1975
DOI: 10.2307/3543277
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assimilation Efficiency of Gammarus pseudolimnaeus (Amphipoda) Feeding on Fungal Mycelium or Autumn-Shed Leaves

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
74
0

Year Published

1978
1978
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 122 publications
(79 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
5
74
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Pre-moulting clearance of the gut has also been reported for the isopod Idotea baltica Pallas, by Strong & Daborn (1980) . The calculated fast gut passage times are in line with those obtained for Gammarus pseudolimnaeus ; 0 .87-1 .42 h at 15 °C, by Marchant& Hynes(1981) and 0 .75-2 .0 h at 17 'C, by Barlocher & Kendrick (1975) . There is no clear evidence of different gut passage times comparing exposed elm leaves and fine detritus .…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 66%
“…Pre-moulting clearance of the gut has also been reported for the isopod Idotea baltica Pallas, by Strong & Daborn (1980) . The calculated fast gut passage times are in line with those obtained for Gammarus pseudolimnaeus ; 0 .87-1 .42 h at 15 °C, by Marchant& Hynes(1981) and 0 .75-2 .0 h at 17 'C, by Barlocher & Kendrick (1975) . There is no clear evidence of different gut passage times comparing exposed elm leaves and fine detritus .…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 66%
“…S8). However, as the nutritional value of microbial cells is four to ten times higher than that of unconditioned leaf material [15] and fungi usually contribute more than 85% to the microbial biomass on decaying leaves [34], the reduced fungal biomass alone indicates a substantially lower nutritional value of the leaf material in the tebuconazole treatment. Thus, Gammarus is possibly also forced to compensate, besides the direct toxic effects, the nutritional deficiency by an increase in assimilation (i.e., postingestive compensation) [35].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thereafter, filters were dried and weighed as described above to determine feces production of each animal. During the first week of the present study, feces production was not assessed because feces may have originated from food different than that provided during the bioassay [15]. Accordingly, from week two onward, three additional replicates per treatment were set up without animals to correct for increases in filter weight due to microbial decomposition of leaf material.…”
Section: Bioassaymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We used the following assimilation efficiencies for invertebrate consumers: diatoms, 0.3; amorphous detritus, 0.1; leaf litter, 0.1; filamentous algae, 0.3; macrophytes, 0.1; fungi, 0.7; and animal material, 0.7 (Ba¨rlocher and Kendrick 1975, Benke and Wallace 1980, 1997. NPE of invertebrates was assumed to be 0.5.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%