Benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages in the US nearshore zone of Lake Erie, 2009: Status and linkages to landscape-derived stressors

Scharold, Jill V.; Corry, Timothy D.; Yurista, Peder M.; Kelly, John R.

doi:10.1016/j.jglr.2015.03.020

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Spatial variation in lower food web processes can also exert strong influences on spatial heterogeneity in food web structure in aquatic systems (Crowder & Cooper, 1982;Rude, Trushenski, & Whitledge, 2016;Sass, Gille, Hinke, & Kitchell, 2006). The southwest portion of the lake receives relatively little allochthonous nutrient input from different land use types (forested vs. urban and agriculture) compared to other sites, which may affect fatty acid availability by changing primary production pathways from bacterial and detrital sources to phytoplankton production (Larson et al, 2013;Lau et al, 2012;Rude et al, 2016;Scharold, Corry, Yurista, & Kelly, 2015). Similar west-to-east spatial patterns have been observed in the microbial communities, nitrogen cycling dynamics and nearshore primary productivity in Lake Michigan (Gardner et al, 2004;Hutton Stadig, 2016;Turschak et al, 2018).…”

Section: Spatial Variation In Trophic Diversity and Niche Sizementioning

confidence: 99%

Individual and spatial variation are as important as species‐level variation to the trophic complexity of a lentic food web

Feiner

Foley

Bootsma

et al. 2019

Ecology of Freshwater Fish

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecological complexity may improve ecosystem function, stability and adaptability to natural and anthropogenic disturbances. Intraspecific trophic variation can represent a significant component of total community variation and can influence food web structure and function. Thus, understanding how trophic niches are partitioned between intraspecific and interspecific processes could improve our understanding of food web dynamics. We examined gut contents, fatty acids and stable isotope ratios in round goby (Neogobius melanostomus) and yellow perch (Perca flavescens) across six sites in Lake Michigan, USA, to determine patterns in intra‐ and interspecific trophic composition (i.e., mean gut or fatty acid composition) and diversity (i.e., the diversity of gut items or fatty acids). We also examined relationships between fatty acid diversity and gut content characteristics to understand potential mechanisms shaping individual trophic phenotypes. There was significant variation in both trophic composition and diversity among sites, and individual and spatial variation was as important to total trophic variation as species identity. Round goby that consumed dreissenid mussels had more diverse fatty acid profiles than those that consumed other benthic invertebrates, whereas yellow perch fatty acid diversity was not related to gut content composition. Our results confirm that intraspecific variation in resource use can be as important to trophic dynamics as interspecific variation, and that spatial variation in lower level food web processes or habitat may strongly structure local food web dynamics. Individual‐level examination of trophic diversity, in concert with trophic composition, could provide additional information about the resilience, function and adaptability of local food webs.

show abstract

Section: Spatial Variation In Trophic Diversity and Niche Sizementioning

confidence: 99%

Individual and spatial variation are as important as species‐level variation to the trophic complexity of a lentic food web

Feiner

Foley

Bootsma

et al. 2019

Ecology of Freshwater Fish

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2). First we defined the nearshore as a well-mixed zone, distinct from the stratified offshore and where longshore currents dominate, and is often thought to be the approximate depth limit of tributary influence (Yurista et al 2012(Yurista et al , 2016Kelly et al 2015;Scharold et al 2015;Wang et al 2015). We defined the extent of the nearshore zone as <30 m depth Fig.…”

Section: Bathymetrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecosystem classification and mapping of the Laurentian Great Lakes

Riseng

Wehrly

Wang³

et al. 2018

Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Owing to the enormity and complexity of the Laurentian Great Lakes, an ecosystem classification is needed to better understand, protect, and manage this largest freshwater ecosystem in the world. Using a combination of statistical analyses, published knowledge, and expert opinion, we identified key driving variables and their ecologically relevant thresholds and delineated and mapped aquatic systems for the entire Great Lakes. We identified and mapped 77 aquatic ecological units (AEUs) that depict unique combinations of depth, thermal regime, hydraulic, and landscape classifiers. Those 77 AEU types were distributed across 1997 polygons (patches) ranging from 1 to >48 000 km 2 in area and were most diverse in the nearshore (35 types), followed by the coastal margin (26), and then the offshore (16). Our classification and mapping of ecological units captures gradients that characterize types of aquatic systems in the Great Lakes and provides a geospatial accounting framework for resource inventory, status and trend assessment; research for ecosystem questions; and management and policy-making. Résumé : En raison de l'énormité et de la complexité des Grands Lacs laurentiens, une classification des écosystèmes est nécessaire pour mieux comprendre, protéger et gérer ce plus grand écosystème d'eau douce du monde. En utilisant une combinaison d'analyses statistiques, de connaissances publiées et d'opinions de spécialistes, nous avons cerné des variables clés et leurs seuils importants sur le plan écologique, et délimité et cartographié les systèmes aquatiques pour l'entièreté des Grands Lacs. Nous avons cerné et cartographié 77 unités écologiques aquatiques (UEA) qui représentent les différentes combinaisons de profondeur, de régime thermique et de variables hydrauliques et du paysage importantes pour la classification. Ces 77 types d'UEA sont répartis sur 1997 polygones (parcelles) de superficies allant de 1 à >48 000 km 2 , la région sublittorale en présentant la plus grande diversité (35 types), suivie des bandes côtières (26), puis de la zone extracôtière (16). La classification et la cartographie des unités écologiques font ressortir les gradients qui caractérisent les types de systèmes aquatiques dans les Grands Lacs et fournissent un cadre géospatial de référence pour l'inventaire des ressources, l'évaluation des statuts et tendances, la recherche sur des questions touchant aux écosystèmes et la gestion et l'élaboration de politiques. [Traduit par la Rédaction]

show abstract

Exploration of spatial variability in nearshore water quality using the first Great Lakes National Coastal Condition Assessment survey

Kelly

Yurista

Starry

et al. 2015

Journal of Great Lakes Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages in the US nearshore zone of Lake Erie, 2009: Status and linkages to landscape-derived stressors

Cited by 7 publications

References 54 publications

Individual and spatial variation are as important as species‐level variation to the trophic complexity of a lentic food web

Individual and spatial variation are as important as species‐level variation to the trophic complexity of a lentic food web

Ecosystem classification and mapping of the Laurentian Great Lakes

Exploration of spatial variability in nearshore water quality using the first Great Lakes National Coastal Condition Assessment survey

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About