Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Portage connectivity does not predict establishment success of canoe-mediated dispersal for crustacean zooplankton

  • Published:
Aquatic Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although community structure may be largely determined by local abiotic and biotic conditions under moderate levels of dispersal, anthropogenic activities can enhance dispersal rates far beyond what would otherwise occur in natural systems. We investigated the potential impact of recreational canoeing on crustacean zooplankton community structure in Killarney Provincial Park, Canada, where canoes that are transported between lakes via portage routes may enhance zooplankton community connectivity by providing a dispersal “short-cut.” We conducted a study to (1) quantify zooplankton attachment to canoe hulls after paddling through a lake and assess the importance of canoes to overall seasonal dispersal within a lake relative to other means of dispersal, (2) test the prediction that zooplankton survivorship is negatively correlated with portage duration using a mesocosm experiment, and (3) test whether variation in lake community composition was better explained by models based on reduced portage-corrected distances or true edge-to-edge distances between lakes along popular canoe routes. Here, we report the findings that canoes have the potential to act as frequent dispersal vectors, but appear to have little impact on community structure in portage-connected lakes. Substantial numbers of adult zooplankton became attached to canoe hulls and were able to establish viable populations even after exposure to portage conditions for 30 min. However, canoe-mediated dispersal only accounted for a very small proportion (<1% in this case) of overall seasonal dispersal. Moreover, environmental variables explained the greatest amount of variation in community composition among park lakes. Nevertheless, this study indicates that canoe dispersal could be more effective for specific species such as Sida crystallina than is evident by analysis of entire communities and could facilitate the spread of invasive species amenable to attaching to boat hulls. Thus, the debate about whether community composition is more strongly influenced by local environmental conditions or regional dispersal may vary depending on the scale of consideration (i.e., individual species vs. whole community).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allen MR (2007) Measuring and modeling dispersal of adult zooplankton. Oecologia 153:135–143

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson MJ (2001) A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Austral Ecol 26:32–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson MJ (2005) PERMANOVA: a FORTRAN computer program for permutational multivariate analysis of variance. Department of Statistics, University of Auckland, New Zealand

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnott SE, Vanni MJ (1993) Zooplankton assemblages in fishless bog lakes: influence of biotic and abiotic factors. Ecology 74:2361–2380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnott SE, Magnuson JJ, Yan ND (1998) Crustacean zooplankton species richness: single- and multiple-year estimates. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 55:1573–1582

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Arnott SE, Jackson AB, Alarie Y (2006) Distribution and potential effects of water beetles in lakes recovering from acidification. J N Am Benthol Soc 25:811–824

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barbiero RP, Tuchman ML (2004) Changes in the crustacean communities of Lakes Michigan, Huron, and Erie following the invasion of the predatory cladoceran Bythotrephes longimanus. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 61:2111–2125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Binks JA, Arnott SE, Sprules WG (2005) Local factors and colonist dispersal influence crustacean zooplankton recovery from cultural acidification. Ecol Appl 15:2025–2036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohonak AJ (1999) Effect of insect-mediated dispersal on the genetic structure of postglacial water mite populations. Heredity 82:451–461

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bohonak AJ, Whiteman HH (1999) Dispersal of the fairy shrimp Branchinecta coloradensis (Anostraca): effects of hydroperiod and salamanders. Limnol Oceanogr 44:487–493

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boileau MG, Hebert PDN, Schwartz SS (1992) Non-equilibrium gene frequency divergence: persistent founder effects in natural populations. J Evol Biol 5:25–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boudreau SA, Yan ND (2003) The differing crustacean zooplankton communities of Canadian Shield lakes with and without the nonindigenous zooplanktivore Bythotrephes longimanus. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 60:1307–1313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brendonck L, DeMeester L (2003) Egg banks in freshwater zooplankton: evolution and ecological archives in the sediment. Hydrobiologia 491:65–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cáceres CE, Soluk DA (2002) Blowing in the wind: a field test of overland dispersal and colonization by aquatic invertebrates. Oecologia 131:402–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cáceres CE, Christoff AN, Boeing WJ (2007) Variation in ephippial buoyancy in Daphnia pulicaria. Freshw Biol 52:313–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cadotte MW (2007) Competition-colonization trade-offs and disturbance effects at multiple scales. Ecology 88:823–829

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen GM, Shurin JB (2003) Scale-dependence and mechanisms of dispersal in freshwater zooplankton. Oikos 103:603–617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cottenie K, Michels E, Nuytten N, DeMeester L (2003) Zooplankton metacommunity structure: regional vs. local processes in highly interconnected ponds. Ecology 84:991–1000

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Meester LA, Gόmez A, Okamura B, Schwenk K (2002) The monopolization hypothesis and the dispersal-gene flow paradox in aquatic organisms. Oecologica 23:121–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeClerck S, Vanderstukken M, Pals A, Muylaert K, DeMeester L (2007) Plankton biodiversity along a gradient of productivity and its mediation by macrophytes. Ecology 88:2199–2210

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Derry AM, Arnott SE, Shead JA, Hebert PDN, Boag PT (2009) Ecological linkages between community and genetic diversity in zooplankton among boreal shield lakes. Ecology 90:2275–2286

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dray S, Legendre P, Peres-Neto PR (2006) Spatial modelling: a comprehensive framework for principal coordinate analysis of neighbour matrices (PCNM). Ecol Model 196:483–493

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edmondson WT (1959) Fresh-water biology. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Fairchild GW (1981) Movement and microdistribution of Sida crystallina and other littoral microcrustaceans. Ecology 62:1341–1352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gotelli NJ, Colwell RK (2001) Quantifying biodiversity: procedures and pitfalls in the measurement and comparison of species richness. Ecol Lett 4:379–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray DK, Arnott SE (2011) Does dispersal limitation impact the recovery of zooplankton damaged by a regional stressor? Ecol App 21:1241–1256

    Google Scholar 

  • Green AJ, Figuerola J (2005) Recent advances in the study of long-distance dispersal of aquatic invertebrates via birds. Diversity Distrib 11:149–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffith DA, Peres-Neto PR (2006) Spatial modeling in ecology: the flexibility of eigenfunction spatial analyses. Ecology 87:2603–2613

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I, Gilpin M (1991) Metapopulation dynamics: brief history and conceptual domain. Biol J Linn Soc 42:3–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Havel JE, Shurin JB (2004) Mechanisms, effects, and scales of dispersal in freshwater zooplankton. Limnol Oceanogr 49:1229–1238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Havel JE, Stelzleni-Schwent J (2000) Zooplankton community structure: the role of dispersal. Verh Int Ver Theor Angew Limnol 27:3264–3268

    Google Scholar 

  • Hessen DO, Walseng B (2008) The rarity concept and the commonness of rarity in freshwater zooplankton. Freshw Biol 53:2026–2035

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holt C, Yan ND (2003) Recovery of crustacean zooplankton communities from acidification in Killarney Park, Ontario, 1971–2000: pH 6 as a recovery goal. Ambio 32:203–207

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hudson PL, Reid JW, Lesko LT, Selgeby JH (1998) Cyclopoid and harpacticoid copepods of the Laurentian Great Lakes. Bull Ohio Biol Surv NS 12:21–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins DG, Buikema AL Jr (1998) Do similar communities develop in similar sites? A test with zooplankton structure and function. Ecol Monograph 68:421–443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins DG, Underwood MO (1998) Zooplankton may not disperse readily in wind, rain, or waterfowl. Hydrobiologia 387(388):15–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson LE, Ricciardi A, Carlton JT (2001) Overland dispersal of aquatic invasive species: a risk assessment of transient recreational boating. Ecol Appl 11:1789–1799

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller W, Yan ND, Holtze KE, Pitblado JR (1990) Inferred effects of lake acidification on Daphnia galeata mendotae. Environ Sci Technol 24:1259–1261

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Keller W, Yan ND, Somers KM, Heneberry JH (2002) Crustacean zooplankton communities in lakes recovering from acidification. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 59:726–735

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Keller W, Heneberry JH, Dixit SS (2003) Decreased acid deposition and the chemical recovery of Killarney, Ontario lakes. Ambio 32:183–189

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Keller W, Yan ND, Gunn JM, Heneberry JH (2007) Recovery from acidified lakes: lessons from Sudbury, Ontario. Water Air Soil Poll Focus 7:317–322

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kramer AM, Sarnelle O, Knapp RA (2008) Allee effect limits colonization success of sexually reproducing zooplankton. Ecology 89:2760–2769

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kuns MM, Sprules WG (2000) Zooplankton production in Lake Ontario: a multistrata approach. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 57:2240–2247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legendre P, Gallagher ED (2001) Ecologically meaningful transformations for ordination of species data. Oecologia 129:271–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legendre P, Legendre L (1998) Numerical ecology. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Leibold MA, Norberg J (2004) Biodiversity in metacommunities: plankton as complex adaptive systems? Limnol Oceanogr 49:1278–1289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leibold MA, Holyoak M, Mouquet N, Amarasekare P, Chase JM, Hoopes MF, Holt RD, Shurin JB, Law R, Tilman D, Loreau M, Gonzalez A (2004) The metacommunity concept: a framework for multi-scale community ecology. Ecol Lett 7:601–613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lepš J, Šmilauer P (2003) Multivariate analysis of ecological data using CANOCO. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Louette G, De Meester L, Declerck S (2008) Assembly of zooplankton communities in newly created ponds. Freshw Biol 53:2309–2320

    Google Scholar 

  • Lukaszewski Y, Arnott SE, Frost TM (1999) Regional versus local processes in determining zooplankton community composition of Little Rock Lake, Wisconsin, USA. J Plankton Res 21:991–1003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McArdle BH, Anderson MJ (2001) Fitting multivariate models to community data: a comment on distance-based redundancy analysis. Ecology 82:290–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michels E, Cottenie K, Neys L, De Gelas K, Coppin P, De Meester L (2001) Geographical and genetic distances among zooplankton populations in a set of interconnected ponds: a plea for using GIS modelling of the effective geographical distance. Mol Ecol 10:1929–1938

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Minns CK, Moore JE, Schindler DW, Jones ML (1990) Assessing the potential extent of damage to inland lakes in Eastern Canada due to acidic deposition. III. Predicted impacts on species richness in seven groups of aquatic biota. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 47:821–830

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedruski MT, Arnott SE (2011) The effects of habitat connectivity and regional heterogeneity on artificial pond metacommunities. Oecologia 166:221–228

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Peres-Neto PR, Legendre P, Dray S, Borcard D (2006) Variation partitioning of species data matrices: estimation and comparison of fractions. Ecology 87:2614–2625

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Quinn G, Keough M (2002) Experimental design and data analysis for biologists. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core Team (2010) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. In: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria

  • Rice WR, Gaines SD (1994) Extending nondirectional heterogeneity tests to evaluate simply ordered alternative hypotheses. P Natl Acad Sci USA 91:225–226

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schartau AK, Halvorsen G, Walseng B (2007) Northern lakes recovery study—microcrustaceans: reference conditions, acidification, and biological recovery. NINA Report 235, Oslo

  • Schindler DW (1998) A dim future for boreal waters and landscapes. Bioscience 48:157–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shead J (2007) Chemical and biological recovery of Killarney Park, Ontario lakes (1972–2005) from historical acidification. Dissertation, Queen’s University

  • Shurin JB (2000) Dispersal limitation, invasion resistance, and the structure of pond zooplankton communities. Ecology 81:3074–3086

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shurin JB (2001) Interactive effects of predation and dispersal on zooplankton communities. Ecology 82:3404–3416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shurin JB, Havel JE, Leibold MA, Pinel-Alloul B (2000) Local and regional zooplankton species richness: a scale-dependent test for saturation. Ecology 81:3062–3073

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephens PA, Sutherland WJ, Freckleton RP (1999) What is the allee effect? Oikos 87:185–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strecker AL, Arnott SE (2010) Complex interactions between regional dispersal of native taxa and an invasive species. Ecology 91:1035–1047

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ter Braak CJF, Šmilauer P (2002) Canoco for windows ver. 4.54. Biometris Plant Research In, Wageningen

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanschoenwinkel B, Gielen S, Seaman M, Brendonck L (2008) Any way the wind blows—frequent wind dispersal drives species sorting in ephemeral aquatic communities. Oikos 117:125–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witty LM (2004) Practical guide to identifying freshwater zooplankton, 2nd edn. Cooperative Freshwater Ecology Unit, Sudbury

    Google Scholar 

  • Zar JH (1999) Biostatistical analysis, 4th edn. Prentice Hall, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would sincerely like to thank the staff of Killarney Provincial Park for providing logistical support and campsite use information, Derek Gray for providing dispersal data for George Lake, Bjorn Walseng for providing George Lake zooplankton abundance data from a survey conducted in 1999, and Christopher Eckert for providing insightful comments on the manuscript and statistical analysis. This manuscript also benefitted from suggestions by four anonymous reviewers. We would also like to thank Courtney Ostic, Celia Symons, and Derek Gray of the Arnott Lab field crew whose tireless efforts made this study possible. Funding was provided by Friends of Killarney Park, a Natural Sciences and Engineering Council (NSERC) Discovery Grant awarded to SEA, and NSERC USRA awards to ADS and TP.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Ashley D. Stasko & Theresa Patenaude

    Present address: Living With Lakes Centre, Laurentian University, 935 Ramsey Lake Road, Sudbury, ON, P3E 3C6, Canada

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, Queen’s University, 116 Barrie St., Kingston, ON, K7L 3J9, Canada

    Ashley D. Stasko, Theresa Patenaude & Shelley E. Arnott

  2. Department of Biology, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, ON, K1S 5B6, Canada

    Theresa Patenaude

  3. Department of Environmental Science and Management, Portland State University, PO Box 751, Portland, OR, 97207, USA

    Angela L. Strecker

Authors
  1. Ashley D. Stasko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Theresa Patenaude
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Angela L. Strecker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Shelley E. Arnott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shelley E. Arnott.

Additional information

Handling Editor: Piet Spaak.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 39 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Stasko, A.D., Patenaude, T., Strecker, A.L. et al. Portage connectivity does not predict establishment success of canoe-mediated dispersal for crustacean zooplankton. Aquat Ecol 46, 9–24 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10452-011-9378-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10452-011-9378-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation