2017
DOI: 10.1111/ele.12882
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Understanding the stoichiometric limitation of herbivore growth: the importance of feeding and assimilation flexibilities

Abstract: Ecological stoichiometry suggests that herbivore growth is limited by phosphorus when this element in the diet is < 8.6 μg P mg C (C : P atomic ratio > 300). However, in nature, it is not necessarily related to the relative phosphorus content in diets. This may be the result of complex feeding and assimilation responses to diets. We examined these possibilities using herbivorous plankton fed mono-specific and mixed algae varying in phosphorus content of 1.6 to 8.1 μg P mg C . The herbivores showed a 10-fold gr… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
38
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 56 publications
0
38
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To minimize this isotopic routing effect on the TP estimation of animals, some mixing model packages (e.g., SIAR) consider the stoichiometric imbalance among diets by weighting the estimate with the elemental concentration of each resource (e.g., Par-nell et al 2010). However, the elemental concentration is not necessarily proportional to consumers' growth because their AE may be adjusted depending on food quality (Urabe et al 2018). Furthermore, most researchers separately use bulk Prey 2 (TP = 2) Fig.…”
Section: Source Mixing Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To minimize this isotopic routing effect on the TP estimation of animals, some mixing model packages (e.g., SIAR) consider the stoichiometric imbalance among diets by weighting the estimate with the elemental concentration of each resource (e.g., Par-nell et al 2010). However, the elemental concentration is not necessarily proportional to consumers' growth because their AE may be adjusted depending on food quality (Urabe et al 2018). Furthermore, most researchers separately use bulk Prey 2 (TP = 2) Fig.…”
Section: Source Mixing Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, Meunier et al (2014) introduced a more physiology-oriented view on the concept and questioned the linearity of this response. Indeed, homeostasis is maintained by the simultaneous action of multiple regulating processes (Frost et al 2005;He & Wang 2008;Hessen et al 2013), such as feeding (Suzuki-Ohno et al 2012;Urabe et al 2018), assimilation (DeMott et al 1998Urabe et al 2018), allocation (Urabe & Sterner 2001;Frost et al 2010), excretion (Frost et al 2004(Frost et al , 2005 and respiration (Jensen et al 2006;Hessen & Anderson 2008). Variation in the efficiency of these processes along a stoichiometric food gradient is very likely and is expected to result in a variable homeostatic strength across such gradient.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This implies that (1) assimilation efficiencies vary with prey quantity and quality (Montagnes and Fenton ) and (2) the optimization of assimilation instead of ingestion rates determines the feeding behavior of consumers (Jumars , Urabe et al. ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More advanced predator-prey models demonstrated the influence of gut transition times (time period food particles are kept in consumers' gut) on nutrient assimilation (Mitra and Flynn 2007) and revealed a nonlinear relationship between ingestion and assimilation rates (Darchambeau 2005, Fenton et al 2010). This implies that (1) assimilation efficiencies vary with prey quantity and quality (Montagnes and Fenton 2012) and (2) the optimization of assimilation instead of ingestion rates determines the feeding behavior of consumers (Jumars 2000a, Urabe et al 2018.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%