1986
DOI: 10.1007/bf00377057
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The effect of acquired microbial enzymes on assimilation efficiency in the common woodlouse, Tracheoniscus rathkei

Abstract: The digestive tract of the common woodlouse, Tracheoniscus rathkei Brandt (Isopoda: Oniscoidea), contains digestive enzymes active against α-1,4-glucans, which are the chief storage polysaccharides of vascular plants, algae, fungi, and animals, and β-1,3-glucans, which are present in algae and fungi. Digestive tract extracts also exhibit significant activity toward xylan and carboxymethyl-cellulose but negligible activity toward microcrystalline cellulose, substrates representative of the major structural poly… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
12
0
2

Year Published

1986
1986
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
12
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The presence of active acquired enzymes in the gut does not necessarily prove that these enzymes increase the digestive efficiency of the animal partner (Kukor & Martin 1986) and similarly, the faecal enzymes of leaf-cutting ants could just be traces of fungal enzymes that accidentally have escaped proteolysis in the gut and that do not contribute to the degradation of leaf material in the fungus garden. However, we found that the activity of a specific fungal enzyme was on average five times higher in the faecal droplets as in the mature garden material.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The presence of active acquired enzymes in the gut does not necessarily prove that these enzymes increase the digestive efficiency of the animal partner (Kukor & Martin 1986) and similarly, the faecal enzymes of leaf-cutting ants could just be traces of fungal enzymes that accidentally have escaped proteolysis in the gut and that do not contribute to the degradation of leaf material in the fungus garden. However, we found that the activity of a specific fungal enzyme was on average five times higher in the faecal droplets as in the mature garden material.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since it is assumed that terrestrial isopods do not possess endogenous cellulases, these crucial depolymerising enzymes must originate from microorganisms that are either indigenous to the ecosystem or ingested with food. The majority of authors support the latter [6,17] and some have even suggested that the gut of the woodlouse is actually not a favourable environment for microbial growth, as demonstrated by studies on the typical soil bacterium Pseudomonas fluorescens [19,20,39,40]. However, a process of intensified bacterial growth was observed in the faeces of P. scaber , and this is assumed to be the net effect of lysis during food transit through the gut and growth in the faeces after voiding.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Microbes in the gut of terrestrial isopods have been observed and studied by several authors [11–20]. Their presence indicates that the isopod gut represents a suitable environment for microbial colonisation, although it lacks specialised structures or modifications of the gut, which would facilitate colonisation [11,12,14].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Terrestrial isopods (Isopoda: Oniscidea), which feed on the leaf litter of terrestrial plants, are capable of hydrolytically digesting cellulose (Hartenstein 1964(Hartenstein , 1982Hassall and Jennings 1975;Kozlovskaja and Striganova 1977;Kukor and Martin 1986;Zimmer and Topp 1998a) and oxidatively degrading phenolic leaf litter compounds (Neuhauser and Hartenstein 1976;Zimmer and Topp 1998b;Zimmer 1999). It has been proposed that these digestive capabilities, being adaptive to terrestrial food sources, are brought about by bacterial symbionts of the isopods' midgut glands (hepatopancreas) (Zimmer and Topp 1998a,b;Zimmer 1999;Zimmer et al 2001Zimmer et al , 2002.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%