The inhibitory effect of mixotrophic Ochromonas gloeopara on the survival and reproduction of Daphnia similoides sinensis

Tang, Hengxing; Zhu, Shuangshuang; Wang, Na; Zi, Xu; Huang, Jing; Gu, Lei; Sun, Yunfei; Zhang, Lu; Yang, Zhou; Huang, Yuan

doi:10.1007/s11356-020-09291-1

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…egg production, hatching success) and growth efficiency of zooplankton predators in conjunction with a single prey species in monoculture reared in conditions along the mixotrophic spectrum or varying proportions of phagotrophy and photoautotrophy ratios (Traboni et al, 2021). Given the potential for toxicity (Hiltunen et al, 2012;Tang et al, 2020) or inedibility (Vad et al, 2020) among mixoplankton, we also see a need for prey-preference assays (as in Castellani et al, 2008;Parrish et al, 2012), but focused on mixoplankton and their varying nutritional value as prey. Advances in flow cytometric sorting and imaging allow for discrimination between potential mixotrophic prey items in situ, which could allow for studies of prey selection in spectrometry) could be used to quantify carbon and nitrogen fluxes in mixoplankton.…”

Section: Isotopesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recommendations for advancing mixoplankton research through empirical-model integration

Millette,

Leles,

Johnson

et al. 2024

Front. Mar. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Protist plankton can be divided into three main groups: phytoplankton, zooplankton, and mixoplankton. In situ methods for studying phytoplankton and zooplankton are relatively straightforward since they generally target chlorophyll/photosynthesis or grazing activity, while the integration of both processes within a single cell makes mixoplankton inherently challenging to study. As a result, we understand less about mixoplankton physiology and their role in food webs, biogeochemical cycling, and ecosystems compared to phytoplankton and zooplankton. In this paper, we posit that by merging conventional techniques, such as microscopy and physiological data, with innovative methods like in situ single-cell sorting and omics datasets, in conjunction with a diverse array of modeling approaches ranging from single-cell modeling to comprehensive Earth system models, we can propel mixoplankton research into the forefront of aquatic ecology. We present eight crucial research questions pertaining to mixoplankton and mixotrophy, and briefly outline a combination of existing methods and models that can be used to address each question. Our intent is to encourage more interdisciplinary research on mixoplankton, thereby expanding the scope of data acquisition and knowledge accumulation for this understudied yet critical component of aquatic ecosystems.

show abstract

Section: Isotopesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recommendations for advancing mixoplankton research through empirical-model integration

Millette,

Leles,

Johnson

et al. 2024

Front. Mar. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

In Vitro Antiproliferative Activity and Phytochemicals Screening of Extracts of the Freshwater Microalgae, Chlorochromonas danica

Kilari

Balakrishnan

2022

Appl Biochem Biotechnol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From adverse to beneficial – contrasting dietary effects of freshwater mixotrophs on zooplankton

Vad

Schneider

Fischer

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The importance of mixotrophic algae as key bacterivores in microbial food webs is increasingly acknowledged, but their effects on consumers is less understood, with previous studies having revealed contrasting results. In freshwater, this may be related to fundamental differences in the nutritional quality of two major mixotrophic groups. While cryptophytes are generally considered as high-quality food for zooplankton, chrysophytes (golden algae) are often referred to be toxic.Using four chrysophyte species, we performed a comparative study as an attempt to generalize their dietary quality by (1) revealing their stoichiometric and biochemical profiles, and (2) quantifying their dietary effects in feeding bioassays with Daphnia longispina. We compared the observed effects to a known high-quality reference food (Cryptomonas sp.) and a starvation control as a reference for potential toxicity.We found dramatic differences in survival and growth of D. longispina depending on the chrysophyte species provided as food. Even within the same genus, dietary quality ranged from deleterious to high. As this was not reflected in differences in cellular stoichiometry and fatty acid profiles, we suggest that toxicity may be the underlying mechanism.Our results suggest that the dietary effects of chrysophytes cannot be generalised. Besides, the fact that a species previously reported to be deleterious turned out to be a beneficial food source suggests that toxic effects may dynamically vary depending on environmental cues, mode of nutrition or the investigated strain.To fully understand the nutritional value of mixotrophic algae in aquatic food webs, representatives of multiple taxa need to be tested under a range of environmental conditions. This is also needed for a better predictive capability of climate change effects, as it may not only promote the dominance of mixotrophic algae, but also induce functional changes related to their nutritional quality.

show abstract

The inhibitory effect of mixotrophic Ochromonas gloeopara on the survival and reproduction of Daphnia similoides sinensis

Cited by 4 publications

References 50 publications

Recommendations for advancing mixoplankton research through empirical-model integration

Recommendations for advancing mixoplankton research through empirical-model integration

In Vitro Antiproliferative Activity and Phytochemicals Screening of Extracts of the Freshwater Microalgae, Chlorochromonas danica

From adverse to beneficial – contrasting dietary effects of freshwater mixotrophs on zooplankton

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About