2000
DOI: 10.1023/a:1007691425268
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Influence of Structural Complexity on Fish–zooplankton Interactions: A Study Using Artificial Submerged Macrophytes

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
33
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 148 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
1
33
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Increasing vegetation density of non-woody aquatic plants reduces swimming speed and visibility, leading to reduced prey capture rates in fishes (Manatunge et al 2000). Similarly, increasing prop-root density increases densities of several common fish species (Cocheret de la Moriniere et al 2004).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Increasing vegetation density of non-woody aquatic plants reduces swimming speed and visibility, leading to reduced prey capture rates in fishes (Manatunge et al 2000). Similarly, increasing prop-root density increases densities of several common fish species (Cocheret de la Moriniere et al 2004).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We tentatively conclude that this fish is not deleteriously affected by living in macrophytes in terms of its foraging; however, in contrast, most research on other fishes has found that the structure of dense macrophytes reduces foraging success. For example, Diehl (1988) found the capture rates of bream (Abramis brama) and roach (Rutilus rutilus) were considerably reduced in artificial vegetation, and the results of Manatunge et al (2000) were similar for Pseudorasbora parva.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most studies on fish foraging in complex habitats, such as those of Diehl (1988) and Manatunge et al (2000), used only one prey type and thus eliminated the potential for the fish to switch to prey that is more easily located or captured in the complex habitat. Whether the apparent reduction in the feeding efficiency of these species in complex habitats can be compensated for by switching to other prey taxa in the wild is unknown.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some experimental studies, however, suggest that the highest fish foraging efficiency occurs at intermediate macrophyte densities, which could represent the best compromise between food availability and amount of consumed food. With increasing habitat complexity, foraging efficiency declines monotonically (Manatunge et al, 2000), but this relationship concerns only large-sized individuals. The present data reveal that generally small fishes appear to be less affected by the habitat variables, exhibiting more uniform spatial distribution (Grenouillet & Pont, 2001).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%