Herbivory, Nutrients, and Phytoplankton Dynamics in Lake Mendota, 1987–89
It is becoming increasingly clear that lake plankton communities are regulated by both predation and resources. Top predators, through effects on herbivores, can regulate phytoplankton community structure, biomass, and primary productivity (Carpenter et al. 1985; Carpenter and Kitchell 1988; Vanni and Findlay 1990). Increase in potential limiting nutrients, such as nitrogen and phosphorus, can stimulate phytoplankton production and biomass, and the ratio of limiting nutrients can influence community structure (Schindler 1977; Smith 1983). Recently, lake ecologists have realized that when attempting to explain phytoplankton dynamics, both nutrients and herbivory must be considered. Often the two interactions simultaneously influence phytoplankton, although their relative strengths may vary seasonally (e.g. Sommer et al. 1986; Vanni and Temte 1990). Furthermore, resource effects and herbivore effects may interact in complex ways to influence phytoplankton (Leibold 1980; Sterner 1990; Carpenter et al. 1991)—a case of the interactions themselves interacting (Roughgarden and Diamond 1986).
KeywordsClearance Rate Phytoplankton Biomass Soluble Reactive Phosphorus Eutrophic Lake Spring Bloom
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Adrian R (1988) Untersuchungen zur herbivoren und carnivoren ernährungsweise von Cyclops kolensis und C. vicinus (Crustacea: Copepoda). Dissertation, Freien Universität, BerlinGoogle Scholar
- Benndorf J, Schultz H, Benndorf A, Unger R, Penz E, Kneschke H, Kossatz K, Dumke R, Hornig U, Kruspe R, Reichel S (1988) Food-web manipulation by enhancement of piscivorous fish stocks: Long-term effects in the hypertrophic Bautzen Reservoir. Limnologica 19:97–110Google Scholar
- Carpenter SR, Frost TM, Kitchell JF, Kratz TK, Schindler DW, Shearer J, Sprules WG, Vanni MJ, Zimmerman AP (1991) Patterns of primary production and herbivory in 25 North American lake ecosystems. In Cole J, Findlay S, Lovett G (eds) Comparative analysis of ecosystems: Patterns, mechanisms and theories, Springer-Verlag, New York, pp 67–96Google Scholar
- Hessen DO (1990) The algal—grazer interface: Competitive feedback mechanisms linked to nutrient cycling. Paper presented at Vth International Ecological Congress, Yokohama, Japan, August 1990Google Scholar
- Lathrop RC (1990) Response of Lake Mendota (Wisconsin, U.S.A.) to decreased phosphorus loadings and the effect on downstream lakes. Verh. Internat. Verein. Limnol. 24:457–463Google Scholar
- Reynolds CS (1984a) The ecology of freshwater phytoplankton. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, EnglandGoogle Scholar
- Roughgarden J, Diamond J (1986) Overview: The role of species interactions in community ecology. In Diamond J, Case TJ (eds) Community ecology, Harper and Row, New York, pp 333–343Google Scholar
- Sommer U, Gliwicz ZM, Lampert W, Duncan A (1986) The PEG-model of seasonal succession of planktonic events in fresh water. Arch. Hydrobiol. 106:433–471Google Scholar
- Sterner RW (1989) The role of grazers in phytoplankton succession. In Sommer U (ed) Plankton ecology—succession in plankton communities, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 107–170Google Scholar
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1979) Methods for chemical analysis of water and wastes. 2nd edn. U.S. EPA Report EPA-600/4-791020Google Scholar