Abstract
In temperate lakes, eutrophication and warm temperatures can promote cyanobacteria blooms that reduce water quality and impair food-chain support. Although parasitic chytrids of phytoplankton might compete with zooplankton, they also indirectly support zooplankton populations through the “mycoloop”, which helps move energy and essential dietary molecules from inedible phytoplankton to zooplankton. Here, we consider how the mycoloop might fit into the biodiversity–ecosystem functioning (BEF) framework. BEF considers how more diverse communities can benefit ecosystem functions like zooplankton production. Chytrids are themselves part of pelagic food webs and they directly contribute to zooplankton diets through spore production and by increasing host edibility. The additional way that chytrids might support BEF is if they engage in “kill-the-winner” dynamics. In contrast to grazers, which result in “eat-the-edible” dynamics, kill-the-winner dynamics can occur for host-specific infectious diseases that control the abundance of dominant (in this case inedible) hosts and thus limit the competitive exclusion of poorer (in this case edible) competitors. Thus, if phytoplankton diversity provides functions, and chytrids support algal diversity, chytrids could indirectly favour edible phytoplankton. All three mechanisms are linked to diversity and therefore provide some “insurance” for zooplankton production against the impacts of eutrophication and warming. In our perspective piece, we explore evidence for the chytrid insurance hypothesis, identify exceptions and knowledge gaps, and outline future research directions.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
The Irish Potato famine is reminder of what can happen when a population relies on a narrow diet. In lakes, generalist grazers like Daphnia push the phytoplankton community towards a low-diversity state dominated by inedible species at the expense of food-chain support for zooplankton. Indeed, the theory of biodiversity–ecosystem functioning ascribes several positive benefits to diverse communities (Table 1). A proposed source of food during phytoplankton blooms is the microbial loop (Pomeroy 1974) that occurs when bacteria, phagotrophic flagellates, and protozoans decompose organic material and then become a supplemental food source for zooplankton (Porter 1996). However, microbes are not always a sufficient replacement diet for edible phytoplankton (Taipale et al. 2012).
Like the microbial loop hypothesis, the mycoloop hypothesis aims to explain how zooplankton often persist under bloom conditions (Kagami et al. 2007a; Kagami et al. 2007b; Grami et al. 2011; Table 1). In contrast to the microbial loop, the chytrid fungi (Phylum Chytridiomycota) that infect and kill phytoplankton (not the distantly related chytrids that infect amphibian hosts), form an energetic loop that redirects energy from inedible phytoplankton to zooplankton in the form of edible fungal zoospores (Kagami et al. 2014; Frenken et al. 2017). This mycoloop provides essential dietary molecules (Taube et al. 2019; Gerphagnon et al. 2019; Rasconi et al. 2020) that benefit zooplankton (Agha et al. 2016; Frenken et al. 2020a; Frenken et al. 2020b; Abonyi et al. 2023) and exceed the carbon cycled through the microbial loop (Abonyi et al. 2023). Therefore, the mycoloop is a potentially more important source of food during bloom conditions than the microbial loop (e.g. Kagami et al. 2007a; Kagami et al. 2007b; Agha et al. 2016; Abonyi et al. 2023). But if and how chytrids contribute to pelagic food webs outside bloom events is unclear. In this perspective piece, we consider a new idea called the “chytrid insurance hypothesis” that considers a role for parasites in biodiversity–ecosystem functioning.
The biodiversity–ecosystem functioning hypothesis (BEF) argues that diversity can promote stability, production, and other ecosystem attributes (Naeem and Li 1997; Hooper et al. 2005; Duffy et al. 2017). This can occur if having more species in a community makes it easier for the community to respond to changing or unpredictable conditions due to mechanisms like complementarity (species play different roles) or a portfolio/sampling effect (if there are many species, at least one is bound to be successful at a particular moment) (Loreau and Hector 2001; Table 1). To that end, according to the insurance hypothesis, biodiversity increases the chance that some species maintain functioning even if others fail (Yachi and Loreau 1999; Table 1). Just as a diverse stock portfolio gives some insurance that a worker’s retirement account makes steady gains even in an uncertain financial market, biodiversity can help insure that an ecosystem will function and provide benefits even in unstable or unpredictable conditions. Thus, it seems plausible that a more diverse diet could help insure zooplankton against population crashes (Striebel et al. 2009). As envisioned by Frainer et al. (2018), there are three ways that chytrid parasites might mediate biodiversity–ecosystem functioning: (1) parasites produce edible stages, (2) infected hosts are altered in a way that adds trait diversity to a host population, (3) parasites help maintain host diversity. We propose that chytrids can do all three: (1) free-swimming chytrid zoospores are nutritious food for zooplankton, (2) chytrid sporangia can make inedible hosts edible by infection of the host, (3) chytrid host specificity maintains edible phytoplankton diversity. If true, chytrids provide insurance to zooplankton against conditions that would otherwise lead to blooms of inedible phytoplankton.
Zooplankton and phytoplankton communities
Phytoplankton community composition can regulate zooplankton growth (Behl and Stibor 2015). Zooplankton can be picky eaters, preferring small- to medium-sized diet items, such as Cryptophytes and green algae (Fig. 1). Filter-feeding zooplankton, like rotifers, selectively graze on small things < 10 µm (Arndt 1993), whereas non-selective cladocerans (Daphnia; Burns 1968; Carpenter et al. 1993) and copepods (Vanderploeg et al. 1984; Bern 1994) eat small- and medium-sized food (< 30 μm). However, most zooplankton are unable to eat large phytoplankton (> 30 µm). Diverse phytoplankton communities tend to have more edible species. More diverse communities are also better food, because they have more lipids (Stockenreiter et al. 2012), including long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (LC PUFA; Marzetz et al. 2017) that zooplankton need (Tessier and Goulden 1982), but cannot synthesise (Gulati and Demott 1997; Table 1). Under eutrophication and warming conditions (Paerl and Huisman 2008; O’Neil et al. 2012), the diverse phytoplankton community often shifts from diatoms and chrysophytes to a few green algae or cyanobacteria (Ptacnik et al. 2008; Glibert et al. 2018; Gobbler 2020). Figure 1 illustrates how this compositional shift reduces the availability of LC PUFA and sterols for zooplankton (Taipale et al. 2019; Calderini et al. 2023), thereby decreasing zooplankton production (Elert et al. 2003; Ger et al. 2016; Peltomaa et al. 2017). Indeed, because phytoplankton vary in their edibility and nutritional value (Taipale et al. 2013), phytoplankton community structure can affect zooplankton production more than phytoplankton abundance (Calderini et al. 2023).
Parasitic chytrids are pervasive and diverse in pelagic food webs
Key to our hypothesis is that chytrids are diverse and their abundance scales with host density. There are many chytrid species, and collectively, they often reach 20% and can reach almost 100% prevalence during phytoplankton blooms (Rasconi 2012). Free-swimming zoospores (~ 2–5 µm; Sparrow 1960) seek out and, depending on the chytrid species, infect a range of algae and cyanobacteria, mainly inedible taxa (Sparrow 1960; Sime-Ngando 2012; Money 2016). Upon successful infection, chytrids develop sessile sporangia that convert host biomass into spores. This reduces phytoplankton fitness and can be fatal (Frenken et al. 2017).
Chytrid zoospores are nutritious food for zooplankton
The mycoloop is an example of how adding parasite species can directly increase ecosystem functioning. Although it might seem as if chytrids simply compete with zooplankton for phytoplankton, zoospores are eaten by both selective (e.g. rotifers, see Frenken et al. 2018) and non-selective filter feeders (e.g. cladocerans, see Kagami et al. 2007a; Kagami et al. 2007b; Agha et al. 2016). Notably, zoospores are nutritious, because they convert short-chain to long-chain PUFA (Taube et al. 2019; Rasconi et al. 2020) and can produce sterols de novo (Gerphagnon et al. 2019). Consequently, chytrids benefit zooplankton by converting inedible poor-quality phytoplankton into nutritious edible zoospores through “trophic upgrading” (Breteler et al. 1999; Veloza et al. 2006; Bec et al. 2006, 2010; Table 1).
The mycoloop hypothesis has been subject to population modelling to evaluate scenarios and explore population dynamics (Grami et al. 2011; Miki et al. 2011; Kagami et al. 2014; Frenken et al. 2020a; Frenken et al. 2020b; Thongthaisong et al. 2022). In a pioneering paper, Miki et al. (2011) found that although the mycoloop could have positive effects on zooplankton production, the overall impact could be negative if zooplankton growth efficiency was lower when feeding on chytrids than on small algae (Fig. 4, left panel). In more recent models, parasitism by chytrids was found to alleviate competition amongst edible phytoplankton, increasing zooplankton production (Kagami et al. 2014). High zooplankton densities can also reduce chytrid transmission (through consuming free-living infective zoospores) and overgraze edible algae, favouring the growth of inedible phytoplankton that can then feedback to depress the zooplankton population (Kagami et al. 2014; Thongthaisong et al. 2022). Although modelling indicates that the mycoloop predominantly influences blooms (Thongthaisong et al. 2022), this might relate to modelling assumptions that nutrients are not recycled in the system through zooplankton excretion and death. Model outcomes, thus, may hinge on critical details about how the mycoloop system is defined mathematically.
Chytrid infection helps make inedible hosts edible
In addition to producing edible spores, chytrids diversify zooplankton diets by fragmenting inedible phytoplankton (Gerphagnon et al. 2013; Agha et al. 2016; Frenken et al. 2020a; Frenken et al. 2020b) and increasing their nutritional quality (Gerphagnon et al. 2019; Taube et al. 2019; Rasconi et al. 2020; Table 1). Following fragmentation, zooplankton can graze on both chytrid zoospores (Gerphagnon et al. 2019; Taube et al. 2019; Rasconi et al. 2020) and phytoplankton fragments (Abonyi et al. 2023), providing a more diverse resource to sustain zooplankton populations. By providing carbon, LC PUFA, and sterols, chytrids may act as a buffer for energetic and essential molecule requirements when they are most needed by zooplankton (Fig. 2; Table 1).
Chytrid host specificity maintains edible phytoplankton diversity
Although it might seem like phytoplankton production alone should drive zooplankton growth rates, fast-growing edible algae in diverse communities can also enhance zooplankton growth (Marzetz et al. 2017). Zooplankton growth appears to increase because higher diversity enhances diet quality (Marzetz et al. 2017) due to a higher likelihood of encountering high-quality resources (i.e. the sampling effect; Naeem and Wright 2003). When ecosystem functions like zooplankton production and water quality are supported by phytoplankton diversity, there is the potential for a positive BEF relationship (Fridley 2001; Loreau and Hector 2001). Indeed, a positive BEF relationship is a key assumption on which the chytrid insurance hypothesis rests. Specifically, chytrids may diversify phytoplankton communities with complementarity or portfolio effects that benefit zooplankton communities as well as physical processes like nutrient cycling in water.
Succession in plankton can be predictable, with some systems experiencing seasonal blooms (Sommer et al. 1986). In early stages, phytoplankton density is low, and reduced competition allows additive community assembly (see Table 1), promoting diverse and rapidly growing communities (Weis et al. 2007). Edible phytoplankton are expected to particularly benefit zooplankton during early successional stages (Thongthaisong et al. 2022). In non-bloom conditions, chytrid prevalence typically remains moderate (ranging between 3 and 20%, Sime-Ngando 2012; Gsell et al. 2022). However, because most chytrids are host specific (e.g. Rhizophydium planktonicum, Rhizophydium megarrhizum; Frenken et al. 2017 and references therein), “kill-the-winner” dynamics, where numerically common taxa suffer more from parasitism (Thingstad et al. 2000; Table 1), might maintain diversity amongst edible phytoplankton. Indeed, the community composition of chytrids often follows the seasonal dynamics of the phytoplankton community, with infection rates reflecting phytoplankton composition and abundance (Rasconi et al. 2012). Thus, the interactions amongst chytrids, phytoplankton and zooplankton may vary considerably over succession (Fig. 3).
At later successional stages, zooplankton depress the abundance of edible phytoplankton, which releases nutrients and may allow inedible phytoplankton to undergo monospecific blooms (Huisman et al. 1999; Prince et al. 2008; Chakraborty and Feudel 2014). Depending on the presence of generalist grazers like Daphnia (Tessier and Woodruff 2002) and the lake’s trophic state, large-sized diatoms, green algae, or cyanobacteria can eventually dominate over others (Sommer et al. 1986). Collectively, eutrophication, grazing on edible phytoplankton, and lake warming intensify the dominance of inedible phytoplankton, particularly cyanobacteria (Paerl and Huisman 2008; O’Neil et al. 2012), resulting in more efficient resource use for phytoplankton but impaired ecosystem functioning for zooplankton (Filstrup et al. 2014). Like bloom-forming taxa, chytrid densities increase with lake trophic state and track positively with host dominance (Rasconi et al. 2012; Thongthaisong et al. 2022). High rates of chytrid infection can suppress host density (Agha et al. 2016; Frenken et al. 2018; 2020a; 2020b; Abonyi et al. 2023), suggesting a strong regulatory role for chytrids under bloom conditions. By predominantly infecting most inedible phytoplankton (Van Donk and Bruning 1992; Frenken et al. 2017; Sassenhagen et al. 2023), chytrids might reduce the rate at which inedible species outcompete edible species (Rasconi et al. 2011). For instance, phytoplankton diversity increased after a chytrid-induced decline of the dominant inedible diatom, Asterionella formosa (Canter and Lund 1951; Van Donk and Ringelberg 1983), remaining the best evidence that chytrids can foster phytoplankton diversity.
Although the chytrid insurance hypothesis assumes that chytrids increase phytoplankton community evenness and reduce phytoplankton abundance, the diversity and abundance of phytoplankton communities (and the relationship between diversity and abundance) should feedback to affect chytrid success. Such feedbacks may strengthen or weaken the chytrid insurance hypothesis. For instance, if phytoplankton communities are additive (more nutrients or diverse habitats leads to more phytoplankton individuals per species), then host-specific and generalist chytrids should increase in prevalence with phytoplankton diversity, further increasing phytoplankton evenness (and chytrid insurance) whilst regulating phytoplankton abundance. If phytoplankton communities are substitutive (more diversity leads to fewer individuals per species; Table 1), then increased phytoplankton diversity should not affect overall chytrid prevalence, but should increase the proportion of generalist chytrid species, thereby reducing the potential for kill-the-winner dynamics and chytrid insurance. Furthermore, if zoospores do not discriminate amongst host species when attempting to infect, a diversity-dilution effect could result (Frenken et al. 2017) whereby increased phytoplankton diversity would decrease host-specific chytrid species, further reducing chytrid insurance. Finally, phytoplankton diversity-abundance relationships might change with succession or environmental conditions, making chytrid insurance context dependent.
Testing the chytrid insurance hypothesis
Field observations, lab experiments, and mathematical models have been used to investigate the mycoloop hypothesis and these approaches could also be used to assess the conditions under which the chytrid insurance hypothesis might hold. For instance, field observations on the mycoloop could be expanded to include more information about the associations between phytoplankton diversity, chytrid prevalence, and zooplankton growth and abundance. Obvious predictions are that zooplankton growth rates increase with phytoplankton diversity and that chytrids are more likely to infect abundant phytoplankton species. One growing source of information is environmental DNA samples that can indicate chytrid and phytoplankton diversity, albeit with limitations related to the paucity of sequence data for parasitic chytrids and the inability to quantify abundance (Frenken et al. 2017). This and more traditional information are needed to document when the chytrid insurance hypothesis is important in nature.
Some investigators have manipulated the presence of chytrids in microcosms to test cause and effect relationships. Chytrids can be isolated from field collections and kept in culture for short-term microcosm experiments (e.g. Agha et al. 2016; Kagami et al. 2007a; Kagami et al. 2007b; Abonyi et al. 2023). Future work could manipulate phytoplankton diversity to evaluate the conditions under which chytrids can increase zooplankton growth. Furthermore, infection experiments between different chytrid and phytoplankton species would help evaluate the key assumption that chytrids engage in kill-the-winner strategies that promote phytoplankton diversity. It should also be possible to gauge how diet quality and diversity affect zooplankton growth in synthetic communities. Finally, by manipulating the presence or absence of chytrids, researchers could assess the degree that the mycoloop fosters phytoplankton diversity and delays or constrains succession towards blooms and associated zooplankton crashes. Given that there are many potential reasons for associations between chytrid parasitism, phytoplankton diversity, and zooplankton growth rates, laboratory experiments will be key to deciphering whether chytrids help foster a positive biodiversity–ecosystem functioning relationship or are simply correlated with it.
The chytrid insurance hypothesis could also be subject to population modelling to evaluate scenarios and explore population dynamics difficult to evaluate empirically. Models could be designed to determine the parameter ranges under which insurance occurs and the extent and nature to which insurance affects pelagic food webs. Doing so is not trivial because to identify the range of conditions under which the presence of chytrids facilitates a positive BEF relationship would require modelling food diversity, food quality, and phytoplankton diversity. Although such models have not been attempted, foundational mycoloop models have fallen into two categories: Lotka–Volterra style NPZ models (see Franks 2002) like Miki et al. (2011; Fig. 4, left panel) and food-web models as pioneered by Grami et al. (2011). Food-web models may be better suited for encompassing a broader diversity of edible and inedible phytoplankton and their various indirect effects. Alternatively, Smith et al. (2016) provides a model of phytoplankton diversity designed to evaluate BEF that might be altered to include chytrids. Such models are not simple, but seem worth exploring.
Regardless of the modelling framework, considering that chytrids have distinct parasitic and dispersal stages might lead to different dynamics than the current modelling approach of treating chytrid spores like predators (Miki et al. 2011; Thongthaisong et al. 2022). This is because recognising an infected class for phytoplankton will allow chytrids to directly compete with uninfected hosts for resources, and suffer the consequences of intimacy if hosts die (Fig. 4, right panel). Indeed, models could benefit from more information about the chytrid life cycle, such as which hosts are infected by spores, and the effect of sporangia on infected host reproduction and mortality. Another consideration for modelling is that chytrid resting stages may increase system stability or that environmental factors like light and temperature can constrain infection dynamics (Gsell et al. 2022). Finally, allowing nutrient recycling through zooplankton excretion and death (Barranco et al. 2020) would reduce phytoplankton competition for nutrients, and this might alter previous modelling conclusions that chytrid effects are limited to bloom periods (Fig. 4, right panel). These suggestions should be approached with the understanding that incorporating additional complexities in models can reduce tractability and pose challenges in parameterisation. Yet when combined with field and experimental work, modelling will likely be needed to fully understand the conditions under which the chytrid insurance hypothesis applies.
Conclusion
In posing the chytrid insurance hypothesis, we integrate the mycoloop into a biodiversity–ecosystem functioning framework. Biodiversity might benefit zooplankton production in three ways. First, adding diversity in the form of edible chytrid parasites creates potential for the mycoloop to benefit zooplankton directly. Second, chytrid parasites further add to diet diversity by altering the edibility of infected hosts. Finally, if phytoplankton diversity leads to more predictable and higher quality food, then kill-the-winner dynamics that promote phytoplankton diversity could reduce the conditions under which non-edible phytoplankton species bloom. All of these outcomes seem plausible, at least under some conditions, but models, experiments, and observations are needed to test core assumptions and refine predictions.
Data availability
No data are included in the manuscript.
References
Abonyi A, Rasconi S, Ptacnik R, Pilecky M, Kainz MJ (2023) Chytrids enhance Daphnia fitness by selectively retained chytrid-synthesised stearidonic acid and conversion of short-chain to long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids. Freshw Biol 68(1):77–90
Agha R, Saebelfeld M, Manthey C, Rohrlack T, Wolinska J (2016) Chytrid parasitism facilitates trophic transfer between bloom-forming cyanobacteria and zooplankton (Daphnia). Sci Rep 6:35039
Arndt H (1993) Rotifers as predators on components of the microbial web (bacteria, heterotrophic flagellates, ciliates)—a review. Rotifer Symposium VI. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 231–246
Arts MT, Brett MT, Kainz M (2009) Lipids in aquatic ecosystems. Springer Science & Business Media
Barranco VS, Van der Meer MT, Kagami M, Van den Wyngaert S, Van de Waal DB, Van Donk E, Gsell AS (2020) Trophic position, elemental ratios and nitrogen transfer in a planktonic host–parasite–consumer food chain including a fungal parasite. Oecologia 194(4):541–554
Bec A, Martin-Creuzburg D, von Elert E (2006) Trophic upgrading of autotrophic picoplankton by the heterotrophic nanoflagellate Paraphysomonas sp. Limnol Oceanogr 51(4):1699–1707
Bec A, Martin-Creuzburg D, Von Elert E (2010) Fatty acid composition of the heterotrophic nanoflagellate Paraphysomonas sp.: influence of diet and de novo biosynthesis. Aquatic Biol 9(2):107–112
Behl S, Stibor H (2015) Prey diversity and prey identity affect herbivore performance on different time scales in a long term aquatic food-web experiment. Oikos 124(9):1192–1202
Bern L (1994) Particle selection over a broad size range by crustacean zooplankton. Freshw Biol 32(1):105–112
Breteler WK, Schogt N, Baas M, Schouten S, Kraay GW (1999) Trophic upgrading of food quality by protozoans enhancing copepod growth: role of essential lipids. Mar Biol 135(1):191–198
Burns CW (1968) The relationship between body size of filter-feeding Cladocera and the maximum size of particle ingested. Limnol Oceanogr 13(4):675–678
Calderini ML, Pääkkönen S, Salmi P, Peltomaa E, Taipale SJ (2023) Temperature, phosphorus and species composition will all influence phytoplankton production and content of polyunsaturated fatty acids. J Plankton Res. https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/fbad026
Canter HM, Lund JWG (1951) Studies on plankton parasites: III. Examples of the interaction between parasitism and other factors determining the growth of diatoms. Ann Bot 15:359–371
Carpenter SR, Lathrop RC, Muñoz-del-Rio A (1993) Comparison of dynamic models for edible phytoplankton. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 50(8):1757–1767
Chakraborty S, Feudel U (2014) Harmful algal blooms: combining excitability and competition. Thyroid Res 7:221–237
Duffy JE, Godwin CM, Cardinale BJ (2017) Biodiversity effects in the wild are common and as strong as key drivers of productivity. Nature 549(7671):261–264
Elert EV, Martin-Creuzburg D, Le Coz JR (2003) Absence of sterols constrains carbon transfer between cyanobacteria and a freshwater herbivore (Daphnia galeata). Proc Royal so London. Series b: Biol Sci 270(1520):1209–1214
Filstrup CT, Hillebrand H, Heathcote AJ, Harpole WS, Downing JA (2014) Cyanobacteria dominance influences resource use efficiency and community turnover in phytoplankton and zooplankton communities. Ecol Lett 17(4):464–474
Frainer A, McKie BG, Amundsen PA, Knudsen R, Lafferty KD (2018) Parasitism and the biodiversity-functioning relationship. Trends Ecol Evol 33(4):260–268
Franks PJ (2002) NPZ models of plankton dynamics: their construction, coupling to physics, and application. J Oceanogr 58(2):379–387
Frenken T, Alacid E, Berger SA, Bourne EC, Gerphagnon M, Grossart HP, Agha R (2017) Integrating chytrid fungal parasites into plankton ecology: research gaps and needs. Environ Microbiol 19(10):3802–3822
Frenken T, Wierenga J, van Donk E, Declerck SA, de Senerpont Domis LN, Rohrlack T, Van de Waal DB (2018) Fungal parasites of a toxic inedible cyanobacterium provide food to zooplankton. Limnol Oceanogr 63(6):2384–2393
Frenken T, Miki T, Kagami M, Van de Waal DB, Van Donk E, Rohrlack T, Gsell AS (2020a) The potential of zooplankton in constraining chytrid epidemics in phytoplankton hosts. Ecology 101(1):e02900
Frenken T, Wolinska J, Tao Y, Rohrlack T, Agha R (2020b) Infection of filamentous phytoplankton by fungal parasites enhances herbivory in pelagic food webs. Limnol Oceanogr. https://doi.org/10.1002/lno.11474
Fridley JD (2001) The influence of species diversity on ecosystem productivity: how, where, and why? Oikos 93:514–526
Ger KA, Urrutia-Cordero P, Frost PC, Hansson LA, Sarnelle O, Wilson AE, Lürling M (2016) The interaction between cyanobacteria and zooplankton in a more eutrophic world. Harmful Algae 54:128–144
Gerphagnon M, Latour D, Colombet J, Sime-Ngando T (2013) Fungal parasitism: life cycle, dynamics and impact on cyanobacterial blooms. PLoS ONE 8(4):e60894
Gerphagnon M, Agha R, Martin-Creuzburg D, Bec A, Perriere F, Rad-Menéndez C, Wolinska J (2019) Comparison of sterol and fatty acid profiles of chytrids and their hosts reveals trophic upgrading of nutritionally inadequate phytoplankton by fungal parasites. Environ Microbiol 21(3):949–958
Glibert PM, Al-Azri A, Icarus Allen J, Bouwman AF, Beusen AH, Burford MA, Zhou M (2018) Key questions and recent research advances on harmful algal blooms in relation to nutrients and eutrophication. Global ecology and oceanography of harmful algal blooms. Springer, pp 229–259
Gobler CJ (2020) Climate change and harmful algal blooms: insights and perspective. Harmful Algae 91:101731
Grami B, Rasconi S, Niquil N, Jobard M, Saint-Béat B, Sime-Ngando T (2011) Functional effects of parasites on food web properties during the spring diatom bloom in Lake Pavin: a linear inverse modeling analysis. PLoS ONE 6(8):e23273
Gsell AS, Wolinska J, Preuß K, Teurlincx S, Özkundakci D, Hilt S, Adrian R (2022) Long-term trends and seasonal variation in host density, temperature, and nutrients differentially affect chytrid fungi parasitising lake phytoplankton. Freshwater Biol 67(9):1532–1542
Gulati R, Demott W (1997) The role of food quality for zooplankton: remarks on the state-of-the-art, perspectives and priorities. Freshw Biol 38(3):753–768
Hooper DU, Chapin Iii FS, Ewel JJ, Hector A, Inchausti P, Lavorel S, Schmid B (2005) Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: a consensus of current knowledge. Ecol Monogr 75(1):3–35
Huisman J, van Oostveen P, Weissing FJ (1999) Species dynamics in phytoplankton blooms: incomplete mixing and competition for light. Am Nat 154(1):46–68
Ilić M, Cordellier M, Fink P (2021) Intrapopulation variability in a functional trait: susceptibility of Daphnia to limitation by dietary fatty acids. Freshw Biol. https://doi.org/10.1111/fwb.13623
Kagami M, de Bruin A, Ibelings BW, van Donk E (2007a) Parasitic chytrids: their effects on phytoplankton communities and food-web dynamics. Hydrobiologia 578(1):113–129
Kagami M, von Elert E, Ibelings BW, de Bruin A, Van Donk E (2007b) The parasitic chytrid, Zygorhizidium, facilitates the growth of the cladoceran zooplankter, Daphnia, in cultures of the inedible alga, Asterionella. Proc Royal Soc b: Biol Sci 274(1617):1561–1566
Kagami M, Miki T, Takimoto G (2014) Mycoloop: chytrids in aquatic food webs. Front Microbiol 5:166
Loreau M, Hector A (2001) Partitioning selection and complementarity in biodiversity experiments. Nature 412:72–76
Martin-Creuzburg D, von Elert E, Hoffmann KH (2008) Nutritional constraints at the cyanobacteria—Daphnia magna interface: the role of sterols. Limnol Oceanogr 53(2):456–468
Marzetz V, Koussoroplis AM, Martin-Creuzburg D, Striebel M, Wacker A (2017) Linking primary producer diversity and food quality effects on herbivores: a biochemical perspective. Sci Rep 7(1):1–9
Miki T, Takimoto G, Kagami M (2011) Roles of parasitic fungi in aquatic food webs: a theoretical approach. Freshw Biol 56(6):1173–1183
Money NP (2016) Fungal diversity. The fungi. Academic Press, pp 1–36
Müller-Navarra DC, Brett MT, Liston AM, Goldman CR (2000) A highly unsaturated fatty acid predicts carbon transfer between primary producers and consumers. Nature 403(6765):74–77
Naeem S, Li S (1997) Biodiversity enhances ecosystem reliability. Nature 390(6659):507–509
Naeem S, Wright JP (2003) Disentangling biodiversity effects on ecosystem functioning: deriving solutions to a seemingly insurmountable problem. Ecol Lett 6:567–579
O’Neil JM, Davis TW, Burford MA, Gobler CJ (2012) The rise of harmful cyanobacteria blooms: the potential roles of eutrophication and climate change. Harmful Algae 14:313–334
Paerl HW, Huisman J (2008) Blooms like it hot. Science 320(5872):57–58
Peltomaa ET, Aalto SL, Vuorio KM, Taipale SJ (2017) The importance of phytoplankton biomolecule availability for secondary production. Front Ecol Evol 5:128
Pilecky M, Závorka L, Arts MT, Kainz MJ (2021) Omega-3 PUFA profoundly affect neural, physiological, and behavioural competences–implications for systemic changes in trophic interactions. Biol Rev 96(5):2127–2145
Pomeroy LR (1974) The ocean’s food web, a changing paradigm. Bioscience 24(9):499–504
Porter KG (1996) Integrating the microbial loop and the classic food chain into a realistic planktonic food web. Food webs: integration of patterns and dynamics. Springer, Boston, MA, US, pp 51–59
Prince EK, Myers TL, Kubanek J (2008) Effects of harmful algal blooms on competitors: allelopathic mechanisms of the red tide dinoflagellate Karenia brevis. Limnol Oceanogr 53(2):531–541
Ptacnik R, Lepistö L, Willén E, Brettum P, Andersen T, Rekolainen S, Carvalho L (2008) Quantitative responses of lake phytoplankton to eutrophication in Northern Europe. Aquat Ecol 42(2):227–236
Rasconi S, Jobard M, Sime-Ngando T (2011) Parasitic fungi of phytoplankton: ecological roles and implications for microbial food webs. Aquat Microb Ecol 62(2):123–137
Rasconi S, Niquil N, Sime-Ngando T (2012) Phytoplankton chytridiomycosis: community structure and infectivity of fungal parasites in aquatic ecosystems. Environ Microbiol 14(8):2151–2170
Rasconi S, Ptacnik R, Danner S, Van den Wyngaert S, Rohrlack T, Pilecky M, Kainz MJ (2020) Parasitic chytrids upgrade and convey primary produced carbon during inedible algae proliferation. Protist. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.protis.2020.125768
Ruess L, Müller-Navarra D (2019) Essential biomolecules in food webs. Front Ecol Evol 7:269
Sassenhagen I, Langenheder S, Lindström ES (2023) Infection strategies of different chytrids in a diatom spring bloom. Freshw Biol. https://doi.org/10.1111/fwb.14079
Sime-Ngando T (2012) Phytoplankton chytridiomycosis: fungal parasites of phytoplankton and their imprints on the food web dynamics. Front Microbiol 3:361
Sommer U, Gliwicz ZM, Lampert W, Duncan A (1986) The PEG-model of seasonal succession of planktonic events in fresh waters. Arch Hydrobiol 106(4):433–471
Sparrow FK (1960) Aquatic phycomycetes. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, p 1187
Stockenreiter M, Graber AK, Haupt F, Stibor H (2012) The effect of species diversity on lipid production by micro-algal communities. J Appl Phycol 24(1):45–54
Striebel M, Behl S, Stibor H (2009) The coupling of biodiversity and productivity in phytoplankton communities: consequences for biomass stoichiometry. Ecology 90(8):2025–2031
Taipale SJ, Brett MT, Pulkkinen K, Kainz MJ (2012) The influence of bacteria-dominated diets on Daphnia magna somatic growth, reproduction, and lipid composition. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 82(1):50–62
Taipale S, Strandberg U, Peltomaa E, Galloway AW, Ojala A, Brett MT (2013) Fatty acid composition as biomarkers of freshwater microalgae: analysis of 37 strains of microalgae in 22 genera and in seven classes. Aquat Microb Ecol 71(2):165–178
Taipale SJ, Vuorio K, Aalto SL, Peltomaa E, Tiirola M (2019) Eutrophication reduces the nutritional value of phytoplankton in boreal lakes. Environ Res 179:108836
Taube R, Fabian J, Van den Wyngaert S, Agha R, Baschien C, Gerphagnon M, Premke K (2019) Potentials and limitations of quantification of fungi in freshwater environments based on PLFA profiles. Fungal Ecol 41:256–268
Tessier AJ, Goulden CE (1982) Estimating food limitation in cladoceran populations 1. Limnol Oceanogr 27(4):707–717
Tessier AJ, Woodruff P (2002) Cryptic trophic cascade along a gradient of lake size. Ecology 83(5):1263–1270
Thingstad TF (2000) Elements of a theory for the mechanisms controlling abundance, diversity, and biogeochemical role of lytic bacterial viruses in aquatic systems. Limnol Oceanogr 45(6):1320–1328
Thongthaisong P, Kasada M, Grossart HP, Wollrab S (2022) Critical role of parasite-mediated energy pathway on community response to nutrient enrichment. Ecol Evol 12(12):e9622
Van Donk E, Ringelberg J (1983) The effect of fungal parasitism on the succession of diatoms in Lake Maarsseveen I (The Netherlands). Freshw Biol 13:241–251
Van Donk E, Bruning K (1992) Ecology of aquatic fungi in and on algae. Algal symbiosis-plants, animals, fungi interactions explored. Biopress Ltd, pp 567–592
Vanderploeg HA, Scavia D, Liebig JR (1984) Feeding rate of Diaptomus sicilis and its relation to selectivity and effective food concentration in algal mixtures and in Lake Michigan. J Plankton Res 6(6):919–941
Veloza AJ, Chu FLE, Tang KW (2006) Trophic modification of essential fatty acids by heterotrophic protists and its effects on the fatty acid composition of the copepod Acartia tonsa. Mar Biol 148(4):779–788
Weis JJ, Cardinale BJ, Forshay KJ, Ives AR (2007) Effects of species diversity on community biomass production change over the course of succession. Ecology 88(4):929–939
Yachi S, Loreau M (1999) Biodiversity and ecosystem productivity in a fluctuating environment: the insurance hypothesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci 96(4):1463–1468
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF Project P 30419-B29). AA was also supported by FK 142485 (National Research, Development and Innovation Office, Hungary) and by the János Bolyai Research Scholarship of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences.
Funding
Open access funding provided by HUN-REN Centre for Ecological Research.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Conceptualisation: AA, KL, MJK, RP, SR. Figures and tables: AA, JF. Writing: AA, KL, JF. Commenting and editing text: all authors.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflict of interest to declare. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.
Additional information
Communicated by Tara Merrill and Jason Hoverman.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Abonyi, A., Fornberg, J., Rasconi, S. et al. The chytrid insurance hypothesis: integrating parasitic chytrids into a biodiversity–ecosystem functioning framework for phytoplankton–zooplankton population dynamics. Oecologia 204, 279–288 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-024-05519-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-024-05519-w