<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0" article-type="research-article"><?xmltex \bartext{Research article}?>
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">OS</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Ocean Science</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">OS</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Ocean Sci.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1812-0792</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/os-18-1763-2022</article-id><title-group><article-title>Planktonic cnidarian responses to contrasting thermohaline <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>and circulation
seasonal scenarios in a tropical western <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>boundary current system</article-title><alt-title>Planktonic cnidarian seasonal responses in a western boundary system</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Planktonic cnidarian seasonal responses in a western boundary system}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{E.~Giachini Tosetto et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1 aff2 aff3">
          <name><surname>Giachini Tosetto</surname><given-names>Everton</given-names></name>
          <email>evertontosetto@hotmail.com</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2 aff3 aff4">
          <name><surname>Bertrand</surname><given-names>Arnaud</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Neumann-Leitão</surname><given-names>Sigrid</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Costa da Silva</surname><given-names>Alex</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff5">
          <name><surname>Nogueira Júnior</surname><given-names>Miodeli</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>MARBEC, Univ Montpellier, CNRS, IFREMER, IRD, Sète, 34200, France</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, Sète, 34200,
France</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Departamento de Oceanografia, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco,
Recife, 50670-901, Brazil</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>Departamento de Pesca e Aquicultura, Universidade Federal Rural de
Pernambuco, Recife, 52171-900, Brazil</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff5"><label>5</label><institution>Departamento de Sistemática e Ecologia, Universidade Federal da
Paraíba, João Pessoa, 58051-900, Brazil</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Everton Giachini Tosetto (evertontosetto@hotmail.com)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>15</day><month>December</month><year>2022</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>18</volume>
      <issue>6</issue>
      <fpage>1763</fpage><lpage>1779</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>14</day><month>April</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>6</day><month>May</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>15</day><month>November</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>16</day><month>November</month><year>2022</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2022 Everton Giachini Tosetto et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2022</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/18/1763/2022/os-18-1763-2022.html">This article is available from https://os.copernicus.org/articles/18/1763/2022/os-18-1763-2022.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/18/1763/2022/os-18-1763-2022.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://os.copernicus.org/articles/18/1763/2022/os-18-1763-2022.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>

      <p id="d1e150">In western boundary current systems (WBCSs), strong
currents flow coastward carrying oceanic water masses and their associated
planktonic fauna. Variation in the intensity of these currents and in the
continental runoff may affect the dynamic interplay between oceanic and
coastal communities. In addition, changes in the continental runoff and the
thermohaline structure modulate the primary production, adding complexity to
the dynamics of these oligotrophic systems. These dynamics likely shape the
planktonic cnidarian communities. To further understand such relationships,
we used a comprehensive dataset encompassing samples collected above the
shelf and slope and around oceanic seamounts and islands of the Fernando de
Noronha Ridge in the western tropical South Atlantic, in two seasons
characterised by distinct thermohaline structure and circulation patterns.
Results show that in the tropical South Atlantic and, likely, other western
boundary systems with narrow continental shelves, coastward currents spread
oceanic waters and their associated cnidarian species over the continental
shelf. However, while both coastal and oceanic communities co-occur when the
continental runoff is notable, oceanic species dominate almost the entire
shelf during the dry season characterised by a stronger boundary current
intensity. We also conclude that when the mixed-layer depth and associated
nutricline are shallower, the enhanced primary productivity supports larger
populations of planktonic cnidarian species through a bottom–up control.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e162">Planktonic cnidarians are predators of zooplankton present in most marine
environments. Due to their high feeding rates and capacity to reproduce fast
and bloom, under specific favourable conditions they have the capacity to
control the entire pelagic community with potential impacts on human
activities such as fisheries (Boero, 2013; Yilmaz, 2015). Historically, this
group was considered a dead end in the pelagic food web due to the low
proportion of carbon in their gelatinous tissues. However, recent studies
appointed them as a significant food source for many higher trophic level
groups, from crustaceans to marine turtles (Ayala et al., 2018; Hays et al.,
2018). These factors, associated with a concern that gelatinous populations
could be globally increasing due to anthropogenic pressure (Condon et al.,
2012; Mills, 2001; Nogueira Júnior et al., 2022; Purcell et al., 2007), enhanced the scientific and popular interest in the dynamics of the group
and their role in ecosystem functioning.</p>
      <p id="d1e165">The distribution patterns of planktonic cnidarians are closely related to
physical processes. Distinct water masses typically present characteristic
species (Pagès, 1992; Pagès et al., 2001; Nogueira Júnior et
al., 2014). Oceanic circulation features (e.g. currents, eddies and
upwelling/downwelling) transporting these water masses also convey the
associated cnidarian fauna, shaping their meso-scale distribution patterns
(Tosetto et al., 2021). Local resource availability and seawater
characteristics such as temperature, salinity and food availability are
important factors controlling cnidarian species abundance and distribution,
usually at smaller scales (Gibbons and Buecher, 2001; Gili et al., 1988; Luo
et al., 2014). Due to these close relationships, among zooplankton
communities, planktonic cnidarians are excellent model organisms to
understand the complex dynamics between oceanic processes and marine life.</p>
      <p id="d1e168">In western boundary current systems (WBCS), strong currents flow coastward
carrying oceanic water masses and their associated planktonic fauna over the
continental shelf (Dossa et al., 2021; Neumann-Leitão et al., 1999;
Thibault-Botha et al., 2004; Tosetto et al., 2021). Under specific
conditions (e.g. narrow shelves and low continental drainage), oceanic
intrusions may reach coastal areas, with typically oceanic species (e.g.
<italic>Diphyes bojani</italic>, <italic>Chellophies appendiculata</italic>, <italic>Bassia bassensis</italic>) dominating the entire continental shelf (Tosetto et al., 2021;
Thibault-Botha et al., 2004). In the WBCS of the tropical South Atlantic,
such conditions were observed in austral spring, when the continental runoff
is reduced and the western boundary current flow is intense (Tosetto et al.,
2021). In austral autumn, continental rainfall and temperature are higher
and winds are weaker in the area compared to spring, leading to distinct
circulation and thermohaline structure scenarios (Assunção et al.,
2020; Dossa et al., 2021). The North Brazilian Undercurrent (NBUC), which
flows northwards parallel to the coast and is responsible for the oceanic
intrusions over the continental shelf in spring, is weaker and has its core
further from the shelf break in autumn (Dossa et al., 2021). Such
a circumstance, associated with the higher continental discharge, has the
potential to reduce the influence of the oceanic species over the
continental shelf and favour the spread of coastal species (e.g. <italic>Muggiaea</italic> spp.,
<italic>Liriope tetraphylla</italic>). However, the effects of the variability in western boundary current
intensity, intrusions of tropical water and river runoff over the
continental shelf in zooplankton distribution and abundance are still to be
tested.</p>
      <p id="d1e186">Offshore, in the Fernando de Noronha Ridge (FNR), a strong stratification
occurs. Still, due to wind mixing and the shear between the near-surface
westward-flowing central South Equatorial Current (cSEC) and the sub-surface
eastward South Equatorial Undercurrent (SEUC), the mixed-layer depth is
shallower in autumn than in spring (Assunção et al., 2020). A
shallower mixed layer leads to an increase in the nutrient input to the
photic layer, enhancing primary production and phytoplankton biomass (Farias
et al., 2022). The role of the stratification, mixing and light penetration
in the modulation of the primary production is well known (Farias et al.,
2022; Mignot et al., 2014; Polovina et al., 1995; Signorini et al., 1999), and it was also related with increased production of zooplankton, through
a bottom–up control effect (Farstey et al., 2002; Hadfield and Sharples, 1996;
Polovina et al., 1995). However, the effects of such changes in zooplankton
communities, particularly cnidarians, from highly stratified and
oligotrophic tropical systems are still unknown.</p>
      <p id="d1e190">Here, we test two main hypotheses. First, an increase in continental runoff
and a reduction in western boundary current intensity would increase the
presence of coastal species and reduce the presence of oceanic cnidarian species
over the continental shelf in WBCS. Second, the shallower the mixed-layer
depth, the greater the abundance of planktonic cnidarian communities. For
that, we compared the spatial patterns in planktonic cnidarian distribution
and abundance from data collected above the shelf, slope and around oceanic
seamounts and islands of the FNR in the western tropical South Atlantic in
spring (Tosetto et al., 2021) with a new dataset collected in autumn.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e195">Geographic location of the study area in the western tropical
South Atlantic, showing the sampled stations during <bold>(a)</bold> spring 2015 and <bold>(b)</bold> autumn 2017.
</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/18/1763/2022/os-18-1763-2022-f01.png"/>

      </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Materials and methods</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>Data</title>
      <p id="d1e225">Data were collected during two “Acoustics along the Brazilian coast”
surveys (ABRACOS 1 and ABRACOS 2; Bertrand, 2015, 2017) performed along the
northeast Brazilian continental shelf and slope between 5 and 9<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S and around oceanic seamounts and islands from FNR, including the Fernando
de Noronha Archipelago itself and the Rocas Atoll (Fig. 1). The surveys were
carried out on board the French oceanographic vessel R/V <italic>Antea</italic> in austral
spring (September–October 2015) and autumn (April–May 2017). Planktonic
cnidarians were sorted from zooplankton samples collected at 34 and 45
stations in spring and autumn, respectively (Fig. 1). Samples were collected
through oblique hauls, with a bongo net with a 300 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m mesh size and 0.6 m
mouth opening. The water column was sampled from near the bottom to the surface over
the continental shelf and from 200 m to the surface in the offshore. The
net was towed at approximately 2 knots, at various times of day and night.
The net was fitted with a calibrated mechanical flowmeter (Hydro-Bios) to
estimate the volume filtered during each haul. Samples were fixed with 4 %
formaldehyde buffered with sodium tetraborate (0.5 g L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e263">In the laboratory, whole zooplankton samples were analysed under
a stereomicroscope, and cnidarian specimens were identified (mainly according
to Pugh, 1999; Bouillon, 1999) and counted. Abundances were standardised with regard to the number of individuals (ind.) per 100 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for medusae and number of colonies
per 100 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for siphonophores. For calycophorans, the number of
anterior nectophores was used for estimating the polygastric stage
abundance and eudoxid bracts for the eudoxid stage abundance (e.g. Hosia
and Båmstedt, 2007; Hosia et al., 2008a). For physonects and
Hippopodidae, the number of colonies was roughly estimated by dividing the
number of nectophores by 10 (Pugh, 1984).</p>
      <p id="d1e290">Vertical profiles of temperature (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C), practical salinity and
fluorescence were obtained with a CTD-O2 profiler Seabird SBE911+.
Conductivity, temperature and pressure accuracies were estimated at 0.0003 S m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, 0.001 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C and 0.7 dbar, respectively. In addition to CTD-O2, continuous along-track sea surface Practical Salinity data were acquired
with a thermosalinograph SBE21. Along-track current profiles were recorded
with an “Ocean Surveyor” ship-mounted acoustic Doppler current profiler
(SADCP) operating at a frequency of 75 kHz with a depth range of 15–700 m.
SADCP data were processed and edited using the Common Ocean Data Access
System (CODAS) software package developed at the University of Hawaii
(<uri>https://currents.soest.hawaii.edu/home/index.html</uri>, last access: 15 January 2018). The relative velocities were rotated
from the transducer to the Earth reference frame using the ship gyrocompass.
The global positioning system (GPS) was used to retrieve the absolute
current velocities. The orientation of the transducer relative to the
gyroscopic compass and an amplitude correction factor for the SADCP were
determined by standard calibration procedures. Finally, velocity profiles
were averaged hourly, providing profiles in the 19–600 m range. SADCP data
over the shelf (bathymetry shallower than 70 m) were often contaminated by
spurious reflections from the bottom, so the data coverage was only partial
in these areas. The current measurements were resampled to 0.1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
spatial resolution and depth integrated (0–70 m depth). The analyses of the
data obtained by SADCP are
discussed in Dossa et al. (2021) and Costa da Silva et al. (2021).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>Data analysis</title>
      <p id="d1e343">For the data analysis, stations were grouped in three systems (Fig. 1):
continental shelf, WBCS (offshore stations adjacent to coast, mainly over
the slope) and the South Equatorial Current system (SECS; stations along the
FNR). WBCS and SECS present a distinct thermohaline structure
(Assunção et al., 2020). Stations A2_39 and
A2_54 were located in the transition zone between WBCS and
SECS and thus removed for the comparative analysis. To dampen effects of
dominant species, abundance data were transformed by log (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) in all
analyses. A permutational multivariate analysis of variance (PERMANOVA;
Anderson et al., 2008) was used to test for diel differences in the
community structure of planktonic cnidarians on both seasons. Since no
significant differences were observed (pseudo <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.93842</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and 0.86812, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.451</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and 0.509, for spring and autumn, respectively) the pooled set of
day and night data was used.</p>
      <p id="d1e382">Factorial analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed to test for
differences in hydromedusae and siphonophores richness and total abundance
and the abundance of the most abundant species (abundance <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %), according to the region (shelf, WBCS and SECS), the season and the
interactions between these factors. When ANOVA was significant, a Tukey
post hoc test was used to identify the levels (seasons and regions) that
differed among each other.</p>
      <p id="d1e395">Spatial patterns in planktonic cnidarian community abundance in autumn were
identified by hierarchical cluster analysis using Bray–Curtis similarity
matrix. The validity of the groups defined by the cluster analysis was
tested through the SIMPROF test (5 % significance level). A similarity percentage (SIMPER) analysis was performed to identify representative
species and their contribution to similarity within the groups defined by
the cluster analysis. This procedure was previously performed by Tosetto et
al. (2021) for the spring dataset.</p>
      <p id="d1e398">For each system, constrained ordination analyses were performed to identify
associations between the most abundant planktonic cnidarian species and the
environmental variables. The following continuous explanatory variables were
used: (i) surface layer (0–30 m) temperature, (ii) salinity, (iii) dissolved oxygen (except for shelf), (iv) fluorescence (as an indirect
measure of biological productivity), (v) mixed-layer depth, (vi) bottom
depth, (vii) the zonal component of acoustic Doppler current profiler (ADCP) data integrated over the first 70 m
depth and (viii) the meridional component of ADCP data integrated over the first
70 m depth. Seasons (spring and autumn) were used as qualitative explanatory
variables. Detrended canonical correspondence analysis (DCCA) revealed a
small length of variable gradients (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), indicating that a linear
method was more appropriate to use on this occasion, and thus redundancy
analysis (RDA) was selected (Lepš and Šmilauer, 2003).</p>
      <p id="d1e412">Distribution maps were produced with QGIS 3.20 (QGIS Development Team, 2022).
Factorial ANOVA was performed in Statistica 10 (StatSoft Inc., 2011).
Cluster, SIMPROF, SIMPER and PERMANOVA analyses were performed in Primer v.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> PERMANOVA (Clarke and Gorley, 2006). DCCA and RDA were performed in
CANOCO 4.5 (Lepš and Šmilauer, 2003).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e424">Surface (0–70 m; <bold>a, b</bold>) and deeper (70–350 m; <bold>c, d</bold>) current vectors
and velocity of ADCP data during spring 2015 <bold>(a, c)</bold> and autumn 2017 <bold>(b, d)</bold>.
Dashed lines indicate boundary between the WBCS, transition zone and SECS.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/18/1763/2022/os-18-1763-2022-f02.jpg"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Results</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Environmental background</title>
      <p id="d1e461">Whatever the season, surface (0–70 m) SADCP data showed the central branch
of the South Equatorial Current (cSEC) flowing westward in the open ocean
with its core around FNR (Fig. 2a, b). Meanwhile, the NBUC flows northward
over the continental slope with intrusions over the continental shelf. The
cores of both currents meet up in the northwest part of the study area
(around 3.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S, 35<inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> W) forming the North Brazil Current
(Bourles et al., 1999; Dossa et al., 2021; Stramma and England, 1999).</p>
      <p id="d1e482">Although the NBUC was weaker south of 7.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S in both seasons, it
was even weaker in spring 2015 (Fig. 2a) due to the presence of an anticyclonic
eddy. Thus, intrusions of oceanic waters over the shelf were greatly reduced
in the region of the Pernambuco Plateau in spring (Fig. 2a; Tosetto et al.,
2021; Dossa et al., 2021). Such a feature was not observed in autumn, and thus
intrusions over the shelf were observed all along the coast (Fig. 2b). In
deeper waters, we observed the core of the NBUC flowing along the entire extent
of the slope in both seasons (Fig. 2c, d). However, it was stronger and
deeper (upper limit at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">105</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m; Fig. 2c), in spring than in
autumn, when the core was less intense, shallower (upper limit at
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">80</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m) and flowing slightly further away from the coast (Fig. 2d). Such differences were reflected in surface currents, which were
stronger over the slope in autumn (Fig. 2b) but similar in both seasons over
the continental shelf. (Fig. 2a, b; Dossa et al., 2021). For a detailed
description and discussion of circulation patterns and seasonal variability
of the NBUC, see Dossa et al. (2021).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e516">Vertical profiles of temperature <bold>(a, b, c)</bold>, salinity <bold>(d, e, f)</bold> and
fluorescence <bold>(g, h, i)</bold> during spring 2015 (blue) and autumn 2017 (orange) in
three distinct areas from the western tropical South Atlantic. Solid lines
are the average among stations, and dashed lines are the maximum and minimum in each season and area.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/18/1763/2022/os-18-1763-2022-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e535">In both seasons, the WBCS (over the slope) and the SECS (FNR) presented
a distinct thermohaline structure (Fig. 3b, c, e, f). The thermocline and
halocline were sharp in the SECS (Fig. 3c, f), with the South Atlantic
Central Water mass (SACW; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C) reaching up to
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">150</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m depth. They were less abrupt in WBCS (Fig. 3b, c) and
the SACW was only observed below 250 m (Fig. 3 in Silva et al., 2021; Fig. 3
in Dossa et al., 2021). In both offshore areas, the upper limit of the
mixed-layer depth (MLD) was shallower in autumn. However, the difference was
much more pronounced in the SECS (90 and 46 m in spring and autumn,
respectively; Fig. 3c, f) than in the WBCS (53 and 39 m in spring and
autumn, respectively; Assunção et al., 2020).</p>
      <p id="d1e567">Sea surface temperature was higher in autumn in offshore areas and over the
continental shelf (Figs. 3, S1 in the Supplement). Due to the
higher temperature, evaporation was intense and sea surface salinity was
generally higher during autumn even with the greater rainfall during this
season (Figs. 3, S1). Specifically, over the
continental shelf, distinct patterns were observed in sea surface salinity
from thermosalinograph data during each season (Fig. S2). In spring, as a result of the reduced continental discharge and
higher evaporation over shallow areas, surface salinity was higher in the
more inshore areas, with a reduction when approaching the shelf break and
offshore. Differently, in autumn, although the overall salinity was higher, the highest values were along the outer shelf/shelf break, with lower salinity
in inshore waters (up to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m isobath) due to the higher
continental runoff (Fig. S2). For a detailed
description and discussion of the seasonal variability of the thermohaline
structure, see Assunção et al. (2020).</p>
      <p id="d1e580">Over the continental shelf, although presenting high variability,
fluorescence was higher in near-bottom water and in the surface layer in autumn
(Fig. 3g), coinciding with a period of larger continental discharge and
nutrient input. In both the WBCS and the SECS, the peak of fluorescence
reached similar values within the thermocline in both seasons (Fig. 3h, i).
However, in the surface layer, while in the WBCS fluorescence was similar in
both seasons (note the small difference at the MLD), in the SECS it was
higher in autumn when the MLD and the nutricline were shallower (Fig. 3h, i;
Assunção et al., 2020; Silva et al., 2021; Farias et al., 2022).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Species composition</title>
      <p id="d1e591">In total, 93 taxa of planktonic cnidarians were sampled in the area,
corresponding to 42 hydromedusae, 48 siphonophores, and 3 scyphomedusae. A
similar number of taxa were present at each season: 73 in spring and 74 in
autumn, with 18 and 19 exclusive species, respectively. In addition, many
unidentified larval stages (cerinula, ephyrae and athorybia) were collected
(Table S1 in the Supplement; Table 1 in Tosetto et al., 2021). In both seasons,
the most frequent and abundant species were almost the same. Among
hydromedusae, <italic>Aglaura hemistoma</italic> and <italic>L. tetraphylla </italic>occurred in more than 85 % of the samples. However,
while <italic>A. hemistoma</italic> was the most abundant in spring, <italic>L. tetraphylla</italic> dominated in autumn. Among
siphonophores, <italic>Abylopsis eschscholtzii</italic>, <italic>Abylopsis tetragona</italic>, <italic>B. bassensis</italic>, <italic>C. appendiculata</italic>, <italic>D. bojani</italic>, <italic>Eudoxoides mitra</italic> and <italic>Sulculeolaria chuni</italic> were present in more than 80 % of the
samples in both seasons and <italic>Eudoxoides spiralis</italic> in spring. <italic>B. bassensis</italic>, <italic>C. appendiculata</italic>, <italic>D. bojani</italic> and <italic>E. mitra </italic>were also the most abundant
siphonophores on both cruises, representing 46.5 % of the total abundance
in spring and 36.9 % in autumn (Table S1, Table 1 in Tosetto
et al., 2021).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e646">Comparison of average number of species and total abundance of
hydromedusae and siphonophores during spring 2015 (blue) and autumn 2017
(orange) in three distinct areas from the western tropical South Atlantic. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> Significant seasonal changes in ANOVA.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/18/1763/2022/os-18-1763-2022-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e665">Results of the factorial analysis of variance testing
differences in community indicators and abundance of representative
planktonic cnidarian species among seasons (spring and autumn) and areas
(shelf, WBCS and SECS). Significant <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values are in bold.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="7">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Indicator/species</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col3" align="center" colsep="1">Seasons </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col4" nameend="col5" align="center" colsep="1">Areas </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col6" nameend="col7" align="center">Seasons <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> area </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Hydromedusae richness</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.05</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.31</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.36</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.26</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.26</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.29</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Total hydromedusae abundance</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">13.96</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">19.98</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">15.20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Siphonophores richness</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">31.62</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">56.56</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">3.10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>0.05</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Total siphonophores abundance</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4.01</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.05</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2.32</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10.67</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Liriope tetraphylla</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">9.49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">12.04</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">9.05</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Aglaura hemistoma</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.97</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5.46</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>0.01</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">6.87</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Aequorea</italic> spp.</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">8.94</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">6.79</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">7.12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Diphyes bojani</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2.36</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.38</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.26</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10.81</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Bassia bassensis</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.59</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5.95</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">18.77</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Chelophyes appendiculata</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.06</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.81</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5.17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>0.01</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2.49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>0.09</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Eudoxoides mitra</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">3.43</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><bold>0.07</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">42.85</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.92</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.15</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Muggiaea kochii</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">8.34</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><bold>0.01</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">15.40</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">6.84</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Abylopsis eschscholtzii</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">32.31</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">17.32</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">14.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Abylopsis tetragona</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">24.36</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">6.03</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">12.46</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Sulculeolaria chuni</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">3.04</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.24</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.79</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">3.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.05</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Eudoxoides spiralis</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">30.20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><bold>0.00</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.93</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.40</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.39</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>0.02</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title>Spatial and seasonal patterns in diversity and abundance</title>
      <p id="d1e1233">Hydromedusae species richness was similar all over the study area, with no
significant differences among areas or seasons and averaging 4.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2.3 and 4.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.5 species per station in spring and autumn,
respectively (Table 1, Fig. 4). However, while in spring the total
hydromedusae abundance was similar in all areas, averaging 49.9 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 66.2 ind. 100 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, in autumn it was significantly higher over the
continental shelf, where it reached up to 1067.6 ind. 100 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (383.4 ind. 100 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> on average; Table 1, Figs. 4, 5; Fig. 2 in Tosetto et al.,
2021). No significant seasonal changes were observed in total hydromedusae
abundance in the open ocean.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e1296">Comparison of average abundance (ind. 100 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of
representative species of hydromedusae and siphonophores during spring 2015
(blue) and autumn 2017 (orange) in three distinct areas from the western
tropical South Atlantic. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> Significant seasonal changes in ANOVA.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/18/1763/2022/os-18-1763-2022-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1327">The two dominant hydromedusae, <italic>L. tetraphylla</italic> and <italic>A. hemistoma</italic>, were widespread over the area. <italic>L. tetraphylla</italic>
presented higher abundance over the continental shelf in both seasons.
However, in autumn it was 1 order of magnitude higher than in spring on average, reaching up to 770.3 ind. 100 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (Table 1, Figs. 5, 6; Fig. 3
in Tosetto et al., 2021). In both seasons, <italic>A. hemistoma</italic> was more evenly distributed than
<italic>L. tetraphylla</italic>, with high abundances occurring both over the continental shelf and in the
open ocean. But, as occurred with <italic>L. tetraphylla</italic>, it was significantly higher over the
continental shelf in autumn (Table 1, Figs. 5, 6; Fig. 3 in Tosetto et al.,
2021). The third most abundant hydromedusa taxon, <italic>Aequorea</italic> spp., occurred in low
abundances over the area in spring. However, in autumn its abundance was
significantly higher in the SECS, reaching up to 38.3 ind. 100 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
was nearly absent over the shelf and in the WBCS (Table 1, Figs. 5, 6).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e1379">Geographic distribution of representative species of hydromedusae
and siphonophores in the first 200 m of the water column in autumn 2017. For
calycophoran siphonophores, black represents the polygastric stage and white
the eudoxid stage.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/18/1763/2022/os-18-1763-2022-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1388">Siphonophores richness was significantly higher in the two oceanic areas
than over the continental shelf, especially in the WBCS where it was also
significantly higher in spring (reaching 23 species, 19.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2.9 on average) than in autumn (13.3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.5 species on average). No
differences among seasons were observed over the shelf and in the SECS
(Table 1, Fig. 4). The total abundance of siphonophores was similar between
seasons over the continental shelf (137.2 and 169.5 ind. 100 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> on average in spring and autumn, respectively). Meanwhile, a contrasting
pattern was observed in the oceanic areas: in spring it was higher in the
WBCS (not statically significant), averaging 153.4 ind. 100 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, while
in autumn significantly higher abundances were observed in the SECS (245.2 ind. 100 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> on average; Table 2, Fig. 4; Fig. 2 in Tosetto et al.,
2021).</p>
      <p id="d1e1441">Although most dominant siphonophores were widespread over the area, distinct
seasonal and spatial patterns were observed. <italic>E. mitra</italic> was more abundant in the SECS
in both seasons. However, the pattern was more pronounced in autumn when
this species reached up to 109.5 ind. 100 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. <italic>A. eschscholtzii</italic>, which occurred in
similar abundances in the three areas in spring, was significantly more
abundant in the SECS in autumn, reaching up to 67.6 ind. 100 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. In
the WBCS, average abundances of <italic>E. mitra</italic> and <italic>A. eschscholtzii</italic> were similar in spring and autumn
(Table 1, Figs. 5, 6; Fig. 4 in Tosetto et al., 2021). Otherwise, over the
continental shelf and in the WBCS, <italic>D. bojani</italic> and <italic>B. bassensis</italic> were more abundant in spring than in
autumn, while in the SECS the opposite was observed, and these species were
significantly more abundant in autumn (Table 1, Figs. 5, 6; Fig. 4 in
Tosetto et al., 2021).</p>
      <p id="d1e1487">In spring, <italic>C. appendiculata</italic> was slightly more abundant over the continental shelf and in the
WBCS than in the SECS. Although, in autumn its abundance was higher over the
continental shelf and lower in the two oceanic areas, seasonal changes were
not significant (Table 1, Figs. 5, 6; Fig. 4 in Tosetto et al., 2021).
Otherwise, <italic>A. tetragona</italic> and <italic>E. spiralis</italic> were more abundant over the continental shelf and in the
WBCS than in the SECS in spring. Conversely, in autumn they were less
abundant in the shelf and WBCS than in autumn, and the abundances of these
species were similar in the three systems (Table 1, Figs. 5, 6; Fig. 4 in
Tosetto et al., 2021).</p>
      <p id="d1e1499">Distinctly from other dominant siphonophores, in both seasons <italic>M. kochii</italic> occurred
almost exclusively over the continental shelf. However, while in spring the
species was restricted to few stations in the south of the area, in autumn
it occurred in higher abundances and was distributed over most of the
continental shelf, except a few stations in the outer shelf (Table 1, Figs. 5, 6; Fig. 4 in Tosetto et al., 2021). No spatial and temporal patterns were
identified in the abundance of <italic>S. chuni</italic>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e1511"><bold>(a)</bold> Cluster analysis dendrogram of autumn 2017 data indicating two
main groups and subgroups of stations with similar planktonic cnidarian
communities in the western tropical south Atlantic Ocean; dashed lines are
significant groups in the SIMPROF analysis. <bold>(b)</bold> Map indicating location of
the groups and subgroups arranged in the cluster analysis during spring 2015
(Tosetto et al., 2021). <bold>(c)</bold> Map indicating location of the groups and
subgroups arranged in the cluster analysis during autumn 2017. Dendogram of
spring data in Tosetto et al. (2021).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/18/1763/2022/os-18-1763-2022-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <label>3.4</label><title>Community structure</title>
      <p id="d1e1536">In spring, two main groups of stations were depicted in the cluster
analysis. Group A was represented by four stations over the shelf in the
southernmost part of the study area (Fig. 7b). It was mainly characterised
by the large abundances of <italic>M. kochii</italic>, <italic>A. hemistoma</italic> and <italic>L. tetraphylla</italic>. It also differed from the other groups
by the absence or low abundance of other dominant siphonophores. Group B was
represented by the remaining neritic stations and all stations of the WBCS
and the SECS where siphonophores such as <italic>D. bojani</italic>, <italic>B. bassensis</italic>, <italic>A. tetragona</italic>, <italic>C. appendiculata</italic> and <italic>E. mitra</italic> were more abundant.
This group was further subdivided into several subgroups, which differed among
each other in the abundance of dominant species. For a detailed description
and discussion of the cnidarian community structure in the area in spring,
see Tosetto et al. (2021).</p>
      <p id="d1e1564">Similarly, two main groups were depicted in autumn (Fig. 7c). Group X was
composed by shallow stations (bottom depth <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m) over the
continental shelf. SIMPER analysis indicated an average similarity of
63.1 %. It was mainly characterised by the occurrences in large or medium
abundance of <italic>L. tetraphylla</italic>, <italic>M. kochii</italic>, <italic>A. hemistoma</italic>, <italic>A. eschscholtzii</italic>, <italic>C. appendiculata</italic> and <italic>B. bassensis</italic>. One outlier was present in this branch (station
autumn_3), and it differed from the main branch due to the
absence of <italic>A. hemistoma</italic>, <italic>A. eschscholtzii</italic>, <italic>C. appendiculata</italic> and <italic>B. bassensis</italic> (Table 2).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e1610">Redundancy analyses (RDAs) performed between the cnidarian
community and environmental explanatory variables from the continental
shelf, the western boundary current system (WBCS) and the South Equatorial
Current System (SECS) in the western tropical South Atlantic.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/18/1763/2022/os-18-1763-2022-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e1623">Results of SIMPER analysis, showing the relative
contribution of planktonic cnidarian species in the formation of the groups
defined in the cluster analysis during autumn 2017.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="4">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Species</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">X</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Y1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Y2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Abylopsis eschscholtzii</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">11.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">5.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">11.6</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Aequorea </italic>spp.</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">3.7</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Abylopsis tetragona</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">8.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5.6</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Aglaura hemistoma</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">19.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">7.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">11.2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Bassia bassensis</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">6.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">11.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">13.6</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Chelophyes appendiculata</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">7.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">15.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">7.3</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Cordagalma ordinatum</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">3.9</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Diphyes bojani</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">14.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">15.3</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Eudoxoides mitra</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">13.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">12.4</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Eudoxoides spiralis</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">3.6</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Lensia meteori</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">4.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">–</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Liriope tetraphylla</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">26.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">5.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">–</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Muggiaea kochii</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">21</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">–</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Sulculeolaria chuni</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e1888">Group Y was composed by the deeper stations over the continental shelf and
all stations in the WBCS and the SECS. This group was subdivided into two
large branches and several outliers. Subgroup Y1 was composed by most
stations of WBCS over the slope. SIMPER analysis indicated an average
similarity of 73.4 % within the group (Table 2). It was represented by the
species <italic>C. appendiculata</italic>, <italic>D. bojani</italic>, <italic>E. mitra</italic>, <italic>B. bassensis</italic>, <italic>A. tetragona</italic>, <italic>A. hemistoma</italic>, <italic>L tetraphylla</italic>, <italic>A. eschscholtzii</italic>, <italic>Lensia meteori</italic> and <italic>E. spiralis</italic>, occurring in high or medium abundances.
Subgroup Y2 (average similarity of 78.1 %) included most stations in SECS,
represented by the species <italic>D. bojani</italic>, <italic>B. bassensis</italic>, <italic>E. mitra</italic>, <italic>A. eschscholtzii</italic>, <italic>A. hemistoma</italic>, <italic>C. appendiculata</italic>, <italic>A. tetragona</italic>, <italic>S. chuni</italic>, <italic>Cordagalma ordinatum</italic> and <italic>Aequorea</italic> spp (Table 2). Subgroup Y2
differed from Y1 due to the higher abundance of <italic>A. eschscholtzii</italic>, <italic>B. bassensis</italic>, <italic>Aequorea</italic> spp., <italic>D. bojani</italic>, <italic>A. hemistoma</italic>, <italic>E. mitra</italic> and <italic>C. ordinatum</italic> and the
lower abundance of <italic>L. meteori</italic> and <italic>C. appendiculata</italic>.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Table 3</label><caption><p id="d1e1985">Summary of the redundancy analyses (RDAs) performed between
the cnidarian community and environmental explanatory variables from the
continental shelf, the western boundary current system (WBCS) and the South
Equatorial Current System (SECS) in the western tropical South Atlantic.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="7">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col3" align="center" colsep="1">Shelf </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col4" nameend="col5" align="center" colsep="1">WBCS </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col6" nameend="col7" align="center">SECS </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Axis 1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Axis 2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Axis 1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Axis 2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Axis 1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Axis 2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Eigenvalues</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.327</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.132</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.179</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.101</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.411</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.103</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Species–environment correlations</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.843</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.908</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.904</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.759</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.958</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.796</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col7">Cumulative variance (%) </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Of species data</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">32.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">45.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">17.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">28</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">41.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">51.4</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Of species–environment relationships</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">56</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">78.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">35.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">56.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">65.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">81.7</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col7">Correlations of explanatory variables </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Spring</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.3144</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.865</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.8473</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.1287</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.9647</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.0439</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Autumn</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.3144</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.865</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.8473</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1287</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.9647</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.0439</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Bottom depth</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.8021</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.1315</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.0838</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.4804</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.4311</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.31</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Temperature</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.5136</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.7517</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.8698</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1441</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.9605</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.005</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Salinity</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.5049</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.3943</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.1684</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.4868</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.9079</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.0097</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Fluorescence</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.7822</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.1583</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.4763</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.382</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.7149</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.0018</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Mixed-layer depth</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.4322</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.2034</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.8906</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.0029</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Zonal currents</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.0185</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.2676</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.5719</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.3988</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.9061</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.0805</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Meridional currents</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.0756</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.667</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.0767</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.2647</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.3528</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5446</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS5">
  <label>3.5</label><title>Species responses to environmental gradients</title>
      <p id="d1e2568">The two first canonical axes of the RDA explained 45.9 %, 28 % and 51.4 % of
species variance for the shelf, WBCS and SECS, respectively (Table 3). A monte
Carlo test showed that the first and all canonical axes together were
significant (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) for the three analyses. Over the continental
shelf, the first axis was related to the cross-shelf spatial structure,
being positively related to fluorescence and negatively related to bottom
depth. The second axis was related to seasonal variability being positively
related to autumn, with stronger northward surface currents and higher
temperature, salinity and fluorescence, and negatively related to spring
(Fig. 8a, Table 3). In this system, <italic>L. tetraphylla</italic> and <italic>M. kochii</italic> were positively related with axis
1, such a relation reflecting their higher abundances in shallower and more
productive coastal waters during both seasons. Other species were negatively related with axis 1, reflecting their higher abundances in the areas over
the shelf with the influence of oceanic waters. Among these species, <italic>A. eschscholtzii</italic> and <italic>D. dispar</italic> were
also positively related to axis 2, reflecting their higher abundance during
autumn, while <italic>B. bassensis</italic>, <italic>A. tetragona</italic> and <italic>E. spiralis</italic> were negatively related to axis 2, reflecting their
higher abundance in spring (Fig. 8a).</p>
      <p id="d1e2605">In the WBCS, the first axis was mainly related to the seasonal variability,
being positively related to spring, with a deeper mixed layer and weaker westward currents or the presence of eastward surface currents (see Tosetto et al., 2021),
and negatively related to autumn, with higher temperature and fluorescence.
The second axis was positively related to salinity and negatively related to
bottom depth and stronger northward surface currents (Fig. 8b, Table 3). In
this system, <italic>C. appendiculata</italic>, <italic>B. bassensis</italic>, <italic>A. tetragona</italic>, <italic>E. Spiralis</italic> and <italic>L. meteori</italic> were positively related to axis 1, reflecting their
higher abundance during spring. <italic>E. mitra</italic>, <italic>D. bojani</italic>, <italic>D. dispar</italic> and <italic>A. eschscholtzii</italic> were negatively related to axis 1,
reflecting their higher abundance in autumn, when shallower mixed layers and
higher fluorescence and temperature were observed. <italic>A. hemistoma</italic>, <italic>L. tetraphylla</italic> and <italic>S. chuni</italic> were positively
related to axis 2 and shallower waters over the slope (Fig. 8b).</p>
      <p id="d1e2646">In the SECS, the first axis was mainly related to the seasonal variability
being positively related to autumn, with higher temperature and
fluorescence, and negatively related to spring, with a deeper mixed layer and
weaker westward surface currents. The second axis was positively related to
stronger northward surface currents (Fig. 8c, Table 3). In this system, <italic>E. mitra</italic>,
<italic>A. hemistoma</italic>, <italic>A. tetragona</italic>, <italic>S. chuni</italic>, <italic>B. bassensis</italic>, <italic>D. bojani</italic> and <italic>C. ordinatum</italic>. <italic>A. eschscholtzii</italic>, <italic>D. dispar</italic> and <italic>Aequorea</italic> spp. were positively related to axis 1, reflecting their
higher abundance in autumn, when shallower mixed layers and higher
fluorescence and temperature were observed. Meanwhile, <italic>L.tetraphylla</italic>, <italic>E. spiralis</italic>, <italic>C. appendiculata</italic> and <italic>L. meteori</italic> were
negatively related to axis 1, reflecting their higher abundance in spring
(Fig. 8c).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Discussion</title>
      <p id="d1e2702">Here, we describe contrasting seasonal patterns in the planktonic cnidarian
community in response to ecological and physical forcing in the western
tropical South Atlantic. Although the species composition of the cnidarian
community was similar in spring and autumn, with almost the same species
dominating each specific area, the distribution and abundance of species
both over the continental shelf and in the oceanic WBCS and SECS were
different. We associate these differences with distinct scenarios in the
thermohaline structure, circulation and continental runoff.</p>
      <p id="d1e2705">In spring, over the continental shelf, intrusions of oceanic water masses
caused by the coastward currents characteristic of the WBCS (NBUC and cSEC) reached coastal areas. Most samples were then dominated by cnidarian
species that typically dominate in the open ocean, such as the siphonophores
<italic>C. appendiculata</italic>, <italic>D. bojani</italic>, <italic>B. bassensis</italic> and <italic>A. tetragona</italic>. In the western tropical South Atlantic, the dominance of such
oceanic communities over the continental shelf is not exclusive in
cnidarians and has been observed for other zooplanktonic groups such as
copepods, chaetognaths, thaliaceans and fish larvae (Neumann-Leitao et al.,
2008; Neumann-Leitão et al., 1999; Santana et al., 2020; Schwamborn et
al., 1999). Meanwhile, the coastal community (group A), with a high abundance
of <italic>M. kochii</italic> and <italic>L. tetraphylla</italic> and an absence or reduced abundance of the siphonophores mentioned
above, was restricted to a particular area over the Pernambuco Plateau. In
this area, oceanic intrusions were reduced due to the presence of an
anticyclonic eddy centred at 8.9<inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S, 34.1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> W that
locally dampened the NBUC system that favoured the oceanward flow of coastal
waters (Tosetto et al., 2021; Dossa et al., 2021).</p>
      <p id="d1e2745">In autumn, although the average velocity and water transport of the NBUC
system were weaker, the core of the current was shallower than in spring,
which resulted in stronger surface currents. However, it was also more
offshore; thus, over the continental shelf, no remarkable differences were
observed in surface currents between spring and autumn (Fig. 2b; Dossa et
al., 2021). Based on that, similar to spring, the dominance of oceanic
planktonic cnidarian species over the continental shelf would be expected.</p>
      <p id="d1e2748">However, autumn is also the rainy season in northeast Brazil. With the higher
continental runoff, the characteristic coastal water can further spread
over the continental shelf, potentially enhancing the distance which
coastal waters species can reach. The combination of these two antagonist
processes (larger continental runoff and advection of oceanic waters)
produced an interesting response in the structure of the cnidarian
community. The sharp outline between “coastal” and “oceanic-like”
communities present in spring (group A and subgroup B1) was not observed in
autumn. Instead, both communities merged, and characteristic species of both
environments (e.g. <italic>M. kochii</italic>, <italic>L. tetraphylla</italic>, <italic>A. eschscholtzii</italic>, <italic>C. appendiculata</italic> and <italic>B. bassensis</italic>) coexisted in most stations over the
continental shelf (group X). An exception was the closest station to the coast
(station autumn_3), where oceanic species were absent or
occurred in low abundance, and stations in the outer shelf, which presented
the typical oceanic community and were included in group Y. A typical
coastal community spreading along the northeast Brazilian coast was also
observed in other zooplankton groups such as copepods, chaetognaths and
appendicularians, with large concentrations of larvae from mangrove
organisms as well (Ekau et al., 1999; Neumann-Leitao et al., 2008;
Neumann-Leitão et al., 1999; Schwamborn et al., 1999). These coastal
communities usually spread from 7 up to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km offshore,
sometimes merging with the oceanic community, as we also observed in
planktonic cnidarians in autumn. This extension is likely affected by the
physical constraints discussed above and by species ecological niche. Thus,
our first hypothesis was partially correct: with an increase in continental
runoff and a reduction in western boundary current intensity, the range of
coastal cnidarian species were indeed increased. But the reduction in the
current intensity was not enough to reduce the presence of oceanic cnidarian
species over the continental shelf; thus both communities merged and species
co-occurred.</p>
      <p id="d1e2778">The dynamic interaction between oceanic water mass intrusions and the spread
of coastal waters and continental runoff is likely to be the main factor
affecting the distribution of planktonic cnidarians over continental shelves
in WBCS. In narrow continental shelves, when the continental discharge is
reduced and intrusions are strong, oceanic communities may dominate almost
the entire shelf. This circumstance was observed in our spring data (Tosetto
et al., 2021), and similar patterns were observed on the east coast of Africa
(Thibault-Botha et al., 2004). When the continental discharge is enhanced
and intrusions are strong, the mixing of both water masses may allow the
coexistence of species from both environments (although species niche
restrictions may act as well). Such circumstances were observed in our data
in autumn and in the continental shelf off southeast and south Brazil and
off South Africa in some seasons (Nogueira and Oliveira Jr., 1991; Nogueira
Júnior et al., 2014; Thibault-Botha et al., 2004). Meanwhile, in WBCSs
with wider continental shelves and larger river discharge, such as the east
coast of China (Yangtze River), typical coastal cnidarian species (mainly
represented by <italic>Muggiaea</italic> spp.) may spread and dominate almost the entire shelf.
Oceanic species are then restricted to the core of the western boundary current over the outer
shelf and slope (e.g. Xu, 2006, 2009; Xu and Lin, 2006).</p>
      <p id="d1e2784">To further support this hypothesis, unlike WBCSs, in the eastern margin of
ocean basins, currents typically flow away to the coast. The oceanward flow
opens space over the continental shelf for the spread of coastal waters,
which also favours the uplift of deeper water masses (Carr and Kearns, 2003).
Thus, contrastingly to the patterns observed in WBCSs, coastal cnidarian
species such as <italic>Muggiaea</italic> spp., <italic>L. tetraphylla</italic> and <italic>Obelia</italic> spp. typically dominate the community
inhabiting the entire continental shelves in eastern boundary systems,
sometimes also spreading beyond the shelf break, while other siphonophores
are absent or occur in low abundance. Such circumstances were observed in
eastern boundary systems from the South Atlantic (e.g. Pagès and Gili,
1991, 1992; Pagès et al., 1991), South Pacific (e.g.
Apablaza and Palma, 2006; Rodríguez and Ruiz, 2019; Palma and Rosales, 1995) and North Pacific (e.g. Segura-Puertas et al., 2010; Gamero-Mora et
al., 2015). The patterns observed in both margins of ocean basins reinforce
the major role of ocean circulation in the distribution of planktonic
cnidarians both through advection of oceanic species over the continental
shelf and/or the spread of coastal species to the outer shelf.</p>
      <p id="d1e2796">Back to the western tropical South Atlantic, apart from the spread of
coastal cnidarian species, the higher freshwater runoff observed in autumn
provides an important supply of nutrients to a continental shelf that is
quite oligotrophic during most of the year (Brandini et al., 1997; Castro et
al., 2006; Ekau and Knoppers, 1999). These nutrients support greater primary
production in the rainy season, noted by the general increase in the
fluorescence over the continental shelf in our CTD-O2 data on the autumn cruise
(Fig. 3g). High primary production may lead to a general increase in the
abundance and biomass of organism through the trophic web (bottom–up control), and
this is likely behind the increase in the abundance of many dominant
cnidarian species, such as <italic>M. kochii</italic>, <italic>L. tetraphylla</italic>, <italic>A. hemistoma</italic>, <italic>C. appendiculata</italic>, <italic>A. eschscholtzii</italic> and <italic>S. chuni</italic>, in autumn (compared to spring) over
the continental shelf (Figs. 5, 8).</p>
      <p id="d1e2818">A similar process was observed in the oceanic SECS as well. There, the
increase in the supply of nutrients that enhanced primary production in
autumn occurred because the thermocline between the oligotrophic tropical
water and the nutrient-rich South Atlantic Central Water was shallower than
in spring (Fig. 3; Assunção et al., 2020; Silva et al., 2021). Thus,
more nutrients present in the latter reached photic layers, becoming
available to phytoplankton (Fig. 3i; Farias et al., 2022). The relation
between changes in the mixing of water masses and light penetration with primary
production in tropical systems is dynamic and in some circumstances, a large
mixed layer favours the supply of nutrients to photic layers (Mignot et al.,
2014; Polovina et al., 1995; Signorini et al., 1999). However, the opposite
was observed in our area, likely due to the high stratification in the system
(Farias et al., 2022). In any case, the increase in primary production related
to changes in mixed-layer depth typically reflects an increased production
in the upper trophic chain in zooplankton, reflecting a bottom–up control
mixed layer (Polovina et al., 1995). In the SECS, this process and the
consequent increase in food availability likely increase the abundance of
most dominant cnidarian species as well (e.g. <italic>Aequorea</italic> spp., <italic>D. bojani</italic>, <italic>B. bassensis</italic>, <italic>E. mitra</italic> and <italic>A. eschscholtzii</italic>). Thus, our
results support our second hypothesis that the enhanced primary productivity
caused by the shallower mixed-layer depth in oligotrophic systems supports
more abundant planktonic cnidarian communities.</p>
      <p id="d1e2836">In WBCSs, with a thicker thermocline and less pronounced seasonal changes in
the depth of the mixed layer (Assunção et al., 2020), such an increase did
not occur in primary production (Fig. 3h) or in the abundance of
the species referred to above (Fig. 5). Instead, species that were dominant
over the continental slope in spring, such as <italic>A. tetragona</italic>, <italic>E. spiralis</italic> and <italic>L. meteori</italic>, were significantly
less abundant in autumn (Fig. 5). One hypothesis yet to be tested to explain
these differences is that in the spring the organisms were pushed by the
currents towards the slope, accumulating there. In autumn, the core of the
NBUC was weaker and more diffuse; under these circumstances the accumulation
of organisms may not have occurred. An accumulation of organisms associated with circulation and sloping topography is not rare among zooplankton (e.g.
Cotté and Simard, 2005; Hazen et al., 2009; Sourisseau et al., 2006)
but was never observed in cnidarians. Further approaches considering
stratified samples and/or other methods such active acoustics may help to
better understand the interaction among the behaviour of these and other
species, oceanic currents, and bottom topography in the western tropical
South Atlantic.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>5</label><title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e2857">We observed contrasting seasonal patterns in the planktonic cnidarian
community in response to ecological and physical processes associated with changes in the thermohaline structure and circulation in the western
boundary system of tropical South Atlantic. We concluded that in the
tropical South Atlantic and, likely, other western boundary systems with
narrow continental shelves, coastward currents spread oceanic waters and their associated cnidarian species, such as <italic>C. appendiculata</italic>, <italic>D. bojani</italic>, <italic>B. bassensis</italic> and <italic>A. tetragona</italic>, over the continental shelf.
However, when the intensity of western boundary currents is weaker and under
higher continental runoff (as observed in autumn in this study), coastal
(e.g. <italic>M. kochii</italic> and <italic>L. tetraphylla</italic>) and oceanic communities merge and co-occur, while in dry
seasons (herein in spring), oceanic species may dominate the entire shelf.
We also conclude that the enhanced primary productivity in oligotrophic
systems caused by the seasonal changes in the depth of the mixed layer that
uplift nutrient-rich water masses to photic layers, as we observed in
autumn, supports larger populations of planktonic cnidarian species through
bottom–up control.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><app-group>

<app id="App1.Ch1.S1">
  <?xmltex \currentcnt{A}?><label>Appendix A</label><title>List of acronyms</title>
      <p id="d1e2890"><table-wrap id="Taba" position="anchor"><oasis:table><oasis:tgroup cols="2">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:tbody>

       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><bold>Abbreviation</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><bold>Definition</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>

       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
       </oasis:row>

       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">cSEC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">central South Equatorial Current</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">FNR</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Fernando de Noronha Ridge</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NBUC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">North Brazilian Undercurrent</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SECS</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">South Equatorial Current System</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SEUC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">South Equatorial Undercurrent</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">WBCS</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Western boundary current system</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap></p>
</app>
  </app-group><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e2980">The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in SEANOE at <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.17882/92011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.17882/92011</ext-link> (Tosetto et al., 2022).</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><p id="d1e2986">The supplement related to this article is available online at: <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/os-18-1763-2022-supplement" xlink:title="zip">https://doi.org/10.5194/os-18-1763-2022-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e2995">AB and SNL were responsible for taxonomy. EGT and MNJ carried out data analysis. EGT wrote the original draft. All authors reviewed and edited the final paper.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e3001">The contact author has declared that neither of the authors has any competing interests.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="disclaimer"><title>Disclaimer</title>

      <p id="d1e3007">Publisher’s note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e3013">We are grateful to the French oceanographic fleet
for funding the survey ABRACOS 1 and the officers, crew and scientific
team of the R/V <italic>Antea</italic> for their contribution to the success of the
operations. The present study was not possible without the support of all
members from LABZOO and other laboratories from UFPE and UFRPE. We thank CAPES (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível
Superior) and CNPq (Brazilian National Council for Scientific and
Technological Development), which provided Research Scholarships to Everton Giachini Tosetto and Sigrid Neumann-Leitão. This work is a contribution to the LMI TAPIOCA
(<uri>https://tapioca.ird.fr/</uri>).</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e3024">This research has been supported by the CAPES/COFECUB programme (grant agreement no. 88881.142689/2017-01) and the European Union’s Horizon 2020 projects PADDLE (grant agreement no. 73427) and TRIATLAS (grant agreement no. 817578).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e3030">This paper was edited by Mario Hoppema and reviewed by Marco Corrales and Martin Vodopivec.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Anderson, M. J., Gorley, R. N., and Clarke, K. R.: Permanova For Primer:
Guide to Software and Statiscal Methods, PRIMER-E, Plymouth, 214 pp., 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Apablaza, P. and Palma, S.: Efecto de la zona de mínimo oxígeno
sobre la migración vertical de zooplancton gelatinoso en la bahía
de Mejillones (Effect of the oxygen minimum zone on the vertical migration
of gelatinous zooplankton in Mejillones Bay), Investig. Mar., 34, 81–95,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-71782006000200009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.4067/S0717-71782006000200009</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Assunção, R. V., Silva, A. C., Roy, A., Bourlès, B., Silva, C.
H. S., Ternon, J.-F., Araujo, M., and Bertrand, A.: 3D characterisation of
the thermohaline structure in the southwestern tropical Atlantic derived
from functional data analysis of in situ profiles, Prog. Oceanogr., 187,
102399, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2020.102399" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.pocean.2020.102399</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ayala, D. J., Munk, P., Lundgreen, R. B. C., Traving, S. J., Jaspers, C.,
Jørgensen, T. S., Hansen, L. H., and Riemann, L.: Gelatinous plankton is
important in the diet of European eel (Anguilla anguilla) larvae in the
Sargasso Sea, Sci. Rep., 8, 6156,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-24388-x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41598-018-24388-x</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bertrand, A.: ABRACOS cruise, R/V <italic>Antea</italic>, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.17600/15005600" ext-link-type="DOI">10.17600/15005600</ext-link>,
2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bertrand, A.: ABRACOS 2 cruise, R/V <italic>Antea</italic>, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.17600/17004100" ext-link-type="DOI">10.17600/17004100</ext-link>,
2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Boero, F.: Review of Jellyfish Blooms in the Mediterranean and Black Sea.
Studies and Reviews, General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean No
92, FAO, Rome, 64 pp., 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Bouillon, J.: Hydromedusae, in: South Atlantic zooplankton, edited by:
Boltovskoy, D., Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, 424–512, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bourles, B., Molinari, R. L., Johns, E., Wilson, W. D., and Leaman, K. D.:
Upper layer currents in the western tropical North Atlantic (1989–1991), J.
Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 104, 1361–1375, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/1998JC900025" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/1998JC900025</ext-link>,
1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Brandini, F. P., Lopes, R. M., Gutseit, K. S., and Sassi, R.: Planctonologia
na plataforma continental do Brasil: diagnose e revisão
bibliográfica (Planktonology on the continental shelf of Brazil:
diagnosis and literature review), CEMAR/MMA/CIRM/FEMAR, Brasilia, ISBN 85-86576-01-8, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Carr, M.-E. and Kearns, E. J.: Production regimes in four Eastern Boundary
Current systems, Deep Sea Res. Pt. II, 50, 3199–3221,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsr2.2003.07.015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.dsr2.2003.07.015</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Castro, B. M., Brandini, F. P., Pires-Vanin, A. M. S., and Miranda, L. B.:
Multidisciplinary oceanographic processes on the Western Atlantic
continental shelf between 4<inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N and 34<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S, The Sea, 14,
1–39, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Clarke, K. R. and Gorley, R. N.: PRIMER 6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> PERMANOVA, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Condon, R. H., Graham, W. M., Duarte, C. M., Pitt, K. A., Lucas, C. H.,
Haddock, S. H. D., Sutherland, K. R., Robinson, K. L., Dawson, M. N.,
Decker, M. B., Mills, C. E., Purcell, J. E., Malej, A., Mianzan, H., Uye,
S., Gelcich, S., and Madin, L. P.: Questioning the Rise of Gelatinous
Zooplankton in the World's Oceans, BioScience, 62, 160–169,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2012.62.2.9" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1525/bio.2012.62.2.9</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Cotté, C. and Simard, Y.: Formation of dense krill patches under tidal
forcing at whale feeding hot spots in the St. Lawrence Estuary, Mar. Ecol.
Prog. Ser., 288, 199–210, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3354/meps288199" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3354/meps288199</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dossa, A. N., Silva, A. C., Chaigneau, A., Eldin, G., Araujo, M., and
Bertrand, A.: Near-surface western boundary circulation off Northeast
Brazil, Prog. Oceanogr., 190, 102475,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2020.102475" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.pocean.2020.102475</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ekau, W. and Knoppers, B.: An introduction to the pelagic system of the
Northeast and East Brazilian shelf, Arch. Fish. Mar. Res., 47, 5–24,
1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ekau, W., Westhaus-Ekau, P., and Medeiros, C.: Large scale distribution of
fish larvae in the continental shelf waters off North-East Brazil, Arch.
Fish. Mar. Res., 47, 183–200, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Farias, G. B., Molinero, J.-C., Carré, C., Bertrand, A., Bec, B., and
Melo, P. A. M. de C.: Uncoupled changes in phytoplankton biomass and size
structure in the western tropical Atlantic, J. Mar. Syst., 227, 103696,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmarsys.2021.103696" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jmarsys.2021.103696</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Farstey, V., Lazar, B., and Genin, A.: Expansion and homogeneity of the
vertical distribution of zooplankton in a very deep mixed-layer, Mar. Ecol.
Prog. Ser., 238, 91–100, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3354/meps238091" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3354/meps238091</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gamero-Mora, E., Ceballos-Corona, G., Gasca, R., and Morales-Blake, A.:
Análisis de la comunidad del zooplancton gelatinoso (Hydrozoa,
Ctenophora, Thaliacea) en el Pacífico central mexicano, abril-mayo 2011
(Analysis of the gelatinous zooplankton community (Hydrozoa, Ctenophora,
Thaliacea) in the Mexican Central Pacific, April–May 2011), Rev. Biol. Mar.
Oceanogr., 50, 111–124, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-19572015000100009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.4067/S0718-19572015000100009</ext-link>,
2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gibbons, M. J. and Buecher, E.: Short-term variability in the assemblage of
medusae and ctenophores following upwelling events in the southern Benguela
ecosystem, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 220, 169–177,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3354/meps220169" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3354/meps220169</ext-link>, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gili, J. M., Pagès, F., Sabatès, A., and Ros, J. D.: Small-scale
distribution of a cnidarian population in the western Mediterranean, J.
Plankton Res., 10, 385–401, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/10.3.385" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1093/plankt/10.3.385</ext-link>, 1988.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Hadfield, M. and Sharples, J.: Modelling mixed-layer depth and plankton
biomass off the west coast of South Island, New Zealand, J. Mar. Syst., 8,
1–29, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hays, G. C., Doyle, T. K., and Houghton, J. D. R.: A Paradigm Shift in the
Trophic Importance of Jellyfish?, Trends Ecol. Evol., 33, 874–884,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2018.09.001" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.tree.2018.09.001</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hazen, E., Friedlaender, A., Thompson, M., Ware, C., Weinrich, M., Halpin,
P., and Wiley, D.: Fine-scale prey aggregations and foraging ecology of
humpback whales <italic>Megaptera novaeangliae</italic>, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 395, 75–89,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3354/meps08108" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3354/meps08108</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Lepš, J. and Šmilauer, P.: Multivariate Analysis of Ecological Data
using CANOCO, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 269 pp., 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Luo, J. Y., Grassian, B., Tang, D., Irisson, J. O., Greer, A., Guigand, C.
C., McClatchie, S., and Cowen, R. K.: Environmental drivers of the
fine-scale distribution of a gelatinous zooplankton community across a
mesoscale front, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 510, 129–149,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3354/meps10908" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3354/meps10908</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mignot, A., Claustre, H., Uitz, J., Poteau, A., D'Ortenzio, F., and Xing,
X.: Understanding the seasonal dynamics of phytoplankton biomass and the
deep chlorophyll maximum in oligotrophic environments: A Bio-Argo float
investigation, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 28, 856–876,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GB004781" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2013GB004781</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mills, C. E.: Jellyfish blooms: are populations increasing globally in
response to changing ocean conditions?, Hydrobiologia, 55–68,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0722-1_" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/978-94-010-0722-1_</ext-link> 6, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Neumann-Leitão, S., Gusmao, L., Silva, T., do Nascimento-Vieira, D., and
Silva, A.: Mesozooplankton biomass and diversity in coastal and oceanic
waters off North-Eastern Brazil, Arch. Fish. Mar. Res., 47, 153–165, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Neumann-Leitao, S., Sant'anna, E. M. E., Gusmao, L. M. D. O., Do
Nascimento-Vieira, D. A., Paranagua, M. N., and Schwamborn, R.: Diversity
and distribution of the mesozooplankton in the tropical Southwestern
Atlantic, J. Plankton Res., 30, 795–805,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/fbn040" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1093/plankt/fbn040</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Nogueira, C. R. and Oliveira Jr., S. dos R.: Siphonophora from the coast of
Brazil (17<inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S to 24<inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S), Bol. Inst. Ocean., 39, 61–69,
1991.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Nogueira Júnior, M., Brandini, F. P., and Codina, J. C. U.: Distribution
of planktonic cnidarians in response to South Atlantic Central Water
intrusion in the South Brazilian Bight, Cont. Shelf Res., 89, 93–102,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csr.2014.02.022" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.csr.2014.02.022</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Nogueira Júnior, M., Tosetto, E. G., Baldoni, L. C., Dutto, S., Hidaka,
M., Lindsay, D. J., and Nagata, R. M.: Gelatinous Zooplankton, in: Marine
Biology A Functional Approach to the Oceans and their Organisms, edited by:
Pan, J. and Pratolongo, P. D., CRC Press, Boca Raton, 150–179,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429399244" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1201/9780429399244</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Pagès, F.: Mesoscale coupling between planktonic cnidarian distribution
and water masses during a temporal transition between active upwelling and
abatement in the northern Benguela system, South Afr. J. Mar. Sci., 12,
41–52, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2989/02577619209504689" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2989/02577619209504689</ext-link>, 1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Pagès, F. and Gili: Effects of large-scale advective processes on
gelatinous zooplankton populations in the northern Benguela ecosystem, Mar.
Ecol. Prog. Ser., 75, 205–215, 1991.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Pagès, F. and Gili, J.-M.: Influence of Agulhas waters on the population
structure of planktonic Cnidarians in the southern Benguela Region, Sci.
Mar., 56, 109–123, 1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Pagès, F., Verheye, H. M., Gili, J.-M., and Flos, J.: Short-term effects
of coastal upwelling and wind reversals on epiplanktonic cnidarians in the
southern Benguela ecosystem, South Afr. J. Mar. Sci., 10, 203–211,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2989/02577619109504632" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2989/02577619109504632</ext-link>, 1991.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Pagès, F., González, H. E., Ramón, M., Sobarzo, M., and Gili,
J.-M.: Gelatinous zooplankton assemblages associated with water masses in
the Humboldt Current System, and potential predatory impact by Bassia
bassensis (Siphonophora: Calycophorae), Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 210, 13–24,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3354/meps210013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3354/meps210013</ext-link>, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Palma, G. S. and Rosales G, S.: Composición, distribución y
abundancia estacional del macroplancton de la bahía de Valparaíso
(Composition, distribution and seasonal abundance of the macroplankton of
the Bay of Valparaíso), Investig. Mar., 23, 49-66,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-71781995002300003" ext-link-type="DOI">10.4067/S0717-71781995002300003</ext-link>, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Polovina, J. J., Mitchum, G. T., and Evans, G. T.: Decadal and basin-scale
variation in mixed-layer depth and the impact on biological production in
the Central and North Pacific, 1960-88, Deep Sea Res., 42, 1701–1716, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0967-0637(95)00075-H" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/0967-0637(95)00075-H</ext-link>, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Pugh, P. R.: The diel migrations and distributions within a mesopelagic
community in the North East Atlantic. 7. Siphonophores, Prog. Oceanogr., 13,
461–489, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0079-6611(84)90016-8" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/0079-6611(84)90016-8</ext-link>, 1984.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Pugh, P. R.: Siphonophorae, in: South Atlantic Zooplankton, edited by:
Boltovskoy, D., Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, 467–511, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Purcell, J., Uye, S., and Lo, W.: Anthropogenic causes of jellyfish blooms
and their direct consequences for humans: a review, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.,
350, 153–174, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3354/meps07093" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3354/meps07093</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
QGIS Development Team: QGIS Geographic Information System, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Rodríguez, K. M. and Ruiz, E. C. A.: Distribución y ecología
de medusas y sifonóforos en tres estaciones de la zona marino costera de
la Península de Santa Elena (Distribution and ecology of medusae and
siphonophores in three stations of the coastal marine zone of the Santa
Elena Peninsula), Ecuador, Rev. Científica Tecnológica UPSE, 6,
24–33, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.26423/rctu.v6i2.443" ext-link-type="DOI">10.26423/rctu.v6i2.443</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Santana, J. R., Costa, A. E. S. F. D., Veleda, D., Schwamborn, S. H. L.,
Mafalda Júnior, P. O., and Schwamborn, R.: Ichthyoplankton community
structure on the shelf break off northeastern Brazil, An. Acad. Bras.
Ciênc., 92, e20180851, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1590/0001-3765202020180851" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1590/0001-3765202020180851</ext-link>,
2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Schwamborn, R., Ekau, W., Pinto, A. S., Silva, T. A., and Saint-Paul, U.:
The contribution of estuarine decapod larvae to marine zooplankton
communities in northeast Brazil, Arch. Fish. Mar. Res., 17, 59–74, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Segura-Puertas, L., Franco-Gordo, C., Suárez-Morales, E., Gasca, R., and
Gódinez-Domínguez, E.: Summer composition and distribution of the
jellyfish (Cnidaria: Medusozoa) in the shelf area off the central Mexican
Pacific, Rev. Mex. Biodivers., 81, 103–112, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Signorini, S. R., Murtugudde, R. G., McClain, C. R., Christian, J. R.,
Picaut, J., and Busalacchi, A. J.: Biological and physical signatures in the
tropical and subtropical Atlantic, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 104,
18367–18382, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JC900134" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/1999JC900134</ext-link>, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Silva, A. C., Chaigneau, A., Dossa, A. N., Eldin, G., Araujo, M., and
Bertrand, A.: Surface Circulation and Vertical Structure of Upper Ocean
Variability Around Fernando de Noronha Archipelago and Rocas Atoll During
Spring 2015 and Fall 2017, Front. Mar. Sci., 8, 598101,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.598101" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3389/fmars.2021.598101</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sourisseau, M., Simard, Y., and Saucier, F.: Krill aggregation in the St.
Lawrence system, and supply of krill to the whale feeding grounds in the
estuary from the gulf, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 314, 257–270,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3354/meps314257" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3354/meps314257</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
StatSoft Inc.: Statistica, version 10, Tulsa, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Stramma, L. and England, M.: On the water masses and mean circulation of the
South Atlantic Ocean, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 104, 20863–20883,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JC900139" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/1999JC900139</ext-link>, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Thibault-Botha, D., Lutjeharms, J. R. E., and Gibbons, M. J.: Siphonophore
assemblages along the east coast of South Africa; mesoscale distribution and
temporal variations, J. Plankton Res., 26, 1115–1128,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/fbh104" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1093/plankt/fbh104</ext-link>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Tosetto, E. G., Bertrand, A., Neumann-Leitão, S., Costa da Silva, A.,
and Nogueira Júnior, M.: Spatial patterns in planktonic cnidarian
distribution in the western boundary current system of the tropical South
Atlantic Ocean, J. Plankton Res., 43, 270–287,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/fbaa066" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1093/plankt/fbaa066</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Tosetto, E. G., Nogueira Junior, M., Neumann-Leitão, S., Costa Da Silva, A., and Bertrand, A.: Abundance data of planktonic cnidarians collected during the ABRACOS 1 and 2 surveys performed along the northeast Brazilian continental shelf, slope and open ocean, [data set], https://doi.org/10.17882/92011, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Xu, Z.: Dynamics of medusa abundance in the East China Sea, Acta Zool. Sin.,
52, 854–861, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Xu, Z.: Water environment adaptability amd ecological groups of hydromedusae
in East China Sea, Chin. J. Appl. Ecol., 20, 177–184, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Xu, Z. and Lin, M.: Causal analysis on diversity of medusa in the East China
Sea, Biodivers. Sci., 14, 508–516, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1360/biodiv.060066" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1360/biodiv.060066</ext-link>,
2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Yilmaz, I. N.: Collapse of zooplankton stocks during <italic>Liriope tetraphylla</italic> (Hydromedusa) blooms
and dense mucilaginous aggregations in a thermohaline stratified basin, Mar.
Ecol., 36, 595–610, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/maec.12166" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/maec.12166</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Planktonic cnidarian responses to contrasting thermohaline and circulation seasonal scenarios in a tropical western boundary current system</article-title-html>
<abstract-html/>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Anderson, M. J., Gorley, R. N., and Clarke, K. R.: Permanova For Primer:
Guide to Software and Statiscal Methods, PRIMER-E, Plymouth, 214 pp., 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Apablaza, P. and Palma, S.: Efecto de la zona de mínimo oxígeno
sobre la migración vertical de zooplancton gelatinoso en la bahía
de Mejillones (Effect of the oxygen minimum zone on the vertical migration
of gelatinous zooplankton in Mejillones Bay), Investig. Mar., 34, 81–95,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-71782006000200009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-71782006000200009</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Assunção, R. V., Silva, A. C., Roy, A., Bourlès, B., Silva, C.
H. S., Ternon, J.-F., Araujo, M., and Bertrand, A.: 3D characterisation of
the thermohaline structure in the southwestern tropical Atlantic derived
from functional data analysis of in situ profiles, Prog. Oceanogr., 187,
102399, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2020.102399" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2020.102399</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Ayala, D. J., Munk, P., Lundgreen, R. B. C., Traving, S. J., Jaspers, C.,
Jørgensen, T. S., Hansen, L. H., and Riemann, L.: Gelatinous plankton is
important in the diet of European eel (Anguilla anguilla) larvae in the
Sargasso Sea, Sci. Rep., 8, 6156,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-24388-x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-24388-x</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Bertrand, A.: ABRACOS cruise, R/V <i>Antea</i>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.17600/15005600" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.17600/15005600</a>,
2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Bertrand, A.: ABRACOS 2 cruise, R/V <i>Antea</i>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.17600/17004100" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.17600/17004100</a>,
2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Boero, F.: Review of Jellyfish Blooms in the Mediterranean and Black Sea.
Studies and Reviews, General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean No
92, FAO, Rome, 64 pp., 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Bouillon, J.: Hydromedusae, in: South Atlantic zooplankton, edited by:
Boltovskoy, D., Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, 424–512, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Bourles, B., Molinari, R. L., Johns, E., Wilson, W. D., and Leaman, K. D.:
Upper layer currents in the western tropical North Atlantic (1989–1991), J.
Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 104, 1361–1375, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/1998JC900025" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/1998JC900025</a>,
1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Brandini, F. P., Lopes, R. M., Gutseit, K. S., and Sassi, R.: Planctonologia
na plataforma continental do Brasil: diagnose e revisão
bibliográfica (Planktonology on the continental shelf of Brazil:
diagnosis and literature review), CEMAR/MMA/CIRM/FEMAR, Brasilia, ISBN 85-86576-01-8, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Carr, M.-E. and Kearns, E. J.: Production regimes in four Eastern Boundary
Current systems, Deep Sea Res. Pt. II, 50, 3199–3221,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsr2.2003.07.015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsr2.2003.07.015</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Castro, B. M., Brandini, F. P., Pires-Vanin, A. M. S., and Miranda, L. B.:
Multidisciplinary oceanographic processes on the Western Atlantic
continental shelf between 4°&thinsp;N and 34°&thinsp;S, The Sea, 14,
1–39, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Clarke, K. R. and Gorley, R. N.: PRIMER 6&thinsp;+&thinsp;PERMANOVA, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Condon, R. H., Graham, W. M., Duarte, C. M., Pitt, K. A., Lucas, C. H.,
Haddock, S. H. D., Sutherland, K. R., Robinson, K. L., Dawson, M. N.,
Decker, M. B., Mills, C. E., Purcell, J. E., Malej, A., Mianzan, H., Uye,
S., Gelcich, S., and Madin, L. P.: Questioning the Rise of Gelatinous
Zooplankton in the World's Oceans, BioScience, 62, 160–169,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2012.62.2.9" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2012.62.2.9</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Cotté, C. and Simard, Y.: Formation of dense krill patches under tidal
forcing at whale feeding hot spots in the St. Lawrence Estuary, Mar. Ecol.
Prog. Ser., 288, 199–210, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3354/meps288199" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3354/meps288199</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Dossa, A. N., Silva, A. C., Chaigneau, A., Eldin, G., Araujo, M., and
Bertrand, A.: Near-surface western boundary circulation off Northeast
Brazil, Prog. Oceanogr., 190, 102475,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2020.102475" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2020.102475</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Ekau, W. and Knoppers, B.: An introduction to the pelagic system of the
Northeast and East Brazilian shelf, Arch. Fish. Mar. Res., 47, 5–24,
1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Ekau, W., Westhaus-Ekau, P., and Medeiros, C.: Large scale distribution of
fish larvae in the continental shelf waters off North-East Brazil, Arch.
Fish. Mar. Res., 47, 183–200, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Farias, G. B., Molinero, J.-C., Carré, C., Bertrand, A., Bec, B., and
Melo, P. A. M. de C.: Uncoupled changes in phytoplankton biomass and size
structure in the western tropical Atlantic, J. Mar. Syst., 227, 103696,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmarsys.2021.103696" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmarsys.2021.103696</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Farstey, V., Lazar, B., and Genin, A.: Expansion and homogeneity of the
vertical distribution of zooplankton in a very deep mixed-layer, Mar. Ecol.
Prog. Ser., 238, 91–100, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3354/meps238091" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3354/meps238091</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Gamero-Mora, E., Ceballos-Corona, G., Gasca, R., and Morales-Blake, A.:
Análisis de la comunidad del zooplancton gelatinoso (Hydrozoa,
Ctenophora, Thaliacea) en el Pacífico central mexicano, abril-mayo 2011
(Analysis of the gelatinous zooplankton community (Hydrozoa, Ctenophora,
Thaliacea) in the Mexican Central Pacific, April–May 2011), Rev. Biol. Mar.
Oceanogr., 50, 111–124, <a href="https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-19572015000100009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-19572015000100009</a>,
2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Gibbons, M. J. and Buecher, E.: Short-term variability in the assemblage of
medusae and ctenophores following upwelling events in the southern Benguela
ecosystem, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 220, 169–177,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3354/meps220169" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3354/meps220169</a>, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Gili, J. M., Pagès, F., Sabatès, A., and Ros, J. D.: Small-scale
distribution of a cnidarian population in the western Mediterranean, J.
Plankton Res., 10, 385–401, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/10.3.385" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/10.3.385</a>, 1988.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Hadfield, M. and Sharples, J.: Modelling mixed-layer depth and plankton
biomass off the west coast of South Island, New Zealand, J. Mar. Syst., 8,
1–29, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Hays, G. C., Doyle, T. K., and Houghton, J. D. R.: A Paradigm Shift in the
Trophic Importance of Jellyfish?, Trends Ecol. Evol., 33, 874–884,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2018.09.001" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2018.09.001</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Hazen, E., Friedlaender, A., Thompson, M., Ware, C., Weinrich, M., Halpin,
P., and Wiley, D.: Fine-scale prey aggregations and foraging ecology of
humpback whales <i>Megaptera novaeangliae</i>, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 395, 75–89,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3354/meps08108" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3354/meps08108</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Lepš, J. and Šmilauer, P.: Multivariate Analysis of Ecological Data
using CANOCO, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 269 pp., 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Luo, J. Y., Grassian, B., Tang, D., Irisson, J. O., Greer, A., Guigand, C.
C., McClatchie, S., and Cowen, R. K.: Environmental drivers of the
fine-scale distribution of a gelatinous zooplankton community across a
mesoscale front, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 510, 129–149,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3354/meps10908" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3354/meps10908</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Mignot, A., Claustre, H., Uitz, J., Poteau, A., D'Ortenzio, F., and Xing,
X.: Understanding the seasonal dynamics of phytoplankton biomass and the
deep chlorophyll maximum in oligotrophic environments: A Bio-Argo float
investigation, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 28, 856–876,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GB004781" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GB004781</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Mills, C. E.: Jellyfish blooms: are populations increasing globally in
response to changing ocean conditions?, Hydrobiologia, 55–68,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0722-1_" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0722-1_</a> 6, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Neumann-Leitão, S., Gusmao, L., Silva, T., do Nascimento-Vieira, D., and
Silva, A.: Mesozooplankton biomass and diversity in coastal and oceanic
waters off North-Eastern Brazil, Arch. Fish. Mar. Res., 47, 153–165, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Neumann-Leitao, S., Sant'anna, E. M. E., Gusmao, L. M. D. O., Do
Nascimento-Vieira, D. A., Paranagua, M. N., and Schwamborn, R.: Diversity
and distribution of the mesozooplankton in the tropical Southwestern
Atlantic, J. Plankton Res., 30, 795–805,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/fbn040" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/fbn040</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Nogueira, C. R. and Oliveira Jr., S. dos R.: Siphonophora from the coast of
Brazil (17°&thinsp;S to 24°&thinsp;S), Bol. Inst. Ocean., 39, 61–69,
1991.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Nogueira Júnior, M., Brandini, F. P., and Codina, J. C. U.: Distribution
of planktonic cnidarians in response to South Atlantic Central Water
intrusion in the South Brazilian Bight, Cont. Shelf Res., 89, 93–102,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csr.2014.02.022" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csr.2014.02.022</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Nogueira Júnior, M., Tosetto, E. G., Baldoni, L. C., Dutto, S., Hidaka,
M., Lindsay, D. J., and Nagata, R. M.: Gelatinous Zooplankton, in: Marine
Biology A Functional Approach to the Oceans and their Organisms, edited by:
Pan, J. and Pratolongo, P. D., CRC Press, Boca Raton, 150–179,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429399244" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429399244</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Pagès, F.: Mesoscale coupling between planktonic cnidarian distribution
and water masses during a temporal transition between active upwelling and
abatement in the northern Benguela system, South Afr. J. Mar. Sci., 12,
41–52, <a href="https://doi.org/10.2989/02577619209504689" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2989/02577619209504689</a>, 1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Pagès, F. and Gili: Effects of large-scale advective processes on
gelatinous zooplankton populations in the northern Benguela ecosystem, Mar.
Ecol. Prog. Ser., 75, 205–215, 1991.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Pagès, F. and Gili, J.-M.: Influence of Agulhas waters on the population
structure of planktonic Cnidarians in the southern Benguela Region, Sci.
Mar., 56, 109–123, 1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Pagès, F., Verheye, H. M., Gili, J.-M., and Flos, J.: Short-term effects
of coastal upwelling and wind reversals on epiplanktonic cnidarians in the
southern Benguela ecosystem, South Afr. J. Mar. Sci., 10, 203–211,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.2989/02577619109504632" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2989/02577619109504632</a>, 1991.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Pagès, F., González, H. E., Ramón, M., Sobarzo, M., and Gili,
J.-M.: Gelatinous zooplankton assemblages associated with water masses in
the Humboldt Current System, and potential predatory impact by Bassia
bassensis (Siphonophora: Calycophorae), Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 210, 13–24,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3354/meps210013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3354/meps210013</a>, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Palma, G. S. and Rosales G, S.: Composición, distribución y
abundancia estacional del macroplancton de la bahía de Valparaíso
(Composition, distribution and seasonal abundance of the macroplankton of
the Bay of Valparaíso), Investig. Mar., 23, 49-66,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-71781995002300003" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-71781995002300003</a>, 1995.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Polovina, J. J., Mitchum, G. T., and Evans, G. T.: Decadal and basin-scale
variation in mixed-layer depth and the impact on biological production in
the Central and North Pacific, 1960-88, Deep Sea Res., 42, 1701–1716, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0967-0637(95)00075-H" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/0967-0637(95)00075-H</a>, 1995.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Pugh, P. R.: The diel migrations and distributions within a mesopelagic
community in the North East Atlantic. 7. Siphonophores, Prog. Oceanogr., 13,
461–489, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0079-6611(84)90016-8" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/0079-6611(84)90016-8</a>, 1984.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Pugh, P. R.: Siphonophorae, in: South Atlantic Zooplankton, edited by:
Boltovskoy, D., Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, 467–511, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Purcell, J., Uye, S., and Lo, W.: Anthropogenic causes of jellyfish blooms
and their direct consequences for humans: a review, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.,
350, 153–174, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3354/meps07093" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3354/meps07093</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
QGIS Development Team: QGIS Geographic Information System, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
Rodríguez, K. M. and Ruiz, E. C. A.: Distribución y ecología
de medusas y sifonóforos en tres estaciones de la zona marino costera de
la Península de Santa Elena (Distribution and ecology of medusae and
siphonophores in three stations of the coastal marine zone of the Santa
Elena Peninsula), Ecuador, Rev. Científica Tecnológica UPSE, 6,
24–33, <a href="https://doi.org/10.26423/rctu.v6i2.443" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.26423/rctu.v6i2.443</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Santana, J. R., Costa, A. E. S. F. D., Veleda, D., Schwamborn, S. H. L.,
Mafalda Júnior, P. O., and Schwamborn, R.: Ichthyoplankton community
structure on the shelf break off northeastern Brazil, An. Acad. Bras.
Ciênc., 92, e20180851, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1590/0001-3765202020180851" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1590/0001-3765202020180851</a>,
2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Schwamborn, R., Ekau, W., Pinto, A. S., Silva, T. A., and Saint-Paul, U.:
The contribution of estuarine decapod larvae to marine zooplankton
communities in northeast Brazil, Arch. Fish. Mar. Res., 17, 59–74, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Segura-Puertas, L., Franco-Gordo, C., Suárez-Morales, E., Gasca, R., and
Gódinez-Domínguez, E.: Summer composition and distribution of the
jellyfish (Cnidaria: Medusozoa) in the shelf area off the central Mexican
Pacific, Rev. Mex. Biodivers., 81, 103–112, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Signorini, S. R., Murtugudde, R. G., McClain, C. R., Christian, J. R.,
Picaut, J., and Busalacchi, A. J.: Biological and physical signatures in the
tropical and subtropical Atlantic, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 104,
18367–18382, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JC900134" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JC900134</a>, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Silva, A. C., Chaigneau, A., Dossa, A. N., Eldin, G., Araujo, M., and
Bertrand, A.: Surface Circulation and Vertical Structure of Upper Ocean
Variability Around Fernando de Noronha Archipelago and Rocas Atoll During
Spring 2015 and Fall 2017, Front. Mar. Sci., 8, 598101,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.598101" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.598101</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Sourisseau, M., Simard, Y., and Saucier, F.: Krill aggregation in the St.
Lawrence system, and supply of krill to the whale feeding grounds in the
estuary from the gulf, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 314, 257–270,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3354/meps314257" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3354/meps314257</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
StatSoft Inc.: Statistica, version 10, Tulsa, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Stramma, L. and England, M.: On the water masses and mean circulation of the
South Atlantic Ocean, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 104, 20863–20883,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JC900139" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JC900139</a>, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
Thibault-Botha, D., Lutjeharms, J. R. E., and Gibbons, M. J.: Siphonophore
assemblages along the east coast of South Africa; mesoscale distribution and
temporal variations, J. Plankton Res., 26, 1115–1128,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/fbh104" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/fbh104</a>, 2004.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>
Tosetto, E. G., Bertrand, A., Neumann-Leitão, S., Costa da Silva, A.,
and Nogueira Júnior, M.: Spatial patterns in planktonic cnidarian
distribution in the western boundary current system of the tropical South
Atlantic Ocean, J. Plankton Res., 43, 270–287,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/fbaa066" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/fbaa066</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
Tosetto, E. G., Nogueira Junior, M., Neumann-Leitão, S., Costa Da Silva, A., and Bertrand, A.: Abundance data of planktonic cnidarians collected during the ABRACOS 1 and 2 surveys performed along the northeast Brazilian continental shelf, slope and open ocean, [data set], https://doi.org/10.17882/92011, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>
Xu, Z.: Dynamics of medusa abundance in the East China Sea, Acta Zool. Sin.,
52, 854–861, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>
Xu, Z.: Water environment adaptability amd ecological groups of hydromedusae
in East China Sea, Chin. J. Appl. Ecol., 20, 177–184, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>
Xu, Z. and Lin, M.: Causal analysis on diversity of medusa in the East China
Sea, Biodivers. Sci., 14, 508–516, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1360/biodiv.060066" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1360/biodiv.060066</a>,
2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>
Yilmaz, I. N.: Collapse of zooplankton stocks during <i>Liriope tetraphylla</i> (Hydromedusa) blooms
and dense mucilaginous aggregations in a thermohaline stratified basin, Mar.
Ecol., 36, 595–610, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/maec.12166" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/maec.12166</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
