Literature DB >> 12154388

Microscale evaluation of the effects of grazing by invertebrates with contrasting feeding modes on river biofilm architecture and composition.

J R Lawrence1, B Scharf, G Packroff, T R Neu.   

Abstract

River biofilms are a valuable food resource for many invertebrates. In the present study biofilms were cultivated in a rotating annular bioreactor with river water as sole source of inoculum. The resulting biofilms were then presented to starved snails, ostracods, and mayflies as sole food source. The biofilms were then removed and microscopically examined to determine areas that had been grazed. The grazed and ungrazed areas were marked and analyzed for the effects of grazing using confocal laser scanning microscopy and image analyses. Samples were treated with fluorescent probes for nucleic acids to quantify bacterial biomass and fluor-conjugated lectins to quantify exopolymer, and far red autofluorescence was imaged to quantify algal or photosynthetic biomass. Grazing by snails significantly reduced algal biomass (1.1 +/- 0.6 micro m 3 micro m 2 to 0.02 +/- 0.04 micro m 3 micro m 2), exopolymer (5.3 +/- 3.4 micro m 3 micro m 2 to 0.18 +/- 0.18 micro m 3 micro m 2), and biofilm thickness (154 micro m +/- 50 to 11 micro m +/- 5.2; ANOVA, p < or= 0.05). Although bacterial biomass was influenced by grazing snails the impact was not statistically significant (p <or= 0.05). Ostracods had a significant (p <or= 0.05) impact on the algal biomass and exopolymer but not on bacteria. Mayfly grazing resulted in reduction of biofilm thickness to approximately 40 mm and reductions in all biofilm components with little evidence of selectivity. Thus grazing consistently resulted in a significant reduction in autotrophic biomass and exopolymer with a resultant increased importance of bacterial biomass within the grazed regions. Examination of grazed biofilms after a recovery period in the absence of grazing indicated that grazed regions remained predominantly bacterial after 28 days. A comparison of grazing in diclofop methyl and atrazine contaminated (1 ppb and 10 ppb) versus control biofilms indicated no significant influence of the contaminants on grazing patterns.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12154388     DOI: 10.1007/s00248-001-1064-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Microb Ecol        ISSN: 0095-3628            Impact factor:   4.552


  19 in total

1.  Effects of current velocity on the nascent architecture of stream microbial biofilms.

Authors:  Tom J Battin; Louis A Kaplan; J Denis Newbold; Xianhao Cheng; Claude Hansen
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 4.792

2.  Effects of fullerene (C60), multi-wall carbon nanotubes (MWCNT), single wall carbon nanotubes (SWCNT) and hydroxyl and carboxyl modified single wall carbon nanotubes on riverine microbial communities.

Authors:  J R Lawrence; M J Waiser; G D W Swerhone; J Roy; V Tumber; A Paule; A P Hitchcock; J J Dynes; D R Korber
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2016-02-12       Impact factor: 4.223

3.  Bacterial community succession in natural river biofilm assemblages.

Authors:  Emilie Lyautey; Colin R Jackson; Jérôme Cayrou; Jean-Luc Rols; Frédéric Garabétian
Journal:  Microb Ecol       Date:  2005-12-15       Impact factor: 4.552

4.  More than just slippery: the impact of biofilm on the attachment of non-sessile freshwater mayfly larvae.

Authors:  Petra Ditsche; Jan Michels; Alexander Kovalev; Jochen Koop; Stanislav Gorb
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2013-12-18       Impact factor: 4.118

Review 5.  Bacterial signaling ecology and potential applications during aquatic biofilm construction.

Authors:  Leticia M Vega; Pedro J Alvarez; Robert J C McLean
Journal:  Microb Ecol       Date:  2013-11-26       Impact factor: 4.552

Review 6.  Biofilm dispersal: mechanisms, clinical implications, and potential therapeutic uses.

Authors:  J B Kaplan
Journal:  J Dent Res       Date:  2010-02-05       Impact factor: 6.116

Review 7.  The ecology and biogeochemistry of stream biofilms.

Authors:  Tom J Battin; Katharina Besemer; Mia M Bengtsson; Anna M Romani; Aaron I Packmann
Journal:  Nat Rev Microbiol       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 60.633

8.  Susceptibility of biofilms to Bdellovibrio bacteriovorus attack.

Authors:  Daniel Kadouri; George A O'Toole
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 4.792

9.  Sensitivities of three tropical indigenous freshwater invertebrates to single and mixture exposures of diuron and carbofuran and their commercial formulations.

Authors:  Odete Rocha; Antônio José Gazonato Neto; Júlio César Dos Santos Lima; Emanuela Cristina Freitas; Mariana Miguel; Adrislaine da Silva Mansano; Raquel Aparecida Moreira; Michiel Adriaan Daam
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2018-04-20       Impact factor: 2.823

10.  Influence of dissolved organic matter and invertebrates on the function of microbial films in groundwater.

Authors:  Timothy J Cooney; Kevin S Simon
Journal:  Microb Ecol       Date:  2009-05-15       Impact factor: 4.552

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.