4.2 Article

Seasonal changes in food quantity and quality of the common North Sea copepods Temora longicornis and Pseudocalanus elongatus: a bioassay approach

期刊

MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES
卷 399, 期 -, 页码 141-155

出版社

INTER-RESEARCH
DOI: 10.3354/meps08357

关键词

Copepod; Food quantity; Food quality; Seasonal dynamics; Bioassay

资金

  1. Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO)
  2. Foundation for Earth and Life Sciences [ALW] [809.33.02]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We evaluated the food quantity and quality over a seasonal cycle for the development and egg production of the common North Sea copepods Temora longicornis and Pseudocalanus elongatus, using a bioassay approach. Seston was sampled from December to October from a well-mixed water column of the Marsdiep (Dutch Wadden Sea) and fed to cultured copepods at a constant temperature of 15 degrees C, thus excluding seasonal effects of temperature, body size, age, and maternal nutrition. Copepod response was evaluated by measuring egg production and juvenile development, while the seston quantity and quality were measured as the concentrations of chl a, specific phytoplankton pigments, particulate organic carbon (POC), particulate organic nitrogen (PON), fatty acids, and sterols. The egg production of both copepods was low when feeding on seston collected in winter, but increased to peak values with the seston from the spring bloom in March-April. The juveniles of both species were able to complete their development only in spring experiments. A multiple regression analyses and comparison to a good-quality standard food of the same concentration suggested that, in an annual scale, the egg production and development of T longicornis mainly depended on phytoplankton concentration, while the egg production and development of P. elongatus appeared also to benefit from detritus or heterotrophic food sources. The present study did not detect an influence of a specific food quality variable; however, an unexplained high juvenile mortality in summer suggests that all factors are not understood yet.

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

4.2
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