Hydrobiologia

, Volume 740, Issue 1, pp 79–88 | Cite as

Understanding of colonization and breakdown of leaves by invertebrates in a tropical stream is enhanced by using biomass as well as count data

  • Alan M. Tonin
  • Luiz U. Hepp
  • Rozane M. Restello
  • José F. GonçalvesJr.
Primary Research Paper
First Online:
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:

Abstract

We hypothesized that (i) the importance of shredders for leaf breakdown is more evident in terms of their biomass than their abundance, due to the large bodies and high-feeding efficiencies of some typical shredders; (ii) non-shredder invertebrates select more refractory leaves because these are a more stable substrate for colonization or to obtain other forms of food. To test these hypotheses, we performed a decomposition experiment with leaves of contrasting chemical composition in a tropical stream, and determined the changes in the ash-free dry mass (AFDM) of the litter, and the invertebrate abundance and biomass during a 44-day period. The biomass of shredders showed a positive relationship with AFDM remaining, whereas their abundance was unrelated to AFDM. While shredder abundance represented only 4–12% of total invertebrate abundance, shredder biomass constituted 19–36% of total invertebrate biomass. We conclude that (i) shredder biomass expresses better than abundance the role of this guild in the decomposition of leaf detritus, demonstrating that they are important for the functioning of tropical streams; (ii) incubation time rather than stability of leaf litter as a substrate influences colonization by non-shredder invertebrates.

Keywords

Leaf quality Functional feeding group Detritivore Litter decomposition Body size 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Dr Irineu Bianchini Jr. for comments on an early version of the manuscript, and two anonymous referees and the Associate Editor for their suggestions and criticisms. Janet Reid revised the English. The English revision was financed by DPP/Universidade de Brasília (Edital 05/2012). AMT received a scholarship from the Universidade Regional Integrada do Alto Uruguai e das Missões - Campus Erechim. RMR received financial support from CNPq (Process #475251/2009-1). LUH received financial support from FAPERGS (Process #12/1354-0), and CNPq (Process #471572/2012-8).

Supplementary material

10750_2014_1939_MOESM1_ESM.doc (106 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 106 kb)

References

  1. Ardón, M. & C. M. Pringle, 2008. Do secondary compounds inhibit microbial- and insect-mediated leaf breakdown in a tropical rainforest stream, Costa Rica? Oecologia 155: 311–323.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ardón, M., C. M. Pringle & S. L. Eggert, 2009. Does leaf chemistry differentially affect breakdown in tropical vs temperate streams? Importance of standardized analytical techniques to measure leaf chemistry. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 28: 440–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bärlocher, F. & M. S. Graça, 2005. Total phenolics. In Graça, M. A. S., F. Bärlocher & M. O. Gessner (eds), Methods to Study Litter Decomposition. Springer, Netherlands: 97–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Biasi, C., A. M. Tonin, R. M. Restello & L. U. Hepp, 2013. The colonisation of leaf litter by Chironomidae (Diptera): the influence of chemical quality and exposure duration in a subtropical stream. Limnologica-Ecology and Management of Inland Waters 43: 427–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boyero, L., A. Ramírez, D. Dudgeon & R. G. Pearson, 2009. Are tropical streams really different? Journal of the North American Benthological Society 28: 397–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boyero, L., R. G. Pearson, D. Dudgeon, M. A. S. Graça, M. O. Gessner, R. Albariño, V. Ferreira, C. M. Yule, A. J. Boulton, M. Arunachalam, M. Callisto, E. Chauvet, A. Ramírez, J. Chará, M. S. Moretti, J. F. J. Gonçalves, J. E. Helson, A. Chará-Serna, A. C. Encalada, J. N. Davies, S. Lamothe, A. Cornejo, A. O. Y. Li, L. M. Buria, V. D. Villanueva, M. C. Zúñiga & C. M. Pringle, 2011. Global distribution of a key trophic guild contrasts with common latitudinal diversity patterns. Ecology 92: 1839–1848.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boyero, L., L. A. Barmuta, L. Ratnarajah, K. Schmidt & R. G. Pearson, 2012a. Effects of exotic riparian vegetation on leaf breakdown by shredders: a tropical–temperate comparison. Freshwater Science 31: 296–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boyero, L., R. G. Pearson, D. Dudgeon, V. Ferreira, M. A. S. Graça, M. O. Gessner, A. J. Boulton, E. Chauvet, C. M. Yule, R. Albariño, A. Ramirez, J. E. Helson, M. Callisto, M. Arunachalam, J. Chará, R. Figueroa, J. M. Mathooko, J. F. J. Gonçalves, M. S. Moretti, A. Chará-Serna, J. N. Davies, A. C. Encalada, S. Lamothe, L. M. Buria, J. Castela, A. Cornejo, A. O. Y. Li, C. M’Erimba, V. D. Villanueva, M. C. Zúñiga, C. M. Swan & L. A. Barmuta, 2012b. Global patterns of stream detritivore distribution: implications for biodiversity loss in changing climates. Global Ecology and Biogeography 21: 134–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boyero, L., B. J. Cardinale, M. Bastian & R. G. Pearson, 2014. Biotic vs. abiotic control of decomposition: a comparison of the effects of simulated extinctions and changes in temperature. PLoS One 9: e87426.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Callisto, M. & M. A. S. Graça, 2013. The quality and availability of fine particulate organic matter for collector species in headwater streams. International Review of Hydrobiology 98: 132–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Camacho, R., L. Boyero, A. Cornejo, A. Ibanez & R. G. Pearson, 2009. Local variation in shredder distribution can explain their oversight in tropical streams. Biotropica 41: 625–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chara, J., D. Baird, T. Telfer & L. Giraldo, 2007. A comparative study of leaf breakdown of three native tree species in a slowly-flowing headwater stream in the Colombian Andes. International Review of Hydrobiology 92: 183–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cheshire, K., L. Boyero & R. G. Pearson, 2005. Food webs in tropical Australian streams: shredders are not scarce. Freshwater Biology 50: 748–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cummins, K. W., R. W. Merritt & P. C. N. Andrade, 2005. The use of invertebrate functional groups to characterize ecosystem attributes in selected streams and rivers in south Brazil. Studies on Neotropical Fauna and Environment 40: 69–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Danger, M., J. Arce Funck, S. Devin, J. Heberle & V. Felten, 2013. Phosphorus content in detritus controls life-history traits of a detritivore. Functional Ecology 27: 807–815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Das, M., T. V. Royer & L. G. Leff, 2007. Diversity of fungi, bacteria, and actinomycetes on leaves decomposing in a stream. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 73: 756–767.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Dobson, M., A. Magana, J. M. Mathooko & F. K. Ndegwa, 2002. Detritivores in Kenyan highland streams: more evidence for the paucity of shredders in the tropics? Freshwater Biology 47: 909–919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dudgeon, D. & K. K. Wu, 1999. Leaf litter in a tropical stream: food or substrate for macroinvertebrates? Archiv für Hydrobiologie 146: 65–82.Google Scholar
  19. Fernández, H. R. & E. Domínguez, 2001. Guía para la determinación de los artrópodos bentónicos sudamericanos. Universidad Nacional de Tucumán, Facultad de Ciencias Naturales e Instituto Milho, Editorial Universitaria de Tucumán, Tucumán.Google Scholar
  20. Flindt, M. R. & A. I. Lillebø, 2005. Determination of total nitrogen and phosphorus in leaf litter. In Graça, M. A. S., F. Bärlocher & M. O. Gessner (eds), Methods to Study Litter Decomposition. Springer, Netherlands: 53–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Foucreau, N., S. Puijalon, F. Hervant & C. Piscart, 2013. Effect of leaf litter characteristics on leaf conditioning and on consumption by Gammarus pulex. Freshwater Biology 58: 1672–1681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Franken, R. J. M., B. Waluto, E. T. H. M. Peeters, J. J. P. Gardeniers, J. A. J. Beijer & M. Scheffer, 2005. Growth of shredders on leaf litter biofilms: the effect of light intensity. Freshwater Biology 50: 459–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gessner, M. O., E. Chauvet & M. Dobson, 1999. A perspective on leaf litter breakdown in streams. Oikos 85: 377–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Goering, H. K. & P. J. Van Soest, 1970. Forage Fiber Analyses (Apparatus, Reagents, Procedures, and Some Applications). U. S. Agricultural Research Service, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  25. Gonçalves, J. F. J., M. A. S. Graça & M. Callisto, 2006. Leaf-litter breakdown in 3 streams in temperate, Mediterranean, and tropical Cerrado climates. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 25: 344–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gonçalves, J. F. J., M. A. S. Graça & M. Callisto, 2007. Litter decomposition in a Cerrado savannah stream is retarded by leaf toughness, low dissolved nutrients and a low density of shredders. Freshwater Biology 52: 1440–1451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gonçalves, J. F. J., R. S. Rezende, N. M. Martins & R. S. Gregorio, 2012. Leaf breakdown in an Atlantic Rain Forest stream. Austral Ecology 37: 807–815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Graça, M., L. Maltby & P. Calow, 1993. Importance of fungi in the diet of Gammarus pulex and Asellus aquaticus I: feeding strategies. Oecologia 93: 139–144.Google Scholar
  29. Graça, M. A. S., 2001. The role of invertebrates on leaf litter decomposition in streams – a review. International Review of Hydrobiology 86: 383–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hepp, L. U., C. Biasi, S. V. Milesi, F. Veiga & R. M. Restello, 2008. Chironomidae (Diptera) larvae associated to Eucalyptus globulus and Eugenia uniflora leaf litter in a subtropical stream (Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil). Acta Limnologica Brasiliensia 20: 345–350.Google Scholar
  31. Hepp, L. U., R. Delanora & A. Trevisan, 2009. Compostos secundários durante a decomposição foliar de espécies arbóreas em um riacho do sul do Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 23: 407–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Irons III, J. G., M. W. Oswood, R. J. Stout & C. M. Pringle, 1994. Latitudinal patterns in leaf litter breakdown: is temperature really important? Freshwater Biology 32: 401–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jabiol, J., B. G. McKie, A. Bruder, C. Bernadet, M. O. Gessner & E. Chauvet, 2013. Trophic complexity enhances ecosystem functioning in an aquatic detritus-based model system. Journal of Animal Ecology 82: 1042–1051.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kendrick, M. R. & J. P. Benstead, 2013. Temperature and nutrient availability interact to mediate growth and body stoichiometry in a detritivorous stream insect. Freshwater Biology 58: 1820–1830.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Landeiro, V. L., N. Hamada & A. S. Melo, 2008. Responses of aquatic invertebrate assemblages and leaf breakdown to macroconsumer exclusion in Amazonian “terra firme” streams. Fundamental and Applied Limnology 172: 49–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Landeiro, V. L., N. Hamada, B. S. Godoy & A. S. Melo, 2010. Effects of litter patch area on macroinvertebrate assemblage structure and leaf breakdown in Central Amazonian streams. Hydrobiologia 649: 355–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lecerf, A. & J. S. Richardson, 2010. Litter decomposition can detect effects of high and moderate levels of forest disturbance on stream condition. Forest Ecology and Management 259: 2433–2443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Legendre, P. & L. Legendre, 2012. Numerical Ecology, Vol. 20, 3rd English edn. Elsevier, Netherlands.Google Scholar
  39. Li, A. O. Y., L. C. Y. Ng & D. Dudgeon, 2008. Effects of leaf toughness and nitrogen content on litter breakdown and macroinvertebrates in a tropical stream. Aquatic Sciences 71: 80–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ligeiro, R., M. S. Moretti, J. F. Gonçalves & M. Callisto, 2010. What is more important for invertebrate colonization in a stream with low-quality litter inputs: exposure time or leaf species? Hydrobiologia 654: 125–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Martinson, H. M., K. Schneider, J. Gilbert, J. E. Hines, P. A. Hambäck & W. F. Fagan, 2008. Detritivory: stoichiometry of a neglected trophic level. Ecological Research 23: 487–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Moretti, M., R. Loyola, B. Becker & M. Callisto, 2009. Leaf abundance and phenolic concentrations codetermine the selection of case-building materials by Phylloicus sp. (Trichoptera, Calamoceratidae). Hydrobiologia 630: 199–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Oliveira-Filho, A. T., J. C. Budke, J. A. Jarenkow, P. V. Eisenlohr & D. R. M. Neves, 2013. Delving into the variations in tree species composition and richness across South American subtropical Atlantic and Pampean forests. Journal of Plant Ecology 6: 1–23.Google Scholar
  44. Pes, A. M. O., N. Hamada & J. L. Nessimian, 2005. Chaves de identificação de larvas para famílias e gêneros de Trichoptera (Insecta) da Amazônia Central, Brasil. Revista Brasileira de Entomologia 49: 181–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. R Core Team, 2013. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.Google Scholar
  46. Rincón, J. & I. Martínez, 2006. Food quality and feeding preferences of Phylloicus sp. (Trichoptera:Calamoceratidae). Journal of the North American Benthological Society 25: 209–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rueda-Delgado, G., K. M. Wantzen & M. B. Tolosa, 2006. Leaf-litter decomposition in an Amazonian floodplain stream: effects of seasonal hydrological changes. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 25: 233–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Santiago, L. S., 2007. Extending the leaf economics spectrum to decomposition: evidence from a tropical forest. Ecology 88: 1126–1131.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Santos Fonseca, A., I. Bianchini Jr, C. Pimenta, C. Soares & N. Mangiavacchi, 2013. The flow velocity as driving force for decomposition of leaves and twigs. Hydrobiologia 703: 59–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Soares, T. S., R. Carvalho & A. B. D. Vale, 2003. Avaliação econômica de um povoamento de Eucalyptus grandis destinado a multiprodutos. Revista Árvore 27: 689–694.Google Scholar
  51. Wallace, J. B., 1997. Multiple trophic levels of a forest stream linked to terrestrial litter inputs. Science 277: 102–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wantzen, K. M., A. Siqueira, C. N. Cunha & M. F. Pereira de Sá, 2006. Stream-valley systems of the Brazilian Cerrado: impact assessment and conservation scheme. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 16: 713–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Yule, C. M., M. Y. Leong, K. C. Liew, L. Ratnarajah, K. Schmidt, H. M. Wong, R. G. Pearson & L. Boyero, 2009. Shredders in Malaysia: abundance and richness are higher in cool upland tropical streams. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 28: 404–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alan M. Tonin
    • 1
    • 2
  • Luiz U. Hepp
    • 2
  • Rozane M. Restello
    • 2
  • José F. GonçalvesJr.
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratório de Limnologia, Departamento de Ecologia, Instituto de Ciências BiológicasUniversidade de BrasíliaBrasíliaBrazil
  2. 2.Laboratório de Biomonitoramento, Departamento de Ciências BiológicasUniversidade Regional Integrada do Alto Uruguai e das MissõesErechimBrazil

Personalised recommendations