Grazing and colony size development in Phaeocystis globosa (Prymnesiophyceae): the role of a chemical signal

By Kwok-Fung Tang. 2003

126 citations recorded by the source corpus.

The bloom-forming prymnesiophyte Phaeocystis globosa forms hollow, spherical, mucilaginous colonies that vary from micrometres to millimetres in size. A recent paper gave the first empirical evidence that colony size increase in P. globosa is a defensive response against grazers, and knowing the signalling mechanism(s) behind this response will thus be a key to understanding the trophodynamics in systems dominated by this species. I conducted experiments with specially designed diffusion incubators, each of which consists of a non-grazing chamber (with P. globosa only) and a grazing chamber (grazers + phytoplankton) connected by 2 μm polycarbonate membrane filters. The results showed that physical contact with grazers was not required to initiate the defensive response; instead, P. globosa colony size increase was found to be stimulated by dissolved chemicals generated by ambient grazing activities. This signal was non-species specific, such that various combinations of three species of grazers and four species of phytoplankton in the grazing chambers all resulted in significant, but different extents of colony enlargement in P. globosa in the non-grazing chambers (30-300% larger than the 'grazer-free' control). High concentrations of ambient solitary P globosa cells and other phytoplankton seemed to suppress colony enlargement in P globosa, and grazers would help reduce this inhibition by removing the ambient solitary P globosa cells and other phytoplankton. These non-species-specific mechanisms would allow P. globosa to regulate colony size development and defend itself in diverse planktonic systems, which may help to explain the global success of this species.

Subfields: Molecular Biology, Oceanography

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7f649ae21b6029bae5ceddf6714947b70e3c45e3

How researchers see this paper

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

In Molecular Biology

1. Fanxiang Kong
2. M. Lürling
3. Matthijs Vos
4. M. Koski
5. Xiaoli Shi
6. Huansheng Cao
7. Zhou Yang
8. A. Ianora

In Oceanography

1. M. Lürling
2. Fanxiang Kong
3. W. Beekman
4. Matthijs Vos
5. M. Koski
6. Xiaoli Shi
7. Huansheng Cao
8. Zhou Yang

Citations in the corpus

• Morphological Response of Microcystis aeruginosa to Grazing by Different Sorts of Zooplankton (2006, background): “Inducible colony formation found in present experiment and some other studies (Harvell, 1990; Luerling & van Donk, 1996, 1997; Fialkowska & Pajdak-Stós, 1997, 2002; Boraas et al., 1998; Pajdak-Stós et al., 2001; Jakobsen & Tang, 2002; Tang, 2003; Lürling, 2003a, b; van Holthoon et al., 2003; Wiltshi”
• Palmelloids formation in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii : defence against rotifer predators? (2006, background): “…of protective colonies in freshwater green algae Actinastrum, Coelastrum, Desmodesmus, and Scenedesmus, and the marine prymnesiophyte Phaeocystis might be evoked by zooplankton associated chemicals (Hessen & Van Donk 1993, Lürling 1998, Van Donk et al. 1999, Yasumoto et al. 2000, Tang 2003).”
• Zooplankton grazing on Phaeocystis: a quantitative review and future challenges (2007, background): “In one study chemical cues from grazers triggered colony enlargement ( Tang 2003 ).”
• Invited Review - Fight on Plankton! or, Phytoplankton Shape and Size as Adaptive Tools to Get Ahead in the Struggle for Life (2011, unknown): “Therefore this signal appears non-species specific (Tang, 2003).”
• Current understanding of Phaeocystis ecology and biogeochemistry, and perspectives for future research (2007, background): “1988b) happen randomly, are they driven only by physical (light, temperature) or chemical (nutrient) stimuli, or are they also under biological control such as grazing (Tang 2003), or perhaps intra- or interspecies signaling? In any case, these transformations are best viewed as responses to stresso”
• INDUCIBLE DEFENSES AND TROPHIC STRUCTURE (2004, background): “1999) and marine algae (Tang 2003).”
• Biologically induced modification of seawater viscosity in the Eastern English Channel during a Phaeocystis globosa spring bloom (2006, background): “It has been recently shown that high concentrations of ambient solitary P. globosa cells and other phytoplankton seemed to suppress colony enlargement in P. globosa, and that grazers would help reduce this inhibition by removing the solitary cells (Tang, 2003).”
• Seasonal microbial processes in a high-latitude fjord (Kongsfjorden, Svalbard): I. Heterotrophic bacteria, picoplankton and nanoflagellates (2011, background): “It has been proposed that the ratio between single and colonial cells is induced by top-down regulation (Tang 2003), reXecting for instance the poor ability of mesozooplankton to feed upon single cells (Wassmann et al. 2005).”
• The life cycle of Phaeocystis: state of knowledge and presumptive role in ecology (2007, background): “The presence of grazers has been shown to induce colony size increase (Jakobsen and Tang 2002) through the release of infochemicals ( Tang 2003 ).”
• Induced defences in marine and freshwater phytoplankton: a review (2011, background): “The author concluded that the signal was non-species-specific (Tang, 2003), but we argue that the signals may have been slightly different for the two dinoflagellate protozoan grazers and the calanoid copepod Temora longicus, whilst having comparable effects on the strain of P. globosa (CCMP 1528)…”