Potential Predator-prey Relationships between Bythotrephes longimanus and Cercopagis pengoi in Southwestern Lake Michigan

Witt, Allison; Cáceres, Carla E.

doi:10.1016/s0380-1330(04)70367-6

Cited by 20 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This species is believed to cause declines in smaller zooplankton (nauplii, bosminids; Benoît et al, 2002, Warner et al, 2006, but the decline of this species was not accompanied by increases in these groups in our data set. Bythotrephes may be an important predator on Cercopagis (Panov et al, 2007) and has been shown to consume Cercopagis in the experiments (Witt and C aceres, 2004), but it is not yet known if this interaction is an important aspect of the population dynamics of Cercopagis in the Great Lakes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lake Ontario zooplankton in 2003 and 2008: Community changes and vertical redistribution

Rudstam

Holeck

Bowen

et al. 2015

Aquatic Ecosystem Health &Amp; Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lake-wide zooplankton surveys are critical for documenting and understanding food web responses to ecosystem change. Surveys in 2003 and 2008 during the binational intensive field year in Lake Ontario found that offshore epilimnetic crustacean zooplankton declined by a factor of 12 (density) and factor of 5 (biomass) in the summer with smaller declines in the fall. These declines coincided with an increase in abundance of Bythotrephes and are likely the result of direct predation by, or behavioral responses to this invasive invertebrate predator. Whole water column zooplankton density also declined from 2003 to 2008 in the summer and fall (factor of 4), but biomass only declined in the fall (factor of 2). The decline in biomass was less than the decline in density because the average size of individual zooplankton increased. This was due to changes in the zooplankton community composition from a cyclopoid/ bosminid dominated community in 2003 to a calanoid dominated community in 2008. The increase in calanoid copepods was primarily due to the larger species Limnocalanus macrurus and Leptodiaptomus sicilis. These cold water species were found in and below the thermocline associated with a deep chlorophyll layer. In 2008, most of the zooplankton biomass resided in or below the thermocline during the day. Increased importance of copepods in deeper, colder water may favor Cisco and Rainbow Smelt over Alewife because these species are better adapted to cold temperatures than Alewife.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lake Ontario zooplankton in 2003 and 2008: Community changes and vertical redistribution

Rudstam

Holeck

Bowen

et al. 2015

Aquatic Ecosystem Health &Amp; Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Both Leptodora and Cercopagis densities are highest when Bythotrephes densities are low or zero. Because Bythotrephes will eat Cercopagis (Witt and Caceres, 2004) and probably Leptodora as well (Branstrator, 1995), their declines may be the result of Bythotrephes predation (Branstrator and Lehman, 1991). Cercopagis and Leptodora usually appear earlier in the season than Bythotrephes allowing them a period of respite from putative predation from Bythotrephes.…”

Section: Temporal and Spatial Differences In Occurrencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both Leptodora and Cercopagis numbers declined when Bythotrephes was present, possibly due to direct predation (Witt and Caceres, 2004;Branstrator, 2005) as well as competition for food with the larger predator (Branstrator, 2005;Pichlová-Ptáčníková and Vanderploeg, 2009) that can efficiently consume a broader size range of prey than the other two species (Vanderploeg et al, 1993;Schultz and Yurista, 1999;Branstrator, 2005;Pichlová-Ptáčníková and Vanderploeg, 2009). When Lake Michigan was first invaded in the mid 1980s by Bythotrephes, Leptodora declined in number (Lehman, 1991;Branstrator, 1995).…”

Section: Temporal and Spatial Differences In Occurrencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…These three predatory cladocerans are potential competitors, and Bythotrephes, the largest in mean body weight, can consume Leptodora and Cercopagis (Branstrator, 1995;Witt and Caceres, 2004). Although Bythotrephes can consume larger prey items than both Leptodora and Cercopagis, all three have overlapping size ranges for preferred prey items such as cladocerans Daphnia spp., Bosmina, Eubosmina, and many rotifers (Branstrator and Lehman, 1991;Vanderploeg et al, 1993;Rivier, 1998;Schultz and Yurista, 1999;Laxson et al, 2003;Pichlová-Ptáčníková and Vanderploeg, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Temporal and spatial separation allow coexistence of predatory cladocerans: Leptodora kindtii, Bythotrephes longimanus and Cercopagis pengoi, in southeastern Lake Michigan

Cavaletto

Vanderploeg

Pichlová-Ptáčníková

et al. 2010

Journal of Great Lakes Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…To understand the impact of invasive species on ecosystems, we need to understand their interactions with native and other invasive species (Witt & Caceres, 2004). We sampled a nearshore area in Lake Michigan during August 2004 to collect information on the interactions of the alewife with two predatory cladocerans, Bythotrephes and Cercopagis .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alewife planktivory controls the abundance of two invasive predatory cladocerans in Lake Michigan

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. We sampled along a nearshore transect (10-m bathymetric contour) in Lake Michigan to determine diet, 24-h feeding periodicity, daily ration and food requirements of an invasive fish, the alewife, Alosa pseudoharengus, relative to zooplankton abundance and production. Our objective was to determine whether the alewife controls the abundance of two invasive, predatory cladocerans, Bythotrephes longimanus and Cercopagis pengoi. 2. Bosminidae was the most abundant prey taxon and Chydoridae, Leptodora, Chironomidae and Bythotrephes were the least abundant. Neither Bythotrephes nor Cercopagis were important prey for small alewives (£100 mm). Bythotrephes was eaten by over 50% of large alewives (>100 mm) and accounted for 10-27% of the diet weight. Cercopagis was eaten by about 30% of the large alewives but only accounted 1% of the diet weight. 3. Food weight in stomachs was highest early in the night for small alewives and lowest at night for large alewives. Chironomidae and large Chydoridae were the preferred prey of small alewives. Bythotrephes and large Chydoridae were the preferred prey for large alewives. 4. Food requirements of alewife were much less than production for most prey taxa, although the consumption of Bythotrephes greatly exceeded production on both dates. Alewives consumed only 3% of Cercopagis production. High selectivity and food requirements of alewife for Bythotrephes, and low selectivity and food requirements for Cercopagis, probably explain the difference in abundance between these two invasive cladocerans at our nearshore site in Lake Michigan.

show abstract

Potential Predator-prey Relationships between Bythotrephes longimanus and Cercopagis pengoi in Southwestern Lake Michigan

Cited by 20 publications

References 33 publications

Lake Ontario zooplankton in 2003 and 2008: Community changes and vertical redistribution

Lake Ontario zooplankton in 2003 and 2008: Community changes and vertical redistribution

Temporal and spatial separation allow coexistence of predatory cladocerans: Leptodora kindtii, Bythotrephes longimanus and Cercopagis pengoi, in southeastern Lake Michigan

Alewife planktivory controls the abundance of two invasive predatory cladocerans in Lake Michigan

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About