Size paradigms in copepod communities: a re-examination

By R. Hopcroft, J. Roff, F. Chavez. Hydrobiologia, 2001

116 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

A nonparametric method for the measurement of size diversity with emphasis on data standardization (2008, background): “1998, and references therein), although they dominate most aquatic communities (Hopcroft et al. 2001).”
The trophodynamics of marine top predators: Current knowledge, recent advances and challenges (2015, background): “Crustaceans Hopkins et al. (1994) and Boudreau and Worm (2012)”
Large-scale patterns in diversity and community structure of surface water copepods from the Atlantic Ocean (2002, background): “Due to the net mesh used (200 µm), smaller genera and young copepodite stages were likely to be under-sampled (Gallienne & Robins 2001, Hopcroft et al. 2001), and absolute diversity to be under-estimated.”
Zooplankton communities of the Arctic’s Canada Basin: the contribution by smaller taxa (2005, background): “Although mesh size can also represent a significant bias in biomass estimates in most ecosystems (Hopcroft et al. 2001), the bias resulting from differences in mesh sizes below 236 lm is relatively small in the central Arctic, and therefore not of major consequence in comparing studies.”
The importance of small-sized copepods in a frontal area of the Aegean Sea (2007, background): “The relative contribution of small-sized copepods to biomass and production of the total copepod community is in agreement with investigations in temperate and tropical ecosystems (Hopcroft et al., 2001; Satapoomin et al., 2004).”