Underwater attachment in current: the role of setose attachment structures on the gills of the mayfly larvae<i>Epeorus assimilis</i>(Ephemeroptera, Heptageniidae)

Ditsche-Kuru, Petra; Koop, Jochen H. E.; Gorb, Stanislav N.

doi:10.1242/jeb.037218

Cited by 36 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Several mayfly and midge genera indicative of our runoff rivers have short life cycles with rapid development to adult phases, enabling recolonization during variable flow events (Lytle and Poff 2004). Morphological adaptations, such as setose pads and dorsoventral flattening in mayfly genera (Heptageniidae) also enable individuals to increase frictional resistance or avoid turbulence all together during high discharge events in runoff rivers (Merritt et al 2008, Ditsche-Kuru et al 2010). In addition, some longer-lived runoff-river indicator spe- cies in our study, such as stoneflies of the genus Sweltsa, exhibit behavioral adaptations to deal with periodic drying or extreme low-flow events (Dieterich and Anderson 1995).…”

Section: Invertebrate Diversity and Community Compositionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environment shapes invertebrate assemblage structure differences between volcanic spring-fed and runoff rivers in northern California

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Flow variability plays an important role in structuring lotic communities, yet comparatively little is known about processes governing assemblage dynamics in stream ecosystems with stable environmental conditions, such as spring-fed rivers. Volcanic spring-fed rivers (hereafter spring-fed rivers) occur in geologically active landscapes of the western USA and around the globe. We sampled invertebrate assemblages and quantified primary productivity and habitat characteristics of spring-fed and runoff rivers in northern California over 4 seasons. We predicted that abiotic factors would be more stable and nutrient availability greater and that invertebrate density would be greater and diversity lower in spring-fed than in runoff rivers. Runoff rivers exhibited high variability in discharge and temperature, whereas spring-fed rivers were relatively stable with high naturally occurring nutrient levels. On average, NO 3 − and PO 4 3− concentrations were 40× greater in spring-fed than in runoff rivers. Spring-fed rivers supported nearly 7 to 16× greater densities of invertebrates than runoff systems, depending on season. However, invertebrate species richness was greater in runoff rivers in all seasons. Spring-fed river invertebrate assemblages were strongly correlated with elevated nutrient concentrations and basal C sources, whereas runoff assemblages were associated with discharge variability and median substrate size. We suggest that strong differences in abiotic variability between spring-fed and runoff rivers play an important role in determining invertebrate assemblage structure. Because spring-fed rivers exhibit more stable temperatures throughout the year and lower temperatures during the summer than runoff rivers, they may provide essential refugia for coldwater taxa in a warming climate.

show abstract

Section: Invertebrate Diversity and Community Compositionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environment shapes invertebrate assemblage structure differences between volcanic spring-fed and runoff rivers in northern California

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, different species of macro-organisms can settle on substrates, adding to the heterogeneity of fouled surfaces (Donlan, 2002). Fouling influences surface properties such as roughness, material stiffness, wettability Attachment to challenging substrates -fouling, roughness and limits of adhesion in the northern clingfish (Gobiesox maeandricus) and surface chemistry, which can then affect adhesive strength and friction (Ditsche-Kuru et al, 2010;Ditsche et al, 2014;Scherge and Gorb, 2001). A biofilm can lead to an increase in attachment force in the face of biofouling or a decrease, depending on many different factors (Ditsche et al, 2014;Hadfield, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attachment to challenging substrates – fouling, roughness and limits of adhesion in the northern clingfish (Gobiesox maeandricus)

Ditsche

Wainwright

Summers

2014

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Northern clingfish use a ventral suction disc to stick to rough substrates in the intertidal zone. Bacteria, algae and invertebrates grow on these surfaces (fouling) and change the surface properties of the primary substrate, and therefore the attachment conditions for benthic organisms. In this study, we investigate the influence of fouling and surface roughness on the adhesive strength of northern clingfish, Gobiesox maeandricus. We measured clingfish tenacity on unfouled and fouled substrates over four surface roughnesses. We exposed surfaces for 6 weeks in the Pacific Ocean, until they were covered with periphyton. Clingfish tenacity is equivalent on both fouled and unfouled smooth substrates; however, tenacity on fouled rough surfaces is less compared with tenacity on unfouled ones. We hypothesize that parts of biofilm may act as a lubricant and decrease friction of the disc margin, thereby making disc margins slip inwards and fail at lower tenacities. Nevertheless, even on fouled surfaces the adhesive forces are approximately 150 times the body weight of the fish. To identify the upper threshold of surface roughness the fish can cling to, we tested seven unfouled substrates of increasing surface roughness. The threshold roughness at which northern clingfish failed increased with specimen size. We hypothesize that because of the elastic properties of the disc margin, a larger disc can adapt to larger surface irregularities. The largest specimens (length 10-12 cm) were able to cling to surfaces with 2-4 mm grain size. The fish can attach to surfaces with roughness between 2 and 9% of the suction disc width.

show abstract

“…Our recent investigations indicate that the presence of a biofilm considerably influences the ability of some aquatic insect larvae to attach to the substrate surface. For example, the reported ability of the running water mayfly Epeorus to attach to smooth surfaces [30,31] was no longer observed on smooth sterile substrates [32]. Besides a single tarsal claw, these mayfly larvae are equipped with additional attachment devices, for example friction pads (figure 1), which contribute to the general attachment force of the insect [31,33].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, the reported ability of the running water mayfly Epeorus to attach to smooth surfaces [30,31] was no longer observed on smooth sterile substrates [32]. Besides a single tarsal claw, these mayfly larvae are equipped with additional attachment devices, for example friction pads (figure 1), which contribute to the general attachment force of the insect [31,33]. Surface roughness varies greatly in natural aquatic substrates and has a significant impact on the forces exerted by different attachment devices in E. assimils as well as in other insects [31,32,34].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These larvae also have special setose attachment pads on the ventral side of their gill lamellae, which are in close contact with the substrate when the larva rests in stronger currents. These attachment pads increase friction on sterile smooth substrates and might increase friction on the biofilm as well [31]. We hypothesize that both components together, the increased attachment force of the claws and the friction generated by attachment pads, can increase the friction force up to a value that enables the animals to inhabit smooth stones with a biofilm cover even while being exposed to higher flow forces.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

More than just slippery: the impact of biofilm on the attachment of non-sessile freshwater mayfly larvae

Ditsche

Michels

Kovalev

et al. 2014

J. R. Soc. Interface.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While terrestrial insects can usually attach directly to a substrate, for aquatic insects the situation is more complicated owing to the presence of a biofilm on the primary substrates. This important fact has been neither the subject of investigation nor commonly taken into account in the interpretation of functional aspects of attachment in mobile freshwater animals. In this study, we investigate the impact of a biofilm on the attachment of living mayfly larvae. We performed in vivo attachment experiments in a flow channel using different substrates with defined surface roughness. Additionally, we measured friction forces directly generated by dissected tarsal claws on the same substrates. On substrates with smooth or slightly rough surfaces, which have little or no surface irregularities large enough for the claws to grasp, the presence of a biofilm significantly increases the friction force of claws. Consequently, larvae can endure higher flow velocities on these smooth substrates. The opposite effect takes place on rough substrates, where the friction force of claws decreases in the presence of a biofilm. Consequently, a biofilm is a critical ecological structure for these larvae, and other aquatic organisms, not only as a food source but also as a factor influencing attachment ability.

show abstract

Underwater attachment in current: the role of setose attachment structures on the gills of the mayfly larvaeEpeorus assimilis(Ephemeroptera, Heptageniidae)

Cited by 36 publications

References 28 publications

Environment shapes invertebrate assemblage structure differences between volcanic spring-fed and runoff rivers in northern California

Environment shapes invertebrate assemblage structure differences between volcanic spring-fed and runoff rivers in northern California

Attachment to challenging substrates – fouling, roughness and limits of adhesion in the northern clingfish (Gobiesox maeandricus)

More than just slippery: the impact of biofilm on the attachment of non-sessile freshwater mayfly larvae

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About