Abstract
Plankton from Station I of Donghu Lake, an eutrophic lake, was divided into three groups (2–32 μm, 32–112 μm and >112 μm) by filtering the water sample through 2, 32, 112 μm pores. It was supposed that the 2–32 μm Protozoa (group 1) was fed on by the 32–112 μm Protozoa and small rotifers (group 2) and >112 μm large rotifers, cladocerans and copepods (group 3). The feeding rate of zooplankton in situ was estimated by counting the protozoan individuals and also by the14C-NaHCO3 method. The P/B ratio of the small Protozoa (group 1) was 2.9 for 6 h and 1.2 for 24 h. The feeding rate of the 32–112 μm zooplankton on small Protozoa (2–32 μm) was about 2/3 the total feeding rate of zooplankton, and that of >112 μm zooplankton on the 2–32 μm Protozoa was 1/3 of the total feeding rate. The lower the density of feeders, the higher were the feeding rates. The daily production of the 2–32 μm protozoans was 1.559 mg/L, which equaled to 25% of the daily food consumption of other zooplankton. Isotope experiments showed result similar to that from the above direct counting method.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bloem, J., Ellenbroek, F. M., Bar-Gilissen, M. J. B. et al., 1986. Fixation, counting, and manipulation of heterotrophic nanoflagellates.Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 52: 1266–1272.
Borgmann, U., Shear, H., Moore, J., 1984. Zooplankton and potential fish production in Lake Ontario.Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 41: 1303–1309.
Caron, D. A., 1983. Technique for enumeration of heterotrophic and phototrophic nanoplankton, and comparison with other procedures.Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 46: 491–498.
Carrick, H. J., Fahnenstiel, G. L., 1992. Growth and production of planktonic protozoa in Lake Michigan: In situ versus in vitro comparisons and importance food web dynamics.Limnol. Oceanogr. 37: 1221–1235.
Carrick, H. J., Fahnenstiel, G. L., Stoermer, E. F. et al., 1992. The importance of zooplankton protozoan trophic couplings in Lake Michigan.Limnol. Oceanogr. 36: 1335–1345.
Debiase, A. E., Sanders, R. W., Poeter, K. G., 1990. Relative nutritional value of ciliate protozoa and algae as food for Daphnia.Microb. Ecol. 19: 199–210.
Ferrier, C., Rassoulzadegan, F., 1991. Density-dependent effects of protozoans on specific growth rates in pico-and nanoplanktonic assemblages.Limnol. Oceanogr. 36: 657–669.
Gifford, D. J., Dagg, M. J., 1988. Feeding of the estuarine copepodAcartia tonsa Dana: Carnivory vs. Herbivory in natural microplankton assemblage.Bull. Mar. Sci. 43: 458–468.
Gliwicz, Z. M., 1980. Filtering rates, food size selection, and feeding rates in cladocerams: Another aspect of interspecific competition in filter-feeding zooplankton.Am. Soc. Limnol. Oceanogr. Spec. Symp. 3: 282–291.
Huang, X. F., 1991. Production of dominant zooplankton.In: Liu, J. K. (ed.), Ecology on Lake Donghu (in Chinese). Science Press, Beijing, p. 206–237.
Johannes, R. E., 1965. Influence of marine protozoa on nutrient regeneration.Limnol. Oceanogr. 10: 434–442.
Kleppel, G. S., Frazel, D., Pieper, R. E. et al., 1988. Natural diets of zooplankton of southern California.Mar. Ecol. Prg. Ser. 49: 231–241.
Kopylov, A. I., Pasternak, A. F., Moiseyev, Y. V., 1981. Consumption of zooflagellates by planktonic organisms.Oceanology 21: 269–271.
Laws, E. A., Redalie, D. G., Haas, L. W. et al. 1984. High phytoplankton growth and production rates in oligtrophic Hawaiian coastal waters.Limnol. Oceanogr. 29: 1161–1169.
Lehman, J. T., 1980. Release and cycling of nutrients planktonic algae and herbivores.Limnol. Oceanogr. 25: 620–632.
Nival, P., Nival, S., 1976. Particle retention of an herbivorous copepod, Acartia clausi (adult and copepodite stages): Effects on grazing.Limnol. Oceanogr. 21: 24–38.
Peters, R. H., 1984. Methods for the study of feeding, filtering and assimilation by zooplankton.In: IBP Handbook 17, Second edition, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, p. 336–372.
Porter, K. G., 1976. Enhancement of algal growth and productivity by grazing zooplankton.Science 192: 1332–1334.
Roman, M. R., Ducklow, H. W., Fuhrman, J. A.,et al. 1988. Production, consumption and nutrient cycling in a laboratory mesocosm.Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 42: 39–52.
Sanders, R. W., Porter, K. G., 1990. Bacterivorous flagellates as food resources for the freshwater crustacean zooplankterDaphnia ambigua.Limnol. Oceanogr. 35: 188–191.
Sherr, B., Sherr, E., 1983. Enumeration of heterotrophic microprotozoa by epifluorescence microscopy.Estuarine Coastal Shelf Sci. 16: 1–7.
Stoecker, D. K., Capuzzo, J. M., 1990. REVIEW Predation on protozoa: its importance to zooplankton.J. Plank. Res. 12: 891–908.
Stoecker, D. K., Egloff, D. A., 1987. Predation byAcartia tonsa Dana on planktonic ciliates and rotifers.J. Exp. Mar. Bio. Ecol. 110: 53–68.
Taylor, G. T., 1982. The role of pelagic heterotrophic protozoa in nutrient cycling: A review.Ann. Inst. Oceanogr. (Paris)58(s): 227–241.
Taylor, W. D., Johansson, O. E., 1991. A comparison of estimates of productivity and consumption by zooplankton for planktonic ciliates in Lake Ontario.J. Plank. Res. 13: 363–372.
Vanderploeg, H. A., 1981. Seasonal particle selection byDiaptomus sicilis in offshore Lake Michigan.Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 38: 504–517.
Weisse, T., 1991. The annual cycle of heterotrophic freshwater nanoflagellates: role of bottom-up versus top-down control.J. Plankton Research 13: 167–185.
Xu, R. L., Shen, Y. F., Gu, M. R., 1991. Production of planktonic protozoa in Lake Donghu, Wuhan, (in Chinese). Thesis collection of the 4th symposium of the Limnology and Oceanography Society. Science Press, Beijing, p. 287–301.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Project 39470144 Supported by NSFC.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sheng-gui, W., Yun-fen, S. Preliminary studies on the role of protozoa in the food web of Donghu Lake. Chin. J. Ocean. Limnol. 18, 227–233 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02842668
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02842668