2017
DOI: 10.1007/s10661-017-5804-y
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Copepod grazing and their impact on phytoplankton standing stock and production in a tropical coastal water during the different seasons

Abstract: The grazing rate of copepods on the total and size-fractionated phytoplankton biomass in a coastal environment (off Kochi, southwest coast of India) were measured during pre-monsoon (PRM), peak southwest monsoon (PKSWM), late southwest monsoon (LSWM) and post-southwest monsoon (PSWM). The phytoplankton standing stock (chlorophyll a-Chl. a) and growth rate (GR) were less during the PRM (Chl. a 0.58 mg m; GR 0.23 ± 0.02) and PSWM (Chl. a 0.89 mg m; GR 0.30 ± 0.05) compared to PKSWM (Chl. a 6.67 mg m; GR 0.43 ± 0… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The grazing of copepods can potentially decrease the abundance of specific phytoplankton species, which will create opportunities for other species to thrive and ultimately result in increased phytoplankton diversity. This ecological phenomenon is commonly referred to as “grazing control” and has been observed in various marine ecosystems [ 61 , 62 ]. By contrast, phytoplankton alpha diversities in the S and FS treatments were significantly lower than in the C and F treatments, and their assemblage compositions were similar but significantly different from those of the C and F treatments ( Figure 3 a–c).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The grazing of copepods can potentially decrease the abundance of specific phytoplankton species, which will create opportunities for other species to thrive and ultimately result in increased phytoplankton diversity. This ecological phenomenon is commonly referred to as “grazing control” and has been observed in various marine ecosystems [ 61 , 62 ]. By contrast, phytoplankton alpha diversities in the S and FS treatments were significantly lower than in the C and F treatments, and their assemblage compositions were similar but significantly different from those of the C and F treatments ( Figure 3 a–c).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Given the size difference between most diatoms and dinoflagellates (diatoms dominate the 12 μm samples, dinoflagellates dominate the 0.4 μm samples), these groups face different pressures when it comes to grazing. Diatoms, for example, are the primary food source for copepods (Jagadeesan et al, 2017; Liu et al, 2016), while dinoflagellates face grazing pressure from smaller plankton like ciliates (Pierce & Turner, 1992).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The increased relative abundance in diatoms could also help explain why copepod relative abundance also appears connected to rubble percent and mean NPP in the CAP ordinations (Figure 4). Both diatoms and ciliates are important components of copepod diets (Calbet & Saiz, 2005; Jagadeesan et al, 2017), and the increased relative abundance of both of these groups, combined with a decrease in abundance of higher trophic level predators at sites with high rubble percent, could allow for copepods to be more successful there.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…4a). However, this predation or intake relationship for cyclopoids ingesting nanophytoplankton has been proved by a recent research work (50), and it means that the causality from nanophytoplankton to cyclopoids is true by the CVP algorithm for the plankton food chain (Fig. 4b).…”
Section: Detecting Causal Network In Multiple Contextsmentioning
confidence: 92%