Fig. 4

(A) Epipelagic net zooplankton biomass (in mgC m^-3) from Stromberg et al. (2009). Note the log-transformed colour scale. (B) Ratio between epipelagic and mesopelagic biomass using Stromberg et al. (2009) and epipelagic zooplankton and mesopelagic biomass from the variable-depth POC model. Note the square root of the scale for the colour bar. (C) 2D map depicting the relationship between mesopelagic mesozooplankton biomass derived from POC estimates and Stromberg et al. (2009). Quantile breaks in the legend were created at the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles. (D) Epipelagic net zooplankton biomass (mg m-3 wet weight) from Bogorov et al. (1968). (E) Ratio between epipelagic and mesopelagic biomass using Bogorov et al. epipelagic zooplankton and mesopelagic biomass from the variable-depth POC model. Note the square root of the scale for the colour bar. (F) 2D map depicting the relationship between the mesopelagic mesozooplankton biomass derived from POC estimates Bogorov et al. estimated the total zooplankton biomass in the top 100 m of the water column. Quantile breaks in the legend were created at the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles for mesopelagic biomass and < 50, 51–200, 201–500, > 500 mg·m⁻³ wet weight intervals for Bogorov’s et al. biomass estimates. All maps are in Eckert IV global equal area projection.