Fish-mediated zooplankton community structure in shallow turbid waters: a mesocosm study
Turbidity influences the success of fish feeding, but little is known about the difference in the effects of turbidity as a result of organic and inorganic matter. To assess the feeding behaviour of a native fish, Goodea atripinnis, under turbid conditions (up to 120 NTU) generated by Microcystis aeruginosa or silt, we conducted mesocosm experiments for 25 days using 40-L plastic mesocosms. Each tank received two G. atripinnis individuals (predators) with a mean total length 61 mm and cladoceran zooplankton (prey) (Alona glabra, Chydorus sphaericus, Moina macrocopa, Simocephalus vetulus, Ceriodaphnia dubia, and Daphnia pulex) of 100 ind. L−1. Filtered water from Xochimilco Lake was used to fill the mesocosms. Goodea atripinnis had a selective effect on the zooplankton community in the form of a decrease in the number of pelagic cladocerans. The zooplankton composition, which was least affected by the fish, included small-sized (400–480 µm) benthic cladocerans (e.g. Chydorus sphaericus) and copepods (both calanoids and cyclopoids). Prey consumption by the fish was highest under conditions with inorganic turbidity, while in the fishless treatments, small cladocerans (along with calanoids) had a high density. Organic turbidity offered refuge against fish predation to A. glabra, C. sphaericus, Daphnia pulex, M. alburquerquensis and A. americanus, whereas inorganic turbidity allowed only both test copepods to coexist in the presence of fish. The results suggest that fish predation is a powerful factor regulating zooplankton communities, even in highly turbid waters.
KeywordsFish feeding Copepods Cladocerans Silt Microcystis
Manuel A. Gayosso-Morales thanks the Mexican Council for Science and Technology (CONACyT-211276) for a doctoral scholarship and Instituto Politécnico Nacional, ENCB for additional help and support. SN and SSSS thank PAPIIT (UNAM) (IN216315, IN219218, and IN214618) for financial assistance. FMJ is grateful to EDI-IPN and COFAA-IPN for the partial support to this project.
PAPIIT (UNAM) (IN216315, IN219218 and IN214618). EDI-IPN and COFAA-IPN for the partial support to this project.
- Drenner RW, McComas SR (1980) The roles of zooplankter escape ability and fish size selectivity in the selective feeding and impact of planktivorous fish. In: Kerfoot WC (ed) Evolution and ecology of zooplankton communities. University of New England Press, Hanover, pp 587–593Google Scholar
- Gayosso-Morales MA, Nandini S, Martínez-Jeronimo FF, Sarma SSS (2017) Effect of organic and inorganic turbidity on the zooplankton community structure of a shallow waterbody in Central Mexico (Lake Xochimilco, Mexico). J Environ Biol 38:1183–1196. https://doi.org/10.22438/jeb/38/6(SI)/03 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Gerking SD (1994) Feeding ecology of fish. Academic Press, Cambridge, p 416Google Scholar
- Jeppesen E, Søndergaard M, Mazzeo N, Meerhoff M, Branco C, Huszar V, Scasso F (2005) Lake restoration and biomanipulation in temperate lakes: relevance for subtropical and tropical lakes. In: Reddy V (ed) Tropical eutrophic lakes: their restoration and management. Science Publishers Inc, Enfield, pp 341–359Google Scholar
- Keshavanath P, Beveridge MC, Baird DJ, Lawton LA, Nimmo A, Codd GA (1994) The functional grazing response of a phytoplanktivorous fish Oreochromis niloticus to mixtures of toxic and non-toxic strains of the cyanobacterium Microcystis aeruginosa. J Fish Biol 45:123–129. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.1994.tb01291.x Google Scholar
- Koste W (1978) Rotatoria. Borntraeger, BerlinGoogle Scholar
- Krebs JR, Davies NB (1993) Behavioural ecology. An evolutionary approach. Wiley, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Lyons J, Gutierrez-Hernandez A, Díaz-Pardo E, Soto-Galera E, Medina-Nava M, Pineda-Lopez R (2000) Development of a preliminary index of biotic integrity (IBI) based on fish assemblages to assess ecosystem condition in the lakes of central Mexico. Hydrobiologia 418:57–72. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003888032756 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Miller RR, Minckley WL, Norris S, StevenMark M (2009) Freshwater fishes of Mexico. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, p 490Google Scholar
- Miranda R, Galicia D, Monks S, Pulido-Flores G (2010) First record of Goodea atripinnis (Cyprinodontiformes: Goodeidae) in the state of Hidalgo (Mexico) and some considerations about its taxonomic position. Hidrobiológica 20:185–190Google Scholar
- Niemisto J, Tallberg P, Horppila J (2005) Sedimentation and resuspension-factors behind the clay-turbidity in Lake Hiidenvesi. Adv Limnol 59:25–38Google Scholar
- Pepin P, Penney RW (1997) Patterns of prey size and taxonomic composition in larval fish: are there general size-dependent models? J Fish Biol 51:84–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.1997.tb06094.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Peredo-Alvarez VM, Sarma SSS, Nandini S (2004) Studies on the functional responses of the Mexican live bearer fish Allotoca meeki (Goodeidae: Cyprinodontiformes). Adv Fish Wildl Ecol Biol 3:27–40Google Scholar
- Picapedra PHS, Sanches PV, Lansac-Tôha FA (2018) Effects of light-dark cycle on the spatial distribution and feeding activity of fish larvae of two co-occurring species (Pisces: Hypophthalmidae and Sciaenidae) in a Neotropical floodplain lake. Braz J Biol 78:763–772. https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.179070 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Smirnov NN (1974) Fauna of the U.S.S.R. Crustacea. Keter Publishing House, JerusalemGoogle Scholar
- Ter Braak CJ, Smilauer P (2002) CANOCO reference manual and CanoDraw for Windows user’s guide: software for canonical community ordination (version 4.5). www.canoco.com