| Literature DB >> 31235736 |
Jennifer Harfmann1, Tomofumi Kurobe2, Brian Bergamaschi3, Swee Teh2, Peter Hernes4.
Abstract
Particulate material comprising the detrital remains of terrestrial plants and macrophytes is a substantial source of organic matter to estuaries and therefore has the potential to support the energy demands of the pelagic aquatic food web. Despite the prevalence of macrophytic or terrestrial particulate organic carbon (tPOC), phytoplankton are nutritionally superior and are thought to be the primary food resource for zooplankton. However, estuarine phytoplankton primary productivity abundances can wax and wane, and often production cannot meet heterotrophic energy needs. In this study, we examined how tPOC (detritus of macrophytes and grasses) may affect survival of a calanoid copepod (Eurytemora affinis) common in the San Francisco Estuary (SFE), an estuary with relatively low phytoplankton primary productivity. Using chemical biomarkers and a targeted DNA metagenomic methodology, we show that E. affinis consumed tPOC (dominated by Schoenoplectus sp., or tule) even when phytoplankton were abundant and tPOC was scarce. Furthermore, we found that a mixed diet of phytoplankton and terrestrial material (1:3 carbon ratio) enhanced the survival of E. affinis over a diet of phytoplankton alone. These data show that tPOC can be a vital supplementary food source for zooplankton, perhaps extending survival during low phytoplankton periods, and may help explain elevated zooplankton abundances in tidal wetlands and other detrital-dominated regions.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31235736 PMCID: PMC6591215 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-45503-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Quality (food type) and quantity (feeding rate) of daily food regimens for survival feeding experiments.
| Treatment | Feeding ratea | Amount of carbon administered by food type | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pure algae | Average | 2.38 µg C ( | |
| Pure grassb | Average | 2.38 µg C (Mixed grasses) | |
| Pure cattailc | Average | 2.38 µg C ( | |
| Pure tuleb | Average | 2.38 µg C ( | |
| No food | N/A | N/A | |
| Pure algae | Low | N/A | 0.6 µg C ( |
| Mixed-grass | Average | 1.78 µg C (Mixed grasses) | 0.6 µg C ( |
| Mixed-cattail | Average | 1.78 µg C ( | 0.6 µg C ( |
| Mixed-tule | Average | 1.78 µg C ( | 0.6 µg C ( |
aDaily feeding rate is carbon-normalized across regimens regardless of food type. Average feeding rate, based on Kayfetz & Kimmerer[39] is 2.38 µg C, and low feeding rate is 0.6 µg C.
bMixed annual grasses were collected from the Sierra Foothills Research and Extension Center in California.
cMacrophytes were collected from SFE wetlands.
Elemental composition (C and N) of algae and vascular plant litters.
| Weight % C | Weight % N | |
|---|---|---|
| Algae ( | 25 | 5 |
| Mixed grassesa | 39 | 0.8 |
| Cattail ( | 42 | 0.4 |
| Tule ( | 40 | 0.4 |
aMixed annual grasses were collected from the Sierra Foothills Research and Extension Center in California.
bMacrophytes were collected from SFE wetlands.
Chemical biomarkers (chlorophyll a and lignin) in water column particulates and ingested copepod gut before and after consumption feeding experiment.
| Particulates (water column) | Ingested (copepod gut) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chlorophyll | Lignin | Lignin | |||||
| S:Va | C:Vb | Λ8 (mg 100 mgOC−1)c | S:Va | C:Vb | Normalized (ng copepod−1) | ||
| Before feeding | 3.4 ± 0.8 | 1.3 | 0.38 | 0.99 | 0.68 | 0.44 | 0.038 |
| After feeding | 2.0 ± 0.3 | 0.97 | 0.38 | 1.3 | 1.3 | N.D.d | 1.9 |
aRatio of syringyl lignin phenols (syringaldehyde, acetosyringone, syringic acid) to vanillyl lignin phenols (vanillin, acetovanillone, vanillic acid).
bRatio of cinnamyl lignin phenols (p‐coumaric acid, ferulic acid) to vanillyl lignin phenols (vanillin, acetovanillone, vanillic acid).
cCarbon-normalized yield of eight lignin phenols (vanillin, acetovanillone, vanillic acid, syringaldehyde, acetosyringone, syringic acid, p‐coumaric acid, ferulic acid).
dN.D. = non-detect; lower than the instrument/method detection limit.
Figure 1Percentage of internal transcribed spacer (ITS) sequences attributed to autotrophs in initial water column particulates (“initial water column”, top panels) and copepod gut after four days of feeding (“post-feeding copepod gut”, bottom panels). Left-most pie charts indicate relative percentages of total vascular and non-vascular autotrophs, while center and right-most pie charts show detailed distributions of each class.
Figure 2E. affinis survival curves for pure Chlorella algae food treatments at a low feeding rate (red, 0.6 µg C d−1) and average feeding rate (blue, 2.38 µg C d−1). A no food control (black, 0 µg C d−1) is plotted for reference.
Figure 3E. affinis survival curves for algal and vascular plant treatments. Vascular plants consisted of macrophytes (tule & cattail from the estuary) and grasses (mixed species from the catchment area). For each of tule (purple, top panel), cattail (blue, center panel), and grass (green, bottom panel), average feeding rate survival curves (2.38 µg C d−1) are plotted for pure plant material (lighter colors) and mixed algae and plant material (1:3 carbon ratio, darker colors). Pure Chlorella at a low feeding rate (red, 0.6 µg C d−1) is plotted for reference.