1995
DOI: 10.1093/plankt/17.7.1573
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Rates of ingestion and their variability between individual calanoid copepods: direct observations

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
6
0

Year Published

2000
2000
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This value is higher than that reported for the equatorial Pacific (47%) (Zhang et al 1995), but agrees with the variations found in the grazing pressure (between 35 and 68%) (Sautour et al 1996) with high variability (5-100%) (Perissinotto 1992). On the other hand, some studies (Paffenhöfer et al 1995) have shown feeding rates similar to our calculated grazing pressure (35%-65%, V.C.= 57%). Feeding rate can be considered an estimate of grazing pressure because both are influenced by size, concentration, food quality (De Mott 1988, Kleppel 1993 and clearance rate, which varies with feeding characteristics of the herbivorous species (Paffenhöfer 1988).…”
Section: Phyto-zooplankton Couplingsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…This value is higher than that reported for the equatorial Pacific (47%) (Zhang et al 1995), but agrees with the variations found in the grazing pressure (between 35 and 68%) (Sautour et al 1996) with high variability (5-100%) (Perissinotto 1992). On the other hand, some studies (Paffenhöfer et al 1995) have shown feeding rates similar to our calculated grazing pressure (35%-65%, V.C.= 57%). Feeding rate can be considered an estimate of grazing pressure because both are influenced by size, concentration, food quality (De Mott 1988, Kleppel 1993 and clearance rate, which varies with feeding characteristics of the herbivorous species (Paffenhöfer 1988).…”
Section: Phyto-zooplankton Couplingsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…In the present experiments, the maximum number of cells consumed per second varied from 0.5 for Oithona simp l e~ to 1.5 for Parvocalanus crassirostns and 0. nana, assuming continuous grazing. The existence of feeding rhythms (Fuller 1937, Petipa 1958, Dagg & Grill 1980, Haney 1988, Saito & Taguchi 1996, discontinuities in the grazing (Cowles & Strickler 1983, Price & Paffenhijfer 1986, Jonsson & Tiselius 1990, Saiz 1994) and active rejection of cells (Paffenhofer et al 1995) implies that the number of cells handled per animal per second of active feeding was even higher. In addition, ingestion rates may appear to slow down, when quantified as cells copepod-' d-l, because copepods may take longer to handle the larger cells that became more prevalent as the concentration of nanoplankton increased.…”
Section: Patterns Of Food Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…evidence of the ingestion of protozoans comes, mostly, from predation experiments done in situ or in the laboratory (Paffenhöfer et al, 1995), through the use of biomarkers (kivi & setala, 1995; li et al, 1996), filming (Verity & Paffenhöfer, 1996), or through identification of hard parts such as loricae and skeletal material in gut contents or in fecal pellets (conover, 1982). a previous investigation (eskinazi-sant'anna, 2000) showed that the protozoan S. zanclea forms Braz.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%