conception of the baltic sea biodiversity: view from osmoregulation and brackish water hydrobiology...

CONCEPTION OF THE BALTIC SEA BIODIVERSITY:

VIEW FROM OSMOREGULATION AND BRACKISH WATER HYDROBIOLOGY

PRINCIPLES

Aladin N.V.1, Keyser D.2, Plotnikov I.S.1, Dianov M.B.1

1 - Zoological Institute of RAS, St. Petersburg, 2 - Hamburg Universityin co-operation with Khlebovich V.V and Peter Kjaerboe

The Baltic Sea Day

St. Petersburg, March 21-23, 2007

• Baltic Sea is semi-closed, shallow, brackish water body having smooth salinity gradient and unique fauna and flora.

• It is a young sea and in glacial time it was a cold lake. Baltic Sea until now retains many features of lake.

• Biodiversity of Baltic Sea is relatively low while in its own way is unique and needs special measures for its preservation.

Sub-regions of Baltic Sea

1. Baltic proper

2. Kattegat

3. The Sound

4. Western Baltic

5. Bothnian Bay

6. Bothnian Sea

7. Archipelago Sea

8. Gulf of Finland

9. Gulf of Riga

Main rivers of Baltic Sea basin

Kattegat1. GötaälvBaltic proper1. Göta Kanal2. Oder3. Vistula4. NemunasBothnian Sea1. Dalälven2. Ångermanälven3. KokemaenjokiBothnian Bay1. Skellefteälv2. Muonioalv3. Kemijoki4. Livajoki5. OulujokiGulf of Finland1. Neva2. NarvaGulf of Riga1. Daugava

River run-off to the Baltic Sea and its various

subcatchmentsfrom 1950 to 1998.

Note: The horizontal lines represent the mean values for the years 1950-1993.

(Source: HELCOM 2002)

Riverine waters are giving considerable contribution practically to all water areas of the Baltic Sea.

• In the Baltic Sea there are oligohaline and mesohaline water areas, and each of them has its own specific flora and fauna.

• The most freshened areas there are Gulf of Finland and Gulf of Bothnia.

• Central water area of Baltic Sea has pronounced mesohaline character.

• Only in Kattegat and Sound can polyhaline conditions be found.

Near-bottom (1) and surface (2) isohalines (‰) of the Baltic Sea (by S. Ekman)

Salinity (‰) at surface in the Baltic Sea and in the zone of transition to the North Sea in August (by P.Hunfer, 1982)

Following main principles of conception of relativity and plurality of salinity barrier zones (Aladin, 1986, 1988; Aladin, Plotnikov, 2007) the following salinity

zones were suggested for oceanic, Caspian and Aral waters.

Critical salinity shift to higher concentrations in water of Caspian and Aral seas as compared with oceanic water

(by: Aladin, 1986, 1989)

Following main principles of conception of relativity and plurality of salinity barrier zones (Aladin, 1986, 1988; Aladin, Plotnikov, 2007) the following salinity

zones were suggested for oceanic, Caspian and Aral waters.

Zones Ocean Caspian AralBasic freshwater 0-2 ‰ 0-2.5 ‰ 0-3 ‰

Transitional

freshwater-brackishwater2-5 ‰ 2.5-7 ‰ 3-8 ‰

Basic brackishwater 5-8 ‰ 7-11 ‰ 8-13 ‰

Transitional

brackishwater-marine 8-26 ‰ 11-28 ‰ 13-29 ‰

Basic marine 26-40 ‰ 28-41 ‰ 29-42 ‰

Transitional

marine-hyperhaline40-50 ‰ 41-50.5 ‰ 42-51 ‰

Basic hyperhaline > 50 ‰ > 50.5 ‰ > 51 ‰

α-, β- and - horohalinicums in the waters classified by salinity (by: Aladin, 1986, 1988; Khlebovich, 1989 )

- Freshwater ecosystems

- Transitional freshwater-brackishwater ecosystems

- Brackishwater ecosystems

- Transitional brackishwater-marine ecosystems

- Marine ecosystems

Baltic Sea

- Freshwater ecosystems

- Transitional freshwater-brackishwater ecosystems

- Brackishwater ecosystems

- Transitional brackishwater-marine ecosystems

Aral Sea

- Freshwater ecosystems

- Transitional freshwater-brackishwater ecosystems

- Brackishwater ecosystems

- Transitional brackishwater-marine ecosystems

- Marine ecosystems

- Transitional marine-hyperhaline ecosystems

- Hyperhaline ecosystems

Caspian Sea

- Freshwater ecosystems

- Transitional freshwater-brackishwater ecosystems

- Brackishwater ecosystems

- Transitional brackishwater-marine ecosystems

- Marine ecosystems

- Transitional marine-hyperhaline ecosystems

- Hyperhaline ecosystems

Sea of Azov

- Freshwater ecosystems

- Transitional freshwater-brackishwater ecosystems

- Brackishwater ecosystems

- Transitional brackishwater-marine ecosystems

Black Sea

Aral Seain 1989

- Freshwater ecosystems

- Transitional freshwater-brackishwater ecosystems

- Brackishwater ecosystems

- Transitional brackishwater-marine ecosystems

- Marine ecosystems

- Freshwater ecosystems

- Transitional freshwater-brackishwater ecosystems

- Brackishwater ecosystems

- Transitional brackishwater-marine ecosystems

- Marine ecosystems

- Transitional marine-hyperhaline ecosystems

- Hyperhaline ecosystems

Aral Seain 2006

Baltic Sea

Caspian Sea

Sea of Azov

Aral Seaprior 1960

Aral Seain 2006

Area of different salinity zones in different brackishwater seas and lakes

  Aral Sea Aral Sea Caspian Black Sea Baltic

Zones (in 2006) (prior 1960) Sea Sea of Azov Sea

Basic freshwater 0.01 0.93 5.02 0.25 2.26 5.63

Transitional freshwater-brackishwater 0.04 2.58 6.52 0.03 3.33 14.89

Basic brackishwater 0.23 88.65 13.42 0.02 7.87 61.54

Transitional brackishwater-marine 20.71 7.84 70.87 99.70 82.90 4.10

Basic marine 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 1.15 13.84

Transitional marine-hyperhaline 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.53 0.00

Basic hyperhaline 79.01 0.00 4.11 0.00 1.96 0.00

Percentage of water areas of different salinity zones in different brackishwater seas and lakes

At present Baltic Sea is the only sea where basic brackishwater zone is occupying more than half of its area (> 60%)

1 2 3 4

5 6 7 8

Water bodies of Paleo-Baltic Sea(by Zenkevich, 1963, with corrections and additions)

1 – maximal phase of the last glaciation; 2- Danish glaciation (15 ths B.P.); 3 – Baltic Glacial Lake (14 ths B.P.); 4 – Yoldia Sea (12 ths B.P.); 5 – Ancylus Lake-Sea (7 ths B.P.); 6 – last phase of Ancylus Lake-Sea (5 ths B.P.);

7 – Littorina Sea (4 ths B.P.); 8 – modern phase (since 2 ths B.P.) Indicated only average salinity without salinity gradient in the Baltic Sea

Water bodies of the PalaeocaspianA — Balakhansky (5 mil B.P.); B — Akchagylsky (3 mil B.P.); C — Postakchagylsky (> 2 mil B.P.); D — Apsheronsky (2 mil B.P.);

E — Tyurkyansky (< 2 mil B.P.); F — Bakinsky (1.7 mil B.P.); G — Venedsky or Ushtalsky (0.5 mil B.P.); H — the Early Khazarsky (400 ths B.P.); I — the Late Khazarsky; J — Atelsky (> 50 ths B.P.); K — the Early Khvalynsky; L — Enotaevsky; M — the Late Khvalynsky;

N — Mangyshlaksky (7.5 ths B.P.); O — the New Caspian (5 ths B.P.); P — the present. Indicated only average salinity without salinity gradient

Changing of the species number in the Baltic Sea following salinity gradient

Scheme of aquatic fauna pattern change in water bodies with different salinities (by: Remane, 1934; Khlebovich, 1962; Kinne, 1971; with additions and corrections)

1 – freshwater, 2 – brackish-water, 3 – marine, 4 – hyperhaline and ultrahaline species

Changing of the species number following salinity gradient in the Baltic Sea

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Salinity, g/l

No

. of

sp

ec

ies

Decreasing of marine species biodiversity following decreasing

of the Baltic Sea salinity

Number of fishes, free-living invertebrates and plants without micro-Metazoa, Protozoa and Bacteria in the Baltic Sea

By A.Alimov's formula(n=199.21*S0.155)

From scientific literature by expert

evaluation

Baltic Sea Proper 1370 700

Gulf of Finland 982 1000

Bay of Bothnia 1021 1100

Bothnian Sea 1144 1200

Gulf of Riga 896 900

Kattegat 985 4000

Large contribution for studying salinity influence on biodiversity have been made 2 scientists:

Prof. Otto Kinne and his theory on horohalinicum

Prof. Vladislav Khlebovich and his theory of critical salinity

• Biodiversity of the Baltic Sea has been studied intensively since the middle of 19th century. Studies of Swedish zoologist Loven (1864) could be considered pioneering. It is important to also mention works of Möbius (1873) and Heinke (Möbius, Heinke, 1883), and also Brandt (1897) and Nordquist (1890).

• Since the beginning of 20th century, the number of works on the Baltic Sea biodiversity has increased. There were publications by Ekman (1913), Petersen (1913, 1914) and Thulin (1922). Later there were studies by Demel with co-authors (Demel et al., 1927-1954), by Remane (1933-1955), by Segersträle (1932-1958) and by Välikangas (1926-1933), by Kinne (1949-1970) and others.

Russian and soviet scientists also contributed to the studies of Baltic Sea biodiversity.

A few of them, with years of their major scientific publications, include:

•Derjugin(1923-1924, 1934-1935)

•Nikolaev(1949-1985)

•Shurin(1957)

•Zenkevich(1963)

•Khlebovich(1974)

•Järvekülg(1960-1999)

•and many others

Above-mentioned scientists from Baltic Sea states have demonstrated that biodiversity of this young sea was formed in the postglacial time and is highly heterogeneous by its composition.

It consists of three main components:

1) marine

2) freshwater

3) brackishwater (sensu stricta).

The first group is the main part of Baltic Sea biota. It includes relicts if previous geological times and immigrants from remote marine water bodies.

The second group includes large number of Baltic Sea inhabitants, which come together with freshwater inflow.

The third group is represented by large number of species and is divided into 2 subgroups:

1) Ancient brackishwater arctic relicts (pseudorelicts-immigrants) formed in the glacial time in freshened areas of arctic basin that migrated into the Baltic Sea in postglacial time from the North-East and East possibly via fresh waters.

2) Brackishwater forms originated from freshwater ones.

Aquatic organisms

Osmoconformers Osmoregulators

Classification of osmoconformers and osmoregulators

Osmoconformers I

Osmoconformers II

Osmoconformers III

Confohyperosmotics

Confohyperosmotics I

Confohyperosmotics II

Hyperosmotics Amphyosmotics

Hypoosmotics

Hyperosmotics II

Hyperosmotics I Amphyosmotics I

Amphyosmotics II

Amphyosmotics III

Amphyosmotics IV

General table of osmoconformers and osmoregulators

Osmoconformers

Osmoregulators

Confohyperosmotics Hyperosmotics Amphyosmotics Hypoosmotics

I

II

III

I

II

I

II

I

II

III

IV

I

Osmoconformers – majority of recent primary marine hydrobionts: Coeletnterata, Vermes, Mollusca, Arthropoda, Echinodermata, etc.

Confohyperosmotics – majority of recent widely euryhaline primary marine hydrobionts: Polychaeta, Gastropoda, Crustacea, etc.

Hyperosmotics – majority of recent freshwater hydrobionts: Oligochaeta, Rotatoria, Mollusca, Crustacea, Insecta, freshwater Pisces, etc.

Amphyosmotics – some Crustacea, some Insecta, anadrom Pisces.

Hypoosmotics – some secondary marine Crustacea, majority of recent secondary marine Pisces.

Evolution of all known types of osmoregulation

A0 – Hypothetic ancestral osmoconformer

A1 – Stenohaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers I)

A2 – Marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers II)

A3 – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers III)

B1 – Widely euryhaline marine hydrobionts (confohyperosmotics I)

B2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of marine origin (confohyperosmotics II)

C1 – Freshwater hydrobionts (hyperosmotics I)

C2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hyperosmotics II or secondary confohyperosmotics)

D1 – Some Caspian Brackish water hydrobionts (amphiosmotics I)

D2 – Some euryhaline Australian hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics II)

D3 – Euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics III)

D4 – Widely euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics IV)

E – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hypoosmotics)

2.241.67

1.100.56

E

10 30

10 30

A1

10 30

C2

10 30

D2

D4

10 30 50 70> 100

1.67

1.10

0.56

2.24D3

1.671.10

0.56

2.24 D1

1.671.100.56

2.24 C1

1.67

1.10

0.56

2.24B2

1.67

1.10

0.56

2.24 B1

1.671.100.56

2.24 A3

1.67

1.100.56

2.24 A2

30

1.67

1.100.56

2.24

10

A0

Evolution of all known types of osmoregulation

A1 – Stenohaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers I)

A2 – Marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers II)

A3 – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers III)

B1 – Widely euryhaline marine hydrobionts (confohyperosmotics I)

B2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of marine origin (confohyperosmotics II)

C1 – Freshwater hydrobionts (hyperosmotics I)

C2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hyperosmotics II or secondary confohyperosmotics)

D1 – Some Caspian Brackish water hydrobionts (amphiosmotics I)

D2 – Some euryhaline Australian hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics II)

D3 – Euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics III)

D4 – Widely euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics IV)

E – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hypoosmotics)

Percentage of different types of osmoconformers and osmoregulators in the World Ocean and fully saline seas as Barents Sea, Sea of Japan, etc.

A1 – Stenohaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers I) – 30%

A2 – Marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers II) - 25%

A3 – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers III) – 15%

B1 – Widely euryhaline marine hydrobionts (confohyperosmotics I) – 5%

B2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of marine origin (confohyperosmotics II) – 3%

C1 – Freshwater hydrobionts (hyperosmotics I) – 0%

C2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hyperosmotics II or secondary confohyperosmotics) – 1%

D1 – Some Caspian Brackish water hydrobionts (amphiosmotics I) – 0%

D2 – Some euryhaline Australian hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics II) – 0%

D3 – Euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics III) – 1%

D4 – Widely euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics IV) – 0%

E – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hypoosmotics) – 20%

Percentage of different types of osmoconformers and osmoregulators in the World Ocean and fully

saline seas as Barents Sea, Sea of Japan, etc.

30%

25%

15%

5%

3%

1%

1%

20%

A1 – Stenohaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers I)

A2 – Marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers II)

A3 – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers III)

B1 – Widely euryhaline marine hydrobionts(confohyperosmotics I)

B2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of marine origin(confohyperosmotics II)

C2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of freshwater origin(hyperosmotics II or secondary confohyperosmotics)

D3 – Euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin(amphiosmotics III)

E – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts of freshwater origin(hypoosmotics)

Percentage of different types of osmoconformers and osmoregulators in brackish water seas as Black Sea, Sea of Azov, etc.

A1 – Stenohaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers I) – 3%

A2 – Marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers II) - 5%

A3 – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers III) – 10%

B1 – Widely euryhaline marine hydrobionts (confohyperosmotics I) – 10%

B2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of marine origin (confohyperosmotics II) – 15%

C1 – Freshwater hydrobionts (hyperosmotics I) – 5%

C2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hyperosmotics II or secondary confohyperosmotics) – 10%

D1 – Some Caspian Brackish water hydrobionts (amphiosmotics I) – 5%

D2 – Some euryhaline Australian hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics II) – 0%

D3 – Euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics III) – 5%

D4 – Widely euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics IV) – 2%

E – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hypoosmotics) – 30%

Percentage of different types of osmoconformers and osmoregulators in brackish water seas as Black

Sea, Sea of Azov, etc.

Percentage of different types of osmoconformers and osmoregulators in freshwater lakes as Ladoga, Onega, etc.

A1 – Stenohaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers I) – 0%

A2 – Marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers II) - 0%

A3 – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers III) –0%

B1 – Widely euryhaline marine hydrobionts (confohyperosmotics I) – 0%

B2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of marine origin (confohyperosmotics II) – 0%

C1 – Freshwater hydrobionts (hyperosmotics I) – 98%

C2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hyperosmotics II or secondary confohyperosmotics) – 1%

D1 – Some Caspian Brackish water hydrobionts (amphiosmotics I) – 1%

D2 – Some euryhaline Australian hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics II) – 0%

D3 – Euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics III) – 0%

D4 – Widely euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics IV) – 0%

E – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hypoosmotics) – 0%

Percentage of different types of osmoconformers and osmoregulators in freshwater lakes as Ladoga,

Onega, etc.

Percentage of different types of osmoconformers and osmoregulatorsin the Baltic Sea

A1 – Stenohaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers I) – 0%

A2 – Marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers II) - 0%

A3 – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers III) – 5%

B1 – Widely euryhaline marine hydrobionts (confohyperosmotics I) – 15%

B2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of marine origin (confohyperosmotics II) – 24%

C1 – Freshwater hydrobionts (hyperosmotics I) – 14%

C2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hyperosmotics II or secondary confohyperosmotics) – 9%

D1 – Some Caspian Brackish water hydrobionts (amphiosmotics I) – 9%

D2 – Some euryhaline Australian hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics II) – 0%

D3 – Euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics III) – 10%

D4 – Widely euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics IV) – 0%

E – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hypoosmotics) – 14%

Percentage of different types of osmoconformers and osmoregulators in the Baltic Sea

World Ocean and full-saline seas Brackish water seas as Black Sea, Sea of Azov, etc.

Freshwater lakes as Ladoga, Onega, etc. The Baltic Sea

Percentage of different types of osmoconformers and osmoregulators in the Western Baltic, Baltic Sea proper and Archipelago Sea

A1 – Stenohaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers I) – 0%

A2 – Marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers II) - 0%

A3 – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers III) – 10%

B1 – Widely euryhaline marine hydrobionts (confohyperosmotics I) – 20%

B2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of marine origin (confohyperosmotics II) – 25%

C1 – Freshwater hydrobionts (hyperosmotics I) – 2%

C2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hyperosmotics II or secondary confohyperosmotics) – 5%

D1 – Some Caspian Brackish water hydrobionts (amphiosmotics I) – 10%

D2 – Some euryhaline Australian hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics II) – 0%

D3 – Euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics III) – 10%

D4 – Widely euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics IV) – 0%

E – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hypoosmotics) – 23%

Percentage of different types of osmoconformers and osmoregulators in the Western Baltic, Baltic Sea

proper and Archipelago Sea

World Ocean and full-saline seas Brackish water seas as Black Sea, Sea of Azov, etc.

Freshwater lakes as Ladoga, Onega, etc. Western Baltic, Baltic Sea proper and Archipelago Sea

Percentage of different types of osmoconformers and osmoregulators in the Kattegat and the Sound

A1 – Stenohaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers I) – 0%

A2 – Marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers II) - 0%

A3 – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers III) – 15%

B1 – Widely euryhaline marine hydrobionts (confohyperosmotics I) – 25%

B2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of marine origin (confohyperosmotics II) – 15%

C1 – Freshwater hydrobionts (hyperosmotics I) – 0%

C2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hyperosmotics II or secondary confohyperosmotics) – 3%

D1 – Some Caspian Brackish water hydrobionts (amphiosmotics I) – 5%

D2 – Some euryhaline Australian hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics II) – 0%

D3 – Euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics III) – 15%

D4 – Widely euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics IV) – 0%

E – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hypoosmotics) – 22%

Percentage of different types of osmoconformers and osmoregulators in the

Kattegat and the Sound

World Ocean and full-saline seas Brackish water seas as Black Sea, Sea of Azov, etc.

Freshwater lakes as Ladoga, Onega, etc. Kattegat and the Sound

Percentage of different types of osmoconformers and osmoregulators in the Bothnian Bay and Bothnian Sea

A1 – Stenohaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers I) – 0%

A2 – Marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers II) - 0%

A3 – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers III) – 1%

B1 – Widely euryhaline marine hydrobionts (confohyperosmotics I) – 10%

B2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of marine origin (confohyperosmotics II) – 25%

C1 – Freshwater hydrobionts (hyperosmotics I) – 30%

C2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hyperosmotics II or secondary confohyperosmotics) – 15%

D1 – Some Caspian Brackish water hydrobionts (amphiosmotics I) – 10%

D2 – Some euryhaline Australian hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics II) – 0%

D3 – Euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics III) – 5%

D4 – Widely euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics IV) – 0%

E – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hypoosmotics) – 4%

Percentage of different types of osmoconformers and osmoregulators in the Bothnian Bay and

Bothnian Sea

World Ocean and full-saline seas Brackish water seas as Black Sea, Sea of Azov, etc.

Freshwater lakes as Ladoga, Onega, etc. Bothnian Bay and Bothnian Sea

Percentage of different types of osmoconformers and osmoregulators in the Gulf of Finland

A1 – Stenohaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers I) – 0%

A2 – Marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers II) - 0%

A3 – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers III) – 2%

B1 – Widely euryhaline marine hydrobionts (confohyperosmotics I) – 15%

B2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of marine origin (confohyperosmotics II) – 30%

C1 – Freshwater hydrobionts (hyperosmotics I) – 20%

C2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hyperosmotics II or secondary confohyperosmotics) – 10%

D1 – Some Caspian Brackish water hydrobionts (amphiosmotics I) – 5%

D2 – Some euryhaline Australian hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics II) – 0%

D3 – Euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics III) – 10%

D4 – Widely euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics IV) – 0%

E – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hypoosmotics) – 8%

Percentage of different types of osmoconformers and osmoregulators in the Gulf of Finland

World Ocean and full-saline seas Brackish water seas as Black Sea, Sea of Azov, etc.

Freshwater lakes as Ladoga, Onega, etc. Gulf of Finland

Percentage of different types of osmoconformers and osmoregulators in Neva bay

A1 – Stenohaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers I) – 0%

A2 – Marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers II) - 0%

A3 – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers III) – 0%

B1 – Widely euryhaline marine hydrobionts (confohyperosmotics I) – 1%

B2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of marine origin (confohyperosmotics II) – 1%

C1 – Freshwater hydrobionts (hyperosmotics I) – 96%

C2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hyperosmotics II or secondary confohyperosmotics) – 1%

D1 – Some Caspian Brackish water hydrobionts (amphiosmotics I) – 1%

D2 – Some euryhaline Australian hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics II) – 0%

D3 – Euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics III) – 0%

D4 – Widely euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics IV) – 0%

E – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hypoosmotics) – 0%

Percentage of different types of osmoconformers and osmoregulators in Neva bay

96%

1%

1% 1%

1%

B1 – Widely euryhaline marine hydrobionts(confohyperosmotics I)

B2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of marine origin(confohyperosmotics II)

C1 – Freshwater hydrobionts (hyperosmotics I)

C2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of freshwater origin(hyperosmotics II or secondary confohyperosmotics)

D1 – Some Caspian Brackish water hydrobionts(amphiosmotics I)

World Ocean and full-saline seas Brackish water seas as Black Sea, Sea of Azov, etc.

Freshwater lakes as Ladoga, Onega, etc. Neva bay

Percentage of different types of osmoconformers and osmoregulators in the Gulf of Riga

A1 – Stenohaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers I) – 0%

A2 – Marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers II) - 0%

A3 – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers III) – 5%

B1 – Widely euryhaline marine hydrobionts (confohyperosmotics I) – 17%

B2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of marine origin (confohyperosmotics II) – 25%

C1 – Freshwater hydrobionts (hyperosmotics I) – 15%

C2 – Brackish water hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hyperosmotics II or secondary confohyperosmotics) – 10%

D1 – Some Caspian Brackish water hydrobionts (amphiosmotics I) – 8%

D2 – Some euryhaline Australian hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics II) – 0%

D3 – Euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics III) – 10%

D4 – Widely euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics IV) – 0%

E – Euryhaline marine hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hypoosmotics) – 10%

Percentage of different types of osmoconformers and osmoregulators in the Gulf of Riga

World Ocean and full-saline seas Brackish water seas as Black Sea, Sea of Azov, etc.

Freshwater lakes as Ladoga, Onega, etc. Gulf of Riga

The Baltic Sea Kattegat and the Sound Bothnian Bay and Bothnian Sea

Gulf of Riga Gulf of Finland Neva bay

1.671.100.56

2.24 A3

10 30

Euryhaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers III)

All over the Baltic Sea, excluding strongly freshened areas of

estuaries

1.67

1.10

0.56

2.24 B1

10 30

Widely euryhaline marine hydrobionts(confohyperosmotics I)

All over the Baltic Sea including estuaries

1.67

1.10

0.56

2.24B2

10 30

Brackish water hydrobionts of marine origin (confohyperosmotics II)

All over the Baltic Sea including estuaries

1.671.100.56

2.24 C1

10 30

Freshwater hydrobionts (hyperosmotics I)

Only in estuaries and freshened gulfs of the Baltic Sea, not

available in Kattegat and the Sound

1.67

1.10

0.56

D32.24

10 30

Euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics III)

All over the Baltic Sea including strongly freshened estuaries

2.241.67

1.100.56

E

10 30

Euryhaline marine hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hypoosmotics)

All over the Baltic Sea excluding strongly freshened estuaries

Recent invader to the Baltic Sea Evadne anonyxParthenogenetic female with developing embryos on initial stages in the closed

brood pouch

1.671.10

0.56

2.24D1

10 30

Some Caspian Brackish water hydrobionts (amphiosmotics I)

This recent invader could spread all over the Baltic Sea, except of strongly freshened areas of

estuaries

Recent invader to the Baltic Sea Evadne anonyxParthenogenetic female with developing embryos on final stages in the closed

brood pouch

“Old” invader to the Baltic Sea

Cercopagis pengoi

(Photo by Dr. Flinkman)

Brackish water hydrobionts of freshwater origin (hyperosmotics II or secondary

confohyperosmotics)

10 30

C21.67

1.10

0.56

2.24

This old invader already spread over nearly all the Baltic Sea including

estuaries, but excluding saline areas such as the Sound and Kattegat

In the nearest future one more Cladocera could appear in the Baltic Sea:

Podonevadne camptonyx.

It has the same type of osmoregulation as

Evadne anonyx.

• When you are looking for possible invaders to the Baltic Sea one needs to know their osmoregulation capacities.

• Availability of resting stage is increasing the risk of invasion.

• Representatives of populations from the Sea of Azov have the most similar living conditions to those of the Baltic Sea and risk of their invasion is the highest.

In the Baltic Sea the following hydrobiontsare widespread:

A3 – euryhaline marine hydrobionts (osmoconformers-III);B1 – widely euryhaline marine hydrobionts (confohyperosmotics-

I);B2 – brackish water hydrobionts of marine origin

(confohyperosmotics-II);C1 – freshwater hydrobionts from estuaries of Baltic rivers

(hyperosmotics-I);C2 – brackish water hydrobionts of freshwater origin

(hyperosmotics-II or secondary confohyperosmotics);D1 – some Caspian brackish water hydrobionts (amphiosmotics-I)

invaded Baltic Sea;D3 – euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics-

III); D4 – widely euryhaline hydrobionts of freshwater origin

(amphiosmotics-IV);E – euryhaline marine hydrobionts of freshwater origin

(hypoosmotics).

• At present the main source of immigrants to the Baltic Sea from seas and lakes - remnants of Paratethys are: Black Sea, Sea of Azov, Caspian Lake.

• The average salinity of all this water bodies is very close to those of Baltic Sea: Black Sea – 18 ‰, Sea of Azov – 10 ‰, Caspian Lake – 12 ‰.

Zones of barrier salinities and tolerance ranges of hydrobionts from marine and continental waters : horizontal axis – salinity, ‰; over horizontal axis are given salinity tolerance ranges of hydrobionts from marine waters; below horizontal axis – for those from continental waters.

Osmoconformers: 1 – I, 2 – II, 3 – III;

confohyperosmotics: 4 – I, 5 – II; 6 – hyperosmotics I, 7 –hyperosmotics II or secondary confohyperosmotics;

amphiosmotics: 8 – I, 9 – II, 10 – III, 11 – IV; 12 – hypoosmotics;

Barrier salinities of marine waters: I M – first, 5 –8‰, II M – second, 16–20‰, III M – third, 26–30‰, IV M – fourth, 36–40‰, V M – fifth, 50–55‰;

barrier salinities of continental waters : I c – first, 5–20‰, II c – second, 50–60‰, III c – third, 100–300‰ and more;

A – marine brackish waters; A* – before “critical salinity” 5–8‰, A** – after “critical salinity” 5–8‰, B – typical marine waters, C – marine hyperhaline waters, D – fresh waters, E – continental brackish waters, E*– in the “critical salinity” zone 5–20‰, E**– after the the “critical salinity” zone, F – continental hyperhaline waters.

Summarized from: Journal of General Biology, 1988, vol. 67(7): 974-982.

Unfortunately Baltic Sea is about to be a dying sea. We are very lucky that our sea is not a dead sea yet. In order to improve the situation we need to have some urgent measures. Some of them are already proposed by scientists and decision makers from Baltic Sea littoral states. As an example, I could refer to the suggested measures to oxygenize the deeper salt water of the Baltic Sea made by Peter Kjaerboe and his team.

Circulation, mechanisms

• Wind enough if density homogeneous

• If density differs due to difference in temperature or salinity a cline (språngskikt) occurs

• Oxygenized water then enters by gravity

9 9 5

1 0 0 0

1 0 0 5

1 0 1 0

0 5 1 0 1 5 2 0

S a l t h a l t , s , p r o m i l le

D e n s i te ts a l th a l t , p s u

D e n s i te t , r , k g /m 3

9 9 5

1 0 0 0

1 0 0 5

1 0 1 0

0 5 1 0 1 5 2 0

T e m p e r a t u r , t , o C

D e n s i t e t ,t e m p e r a t u r , o C

D e n s i te t , r , k g /m 3

Run-off to The Baltic Sea

• Spring, summer and autumn run-off from precipitation

• Winter, low run-off due to snow stored on the ground

Water through the Danish sounds beginning of 1900 and today

• Monthly flow through sound from four references (4) and (1)

• Difference in flow 1900 and now due to water stores i.e. dams

• Inflow of salt water is influenced, (7) and (2) and so the renewal of that water

F l ö d e u t g n m d e D a n s k a s u n d e n , q u t , k m 3 / m å n a d

- 2 0

0

2 0

4 0

6 0

8 0

1 0 0

1 3 5 7 9 1 1M å n a d , n , -

J a c o b s e n ,1 8 9 8 - 1 9 1 2

W y r tk i , 1 9 2 6 -1 9 3 5

S o s k i n ,1 8 9 8 - 1 9 4 4

L e h m a n n ,1 9 8 6 - 1 9 8 9

S k i l l n a d i f l ö d e u t g n m d e D a n s k a s u n d e n m e l l a n f ö r r a h a l v a n a v s e k l e t o c h e n s e n a r e , q u t , k m 3 / m å n a d

- 3 5

- 1 5

5

2 5

1 3 5 7 9 1 1M å n a d , n , -

M e d e ls k i l ln a d

S k i l ln

Saltlås, saltlock in the Danish sound St Bält

• Due to flow of cyclones over Scandinavia an oscillating flow occurs in the sounds (5), (6).

• Is it possible to increase resistance when salt water flows out?

• If so, an increased net inflow and renewal will occur (3)

• For references see http://o2gruppen.se

Located in Denmark, Big Belt Sound

Saltlock

• Saltlock overview

• Saltlock closed

• Saltlock open

Mechanism

• Cyclones with low air- pressure passing Denmark brings water

• Saltlock open when inflow, closed when outflow

Conclusions• As is obvious from the data presented here, the

Baltic Sea is very rich in hydrobionts with various types of osmoregulation. In fact there are not only stenohaline marine hydrobionts of freshwater origin (osmoconformers-I,II) but also euryhaline Australian hydrobionts of freshwater origin (amphiosmotics-II).

• As a result, in the Baltic Sea it is possible to find practically all barrier salinities. Barrier salinities of lower salinity range are expressed in the estuaries of Baltic rivers, and those of the higher one are expressed in Kattegat and the Sound.

• Urgent measures are needed to improve the environmental condition in the Baltic Sea. The deep-water zone project proposed by Peter Kjaerboe and his team is considered to be of great importance.

Two final statements• The present investigation was made in order to

influence the international team of top decision-makers from Baltic Sea littoral countries. They must include in Baltic Sea Action Plan real practical measures that could save and maintain the unique brackishwater environment together with its fauna, flora and unique brackishwater ecosystems within this unique European water body.

• The only water body with the same unique brackishwater environment was in the Central Asia. It was Aral Sea. Unfortunately we lost it. We must not loose Baltic Sea, too.

Dike in Berg’s strait funded by GEF and Kazakhstan government allowed to improve brackishwater

environment of Small (Northern) Aral Sea1960 1989

2006 2011

We hope that saltlock in Danish straits will help to protect unique brackiswater environment of the Baltic Sea.

Thank you for your attention