Cited by 182Marine and fisheries researchMarine Biology and Ecology ResearchMarine and coastal ecosystems

Effects of bottom-layer hypoxia on abundances and depth distributions of organisms in Patuxent River, Chesapeake Bay

Open access
Keister, JE, Houde, ED, Breitburg, DL·2000·Marine Ecology Progress Series

Abstract

Oxygen depletion, seasonally common in bottom waters of many stratified aquatic systems, may have strong effects on abundances, distributions, and interactions among organisms, and therefore community dynamics.To examine effects of bottom-layer hypoxia on densities and vertical distributions in a stratified subestuary, fish larvae, their gelatinous predators, and copepod prey were surveyed near-surface, within the pycnocline, and near-bottom in the Patuxent River (Chesapeake Bay) under a range of near-bottom dissolved oxygen (DO) conditions.Overall abundances of fish larvae and copepod nauplii were lower throughout the water column when bottom-layer DO was low (≤ 2 mg DO l -1 ).When bottom-layer DO was low (≤ 2 mg l -1 ), densities of naked goby larvae were less than one-third of those observed during high (> 2 mg l -1 ) DO conditions, and overall density of copepod nauplii declined by > 50%.Depth-distributions of several organisms also were affected by bottom-oxygen depletion: fish larvae, scyphomedusae, and copepods were much less common near the bottom when bottom-layer DO was low than when it was > 2 mg l -1 .The ctenophore Mnemiopsis leidyi occurred in high densities at DO as low as 1.3 mg l -1 , but was nearly absent at <1 mg l -1 .The results indicate the potential for substantial differences in organism interactions, especially predatorprey relationships, between times of high and low bottom-layer DO.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3354/meps205043

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Within Chesapeake Bay, the effects of hypoxia on distribution and abundance of zooplankton and fish larvae have been demonstrated in several locations.

    “Within Chesapeake Bay, the effects of hypoxia on distribution and abundance of zooplankton and fish larvae have been demonstrated in several locations (Roman et al. 1993, Keister et al. 2000, Ludsin et al. 2009).”

    From Patterns and drivers of the demersal fish community of Chesapeake Bay (2013) · cites this paper as Keister et al. 2000

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Keister, J., Houde, E., & Breitburg, D.
Affiliations
  • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (US)
  • University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science (US)
Corresponding author
Keister, JE
Venue
Marine Ecology Progress Series
Published
2000
Volume
205
Pages
43-59
ISSN
  • 0171-8630 (ISSN-L)
  • 1616-1599
OpenAlex
W2013186860
Cited by
182
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 6
FWCI
7.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Marine Ecology Progress Series (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Commerce
  • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
  • Maryland Sea Grant, University of Maryland
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Marine and fisheries research
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Oceanography › Marine Biology and Ecology Research
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Oceanography › Marine and coastal ecosystems
Keywords
dissolved oxygen depletion, Patuxent River, Chesapeake Bay, fish larvae, copepod nauplii, scyphomedusae, Mnemiopsis leidyi, ctenophores, vertical distribution, predator-prey interactions, pycnocline

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