Abiotic and Biotic Factors Affecting the Ingestion Rates of Mixotrophic Nanoflagellates (Haptophyta)
- 140 Downloads
Mixotrophic haptophytes comprise one of several important groups of mixotrophic nanoflagellates in the pelagic environment. This study aimed to investigate if phagotrophy in mixotrophic haptophytes is regulated by light or other factors in the surface (SE) and bottom (BE) of the euphotic zone in the subtropical northwestern Pacific Ocean. We estimated the rates of bacterial ingestion by haptophytes using fluorescently labeled bacteria (FLBs) and fluorescence in situ hybridization. Haptophyte diversity and abundance were also investigated in the same sampling area. The annual mean abundance of haptophytes was 419 ± 85.6 cells mL−1 in both SE and BE. Cells 3–5 μm in size were the dominant group in all haptophytes and accounted for majority of bacteria standing stock removed by haptophytes (53%). Most haptophyte ingestion rates (IRs) were not significantly different between the two layers (average SE ingestion rate: 12.5 ± 2.29 bac Hap−1 h−1; BE: 14.7 ± 3.03 bac Hap−1 h−1). Furthermore, the haptophyte IRs were negatively correlated with nitrate concentrations in the SE and positively correlated with bacterial abundances in the BE, which accounts for the significantly high IRs in August 2012 and 2013. These findings imply that mixotrophic haptophytes in this region had different factors affecting phagotrophy to adapt to the ambient light intensity alterations between SE and BE.
KeywordsMixotrophy Haptophytes Ingestion rate Fluorescence in situ hybridization Fluorescently labeled bacteria
We would like to thank Dr. Chih-Ching Chung, from Institute of Marine Environment and Ecology in National Taiwan Ocean University, for giving the molecular technology support and Dr. Sen-Lin Tang, from Biodiversity Research Center in Academia Sinica, for valuable discussion.
This study was supported by three grants from the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan. The grant numbers are MOST 103-2811-M-019-00, MOST 104-2811-M-019-006, and NSC 101-2611-M-019-015-MY3.
- 1.Sanders RW (1991) Mixotrophic protists in marine and fresh-water ecosystems. J Protozool 38:76–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1550-7408.1991.tb04805.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Elser JJ, Hessen DO (2005) Biosimplicity via stoichiometry: the evolution of food-web structure and processes. Aquatic food webs: an ecosystem approach. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 7–18Google Scholar
- 11.Jones H, Leadbeater B, Green J (1994) Mixotrophy in haptophytes. Syst Assoc Spec Vol 51:247–247Google Scholar
- 13.Mitra A, Flynn KJ, Burkholder JM, Berge T, Calbet A, Raven JA, Graneli E, Glibert PM, Hansen PJ, Stoecker DK, Thingstad F, Tillmann U, Vage S, Wilken S, Zubkov MV (2014) The role of mixotrophic protists in the biological carbon pump. Biogeosciences 11:995–1005. https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-995-2014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.Cabrerizo MJ, Medina-Sánchez JM, Dorado-García I, Villar-Argaiz M, Carrillo P (2017) Rising nutrient-pulse frequency and high UVR strengthen microbial interactions. Sci Rep 7:43615Google Scholar
- 35.Sherr E, Sherr B (1993) Protistan grazing rates via uptake of fluorescently labeled prey. In: Kemp P, Sherr B, Sherr E, Cole J (eds) Current methods in aquatic microbial ecology. Lewis Publ, New York, pp 695–702Google Scholar
- 36.Sherr BF, Sherr EB, Fallon RD (1987) Use of monodispersed, fluorescently labeled bacteria to estimate in situ protozoan bacterivory. Appl Environ Microbiol 53:958–965Google Scholar
- 45.Liu H, Probert I, Uitz J, Claustre H, Aris-Brosou S, Frada M, Not F, de Vargas C (2009) Extreme diversity in noncalcifying haptophytes explains a major pigment paradox in open oceans. Proc Natl Acad Sci 106:12803–12808Google Scholar
- 46.Edvardsen B, Medlin LK (2007) 10 molecular systematics of Haptophyta. Unravelling the algae: the past, present, and future of algal systematics. 183Google Scholar