Abstract
The Southern Ocean is an important region for identifying ecoregions, both to assist in conservation efforts as well as for paleoecological studies. In this paper we use the Southern Ocean Radiolarian Dataset (SORAD), a compilation of surface sediment radiolarian census data, to determine radiolarian ecoregions throughout the Southern Ocean within the Atlantic, Indian and Southwest Pacific Sectors. The distribution of radiolarian species is explored using the unconstrained non-Metric Multidimensional Scaling to identify gradients in species assemblage variability, as well as distinct and sharp changes in assemblage composition. Ecoregions are assigned to groups of sites using Multivariate Regression Tree analysis, and environmental variables are assessed for their explanatory power. Radiolarian distribution was found to be heterogeneous throughout the Southern Ocean, with each Sector hosting a unique group of radiolarian ecoregions. A total of 6 ecoregions were identified for the Atlantic Sector, 8 for the Indian Sector and 6 for the Southwest Pacific Sector. Ecoregions were generally latitudinally distributed, but also appear to be influenced by significant oceanographic features, such as plateaux and islands, large eddy fields, hydrological fronts and sea ice. This study highlights the need for further exploration of radiolarian ecology, and for caution when using radiolarian assemblage variability in paleo-environmental studies.
Introduction
The Southern Ocean (SO) is an important region globally for ocean circulation and climate (Rintoul and Naveira Garabato, 2013). The Antarctic Circumpolar Current, driven by the Southern Hemisphere westerly winds, forms a zonal flow around the SO, separated by fronts (Sokolov and Rintoul, 2009). The zonal circulation of the SO has long been thought to control the planktonic and benthic biological ecosystems (). However, there has been insufficient species data to test this. In this paper we use a new radiolarian assemblage dataset (SORAD; ) to determine radiolarian ecoregions in the Atlantic, Indian and southwest Pacific sectors of the SO and test the hypothesis that the SO exhibits zonal ecoregions.
Ecoregionalisation partitions a large ecosystem into smaller ecoregions using assemblage data, such as relative species abundances (). It can highlight heterogeneity in the broader ecosystem, potentially driven by differences in biogeochemical characteristics and environmental processes. However, due to the sparsity of species data in some oceanic regions, ecoregionalisation is not always possible. Therefore, partitioning of large regions is typically done using abiotic parameters such as temperature, nutrients or salinity, to develop bioregions of relatively predictable and homogeneous environmental conditions (e.g., ; Testa et al., 2021). Combining these two approaches of ecoregions and bioregions will allow for a clearer understanding of regional processes, with insight into the biogeochemical and environmental thresholds of species or ecosystems. Furthermore, an assessment of how closely ecoregions track bioregions provides an evaluation of the usefulness of a certain taxonomic group for reconstructing past environmental conditions.
Several bioregional classifications have been proposed on a global scale (e.g., ; ; van der Spoel, 1983; ). Most partition the SO into two to four latitudinal zones, generally following hydrological fronts such as the Subantarctic and Subtropical fronts (e.g., ; ). and provided comprehensive descriptions of SO biogeochemical bioregions. Both classifications describe the SO as bands of relatively homogeneous environmental conditions, punctuated by subtle environmental variations. However, recent work by Testa et al. (2021) using abiotic partitioning of the SO basin suggested that the interaction of bathymetry with oceanographic and biogeochemical processes produces much more complex mesoscale bioregionalisation of the SO.
Previous ecoregional studies of the SO using phytoplankton, pelagic fish and echinoid species (; ; ) generally agree with the habitat complexity found by Testa et al. (2021), particularly along the Antarctic coast and shelf region. The permanently open ocean zone (POOZ), on the other hand, displays more homogeneity, which is thought to be related to the connectivity of habitat provided by the continuous eastward flow of the Antarctic Circumpolar Current (ACC) ().
Polycystine radiolarians are siliceous marine protists that occur as plankton in all the world’s oceans typically living subsurface (100–500 m; ; Rogers and De Deckker, 2007; ). They are found throughout the SO and show a wide range of biodiversity (). They produce ornate siliceous skeletons ranging in size from below 40 μm to ∼2 mm (). Previous work on radiolarians from the Antarctic coastal and shelf regions of the SO found two distinct assemblages. One typified the Antarctic pelagic and the second one the coastal assemblages (). The only previous SO-wide study of radiolarians north of the Winter Sea Ice (WSI) margin did not have sufficient coverage to assess heterogeneity or develop mesoscale ecoregionalisation ().
In this paper, a new compilation of surface sediment radiolarian assemblages from across multiple SO sectors (SO-RAD; ) is used to explore the ecoregions of the SO from the Subtropical Front (STF) to Antarctica based on species data. The 228 surface sediment samples include 238 radiolarian taxa, ranging in latitude from 10° S to 80° S and longitudinally from 50° W to 190° E (Figure 1). They cover a range of different oceanographic zones, including the Subtropical Zone (STZ; north of the Subtropical Front), the Subantarctic Zone (SAZ; between the STF and the Polar Front) and the Antarctic Zone (AZ; south of the Polar Front), including the seasonal sea ice zone.
FIGURE 1
Our main aim is to examine the extent of radiolarian assemblage heterogeneity throughout the SO and how it might be linked to oceanographic and biogeochemical variability. Understanding the heterogeneity and relationship between specific oceanographic regions and the radiolarian assemblages that inhabit those regions is critical for understanding radiolarian ecology and environmental preferences to aid the interpretation of paleo-environmental changes from preserved radiolarian assemblages in sediment cores from the SO.
Materials and Methods
Background
Radiolarians
Since their first description by
Radiolarian species distribution is influenced by properties of water masses and related frontal systems (
Southern Ocean Setting
The SO surrounds Antarctica and is the only circumpolar ocean on the globe. It is dominated by the eastward flowing wind-driven ACC (Rintoul and Naveira Garabato, 2013). The STF marks the northern-most extent of ACC influence, and for the purpose of this paper, we define the STF as the northern boundary of the SO (Talley et al., 2011). The SO is most commonly described in terms of three major latitudinal zones which are bounded by hydrological fronts (Figure 1; Orsi et al., 1995). The SAZ sits between the STF and the Subantarctic Front (SAF). The Polar Frontal Zone (PFZ) lies between the SAF and the Polar Front (PF). South of the PFZ is the Antarctic Zone (AZ) (Sokolov and Rintoul, 2009). Within the AZ, sea ice expands and contracts seasonally within the SIZ. During summer, sea ice contracts to the Summer Sea-Ice Margin. South of the Summer Sea-Ice Margin, sea-ice cover remains relatively permanent, except in some coastal regions where no sea-ice is present during summer (polynyas). Seasonal sea-ice expansion extends to the Winter Sea Ice (WSI) margin, beyond which lies the permanently open ocean zone (POOZ) (Pondaven et al., 2000; Talley et al., 2011).
Regions within the SO are often referenced to in relation to the adjacent basin. There are three major geographical regions, the Atlantic Sector (65°W to 20°E), the Indian Sector (20–145°E) and the Pacific Sector (145°E to 65°W) (
Southern Ocean Radiolarian Dataset
The Southern Ocean Radiolarian Dataset (SO-RAD) is a collection of 228 Holocene surface sediment samples from the Atlantic, Indian and Southwest Pacific Sectors of the SO (Figure 1;
Some zones and regions of the SO are underrepresented, or not represented at all, within the SO-RAD database. The most notable of such regions is the Southeast Pacific Sector. The PFZ of the SW Pacific and Indian Sectors, southern Australian region, and western Indian Sector are also underrepresented. The SO-RAD database will continue to be updated as further data become available and the addition of data from these regions will allow us to fill in the geographical gaps that currently exist in our analyses and results. Despite these limitations, this is the first and most complete circumpolar surface sediment radiolarian dataset currently available.
Environmental Data
Environmental data representing the climatological mean between 1955 and 2010, including nutrient and density data, were extracted from World Ocean Atlas 2018 0.25 and 1.0 degree grids for Austral summer months of January to March (
Data Analysis
All data analyses were performed using the open source software program R (R Core Team, 2018).
Hellinger dissimilarity distance was calculated for the SO-RAD database abundances (
Non-metric Multidimensional Scaling
Ecoregionalisation is commonly used to understand how community structure changes over a larger region. The first step in this process is to identify ecological patterns in the radiolarian assemblages (
The Hellinger-transformed species data was used to perform 2- and 3-dimensional nMDS using the R Package ‘vegan’ (Oksanen et al., 2019). Two- and three-dimensional ordination plots were produced to visualize the patterns of assemblage dissimilarity with the R packages ‘ggplot2’ (Wickham, 2016) and ‘rgl’ (
The resulting nMDS plots display the best representation of dissimilarity between each point, or site, relative to all the others, providing a visualization of the trends in assemblage composition (Figure 2). Clustering of points on nMDS plots indicates relative similarity between them, while greater distance indicates relative dissimilarity. The plots are able to show gradients of change as well as distinct and very dissimilar groups. To understand where the delineation is between groups, cluster analysis (in this case, Multivariate Regression Tree) allows us to decide where thresholds of compositional change occur. Together, these two methods provide a comprehensive tool for examining the structure of an ecological community.
FIGURE 2

Sites of the SO-RAD with the Southern Ocean from the Subtropical Front to the Antarctic Zone. (A) Map of distribution of clusters determined by MRT analysis of sites within the Southern Ocean; STF, Subtropical Front; SAF, Subantarctic Front; APF, Antarctic Polar Front (Orsi et al., 1995); STZ, Subtropical Zone; SAZ, Subantarctic Zone; PFZ, Polar Frontal Zone; POOZ, Permanently Open Ocean Zone; SIZ, Seasonal Sea-Ice Zone; WSI, Winter Sea-Ice Margin; SSI, Summer Sea-Ice Margin. (B) nMDS of Hellinger transformed relative abundance of Southern Ocean sites. Shape depicts the zone: Antarctic Zone (AZ), Polar Frontal Zone (PFZ), and Subantarctic Zone (SAZ). Color depicts sector: ATL, Atlantic Sector; IND, Indian Sector; SWP, Southwest Pacific. (C) nMDS as per (B), color depicting MRT clusters and shape depicting Sector. Please see Supplementary Figure 1 for a color blind alternative.
Multivariate Regression Tree Analysis
We followed the procedure of
The Hellinger transformed species and environmental data were used to perform MRT analysis using the R package ‘mvpart’ (Therneau et al., 2013). Results of the MRT analysis were extracted using the R package ‘MVPARTwrap’ (Ouellette and Legendre, 2014). The R code was adapted from
In contrast to nMDS plots that display unconstrained view (i.e., variability seen in the species abundance data alone) of dissimilarity in species data, MRT provides a constrained view (i.e., the assemblage variability that can be explained by the environmental variables) of the dissimilarity. In this paper’s context, MRT clusters confirm site similarity seen in nMDS plots and allow us to determine connectivity and ecoregion boundaries based on how the environmental variables affect the dissimilarity observed in the species data alone. These two methods have been used individually or together in many marine ecosystem studies including microplankton (e.g., Rogers and De Deckker, 2007;
Redundancy Analysis
While the MRT uses response variables to determine clusters of sites with similar assemblage composition, the RDA seeks to determine how much influence the combinations of explanatory, or environmental variables have on the assemblage. The method attempts to find a series of linear combinations of explanatory variables through multivariate regression and computes these as canonical axes. The order of the RDA axes relates to the amount of constrained or explained variability in the response data, with the first having the highest canonical eigenvalue and explanatory power, while all unconstrained variability is expressed as residual eigenvalues (
Results
Spatial Variability in SO-RAD Assemblages
Southern Ocean
Two- and three-dimensional (2D and 3D) nMDS plots of radiolarian assemblages of the SO (SAZ to AZ) showed that different basins (e.g., the South Atlantic, Indian and SW Pacific Sectors) were generally identifiable (Figures 2, 3). When all sites were visualized together, the variability of sites from north to south within each Sector plotted along a different plane. This was particularly evident in the 3D nMDS (stress = 0.093), indicating assemblages in each Sector do not vary in the same fashion and are likely responding to different drivers. Each Sector was then subsplit into oceanographic zones (Figure 2). A general north-south trend was apparent in the 2D nMDS (stress = 0.184), with SAZ sites furthest from AZ sites for all sectors, indicating greatest dissimilarity.
FIGURE 3

Three dimensional NMDS plots for Hellinger transformed radiolarian assemblage data at sites of the SO-RAD database south of 30°S for the (A) Southern Ocean, (B) Atlantic, (C) Indian, and (D) Pacific Sectors. Colors represent (A) sectors and (B–D) the ecoregions identified by MRT analysis.
The nMDS plots (Figure 2) showed a transition in site assemblage composition from the Atlantic to Indian SAZ. As expected, due to their contiguity, sites located furthest to the west in the Indian Sector plotted close to Atlantic Sector SAZ sites, indicating that these sites host similar assemblages. The dissimilarity between Indian and Atlantic sites increased for each site moving further east into the Indian Sector, indicating a transition in assemblage composition from the Atlantic to Indian Sector.
The MRT analysis confirmed the heterogeneity of radiolarian assemblages identified by the nMDS plot (Figure 2) and provided 12 clusters with unique radiolarian assemblages (Table 1). Each Sector contained a unique combination of clusters, with only 4 of the 12 occurring in all three Sectors (clusters 2, 3, 4, and 11). Three clusters (1, 6, and 8) occurred only once, in the Weddell Sea (cluster 1), the Indian PFZ (cluster 6) and the Campbell Plateau (cluster 8). Clusters 11 and 12 overlapped the Atlantic-Indian Sector boundary and confirmed that there is a transition and connectivity of assemblages from the Atlantic to Indian Sectors (Figure 2). The sites in the SIZ formed two distinct clusters – one in the Weddell Sea Gyre, and one along the Antarctic Coast and Shelf (ACS). Some overlap of these two clusters occurred on the eastern boundary of the Weddell Sea.
TABLE 1
| Cluster | Species | Relative abundance (%) | ||
| Average | Minimum | Maximum | ||
| 1 | Cenosphaera cristata | 39.1 | 14.7 | 61.7 |
| Larcopyle pylomaticus | 5.1 | 1.7 | 12.3 | |
| Actinomma leptodermum s.l. | 5.1 | 2.3 | 10.4 | |
| Antarctissa denticulata | 21.2 | 6.5 | 52.5 | |
| Lithelius nautiloides | 2.3 | 0.0 | 5.1 | |
| 2 | Lithelius sp. 1 | 0.2 | 0 | 1.1 |
| Antarctissa denticulata | 46.2 | 11.1 | 75.2 | |
| Phormacantha hystrix | 0.7 | 0 | 6.6 | |
| Rhizoplegma boreale | 0.1 | 0 | 0.9 | |
| Zygocircus productus gr. | 1.0 | 0 | 8.7 | |
| 3 | Lithelius nautiloides | 2.3 | 0.5 | 4.3 |
| Larcopyle pylomaticus | 3.2 | 0 | 10.9 | |
| Triceraspyris antarctica | 2.8 | 1.6 | 3.9 | |
| Liriospyris reticulata | 0.1 | 0 | 0.3 | |
| Trisulcus testudus | 2.4 | 0 | 11.9 | |
| 4 | Antarctissa strelkovi | 41.6 | 7.7 | 60.0 |
| Lithomelissa sp. A | 6.9 | 0 | 19.4 | |
| Lithocampe furcaspiculata | 2.7 | 0 | 10.5 | |
| Sethoconus tabulatus | 0.5 | 0 | 2.4 | |
| Saccospyris antarctica | 2.1 | 0.4 | 5.1 | |
| 5 | Tholospyris gephyristes | 0.7 | 0 | 1.6 |
| Antarctissa spp. | 8.2 | 0 | 13.4 | |
| Dictyophimus spp. | 1.1 | 0 | 3.2 | |
| Lithomelissa spp. | 0.9 | 0 | 3.7 | |
| Siphocampe lineata | 0.6 | 0 | 1.0 | |
| 6 | Actinomma antarcticum | 9.7 | 0.3 | 17.7 |
| Cycladophora bicornis | 23.7 | 16.9 | 32.6 | |
| Mitrocalpis araneafera | 0.3 | 0 | 0.7 | |
| Triceraspyris antarctica | 4.4 | 2.0 | 9.1 | |
| Gondwanaria dogieli | 0.2 | 0 | 0.3 | |
| 7 | Lophophaena buetschlii | 0.4 | 0 | 1.1 |
| Phorticium clevei | 12.9 | 1.3 | 32.4 | |
| Antarctissa strelkovi | 18.1 | 14.5 | 28.8 | |
| Actinomma antarcticum | 4.2 | 0 | 13.9 | |
| Actinosphaera spp. | 0.1 | 0 | 0.6 | |
| 8 | Dictyocoryne profunda | 1.8 | 0 | 5.0 |
| Stylochlamydium spp. | 1.5 | 0 | 5.3 | |
| Stylodictya spp. | 2.2 | 0 | 8.9 | |
| Stylodictya validispina | 3.7 | 0.7 | 10.6 | |
| Litheliidae/Pyloniidae | 13.3 | 5.8 | 25.1 | |
| 9 | Styptosphaera spumacea | 3.4 | 0.5 | 6.2 |
| Actinomma medianum | 3.0 | 1.4 | 4.6 | |
| Eucyrtidium acuminatum | 0.7 | 0.3 | 1.0 | |
| Heliodiscus asteriscus | 2.2 | 0.5 | 5.0 | |
| Axoprunum stauraxonium | 1.8 | 0 | 4.2 | |
| 10 | Tetraphormis dodecaster | 0.3 | 0 | 1.2 |
| Actinomma trinacria | 0.6 | 0 | 1.5 | |
| Acrosphaera arktios | 0.1 | 0 | 0.3 | |
| Actinomma delicatulum | 1.5 | 0.3 | 2.5 | |
| Cycladophora bicornis | 14.0 | 0.3 | 48.6 | |
| 11 | Artobotrys borealis | 0.1 | 0 | 0.3 |
| Trisulcus triacanthus | 0.8 | 0 | 1.5 | |
| Pylospira octopyle | 0.7 | 0.5 | 1.0 | |
| Druppatractus variabilis | 1.3 | 0.3 | 2.6 | |
| Lithomelissa setosa | 9.0 | 2.9 | 12.9 | |
| 12 | Eucyrtidium spp. | 2.3 | 0.7 | 9.5 |
| Pseudocubus obeliscus | 0.7 | 0 | 1.4 | |
| Lithomelissa thoracites | 3.8 | 1.8 | 6.4 | |
| Botryopyle inflata | 3.3 | 0.9 | 6.5 | |
| Cenosphaera perforata | 1.4 | 0 | 3.8 | |
The top five species that contribute each cluster of the Southern Ocean Multivariate Regression Tress analysis, and their average, maximum, and minimum relative abundance across all sites that occur in the cluster.
Each Sector had more than one cluster of sites within the AZ. Sites on the western boundary of the Indian Sector clustered with Atlantic Sector AZ sites, and sites on the eastern boundary of the Indian Sector clustered with SW Pacific sites located at the WSI margin. Atlantic AZ sites clustered in two groups – one associated with the SIZ, the other group contained sites located in the POOZ. Within the Pacific Sector, two groups of sites clustered together – sites in the POOZ, and sites in the SIZ. While sites in the SIZ plot with an east-west trending transition on the nMDS, the MRT analysis shows that they should be grouped as a single ecoregion. While each Sector contained more than one cluster within the SIZ, the ACS was common to all sectors.
The SO analyses identified strong primary partitioning at the Sector level, and so it is appropriate to consider each Sector separately for mesoscale ecoregionalisation. In the following sections, we present the results of the analyses of each Sector individually. Here, the clusters are shown as ecoregions, and we use colloquial names for them, describing their relationship to geographical features, for ease of reading the text (these are annotated on Figure 4). The association of the ecoregion with the geographical feature does not denote any environmental connection. The Antarctic Coast and Shelf sites are considered a single ecoregion, and are discussed in each Sector as the Antarctic Coastal and Shelf (ACS) Ecoregion.
FIGURE 4

(A) Maps show the distribution of sites within ecoregions identified by the MRT analysis for each Sector. STF, Subtropical Front; SAF, Subantarctic Front; APF, Antarctic Polar Front (Orsi et al., 1995); STZ, Subtropical Zone; SAZ, Subantarctic Zone; PFZ, Polar Frontal Zone; POOZ, Permanently Open Ocean Zone; SIZ, Seasonal Sea-Ice Zone; WSI, Winter Sea-Ice Margin; SSI, Summer Sea-Ice Margin. (B) 2-dimensional NMDS plots for Hellinger transformed radiolarian assemblage data at sites of the SO-RAD dataset south of 30°S for the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Sectors. Color represents the ecoregions identified by MRT analysis; shapes represent the zone: STZ, Subtropical Zone; SAZ, Subantarctic Zone; PFZ, Polar Frontal Zone; AZ, Antarctic Zone. Pease see Supplementary Figure 2 for a color blind alternative.
Atlantic Sector
Sites within the Atlantic Sector SO-RAD subset showed a distinct north-south trend in assemblage composition in the 2D (stress = 0.086) and 3D (stress = 0.048) nMDS plots (Figures 3, 4). Assemblages at sites in the SIZ were most distinct from all other sites, their dissimilarity apparent by their relative distance from other sites on both plots (Figures 3, 4).
The MRT analysis provided boundaries to the north-south transition of assemblages visible on the Atlantic Sector nMDS (Figure 4; Atlantic Sector map symbol color in brackets). Some sites that are located near frontal boundaries were clustered by MRT analysis with the adjacent zone, rather than its allocated zone according to the Orsi fronts (Figure 4; Orsi et al., 1995). This could be related to the dynamic nature of hydrological fronts. The single mean position of the fronts does not display the extent of frontal shifts, and is therefore considered a guide only for oceanographic boundaries.
North of the STF, the Atlantic Subtropical Ecoregion (pink) encompassed all STZ sites. South of the STF, the clear north-south trend roughly corresponded to the frontal zones: with the Atlantic Subantarctic Ecoregion (blue) between the SAF and PF, the Atlantic Polar Frontal Ecoregion (green) south of the Antarctic Polar Front, and the Atlantic POOZ Ecoregion (red) north of the WSI. South of the WSI margin, two ecoregions were associated with the Weddell Sea Gyre (orange) and the ACS (purple) ecoregions. A single site that was classified within the ACS occurred within the Weddell Sea Gyre. However, this site was grouped with the Weddell Sea Gyre in the SO MRT analysis (Figure 2), reflecting that the assemblage is a transition between these two.
Indian Sector
Indian Sector assemblages vary according to a north-south trend in both the 2D (stress = 0.108) and 3D (stress = 0.062) nMDS plots (Figures 3, 4). There is a group of six sites located in the western Indian Sector that are dissimilar to other sites within the STZ and SAZ. The four sites within the SAZ were found to cluster in SO MRT analysis with sites immediately to the west within the Atlantic Sector. Their positions on the 2D and 3D nMDS plots show that their similarity to assemblages in the Indian Sector increases to the east (Figures 3, 4). MRT analysis confirms that they are distinct from the rest of the Indian Sector assemblages. These formed three ecoregions (Figure 4, Indian Sector map symbol color in brackets) – The Agulhas and Return Current (yellow), the Indian Western STF (blue), and the Western Crozet (purple) Ecoregions.
In the eastern Indian Sector, a group of sites from the South Indian Current area forms an ecoregion (gray). A cluster extending from the STZ to SAZ is the Indian STZ Ecoregion (pink). Within the PFZ and SAZ, two groups extend from west to east, with a narrow latitudinal extent and are roughly divided by the SAF – the Indian PFZ Ecoregion (green) and the Indian SAZ Ecoregion (orange). The clusters within this STZ to the PFZ area east of the Kerguelen Plateau are similar to those found by Rogers and De Deckker (2007), who also used MRT to perform cluster analysis in the same region.
Sites within the SIZ plot with an east-west trending transition. However, MRT analysis shows that they should be grouped as a single ecoregion, the ACS (red).
SW Pacific Sector
The 2D (stress = 0.112) nMDS showed a general north-south trend for sites north of the WSI margin. North of the STF, the 2D and 3D (stress = 0.0725) nMDS plots indicated that assemblages transition toward the SAZ. The MRT analysis showed that these sites can be roughly partitioned according to their location east or west of the North Island of New Zealand – the East and West New Zealand Ecoregions. Sites located on the Campbell Plateau and in the Bounty Trough grouped together, and the MRT analysis confirmed that these sites form the Campbell Plateau Ecoregion. Assemblages appeared on the nMDS to transition from the West New Zealand Ecoregion (pink) to the East New Zealand Ecoregion (yellow) and then to the Campbell Plateau Ecoregion (blue). A single site, Station Site J21 (gray), was identified by MRT analysis, but was indistinct on the nMDS.
Within the POOZ, from the WSI margin to the flanks of the Campbell Plateau, there was a gradient in assemblage composition from south to north on the nMDS, but not enough to provide a partitioning by the MRT analysis. This group was classified as the Pacific POOZ Ecoregion (green). South of the WSI margin, a distinct cluster of sites within the AZ was found on the nMDS. These sites are located within the ACS (red).
Environmental Drivers
The first two constrained eigenvalues of the RDA using the SO subset with all environmental variables accounted for 45% of the total constrained variance [Eigenvalue (proportion explained), RDA 1 = 0.1219 (0.2459), RDA 2 = 0.1001 (0.2018); adjusted R2 = 0.60; anova (global), F = 3.1582, P = 0.001]. No single or small group of explanatory variables were clear controls on the data. When analyzing each individual variable with RDA, 17 variables were eliminated based on low explanatory power (λ1/λ2 < 1; Table 2). The adjusted R2 values for the remaining variables (λ1/λ2 > 1) ranged from 0.16 to 0.19. These variables were included in a partial RDA. The first two constrained eigenvalues of the partial RDA accounted for 33.5% of the total constrained variance [Table 3; Eigenvalue (proportion explained), RDA 1 = 0.1108 (0.2055), RDA 2 = 0.0697 (0.1292); adjusted R2 = 0.54; anova (global), F = 5.8673, P = 0.001]. The partial RDA revealed that a complex combination of abiotic variables drives radiolarian assemblage data, and no single variable could be identified alone as a clear control.
TABLE 2
| Variable | R2 | R2 adjusted | RDA1 | PC1 | λ1/λ2 | Variance | F | Pr(>F) | ANOVA significance code | Residual variance |
| T_200 | 0.1999479 | 0.1942738 | 0.1105 | 0.08229 | 1.342812006 | 0.11053 | 35.239 | 0.001 | *** | 0.44225 |
| T_300 | 0.197717 | 0.1920271 | 0.1093 | 0.08223 | 1.329198589 | 0.10929 | 34.748 | 0.001 | *** | 0.44349 |
| T_400 | 0.1960365 | 0.1903346 | 0.1084 | 0.08199 | 1.322112453 | 0.10837 | 34.381 | 0.001 | *** | 0.44442 |
| T_500 | 0.194226 | 0.1885113 | 0.1074 | 0.08197 | 1.310235452 | 0.10736 | 33.987 | 0.001 | *** | 0.44542 |
| N_200 | 0.1926271 | 0.186901 | 0.1065 | 0.08164 | 1.304507594 | 0.10648 | 33.641 | 0.001 | *** | 0.4463 |
| Depth_27.9 | 0.2002116 | 0.1943737 | 0.1091 | 0.08419 | 1.29587837 | 0.10905 | 34.295 | 0.001 | *** | 0.43563 |
| O_10 | 0.19615 | 0.190449 | 0.1084 | 0.08368 | 1.29541109 | 0.10843 | 34.406 | 0.001 | *** | 0.44435 |
| Den_500 | 0.2003441 | 0.1946728 | 0.1107 | 0.08553 | 1.294282708 | 0.11075 | 35.326 | 0.001 | *** | 0.44203 |
| N_300 | 0.1920974 | 0.1863676 | 0.1062 | 0.08345 | 1.272618334 | 0.10619 | 33.526 | 0.001 | *** | 0.44659 |
| T_100 | 0.1969408 | 0.1912454 | 0.1089 | 0.08571 | 1.270563528 | 0.10887 | 34.579 | 0.001 | *** | 0.44392 |
| P_200 | 0.1865977 | 0.1808289 | 0.1031 | 0.0816 | 1.263480392 | 0.10315 | 32.346 | 0.001 | *** | 0.44963 |
| T_10 | 0.1925995 | 0.1868732 | 0.1065 | 0.0844 | 1.261848341 | 0.10647 | 33.635 | 0.001 | *** | 0.44632 |
| N_100 | 0.1873385 | 0.1815749 | 0.1036 | 0.08431 | 1.228798482 | 0.10356 | 32.504 | 0.001 | *** | 0.44922 |
| Depth_27.3 | 0.1870919 | 0.180741 | 0.1024 | 0.0837 | 1.223416965 | 0.10244 | 29.459 | 0.001 | *** | 0.44509 |
| P_100 | 0.1840423 | 0.1782553 | 0.1017 | 0.08353 | 1.217526637 | 0.10173 | 31.803 | 0.001 | *** | 0.45105 |
| Depth_27.6 | 0.1889352 | 0.1828825 | 0.1043 | 0.08592 | 1.213919926 | 0.10433 | 31.215 | 0.001 | *** | 0.44788 |
| Den_200 | 0.1938979 | 0.1881809 | 0.1072 | 0.08997 | 1.191508281 | 0.10718 | 33.916 | 0.001 | *** | 0.4456 |
| N_400 | 0.1832691 | 0.1774767 | 0.1013 | 0.08507 | 1.19078406 | 0.10131 | 31.64 | 0.001 | *** | 0.45147 |
| Si_500 | 0.1879164 | 0.1821569 | 0.1039 | 0.08732 | 1.189876317 | 0.10388 | 32.627 | 0.001 | *** | 0.4489 |
| P_300 | 0.1787627 | 0.1729383 | 0.09882 | 0.08365 | 1.181350867 | 0.09882 | 30.692 | 0.001 | *** | 0.45396 |
| Den_10 | 0.1819138 | 0.1761118 | 0.1006 | 0.08583 | 1.172084353 | 0.10056 | 31.354 | 0.001 | *** | 0.45222 |
| Si_400 | 0.1864721 | 0.1807024 | 0.1031 | 0.08887 | 1.160121526 | 0.10308 | 32.3119 | 0.001 | *** | 0.4497 |
| Den_1000 | 0.1828506 | 0.1767066 | 0.1011 | 0.08803 | 1.148472112 | 0.10109 | 29.761 | 0.001 | *** | 0.45175 |
| P_10 | 0.1699426 | 0.1640557 | 0.09394 | 0.08189 | 1.147148614 | 0.09394 | 28.868 | 0.001 | *** | 0.45884 |
| N_10 | 0.1674358 | 0.1615311 | 0.09256 | 0.08174 | 1.132370932 | 0.09256 | 28.356 | 0.001 | *** | 0.46023 |
| Si_300 | 0.1856713 | 0.179896 | 0.1026 | 0.09097 | 1.127844344 | 0.10264 | 32.149 | 0.001 | *** | 0.45015 |
| P_400 | 0.1694054 | 0.1635146 | 0.09364 | 0.0858 | 1.091375291 | 0.09364 | 28.758 | 0.001 | *** | 0.45914 |
| Si_200 | 0.1828164 | 0.1770207 | 0.1011 | 0.09422 | 1.07302059 | 0.10106 | 31.544 | 0.001 | *** | 0.45172 |
| Den_100 | 0.1856093 | 0.1798335 | 0.1026 | 0.09576 | 1.071428571 | 0.1026 | 32.136 | 0.001 | *** | 0.45018 |
| N_500 | 0.1691977 | 0.1633055 | 0.09353 | 0.08737 | 1.07050475 | 0.09353 | 28.715 | 0.001 | *** | 0.45925 |
| Depth_27.1 | 0.1737718 | 0.16685242 | 0.09406 | 0.0943 | 0.997454931 | – | – | – | – | – |
| P_500 | 0.1566917 | 0.1507108 | 0.08662 | 0.08814 | 0.982754708 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Si_100 | 0.1735666 | 0.1677054 | 0.09594 | 0.1007 | 0.952730884 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Si_10 | 0.1701043 | 0.1642185 | 0.09403 | 0.1028 | 0.914688716 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Sal_500 | 0.1331713 | 0.1270236 | 0.07361 | 0.1039 | 0.708469682 | – | – | – | – | – |
| MLD_Win | 0.1179105 | 0.1078867 | 0.06238 | 0.1071 | 0.582446312 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Sal_10 | 0.1137487 | 0.1074632 | 0.06288 | 0.09618 | 0.653774173 | – | – | – | – | – |
| O_100 | 0.1156249 | 0.1093528 | 0.06392 | 0.1095 | 0.583744292 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Sal_400 | 0.09319099 | 0.08675972 | 0.05151 | 0.1186 | 0.434317032 | – | – | – | – | – |
| MLD_Sum | 0.09063332 | 0.08404371 | 0.05003 | 0.126 | 0.397063492 | – | – | – | – | – |
| O_400 | 0.07892593 | 0.07239349 | 0.04363 | 0.1022 | 0.426908023 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Sal_100 | 0.09523594 | 0.08881917 | 0.05264 | 0.1247 | 0.422133119 | – | – | – | – | – |
| O_500 | 0.07038342 | 0.06379039 | 0.03891 | 0.1078 | 0.360946197 | – | – | – | – | – |
| O_300 | 0.06660762 | 0.05998781 | 0.03682 | 0.1065 | 0.3457277 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Sal_200 | 0.06978288 | 0.06318559 | 0.03857 | 0.1325 | 0.29109434 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Sal_300 | 0.06824428 | 0.06163609 | 0.03772 | 0.1304 | 0.289263804 | – | – | – | – | – |
| O_200 | 0.04768035 | 0.04092631 | 0.02636 | 0.1269 | 0.207722616 | – | – | – | – | – |
List of environmental variables used for individual redundancy analysis and Lambda (λ1/λ2) selection for partial redundancy analysis.
Variables are denoted by a letter followed by a number representing the depth (m) of variable measurement: Den, density; N, nitrate; O, oxygen; P, phosphate; Si, silicate; T, temperature; MLD_Sum, summer mixed layer depth (m); MLD_Win, winter mixed layer depth (m); Isopycnal depth is denoted by Depth_[density]. *** p-value < 0.001.
TABLE 3
| Variable | RDA1 | RDA2 |
| Den_10 | 0.813 | 0.34044 |
| Den_100 | 0.7395 | 0.58559 |
| Den_1000 | 0.8971 | 0.31723 |
| Den_200 | 0.8223 | 0.46392 |
| Den_500 | 0.8802 | 0.34518 |
| Depth_27.3 | −0.9099 | −0.12597 |
| Depth_27.6 | −0.9092 | −0.25446 |
| Depth_27.9 | −0.8655 | −0.3996 |
| N_10 | 0.8656 | 0.20606 |
| N_100 | 0.858 | 0.32031 |
| N_200 | 0.9175 | 0.13993 |
| N_300 | 0.9312 | 0.02694 |
| N_400 | 0.9051 | −0.03339 |
| N_500 | 0.8645 | −0.10387 |
| O_10 | 0.8776 | 0.29293 |
| P_10 | 0.8645 | 0.21619 |
| P_100 | 0.8588 | 0.30937 |
| P_200 | 0.9056 | 0.17644 |
| P_300 | 0.9041 | 0.07519 |
| P_400 | 0.8841 | 0.0302 |
| Si_200 | 0.7562 | 0.55719 |
| Si_300 | 0.8016 | 0.4956 |
| Si_400 | 0.8305 | 0.45119 |
| Si_500 | 0.8512 | 0.42619 |
| T_10 | −0.8589 | −0.3268 |
| T_100 | −0.8657 | −0.35628 |
| T_200 | −0.8975 | −0.2156 |
| T_300 | −0.888 | −0.19527 |
| T_400 | −0.8835 | −0.173 |
| T_500 | −0.877 | −0.16473 |
Environmental variable RDA scores for Lambda (λ1/λ2) selected variables used in a partial redundancy analysis.
The two highest and lowest scores for RDA 1 and 2 are in bold. Variables are denoted by a letter followed by a number representing the depth (m) of variable measurement: Den, density; N, nitrate; O, oxygen; P, phosphate; Si, silicate; T, temperature. Isopycnal depth is denoted by Depth_[density].
Discussion
Heterogeneity of the Southern Ocean
Radiolarian assemblages of the SO-RAD surface sediment census dataset (
Our results show that radiolarian distribution can be divided according to Sector, each containing a distinct assemblage and unique pattern of north-south trending variability. The exception to this Sector variation is in the SO-RAD assemblages found south of the WSI margin in the AZ. Here, the assemblages show greater similarity than those north of the WSI margin, apart from sites within the Weddell Sea Gyre.
This longitudinal heterogeneity of the radiolarian assemblages is somewhat unexpected, as previous work on SO species including fish and echinoids, showed a very different pattern of species distribution (
Attempts to determine which environmental variables drive the distribution of SO radiolarians using the RDA suggests that no single or small group of variables are the main drivers of the patterns observed in this study. This is likely due to the collinearity of many variables in the SO. Therefore, radiolarians do not appear to respond to a single variable, but rather a combination. Previous work using radiolarians as a proxy for temperature appear robust (
Heterogeneity Within Each Sector
Since each Sector hosts a unique distribution of radiolarian assemblages, it is important to examine each one separately. Here we will discuss the features that appear to be associated with the distribution of radiolarians, and potential drivers of the patterns we observed in each Sector.
Atlantic Sector
The Atlantic Sector provides no significant topographical obstacle to the flow of the ACC east of the Drake Passage and the East Scotia Ridge. The clear north-south trend of radiolarian distribution reflects this relative simplicity. The assemblages from the SIZ are quite distinct from those in the POOZ, indicating that sea ice processes are a potential driver of radiolarian distribution. Within the SIZ, there are two variations of radiolarian composition: one includes sites within the Weddell Gyre; the other is associated with Antarctic shelf areas.
The Weddell Gyre has several processes that could account for the unique assemblage that occurs in the SIZ, which are different from those affecting the assemblages found associated with the open Antarctic Coast and Shelf regions. The cyclonic Weddell Gyre results in strong upwelling of nutrient-rich deep water. The gyre is also influenced by ice sheet meltwater and calved icebergs from the Filchner–Ronne Ice Shelf flow into the Weddell Sea from shelf streams. The resuspension of shelf sediments and the melting of icebergs are all thought to bring significant quantities of the limiting micronutrient iron (Fe) to the Weddell Gyre (
Indian Sector
The main feature highlighted by the Indian Sector nMDS plot was a distinct group of radiolarian assemblages at sites where the Agulhas and Agulhas Return Currents flow around the southern tip of the African continent. These two currents form the strongest, most variable western boundary system across the world’s oceans (Thompson, 2012; Zhu et al., 2018). The Agulhas Current is a Western Boundary Current in the upper 800 m of the water column that brings warm Indian Ocean water poleward along the east coast of the African continent (
Assemblages downstream of the Crozet and Kerguelen Islands in the PFZ and SAZ are distinct from other regions. The presence of eddy fields, the proximity of frontal systems to each other and shallow topography may contribute to this distinction. Eddy pumping in this region entrains deep nutrient-rich water and brings it to the surface resulting in high primary productivity (
SW Pacific Sector
The nMDS plot for the SW Pacific Sector reveals that assemblage composition varies in relation to topographical features, which strongly control the position and flow of the region’s frontal systems and currents. North of the STF in the low nutrient, warm subtropical waters, the assemblages appear relatively similar, but there are distinct assemblages east and west of the North Island of New Zealand. A potential candidate for the differentiation between assemblages in the STZ is the East Australian Current, which leaves the Australian coast and flows east across the Tasman Sea in the Tasman Front via a series of stationary eddies then around the top of the North Island of New Zealand (Stanton et al., 1997;
The Chatham Rise, which locks the position of the STF to its southern flank (
A distinct assemblage was found to extend from the south-eastern boundary of the Campbell Plateau to the WSI margin. This represents a region of ice-free ocean that has relatively deep and flat topography (abyssal plains), dominated by the strong flowing ACC. The potential influence of the Macquarie Ridge, which focuses the flow of the ACC through narrow gaps and generates significant downstream eddy activity, was not clear in this study, as the SO-RAD does not currently include sites immediately west of the ridge.
A distinct assemblage within the SIZ in the Southwest Pacific Sector was easily identified on the nMDS plot. Most of these sites are within the Ross Sea. Seasonal sea-ice formation and melt within the Ross Sea result in large fluctuations in the abiotic properties of the water column, including nutrient concentrations, irradiance, temperature and salinity (Smith and Comiso, 2008; Smith et al., 2012). The dynamics associated with sea ice processes are known to impact diatom assemblages, resulting in high productivity during spring and into summer (
Other Drivers of Heterogeneity
The alteration of water properties due to the upwelling and mixing of different water masses, along with the local influences of increased bioavailable Fe concentrations, which likely influence the phytoplankton communities which radiolarians consume, may influence the association between radiolarian assemblages and the characteristic oceanographic features of the Sectors. Each Sector receives water from the adjacent ocean basins, which carries with it a unique suite of properties (
Two Indian Sector clusters, the Indian PFZ and Indian SAZ, may be related to different levels of Fe availability. Natural Fe fertilization results in high primary productivity, as it is a limiting micronutrient in the High Nutrient-Low Chlorophyll SO (Uchida et al., 2020). Fe fertilization occurs in regions where mesoscale eddy activity transports Fe to surface waters from the deep, particularly downstream of islands and shallow topography, or where ice-melt and runoff introduce Fe to the water column in coastal regions (
Ecological interactions, such as competition and predator-prey interactions, have significant impacts on community structure. Other zooplankton such as copepods and ostracods are known to occupy similar space in the water column as radiolarians, specifically at the base of the mixed layer, where a deep chlorophyll maximum can occur, along with the accumulation of detritus from surface waters (
Here we do not suggest causation of radiolarian distribution in the SO, but rather discuss the features that coincide with the observed patterns of SO-RAD radiolarian distribution. Future work should explore environmental and ecological factors that may drive the heterogeneity found in this study, as well as the ecological impact of radiolarian assemblage variation on the larger ecosystem.
Comparison to Bioregionalisation of the Southern Ocean
The results of this study did not contradict the latitudinal zones that were previously proposed for SO bioregions. However, our results indicated that the SO can be divided by Sectors and further subdivided by the latitudinal zones (Figures 3, 4). Testa et al. (2021) presented physical and biogeochemical regionalization models, the former resulting in homogeneous latitudinal bands, while the latter presented a complex pattern of regions that varied significantly between Sectors. The results of this study support the complexity presented by the latter. However, radiolarian distribution appears less complex than the patterns observed by Testa et al. (2021) suggesting that radiolarians are not as sensitive to the fine-scale variability used to define the biogeochemical regions.
Application of SO-RAD Ecoregions
A goal of eco- and bioregionalisation is to determine environmental drivers of assemblage groups for defining different ecologically distinct regions, which may be important for the proposal of Marine Protected Areas and protecting biodiversity. Additionally, they can be used to reconstruct past conditions – paleoceanography. This ecoregionalisation study shows that radiolarian assemblages differ between SO Sectors based on the SO-RAD database. The heterogeneity between SO Sectors and the lack of close connection evident in the nMDS and the MRT indicate that each Sector has a unique radiolarian assemblage likely as a response to a unique and complex combination of environmental drivers. Therefore, only census data from the relevant Sector should be used as a modern analog in paleo-environmental studies from that Sector.
Conclusion
The SO-RAD database allows a first assessment of radiolarian assemblages across three Sectors of the Southern Ocean. The use of nMDS combined with MRT cluster analysis to identify dissimilarity across the SO has shown both latitudinal and longitudinal variation in radiolarian assemblages. The longitudinal heterogeneity, especially within the ACC, where homogeneity would have been expected due to connectivity of flow and similar SST conditions, is surprising. Each Sector is host to a unique composition of radiolarian assemblages, transitioning from one Sector to another and forming a distinct pattern of ecoregions. These differences are likely driven by variability in the oceanographic characteristics of each Sector, and this variation must be considered when studying radiolarian ecology or using them for paleo-reconstructions in the SO.
Publisher’s Note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Statements
Data availability statement
Publicly available datasets were analyzed in this study. This data can be found here: https://github.com/vloweSO/SO-Radiolarian-Ecoregionalisation.
Author contributions
VL performed the analyses and wrote the initial version of the manuscript. GC and HB reviewed and provided support for analyses, interpretations, and revision of the initial manuscript. All authors contributed to the results, interpretations, and successive versions of the manuscript.
Funding
VL and K-AL are each supported by an Australian Research Training Program (RTP) scholarship. GC contribution was supported by the New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment through the Antarctic Science Platform (ANTA1801) and the Global Change through Time Programme (GCT SSIF, contract C05X1702).
Acknowledgments
We wish to thank the reviewers for their valuable comments that allowed us to enhance the manuscript.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Supplementary material
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2022.829676/full#supplementary-material
Supplementary Figure 1Sites of the SO-RAD with the Southern Ocean from the Subtropical Front to the Antarctic Zone. (A) Map of distribution of clusters (1–12) determined by MRT analysis of sites within the Southern Ocean; STF, Subtropical Front; SAF, Subantarctic Front; APF, Antarctic Polar Front (Orsi et al., 1995); STZ, Subtropical Zone; SAZ, Subantarctic Zone; PFZ, Polar Frontal Zone; POOZ, Permanently Open Ocean Zone; SIZ, Seasonal Sea-Ice Zone; WSI, Winter Sea-Ice Margin; SSI, Summer Sea-Ice Margin. (B) nMDS of Hellinger transformed relative abundance of Southern Ocean sites. Shape depicts the zone: Antarctic Zone (AZ), Polar Frontal Zone (PFZ), and Subantarctic Zone (SAZ). Shade depicts sector: ATL, Atlantic Sector; IND, Indian Sector; SWP, Southwest Pacific. (C) nMDS as per (B), shade depicting sector clusters and numbers (1–12) depicting MRT cluster.
Supplementary Figure 2(A) Maps show the distribution of sites within ecoregions identified by the MRT analysis for each Sector. STF, Subtropical Front; SAF, Subantarctic Front; APF, Antarctic Polar Front (Orsi et al., 1995); STZ, Subtropical Zone; SAZ, Subantarctic Zone; PFZ, Polar Frontal Zone; POOZ, Permanently Open Ocean Zone; SIZ, Seasonal Sea-Ice Zone; WSI, Winter Sea-Ice Margin; SSI, Summer Sea-Ice Margin. (B) 2-dimensional NMDS plots for Hellinger transformed radiolarian assemblage data at sites of the SO-RAD dataset south of 30°S for the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Sectors. Color represents the ecoregions identified by MRT analysis; shapes represent the zone: STZ, Subtropical Zone; SAZ, Subantarctic Zone; PFZ, Polar Frontal Zone; AZ, Antarctic Zone. Key associated with each Sectors’ nMDS also refers to the associated map above.
References
1
AbelmannA.BrathauerU.GersondeR.SiegerR.ZielinskiU. (1999). Radiolarian-based transfer function for the estimation of sea surface temperatures in the Southern Ocean (Atlantic Sector).Paleoceanography14410–421.
2
AbelmannA.GowingM. M. (1997). Spatial distribution pattern of living polycystine radiolarian taxa - baseline study for paleoenvironmental reconstructions in the Southern Ocean (Atlantic sector).Mar. Micropaleontol.303–28.
3
AdlerD.MurdochD. (2020). Package ‘rgl.’ Available online at: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=rgl(accessed April 14, 2020).
4
AitchisonJ. C.SuzukiN.CaridroitM.DanelianT.NobleP. (2017). Paleozoic radiolarian biostratigraphy.Geodiversitas39503–531. 10.5252/g2017n3a5
5
ArdynaM.ClaustreH.SalléeJ. B.D’OvidioF.GentiliB.van DijkenG.et al (2017). Delineating environmental control of phytoplankton biomass and phenology in the Southern Ocean.Geophys. Res. Lett.445016–5024. 10.1002/2016GL072428
6
ArmbrechtL. H.RoughanM.RossiV.SchaefferA.DaviesP. L.WaiteA. M.et al (2014). Phytoplankton composition under contrasting oceanographic conditions: upwelling and downwelling (Eastern Australia).Cont. Shelf Res.7554–67. 10.1016/j.csr.2013.11.024
7
Armynot du ChâteletE.FrancescangeliF.BouchetV. M. P.FrontaliniF. (2018). Benthic foraminifera in transitional environments in the English Channel and the southern North Sea: a proxy for regional-scale environmental and paleo-environmental characterisations.Mar. Environ. Res.13737–48. 10.1016/j.marenvres.2018.02.021
8
BeA. W. H.TolderlundD. S. (1971). “Distribution and ecology of living plankton Foraminifera in surface waters of the Atlantic and Indian Oceans,” in The Micropaleontology of Oceans, edsFunnelB. M.RiedelW. R. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 105–159.
9
BlainS.SarthouG.LaanP. (2008). Distribution of dissolved iron during the natural iron-fertilization experiment KEOPS (Kerguelen Plateau.Deep Sea Res. II Top. Stud. Oceanogr.55594–605. 10.1016/j.dsr2.2007.12.028
10
BoltovskoyD. (2017). Vertical distribution patterns of Radiolaria Polycystina (Protista) in the World Ocean: living ranges, isothermal submersion and settling shells.J. Plankton Res.39330–349. 10.1093/plankt/fbx003
11
BoltovskoyD.AlderV. A. (1992). Paleoecological implications of radiolarian distribution and standing stocks versus accumulation rates in the Weddell Sea.Antarct. Res. Ser.56377–384. 10.1029/ar056p0377
12
BoltovskoyD.CorreaN. (2016). Biogeography of Radiolaria Polycystina (Protista) in the World Ocean.Prog. Oceanogr.14982–105. 10.1016/j.pocean.2016.09.006
13
BorcardD.GilletF.LegendreP. (2018). Numerical Ecology with R, 2nd Edn. Cham: Springer.
14
CauletJ. P.Vénec-PeyréM. T.Vergnaud-GrazziniC.NigriniC. (1992). “Variation of South Somalian upwelling during the last 160 ka: radiolarian and foraminifera records in core MD 85674,” in Upwelling Systems: Evolution since the Early Miocene, edsSummerhayesC. P.et al (London: Special Publications), 379–389. 10.1144/GSL.SP.1992.064.01.25
15
ChiswellS. M.BostockH. C.SuttonP. J. H.WilliamsM. J. (2015). Physical oceanography of the deep seas around New Zealand: a review.N. Z. J. Mar. Freshw. Res.49286–317. 10.1080/00288330.2014.992918
16
Civel-MazensM.CrostaX.CorteseG.MichelE.MazaudA.TherO.et al (2021b). Impact of the Agulhas Return Current on the oceanography of the Kerguelen Plateau region.Quat. Sci. Rev.251:106711. 10.1016/j.quascirev.2020.106711
17
Civel-MazensM.CrostaX.CorteseG.MichelE.MazaudA.TherO.et al (2021a). Antarctic Polar Front migrations in the Kerguelen Plateau region, Southern Ocean, over the past 360 kyrs.Glob. Planet. Change202:103526. 10.1016/j.gloplacha.2021.103526
18
CLIMAP (1976). The surface of the ice-age Earth.Science1911131–1137. 10.1126/science.191.4232.1131
19
CLIMAP (1981). Seasonal Reconstruction of the Earth’s Surface at the Last Glacial Maximum.Boulder, CO: Geological Society of America.
20
CorteseG.AbelmannA. (2002). Radiolarian-based paleotemperatures during the last 160 kyr at ODP Site 1089 (Southern Ocean.Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol.182259–286. 10.1016/S0031-0182(01)00499-0
21
CorteseG.AbelmannA.GersondeR. (2007). The last five glacial-interglacial transitions: a high-resolution 450,000-year record from the subantarctic Atlantic.Paleoceanography221–14. 10.1029/2007PA001457
22
CorteseG.DunbarG. B.CarterL.ScottG.BostockH.BowenM.et al (2013). Southwest Pacific Ocean response to a warmer world: Insights from marine isotope stage 5e.Paleoceanography28585–598. 10.1002/palo.20052
23
CorteseG.PrebbleJ. (2015). A radiolarian-based modern analogue dataset for palaeoenvironmental reconstructions in the southwest Pacific.Mar. Micropaleontol.11834–49. 10.1016/j.marmicro.2015.05.002
24
DawsonH. R. S.StruttonP. G.GaubeP. (2018). The unusual surface chlorophyll signatures of southern ocean eddies.J. Geophys. Res. Oceans1236053–6069. 10.1029/2017JC013628
25
De’AthG. (2002). Multivariate regression trees: a new technique for modeling species-environment relationships.Ecology831105–1117.
26
EhrenbergC. G (1844). On microscopic life in the ocean at the South Pole, and at considerable depth.Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist.14169–181. 10.1080/037454809496376
27
EllwoodM. J.StrzepekR. F.StruttonP. G.TrullT. W.FourquezM.BoydP. W. (2020). Distinct iron cycling in a Southern Ocean eddy.Nat. Commun.11:825. 10.1038/s41467-020-14464-0
28
Fabri-RuizS.DanisB.NavarroN.KoubbiP.LaffontR.SaucèdeT. (2020). Benthic ecoregionalization based on echinoid fauna of the Southern Ocean supports current proposals of Antarctic Marine Protected Areas under IPCC scenarios of climate change.Glob. Change Biol.262161–2180. 10.1111/gcb.14988
29
FerryA. J.CrostaX.QuiltyP.FinkD.HowardW. I.ArmandL. K. (2015). First records of winter sea ice concentration in the southwest Pacific sector of the Southern Ocean.Paleoceanography231525–1539. 10.1002/2014PA002764
30
Forcén-VázquezA.WilliamsM. J. M.BowenM.CarterL.BostockH. (2021). Frontal dynamics and water mass variability on the Campbell Plateau.N. Z. J. Mar. Freshw. Res.55199–222. 10.1080/00288330.2021.1875490
31
GarciaH. E.BoyerT. P.BaranobaR. A.LocarniniA. V.MishonovA.GrodskyA.et al (2019). World Ocean Atlas 2018. NOAA National Centers for Environmental Infomation. Available online at: https://accession.nodc.noaa.gov/NCEI-WOA18(accessed 24, 2021).
32
González-WevarC. A.SegoviaN. I.RosenfeldS.OjedaJ.HüneM.NarettoJ.et al (2018). Unexpected absence of island endemics: long-distance dispersal in higher latitude sub-Antarctic Siphonaria (Gastropoda: Euthyneura) species.J. Biogeogr.45874–884. 10.1111/jbi.13174
33
GrahamR. M.De BoerA. M. (2013). The dynamical subtropical front.J. Geophys. Res. Oceans1185676–5685. 10.1002/jgrc.20408
34
GrahamR. M.De BoerA. M.van SebilleE.KohfeldK. E.SchlosserC. (2015). Inferring source regions and supply mechanisms of iron in the Southern Ocean from satellite chlorophyll data.Deep Sea Res. I Oceanogr. Res. Pap.1049–25. 10.1016/j.dsr.2015.05.007
35
GrantS.ConstableA.RaymondB.DoustS. (2006). Bioregionalisation of the Southern Ocean: Report of Experts Workshop.Hobart: WWF-Australia and ACE CRC.
36
Hernandez-AlmeidaI.BoltovskoyD.KruglikovaS. B.CorteseG. (2020). A new radiolarian transfer function for the pacific ocean and application to fossil records: assessing potential and limitations for the last glacial-interglacial cycle.Glob. Planet. Change190:103186. 10.1016/j.gloplacha.2020.103186
37
Hernández-AlmeidaI.CorteseG.YuP. S.ChenM. T.KuceraM. (2017). Environmental determinants of radiolarian assemblages in the western Pacific since the last deglaciation.Paleoceanography32830–847. 10.1002/2017PA003159
38
HillK. L.RintoulS. R.RidgwayK. R.OkeP. R. (2011). Decadal changes in the South Pacific western boundary current system revealed in observations and ocean state estimates.J. Geophys. Res. Oceans116:C01009. 10.1029/2009JC005926
39
GrantS. M.HillS. L.FretwellP. T. (2013). Spatial distribution of management measures, antarctic krill catch and southern ocean bioregions: implications for conservation planning.CCAMLR Sci.201–19.
40
ImbrieJ.KippN. G. (1971). “A new micropaleontological method for quantitative paleoclimatology: application to a late Pleistocene Carribean core,” in Late Cenozoic Glacial Ages, ed.TurekianK. K. (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press), 71–181.
41
JugginsS. (2013). Quantitative reconstructions in palaeolimnology: New paradigm or sick science?Quat. Sci. Rev.6420–32. 10.1016/j.quascirev.2012.12.014
42
KortschS.PrimicerioR.BeuchelF.RenaudP. E.RodriguesJ.LønneO. J.et al (2012). Climate-driven regime shifts in Arctic marine benthos.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.10914052–14057. 10.1073/pnas.1207509109
43
KoubbiP.Ozouf-CostazC.GoarantA.MotekiM.HulleyP. A.CausseR.et al (2010). Estimating the biodiversity of the East Antarctic shelf and oceanic zone for ecoregionalisation: example of the ichthyofauna of the CEAMARC (Collaborative East Antarctic Marine Census) CAML surveys.Polar Sci.4115–133. 10.1016/j.polar.2010.04.012
44
LawlerK.CorteseG.Civel-mazensM.BostockH.CrostaX.LeventerA.et al (2021). The Southern Ocean RADiolarian (SO-RAD) dataset: a new compilation of modern radiolarian census data.Earth Syst. Sci. Data135441–5453. 10.5194/essd-13-5441-2021
45
LazarusD.BittniokB.Diester-HaassL.MeyersP.BillupsK. (2006). Comparison of radiolarian and sedimentologic paleoproductivity proxies in the latest Miocene-Recent Benguela Upwelling System.Mar. Micropaleontol.60269–294. 10.1016/j.marmicro.2006.06.003
46
LegendreP.De CáceresM. (2013). Beta diversity as the variance of community data: dissimilarity coefficients and partitioning.Ecol. Lett.16951–963. 10.1111/ele.12141
47
LegendreP.LegendreL. (2012). “Ordination in reduced space,” in Numerical EcologyedsLegendreP.LegendreL. (Oxford: Elsevier), 425–520. 10.1016/b978-0-444-53868-0.50009-5
48
Lima-MendezA. G.FaustK.HenryN.ColinS.CarcilloF.ChaffronS.et al (2015). Determinants of community structure in the global plankton interactome.Science348:1262073. 10.1126/science.1262073
49
LinseK.GriffithsH. J.BarnesD. K. A.ClarkeA. (2006). Biodiversity and biogeography of Antarctic and sub-Antarctic mollusca.Deep Sea Res. II Top. Stud. Oceanogr.53985–1008. 10.1016/j.dsr2.2006.05.003
50
LonghurstA. R. (1998). Ecological Geography of the Sea, 1st Edn. London: Academic Press.
51
LonghurstA. R. (2007). Ecological Geography of the Sea, 2nd Edn. London: Academic Press. 10.1016/B978-0-12-455521-1.X5000-1
52
LumpkinR.SpeerK. (2007). Global ocean meridional overturning.J. Phys. Oceanogr.372550–2562. 10.1175/JPO3130.1
53
LutjeharmsJ. R. E. (2006). The Agulhas Current.Berlin: Springer.
54
LutjeharmsJ. R. E.AnsorgeI. J. (2001). The agulhas return current.J. Mar. Syst.30115–138. 10.1016/s0924-7963(01)00041-0
55
MontereyG.LevitusS. (1997). Climatological Cycle of Mixed Layer Depth in the World Ocean. NOAA Atlas NESDIS 14.Washington DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
56
MooreT. C.HutsonW. H.KippN.HaysJ. D.PrellW.ThompsonP.et al (1981). The biological record of the ice-age ocean.Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol.35357–370. 10.1016/0031-0182(81)90102-4
57
NigriniC.CauletJ. P. (1992). Late Neogene radiolarian assemblages characteristic of Indo-Pacific areas of upwelling.Micropaleontology38139–164. 10.2307/1485992
58
NishimuraA.NakasekoK. (2011). Characterization of radiolarian assemblages in the surface sediments of the Antarctic Ocean.Palaeoworld20232–251. 10.1016/j.palwor.2011.05.002
59
OksanenJ.BlanchetF. G.FriendlyM.KindtR.LegendreP.McglinnD.et al (2019). vegan: Community Ecology Package. R package version 2.4-2. Available Online at: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/vegan/vegan.pdf(accessed April 14, 2020).
60
OrsiA. H.WhitworthT.NowlinW. D. (1995). On the meridional extent and fronts of the Antarctic Circumpolar Current.Deep Sea Res. I Oceanogr. Res. Pap.42641–673. 10.1016/0967-0637(95)00021-W
61
OuelletteM.-H.LegendreP. (2014). Package ‘MVPARTwrap.’ Available Online at: http://www.r-project.org(accessed April 14, 2020).
62
PanitzS.CorteseG.NeilH. L.DiekmannB. (2015). A radiolarian-based palaeoclimate history of Core Y9 (Northeast of Campbell Plateau, New Zealand) for the last 160 kyr.Mar. Micropaleontol.1161–14. 10.1016/j.marmicro.2014.12.003
63
ParkY. H.ParkT.KimT. W.LeeS. H.HongC. S.LeeJ. H.et al (2019). Observations of the Antarctic Circumpolar Current Over the Udintsev Fracture Zone, the Narrowest Choke Point in the Southern Ocean.J. Geophys. Res. Oceans1244511–4528. 10.1029/2019JC015024
64
Peres-NetoP. R.LegendreP.DrayS.BorcardD. (2006). Variation Partitioning of Species Data Matrices: estimation and comparison of fractions.Ecology872614–2625. 10.1890/0012-9658(2006)87[2614:vposdm]2.0.co;2
65
PinkertonM. H.DécimaM.KitchenerJ. A.TakahashiK. T.RobinsonK. V.StewartR.et al (2020). Zooplankton in the Southern Ocean from the continuous plankton recorder: distributions and long-term change.Deep Sea Res. I Oceanogr. Res. Pap.162:103303. 10.1016/j.dsr.2020.103303
66
PondavenP.RagueneauO.TréguerP.HauvespreA.DezileauL.ReyssJ. L. (2000). Resolving the “opal paradox” in the Southern Ocean.Nature405168–172. 10.1038/35012046
67
PrebbleJ. G.BostockH. C.CorteseG.LorreyA. M.HaywardB. W.CalvoE.et al (2017). Evidence for a Holocene Climatic Optimum in the southwest Pacific: a multiproxy study.Paleoceanography32763–779. 10.1002/2016PA003065
68
R Core Team (2018). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing.Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
69
RajanahallyM. A.LesterP. J.ConveyP. (2015). Aspects of resilience of polar sea ice algae to changes in their environment.Hydrobiologia761261–275. 10.1007/s10750-015-2362-6
70
ResplandyL.LévyM.McGillicuddyD. J. (2019). Effects of eddy-driven subduction on ocean biological carbon pump.Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles331071–1084. 10.1029/2018GB006125
71
RintoulS. R.Naveira GarabatoA. C. (2013). Dynamics of the southern ocean circulation.Int. Geophys.103471–492.
72
RogersJ.De DeckkerP. (2007). Radiolaria as a reflection of environmental conditions in the eastern and southern sectors of the Indian Ocean: a new statistical approach.Mar. Micropaleontol.65137–162. 10.1016/j.marmicro.2007.07.001
73
SchlitzerR. (2020). Ocean Data View. Available Online at: https://odv.awi.de(accessed April 14, 2020).
74
SmithW. O.ComisoJ. C. (2008). Influence of sea ice on primary production in the Southern Ocean: a satellite perspective.J. Geophys. Res. Oceans113:C05S93. 10.1029/2007JC004251
75
SmithW. O. J.SedwickP. N.ArrigoK. R.AinleyD. G.OrsiA. H. (2012). The Ross Sea in a sea of change.Oceanography2590–103. 10.5670/oceanog.2012.80
76
SokolovS.RintoulS. R. (2009). Circumpolar structure and distribution of the antarctic circumpolar current fronts: 2. Variability and relationship to sea surface height.J. Geophys. Res. Oceans114:C11019. 10.1029/2008JC005248
77
StantonB. R.SuttonP. J. H.ChiswellS. M. (1997). The East Auckland Current, 1994–95.N. Z. J. Mar. Freshw. Res.31537–549. 10.1080/00288330.1997.9516787
78
SuzukiN.NotF. (2015). “Marine protists: diversity and dynamics,” in Marine Protists: Diversity and Dynamics, edsOhtsukaS.SuzakiT.HoriguchiT.SuzukiN.NotF. (Tokyo: Springer), 1–637. 10.1007/978-4-431-55130-0
79
TalleyL. D.PickardG. L.EmeryW. J.SwiftJ. H. (2011). Descriptive Physical Oceanography: An Introduction, 6th Edn. Boston, MA: Elsevier.
80
TestaG.PiñonesA.CastroL. R. (2021). Physical and Biogeochemical Regionalization of the Southern Ocean and the CCAMLR Zone 48.1.Front. Mar. Sci.8:592378. 10.3389/fmars.2021.592378
81
TherneauT. M.AtkinsonB.RipleyB.OksanenJ.De’athG. (2013). Mvpart: Multivariate Partitioning. R Packag. version 1.6-1. Available Online at: http://cran.rproject.org/(accessed April 14, 2020).
82
ThompsonP. R. (2012). Sea Surface Height: A Versitile Climate Variable for Investigations of Decadal Change.Ph.D. thesis. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida.
83
TimmermannA. (2003). Decadal ENSO amplitude modulations: a nonlinear paradigm.Glob. Planet. Change37135–156. 10.1016/S0921-8181(02)00194-7
84
UchidaT.BalwadaD.AbernatheyR. P.McKinleyG. A.SmithS. K.LévyM. (2020). Vertical eddy iron fluxes support primary production in the open Southern Ocean.Nat. Commun.11:1125. 10.1038/s41467-020-14955-0
85
van der SpoelS. (1983). A Comparative Atlas of Zooplankton: Biological Patterns in the Oceans.Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
86
VernetM.GeibertW.HoppemaM.BrownP. J.HaasC.HellmerH. H.et al (2019). The Weddell Gyre, Southern Ocean: present knowledge and future challenges.Rev. Geophys.57623–708. 10.1029/2018RG000604
87
WickhamH. (2016). ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis.New York, NY: Springer-Verlag. Available online at: https://ggplot2.tidyverse.org(accessed April 14, 2020).
88
ZhuY.QiuB.LinX.WangF. (2018). Interannual Eddy Kinetic energy modulations in the agulhas return current.J. Geophys. Res. Oceans1236449–6462. 10.1029/2018JC014333
89
ZoccaratoL.PallaviciniA.CerinoF.Fonda UmaniS.CelussiM. (2016). Water mass dynamics shape Ross Sea protist communities in mesopelagic and bathypelagic layers.Prog. Oceanogr.14916–26. 10.1016/j.pocean.2016.10.003
Summary
Keywords
radiolarians, Southern Ocean (SO), ecoregionalisation, oceanography, ecology
Citation
Lowe V, Cortese G, Lawler K-A, Civel-Mazens M and Bostock HC (2022) Ecoregionalisation of the Southern Ocean Using Radiolarians. Front. Mar. Sci. 9:829676. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2022.829676
Received
06 December 2021
Accepted
27 January 2022
Published
03 March 2022
Volume
9 - 2022
Edited by
Gustavo Fonseca, Federal University of São Paulo, Brazil
Reviewed by
Johan Renaudie, Natural History Museum, Berlin (MfN), Germany; Alexander Matul, P.P. Shirshov Institute of Oceanology, Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS), Russia; Demetrio Boltovskoy, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina
Updates

Check for updates
Copyright
© 2022 Lowe, Cortese, Lawler, Civel-Mazens and Bostock.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Vikki Lowe, v.lowe@uq.edu.au
This article was submitted to Marine Evolutionary Biology, Biogeography and Species Diversity, a section of the journal Frontiers in Marine Science
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.