Feeding by heterotrophic dinoflagellates on the common marine heterotrophic nanoflagellate Cafeteria sp.

Jeong, Hoon Eui; Song, Jeong Eun; Kang, Nam Seon; Kim, Shin; Yoo, Yeong Du; Park, Jae Yeon

doi:10.3354/meps333151

Cited by 36 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…ESD of the CC particle volume was also in agreement with published ESD values (Jeong et al 2007). The comparison of volume estimates derived with the two meth- Fig.…”

Section: Fig 2 Count Loss (%) Due To Coincidence Events When Using supporting

confidence: 79%

Reliability of rapid, semi‐automated assessment of plankton abundance, biomass, and growth rate estimates: Coulter Counter versus light microscope measurements

Kim

Menden‐Deuer

2013

Limnology & Ocean Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Here we determined (1) how accurately the semi‐automated Coulter Counter (CC) measured the abundance, volume, and growth rates of mono‐specific plankton cultures compared to light microscopy and (2) whether CC‐derived particle size‐abundance spectra of whole water samples provided a near‐real time assessment of plankton community composition. A significant, positive relationship was found between CC particle and microscope cell abundance and volume estimates for 16 phylogenetically diverse plankton species. However, abundance estimates of the 2 methods differed significantly from a 1:1 relationship, with CC counts on average 15% greater than microscopy counts. Growth rate estimates showed excellent agreement for both methods for all species and were consistent over time. No significant differences in abundance, growth rate, or size estimates were observed due to light levels (Scrippsiella trochoidea) or strain variation (Heterosigma akashiwo). CC‐based, ship‐board characterization of whole plankton communities, from Georges Bank, captured changes in size‐abundance spectra and thus provided a coarse picture of in‐situ community composition. In the laboratory, the CC appears particularly well‐suited to measuring relative changes in cell abundance, such as for growth and grazing rate measurements of mono‐specific laboratory cultures, or when predator and prey species are well separated by size differences. Although microscopy remains essential for plankton analyses, these results suggest that the CC can increase sample size, improving accuracy, and precision of studies requiring frequent sampling or high degrees of replication. Deployment of these automated techniques in the field may aid in quantifying spatial and temporal variability in plankton community structure by forthcoming ocean‐observing systems.

show abstract

“…ESD of the CC particle volume was also in agreement with published ESD values (Jeong et al 2007). The comparison of volume estimates derived with the two meth- Fig.…”

Section: Fig 2 Count Loss (%) Due To Coincidence Events When Using supporting

confidence: 79%

Reliability of rapid, semi‐automated assessment of plankton abundance, biomass, and growth rate estimates: Coulter Counter versus light microscope measurements

Kim

Menden‐Deuer

2013

Limnology & Ocean Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Heterotrophic dinoflagellates feed on bacteria (Lessard & Swift 1985, Strom 1991, algae (Jacobson 1987, Johnson et al 2003, Menden-Deuer et al 2005, heterotrophic nanoflagellates (Jeong et al 2007b), ciliates , eggs and naupliar stages of copepods (Jeong 1994), larvae of bivalves (Burkholder & Glasgow 1997, Springer et al 2002, the blood of finfish (Burkholder & Glasgow 1997, Parrow et al 2005, Jeong et al 2006, and the epidermis, muscle, and gills of finfish (Burkholder & Glasgow 1997). However, prior to the present study, there had been no studies on the feeding by a heterotrophic dinoflagellate species on other heterotrophic dinoflagellate species.…”

Section: Growth and Ingestion Ratesmentioning

confidence: 84%

Feeding by protists and copepods on the heterotrophic dinoflagellates Pfiesteria piscicida, Stoeckeria algicida, and Luciella masanensis

Jeong¹,

Kim²,

Song³

et al. 2007

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-1 , respectively). S. jeokjo had significantly higher attack ratios (number of attempted captures relative to number of physical contacts between predator and prey) when fed on P. piscicida and S. algicida (18 to 25%) than on L. masanensis (5%). Similarly, successful capture (number of prey ingested relative to number of attempted captures) of P. piscicida and S. algicida (82 to 87%) was significantly higher than that of L. masanensis (2%). L. masanensis may have defensive behavior or chemical protection against predation. However, maximum ingestion rates of Acartia spp. fed on these dinoflagellate species were similar. In understanding the population dynamics and predatorprey interactions of these 3 closely related dinoflagellate species, it is important to distinguish between predation by protists and by copepods.

show abstract

“…Small (< 20 µm) gymnodinoid dinoflagellates feed on coccoid cyanobacteria (Strom 1991) and on small (2-5 µm) eukaryotic phytoplankton (Sherr et al 1991). Larger species of gymnodinoid dinoflagellates feed and grow on a wide variety of prey types, including individual taxa of phytoflagellates and centric diatoms ranging in size from 7 to 50 µm in equivalent spherical diameter (Hansen 1992), the red tide ochrophyte Chattonella antiqua (Nakamura et al 1992), the red-tide dinoflagellates Prorocentrum minimum and Gymnodinium mikimotoi (Nakamura et al 1995b), the harmful raphidophyte Heterosigma akashiwo (Jeong et al 2005), diverse phytoflagellates (Nakamura et al 1995a, Tang & Simó 2003 and heterotrophic nanoflagellates (Jeong et al 2007). This last report supports the observation of Lessard & Rivkin (1986) that athecate heterotrophic dinoflagellates consume either bacterioplankton or bacterivores during early spring in Antarctic waters.…”

Section: Heterotrophic Gymnodinoid Dinoflagellates Can Consume and Grmentioning

confidence: 99%

Heterotrophic dinoflagellates: a significant component of microzooplankton biomass and major grazers of diatoms in the sea

Sherr¹,

Sherr²

2007

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

363

267

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Feeding by heterotrophic dinoflagellates on the common marine heterotrophic nanoflagellate Cafeteria sp.

Cited by 36 publications

References 43 publications

Reliability of rapid, semi‐automated assessment of plankton abundance, biomass, and growth rate estimates: Coulter Counter versus light microscope measurements

Reliability of rapid, semi‐automated assessment of plankton abundance, biomass, and growth rate estimates: Coulter Counter versus light microscope measurements

Feeding by protists and copepods on the heterotrophic dinoflagellates Pfiesteria piscicida, Stoeckeria algicida, and Luciella masanensis

Heterotrophic dinoflagellates: a significant component of microzooplankton biomass and major grazers of diatoms in the sea

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About