ZOOPLANKTON SECONDARY PRODUCTION MODELS IN CULTURES OF
Daphnia magna: A COMPARISON STUDY
M. Gómez1, I. Ma ínez1, I. Mayo1, J.M. Mo ales1 & T.T. Packa d1
1 Labo a o y o Biological Oceanog aphy. Depa men o Biology. Uni e si y o Las Palmas de G an Cana ia. Cana y Islands, SPAIN
E-mail: [email protected]
INTRODUCTION
RESULTS
Seconda y p oduc ion is he e o ophic g ow h, he a e o biomass inc ease
pe ime in zooplank on o ben hic me azoans. I e lec s he ne balance
be ween me abolic gains in biomass and he in eg al o all me abolic losses.
Then, modeling seconda y p oduc ion a es in he zooplank on is essen ial o
popula ion ecology s udies, ye assessing hese a es is di icul , indi ec , and
poo ly known o he gene al ecology communi y. He e we es i e seconda y
p oduc ion models in cul u es o Daphnia magna (Hun ley and López, 1992; Hi s
and Sheade , 1997; Hi s and Lampi , 1998; S ockwell and Johansson, 1997;
Shu e and Ing, 1997).
Mo he
cul u e
(20L)
Phy oplank on
cul u e
(Scenedesmus sp,
Ankis odesmus sp.)
Yeas cul u e
(Saccha omyces
ce e isiae )
Co n lou cul u e
(come cial)
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Ha es
Size
measu emen s
F eeze
(-20ºC)
Pa ame e s:
* D y mass
* G ow h a es
*Condi ion ac o [ CF = (a·W)/L3 ]
Seawa e
models
Hun ley and
López(1992)
g = 0.0445·e0.111T
Hi s and Sheade (1997)
g=0.0732·100.0246T/Wc0.2962
Hi s and Lampi (1998)
g=0.0723·100.0208T/Wc0.3221
F eshwa e
models
Shu e and
Ing(1997)
P=10(α+βT)·B
S ockwell and
Johansson(1997)
P=10(alog10M+b)·CF·M·N
Di e en cul u es o D. magna we e g own on
phy oplank on, bake ’s yeas o co n lou a 18-21ºC.
G ow h a es we e calcula ed om ime cou se o size (Fig.1)
and d y mass (Fig.2).
Wmax (µg) = 153
Wmax (µg) = 110
Wmax (µg) = 150
gglobal(d-1) = 0.19±0.02
CF = 5.78
gglobal(d-1) = 0.295±0.04
CF = 1.19
gglobal(d-1) = 0.111 ± 0.006
CF = 4.51
Fig1. Daphnia magna g ow h as unc ion o size and d y mass, ed on h ee di e en ypes o ood. Indica ing he measu ed alues o
global g ow h a e (gglobal), maximum weigh (Wmax) and condi ions ac o (CF) o each ype o ood.
O e es ima ed alues
Simila alues
Unde es ima ed alues
Fig4. Modelled e sus measu ed g ow h a es in D. magna ed h ee di e en oods. The line in all h ee panels ep esen s a
one- o-one co espondence. The key iden i ies he models used.
Fig3. Measu ed daily a es o seconda y p oduc ion in
Daphnia magna g ow h on h ee di e en ypes o
ood
Conclusion 1:
Al hough he highes global g ow h a es we e ob ained wi h yeas (0.295 d-1), he highes alues o he condi ion
ac o (5.778) and seconda y p oduc ion (643 g d y mass· d-1)as well as he maximum weigh we e ound in Daphnia ed
on phy oplank on (Fig1 and Table 2). A mix u e yeas and phy oplank on should be he op imal ood o cul u ing
Daphnia magna.
Conclusion 2:
The Hun ley and López (1992) model
o e es ima es seconda y p oduc ion, he Hi s
and Sheade (1997) and he Hi s and Lampi
(1998) models unde es ima ed hem. The bes
seconda y p oduc ion calcula ion was ound
using he S ockwell and Johansson (1997) model
(Fig4 and Table 3). This conclusion is also
ex apola ed o he obse ed daily g ow h a es
(Table 1).
Conclusion 3:
On a u ili a ian basis, because
size is such a good index o
biomass and so easy o measu e,
we ecommend moni o ing i ,
ins ead o d y-mass, in u u e
g ow h- a e s udies. Mon agnes
e al. (2010) also ecommend
size as a p oxy o d y-mass in
Oxy his ma ina.
REFERENCES
Hi s , A.G. and M. Sheade , 1997. A e in si u weigh -speci ic g ow h a es body-size independen in ma ine plank onic copepods? A e-analysis o he global syn heses and a new empi ical model.
Ma ine Ecology P og ess Se ies 154:155-165
Hi s , A.G. and R.S. Lampi , 1998. Towa ds a global model o in si u weigh -speci ic g ow h in ma ine plank onic copepods. Ma ine Biology 132:247-257
Hun ley, M.E. and M.D.G López, 1992. Tempe a u e-dependenden p oduc ion o ma ine copepods: a global syn hesis. Ame ican Na u alis ,140:201-242
Lo eg o e, T., 1966. The de e mina ion o he d y weigh o plank on and he e ec o a ious ac o s on he alues ob ained. In: Some com epo a y s udies in ma ine science. (H. Ba nes ed.). Geo ge
Allen and Unwin LTD. London. pp 429-467.
Shu e , B.J. and K.K. Ing, 1997. Fac o s a ec ing he p oduc ion o zooplank on in lakes. Canadian Jou nal o Fishe ies and Aqua ic Sciences 54:359-377
S ockwell, J.D. and O.E. Johansson, 1997. Tempe a u e-dependen allome ic models o es ima e zooplank on p oduc ion in empe a e eshwa e lakes. Canadian Jou nal o Fishe ies and Aqua ic
Sciences 54:2350-2360
Mon agnes, D.J.S., C.D. Lowe, L. Ma in, P. Wa s, N. Downes-Te ma i, Z. Yang, E.C. Robe s & K. Da idson, 2010.Oxy his ma ina g ow h, sex and ep oduc ion. Jou nal o Plank on Resea ch, doi:
10.1093/plank / bq111
Table 3. Rela ionship be ween p edic ed and measu ed da es o seconda y p oduc ion
Kind o ood
Hun ley and López
(1992)
Hi s and
Sheade (1997)
Hi s and Lampi
(1998)
S ockwell and
Johansson (1997)
Shu e and Ing
(1997)
Phy oplank on
14.99x – 766.73
2 = 0.48
(slope = 14.99)
1.72x - 82.51
2 = 0.57
(slope = 1.72)
1.24x – 59.26
2 = 0.58
(slope =1.24)
0.88x + 14.90
2 = 0.76
(slope = 0.88)
5.23x - 268.41
2 = 0.48
(slope = 5.23)
Yeas
4.30x – 104.65
2 = 0.64
(slope = 4.30)
0.61x – 12.07
2 = 0.71
(slope = 0.61)
0.32x + 0.14
2 = 0.64
(slope = 0.32)
1.09x + 0.99
2 = 0.78
(slope = 1.09)
1.50x – 36.69
2 = 0.64
(slope = 1.50)
Co n lou
24.6x – 733.89
2 = 0.57
(slope = 24.6)
3.16x – 88.35
2 = 0.55
(slope = 3.16)
2.31x – 64.25
2 = 0.54
(slope = 2.31)
2.31x – 42.56
2 = 0.48
(slope = 2.31)
8.76x – 261.67
2 = 0.57
(slope = 8.76)
Table 2. Seconda y p oduc ion alues ob ained wi h se e al models in µg d y mass·d-1
Kind o ood
Measu ed
da es
Hun ley
and
López
(1992)
Hi s and
Sheade
(1997)
Hi s and
Lampi
(1998)
S ockwell
and
Johansson
(1997)
Shu e
and Ing
(1997)
Phy oplank on
643
1979
283
208
719
683
Yeas
452
1000
169
127
502
349
Co n lou
350
1286
224
169
386
454
Table 1. Daily g ow h a es (d-1) ob ained wi h se e al models
Kind o ood
Measu ed
da es
Hun ley and
López
(1992)
Hi s and
Sheade
(1997)
Hi s and
Lampi
(1998)
S ockwell and
Johansson
(1997)
Shu e and
Ing
(1997)
Phy oplank on
0.221 ± 0.162
(n = 10)
0.484 ± 0.067
(n = 10)
0.076 ± 0.022
(n = 10)
0.056 ± 0.017
(n = 10)
0.248 ± 0.189
(n = 10)
0.166 ± 0.021
(n = 10)
Yeas
0.332 ± 0.262
(n = 9)
0.419 ± 0.030
(n = 9)
0.087 ± 0.031
(n = 9)
0.067 ± 0.026
(n = 9)
0.372 ± 0.322
(n = 9)
0.146 ± 0.009
(n = 9)
Co n lou
0.113 ± 0.051
(n = 10)
0.362 ± 0.050
(n = 10)
0.065 ± 0.012
(n = 10)
0.049 ± 0.009
(n = 10)
0.120 ± 0.041
(n = 10)
0.128 ± 0.016
(n = 10)
Bo h he g ow h (Fig.2) and he
seconda y p oduc ion (Fig.3) displayed a
cohe en pa e n du ing he i s 12 days:
Daily g ow h a es dec eased
con inuously wi h he s eepes decline in
he yeas (Fig. 2)
Daily seconda y p oduc ion o he
cul u e ed on phy oplank on and co n
lou inc eased sligh ly, whe eas in he
cul u e ed on yeas he inc ease in he
i s 5 days is g ea e (Fig.3).
Fig2. E olu ion o daily g ow h a es, g(days-1), o
Daphnia magna on h ee di e en ypes o ood