Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 286

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 68 of the 68 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Microzooplankton grazing in the oceans: impacts, data variability, knowledge gaps and future directions

Schmoker, Claire, Hernández-León, Santiago, Calbet, Albert·2013·Journal of Plankton Research

Abstract

Here we review all published data on phytoplankton growth and microzooplankton grazing using the dilution technique to better understand the role of this group of grazers in different regions of the oceans, and to identify the knowledge gaps that require future efforts. A total of 1525 data points assimilated from 110 studies were included and grouped using the biogeographic subsets defined by Longhurst et al. [(1995) An estimate of global primary production in the ocean from satellite radiometer data. J. Plankton Res., 17, 1245–1271]. Total median phytoplankton growth rates in each of the subsets varied between 0.15 (Polar Southern) and 0.83 day−1 (Trades Atlantic), with the corresponding microzooplankton grazing rates ranging between 0.07 (Polar Southern) and 0.48 day−1 (Trades Indian). The median percentage of primary production (PP) grazed by microzooplankton was relatively constant among the regions and ranged from 49 to 77%, with the lowest percentage found in the Westerlies Southern and the highest in the Coastal Indian. Despite strong evidence that microzooplankton grazing impacts were highly variable, no global drivers for this variability (temperature, chlorophyll concentration) were identified in the analysis. As a global carbon budget, the overall consumption of phytoplankton for all regions was 31.3 Gt C year−1, which accounted for 62.4% of the total PP grazed daily. The amount of carbon ingested by micro- and mesozooplankton varied proportionally to the PP and the consumption was five times higher for micro- than for mesozooplankton. As concluding remarks of the study, we present some suggestions that may improve the quality of the data obtained with the dilution technique.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/plankt/fbt023

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 68 references

Cited by

See all 286

Metadata

Authors
Schmoker, C., Hernández-León, S., & Calbet, A.
Venue
Journal of Plankton Research
Published
2013-03-29
Volume
35
Issue
4
Pages
691-706
ISSN
  • 0142-7873 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-3774
OpenAlex
W2104585544
Cited by
286
References
68
FWCI
12.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Microzooplankton grazing in the oceans: impacts, data variability, knowledge gaps and future directions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/plankt/fbt023
The paper
Schmoker, C., Hernández-León, S., & Calbet, A. (2013). Microzooplankton grazing in the oceans: impacts, data variability, knowledge gaps and future directions. Journal of Plankton Research. https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/fbt023

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.