Ecological Research

, Volume 25, Issue 3, pp 619–627 | Cite as

Phosphorus acquisition and competitive abilities of two herbivorous zooplankton, Daphnia pulex and Ceriodaphnia quadrangula

  • Tsubasa IwabuchiEmail author
  • Jotaro Urabe
Original Article


Contrary to an expectation from the size-efficiency hypothesis, small herbivore zooplankton such as Ceriodaphnia often competitively predominate against large species such as Daphnia. However, little is known about critical feeding conditions favoring Ceriodaphnia over Daphnia. To elucidate these conditions, a series of growth experiments was performed with various types of foods in terms of phosphorus (P) contents and composition (algae and bacteria). An experiment with P-rich algae showed that the threshold food level, at which an individual’s growth rate equals zero, was not significantly different between the two species. However, the food P:C ratio, at which the growth rate becomes zero, was lower for Daphnia than for Ceriodaphnia, suggesting that the latter species is rather disfavored by P-poor algae. Ceriodaphnia showed a higher growth rate than Daphnia only when a substantial amount of bacteria was supplied together with a low amount of P-poor algae as food. These results suggest that an abundance of bacteria relative to algae plays a crucial role in favoring Ceriodaphnia over Daphnia because these are an important food resource for the former species but not for the latter.


Competition Growth rate hypothesis Zooplankton P:C stoichiometry Size-efficiency hypothesis 



We thank the two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions on the early version of our manuscript. We wish to thank Wataru Makino and the members of the Community and Ecosystem Laboratory, Tohoku University for technical help and suggestions. This research was financially supported by a grant-in-aid for scientific research A (No. 19207003) and by the Global COE program J03 of MEXT Japan.


  1. Acharya K, Kyle M, Elser JJ (2004) Effects of stoichiometric dietary mixing on Daphnia growth and reproduction. Oecologia 138:333–340CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. APHA (1998) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. American Public Health Association. Water Environment Federation, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  3. Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y (1995) Controlling the false discovery rate—a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Statist Soc B 57:289–300Google Scholar
  4. Brooks JL, Dodson SI (1965) Predation, body size, and composition of plankton. Science 150:28–35CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Burns CW (1969) Relation between filtering rate, temperature, and body size in 4 species of Daphnia. Limnol Oceanogr 14:693–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Crawley MJ (2002) Statistical computing: an introduction to data analysis using S-Plus. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. DeMott WR (1989) The role of competition in zooplankton succession. In: Sommer U (ed) Plankton ecology: succession in plankton communities. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 195–252Google Scholar
  8. DeMott WR, Gulati RD, Siewertsen K (1998) Effects of phosphorus-deficient diets on the carbon and phosphorus balance of Daphnia magna. Limnol Oceanogr 43:1147–1161Google Scholar
  9. Elser JJ, Sterner RW, Gorokhova E, Fagan WF, Markow TA, Cotner JB, Harrison JF, Hobbie SE, Odell GM, Weider LJ (2000) Biological stoichiometry from genes to ecosystems. Ecol Lett 3:540–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Elser JJ, Acharya K, Kyle M, Cotner J, Makino W, Markow T, Watts T, Hobbie S, Fagan W, Schade J, Hood J, Sterner RW (2003) Growth rate-stoichiometry couplings in diverse biota. Ecol Lett 6:936–943CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ferrão-Filho AD, Tessier AJ, DeMott WR (2007) Sensitivity of herbivorous zooplankton to phosphorus-deficient diets: testing stoichiometric theory and the growth rate hypothesis. Limnol Oceanogr 52:407–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gliwicz ZM (1990) Food thresholds and body size in cladocerans. Nature 343:638–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gliwicz ZM, Pijanowska J (1989) The role of predation in zooplankton succession. In: Sommer U (ed) Plankton ecology: succession in plankton communities. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 253–295Google Scholar
  14. Goulden CE, Henry L (1984) Lipid energy reserves and their role in cladocera. In: Meyers DG, Strickler JR (eds) Trophic interactions within aquatic ecosystems. Westview Press, Boulder, pp 167–186Google Scholar
  15. Hall SR (2004) Stoichiometrically explicit competition between grazers: species replacement, coexistence, and priority effects along resource supply gradients. Am Nat 164:157–172CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Hall DJ, Threlkeld ST, Burns CW, Crowley PH (1976) Size-efficiency hypothesis and size structure of zooplankton communities. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 7:177–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hall SR, Leibold MA, Lytle DA, Smith VH (2004) Stoichiometry and planktonic grazer composition over gradients of light, nutrients, and predation risk. Ecology 85:2291–2301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hart RC, Jarvis AC (1993) In situ determinations of bacterial selectivity and filtration-rates by five cladoceran zooplankters in a hypertrophic subtropical reservoir. J Plankton Res 15:295–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. He XJ, Wang WX (2007) Kinetics of phosphorus in Daphnia at different food concentrations and carbon: phosphorus ratios. Limnol Oceanogr 52:395–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hessen DO (1992) Nutrient element limitation of zooplankton production. Am Nat 140:799–814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hessen DO, Andersen T (1990) Bacteria as a source of phosphorus for zooplankton. Hydrobiologia 206:217–223Google Scholar
  22. Hessen DO, Andersen T, Lyche A (1990) Carbon metabolism in a humic lake—pool sizes and cycling through zooplankton. Limnol Oceanogr 35:84–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Higgie M, Blows MW (2008) The evolution of reproductive character displacement conflicts with how sexual selection operates within a species. Evolution 62:1192–1203CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Hobbie JE, Daley RJ, Jasper S (1977) Use of nuclepore filters for counting bacteria by fluorescence microscopy. Appl Environ Microbiol 33:1225–1228PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Kilham SS, Kreeger DA, Lynn SG, Goulden CE, Herrera L (1998) COMBO: A defined freshwater culture medium for algae and zooplankton. Hydrobiologia 377:147–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Knoechel R, Holtby LB (1986) Construction and validation of a body-length-based model for the prediction of cladoceran community filtering rates. Limnol Oceanogr 31:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lampert W (1977) Studies on the carbon balance of Daphnia pulex de Geer as related to environmental conditions. IV. Determination of the ‘‘threshold’’ concentration as a factor controlling the abundance of zooplankton species. Arch Hydrobiol 48:361–368Google Scholar
  28. Lynch M (1978) Complex interactions between natural coexploiters Daphnia and Ceriodaphnia. Ecology 59:552–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lynch M, Weider LJ, Lampert W (1986) Measurement of the carbon balance in Daphnia. Limnol Oceanogr 31:17–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Makino W, Cotner JB, Sterner RW, Elser JJ (2003) Are bacteria more like plants or animals? Growth rate and resource dependence of bacterial C:N:P stoichiometry. Funct Ecol 17:121–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Neill WE (1975) Experimental studies of microcrustacean competition, community composition and efficiency of resource utilization. Ecology 56:809–826CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pace ML, Porter KG, Feig YS (1983) Species-specific and age-specific differences in bacterial resource utilization by two co-occurring cladocerans. Ecology 64:1145–1156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Peters RH (1984) Methods for the study of feeding, grazing and assimilation by zooplankton. In: Downing JA, Rigler FH (eds) A manual on methods for the assessment of secondary productivity in fresh waters. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 336–412Google Scholar
  34. Peterson BJ, Hobbie JE, Haney JF (1978) Daphnia grazing on natural bacteria. Limnol Oceanogr 23:1039–1044CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Porter KG, Feig YS, Vetter EF (1983) Morphology, flow regimes, and filtering rates of Daphnia, Ceriodaphnia, and Bosmina fed natural bacteria. Oecologia 58:156–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ravet JL, Brett MT (2006) Phytoplankton essential fatty acid and phosphorus content constraints on Daphnia somatic growth and reproduction. Limnol Oceanogr 51:2438–2452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Romanovsky YE, Feniova IY (1985) Competition among cladocera—effect of different levels of food-supply. Oikos 44:243–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Shimizu Y, Urabe J (2008) Regulation of phosphorus stoichiometry and growth rate of consumers: theoretical and experimental analyses with Daphnia. Oecologia 155:21–31CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Smith DW, Cooper SD (1982) Competition among cladocera. Ecology 63:1004–1015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sterner RW, Elser JJ (2002) Ecological stoichiometry. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  41. Tessier AJ, Goulden CE (1982) Estimating food limitation in cladoceran populations. Limnol Oceanogr 27:707–717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Threlkeld ST (1976) Starvation and size structure of zooplankton communities. Freshw Biol 6:489–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Urabe J, Watanabe Y (1992) Possibility of N-limitation or P-limitation for planktonic cladocerans—an experimental test. Limnol Oceanogr 37:244–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Urabe J, Elser JJ, Kyle M, Yoshida T, Sekino T, Kawabata Z (2002) Herbivorous animals can mitigate unfavourable ratios of energy and material supplies by enhancing nutrient recycling. Ecol Lett 5:177–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Vadstein O, Jensen A, Olsen Y, Reinertsen H (1988) Growth and phosphorus status of limnetic phytoplankton and bacteria. Limnol Oceanogr 33:489–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Verhoeven KJF, Simonsen KL, McIntyre LM (2005) Implementing false discovery rate control: increasing your power. Oikos 108:643–647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. von Elert E, Martin-Creuzburg D, Le Coz JR (2003) Absence of sterols constrains carbon transfer between cyanobacteria and a freshwater herbivore (Daphnia galeata). Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 270:1209–1214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Waite TA, Campbell LG (2006) Controlling the false discovery rate and increasing statistical power in ecological studies. Ecoscience 13:439–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Yanagimoto T, Yamamoto E (1979) Estimation of safe doses: critical review of the hockey stick regression method. Environ Health Perspect 32:193–199CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Ecological Society of Japan 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of Life SciencesTohoku UniversitySendaiJapan

Personalised recommendations