Effect of food concentration on the carbon balance of <i>Bosmina longirostris</i> (Crustacea: Cladocera)

Urabe, Jotaro

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2427.1991.tb00508.x

Cited by 23 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 28 publications

(48 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In Bosmina, for example, Urabe (1991) found consistent increases in L with food level (0.05, 0.1, 0.25 and 2.5 mg C l -1 ) in seven to eight successive postneonatal instars. About 60% of total assimilate was allocated to Gs at birth, but declined in subsequent instars (to \5% in instar IV at the lowest food).…”

Section: Clonal and Genotypic Differences In Body Sizementioning

confidence: 72%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Body size in freshwater planktonic crustaceans: an overview of extrinsic determinants and modifying influences of biotic interactions

Hart

Bychek

2010

Hydrobiologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In view of its fundamental and pervasive influences and impacts on organism physiology and ecology, body size is recognized as a key component of evolutionary fitness and serves as the cornerstone of a seminal contribution in freshwater zooplankton ecology-the Size Efficiency Hypothesis (SEH) of Brooks & Dodson (Science 150:28-35, 1965). While the roles and implications of body size in predation and competition-central tenets of the SEH-have been widely considered and reviewed, no broader integrated synthesis exists of the collective array of body size determinants and their implications in the ecology in crustacean zooplankton-a numerically and functionally dominant group of aquatic organisms. Focusing on planktonic Cladocera and Copepoda in inland waters, in particular, we provide a wide-ranging overview of the direct and/or indirect effects of environmental conditions, consumable resources and biotic interactions that independently and/or collectively influence the phenotypic expression of body size (particularly as length), both within and between species. Some indirect ultimate evolutionary consequences of body size are considered, and we identify some controversies and unresolved issues related to this biologically crucial trait. While by no means exhaustive, our overview reveals a complex nexus of extrinsic proximate abiotic and biotic factors and interactions that influence body size, the phenotypic expression of which in natural systems commonly reflects contrasting outcomes related to conflicting direct and/or indirect selective pressures. In general, however, body size (both interand intra specifically) declines with rising temperature and increases with rising food supply (depending on its quality), although both temperature and food supply exert contrary influences on particular taxa (or life history stages) under certain environmental circumstances. Predation undoubtedly has an overriding influence on body size selection. Depending on its mechanistic basis (visual, tactile or both in tandem), it selectively favours either small or large body size, both within (adults vs. juveniles) and between prey species, which are accordingly often 'size-trapped' between contrasting selective pressures, with consequent indirect effects. The bioenergetics of fundamental physiological processes undoubtedly set constraints on body size and serve as the primary determinant. However, within such

show abstract

Section: Clonal and Genotypic Differences In Body Sizementioning

confidence: 72%

“…In Bosmina, carapace length in 7 or 8 successive instars was consistently greater at food levels of 0.05, 0.1, 0.25 and 2.5 mg C l -1 (Urabe, 1991), with similar positive influences of food supply on body size evident in Diaphanosoma and Moina (e.g. Sipaȗba-Tavares & Bachion, 2002).…”

Section: Body Size In Relation To Extrinsic Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 77%

Body size in freshwater planktonic crustaceans: an overview of extrinsic determinants and modifying influences of biotic interactions

Hart

Bychek

2010

Hydrobiologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is said that protozoans transfer a large portion of the energy ingested as food from the trophic level below to the predator level as protozoan biomass . However reported gross growth efficiencies of ciliates reported (Verity, 1985) were not necessarily higher than those of Bosmina (Urabe, 1991) .…”

Section: Carbon Flow In Two Fish Culture Pondsmentioning

confidence: 87%

Characteristics of plankton communities in Chinese integrated fish ponds: effects of excessive grazing by planktivorous carps on plankton communities

et al. 1995

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biomass and production of plankton communities were investigated in two Chinese integrated fish culture ponds in August, Dianshanhu Pond (with high density of planktivorous carp) and Pingwang Pond (with low density of planktivorous carp) . The plankton communities were composed of rotifers, protozoans, phytoplankton (<40 µm) and bacteria . The large phytoplankton (>40 µm), cladocerans and copepods were rare because of grazing pressure by the carp . The density or biomass of bacteria (1 .93 x 107 and 2 .20 x 107 cells ml -1 on average in Dianshanhu and Pingwang Ponds, respectively), picophytoplankton (24 .6 and 18 .5 mg m-3 Chla on average) and rotifers (5372 and 20733 ind . 1-1 on average) exceeded the maximum values reported for natural waters .The average [3 H]thymidine uptake rates were 694 and 904 pmoles 1-' h-' (13 .4 and 20 .6 pgC 1 -' h -') and the bacterial production by the >2 pm fraction amounted 21-28% of total [ 3H] thymidine uptake rate in both ponds . The mean chlorophyll a concentrations were 59 .1 and 183 mg m-3 in Dianshanhu and Pingwang Ponds, respectively. 82.4% and 65 .3% of the total Chla was contributed by the <10 Am nano-and picophytoplankton in each pond, respectively. In particular, the picophytoplankton contribution amounted 41 .2% of total Chla in Dianshanhu Pond . Primary production was 2 .5 and 3 .4 gC m -2 d -' in each pond, respectively, and >50% of production was contributed by picophytoplankton . The mean biomasses of protozoa were 168 pg 1-1 and 445 ttg 1 -' and those of rotifers were 763 pg 1-1 and 1186 pg 1-1 in Dianshanhu and Pingwang Ponds, respectively . The ecological efficiencies expressed in terms of the ratios of primary production to zooplankton production were 0 .22 and 0 .31, for the two ponds .

show abstract

“…The assumed taxon specificity is the only generalization on GGE of planktonic organisms used in these models. Individual studies have shown that GGE will depend on food concentration (Verity 1985;Urabe 1991), temperature (Sherr et al 1983;Rassoulzadegan 1982), and food quality. One aspect of food quality, the effect of relative prey size on GGE, has not yet been addressed systematically in individual studies.…”

Section: Acknowledgmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gross growth efficiencies of protozoan and metazoan zooplankton and their dependence on food concentration, predator‐prey weight ratio, and taxonomic group

Straile

1997

Limnology & Oceanography

375

258

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A comprehensive datasct on the gross growth efficiency (GGE) of planktonic protozoans and metazoans was gathered from the literature in order to (1) identify typical ranges of values, (2) to reexamine the taxon specificity of GGE, and (3) to evaluate the impact of food concentration, predator-prey weight ratio, and temperature on GGE. All taxa (i.e. nano/microAagellates, dinoflagellates, ciliates, rotifers, cladocerans, and copepods) were found to have mean and median GGE of -2O-30%. Contrary to the common practice of using different values of GGE for ciliates and crustaceans, I found that the GGE hardly differed between taxa. Variability within all taxa was high and could only partially be attributed to the independent variables mentioned above. The dependency of GGE on food concentrations was the most reliable relationship identified by multiple regression. Establishing further generalizations regarding the dependency of GGE on other factors was hampered by methodological differences among studies and taxa and the lack of information on other potentially important factors such as the clemental composition of prey items. Future studies of GGE should recognize the importance of these factors.Knowledge of fluxes of matter and energy within ecosystems is a prerequisite for the understanding of food web regulation and of the role that oceans and lakes play in the global carbon cycle (Longhurst 199 1). However, quantifying carbon fluxes reliably in particular ecosystems is hampered by many difficulties. The complexity of aquatic food webs outpaces our capacity to make all the necessary measurements at any one site (Vkzina and Platt 1988). This fact forces ecologists to infer unknown fluxes from those that have been measured. A relative straightforward and therefore common approach is to estimate ingestion rates, Z, of a group of organisms (of a guild) from measured growth rates, G, and a fixed gross growth efficiency, GGE: Z = G/GGE. The crucial ratio GGE (G/Z) is the fraction of prey carbon consumed converted to predator carbon. Despite its importance and abundant use in numerous models and applied studies, e.g. on the estimation of fish yield, the literature on GGE is not well developed and provides no or only a few weak generalizations.Searching the literature of carbon flux modeling, one finds that one generalization in particular has reached modelers' ears: planktonic protozoans are thought to achieve higher GGE than do planktonic metazoans. Modelers are quite aware of high protozoan GGE (sensu Caron et al. 1990a) and usually use protozoan GGE 240% in their models. On the other hand, the conclusion of Calow (1977)-that "Metazoa can achive the best possible levels of efficiency pre- AcknowledgmentsThis study was performed within the Special Collaborative Program (SFB) 248 "Cycling of matter in Lake Constance" supported

show abstract

Effect of food concentration on the carbon balance of Bosmina longirostris (Crustacea: Cladocera)

Cited by 23 publications

References 28 publications

Body size in freshwater planktonic crustaceans: an overview of extrinsic determinants and modifying influences of biotic interactions

Body size in freshwater planktonic crustaceans: an overview of extrinsic determinants and modifying influences of biotic interactions

Characteristics of plankton communities in Chinese integrated fish ponds: effects of excessive grazing by planktivorous carps on plankton communities

Gross growth efficiencies of protozoan and metazoan zooplankton and their dependence on food concentration, predator‐prey weight ratio, and taxonomic group

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About