Advertisement

Hydrobiologia

, Volume 203, Issue 1–2, pp 53–61 | Cite as

The accuracy of population density estimates of a horizontally distributed zooplankton community in Dutch fish ponds

  • Johan Verreth
Article

Abstract

To elucidate the effect of the horizontal distribution of different zooplankton populations on the accuracy of population density estimates in a fish pond, 40 samples were taken according to a rectangular grid which divided the pond into 5 longitudinal rows and 10 transversal columns. The zooplankton consisted of 55% copepods (mainly Acanthocyclops viridis), 43% cladocerans (mainly Daphnia longispina and Bosmina longirostris) and 2% Rotatoria. The index of patchiness was mostly higher than 1, revealing a strongly clumped distribution. B. longirostris and D. longispina aggregated in the centre of the pond, exhibiting a shore avoiding behaviour. Chydoridae and Ceriodaphnia quadrangula were concentrated in the littoral zone. Besides this habitat related dispersion, a more passive wind induced distribution was detected for most taxonomic groups. Copepod nauplii were concentrated at the leeward side of the pond while elder copepod stages of A. viridis were found in higher densities at the windward end. Based on the calculated coefficients of variation, a table of the accuracies of the density estimates in relation to the number of samples was presented. For more detailed studies on a particular species population, about 25 samples (column samples of 10 L each) are needed to obtain an accuracy varying between 10 an 20%, depending upon the taxonomic group. A slightly higher precision can be obtained, however at a strongly increasing effort. For the practice of fish farming, two to five sample stations should suffice to estimate the total zooplankton abundance with a 30 to 10% accuracy respectively.

Keywords

Taxonomic Group Littoral Zone Zooplankton Community Rectangular Grid Fish Pond 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Cassie, R. M., 1962. Frequency distribution models in the ecology of plankton and other organisms. J. Anim. Ecol. 31: 65–92.Google Scholar
  2. Dumont, H. J., 1967. A five day study of patchiness in Bosmina coregoni Baird in a shallow eutrophic lake. Mem. Ist. ital. Idrobiol. 22: 81–103.Google Scholar
  3. Davids, C., M. Stolp & C. J. De Groot, 1987. The Cladocerans of the littoral zone of Lake Maarsseveen. I. Hydrobiol. Bull. 21: 71–79.Google Scholar
  4. De Nie, H. W., H. J. Bromley & J. Vijverberg, 1980. Distribution patterns of zooplankton in Tjeukemeer, The Netherlands. J. Plankton Res. 2: 317–334.Google Scholar
  5. De Nie, H. W. & J. Vijverberg, 1985. The accuracy of population density estimates of copepods and cladocerans, using data from Tjeukemeer (the Netherlands) as an example. Hydrobiologia 124: 3–11.Google Scholar
  6. Evans, M. S. & D. S. Sell, 1983. Zooplankton sampling strategies for environmental studies. Hydrobiologia 99: 215–223.Google Scholar
  7. George, D. G. & R. W. Edwards, 1976. The effect of wind on the distribution of chlorophyll A and crustacean plankton in a shallow eutrophic reservoir. J. Appl. Ecol. 13: 667–690.Google Scholar
  8. Hurlbert, S. H. & M. S. Mulla, 1981. Impacts of mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis) predation on plankton communities. Hydrobiologia 83: 125–151.Google Scholar
  9. Kott, P., 1953. Modified whirling apparatus for subsampling of plankton. Aust. J. Mar. Freshwat. Res. 4: 387–397.Google Scholar
  10. Langford, R. R. & E. G. Jermolajev, 1966. Direct effect of wind on plankton distribution. Verh. Int. Ver. Limnol. 16: 188–193.Google Scholar
  11. Lloyd, M., 1967. Mean crowding. J. Anim. Ecol. 36: 1–30.Google Scholar
  12. Malone, B. J. & D. J. McQueen, 1983. Horizontal patchiness in zooplankton populations in two Ontario kettle lakes. Hydrobiologia 99: 101–124.Google Scholar
  13. SAS Institute Inc., 1985. SAS User's Guide: Statistics, Version 5 Edition. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, 956 pp.Google Scholar
  14. Searle, S. R., 1971. Linear Models. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, London, Sydney, Toronto, 532 pp.Google Scholar
  15. Siebeck, O., 1964. Ist die ‘Uferflucht’ planktischer Crustaceen eine Folge der Vertikalwanderung. Arch. Hydrobiol. 60: 419–427.Google Scholar
  16. Sokal, R. R. & F. J. Rohlf, 1969. Biometry. The principles and practice of statistics in biological research. Freeman, San Francisco, CA, 776 pp.Google Scholar
  17. Spencer, C. N. & D. L. King, 1984. Role of Fish in Regulation of Animal Communities in Eutrophic Ponds. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 41: 1851–1855.Google Scholar
  18. Wattiez, C., 1978. Agrégation et migration verticale du zooplancton dans de petits étangs peu profonds. Hydrobiologia 61: 49–67.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Johan Verreth
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Fish culture and FisheriesWageningen Agricultural UniversityWageningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations