Advertisement

Aquatic Sciences

, Volume 79, Issue 3, pp 689–703 | Cite as

Decoupled reciprocal subsidies of biomass and fatty acids in fluxes of invertebrates between a temperate river and the adjacent land

  • Sydney MoyoEmail author
  • Lenin D. Chari
  • Martin H. Villet
  • Nicole B. Richoux
Research Article

Abstract

Streams and riparian areas are tightly coupled through reciprocal trophic subsidies, and there is evidence that these subsidies affect consumers in connected ecosystems. Most studies of subsidies consider only their quantity and not their quality. We determined the bidirectional exchange of organisms between the Kowie River and its riparian zone in South Africa using floating pyramidal traps (to measure insect emergence) and pan traps (to capture infalling invertebrates). The exchanges of biomass were variable spatially (three sites) and temporally (four seasons), with emergence declining about two orders of magnitude between summer (169–1402 mg m−2 day−1) and winter (3–28 mg m−2 day−1) across all sites, while invertebrate infall declined by a much smaller range from summer (413–679 mg m−2 day−1) to winter (11–220 mg m−2 day−1). Conversely, the absolute flux of physiologically important highly unsaturated fatty acids contained in the emergent and infalling arthropods peaked at comparable values in summer (emergence = 0.3–18 mg m−2 day−1 and infall = 0.3–3 mg m−2 day−1) and declined less in winter (emergence = 0.01–0.51 mg m−2 day−1 and infall = 0.01–0.03 mg m−2 day−1). During some seasons, there was no net flux of essential fatty acids, but there was generally a net flow of highly unsaturated fatty acids from river to land, even when land-to-river inputs dominated by biomass. Thus, quantitative net fluxes of biomass were decoupled from net fluxes of qualitatively key nutrients, establishing the importance of considering both the quality and the quantity of trophic subsidies.

Keywords

Reciprocal subsidies Aquatic insect emergence Infalling invertebrates Invertebrate rain Polyunsaturated fatty acids Kowie River South Africa 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank L. Sikutshwa for her assistance in the field; J. Peters and B. Hubbart for their technical assistance; and T. Dalu for providing the physico-chemical data from the Kowie River. This research was funded by the Water Research Commission of South Africa, the National Research Foundation of South Africa, and Rhodes University. Any opinion, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Research Foundation.

Supplementary material

27_2017_529_MOESM1_ESM.docx (32 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 33 kb)

References

  1. Allan JD, Wipfli MS, Caouette JP et al (2003) Influence of streamside vegetation on inputs of terrestrial invertebrates to salmonid food webs. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 60:309–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arts MT, Ackman RG, Holub BJ (2001) “Essential fatty acids” in aquatic ecosystems: a crucial link between diet and human health and evolution. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 58:122–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bartels P, Cucherousset J, Steger K et al (2011) Reciprocal subsidies between freshwater and terrestrial ecosystems structure consumer resource dynamics. Ecology 93:1173–1182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baxter CV, Fausch KD, Murakami M, Chapman PL (2004) Fish invasion restructures stream and forest food webs by interrupting reciprocal prey subsidies. Ecology 85:2656–2663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baxter CV, Fausch KD, Carl Saunders W (2005) Tangled webs: reciprocal flows of invertebrate prey link streams and riparian zones. Freshw Biol 50:201–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Benke AC, Huryn AD, Smock LA, Wallace JB (1999) Length-mass relationships for freshwater macroinvertebrates in North America with particular reference to the southeastern US. J North Am Benthol Soc 18:308–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boulton AJ, Boyero L, Covich AP et al (2008) Are tropical streams ecologically different from temperate streams. In: Dudgeon D (ed) Tropical stream ecology. Elsevier, London, pp 257–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brett MT, Müller-Navarra D, Ballantyne AP et al (2006) Daphnia fatty acid composition reflects that of their diet. Limnol Oceanogr 51:2428–2437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chan EKW, Zhang Y, Dudgeon D (2008) Arthropod “rain” into tropical streams: the importance of intact riparian forest and influences on fish diets. Mar Freshw Res 59:653–660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chari LD (2016) Predators of aerial insects and riparian cross-boundary trophic dynamics: web-building spiders, dragonflies and damselflies. Doctor of Philosophy, Rhodes University, South AfricaGoogle Scholar
  11. Chutter F (1994) The rapid biological assessment of streams and river water quality by means of macroinvertebrate communities in South Africa. Water Research Commission, South AfricaGoogle Scholar
  12. Clarke KR, Gorley RN (2006) PRIMER v6: user manual/tutorial. PlymouthGoogle Scholar
  13. Cloe W III, Garman G (1996) The energetic importance of terrestrial arthropod inputs to three warm water streams. Freshw Biol 36:104–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dalu T, Froneman PW, Richoux NB (2014) Phytoplankton community diversity along a river-estuary continuum. Trans R Soc South Afr 69:107–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Davies I (1984) Sampling aquatic insect emergence. In: Downing JA, Rigler F. (eds) A Manual on methods for the assessment of secondary productivity in fresh water. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, pp 161–227Google Scholar
  16. De Jong GD, Canton SP (2014) Input of terrestrial invertebrates to streams during monsoon-related flash floods in the southwestern US. Southwest Nat 59:228–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. De Moor IJ, Day JA, De Moor FC (2003) Guides to the freshwater invertebrates of Southern Africa. Water Research Commission, South AfricaGoogle Scholar
  18. Delong M, Thorp J (2006) Significance of instream autotrophs in trophic dynamics of the Upper Mississippi River. Oecologia 147:76–85CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Dineen G, Harrison SSC, Giller PS (2007) Seasonal analysis of aquatic and terrestrial invertebrate supply to streams with grassland and deciduous riparian vegetation. Biol Environ 107:167–182Google Scholar
  20. Edwards ED, Huryn AD (1995) Annual contribution of terrestrial invertebrates to a New Zealand trout stream. N Z J Mar Freshw Res 29:467–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Edwards ED, Huryn AD (1996) Effect of riparian land use on contributions of terrestrial invertebrates to streams. Hydrobiologia 337:151–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Folch J, Lees M, Sloane Stanley GH (1957) A simple method for the isolation and purification of total lipides from animal tissues. J Biol Chem 226:497–509PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Freitag H (2004) Composition and longitudinal patterns of aquatic insect emergence in small rivers of Palawan Island, The Philippines. Int Rev Hydrobiol 89:375–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ganihar SR (1997) Biomass estimates of terrestrial arthropods based on body length. J Biosci 22:219–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gladyshev MI, Arts MT, Sushchik NN (2009) Preliminary estimates of the export of omega-3 highly unsaturated fatty acids (EPA + DHA) from aquatic to terrestrial ecosystems. In: Kainz M, Brett MT, Arts MT (eds) Lipids in aquatic ecosystems. Springer, New York, pp 179–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gladyshev MI, Krylov AV, Sushchik NN, Malin MI, Makhutova ON, Chalova IV, Kalacheva GS (2010) Transfer of essential polyunsaturated fatty acids from an aquatic to terrestrial ecosystem through the fish-bird trophic pair. Dokl Biol Sci 431(1):121–123CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Gladyshev MI, Sushchik NN, Makhutova ON (2013) Production of EPA and DHA in aquatic ecosystems and their transfer to the land. Prostaglandins Other Lipid Mediat 107:117–126CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Gruner DS (2003) Regressions of length and width to predict arthropod biomass in the Hawaiian Islands. Pac Sci 57:325–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hayes JW, Rutledge MJ (1991) Relationship between turbidity and fish diets in Lakes Waahi and Whangape, New Zealand. N Z J Mar Freshw Res 25:297–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hebert CE, Chip Weseloh DV, Idrissi A, Arts MT, O’Gorman R, Gorman OT, Locke B, Madenjian CP, Roseman EF (2008) Restoring piscivorous fish populations in the Laurentian Great Lakes causes seabird dietary change. Ecology 89(4):891–897CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Henschel JR, Mahsberg D, Stumpf H (2001) Allochthonous aquatic insects increase predation and decrease herbivory in river shore food webs. Oikos 93:429–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hering D, Plachter H (1997) Riparian ground beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae) preying on aquatic invertebrates: a feeding strategy in Alpine floodplains. Oecologia 111:261–270CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Heydorn AEF, Grindley JR (1982) Estuaries of the Cape part II: synopses of available information on individual systems. Report No.10 Kowie (CSE 10). CSIR Research Report 409, National Research Institute for Oceanology. Creda Press, Cape TownGoogle Scholar
  34. Hixson SM, Arts MT (2016) Climate warming is predicted to reduce omega-3, long-chain, polyunsaturated fatty acid production in phytoplankton. Glob Change Biol 22:2744–2755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hixson SM, Sharma B, Kainz MJ, et al (2015) Production, distribution, and abundance of long-chain omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids: a fundamental dichotomy between freshwater and terrestrial ecosystems. Environ Rev 23:414–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Höfer H, Ott R (2009) Estimating biomass of Neotropical spiders and other arachnids (Araneae, Opiliones, Pseudoscorpiones, Ricinulei) by mass-length regressions. J Arachnol 37:160–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Indarti E, Majid MIA, Hashim R, Chong A (2005) Direct FAME synthesis for rapid total lipid analysis from fish oil and cod liver oil. J Food Compos Anal 18:161–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Iwata T (2007) Linking stream habitats and spider distribution: spatial variations in trophic transfer across a forest–stream boundary. Ecol Res 22:619–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Iwata T, Nakano S, Murakami M (2003) Stream meanders increase insectivorous bird abundance in riparian deciduous forests. Ecography 26:325–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Johnston TA, Cunjak RA (1999) Dry mass–length relationships for benthic insects: a review with new data from Catamaran Brook, New Brunswick, Canada. Freshw Biol 41:653–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kautza A, Sullivan SMP (2015) Shifts in reciprocal river-riparian arthropod fluxes along an urban–rural landscape gradient. Freshw Biol 60:2156–2168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kawaguchi Y, Nakano S (2001) Contribution of terrestrial invertebrates to the annual resource budget for salmonids in forest and grassland reaches of a headwater stream. Freshw Biol 46:303–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lam MMY, Martin-Creuzburg D, Rothhaupt KO, et al (2013) Tracking diet preferences of bats using stable isotope and fatty acid signatures of faeces. PloS One 8:e83452CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. Leroux SJ, Loreau M (2008) Subsidy hypothesis and strength of trophic cascades across ecosystems. Ecol Lett 11:1147–1156PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Marcarelli AM, Baxter CV, Mineau MM, Hall RO (2011) Quantity and quality: unifying food web and ecosystem perspectives on the role of resource subsidies in freshwaters. Ecology 92:1215–1225CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Merritt RW, Cummins KW (1996) Introduction to the aquatic insects of North America, 3rd edn. Kendall/Hunt, DubuqueGoogle Scholar
  47. Moyo S (2016) Aquatic–terrestrial trophic linkages via riverine invertebrates in a South African catchment. Doctor of Philosophy. Rhodes University, South AfricaGoogle Scholar
  48. Müller-Navarra DC, Brett MT, Liston AM, Goldman CR (2000) A highly unsaturated fatty acid predicts carbon transfer between primary producers and consumers. Nature 403(6765):74–77CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Nakano S, Murakami M (2001) Reciprocal subsidies: dynamic interdependence between terrestrial and aquatic food webs. PNAS:166–170Google Scholar
  50. Nakano S, Kawaguchi Y, Taniguchi Y et al (1999a) Selective foraging on terrestrial invertebrates by rainbow trout in a forested headwater stream in northern Japan. Ecol Res 14:351–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Nakano S, Miyasaka H, Kuhara N (1999b) Terrestrial-aquatic linkages: riparian arthropod inputs alter trophic cascades in a stream food web. Ecology 80:2435–2441Google Scholar
  52. Newton M, Ice G (2016) Regulating riparian forests for aquatic productivity in the Pacific Northwest, USA: addressing a paradox. Environ Sci Pollut Res 23:1149–1157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Paetzold A, Schubert C, Tockner K (2005) Aquatic terrestrial linkages along a braided-river: riparian arthropods feeding on aquatic insects. Ecosystems 8:748–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Paetzold A, Lee M, Post D (2008) Marine resource flows to terrestrial arthropod predators on a temperate island: the role of subsidies between systems of similar productivity. Oecologia 157:653–659CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Persson J, Brett MT, Vrede T, Ravet JL (2007) Food quantity and quality regulation of trophic transfer between primary producers and a keystone grazer (Daphnia) in pelagic freshwater food webs. Oikos 116(7):1152–1163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Polis GA, Hurd SD (1996) Linking marine and terrestrial food webs: allochthonous input from the ocean supports high Secondary Productivity on Small Islands and Coastal Land Communities. Am Nat 147:396–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Polis GA, Anderson, Wendy B, Holt, Robert D (1997) Toward an integration of landscape and food web ecology: the dynamics of spatially subsidized food webs. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 28:289–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Power ME, Rainey WE (2000) Food webs and resource sheds: towards spatially delimiting trophic interactions. In: Hutchings MJ, John LA, Stewart AJA (eds) The ecological consequences of environmental heterogeneity: the 40th symposium of the British Ecological Society, Held at the University of Sussex, 23–25 March 1999. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  59. Power ME, Vanni MJ, Stapp PT, Polis GA (2004) Subsidy effects on managed ecosystems: implications for sustainable harvest, conservation, and control. Food Webs Landsc Level:387–409Google Scholar
  60. Purse BV, Thompson DJ (2013) Emergence of the damselflies, Coenagrion mercuriale and Ceriagrion tenellum (Odonata: Coenagrionidae), at their northern range margins, in Britain. Eur J Entomol 100:93–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Richardson JS, Sato T (2015) Resource subsidy flows across freshwater-terrestrial boundaries and influence on processes linking adjacent ecosystems: cross-ecosystem resource subsidies across the water-land boundary. Ecohydrology 8:406–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Rundio DE, Lindley ST (2008) Seasonal patterns of terrestrial and aquatic prey abundance and use by Oncorhynchus mykiss in a California Coastal Basin with a Mediterranean Climate. Trans Am Fish Soc 137:467–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Rundio D, Lindley S (2012) Reciprocal fluxes of stream and riparian invertebrates in a coastal California basin with Mediterranean climate. Ecol Res 27:539–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Sabo JL, Power ME (2002) River-watershed exchange: effects of riverine subsidies on riparian lizards and their terrestrial prey. Ecology 83:1860–1869Google Scholar
  65. Sabo JL, Bastow JL, Power ME (2002) Length-mass relationships for adult aquatic and terrestrial invertebrates in a California watershed. J N Am Benthol Soc 21:336–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Sample BE, Cooper RJ, Greer RD, Whitmore RC (1993) Estimation of insect biomass by length and width. Am Midl Nat 129:234–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Shiel CB, Duvergé PL, Smiddy P, Fairley JS (1998) Analysis of the diet of Leisler’s bat (Nyctalus leisleri) in Ireland with some comparative analyses from England and Germany. J Zool 246:417–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Sikutshwa L (2015) The diet of co-occuring anurans in a small South African river: assessments using stomach contents, stable isotopes and fatty acids profiles. Master of Science Thesis, Rhodes University, South AfricaGoogle Scholar
  69. Slaughter AR (2011) Modelling the relationship between flow and water quality in South African rivers. Doctor of Philosophy, Rhodes University, South AfricaGoogle Scholar
  70. Takimoto G, Iwata T, Murakami M (2002) Seasonal subsidy stabilizes food web dynamics: balance in a heterogeneous landscape. Ecol Res 17:433–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Torres-Ruiz M, Wehr JD, Perrone AA (2007) Trophic relations in a stream food web: importance of fatty acids for macroinvertebrate consumers. N Am Benthol Soc 26:509–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Towers DJ, Henderson IM, Veltman CJ (1994) Predicting dry weight of New Zealand aquatic macroinvertebrates from linear dimensions. N Z J Mar Freshw Res 28:159–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Ulberth F, Henninger M (2006) Determination of the fatty acid profile of fish by a one-step extraction/methylation method. Lipid Fett 97:77–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Vannote RL, Cummins KW, Cushing CE (1980) The river continuum concept. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 37:130–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Wesner JS (2016) Contrasting effects of fish predation on benthic versus emerging prey: a meta-analysis. Oecologia 180:1205–1211CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Wipfli MS (1997) Terrestrial invertebrates as salmonid prey and nitrogen sources in streams: contrasting old-growth and young-growth riparian forests in southeastern Alaska, USA. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 54:1259–1269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Witman JD, Ellis JC, Anderson WB (2004) The influence of physical processes, organisms, and permeability on cross-ecosystem fluxes. In: Polis GA, Power ME, Huxel GR (eds) Food webs at the landscape level. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, pp 335–358Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Zoology and EntomologyRhodes UniversityGrahamstownSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations