Advertisement

Biological Invasions

, 13:2561 | Cite as

The ecological niches of Bythotrephes and Leptodora: lessons for predicting long-term effects of invasion

  • Dag O. Hessen
  • Vegar Bakkestuen
  • Bjørn Walseng
Original Paper

Abstract

We here exploit two large datasets on zooplankton in Norwegian lakes, spanning a wide range of geographical, physical, chemical and biological properties, to assess the ecological niches and habitats of Bythotrephes longimanus and Leptodora kindtii. The species overlapped geographically, yet co-occurred only in a limited number of lakes. Bythotrephes inhabited virtually all types of lakes, except alpine localities and productive lakes dominated by cyprinid communities where the hyaline Leptodora was most abundant. The zooplankton communities also differed in Bythotrephes and Leptodora lakes, probably both reflecting different predatory regimes, but also water quality and other lake-specific properties. We found no evidence for species being excluded by the presence of Bythotrephes, rather the diversity in general was higher in lakes with these predators present compared with those without. We found, however, a very close association between Bythotrephes and Daphnia galeata and to some extent also between Bythotrephes and D. longispina, suggesting that these species also may benefit from Bythotrephes invasion. Both Bythotrephes and Leptodora species occur naturally in this region, and knowledge about the ecological preferences and the zooplankton community composition in Bythotrephes—and Leptodora lakes will provide valuable information about the long-term effects of Bythotrephes invasion and potential interaction with of Leptodora as top invertebrate predator.

Keywords

Bythotrephes Invasion Leptodora Predation Zooplankton community 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are indebted to our colleagues at Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA) and Norwegian Institute for water Research (NIVA) for help and cooperation with sampling and analysis. We would also like to acknowledge the most helpful comments and suggestions from Norman Yan and three anonymous reviewers on an earlier version of this manuscript.

References

  1. Austin MP (2007) Species distribution models and ecological theory: a critical assessment and some possible new approaches. Ecol Model 200:1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bakkestuen V, Erikstad L, Halvorsen R (2008) Step-less models for regional environmental variation in Norway. J Biogeogr 35:1906–1922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bakkestuen V, Erikstad L, Halvorsen R (2009) Klimaendringer og Norges vegetasjon. Hvordan påvirkes vegetasjonsmodeller av ulike klimascenarier? NINA Rapport 524. 24 pp, Oslo (in Norwegian)Google Scholar
  4. Berg DJ, Garton DW (1994) Genetic differentiation in North American and European populations of the cladoceran Bythotrephes. Limnol Oceanogr 39:1503–1516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berg DJ, Garton DW, MacIsaac HJ, Panov VE, Telesh IV (2002) Changes in genetic structure of North American Bythotrephes populations following invasion from Lake Ladoga, Russia. Freshw Biol 47:275–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boudreau SA, Yan ND (2003) The differing crustacean zooplankton communities of Canadian shield lakes with and without the nonindigenous zooplanktovore Bythotrephes longimanus. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 60:1307–1313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boudreau SA, Yan ND (2004) Auditing the accuracy of a volunteer-based surveillance program for an aquatic invader Bythotrephes. Env Monit Assess 91:17–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Braak CJF ter, Smilauer P (2002) CANOCO reference manual and user’s guide to canoco for windows. Software for Canonical Community Ordination (version 4.5). Centre for Biometry WageningenGoogle Scholar
  9. Branstrator DK (2005) Contrasting life histories of the predatory cladocerans Leptodora kindtii and Bythotrephes longimanus. J Plankton Res 27:569–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Branstrator DK, Lehman JT (1991) Invertebrate predation in Lake Michigan: regulation of Bosmina longispina by Leptodora kindtii. Limnol Oceanogr 36:483–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carter JCH, Dadswell MJ, Roff JC, Sprules WG (1980) Distribution and zoogeography of planktonic crustaceans and dipterans in glaciated eastern North America. Can J Zool 58:1355–1387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Colautti RI, Manca M, Viljanen M, Ketalaars AM, Bürgi H, McIsaac HI, Heath DD (2005) Invasion genetics of the Eurasian spiny waterflea: evidence for bottlenecks and gene flow using microsatellites. Mol Ecol 14:1869–1879PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Connell JH (1980) Diversity and the coevolution of competitors, or the ghost of competition past. Oikos 35:131–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Eilertsen O, Økland RH, Økland T, Pedersen O (1990) Data manipulation and gradient length estimation in DCA ordination. J Veg Sci 1:261–270Google Scholar
  15. Elith J, Graham CH (2009) Do they? How do they? WHY do they differ? On finding reasons for differing performances of species distribution models. Ecography 32:66–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Elith J, Leathwick JR (2009) Ecological explanation and prediction across space and time. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 40:677–697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Elith J, Graham CH, Anderson RP, Dudýík M, Ferrier S, Guisan A, Hijmans RJ, Huettmann F, Leathwick JR, Lehmann A, Li J, Lohmann LG, Loiselle BA, Manion G, Moritz C, Nakamura M, Nakazawa Y, Overton JM, Townsend Peterson A, Phillips SJ, Richardson K, Scachetti-Pereira R, Schapire RE, Soberón J, Williams S, Wisz MS, Zimmermann ME (2006) Novel methods improve prediction of species’ distributions from occurrence data. Ecography 29:129–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Enz CA, Heller C, Müller R, Bürgi H-R (2001) Investigations on fecundity of Bythotrephes longimanus in Lake Lucerne (Switzerland) and on Niche Segregation of Leptodora kindtii and Bythotrephes longimanus in Swiss lakes. Hydrobiologia 464:143–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fielding AH, Bell JF (1997) A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models. Environ Cons 24:38–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Foster SE, Sprules GW (2010) Effects of Bythotrephes on the trophic position on native macroinvertebrates. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 76:58–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Garton DW, Berg DJ, Fletcher RJ (1990) Thermal tolerances of the predatory cladocerans Bythotrephes cederstroemi and Leptodora kindti: relationship to seasonal abundance in western Lake Erie. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 47:731–738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Guisan A, Graham CH, Elith J, Huettmann F, Group NSDM (2007) Sensitivity of predictive species distribution models to change in grain size. Divers Distrib 13:332–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hanley J, McNeil B (1982) The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 143:29–36PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Hessen DO, Faafeng BA, Andersen T (1995) Replacement of herbivorous zooplankton species along gradients of ecosystem productivity and fish predation pressure. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 52:733–742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hessen DO, Faafeng BA, Smith VH, Bakkestuen V, Walseng B (2006) Extrinsic and intrinsic controls of zooplankton diversity in lakes. Ecology 87:433–443PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hessen DO, Bakkestuen V, Walseng B (2007) Scale-dependent role of temperature and lake area for zooplankton diversity. Ecography 30:749–758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hill MO, Gauch, HGJ (1980) Detrended correspondence analysis: an improvedordination technique. Vegetatio 42:47–58Google Scholar
  28. Jaynes ET (1957) Information theory and statistical mechanics. Phys Rev 106:620–630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Langeland A (1977) Effect of fish (Salvelinus alpinus, Arctic char) predation on the zooplankton in ten Norwegian lakes. Verh Internat Verein Limnol 20:2065–2069Google Scholar
  30. Lehman JT, Cáceres CE (1993) Food-web response to species invasion by a predatory invertebrate: Bythotrephes in Lake Michigan. Limnol Oceanogr 38:879–891CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lilljeborg W (1901) Cladocera Sueciæ. Nova Acta Soc Reg Sc Ups Ser 3, vol 19, 830 pGoogle Scholar
  32. MacIsaac HJ, Ketelaars HA, Grigorovich IA, Ramcharan CW, Yan ND (2000) Modeling Bythotrephes longimanus invasions in the Great Lakes basin based on its European distribution. Arch Hydrobiol 149:1–21Google Scholar
  33. Manca MM, Portogallo M, Brown ME (2007) Shift in phenology of Bythotrephes longimanus and its modern success in Lake Maggiore as a result of changes in climate and trophy. J Plankt Res 29:515–525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Naesje TF, Jonsson B, Klyve L, Sandlund OT (1987) Food and growth of age-0 smelts, Osmerus eperlanus, in a Norwegian fjord lake. J Fish Biol 30:119–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Palmer A, Stich H-B, Maier G (2001) Distribution patterns and predation risk of the coexisting cladocerans Bythotrephes longimanus and Leptodora kindtii in a large lake—Lake constance. Hydrobiologia 442:301–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pearce J, Ferrier S (2000) Evaluating the predictive performance of habitat models developed using logistic regression. Ecol Model 133:225–245Google Scholar
  37. Phillips SJ, Dudík M (2008) Modeling of species distribution with Maxent: new extensions and a comprehensive evaluation. Ecography 31:161–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Phillips SJ, Anderson RP, Schapire RE (2006) Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecol Model 190:231–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Phillips SJ, Dudík M, Elith J, Graham CH, Lehmann A, Leathwich JR, Ferrier S (2009) Sample selection bias and presence-only distribution models: implications for background and pseudo-absence data. Ecol Appl 19:181–197PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rivier IK (1998) The predatory Cladocera (Onychopoda:Podonidae, Polyphemidae, Cercopagidae) and Leptodorida of the world. Backhuys Publishing, LeidenGoogle Scholar
  41. Rushton SP, Ormerod SJ, Kerby G (2004) New paradigms for modelling species distributions? J Appl Ecol 41:193–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sax DF, Stachowicz JJ, Gaines SD (2005) Species invasions: insights into ecology, evolution, and biogeography. Sinauer Associates, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  43. Strecker AL, Arnott SE (2008) Invasive predator, Bytothrephes, has varied effects on ecosystem function in freshwater lakes. Ecography 11:490–503Google Scholar
  44. Strecker AL, Arnott SE, Yan ND, Girard R (2006) Variation in the response of crustacean zooplankton species richness and competition to the invasive predator Bytothrephes longimanus. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 63:2126–2136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Therriault T, Grigorovich IA, Cristescu M, Ketelaars HAM, Viljanen M, Heath DD, MacIsaac HJ (2002) Taxonomic resolution of the genus Bythotrephes Leydig using molecular markers and re-evaluation of its global distribution, with notes on factors affecting dispersal, establishment and abundance. Divers Distrib 8:67–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Walseng B, Halvorsen G, Schartau AK, Hessen DO (2006) The concept of zooplankton; major contribution from littoral species to species richness in lakes. Limnol Oceanogr 51:2600–2606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Weisz E, Yan ND (2010) Shifting invertebrate zooplanktivores: watershed-level replacement of the native Leptodora by the non-indigenous Bythotrephes in Canadian Shield lakes. Biol Invasions (in press)Google Scholar
  48. Wollan AK, Bakkestuen V, Kauserud H, Gulden G, Halvorsen R (2008) Modelling and predicting fungal distribution patterns using herbarium data. J Biogeogr 35:2298–2310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Yan ND, Pawson TW (1997) Changes in crustacean zooplankton community in Harp Lake, Canada following invasion by Bythotrephes cederstromi. Freshw Biol 37:409–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Yan ND, Girard R, Boudreau S (2002) An introduced invertebrate predator (Bythotrephes) reduces zooplankton species richness. Ecol Lett 5:481–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dag O. Hessen
    • 1
  • Vegar Bakkestuen
    • 2
    • 3
  • Bjørn Walseng
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Biology, Center of Ecological and Evolutionary SynthesisUniversity of OsloOsloNorway
  2. 2.Department of Botany, Natural History MuseumUniversity of OsloOsloNorway
  3. 3.Norwegian Institute for Nature ResearchOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations