In order to study the size dependency of grazing and growth rates in zooplankton, data wcrc collected from laboratory studies in the literature, covering both limnic and marinc organisms. Data were obtained from about 60 species of nano-, micro-, and mesozooplankton, representing flagellates, ciliates, rotifers, meroplankton larvae, copepods, and cladocerans. Estimates of maximum ingestion and clearance were extracted from functional responses (ingestion rates as a function of food density) cstablishcd from laboratory experiments. Maximum specific rates were expressed as a function of predator body volume. Maximum specific clearance and ingestion rates decreased with predator volume within each group of zooplankton, with a-common exponent (scaling factor) of -0.23 (SE = 20.12) in accordance with previous findings. However, significant differences wcrc found between groups. In particular, among the protists, ciliates display maximum ingestion, growth, and clearance rates that exceed those of dinoflagellates by a factor of 2-4. Among the metazooplankton, Calanoid copepods have maximum clearance rates that cxcccd those of filter-feeding cladocerans and meroplankton larvae by a factor of 10. Because of these differenccs between the groups, the entire set of observations could not be fitted by an overall regression.

https://aslopubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.4319/lo.1997.42.4.0687

Zooplankton grazing and growth: Scaling within the 2-2,-μm body size range

A comprehensive datasct on the gross growth efficiency (GGE) of planktonic protozoans and metazoans was gathered from the literature in order to (1) identify typical ranges of values, (2) to reexamine the taxon specificity of GGE, and (3) to evaluate the impact of food concentration, predator-prey weight ratio, and temperature on GGE. All taxa (i.e. nano/microAagellates, dinoflagellates, ciliates, rotifers, cladocerans, and copepods) were found to have mean and median GGE of -2O-30%. Contrary to the common practice of using different values of GGE for ciliates and crustaceans, I found that the GGE hardly differed between taxa. Variability within all taxa was high and could only partially be attributed to the independent variables mentioned above. The dependency of GGE on food concentrations was the most reliable relationship identified by multiple regression. Establishing further generalizations regarding the dependency of GGE on other factors was hampered by methodological differences among studies and taxa and the lack of information on other potentially important factors such as the clemental composition of prey items. Future studies of GGE should recognize the importance of these factors. Knowledge of fluxes of matter and energy within ecosystems is a prerequisite for the understanding of food web regulation and of the role that oceans and lakes play in the global carbon cycle (Longhurst 199 1). However, quantifying carbon fluxes reliably in particular ecosystems is hampered by many difficulties. The complexity of aquatic food webs outpaces our capacity to make all the necessary measure

/pdf/gross-growth-efficiencies-of-protozoan-and-metazoan-1eyw0ks53k.pdf

Gross growth efficiencies of protozoan and metazoan zooplankton and their dependence on food concentration, predator-prey weight ratio, and taxonomic group

Recent investigations have shown that processes within the planktonic microbial web are of great significance for the functioning of limnetic ecosystems. However, the general importance of protozoans and bacteria as food sources for rotifers, a major component of planktonic habitats, has seldom been evaluated. Results of feeding experiments and the analysis of the food size spectrum of rotifers suggest that larger bacteria, heterotrophic flagellates and small ciliates should be a common part of the food of most rotifer species. About 10–40 per cent of rotifers’ food can consist of heterotrophic organisms of the microbial web. Field experiments have indicated that rotifer grazing should generally play a minor role in bacteria consumption compared to feeding by coexisting protozoans. However, according to recent experiments regarding food selection, rotifers should be efficient predators on protozoans. Laboratory experiments have revealed that even nanophagous rotifers can feed on ciliates. Preliminary microcosm and chemostat experiments have indicated that rotifers, due to their relatively low community grazing rates compared to the growth rates of bacteria and protozoans, should generally not be able (in contrast to some cladocerans) to suppress the microbial web via grazing, though they may structure it. Filter-feeding nanophagous rotifers (e.g. brachionids) seem to be significant feeders on the smaller organisms of the microbial web (bacteria, flagellates, small ciliates), whereas grasping species (e.g. synchaetids and asplanchnids) seem to be efficient predators on larger organisms (esp. ciliates). Another important role of rotifers is their feedback effect on the microbial web. Rotifers provide degraded algae, bacteria and protozoans to the microbial web and may promote microbial activity. Additional experimental work is necessary for a better understanding of the function of rotifers in aquatic ecosystems.

Rotifers as predators on components of the microbial web (bacteria, heterotrophic flagellates, ciliates) — a review

Preface. Copyright Acknowledgements. 1. Microbial Diversity and Freashwater Ecosystems. 2. Freshwater Environments: The Influence of Physico-Chemical Conditions on Microbial Communities. 3. Algae: The Major Microbial Biomass in Freshwater Systems. 4. Competition for Light. 5. Inorganic Nutrients: Uptake and Cycling in Freshwater Systems. 6. Bacteria: The Main Heterotrophic Microorganisms in Freshwater Systems. 7. Viruses: Major Parasites in the Freshwater Environment. 8. Fungi and Fungal-like Organisms: Aquatic Biota with a Mycelial Growth Form. 9. Grazing Activities in the Freshwater Environment: The Role of Protozoa and Invertebrates. 10. Eutrophication: The Microbial Response to High Nutrient Levels. Glossary. References. Index.

Freshwater Microbiology: Biodiversity and Dynamic Interactions of Microorganisms in the Aquatic Environment

The aim of this study was to assess the structure and function of the microbial loop in a peatland of the French Massif central, and the impact of fertilization on the different microbial communities. In terms of biomass, testate Amoeba (48% of the total microbial biomass), heterotrophic bacteria (15%), cyanobacteria (14%) and Bacillariophyceae (13%) were the dominant groups of microorganisms. Other microalgae (7%), ciliates (2%) and heterotrophic flagellates (1%) accounted for only a low proportion of total microbial biomass. The relative importance of heterotrophic microorganisms was higher than in marine or lacustrine environments. In addition, ciliates and heterotrophic flagellates only constituted a small proportion of the total protozoan biomass, which was heavily dominated by testate amoeba. Thus, the structure of the protist community in the subaquatic peatland was completely different from that reported for lakes or marine environments. In other aspects, the supply of nutrients (PKCa and NPKCa) resulted in increases of the relative biomasses of heterotrophic bacteria, Bacillariophyceae, and ciliates and by a decrease in the relative proportion of testate amoeba and of other microalgae.

The Microbial Loop at the Surface of a Peatland:Structure, Function, and Impact of Nutrient Input

Abundance, biomass, production, and grazing loss rates of phytoplankton, free-living bacteria, and Protozoa were assessed during an intense spring phytoplankton bloom in prealpine Lake Constance (Bodensee). More than 50% of the primary production was channeled through the microbial loop. Bacteria and ciliates responded rapidly to increasing phytoplankton biomass and production. Maximal growth rates of bacteria and Protozoa were slightly lower than those of the dominating phytoplankton species. Averaged over the spring bloom, bacterial C amounted to 2 1% of phytoplankton C, bacterial production to 18% of particulate primary production. Increase of heterotrophic flagellate populations was prevented by grazing within the microbial loop, probably mainly by the feeding impact of ciliates. Although ciliates controlled flagellate production, they satisfied their food demand primarily by feeding on algae and consumed - 14% of primary pro- duction. Metazoan microzooplankton (copepod nauplii and rotifers) removed -7% of the phy- toplankton production. Herbivorous metazooplankton ingested slightly less. Therefore, the phy- toplankton bloom was not terminated by excess grazing. POd3- depletion and subsequent sedimentation was most likely the prime cause for the termination of the spring bloom.

https://aslopubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.4319/lo.1990.35.4.0781

Response of the microbial loop to the phytoplankton spring bloom in a large prealpine lake

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Doris Springmann

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

Response of the microbial loop to the phytoplankton spring bloom in a large prealpine lake