Relationship Between Wet Weight and Dry Weight of the Periphyton

Sládeček, V.; Sládečková, Alena

doi:10.4319/lo.1963.8.2.0309

Cited by 22 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…, 1997), we cannot exclude other contributing factors. For example, the significant decrease in C/P and C/N ratios with depth might partly be explained by an increase in the degree of periphyton heterotrophy (Sladecek & Sladeckova, 1963), heterotrophic organisms having a higher mean nutrient content than autotrophic ones (Makino et al. , 2003).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of food‐web structure on periphyton stoichiometry in eutrophic lakes: a mesocosm study

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Aquatic herbivores typically have much higher concentrations of nutrients (e.g. N and P) in their tissues than there is in the food they eat. These stoichiometric differences can cause herbivores to be limited by the elemental quality of their food, which could affect, in turn, the structure of consumer communities and even alter key ecosystem processes. 2. In streams and in the littoral zone of shallow lakes, periphyton is an important food resource for benthic animals. Studying the elemental composition of periphyton may help us to understand food-web structure, and any reciprocal effect of this structure on periphyton stoichiometry. 3. To understand how alterations in the food-web structure affect the elemental composition of periphyton in a eutrophic lake, we carried out a long-term experiment (14 months) in large-scale mesocosms (40 m 3 ), in which we manipulated food-web structure, and which were dominated either by planktivorous fish (Rutilus rutilus) or herbivorous invertebrates (without fish). Periphyton was sampled monthly at three depths (0.5, 1.5 and 2.5 m) to determine its biomass and elemental composition (C ⁄ N ⁄ P ratio). Food-web structure, physical and chemical parameters were monitored throughout the experiment. 4. Fish had indirect positive effect on periphyton biomass, leading to twofold higher levels than in herbivore-dominated mesocosms. This result was probably due to control of benthic consumers by fish, suggesting a strong top-down control on periphyton by their consumers in fishless enclosures. 5. The elemental ratios C ⁄ P and C ⁄ N were lower in deep water in both treatments, mainly mediated by light availability, in accordance with the light ⁄ nutrient ratio hypothesis. These ratios were also lower in fishless treatments, probably due to increases in inorganic nutrient availability and grazing pressure in herbivore-dominated systems. During winter, periphyton elemental composition was similar in both treatments, and was unrelated to inorganic nutrient availability. 6. These results indicate that any alteration of food-web structure in lakes, such as in biomanipulation experiments, is likely to modify both the biomass and elemental quality of periphyton. Resultant effects on the consumers of periphyton and macrophytes could play a key role in the success of biomanipulations and should be taken into account in further studies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of food‐web structure on periphyton stoichiometry in eutrophic lakes: a mesocosm study

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The BMAA concentrations measured in seston and zooplankton varied from 0.83 to 1.13 µg g-1 wet weight, which corresponds to approximately 7.5–9.5 µg g −1 dry weight using common conversion factors for phyto- and zooplankton (Kiørboe, 2013; Sládeček and Sládečková, 1963). In the Baltic Sea, the BMAA concentration in cyanobacteria-rich phytoplankton community has been reported to vary from 0.001 to 0.015 μg BMAA/g dry weight, and that of zooplankton 0.004 to 0.087 μg BMAA/g dry weight (Jonasson et al, 2010).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is there a BMAA transfer in the pelagic and benthic food webs in the Baltic Sea?

Zguna

Karlson

Ilag

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

11The evidence regarding BMAA occurrence in the Baltic Sea is contradictory, with benthic 12 sources appearing to be more important than pelagic ones. The latter is counterintuitive 13 considering that pelagic primary producers, such as diatoms, dinoflagellates, and 14 cyanobacteria, are the only plausible source of this compound in the food webs. To elucidate 15 BMAA distribution in trophic pathways, we analyzed BMAA in the pelagic and benthic food 16 webs sampled in summer 2010 in the Northern Baltic Proper. As potential BMAA sources, 17 phytoplankton communities in early and late summer were used. As pelagic consumers, 18 zooplankton, mysids and zooplanktivorous fish (herring) were used, whereas benthic 19 invertebrates (amphipods, priapulids, polychaetes, and clams) and benthivorous fish (perch 20 and flounder) represented the benthic food chain. To establish the trophic structure of the 21 system, the stable isotope (δ 13 C and δ 15 N) composition of its components was determined. 22Contrary to the reported ubiquitous occurrence of BMAA in the Baltic food webs, only 23 phytoplankton and lower consumers (zooplankton and mysids) of the pelagic food chain 24 tested positive. Given that our analytical approaches were adequate, we conclude that no 25 measurable levels of this compound occurred in the benthic invertebrates and any of the 26 tested fish species in the study area. These findings indicate that widely assumed presence 27 and transfer of BMAA to the top consumers in the food webs of the Baltic Sea and, possibly, 28 other systems remain an open question. More controlled experiments and field observations 29 are needed to understand the transfer and possible transformation of BMAA in the food web 30 under various environmental settings. 31 Keywords: BMAA, Baltic Sea, food web, phytoplankton, pelagic and benthic food chains, 32 stable isotopes 33 34 35 62 Réveillon et al., 2015; Salomonsson et al., 2015; Réveillon et al., 2016). However, negative 63 outcomes of such surveys are also quite common (Scott et al., 2009; Niedzwiadek et al., 64 2012). Then again, most studies reporting BMAA transfer from primary producers to fish 65 have weak sampling design, suffering inconsistencies in both temporal and spatial 66 correspondence between the collected samples of sources and consumers. These 67 4 inconsistencies hamper quantitative analysis of the BMAA transfer in the food web and make 68 it difficult to trace this compound to specific producers. As a result, controversy surrounds 69 the sources and pathways of BMAA production and accumulation in aquatic ecosystems, 70 which is further complicated by inadequate analytical approaches that have been frequently 71 used in the past. 72 The evaluation and recent development of the analytical techniques strongly suggest that 73 some of the previous data may overestimate the BMAA concentrations in the environmental 74 samples (Faassen et al., 2012). Indeed, owing to the differences between the analytical 75 methods (Faassen et al., 2012), the reported concent...

show abstract

“…Hynes & Coleman (1968) used size classes to determine macrobenthic productivity . Sladecek & Sladeckova (1963) estimated net productivity by drying organic matter obtained from suspended substrates . Waters (1962) devised a method to estimate the production of primary consumers in a stream .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The organisms were picked from the debris, and preserved in 70% alcohol . The organisms were identified, sorted into major taxa, and weighed after air drying (Sladecek & Sladeckova, 1963) . The biomass per substrate was determined by adding together these values .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sequences of colonization, diversity, biomass, and productivity of macroinvertebrates on artificial substrates in a freshwater canal

Cover

Harrel

1978

Hydrobiologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sequence of colonization, species diversity (d), biomass, and productivity of macroinvertebrates on artificial substrates was determined in a relatively constant environment freshwater canal . Three substrates were removed weekly during a 16 week test period . Community structure of benthic macroinvertebrates was determined at the onset and end of the test period and compared with substrate community structure .Calopsectra sp . was the dominant early colonizing organism ; Dicrotendipes sp . and Dicrotendipes modestus were also abundant . In later collections other chironomids, ephemeropterans, gastropods, oligochaetes, amphipods, and trichopterans occurred . Trichopterans were generally dominant in numbers and biomass in later collections . A total of 104 taxa were collected on the substrates .Collection diversity (a) began at 3 .42 (week 1), decreased to 2 .72 in the third week, and then continually increased for the remainder of the test period to 4 .43 . Cumulative diversity had a similar trend, decreasing from 3 .42 (week I) to 3 .06 in the fourth week, and then increasing to 4 .05 . Neither collection a or cumulative a reached an asymptote in the 16 week period .Collection biomass began at 0 .0867 g/o .26 m 2 for week one and was 1 .0575 g/0.26 m' at the end of the test period . Biomass increased linearly for seven weeks, fluctuated widely until week 14, then increased sharply for the remainder of the test period . Productivity ranged from -3 .42 g/m~/wk in the eighth week to 5 .10 g/m 2 /wk in the last collection . Biomass and productivity were greatly affected by the presences or absences of a relatively few large organisms .

show abstract

Relationship Between Wet Weight and Dry Weight of the Periphyton

Cited by 22 publications

References 6 publications

Effects of food‐web structure on periphyton stoichiometry in eutrophic lakes: a mesocosm study

Effects of food‐web structure on periphyton stoichiometry in eutrophic lakes: a mesocosm study

Is there a BMAA transfer in the pelagic and benthic food webs in the Baltic Sea?

Sequences of colonization, diversity, biomass, and productivity of macroinvertebrates on artificial substrates in a freshwater canal

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About