Habitat Preferences in Net-Spinning Caddis Larvae with Special Reference to the Influence of Water Velocity

Edington, J. M.

doi:10.2307/3081

Cited by 149 publications

(80 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The overlap coefficients between Vth instar Dolophilodes and the five hydropsychid species range from extremely low (particle size) to intermediate (food type and temporal occurrence). Two generalizations emerge from the overlap coefficients presented here: (1) As has been noted previously (Edington 1968, Williams and Hynes 1973, Malas and Wallace 1977, the hydropsychid species differ significantly from the philopotamid Dolophilodes in the size, and somewhat in the type of food particles utilized; (2) Differences in food size and type do not appear to provide sufficient niche differentiation to explain the coexistence of the hydropsychid species if they are competing for food. Three lines of evidence lead us to reject the original hypothesis of resource partitioning by particle size.…”

Section: Resource Partitioningmentioning

confidence: 60%

“…These two calculations, based on essentially independent sets of assumptions, together support the conclusion that the total food supply is not a limiting factor for the Tallulah River net-spinners. Nor does it seem likely that net-spinning sites are limiting, as has been reported for hydropsychids in some larger streams (Edington 1965, Hildrew and Edington 1979, Cudney and Wallace 1980. The maximum hydropsychid abundances observed (five species combined) were 250 individuals per m 2 during the summer when early instars predominated, and ranged from 25-75 larvae per m 3 during the rest of the year.…”

Section: Limiting Factorsmentioning

confidence: 73%

“…A wide variety of factors have been used to explain the sequential longitudinal distribution of filter feeders along a stream (Edington 1968, Gordon and Wallace 1975, Badcock 1976, Wiggins and Mackay 1978, Mackay 1979, Alstad 1980) as well as their coexistence within a given segment of the stream continuum (Mildrew andEdington 1979, Wallace andMerritt 1980). Some of the factors emphasized have been stream size (order), substrate, current velocity, temperature and particle availability (see Hynes 1970, Gordon and Wallace 1975, Wallace and Merritt 1980, for reviews).…”

Section: Longitudinal Distributionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Model of Seston Capture by Net-Spinning Caddisflies

Georgian¹,

Wallace²

1981

Oikos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Six species of net-spinning caddisflies (Trichoptera) coexist in the headwater region of the Tallulah River, a rocky, high-gradient tributary of the Savannah River. These caddisflies feed on the suspended organic matter (seston) captured by their nets. We analyzed these species' nets, microhabitat preferences, and monthly abundances. These data, along with the particle size distributions and monthly abundances of seston, were incorporated into a model of seston capture by these net-spinning caddisflies.The resulting model permitted us to test the hypothesis that differences in capture net mesh sizes serve to partition, by size, the food available to coexisting net-spinning caddisflies. and thus reduce competition between them. The model predicted annual seston capture by the six species of 1300 g AFDW (ash free dry weight), over 1000 times their annual production. The seston captured per longitudinal meter of stream represents 0.005% of the total seston in transport. Resource overlap coefficients indicated that the instars of the five hydropsychid species do not partition the seston by particle size or food type in a manner that reflects competitive interactions. We hypothesize that these filter feeders are limited by the availability of high-quality food items (primarily drifting animals) rather than by the overall seston supply. Species with highly selective feeding habits must filter large volumes of water to permit them to specialize on rare items. High filtration rates require rapid current velocities, large nets, and coarse net meshes. Instars with coarse-meshed nets showed the largest proportionate declines in seston capture rates when the model was simulated using the lower current velocity and smaller seston panicles sizes typical for the larger Savannah River.

show abstract

Section: Resource Partitioningmentioning

confidence: 60%

Section: Limiting Factorsmentioning

confidence: 73%

Section: Longitudinal Distributionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Model of Seston Capture by Net-Spinning Caddisflies

Georgian¹,

Wallace²

1981

Oikos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hydraulic conditions may influence invertebrates directly, for example through the effects of lift and drag forces (Statzner 1988;Weissenberger et al 1991), and indirectly through the effects of water velocity on substrate particle size (Jowett et al 1991 ) and potential food supplies (e.g., periphyton : Biggs & Hickey 1994). Some groups of benthic invertebrates exhibit well-defined velocity preferences whereas others appear to be abundant over a wide range of conditions (Edington 1968;Gore 1978;Jowett et al 1991). Animals that are able to live successfully at high current velocities may do so by seeking refuge from drag in sublayers within the boundary layer (Vogel 1981;Statzner & Holm 1982), by modifying body orientation and posture (e.g., Weissenberger et al 1991), or by possessing specialised adaptations such as the suckers of Blephariceridae (Anderson & Wallace 1984), the large, sucker-like gills of some mayflies (Collier 1994), and the construction of heavier cases in some caddisflies (Webster & Webster 1943).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of hydraulic conditions and larval size on the microdistribution of Hydrobiosidae (Trichoptera) in two New Zealand rivers

Collier¹,

Croker²,

Hickey³

et al. 1995

New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hydraulic conditions utilised by common taxa of the caddisfly family Hydrobiosidae were characterised for the Mangles River, South Island, and the Tongariro River, North Island, New Zealand. Costachorema spp. (predominantly C. xanthopterum and C. callistum) and Hydrobiosis parumbripennis larvae were collected from a wide range of water depths (10-155 cm) and velocities (8-178 cm s -1 ) and from predominantly small gravel to large cobble substrates. Overall densities of Costachorema spp. were significantly (P < 0.01) and positively correlated with water velocity, Froude number, boundary layer Reynolds number, and inferred shear velocity at both sites. Similar relationships were evident for total densities of H. parumbripennis in the Mangles River, whereas a significant inverse correlation was detected between density of this species and water depth and Reynolds number in the Tongariro River. Strongest correlations with densities of Costachorema spp. or H. parumbripennis were detected using water depth, velocity, or Froude number. Almost all ( 90%) C. xanthopterum larvae with head widths > 0.60 mm and most (72%) C. callistum larvae with head widths > 0.91 mm were found in fast water (> 90 cm s -1 ). There was also a tendency for proportionately more large H. parumbripennis M95010 Received 23 February 1995; accepted 13 August 1995 larvae (head widths > 1.2 mm) to be found in faster water. Some possible mechanisms behind the observed microdistribution patterns in relation to hydraulic factors and larval size are discussed.

show abstract

“…Although the discharges of the four Coweeta streams were similar, the abundance of small waterfalls in the Coppice stream made available more suitable habitats than were present in the other streams. These waterfalls produced increased currents, and Eddington (1968) has shown that caddis larvae construct their nets in currents where they are most efficient. P. cardis was least important in the White pine stream which also had the lowest discharge.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Benthic Fauna in Four Small Southern Appalachian Streams

Woodall¹,

Wallace²

1972

American Midland Naturalist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Monthly quantitative samples of benthic organisms were collected from streams in four different watersheds from August 1968 through July 1969. Each of the watersheds supports one of the following types of vegetation: old-field succession, hardwood forest, white pine forest with a few hardwoods, coppice forest. The kinds of organisms in the four streams were generally similar but their relative importance varied significantly. A Duncan's multiple-range test showed significant differences in the numbers of most taxa among the watersheds. The old-field stream had the greatest abundance while the coppice stream had the greatest standing crop biomass. The white pine stream had lowest standing crops of both numbers and biomass. Most of the differences among watersheds were attributed to different inputs of allochthonous detritus.

show abstract

Habitat Preferences in Net-Spinning Caddis Larvae with Special Reference to the Influence of Water Velocity

Cited by 149 publications

References 28 publications

A Model of Seston Capture by Net-Spinning Caddisflies

A Model of Seston Capture by Net-Spinning Caddisflies

Effects of hydraulic conditions and larval size on the microdistribution of Hydrobiosidae (Trichoptera) in two New Zealand rivers

The Benthic Fauna in Four Small Southern Appalachian Streams

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About