Mnemiopsis leidyi Invasion and Biodiversity Changes in the Caspian Sea

1.1 Caspian Sea The complex history of the Caspian Sea formation has lead to a variety of different habitats. Like Australia, the Caspian Sea became isolated thousands of years ago (Plate 1). This isolation led to the speciation of many rare animals in particular the sturgeon. The Caspian Sea is the biggest enclosed body of water on Earth, having an even larger area than that of the American Great Lakes or that of Lake Victoria in East Africa. It is situated where the South-Eastern Europe meets the Asian continent, between latitudes 47 ̊.07́N and 36 ̊.33́N and longitudes 45 ̊.43́E and 54 ̊.20́E. It is approximately 1,030 km long and its width ranges from 435 km to a minimum of 196 km. It has no connection to the world’s oceans and its surface level at the moment is around _26.5 m below MSL. At this level, its total coastline is some 7,000 km in length and its surface area is 386,400 km2. The water volume of the lake is about 78,700 km3.


173
The Volga Delta is situated in the Prikaspiisk lowlands covering around 10,000 km2 and the delta has a width of about 200 km. A feature of the delta region are the so-called Baer knolls which are hillocks, between 3m and 20m in height, formed by the action of onshore winds on the river sediments. These sediments are discharged into the delta at a rate of 8 million tones per year. Numerous small lakes can be found between the knolls and there is a complex system of channels with many islets. The Volga-Caspian shipping canal traverses the delta and is dredged to maintain a depth of no less than 2m (Aladin and Plotnikov, 2004).

Biodiversity in the Caspian
The biodiversity of the Caspian aquatic environment is a product of thousands of years of isolation from the world's oceans, allowing ample time for speciation. The biological diversity of the Caspian and its coastal zone makes the region one of the most valuable ecosystems in the world. The Caspian harbors some 147 species of fish, 450 species, varieties, or forms of phytoplankton, 87 species of algae, and 315 species of zooplankton. One of the most important features of the Caspian's biodiversity is the relatively high level of endemism among its fauna. Recent studies suggest the actual endemism may be even higher than what is already known. To date, there are 331 known endemic species in the Caspian. They are represented by the following: UNDP, www.caspianenvironment.org/ newsite/Data-MajorDocuments.htm.

Four (4) species of Spongia
One (1)  The decline in bioresources and biodiversity are closely linked through food chains and feeding patterns. A disturbance in the phytoplankton-zooplankton and benthic communities caused by invasive species for instance may impact species at higher trophic levels, such as sturgeon or seals. With the invasion of ML (Mnemiopsis leidyi) as well as introductions of other species the naturally occurring food web may have undergone or be undergoing potentially significant disruptions particular when under concurrent stresses. The sturgeon species existed 200 million years ago at the same time as dinosaurs and can therefore be called living fossils. At that time sturgeon inhabited many ancient seas. Later on in the process of evolution, possibly due to competition with bony fish species, the sturgeons started to become extinct but managed to survive in the Caspian Sea. This gigantic lake contains more than 90% of the world resources of sturgeon. Furthermore, the Caspian Sea is also home to many other rare species of crustaceans and mollusks (Birstein et al., 1968). Due to its unique and diverse habitats, the Caspian Sea has become home to many rare species of flora and fauna. In connection with an increase of the Caspian Sea level during the period of 1994 -1996, habitats for rare species of aquatic vegetation have drastically decreased. This can be attributed to a general lack of seeding material in newly formed coastal lagoons and water bodies (Aladin and Plotnikov, 2004). Many rare and endemic plant species of Russia are associated with the intra-zonal communities of the Volga delta and riparian forests of the Samur River delta as well as to the Sarykum barkhan which is a unique refuge for flora adapted to the loose sands of the ancient Central Asian Deserts. The principal limiting factors to successful establishment of plant species are hydrological imbalances within the surrounding deltas, water pollution, and various land reclamation activities. The water level change within the Caspian Sea is an indirect reason for which plants may not get established. This affects aquatic plants of the Volga delta, such as: Aldrovanda veiculosa and Nelumbo caspica. About 11 plant species are found in the Samur River delta, of which some form a unique liana forest that dates back to the Tertiary period. Different factors are involved in decline of biodiversity in the Caspian Sea. 1. One of the factors contributing to depleted fisheries and ecosystem resilience is the separation of anadromous fish from their natal river systems in the Caspian. Reduced access to sturgeon spawning sites began in the 1930s with the construction of irrigation weirs, followed by the construction of large dams on the Kura River in the 1950s, the Volga River in the 1960s, and the Sefidrud River in the early 1970s. In the past 50 years, anadromous fish migrations have been blocked to up to 90% of natural spawning grounds on rivers like the Volga and the Kura. As summarized above, anadromous fish such as sturgeon, salmon or herring develop genetically distinct sub-populations in response to environmental variability. Dams without fish passages block migration up rivers for spawners and down rivers for fingerlings. This loss of connectivity and natural selection cannot be replaced by hatcheries and has had the effect of drastically reducing the biological diversity of the Caspian's fish species and populations. It has led to reduced numbers of fish overall and reduced numbers of genetically distinct populations of fish (Aladin and Plotnikov, 2004). 2. Invasive species are also factors thought to be contributing to ecosystem stress, loss of biodiversity and depleted fisheries. Invasive species have been shown the world over to have direct and indirect impacts on many ecosystem components, including productive fisheries and the economy. Ecosystems often contain cascading feeding interactions that respond in unpredictable ways to introductions. Invasive species affect individuals, populations, and assemblages of populations in the ecosystems where they occur. One assemblage-level impact is a substantial shift in relative abundances, resulting in declines and losses among native fishes, for example. This is widely believed to have happened in the Caspian with respect to the native species of fish called the Kilka among others. Mnemiopsis lediyi, an invasive species of jellyfish, is thought to have affected the cascading feeding interactions that the Kilka relied upon, possibly causing the Kilka populations to decline dramatically, which in turn is thought www.intechopen.com to have impacted the Caspian seal, for whom Kilka are an important food source. Clearly, to restore depleted fisheries, ecosystems and the processes and interactions that occur within them must be protected. 3. The presence of POPs (in particular pesticides) and PTS from exploitation of oil in some parts of the Caspian Sea is a major source of concern, especially their accumulation in the long-lived species -mollusks, seals, and sturgeons (UNDP, www.caspianenvironment.org/newsite/Data-MajorDocuments.htm).

Mnemiopsis leidyi problem in the Caspian
In the early 1980s, the comb jelly Mnemiopsis leidyi, a ctenophore that normally resides off the eastern United States, was accidentally introduced into the Black Sea via ballast waters from cargo ships. This voracious zooplanktonic predator (with extremely high rates of reproduction and growth) reached enormous biomass levels (a few hundreds million tons for the entire basin!) devastating the pelagic (i.e. in water column) food chain in the entire Black Sea basin by the end of 1980s (Vinogradov et al., 1989). Inevitably, such high biomass of this comb jelly consumed a considerable fraction of the zooplankton that had been the food for pelagic fish and their larvae before its arrival. One of the dramatic consequences of the M. leidyi invasion was the sharp drop (from about 630,000 tons in 1988 to steadily 150,000 tons in 1991) in commercial catches of planktivorous fish (mainly the anchovy Engraulis encrasicolus L.) in the Black Sea (Kideys 1994;Prodanov et al., 1997). The yearly economical damage to the fisheries sector alone were estimated to be about 250-500 million USD during this period. Although merely one or two researchers pointed out the overfishing as the major cause, the concurrent sharp decrease in zooplankton quantity from different regions in the Black Sea (Kovalev et al., 1998;Gubanova et al., 2002;Gordina et al., 2004) was a conclusive evidence. Indeed one would expect much higher quantities of zooplankton (due to decreased predation) at low levels of planktivorous fish occurence. The decreased levels of the pelagic fish must have also affected the abundance of top predators (several species of predator fish as well as the three species of dolphins) in the Black Sea. Although there are no systematic data on dolphins, they were noted to be scarcer by fishermen and mariners at this period. M. leidyi did not only affected the quantity of animals but also of plant organisms, known as phytoplankton. These (mainly) photosythetic organisms are the food for zooplankton. Due to decreased levels of zooplankton, phytoplankton had a chance to over-grow in the Black Sea (Yunev et al., 2002) during the peak period in M. leidyi quantity. Such increase was deleterious particularly for some shallow regions in the Black Sea ecosystem (e.g. off Danube River) already badly suffering from eutrophication. The situation in the Black Sea has been one of the most striking examples in marine bioinvasion history. Due to scale of the problem, UNEP intervened and gathered international experts in Geneva in 1994, for investigating methods for solving this problem (GESAMP, 1997). The futility of physical and chemical methods for this problem were noted and therefore, biological control seemed the only workable remedy. And, based on the literature knowledge of feeding specificity, another ctenophore species (Beroe ovata) rose as the best candidate for dealing with M. leidyi problem. Indeed, B. ovata reported feeding only on other ctenophore species (Kremer and Nixon 1976), most notably on M. leidyi. However, scientists from the Geneva meeting could not stress on using a new predator species for dealing with the problem in the Black Sea, due to risk of unexpected problems: What if B. ovata start feeding on other species rather than M. leidyi?. A warning that M. leidyi might also invade the Caspian Sea had been voiced during the Geneva meeting as well as by Dumont (1995). Unfortunately, at the end of the 1990s the invasion of M. leidyi in the Caspian Sea was already being reported (Esmaeili et al., 2000;Ivanov et al., 2000;Roohi, 2000). It must have also been transported in the ballast waters of ships traveling from the Black Sea (salinity 18 ppt) to the Caspian Sea (max. salinity 13-14 ppt) through the Volga Don Canal. Investigations in the Caspian Sea showed by September 2000, it was found everywhere including the northern Caspian where the salinity can be as low as 4 ppt (Shiganova et al., 2001a). The impact of M. leidyi on the Caspian Sea ecosystem has been even worse than in the Black Sea due to the greater sensitivity of this enclosed basin. Adverse impacts from M. leidyi could be listed as the following: 1. Again the fish collapse was the most apparent problem in the ecosystem.  (Kideys et al., 2004(Kideys et al., , 2005. Fishermen even stopped fishing during most part of 2003, due to lack of fish (Fazli and Roohi 2003). 2. Sharp decrease in fish catch became a big problem for thousands people earning livelihood from sprat fishery. The economical loss from sprat fishery alone is hundreds million Euros per year. Most of the fishermen in Iran, who once took loans from banks for starting to a business with promising outlook, cannot now pay their debts and may even end up in prison. Their problem was even at headlines on BBC World TV in 23rd July 2001. 3. Not only pelagic fishes, but also some large predators feeding on these fish such as white sturgeon Huso huso and the endemic Caspian seal Phoca caspica are also suffering from significant population decrease. As reported by the media, the mass deaths of Caspian seals (Phoca caspica) occurred in the northern Caspian Sea during the spring of 2000. There is strong evidence that the epizootic disease observed in seals during the spring of 2000 was caused by under nourishment (Davis et al., 2003). Significantly decreased pregnancy and fat content inseal population were also reported. The white sturgeon, that is famous for the quality of its caviar, mainly depend on sprat as food (Hashemian and Roohi 2004). 4. Biodiversity of the Caspian is important as most of species occur only in this sea all over the world (i.e. endemic). Not only the quantity of zooplankton is reported to decrease sharply, but also the number of species. For example, number of zooplankton (copepod and cladocerans) species during 2001-2002 was only 3 compared to 22 species in 1995 or 1996!. The consequences of such reduction could be very significant for the ecosystem (Roohi et al., 2010) 5. Due to decreased levels of zooplankton, eutrophication (to much plant production) started to be a significant problem for this ecosystem. Global chlorophyll distribution www.intechopen.com obtained via remote sensing display the Caspian Sea as one of the most eutrophic regions in the world in recent years, in contrast to years before M. leidyi invasion (Roohi et al., 2008a, b)

General aspect of Mnemiopsis
Mnemiopsis leidyi -is the lobate ctenophore. Two oral lobes are derivatives of the ctenophore body (spherosome). Four smaller lobes -auricules are situated under the principal two oral lobes. During their movements the lobes in fold completely its buccal orifice. The oral lappets carry tentacular rings. Its central part is situated above the lips of the mouth crevice.
Mnemiopsis characteristics in a glance are as follows: Plate 3.

Mnemiopsis leidyi images of the Caspian Sea
Luminescence-Mnemiopsis is remarkably phosphorescent. The seat of the phosphorescence is confined to the rows of locomotive flappers.

Ecological group-Macrozooplankton
Origin: North American species might be brought into the Black Sea with ballast water by Russian tankers driving oil to the ports at eastern coast of USA. From the Black Sea Mnemiopsis might be transferred into the Caspian Sea also by tankers driving oil though the Volga-Don Canal. World distribution: The native habitat of the ctenophore, Mnemiopsis, is in temperate to subtropical estuaries along the Atlantic coast of North and South America (Harbison et al., 1978). In the early 1980s, it was accidentally introduced to the Black Sea (Vinogradov et al., 1989), where it flourished and expanded into the Azov, Marmara, eastern Mediterranean, and Caspian Seas (Studenikina et al., 1991, Shiganova et al, 2001a, Shiganova et al, 2001b.

Mnemiopsis leidyi photo by ROOHI, A.
Habitat: Mnemiopsis leidyi inhabits coastal areas and surface layers (above thermocline) open sea. Some large ctenophores can spread deeper and even can be found near the bottom in the coastal areas of the Caspian Sea. Migrations: Transferred with the currents. Dial vertical migrations were not recorded, although it is more abundant near the surface at night where they feed and reproduce Relation to salinity: Euryhalinic species. Salinity range from 2 to 38 (Kremer, 1993). In the seas of Mediterranean basin M .leidyi occurs in waters with salinities ranging from 3 in the Sea of Azov to 39 in the eastern Mediterranean. In the Caspian Sea its distribution is limited isohalines of 4 ‰. Relation to temperature: Eurythermic species. Temperatures range from 0 о C in northern native locations in the winter, to 32 о C in the southern estuaries during the summer. Feeding type: Heterotrophic, carnivorous Feeding behavior: The larvae of Mnemiopsis can retract entirely their two tentacles into the tentacular sheaths on either side of the body, between the oral and aboral poles. Reproduction type: Mnemiopsis leidyi-is a self-fertilizing hermaphrodite Relation to environmental factors: The main factors, which are important for reproduction, are temperature and food concentration

Highlights of Mnemiopsis monitoring data in the Caspian
Invasion of the Caspian Sea by the comb-jelly Mnemiopsis leidyi (ML) since late 1990s has become one of the main environmental issue of this unique ecosystem. The adverse effects of this ctenophore was first visible on the pelagic fishery but also evident on other major compartments of the ecosystem, including, phytoplankton, zooplankton, benthos, Caspian Seal and even on some sturgeon species. Some endemic zooplankton species appear to have completely disappeared from samples of ongoing monitoring programs. ML invasion has had major impact on fisheries industry causing considerable economic damage, mostly to the coastal communities which depend on pelagic fisheries for their livelihood. The case of ML in the Caspian Sea is one of the largest invasion impacts ever occurred in a marine ecosystem all over the world.

A review of Mnemiopsis investigations of the Caspian Sea over the last decade
After Mnemiopsis invasion into the Caspian Sea via the ballast water from the Black Sea and/or the Sea of Azov in 1999 (Roohi et al., 2008a), some objectives of this alien ctenophore was taken into account in several local or national projects such as follows: Zooplankton and phytoplankton changes after ML invasion Mnemiopsis monitoring with the spatial and temporal investigations were conducted along the inshore and offshore of the Caspian Sea in Iran-Russia-Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan coasts. Fortunately, the main two countries (Iran and Russia) had established the favorable framework of the jelly study and achieved the appropriate results in which most of the discussion were based on two countries data analysis. Ctenophore samples were collected with an METU (Medalist Technology University) net having a mouth opening of 0.2 m 2 and a screen with a mesh size of 500 m, from the same depths as the Juday net (Vinogradov et al., 1989;Kideys et al., 2001). On completion of each tow, the cod end was immediately passed into a container and ctenophores counted by eye. The body length of each individual with lobes was measured lying flat (out of water) onboard, and the density of Mnemiopsis leidyi (per m 2 and m 3 ) was calculated from the net diameter and tow depth. The ctenophores were sorted in length groups of 5-mm intervals to determine the abundance of different size groups. Length measurements were converted to wet weight using an appropriate equation (Kideys et al., 2001). Samples of Mnemiopsis were collected from 20001 along few semi-transects perpendicular to the Iranian coast of the Caspian Sea (Fig. 1). The ctenophore Mnemiopsis leidyi was found at all stations from 2001-2009. There was a seasonal succession of ctenophore densities every year, the maximum being observed in August and September, and the minimum density in the winter months. A significant correlation was found between the water temperature and the abundance of Mnemiopsis leidyi (P <0.005). The highest summer-autumn average of Mnemiopsis leidyi abundance was observed in 2002 (760 ± 1148 ind.m 3 ), although the biomass during this period (23.2 ± 23.3 g.m 3 ) was lower than in 2001 (41.5 ± 44.3 g.m 3 ). In terms of monthly averages, October 2001 was the month of the maximum abundance and biomass (1157 ± 1614 ind.m 3 and 58.9 ± 40.0 g.m 3 ). In terms of spatial distribution, in spring the maximum abundance of Mnemiopsis leidyi (141 ind.m 3 ) was recorded in the coastal area of the southeastern Caspian Sea (Amirabad) and the minimum (3-14 ind.m 3 ) in waters 100 m deep. In summer, the highest abundance was again noted in the southeastern Caspian Sea, with values 763 ind.m 3 . Likewise, in autumn, the maximum abundance was in the southeast at Babolsar (at the shallowest station of 5 m depth), with a value of 1235 ind.m 3 . In addition, abundance was high at a station with a depth <20 m (500-700 ind.m 3 . In winter the maximum abundance was recorded in the Anzali region, with a value of 653 ind.m 3 (Fig. 3). In the Northern Caspian, M. leidyi was first found only in September 2000; its abundance increased in October, but values were not high: 108 ±65 ind. m-2 (21.6 ±9 ind. m -3 ), biomass 140.4 ±42 g m -2 (28.1 ±8 g m -3 ). In May 2001, M. leidyi was recorded only in the Southern Caspian (Fig. 6A), where its abundance was 1972 ± 683 ind. m -2 (100 ± 34 ind. m -3 ) and biomass 128 ± 57.5 g m -2 (6.4 ± 2 g m -3 ) and in the southwestern part of the Middle Caspian, up to 43° N, abundance was 230 ± 144 ind. m -2 (12 ± 20 ind. m -3 )and biomass was 20.0 ± 37 g m -2 (1.4 ± 2 g m -3 ) (Fig. 4). M. leidyi was most abundant in the western and middle areas of the Southern Caspian, with maximum abundance at the Apsheron Swell and in the western slope waters. Mean size was very small: up to 3.6 mm in the Southern Caspian and 4.2 mm in the Middle Caspian. It is well known that Mnemiopsis shrinks in unfavorable conditions; here, salinity, food, or a combination of both may have been strongly suboptimal. In May, a few eggs and larvae were found in the Southern and Middle Caspian, but mass reproduction did not start yet because of scarcity of reproducing adults and probably, low spring temperatures (16°C in the Southern and 15°C in the Middle Caspian) (Fig.4). In June 2001, Mnemiopsis leidyi began to reproduce and continued its expansion towards the north: in the Southern and south Middle Caspian (Fig. 4), its average abundance was 680 ± 16.8 ind. m -2 (34 ± 2 ind. m -3 ), and biomass 88.3 ± 7.78 g m -2 (4.3 ± 1 g m -3 ) (Fig. 4). The highest abundance and biomass, found in the Southern Caspian, represented values of 2005 ± 1248 ind. m-2 (100 ± 62 ind. m-3) and 230 ± 197.66 g m -2 (10.2 ± 9 g m -3 ), respectively .

A review of zooplankton investigations of the Caspian
Investigations performed in the last decade indicate that there have been important changes in the zooplankton composition and structure in the Caspian Sea. However, contrasting events taking place in different regions of the Caspian Sea indicate a non-uniform structure of its ecosystem. Several fodder zooplankton species have either disappeared from or substantially decreased in number at different sampling sites of the Caspian Sea over the last decade. Some other species adapted to thrive in eutrophic conditions have either appeared or increased in quantity especially meroplankton. Meanwhile the biomass of the fodder zooplankton has also fluctuated considerably through the years. However, there seems to be a reverse trend in the long-term variation of fodder zooplankton between the shallow western and deep eastern areas. Over the last decade the abundance of fish larvae has decreased significantly when compared either to past records or with larval abundances www.intechopen.com of other seas. This was shown to be due mainly to malnutrition of larvae. One of the most striking changes in the Ichtyoplankton has been the shift in the spawning areas of the main fish species in Caspian Sea. Even the invading ctenophore Mnemiopsis were found to be starving. The condition of other species (Calanipeda aquae dulcis and Limnocalanus grimaldii) disclosed the fact that cyclonic regions where chlorophyll and nutrient concentrations are high provide better nutrition than anticyclonic regions.

Species composition of zooplankton
A total of 18 zooplankton species (mero-and holozooplankton) were found. Among them there were 13 species of merozooplankton and only five species of holozooplankton. The latter belonged to Copepoda (four species) and Cladocera (one species) (

Zooplankton frequency
In general, low zooplankton abundance and biomass (wet weight) were observed in summer months from 2001 to 2006. The highest abundance and biomass of zooplankton along the whole water column were not regularly found in the same season each year ( The maximum seasonal mean of zooplankton abundance was recorded in spring and the minimum in summer (Table 3, Fig. 6A-D). In spring, the greatest zooplankton abundance was observed at the Sephidroud River inlet (9×10 4 ind.m 3 ) (Fig. 6A). In summer, the abundance of zooplankton decreased compared with the values reported in spring, and an almost even distribution was found along the coastal regions (max. 8-11 · 103 ind.m 3 ) decreasing towards the open sea (Fig. 6B). In autumn, zooplankton concentration was slightly greater than in summer; again the highest abundance (2×10 4 ind.m×10 4 ) was reported at the Sephidroud River inlet of 5 m depth (Fig. 6C). In winter, abundance was greater than in autumn and the maximum was observed at the Babolsar stations (3 ×10 4 ind.m 3 , Fig. 7D).
Comparison among different groups of zooplankton showed that Copepoda accounted for the maximum abundance and biomass every year from 2001 to 2006 (Fig. 6). Among Copepoda, different developmental stages of the calanoid species A. tonsa dominated during the study period. Copepoda, Cladocera and merozooplankton constituted 88%, 4% and 8% of total zooplankton abundance, respectively. Hossieni et al. (1996) reported 36 zooplankton species (86% holoplankton and 14% meroplankton) in the southern Caspian Sea, consisting of 24 species of Cladocera, seven species of Copepoda and meroplankton such as larvae of Bivalvia and Balanidae (Table 3). www.intechopen.com

Phytoplankton population
In the present study, a total of 226 phytoplankton species were identified. While diatoms constituted 45% of the total species number, chlorophytes, cyanophytes, dinoflagellates and euglenophytes formed 20, 17, 11 and 8% of phytoplankton species, respectively (Fig. 7). Number of species in spring (91 species) and summer (101 species) were higher than in autumn (86 species) and winter (77 species).  -2006 and 1986-1994 The highest monthly mean phytoplankton abundance and biomass were 396 × 10 6 ± 299 × 10 6 cells m-3 in January 2002 and 1,789 ± 1,761mg m-3 in May 2002 (Fig. 8). Minimum abundance and biomass values were observed in August 2003 (1 × 10 6 ± 1 × 10 6 cells m-3 and 7 ± 5 mg m -3 ) (Fig. 8).The overall average cell abundance and biomass of phytoplankton during 2001-2006 were 64 × 10 6 ± 76 × 10 6 cells m-3 and 250 ± 360 mg.m -3 , respectively. While diatoms were the most abundant phytoplankton group during 1996, after the introduction of M. leidyi the abundances of cyanophytes (in autumn) and dinoflagellates (in winter) exceeded diatom abundance in 2001 and 2002 ( Fig. 8 and 9 Fig. 9). According to the sampling on 20 September 2005, in addition to Nodularia sp., another cyanophyte Oscillatoria sp. was also high in abundance. Abundance of Nodularia sp. was 18 ×10 6 cells m -3 at 7 m depth and 1,006 × 10 6 cells m -3 at 20 m depth. Average cyanophyte abundance and biomass at 7 and 20 m depths were 582 9 106 cells m-3 (of which 512 cells m -3 was Nodularia sp.) and 1,655 mg m -3 . The highest seasonal means of phytoplankton abundance and biomass were 179 × 106 cells m -3 and 880 mg m-3 in winter during 2001-2006.  11. Other factors that have to be considered 11.1 Increased chlorophyll levels in the southern Caspian Sea after ML invasion A significant correlation was observed between satellite derived chlorophyll a (Chl a) concentrations and the biomass of the invasive comb jellyfish Mnemiopsis leidyi in the southern Caspian Sea. By consuming the herbivorous zooplankton, the predatory ctenophore M. leidyi may have caused levels of Chl a to rise to very high values (∼9mg m −3 ) in the southern Caspian Sea. There might also be several other factors concurrent with predation effects of M. leidyi influencing Chl a levels in this region, such as eutrophication and climatic changes which play major roles in nutrient, phytoplankton, and zooplankton variations (kideys et al., 2008). The decrease in pelagic fishes due to overfishing, natural, and anthropogenic impacts might have provided a suitable environment for M. leidyi to spread throughout this enclosed basin (Fig. 10). www.intechopen.com