Figure 1.
Spatial distribution of the data.
Gray symbols mark the sampled stations with the symbol area proportional to the number of samples. Lines and polygons indicate the regions pooled together for long-term analyses. The numbers represent the total amount of spring bloom samples, and the number of basin-wide weakly means used for long-term analysis.
Figure 2.
Long-term trends of diatoms and dinoflagellates in the Baltic Sea.
Lines depict the long-term trends of dinoflagellate and diatom biomass (column a), dinoflagellate proportion (column b) and seasonal pattern of dinoflagellate proportion (column c) in six major basins of the Baltic Sea; GoB – Gulf of Bothnia; GoF – Gulf of Finland and Archipelago Sea; NW – northwestern Baltic Proper; GoR – Gulf of Riga; SB – Southern Baltic Sea; Ka – Kattegat, the Belt Sea and the Sound. Symbols represent basin wide weekly averages; trend lines are predicted by GAM smoothers. Eastern Gotland Basin is not shown due to poor data coverage.
Table 1.
Effect of NAO on dinoflagellate proportions in six major basins.
Figure 3.
Spatial variability of the spring bloom peak biomass (wet weight, mg L−1) in the Baltic Sea.
High biomass is characteristic to the eutrophied basins (Gulf of Finland, Gulf of Riga), with a biomass >6 mg L−1. For most of the Baltic Sea, peak biomass of the spring bloom samples falls between 1.5–3 mg L−1.
Figure 4.
Spatial variability in the proportion of dinoflagellates interpolated with ordinary kriging.
The thick contour line separates dinoflagellate dominance (>0.5) and diatom dominance (<0.5).
Figure 5.
Shifts in the proportion of dinoflagellates over the period of ten years (1995 to 2004).
The predictions were made by geographically weighted linear regression and interpolated with ordinary kriging. Positive and negative values represent the areas of increasing and decreasing dinoflagellate proportion, respectively. Thick contour lines denote boundary between areas of increasing and decreasing trend.