES Working Group 23: "Comparative ecology of krill in coastal and oceanic waters around the Pacific Rim" (Oct 2007-2010) with members from US, Canada, Japan, Korean, China and Russia

• Special Issue of Deep Sea Research (So Kawaguchi and W Peterson) on “Krill Biology and Ecology”

• GLOBEC Open Science Meeting (June 09): Krill Workshop 10. Krill biology and ecology in the world’s oceans (A Atkinson, J Goméz-Gutiérrez, B Meyer, W Peterson)

• Student from Ocean University in Qingdao to come to US and join Peterson lab for 18 months, as a visiting scientist to work on krill feeding ecology

PICES Working Group 23First meeting in Dalian, China at PICES 17

• Japan and China are using Tracy Shaw’s “Protocols for live work on krill” that is published on the PICES website. Impressive amount of work in NE Japan and in the Yellow Sea. Yuji Okazaki (Japan) and Sun Song (China).

• Canada is sampling krill and have two great time series (Dave Mackas, RonTanasichuk) but very little experimental work (measurements of rates) is being done.

• Korea is sampling krill as part of their bimonthly surveys) but have not yet begun experimental work (Se Jong Ju, Hyoung Chul Shin, Hyung-Ku Kang)

• US is doing the most experimental work and has the most frequent sampling program (off Newport). Much interest in krill by marine bird ecologists in central California (Sydeman, Jahncke)

• Presentations from US and Japan on modeling krill ecology and dynamics.

Special Issue of Deep Sea Research (So Kawaguchi and W Peterson) on “Krill Biology

and Ecology”

• 19 Papers accepted• All but two are finished and sent to John Milliman• E. superba (4 papers)• E. pacifica (China: 2 papers, US: 2 papers)• T. spinifera (US: 1 paper)• Other species (5 papers – Mexico, Antarctica, Chile)• General topics (5 papers – overviews, modeling, other)

Goals of Workshop 10 at GLOBEC OSM

• For workers on different krill species to discuss and share methods/approaches that have proved effective for one species, then to see whether they can be applied to other euphausiid species.

• To make sure there is a degree of harmony in approaches and to improve technical aspects of specific methods.

• To generate ideas for future collaborations, for example laboratory/seagoing exchanges of personnel and of exchange and pooling of datasets to address wider–scale issues.

• Produce a tangible product that shows where krill research is at the moment, identify hurdles to progress and potential solutions, and provide future direction recommendations.. An overview type paper in MEPS/review length journal (authored e.g. by all participants).

• Have ~ 50 presentation (17 Oral on first day; 33 posters)• Day two is for break-out group discussions.

Synthesis of Euphausiid Population Dynamics, Production, Retention and

Loss under Variable Climatic Conditions

Peterson, Batchelder

Su

rfac

e C

hl a

(u

g/L

)

Month

Mo

nth

ly M

ean

Eg

g D

ensi

ty (

egg

s/m

3)

0

Seasonal Cycles of Euphausiid Spawning off Newport, OR 1996-2006

Number of samples containing eggs

Total number of samples per station

0

100

200

300

400 0

8

0

14

8

15

5

18

6

20

15

21

23

24

21

21

19

22

8

11

4

11

1

6

E. pacificaat NH15

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

NH05

•The ability to speciate euphausiid eggs greatly improved our determination of the seasonal cycle of spawning for Euphausia pacifica and Thysanoessa spinifera

• T. spinifera:

• Spawns Feb-Sept

• Can take advantage of late winter or spring blooms

• E. pacifica:

• Spawns Mar-Sept

• Primarily during summer phytoplankton blooms

100

200

300

400 1

9

5

13

3

15

10

24

6

19

16

31

25

34

15

27

24

34

4

14

1

15

0

7

T. spiniferaat NH05

Shaw & Peterson

00.050.1

0.150.2

0.250.3

0.350.4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

1/9/

2003

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 21

2/6/

2003

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 21

2/14

/200

3

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 21

2/25

/200

3

0123456789

10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 21

4/1/

2003

00.20.40.60.8

11.21.41.61.82

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 21

4/16

/200

3

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 21

5/6/

2003

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 21

5/21

/200

3

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 21

6/5/

2003

0

0.002

0.004

0.006

0.008

0.01

0.012

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 21

7/3/

2003

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 21

8/5/

2003

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

9/5/

2003

00.20.40.60.8

11.21.41.61.82

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 21

9/17

/200

3

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 21

9/26

/200

3

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 21

10/2

3/20

03

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 21

11/3

/200

3

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 21

11/1

7/20

03

Cohort Data 2003

•Using 2003 to show the pattern we found for all years

•Can calculate growth rates using change in cohort mean length over time

•Calculated growth rates were similar to growth rates measured experimentally on live krill

9 JAN

6 FEB

14 FEB

25 FEB

1 APR

6 MAY

16 APR

5 JUN

15 JUN

3 JUL

5 AUG

5 SEP

17 SEP

26 SEP

23 OCT

3 NOV

17 NOV

Shaw & Peterson

Monthly avg densities: E. pacifica and T. spinifera

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.

mo

nth

ly a

vg d

ensi

ty (

# m

-3)

E. pacifica adult

E. pacifica juv

0

1

1

2

2

3

Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.

mo

nth

ly a

vg d

ensi

ty (

# m

-3)

T. spinifera adult

T. spinifera juv

Shaw & Peterson

Krill Modeling in the NCC: Euphausia pacifica bioenergetics, behavior, and distributionDeveloping an individual-based, spatially-explicit bioenergetics model for E.

pacifica larvae that decouples growth [f(T, prey)] and development [f(T)]

Simple stage-based DVM imposed

Individual behavior [f(devel.)]: considered because diel-vertical migration (DVM) may change the individual’s immediate environmental parameters (T, prey, u, v, w, exp. to predators, etc.)

Next steps: expand larval model to

include both juveniles and reproductive

adults

Surface-fixed (5m):

too big

Deep (55m):

too small

With DVM between surface and deep:

Similar to laboratory observations field sized individuals

Summarized model growth (by weight)

Euphausia pacifica bioenergetics, behavior, and distribution relationships in the California Current : Progress and futureUsing particle-tracking model to examine differences in cross-shore displacement during

upwelling for individuals with differing DVM behaviors during various local circulation events

Adult with DVM behavior, seeded at NH10: moves toward shore, maintains position

Passive individuals (no DVM) seeded at NH10, NH15, and NH25 :

move far offshore, do not maintain positions

Preliminary results from runs of individuals seeded near the surface, coupled to simplified (u and w only) physical circulation fields during

upwelling season:

Next steps: compare model results to observed distribution data for same region; use bioenergetics, development, and behavior with 3-D circulation model to examine distributions in the context of DVM and development stage

Synthesis of Euphausiid Population Dynamics, Production, Retention and

Loss under Variable Climatic Conditions

Peterson, Batchelder