4.7 Article

Changes in the relationship between zooplankton and phytoplankton biomasses across a eutrophication gradient

期刊

LIMNOLOGY AND OCEANOGRAPHY
卷 63, 期 6, 页码 2493-2507

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/lno.10955

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The relationship between zooplankton biomass and phytoplankton biomass can provide insight into the structure and function of lake biological communities. We used a Bayesian network model to analyze a continental-scale data set to estimate changes in the relationship between zooplankton (Z) and phytoplankton (P) biomasses along a eutrophication gradient. The Bayesian network model allowed us to combine two different measurements of phytoplankton biomass (chlorophyll a concentration and directly observed biovolume) to improve the precision of estimates of true biomass within each sample. The model also allowed us to estimate separate relationships between P and zooplankton abundance and between P and mean individual zooplankton biomass and then to combine these two relationships into an estimate of seasonal mean zooplankton biomass. The resulting analysis indicated that seasonal mean zooplankton biomass increased proportionally with phytoplankton biomass in oligotrophic lakes, yielding a constant ratio between Z and P and suggested that bottom-up forces determined zooplankton biomass in these systems. In eutrophic lakes, seasonal mean zooplankton biomass was nearly constant with increases in phytoplankton biomass, yielding a decrease in the ratio between Z and P with increasing eutrophication. Bottom-up forces, as quantified by an increase in the proportion of cyanobacteria, accounted for approximately one fifth of the residual variance in the model as the relationship between Z and P changed from direct proportionality in oligotrophic lakes to the nearly constant value of Z observed in eutrophic lakes, suggesting that a combination of both top-down and bottom-up forces likely determined zooplankton biomass in eutrophic lakes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据