Utilization of Phytoplankton by Zooplankton during the Spring Bloom in a Nova Scotia Inlet
- 1 February 1984
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Canadian Science Publishing in Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences
- Vol. 41 (2) , 232-244
- https://doi.org/10.1139/f84-027
Abstract
Coulter counter and microscope counts were used to estimate filtration and ingestion rates experimentally for total zooplankton caught by a 233-μm mesh net from two depths during the spring bloom in Bedford Basin. Initially, most phytoplankton were 14 μg chlorophyll∙L−1and >1 mg C∙L−1and particle volume was >10 mm3∙L−1. Maximum primary production was >30 mg C∙m−3∙h−1. Dominant phytoplankton included Chaetoceros septentrionale early in the bloom, followed by Skeletonema costatum and Thalassiosira, Rhizosolenia, and Chaetoceros spp. Barnacle nauplii and Acartia hudsonica were the most common zooplankton near surface and Pseudocalanus sp. in deeper water. Ingestion was usually greatest at or near peaks in the Coulter counter particle spectrum. Filtration rate was proportional to grazer size and amount ingested and also to ambient particle concentration for near-surface but not deeper zooplankton. Higher ingestion was measured with the Coulter counter but microscopic counts gave higher filtration rates. Smaller surface-layer zooplankton apparently destroyed cells or chains that were not completely ingested. Microscopic estimates of particle volume ingested were 9–60% of that measured with the Coulter counter, suggesting utilization of detritus. Despite discrepancies in what the methods apparently measured, neither suggested a saturating functional response at ambient concentration, but with further concentration, both methods showed reduced filtration activity. Neither method revealed evidence for size-selective feeding, even when particles were compared on the basis of their maximum dimensions, but optical counts showed that single cells or chains of cylindrical shape were preferred to needle-like or spiney cells. Selection for biomass peaks could not be demonstrated using cell volume calculated from microscopic measurement. The 233-μm zooplankton utilized about 10–30% of daily primary production during the bloom.This publication has 27 references indexed in Scilit:
- Distribution of Digestive Enzymes in Zooplankton during the Spring Bloom in a Nova Scotia InletCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 1984
- The feeding, respiration, and excretion of zooplankton in the Bering Sea during a spring bloomDeep Sea Research Part A. Oceanographic Research Papers, 1982
- Fact and artifact in copepod feeding experiments1Limnology and Oceanography, 1980
- Grazing by 35 to 202 ?m micro-zooplankton in Long Island SoundMarine Biology, 1980
- Potential effect of phytoplankton colony breakage on the calculation of zooplankton filtration ratesMarine Biology, 1980
- Origin of Deposited Material Sedimented in a Marine BayJournal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 1978
- The importance of the time factor in the response of zooplankton to varying concentrations of naturally occurring particulate matter 1Limnology and Oceanography, 1978
- Sigmoid Functional Responses by Invertebrate Predators and ParasitoidsJournal of Animal Ecology, 1977
- EFFECTS OF SIZE AND CONCENTRATION OF FOOD PARTICLES ON THE FEEDING BEHAVIOR OF THE MARINE PLANKTONIC COPEPOD CALANUS PACIFICUS1Limnology and Oceanography, 1972
- PHYTOPLANKTON‐ZOOPLANKTON RELATIONSHIPS IN NARRAGANSETT BAY. IV. THE SEASONAL IMPORTANCE OF GRAZING1Limnology and Oceanography, 1970