Top-down control in pelagic systems: a role for invertebrate predation

Blumenshine, Steve; Hambright, K. David

doi:10.1023/a:1024422121048

Cited by 50 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, it is not always easy to distinguish clear patterns and zooplankton communities are generally composed of medium-sized species (Hart and Bychek, 2011). Furthermore, visual predation is not always determinant in controlling zooplankton, since tactile predation can play the main role (Blumenshine and Hambright, 2003). In some temperate lakes and ponds, the main controlling agent of zooplankton may be primary productivity (Finlay et al, 2007) or temperature and pH (Steiner, 2004), rather than predation.…”

Section: N O N -C O M M E R C I a L U S E O N L Ymentioning

confidence: 99%

A long-term study on crustacean plankton of a shallow tropical lake: the role of invertebrate predation

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTIONLong-term studies are essential for understanding ecological processes such as the influence of stressors and are basic for modeling, but are few in number because of their inherent difficulties, including costs (Jackson and Füreder, 2006;Maberly and Elliott, 2012). In particular, long-term studies of zooplankton can reveal the influence of past factors, including management decisions (Hambright, 2008). Some causes of changes in the zooplankton that are perceptible over a longer period include alterations of abiotic factors or predator invasion (Yan et al., 2008).The factors that affect the diversity and size of zooplankton species are intriguing issues, but still subject to controversy. From the classic paper by Brooks and Dodson (1965) to recent studies, several factors have been contemplated, and temperature has emerged as the preponderant factor for explaining latitudinal differences in zooplankton body size (Gillooly and Dodson, 2000). Gillooly and Dodson compared more than 1100 lakes located between 81°N and 77°S latitude, and found that the size variation of cladoceran species was related to latitude, with smaller sizes in the tropics and the Arctic and a greater difference between the tropics and the temperate zone. According to these authors, the highest mean sizes were observed between 6°C and 8°C, declining at higher or lower temperatures. Havens et al. (2015), comparing 122 lakes located from 6° to 74°N and from 19° to 21°S, showed a relationship between size (as weight) of cladocerans and cyclopoid copepods and temperature. In contrast, Iglesias et al. (2011) suggested that predation by fish is the major factor explaining the smaller size of zooplankton in warm lakes. Hart and Bychek (2011), in their extensive review of the many factors that could potentially influence zooplankton size, addressed extrinsic factors such as temperature, food and predation, amongst others, besides intrinsic ones. The authors concluded, however, that although a general pattern may occur, different results can arise from distinct ecosystems.J. Limnol., 2015; 74(3): 606-617 ORIGINAL ARTICLE DOI: 10.4081/jlimnol.2015DOI: 10.4081/jlimnol. .1132 A long-term study on crustacean plankton of a shallow tropical lake: the role of invertebrate predation

show abstract

Section: N O N -C O M M E R C I a L U S E O N L Ymentioning

confidence: 99%

A long-term study on crustacean plankton of a shallow tropical lake: the role of invertebrate predation

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because of the low biomass of Leptodora in surface waters during the day (typically , 1 m 23 ), the importance of predation by Leptodora on zooplankton communities is often thought to be trivial relative to that of vertebrate planktivores (Lunte and Luecke 1990). Such conclusions are misleading, however, because mass-and metabolism-specific predation rates are often much higher for invertebrates than vertebrates (Yodzis and Innis 1992;Shurin and Seabloom 2005), meaning that small underestimates of the abundance and size structure of invertebrate predators could lead to considerable underestimates of their ecological importance (Blumenshine and Hambright 2003). Indeed, nighttime sampling of other invertebrate predators, such as Chaoborus, has revealed strong effects of invertebrate predation on zooplankton biomass (Ramcharan et al 2001).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Food web consequences of size‐based predation and vertical migration of an invertebrate predator (Leptodora kindtii)

Vogt

Matthews

Cobb

et al. 2013

Limnology & Oceanography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In an intensive study of the vertical and horizontal distribution of zooplankton in a eutrophic lake (Katepwa Lake), we found that only adult Leptodora kindtii (. 5 mm in body size) exhibited diel vertical migration (DVM), whereas juvenile Leptodora (, 5 mm) and other zooplankton species did not. Even though a longitudinal survey of five lakes (1994)(1995)(1996)(1997)(1998)(1999)(2000)(2001)(2002)(2003)(2004) indicated that variation in Leptodora density was correlated with several indicators of habitat use (e.g., water temperature) and resource availability (e.g., zooplankton abundance), feeding experiments performed in both lit and unlit conditions demonstrated that a vertebrate predator (perch) strongly reduced Leptodora abundances under all conditions and always preferentially selected large-bodied individuals. Collectively, this evidence suggests that the migratory behavior of large Leptodora is consistent with an antipredator defense strategy. To estimate the ecological significance of Leptodora DVM behavior, we modeled how predation rates on different zooplankton taxa differed between day and night in Katepwa Lake. We found that Leptodora had as much as five-fold higher prey-specific predation rates at night, particularly for intermediatesized prey. We conclude that ignoring the habitat use, size-structure, and vertical migration behavior of Leptodora could considerably underestimate the significance of invertebrate predation in lake food webs, particularly in eutrophic lakes where Leptodora can coexist at high densities with planktivorous fish.

show abstract

“…A similar situation was found in Lake Kinneret where the reduction in Kinneret bleak (Acanthobrama terraesanctae) increased the abundances of cyclopoid copepods. Cyclopoid predation on herbivorous zooplankton subsequently increased the phytoplankton biomass (Blumenshine and Hambright, 2003).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The combination of vertebrate and invertebrate predation forms zooplankton assemblages in natural lakes (Blumenshine and Hambright, 2003) as well as in reservoirs (Hansson et al, 1998). There are great differences between the effect of fish and that of invertebrate predators (IP) on zooplankton species composition, biomass and size structure (e.g., Wojtal et al, 2004or Manca et al, 2008.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the role of fish in aquatic food webs is widely accepted, the effect of planktonic IP on lower trophic levels might be even higher than that of fish (e.g., Blumenshine and Hambright, 2003). Benndorf et al (2000) reported high abundance of IP when planktivorous fish were reduced in numbers by very strong pressure from piscivorous fish.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Different effects of planktonic invertebrate predators and fish on the plankton community in experimental mesocosms

Šorf

Brandl

Znachor

et al. 2014

Ann. Limnol. - Int. J. Lim.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-The impact of fish and cyclopoid copepod predation on zooplankton communities was evaluated using large-volume mesocosms (depth 9.5 m; volume 13 m 3 ) in the Ř ı´mov reservoir (Czech Republic). Two yearling roach and perch individuals introduced into mesocosms represented the fish treatment, which was compared to cyclopoid copepods (initial abundance of 2 ind.L x1 ) and a control with no initial addition of predators. Our results clearly support the hypothesis that planktivorous fish feeding leads to the suppression of large-bodied cladocerans. In the presence of fish, the cladoceran community changed from a dominance of large-bodied Daphnia spp. at the beginning to dominance by the smaller Bosmina longirostris at the end of the experiment. Chlorophyll-a concentration and rotifer abundances increased in the absence of daphnids. In the absence of fish, the presence of large-bodied cladocerans resulted in decreasing chlorophyll-a concentration. Although no significant differences were observed between cyclopoid abundances in treatments stocked with cyclopoids and the control, the proportion of large cladocerans clearly showed the effect of the manipulation. The similar trends in both of these treatments did not confirm the importance of cyclopoid predation in our experiment. The overall strong effect of fish over cyclopoid predation suggests the main role of fish predation in the forming of zooplankton communities and in turn impacting phytoplankton biomass in mesocosms.

show abstract

Top-down control in pelagic systems: a role for invertebrate predation

Cited by 50 publications

References 56 publications

A long-term study on crustacean plankton of a shallow tropical lake: the role of invertebrate predation

A long-term study on crustacean plankton of a shallow tropical lake: the role of invertebrate predation

Food web consequences of size‐based predation and vertical migration of an invertebrate predator (Leptodora kindtii)

Different effects of planktonic invertebrate predators and fish on the plankton community in experimental mesocosms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About