Antarktis-bibliografi er en database over den norske Antarktis-litteraturen.

Hensikten med bibliografien er å synliggjøre norsk antarktisforskning og annen virksomhet/historie i det ekstreme sør. Bibliografien er ikke komplett, spesielt ikke for nyere forskning, men den blir oppdatert.

Norsk er her definert som minst én norsk forfatter, publikasjonssted Norge eller publikasjon som har utspring i norsk forskningsprosjekt.

Antarktis er her definert som alt sør for 60 grader. I tillegg har vi tatt med Bouvetøya.

Det er ingen avgrensing på språk (men det meste av innholdet er på norsk eller engelsk). Eldre norske antarktispublikasjoner (den eldste er fra 1894) er dominert av kvalfangst og ekspedisjoner. I nyere tid er det den internasjonale polarforskninga som dominerer. Bibliografien er tverrfaglig; den dekker både naturvitenskapene, politikk, historie osv. Skjønnlitteratur er også inkludert, men ikke avisartikler eller upublisert materiale.

Til høyre finner du en «HELP-knapp» for informasjon om søkemulighetene i databasen. Mange referanser har lett synlige lenker til fulltekstversjon av det aktuelle dokumentet. For de fleste tidsskriftartiklene er det også lagt inn sammendrag.

Bibliografien er produsert ved Norsk Polarinstitutts bibliotek.

Your search

Reset search
In authors or contributors

Results 3 resources

RelevanceNewest firstOldest firstAuthor A-ZAuthor Z-ATitle A-ZTitle Z-A
Abstracts
  • Ellingsen, K. E., Brandt, A., Ebbe, B., & Linse, K. (2007). Diversity and species distribution of polychaetes, isopods and bivalves in the Atlantic sector of the deep Southern Ocean. Polar Biology, 30(10), 1265–1273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00300-007-0287-x
    View on doi.org
  • Brandt, A., Ellingsen, K. E., Brix, S., Brökeland, W., & Malyutina, M. (2005). Southern Ocean deep-sea isopod species richness (Crustacea, Malacostraca): influences of depth, latitude and longitude. Polar Biology, 28(4), 284–289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00300-004-0688-z

    We examined deep-sea epibenthic sledge isopod data from the Atlantic sector of the Southern Ocean (SO) (depth range=742–5,191 m). Samples were taken during the expeditions EASIZ II (ANT XV-3) in 1998 and ANDEEP I and II (ANT XIX3/4) in 2002. A total of 471 isopod species were recorded from 28 sites. The species richness of the epibenthic sledge samples was highly variable (6–82 species). Species richness was highest at site 131-3 in 3,053 m depth in the north-eastern Weddell Sea. The highest numbers of species were sampled in the middle depth range and lower species richness was found in the shallower and deeper parts of the study area. Depth is suggested to explain isopod species richness better than both latitude and longitude. Between 58°S and 65°S, the number of species ranged from 9 to 82 (mean=35.9). Further south in the Weddell Sea, between 73°S and 74°S, species richness was lower and the number of species ranged from 6 to 35 (mean=19.2). With regard to longitude, the highest species richness (up to 82 species) was found between 50°W and 60°W in the area of the South Shetland Islands and around the Antarctic Peninsula, while numbers did not exceed 50 species in the eastern Weddell Sea. The haul length, ranging from 807 to 6,464 m, was positively correlated with depth; however, there was no linear relationship between haul length and species richness. We therefore suggest that depth was the most important factor explaining isopod species richness. However, only 28 sites were visited and the statistical power is thus limited. Sampling in the deep sea is expensive and time consuming and as yet this is the best isopod data set available from the Atlantic sector of the SO. Future expeditions are therefore important to better explain the current patterns of benthic diversity in Antarctica.

    View on doi.org
  • Connolly, S. R., MacNeil, M. A., Caley, M. J., Knowlton, N., Cripps, E., Hisano, M., Thibaut, L. M., Bhattacharya, B. D., Benedetti-Cecchi, L., Brainard, R. E., Brandt, A., Bulleri, F., Ellingsen, K. E., Kaiser, S., Kröncke, I., Linse, K., Maggi, E., O’Hara, T. D., Plaisance, L., … Wilson, R. S. (2014). Commonness and rarity in the marine biosphere. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8524–8529. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1406664111

    Tests of biodiversity theory have been controversial partly because alternative formulations of the same theory seemingly yield different conclusions. This has been a particular challenge for neutral theory, which has dominated tests of biodiversity theory over the last decade. Neutral theory attributes differences in species abundances to chance variation in individuals’ fates, rather than differences in species traits. By identifying common features of different neutral models, we conduct a uniquely robust test of neutral theory across a global dataset of marine assemblages. Consistently, abundances vary more among species than neutral theory predicts, challenging the hypothesis that community dynamics are approximately neutral, and implicating species differences as a key driver of community structure in nature.Explaining patterns of commonness and rarity is fundamental for understanding and managing biodiversity. Consequently, a key test of biodiversity theory has been how well ecological models reproduce empirical distributions of species abundances. However, ecological models with very different assumptions can predict similar species abundance distributions, whereas models with similar assumptions may generate very different predictions. This complicates inferring processes driving community structure from model fits to data. Here, we use an approximation that captures common features of “neutral” biodiversity models—which assume ecological equivalence of species—to test whether neutrality is consistent with patterns of commonness and rarity in the marine biosphere. We do this by analyzing 1,185 species abundance distributions from 14 marine ecosystems ranging from intertidal habitats to abyssal depths, and from the tropics to polar regions. Neutrality performs substantially worse than a classical nonneutral alternative: empirical data consistently show greater heterogeneity of species abundances than expected under neutrality. Poor performance of neutral theory is driven by its consistent inability to capture the dominance of the communities’ most-abundant species. Previous tests showing poor performance of a neutral model for a particular system often have been followed by controversy about whether an alternative formulation of neutral theory could explain the data after all. However, our approach focuses on common features of neutral models, revealing discrepancies with a broad range of empirical abundance distributions. These findings highlight the need for biodiversity theory in which ecological differences among species, such as niche differences and demographic trade-offs, play a central role.

RIS

Recommended format for most reference management software

BibTeX

Recommended format for BibTeX-specific software

Custom feed
Last update from database: 11/1/24, 3:10 AM (UTC)