4.4 Article

Differences in efficiency of carbon transfer from dissolved organic carbon to two zooplankton groups: an enclosure experiment in an oligotrophic lake

期刊

AQUATIC SCIENCES
卷 69, 期 1, 页码 108-114

出版社

BIRKHAUSER VERLAG AG
DOI: 10.1007/s00027-007-0913-2

关键词

bacterioplankton production; calanoida copepoda; cladocera; zooplankton growth

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We added dissolved organic carbon (C) in various amounts to 6 enclosures in an oligotrophic subarctic lake to assess how bacterioplankton growth on dissolved organic C affects the growth of calanoid copepod (Eudiaptomus graciloides) and cladoceran (Daphnia longispina) zooplankton. Organic C was added as glucose (12.5 to 400 mu gC L-1 d(-1)) and was isotopically distinct (-11.7 parts per thousand) from lakewater organic C (<-27.2 parts per thousand). All enclosures were also enriched with the same amounts of inorganic nitrogen (30 mu gN L(-1)d(-1) as NH4NO3) and inorganic phosphorus (2 mu gP L(-1)d(-1) as Na3PO4). The results showed a direct relationship between bacterial growth on dissolved organic C and incorporation of bacterial biomass into crustacean zooplankton. After 9 days, D. longispina and E. graciloides contained glucose-C in all treatments and the incorporation of glucose-C by zooplankton was strongly correlated with bacterial growth on glucose-C.delta N-15 data revealed different trophic positions of the two crustaceans, suggesting that D. longispina fed directly on bacteria while E. graciloides incorporated bacterial C by consumption of bacterivorus protozoans. Greater incorporation of glucose-C in D. longispina than in E. graciloides was explained by higher individual growth rates in D. longispina, and this difference between the two zooplankters increased as the bacterial production increased. Thus, the results show that the transfer of dissolved organic C through the food web can be more efficient via cladocerans than via calanoid copepods and that the effect becomes more pronounced as bacterial energy mobilization increases.

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

4.4
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