Correcting for underestimation of microzooplankton grazing in bottle incubation experiments with mesozooplankton

By Jens C. Nejstgaard, L. Naustvoll, A. Sazhin. 2001

171 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Global and Planetary Change, Oceanography

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1fdbffd2a6f3db0063dea9d53de3a20ea0b0b950

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Global and Planetary Change

1. A. Calbet
2. E. Saiz
3. P. Ward
4. E. Møller
5. Kwok-Fung Tang
6. Hongbin Liu
7. A. Atkinson
8. M. Dagg

In Oceanography

1. A. Calbet
2. E. Saiz
3. M. Boersma
4. C. Meunier
5. Hongbin Liu
6. E. Møller
7. Kwok-Fung Tang
8. N. Aberle

Citations in the corpus

• Quantitative PCR to estimate copepod feeding (2008, unknown): “gut, and fecal pellet contents (Øresland and Ward 1993; Båmstedt et al. 2000; Fleddum et al. 2001; Nejstgaard et al. 2001; Kaartvedt et al. 2002), automated image analysis of total gut contents in copepods (Billones et al.”
• An overview of Southern Ocean zooplankton data: abundance, biomass, feeding and functional relationships (2012, background): “Second ‘bottle effects’ may lead to underestimates of grazing rates on phytoplankton from bottle incubations (Båmstedt et al., 2000; Nejstgaard et al., 2001) and conversely ‘pigment destruction’ yielding overestimates of phytoplankton ingestion where gut pigment destruction was erroneously corrected”
• Noctiluca scintillans MACARTNEY in the Northern Adriatic Sea: long-term dynamics, relationships with temperature and eutrophication, and role in the food web (2004, background): “(Nejstgaard et al., 2001), the corrected grazing coefficient of N.”
• Copepod feeding in the ocean: scaling patterns, composition of their diet and the bias of estimates due to microzooplankton grazing during incubations (2011, methodology): “b Comparison of the original (uncorrected) copepod ingestion rates from the dataset compiled in this study, with estimated corrected values for within-bottle trophic cascade effects using Nejstgaard et al. (1997, 2001) equations, assuming a gross-growth efficiency of 0.3 for microheterotrophs (Han”
• Molecular detection of algal prey in copepod guts and fecal pellets (2003, methodology): “…mesozooplankton grazing rates (Båmstedt et al. 2000), including the fast and coarse gut pigment method (Mackas and Bohrer 1976), isotope-based in vitro approaches (Roman and Rublee 1981), and laborious time-intensive microscopy-based studies (Verity and Paffenhöfer 1996; Nejstgaard et al. 2001).”
• Zooplankton grazing on Phaeocystis: a quantitative review and future challenges (2007, methodology): “Such analyses could be done by microscopy (Verity and PaVenhofer 1996; Bamstedt et al. 2000) corrected for food web cascades ( Nejstgaard et al. 2001 ), and/or possibly analyzed by a combination of more recent methods such as Xow cytometry (Collier and Campbell 1999; Jonker et al. 2000), computer/ v”
• Zooplankton growth, diet and reproductive success compared in simultaneous diatom- and flagellate-microzooplankton-dominated plankton blooms (2001, methodology): “(5) is based on 33 bottle incubations with Calanus finmarchicus and C. helgolandicus stage CVs and adult females grazing natural plankton (Nejstgaard et al. 2001), including experiments presented here.”
• The trophic roles of microzooplankton in marine systems (2008, background): “In addition, we cannot disregard episodes of high mesozooplankton grazing on primary producers and indirect effects on phytoplankton by pre-dation on microzooplanktonic grazers (Nejstgaard et al ., 2001).”
• Scaling of feeding in marine calanoid copepods (2007, background): “Confounding effects mediated by trophic cascades (Nejstgaard et al. 2001), inappropriate quantification of carnivorous and detritivorous feeding, the Fig.”
• Trophic impact and prey selection by crustacean zooplankton on the microbial communities of an oligotrophic coastal area (NW Mediterranean Sea) (2004, background): “We cannot disregard, however, the possibility that complex interactions in the grazing bottles within the microbial community (trophic cascades; Calbet et al. 2001a, Nejstgaard et al. 2001) could be responsible for these apparent results of podonid feeding.”
• The role of ciliates, heterotrophic dinoflagellates and copepods in structuring spring plankton communities at Helgoland Roads, North Sea (2011, methodology): “As we wanted to keep conditions in microzooplankton und copepod grazing experiments comparable, we chose the second alternative (bottle incubations), that was also necessary for correction of trophic cascade effects in the copepod grazing set-up ( Nejstgaard et al. 1997, 2001; Fonda Umani et al. 20”
• Interactions between nutrients, phytoplankton growth, and micro- and mesozooplankton grazing in the plume of the Mississippi River (2003, background): “To fully correct for cascading effects, a correction that quantifies the increase of phytoplankton growth rate resulting from the release of microzooplankton grazing must always be incorporated (Nejstgaard et al. 1997, 2001).”
• Production of DOC by Calanus finmarchicus, C-glacialis and C-hyperboreus through sloppy feeding and leakage from fecal pellets (2003, background): “If the feeding of copepods on protozooplankton is substantial, this could lead to an underestimation of the DOC loss caused by copepods because the biomass and thus feeding activity of the protozooplankton would be highest in incubations without copepods (Nejstgaard et al. 2001).”