Use of the Simulation Model for the Analysis of the Impact of Parasites on the Dynamics of Abundance, Reproduction, and the Transition to Diapause in the Mass Rotifers Brachionus calyciflorus Pallas of the Volga Delta

  • Alexander K. Gorbunov
  • Boris V. Fiks
  • Victor R. Alekseev
Part of the Monographiae Biologicae book series (MOBI, volume 92)


Rotifers are one of the most important groups of zooplankton, and they play an important role in aquatic ecosystems as initial energy converters of primary and bacterial products. In the course of monitoring studies of the state of ecosystems, many questions arise, the solution of which is necessary for correct interpretation of the data obtained. When considering the dynamics of the abundance of zooplankton and its constituent groups, the main focus is on the state of temperature and oxygen regimes, feed conditions, competitive relationships, and predator consumption, and too little attention is paid to the effects of parasitic organisms on plankton. The question of rotifer infection and the possible influence of this factor on their population dynamics is still poorly studied. Simulating of these processes with the help of mathematical model is described.


Dormancy, Zooplankton, Population dynamics, Resting egg production, Disease in aquatic invertebrates 



Victor R. Alekseev’s participation in this work was supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (grants 07-04-00006а and 17-04-00027).

The study was partly supported by the Russian Academy of Science, topics 65.4 and 65.5.


  1. Alekseev VR (1978) Microcyclops gracilis (Lill.) and M. varicans (Sars) in temporary water bodies of the Volga delta. Hydrobiol Mag 14b(4):29–34Google Scholar
  2. Alekseev VR. De Stasio B, Gilbert JJ (2007) Diapause in aquatic invertebrates. theory and human use, Springer, 257 pp.Google Scholar
  3. Decksbach NK (1928) Zur Kenntnis der Parasiten der Radertiere. Zoolog Anz 78:274–278Google Scholar
  4. Edmondson WT (1960) Reproductive rates of rotifers in natural populations. Mem Ist ital Idrobiol 12:21–77Google Scholar
  5. Galkovskaya GA (1963) About the use of food for growth and the conditions for the maximum output production of rotifers Brachionus calyciflorus Pallas. Zool Mag 43(4):506–512Google Scholar
  6. Gorbunov AK (1979) A method for rapid intravital measurement of microscopic animals using flash backlight microphotography. Hydrobiol Mag 6:114–115Google Scholar
  7. Miracle MR (1977) Epidemiology in rotifers. Arch Hydrobiol Beih Ergebn Limnol H 8:138–141Google Scholar
  8. Mnatsakanova EA, Polishuk LV (1996) Role of parthenogenetic natality and emergence from diapausing eggs in the dynamics of some rotifer populations. Diapause in the Crustacea. Dev Hydrobiol 114:169–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ruttner-Kolisko A (1977) The effect of the microsporid Plistophora asperospora on Conochilus unicornis in Lunzer Untersee (LUS). Arch Hydrobiol Beih Ergebn Limnob Stuttgart 8:135–137Google Scholar
  10. Voronkov NV (1910) On the question of the development cycle of the sporozoa Ascosporidium asperosporum. Transactions of the Hydrobiological station on the Glubokoe lake 3:219–222Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexander K. Gorbunov
    • 1
  • Boris V. Fiks
    • 2
  • Victor R. Alekseev
    • 3
  1. 1.Astrakhan State Nature Biosphere ReserveAstrakhanRussia
  2. 2.Medicine University of LubeckLübeckGermany
  3. 3.Zoological Institute of Russian Academy of SciencesSt. PetersburgRussia

Personalised recommendations