Hydrobiologia

, Volume 387, Issue 0, pp 349–353 | Cite as

Population growth in planktonic rotifers. Does temperature shift the competitive advantage for different species?

  • Claus-Peter Stelzer

Abstract

The numerical response of populations to different food concentrations in an important parameter to be determined for a mechanistic approach to interspecific competition. Theory predicts that the species with the lowest food level (TFL) should always be the superior competitor if only one food source is offered. However, TFLs are not species specific constants but may change along environmental gradients such as food size or temperature.

The hypothesis that temperature differentially affects the TFLs of three planktonic rotifers (Asplanchna priodonta, Brachionus calyciflorus and Synchaeta pectinata) was tested in laboratory experiments. Numerical responses were assessed for all three rotifers at 12, 16, 20, 24 and 28°C with Cryptomonas erosa as food alga. Growth rates of all three rotifers at high food concentrations (1 mg C l-1) increased as temperature increased until the limits of thermal tolerance were reached. This increase was very pronounced for Brachionus, but less for Synchaeta which already had relatively high growth rates at 12°C. Along the temperature gradient, the TFLs of Synchaeta increased from 0.074 to 0.66 mg C l-1, whereas those of Asplanchna and Brachionus stayed relatively constant at 0.3 and 0.2 mg C l-1, respectively. Hence, the zero net growth isocline (ZNGI) of Synchaeta crossed those of Brachionus and Asplanchna at 16 and 20.5°C, respectively. The results suggest that Synchaeta is better adapted to low temperatures than the other two rotifers and should be the superior competitor below 16°C.

competition threshold food level Rotifera temperature Brachionus Synchaeta 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Achenbach, L. & W. Lampert, 1997. Effects of elevated temperatures on threshold food concentrations and possible competitive abilities of differentially sized cladoceran species. Oikos 79: 469–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berzins, B. & B. Pejler, 1989. Rotifer occurrence in relation to temperature. Hydrobiologia 175: 223–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Draper, N. R. & H. Smith, 1980. Applied Regression Analysis. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  4. Gilbert, J. J. & J. D. Jack, 1993. Rotifers as predators on small ciliates. Hydrobiologia 255/256: 247–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gliwicz, Z. M., 1985. Predation and food limitation: an ultimate reason for extinction of planktonic cladoceran species. Arch. Hydrobiol. Suppl. 21: 419–430.Google Scholar
  6. Guillard, R. R. L., 1975. Culture of phytoplankton for feeding marine invertebrates. In Smith W. L. & M. H. Chanley (eds), Culture of Marine Invertebrate Animals. Plenum, New York: 29–60.Google Scholar
  7. Kirk, K. L. & J. J. Gilbert, 1990. Suspended clay and the population dynamics of planktonic rotifers and cladocerans. Ecology 71: 1741–1755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Klüttgen, B., U. Dülmer, M. Engels & H. T. Ratte, 1994a. ADaM, an artificial fresh water for the culture of zooplankton. Wat. Res. 28: 743–746.Google Scholar
  9. Klüttgen, B., U. Dülmer, M. Engels & H. T. Ratte, 1994b. Corrigendum. Wat. Res. 28: 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 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. Suppl. 48: 361–368.Google Scholar
  11. Lampert, W. & U. Schober, 1980. The importance of 'threshold' food concentrations. In Kerfoot, W. C. (ed.), Evolution and Ecology of Zooplankton Communities. University Press of New England, Hanover, New Hampshire: 264–267.Google Scholar
  12. Pourriot, R., 1977. Food and feeding habits of rotifera. Arch. Hydrobiol. Suppl. 8: 243–260.Google Scholar
  13. Rothhaupt, K. O., 1990. Population growth rates of two closely related rotifer species: effects of food quality, particle size, and nutritional quality. Freshwat. Biol. 23: 561–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Seale, D. B., M. E. Boraas & J. B. Horton, 1993. Using of semicontinuous culture methods for examining competitive outcome between two freshwater rotifers (Genus Brachionus) growing on a single algal resource. In Walz, N. (ed.) Plankton Regulation Dynamics. Springer, Berlin: 161–177.Google Scholar
  15. Starkweather, P. L., J. J. Gilbert & T. M. Frost, 1979. Bacterial feeding in the rotifer Brachionus calyciflorus: clearance and ingestion rates, behavior and population dynamics. Oecologia 44: 26–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Stemberger, R. S. & J. J. Gilbert, 1985. Body size, food concentration, and population growth in planktonic rotifers. Ecology 66: 1151–1159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Tilman, D., M. Mattson & S. Langer, 1981. Competition and nutrient kinetics along a temperature gradient: An experimental test of amechanistic approach to niche theory. Limnol. Oceanogr. 26: 1020–1033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Tilman, D., 1982. Resource competition and community structure. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Claus-Peter Stelzer
    • 1
  1. 1.Max-Planck-Institut für LimnologiePlönGermany

Personalised recommendations