Aquatic Ecology

, Volume 32, Issue 3, pp 229–240 | Cite as

The effects of tench (Tinca tinca (L.)) and sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus L.) on planktonic and benthic communities in mesocosms in a shallow lake

  • Meryem Beklioglu
  • Brian Moss

Abstract

The effects of introducing a zooplanktivorous fish, three-spined stickleback, (Gasterosteus aculeatus) and a benthivorous fish, tench (Tinca tinca) separately and in combination to replicated experimental enclosures with two density levels of white water lily (Nymphaea alba) were studied in Little Mere, UK. Numbers of Daphnia hyalina were high and only slightly diminished at reduced lily densities, probably due to stickleback predation, but there was no consequential effect on phytoplanktonic chlorophyll a concentrations. Tench reduced the numbers of gastropods but not of other macroinvertebrates, and in turn increased the biomass of periphyton growing on artificial substrata within the enclosures. The higher lily density reduced oxygen concentrations and pH values and increased total phosphorus and soluble reactive phosphorus concentrations but otherwise had little effect on water chemistry. There was little interactive effect of the fish species. The results are integrated with those of six other such enclosure experiments carried out in Little Mere since 1992.

Benthos mesocosms Nymphaea plankton stickleback tench 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Beklioglu M and Moss B (1995) The impact of pH on interactions among phytoplankton algae, zooplankton and perch (Perca fluviatilis) in a shallow, fertile lake. Freshwat Biol 33: 497-509Google Scholar
  2. Beklioglu M and Moss B (1996) Mesocosm experiments on the interaction of sediment influence, fish predation and aquatic plants with the structure of phytoplankton and zooplankton communities. Freshwat Biol 36: 315-325Google Scholar
  3. Bottrell HH, Duncan A, Gliwicz ZM, Grigiereg E, Herzig A, Hillbricht Ilkowska A, Kurasawa H, Larrson P and Weyleleuska T (1976) A review of some problems in zooplankton production studies. Norw J Zool 24: 419-456Google Scholar
  4. Brett MT and Goldman CR (1996) A meta-analysis of the freshwater trophic cascade. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 93: 7723-7726Google Scholar
  5. Bronmark C (1985) Interactions between macrophytes, epiphytes and herbivores: an experimental approach. Oikos 45: 26-30Google Scholar
  6. Bronmark C (1988) Effects of vertebrate predation on freshwater gastropods: an enclosure experiment. Hydrobiologia 169: 363-370Google Scholar
  7. Bronmark c (1989) Interactions between epiphytes, macrophytes and freshwater snails, a review. J. Moll Stud 55: 299-311Google Scholar
  8. Bronmark C (1994) Effects of tench and perch on interactions in a freshwater, benthic food chain. Ecology 75: 1818-1828Google Scholar
  9. Carvalho L (1994) Top down control of phytoplankton in a shallow hypertrophic lake: Little Mere (England). Hydrobiologia 275/276: 53-63Google Scholar
  10. Carvalho L, Beklioglu M and Moss B (1995) Changes in a deep lake following sewage diversion-a challenge to the orthodoxy of external phosphorus control as a restoration strategy? Freshwat Biol 34: 399-410Google Scholar
  11. Chaney AL and Morbach EP (1962) Modified reagents for the determination of urea and ammonia. Clin Chem 8: 130-132Google Scholar
  12. Daldorph PWG and Thomas JD (1995) Factors influencing the stability of nutrient-enriched freshwater macrophyte communities: the role of sticklebacks, Pungitius pungitiusand freshwater snails. Freshwat Biol 33: 271-289Google Scholar
  13. Gannon JE and Gannon S (1975) Observations on the narcotization of crustacean zooplankton. Crustaceana 28: 220-224Google Scholar
  14. Jeppesen E, Søndergaard M, Jensen JP, Kanstrup E and Pedersen B (1997) Macrophytes and turbidity in brackish lakes with special emphasis on the role of top down control. In: Jeppesen E, Søndergaard M, Søndergaard, M & Kristoffersen, K. (eds) The Structuring Role of Submerged Macrophytes in Lakes. Springer Verlag, New York, in pressGoogle Scholar
  15. Kornijow R and Moss B (1998) Vertical distribution of in-benthos in relation to fish and floating-leaved macrophyte populations. pp227-232 in: Jeppesen E, Søndergaard M, Søndergaard Mo and Kristoffersen K. (eds) The structuring Role of submerged Macrophytes in Lakes. Springer Verlag, New York.Google Scholar
  16. Lammens EHRR, DeNie HW, Vijverberg, J and Densens WLT (1985) Resource partitioning and niche shifts of bream (Abramis brama) and eel (Anguilla anguilla) mediated by predation of smelt (Osmerus eperlanus) on Daphnia hyalina. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 42: 1342-1351Google Scholar
  17. Lauridsen TL and Lodge DM (1996) Avoidance by Daphnia magna of fish and macrophytes: chemical cues and predator mediated use of macrophyte habitat. Limnol. Oceanogr. 41: 794-798Google Scholar
  18. Lauridsen TL, Pedersen LJ, Jeppesen E and Søndergaard M (1996) The importance of macrophyte bed size for cladoceran composition and horizontal migration in a shallow lake. J Plankton Res 18: 2283-2294Google Scholar
  19. Mackereth FJH, Heron J and Talling JF (1978) Water Analysis: some Methods for Limnologists. Sci Pub Freshwat Biol Ass 36, 118 pp.Google Scholar
  20. Martin TH, Crowder LB, Dumas CF and Burkholder JM (1992) Indirect effects of fish on macrophytes in Bays Mountain Lake: evidence for a littoral trophic cascade. Oecologia 89: 476-481Google Scholar
  21. Moss B, Beklioglu M, Carvalho L, Kilinc S, McGowan S and Stephen D (1997) Vertically-challenged limnology; contrasts between deep and shallow lakes. Hydrobiologia 342/343: 257-267Google Scholar
  22. Moss B, Madgwick J and Phillips GL (1996) A Guide to the Restoration of Nutrient-Enriched Shallow Lakes. Broads Authority, Environment Agency and European Union, NorwichGoogle Scholar
  23. Moss B, Kornijow, R and Measey G (1998) The effects of nymphaeid (Nuphar luteaL.) density and predation by perch (Perca fluviatilisL.) on the zooplankton communities in a shallow lake. Freshwat Biol 39: 689-697Google Scholar
  24. Mulholland PJ, Steinman AD, Palumbo AV, Elwood JW and Kirstel D B (1991) Role of nutrient cycling and herbivory in regulating periphyton communities in laboratory streams. Ecology 72: 966-982Google Scholar
  25. Persson L (1987) Effects of habitat and season on competitive interactions between roach Rutilus rutilus and perch Perca fluviatilis. Oecologia 73: 170–177Google Scholar
  26. Persson L and Eklov P (1995) Prey refuges affecting interactions between piscivorous perch and juvenile perch and roach. Ecology 76: 70-81Google Scholar
  27. Scheffer M (1998) Ecology of Shallow Lakes. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  28. Schriver P, Bøgestrand J, Jeppesen E and Søndergaard M (1995) Impact of submerged macrophytes on fish-zooplanktonphytoplankton interactions: large scale enclosure experiments in a shallow eutrophic lake. Freshwat Biol 33: 255-270Google Scholar
  29. Stephen D, Moss B and Phillips G (1998) The relative importance of top-down and bottom-up control of phytoplankton in a shallow macrophyte-dominated lake. Freshwat Biol 39: 699-713Google Scholar
  30. Talling JF and Driver D (1961) Some problems in the estimation of chlorophyll a in phytoplankton. In: Doty MS (ed.) Proceedings of a Conference on Primary Productivity Measurement inMarine and Freshwaters. (pp. 93-101) US Atomic energy Commission Publication TID 7633, HonoluluGoogle Scholar
  31. Timms RM and Moss B (1984) Prevention of growth of potentially dense phytoplankton populations by zooplankton grazing, in the presence of zooplanktivorous fish, in a shallow wetland ecosystem. Limnol Oceanogr 29: 472-486Google Scholar
  32. Underwood GJC (1991) Growth enhancement of the macrophyte Ceratophyllum demersum in the presence of the snail Planorbis planorbis: the effect of grazing and chemical conditioning. Freshwat Biol 26: 325-334Google Scholar
  33. Wetzel RG (1990) Land-water interfaces: metabolic and limnological regulators. Verh int Verein theor angew Limnol 24: 6-24Google Scholar
  34. Wetzel RG and Likens GE (1991) Limnological Analyses. 2nd Edn, Saunders, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  35. Winer BJ (1971) Statistical Principles in Experimental Design. 2nd Edition, McGraw Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Meryem Beklioglu
    • 1
  • Brian Moss
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of BiologyMiddle East Technical UniversityAnkaraTurkey
  2. 2.School of Biological SciencesUniversity of LiverpoolLiverpoolUK

Personalised recommendations