Immunochemical Detection of Predation on Ciliate Protists by Larvae of the Northern Anchovy (Engraulis mordax)

Ohman, Mark D.; Theilacker, Gail H.; Kaupp, Sandor E.

doi:10.2307/1542370

Cited by 52 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is evidence from larval fishes collected in the ocean (Ohman et al, 1991;Fukami et al, 1999;Figueiredo et al, 2005;Pepin and Dower, 2007) and from laboratory experiments (Hunt von Herbing and Gallager, 2000) that oligotrich or choreotrich ciliates might be important food sources for larval fishes. Aloricate ciliates are preferred food of fish larvae in the laboratory (Hunt von Herbing and Gallager, 2000).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feeding on protists and particulates by the leptocephali of the worm eels Myrophis spp. (Teleostei: Anguilliformes: Ophichthidae), and the potential energy contribution of large aloricate protozoa

Govoni¹

2010

Sci. Mar.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY:The food sources of the leptocephali of the teleostean superorder Elopomorpha have been controversial, yet observations on the leptocephali of the worm eels, Myrophis spp. (family Ophichthidae) collected in the northern Gulf of Mexico indicate active, not passive, feeding. Leptocephali had protists in their alimentary canals. Estimates of the physiological energetics of worm eels indicate that large aloricate protozoa including ciliates could provide substantial energy to these leptocephali toward the end of the premetamorphic and metamorphic stages, given the low energy requirements of metamorphosing leptocephali. Global ocean warming will likely force a shift in oceanic food webs; a shift away from large protozoa toward smaller protists is possible. Such a disruption of the oceanic food webs could further compromise the survival of leptocephali.Keywords: Myrophis, leptocephali, feeding, protozoa, ciliates. RESUMEN: Alimentación de los leptocéfalos de las anguilas gusano Myrophis spp. (Teleostei: Perciformes: Ophichthidae) basada en protistas y partículas, y la potencial contribución energética de los grandes protozoos aloricados. -Las fuentes de alimento de los leptocéfalos del superorden de los teleósteos Elopomorpha ha sido controvertida. Sin embargo, las observaciones realizadas en leptocéfalos de las anguilas gusano, Myrophis spp. (Familia Ophichthidae) recolectados en el norte del Golfo de México indican una alimentación activa, no pasiva. Los leptocéfalos tenían protistas en sus tubos digestivos. Las estimaciones de la fisiología energética de las anguilas gusano indican que, dados los bajos requerimientos energéticos de los leptocéfalos durante la metamorfosis, los grandes protozoos ciliados aloricados, incluyendo ciliados, podrían proporcionar sustancial energía a estos leptocéfalos hacia el final de las etapas premetamórficas y metamórficas. El calentamiento global de los océanos es probable que fuerce un cambio en las redes alimenticias oceá-nicas; y es posible un desplazamiento de los grandes protozoos hacia pequeños protistas. Estas perturbaciones de las redes alimenticias oceánicas podrían poner en peligro la supervivencia de los leptocéfalos.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feeding on protists and particulates by the leptocephali of the worm eels Myrophis spp. (Teleostei: Anguilliformes: Ophichthidae), and the potential energy contribution of large aloricate protozoa

Govoni¹

2010

Sci. Mar.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, Ohman et al (1991), using immunochemical detection of predation on ciliates, indicated that after 30 min antibodies of assimilated ciliate could be identified, and that after 2 h the antibodies decreased. In our study the average gut passage time was estimated to be 4 h, so that the ingested food objects pass each gut quarter in an hour.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1000 ciliates larva 21 h 21 . Also, the other few studies of larval fish feeding only on ciliates (Ohman et al 1991) indicated that, at high prey densities, fish larvae are able to ingest large numbers of ciliates (i.e., up to 1500 ciliates larva 21 h 21 ). Hunt von Herbing and Gallager (2000) demonstrated the ability of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) larvae to catch protozoa (prostomatid Balanion), and that they required protozoan food for survival in their early life stages.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ciliates as the crucial food source of larval fish in a shallow eutrophic lake

Zingel

Paaver

Karus

et al. 2012

Limnology & Oceanography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We assessed feeding of planktivorous fish larvae on ciliate protozooplankton in shallow eutrophic Lake Võ rtsjä rv, Estonia to determine whether ciliates are an important part of larval fish diet. We collected larvae of the most common fish species and examined their gut contents by gut segmentation and epifluorescence microscopy. Ciliates were present in the gut of all fish larvae. Gut segmentation analysis showed clear differences in food composition between gut quarters. The hard-bodied food items were quite evenly distributed in the gut, but the soft-bodied ciliates and rotifers were present only in the first gut quarters. Neglecting differences in prey digestion rate leads to underestimation of diet amount and composition and, especially, to underestimation of the role of protists in food. In Võ rtsjä rv, ciliates account for , 60% of the total carbon biomass consumed by fish larvae. The food requirement of fish larvae during first feeding stages (May-Jun) would not be met without consumption of ciliates. Hjort (1914) was first to put forth the so-called 'critical period' hypothesis: the availability of suitable prey at the time when larval fish switch from endogenous to exogenous feeding determine their survival and, thus, the fish yearclass strength. This hypothesis and the further refined theories that derive from it, are all based primarily on the consumption of crustacean prey. Up to date, there are very few studies that have considered the direct protist consumption by fish larvae. Most planktonic protozoa are fragile and therefore get easily degraded in the fish gut. Thus, protist ingestion may have been neglected in the past because of difficulties describing the gut contents of fish larvae, due to a high degree of degradation of the food and the use of normal techniques of microscopy for species identification (Fukami et al. 1999).It has been suggested that most of the coastal waters do not contain enough (metazoan) prey to support larval growth and survival (MacKenzie et al. 1990). Also, some studies indicate that the guts of field-caught larvae often appear empty (van der Meeren and Naess 1993). One explanation for these paradoxes (i.e., apparent low prey levels and empty guts) is that food is sufficiently abundant, but easily digested and therefore not detected by researchers (Figueiredo et al. 2005;Montagnes et al. 2010). One such possible food source that larval fish can ingest and quickly digest is protozoa. If this is the case, the focus on metazoan prey has resulted in fisheries scientists overlooking a key trophic linkage (Montagnes et al. 2010).There have been only sparse field studies concerning protozoa as food of the fish larvae, and most of them have focused only on the hard-bodied protists (Watson and Davis 1989). Only few have tried to estimate the importance of soft-bodied protozoans in the larval diet (Fukami et al. 1999;Nagano et al. 2000;Figueiredo et al. 2005). Modern fluorescence microscopy approaches have been rarely used in this specific research field. Lessard et al...

show abstract

“…Dahle & Laake 1982, Campbell et al 1983, Ward & Carlucci 1985 and multi-cellular (e.g. Feller et al 1979, Feller & Gallagher 1982, Shapiro et al 1989, Ohman et al 1991, Campbell et al 1994) organisms, including planktonic larvae of benthic invertebrates (e.g. Feller 1986, Miller et al 1991, Demers et al 1993, Hanna et al 1994).…”

Section: Immunologicalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Techniques for the identification of bivalve larvae

Garland¹,

Zimmer

2002

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quantification of planktonic larval distributions has been limited by processing time, given the large numbers of samples generated by extensive field surveys. Until recently, the only technique available for reliable species identification of bivalve larvae was direct microscopic observation, but even this method is restricted to larval stages and species that can be distinguished morphologically. Molecular methods (e.g. antibody and oligonucleotide markers) show considerable promise for identifying bivalve larvae to species, regardless of developmental stage, alleviating ambiguity or subjectivity of some traditional, morphology-based taxonomy. Moreover, attaching species-specific molecular probes to fluorescent reporter tags, for example, has great potential for automated, expedited sample-processing. Optical identification techniques are promising, but probably not at the species level. Current methods of distinguishing bivalve larvae -morphological, molecular (i.e. immunological and DNA-based), or optical -are reviewed here to facilitate the selection of appropriate techniques for a given research problem and to stimulate the development of creative alternative approaches for rapid and accurate species identification.

show abstract

Immunochemical Detection of Predation on Ciliate Protists by Larvae of the Northern Anchovy (Engraulis mordax)

Cited by 52 publications

References 20 publications

Feeding on protists and particulates by the leptocephali of the worm eels <i>Myrophis</i> spp. (Teleostei: Anguilliformes: Ophichthidae), and the potential energy contribution of large aloricate protozoa

Feeding on protists and particulates by the leptocephali of the worm eels <i>Myrophis</i> spp. (Teleostei: Anguilliformes: Ophichthidae), and the potential energy contribution of large aloricate protozoa

Ciliates as the crucial food source of larval fish in a shallow eutrophic lake

Techniques for the identification of bivalve larvae

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About