Food-chain relationships in subtidal silty sand marine sediments and the role of meiofauna in stimulating bacterial productivity
- 1 January 1978
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Nature in Oecologia
- Vol. 33 (1) , 55-69
- https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00376996
Abstract
From bibliographic data the biomass correlations (organic dry weight) are constructed for the subsurface layer of a hypothetical 30 m deep silty sand station: 200 μg/ml macrofauna (including 120 μg/ml subsurface deposit feeders), 50 μg/ml meiofauna, 20 μg/ml Foraminifera, 1 μg/ml Ciliata and Flagellata, and 100 μg/ml bacteria. ATP-biomass is discussed. Meiofauna and Foraminifera contribute with 30 and 12% to the living biomass in the sediment, and it is assumed that their contribution to the food of deposit-feeding macrofauna is of a similar percentage. This is corroborated by productivity estimations. Bacteria are the main food of deposit feeding macrofauna, meiofauna, and microfauna. From different calculations it becomes evident that the productivity of bacteria in the sediment is far below figures achieved in experimental cultures: the conclusion is that sediment bacteria, in general, do not live under good environmental conditions. A rather large part of the bacterial population in the sediment seems to be in the stationary phase of life, and only a fraction of the total population exhibits high metabolic rates and rapid duplications. Only these active bacteria are of importance for the breakdown of relatively refractive organic matter in the sediment. In soft bottom marine sediments where the input of organic matter is higher than the remineralization rate, benthic animals stimulate by their activities and by nutrient cycling the decomposition of detritus via bacteria. Though meiofauna, in principle, feeds upon the same food resource as macrofauna, there is no real competition for food, because meiofaunal animals by their activities and by excreting metabolic end products induce a bacterial productivity which would not be there without them, and feed on it. There are a few examples where more specialized interactions exist between benthic animals and bacteria; these interactions have been termed “gardening”. They could be highly important in the benthic ecosystem.This publication has 40 references indexed in Scilit:
- Attraction to decaying organisms as a possible cause for patchy distribution of nematodes in a Bermuda beachOphelia, 1977
- Anaerobiosis and Symbiosis with Bacteria in Free‐living CiliatesThe Journal of Protozoology, 1977
- Quantification of carbon, nitrogen and bacterial biomass in the food of some penaeid prawnsMarine and Freshwater Research, 1977
- The Relation Between Adenosine Triphosphate and Microbial Biomass in Diverse Aquatic EcosystemsInternational Review of Hydrobiology, 1976
- Selective feeding byAbarenicola pacificawith notes onAbarenicola vagabundaand a concept of gardening in lugwormsOphelia, 1975
- The ecology of marine microbenthos IV. Structure and function of the benthic ecosystem, its chemical and physical factors and the microfauna commuities with special reference to the ciliated protozoaOphelia, 1969
- Freilebende Nematoden als Nahrung der SandgarneleCrangon crangonOecologia, 1969
- The bottom fauna of a flatfish nursery groundJournal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 1968
- On the sedimentology and the quantitative distribution of living foraminifera in the northern part of the ØresundOphelia, 1965
- Eine ungew hnliche Assoziation zwischen Blaualgen und freilebenden marinen NematodenÖsterreichische botanische Zeitschrift, 1959