, Volume 255, Issue 1, pp 261–267 | Cite as

Particle size dependent feeding by the rotifer Brachionus plicatilis

  • Olav Vadstein
  • Gunvor Øie
  • Yngvar Olsen


Size selective feeding by Brachionus plicatilis was investigated with algae and bacteria (0.3–3.5 µm) and mono-disperse latex beads (0.3–3.0 µm) in short term feeding experiments.

B. plicatilis demonstrated maximum clearance rate of particles with diameter ≥2µm, but particles with diameter down to 0.3 µm were also ingested. The clearance rate of bacteria was 15–55% of that obtained for optimal sized particles (≥2 µm), and was related to particle size. The relative reduction in retention of particles with diameter < 2 µm was more pronounced for latex beads than for natural food particles, suggesting other mechanisms than size to be important for the particle retention by the rotifer. This is emphasized by the fact that the clearance rates were much lower for latex beads than for natural food particles of comparable size. Efficient retention of bacteria was observed for rotifers in poor physiological condition, i.e. rotifers with low maximum clearance rate. This may reflect a strategy to optimize energy utilization by reducing locomotion costs and increasing energy intake.

The results indicate that B. plicatilis has a low to medium ability to feed on bacteria. In natural ecosystems, its importance as a bacterial grazer is of limited importance. At high population densities, such as in live feed cultures, the rotifer may, however, efficiently remove bacteria from the culture.

Key words

Brachionus plicatilis grazing selection bacteria microbial loop 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Azam, F., T. Fenchel, J. G. Gray. L. A. Meyer-Reil & F. Thingstad, 1983. The ecological role of water-column microbes in the sea. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 10: 257–263.Google Scholar
  2. Bern, L., 1990. Size-related discrimination of nutritive and inert particles by freshwater zooplankton. J. Plankton. Res. 12: 1059–1067.Google Scholar
  3. Brendelberger, H. & W. Geller, 1985. Variability of filter structures in eight Daphnia species: mesh sizes and filtering area. J. Plankton Res. 7: 473–486.Google Scholar
  4. Bogdan, K. G. & J. J. Gilbert, 1987. Quantitative comparison of food niches in some freshwater zooplankton. Oecologia (Berl.) 72: 331–340.Google Scholar
  5. Børsheim, K. Y. & Y. Olsen, 1984. Grazing activities by Daphnia pulex on natural populations of bacteria and algae. Verh. int. Ver. Limnol. 22: 644–648.Google Scholar
  6. Cole, J. J., S. Findlay & M. L. Pace, 1988. Bacterial production in fresh and saltwater ecosystems: a cross-system overview. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 43: 1–10.Google Scholar
  7. DeMott, W. R. 1986. The role of taste in food selection by freshwater zooplankton. Oecologia (Berl.) 69: 334–340.Google Scholar
  8. Dewey, J. M. 1976. Rates of feeding, respiration and growth of the rotifer Brachionus plicatilis and the dinoflagellate Noctiluca miliaris in the laboratory. Ph. D. Thesis Univ. Wash. 117 pp.Google Scholar
  9. Epp, R. W. & W. M. Lewis, 1984. Cost and speed of locomotion for rotifers. Oecologia (Berl.) 61: 289–292.Google Scholar
  10. Hobbie, J. E., J. R. Daley & S. Jasper, 1977. Use of nuclepore filters for counting bacteria by fluorescence microscopy. Appl. Envir. Microbiol. 33: 1225–1228.Google Scholar
  11. Korstad, J., O. Vadstein & Y. Olsen, 1989. Feeding kinetics of Brachionus plicatilis fed Isochrysis galbana. In C. Ricci, T. W. Snell & C. E. King (eds), Rotifer Symposium V. Developments in Hydrobiology 52. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht: 51–57. Reprinted from Hydrobiologia 186/187.Google Scholar
  12. Lubzens, E., A. Tandler & G. Minkoff, 1989. Rotifers as food in aquaculture. In C. Ricci, T. W. Snell & C. E. King (eds), Rotifer Symposium V. Developments in Hydrobiology 52. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht: 387–400. Reprinted from Hydrobiologia 186/187.Google Scholar
  13. Perez Benavente, G. & F. J. Gatesoupe, 1988. Bacteria associated with cultured rotifers and artemia are detrimental to larval turbot, Scophthalmus maximus L. Aquacultural Engineering 7: 289–293.Google Scholar
  14. Rothhoupt, K. O. 1990. Differences in particle-size-dependent feeding efficiencies of closely related rotifer species. Limnol. Oceanogr. 35: 16–23.Google Scholar
  15. Skjermo, J. & O. Vadstein, 1993. Characterization of the bacterial flora of mass cultivated Brachionus plicatilis. Hydrobiologia 255/256: 185–191.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Olav Vadstein
    • 1
  • Gunvor Øie
    • 1
  • Yngvar Olsen
    • 1
  1. 1.SINTEF Applied Chemistry, Center of AquacultureTrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations