Food quality and the heterogeneous spatial distribution of meiofauna

Lee, J. J.; Tietjen, John H.; Mastropaolo, C.; Rubin, H. A.

doi:10.1007/bf02207841

Cited by 91 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…dentatum migrated into the macrophytodetritus accumulation to avoid low oxygen levels in the sediment underneath or to search for more accessible food. Harpacticoids are known to feed on a wide variety of food sources (Hicks and Coull, 1983;Lee et al, 1977), displaying species-specific food preferences (Buffan-Dubau and Carman, 2000;De Troch et al, 2012;Decho and Castenholz, 1986;Pace and Carman, 1996;Wyckmans et al, 2007). Hicks and Coull (1983) stated that the existence of a wide variety of morphologically similar species in one habitat is allowed as a consequence of harpacticoids' selective feeding.…”

Section: Harpacticoid Copepod Species Assemblage In Detritusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seasonal variability of meiofauna, especially harpacticoid copepods, in Posidonia oceanica macrophytodetritus accumulations

Mascart

Lepoint

Deschoemaeker

et al. 2015

Journal of Sea Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The overall aim of this study was (1) to assess the diversity and density of meiofauna taxa, especially harpacticoid copepod species, present within accumulated seagrass macrophytodetritus on unvegetated sand patches and (2) to elucidate the community structure of detritus-associated harpacticoid copepods in relation to natural temporal variability of physico-chemical characteristics of accumulations. This was investigated in a Posidonia oceanica (L.) Delile seagrass ecosystem in the northwest Mediterranean Sea (Bay of Calvi, Corsica, 42°35′N, 8°43′E) using a triplicate macrophytodetritus core field sampling in two contrasting sites over the four seasons of 2011. Meiofauna higher taxa consisted of 50% Copepoda, of which 87% belonged to the Harpacticoida order. Nematoda was the second most abundant taxa. The copepod community displayed a wide variety of morphologically similar and ecologically different species (i.e. mesopsammic, phytal, phytal-swimmers, planktonic and parasitic). The harpacticoid copepod community followed a strong seasonal pattern with highest abundances and species diversity in May-August, revealing a link with the leaf litter epiphyte primary production cycle. Aside from the important role in sheltering, housing and feeding potential of macrophytodetritus, a harpacticoid community BEST analysis demonstrated a positive correlation with habitat complexity and a negative correlation with water movements and P. oceanica leaf litter accumulation.

show abstract

Section: Harpacticoid Copepod Species Assemblage In Detritusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seasonal variability of meiofauna, especially harpacticoid copepods, in Posidonia oceanica macrophytodetritus accumulations

Mascart

Lepoint

Deschoemaeker

et al. 2015

Journal of Sea Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further, food resources used by copepod species may change ontogenetically (Decho & Fleeger 1988a), seasonally (Lee et al 1976), or over shorter time scales such as a tidal cycle (Decho 1988, Souza-Santos et al 1995. Exploitation of different microbial food sources by copepods has been suggested as an explanation for their spatially and temporally heterogeneous distributions (Lee et al 1977, Reiper 1984, Carman & Thistle 1985, Decho & Castenholz 1986, Decho & Fleeger 1988b. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 143: 77-86,1996 Few stud.ies have addressed how microbial food resources are exploited by natural harpacticoid copepod communities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Mar Ecol Prog Ser 143: 77-86,1996 Few stud.ies have addressed how microbial food resources are exploited by natural harpacticoid copepod communities. Field studies (Lee et al 1977, Carman & Thistle 1985, Decho & Castenholz 1986) have provided evidence of interspecific feeding differences among harpacticoid copepods as well as positive spatial correlations between the distribution of copepods and their potential microbial food resources (Decho & Fleeger 198813, Blanchard 1991, Montagna et al 1995. Other field studies , Alongi 1988, however, have detected no correlation between harpacticoid copepods and their microbial food resources.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interspecific differences among meiobenthic copepods in the use of microalgal food resources

Pace¹,

Carman²

1996

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:We examined the potential for interspecific differences among meiobenthic copepods in their exploitation of microalgal food resources in a natural benthic community. The feeding behaviors of Coullana sp., Cletocamptus deitersi, Microarthridion littorale, and Pseudostenhelia wellsi were examined using I4C-radiotracer grazing experiments and gut-pigment analyses. In one grazing experiment, laboratory-cultured microalgae were labeled using NaH1'C03 and injected into intact sediment cores to determine whether copepods were grazing on algae from the water column and/or at the sediment-water interface. In another grazing experiment, NaHL4C03 was injected directly into sediment cores and grazing on I4C-labeled natural algae was measured. Fluorometric analyses of gutpigments were used to determine the recent feeding histories of copepods. Functional responses of copepod feeding to variation in sedimentary chlorophyll (chl) a concentrations were also used to discern interspecific differences in feeding. Coullana sp. grazed on microalgae from the water-column and at the sediment-water interface. C deitersi grazed predominantly on microalgae from the sediment-water interface Grazing on laboratory-cultured algae was minimal in M. littorale and F! wellsi, but grazing experiments with 'v-labeled natural algae and gut-pigment analyses indicated that these copepods grazed on microalgae in the field. However, a positive functional response to chl a concentrations by M. littorale and a lack of a functional response by P wellsi suggest that these 2 species exploit algal resources difterently. Collectively, our observations indicate that each copepod species examined exploits microalgal resources differently.

show abstract

“…Diatoms are known from both laboratory and field studies to be an important food resource of many meiobenthc harpacticoids (Lee et al 1976, Sellner 1976, Brown & Sibert 1977, Harris 1977, Lee et al 1977, Vanden Berghe & Bergmans 1981, Ustach 1982, Admiraal et al 1983, Montagna 1984, Carman & Thistle 1985, Lee et al 1985, Chandler 1986, Decho 1986, Decho & Castenholz 1986, Nilsson 1987, Decho & Fleeger 1988a. Laboratory studies (Decho 1986) have indicated that certain harpacticoids consume diatom food resources at different rates over portions of a simulated tidal cycle.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do harpacticoid grazing rates differ over a tidal cycle? Field verification using chlorophyll-pigment analyses

Decho¹

1988

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Four specles of meiobenthic copepods were examined for dlatom feeding Microscopic analysis of gut-pellet contents from field-collected in&viduals ~n&cated frequent Ingestion of diatoms by 3 harpacticoids (Scottolana canadensis, Microarthndon Ottorale Cletocamptus deitersi) whlle occasional &atom ingestion occurred m Paronychocamptus huntsmani Frustules were usually empty and broken indicahng that contents were d~gested Laboratory expenments using 14C-labehng showed assimilation of diatoms by the 3 species examined Fleld grazing rate s t u b e s were conducted over different portions of a hdal cycle using fluorescent chlorophyll-plgment analysls of gut-contents H~g h e s t dlatom consumphon (p < 0 05) occurred just after the mudflat became exposed (i e Early Low Water level, ELW) for S canadensis, while consumptlon at Late Low Water (LLW i e after mudflat is exposed for several hours) was reduced M llttorale showed a somewhat similar pattern in that highest consumptlon rates (p < 0 05) also occurred dunng ELW However, during High Water (HW) and LLW a similar (but reduced) feeding rate was measured P huntsmani appeared to only ingest &atoms (1 e chlpigments) dunng HW Relationships of feeding processes over a tidal cycle are discussed with regard to distributional patterns in intertidal and subtidal habitats

show abstract

Food quality and the heterogeneous spatial distribution of meiofauna

Cited by 91 publications

References 23 publications

Seasonal variability of meiofauna, especially harpacticoid copepods, in Posidonia oceanica macrophytodetritus accumulations

Seasonal variability of meiofauna, especially harpacticoid copepods, in Posidonia oceanica macrophytodetritus accumulations

Interspecific differences among meiobenthic copepods in the use of microalgal food resources

How do harpacticoid grazing rates differ over a tidal cycle? Field verification using chlorophyll-pigment analyses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About