바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

ISSN : 2287-8327

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.37 No.2
Citation Share

Zooplankton community distribution in shallow reservoirs during winter: Influence of environmental factors on Cyclops vicinus (Copepoda: Cyclopoida)

Journal of Ecology and Environment / Journal of Ecology and Environment, (P)2287-8327; (E)2288-1220
2014, v.37 no.2, pp.99-104
https://doi.org/10.5141/ecoenv.2014.012



& (2014). Zooplankton community distribution in shallow reservoirs during winter: Influence of environmental factors on Cyclops vicinus (Copepoda: Cyclopoida). Journal of Ecology and Environment, 37(2), 99-104, https://doi.org/10.5141/ecoenv.2014.012
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed
PDF Download

Abstract

We estimated the influence of environmental factors on zooplankton communities at 25 reservoirs during winter (De¬cember 2010 to January 2011). Among zooplankton groups, Cyclops vicinus is more dominant during winter, and this is positively related to withered vegetation area and dissolved oxygen level. Therefore, the presence of withered vegeta¬tion might be considered as an important factor to determine C. vicinus distribution during winter. We considered that withered vegetation might be utilized as a habitat for C. vicinus, as well as provide an attachment substrate for periphytic algae. Abundance of periphytic algae can lead to high concentration of dissolved oxygen. Although copepods prefer high water temperatures for increasing their population growth, if Cyclops can overcome low temperature stress that leads to disruption of population, their population growth initiation in the next growing season (i.e. next spring) is possibly pro¬pelled by the winter population.

keywords
Cyclops vicinus, environmental parameters, winter, withered aquatic plant areas

Reference

1.

Beyst B, Buysse D, Dewicke A, Mees J. 2001. Surf zone hyperbenthos of Belgian sandy beaches: seasonal patterns. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 53: 877-895.

2.

Brandt SB. 1993. The effect of thermal fronts on fish growth: a bioenergetics evaluation of food and temperature. Estuaries 16: 142-159.

3.

Byström P, Andersson J, Kiessling A, Eriksson LO. 2006. Size and temperature dependent foraging capacities and metabolism: consequences for winter starvation mortality in fish. Oikos 115: 43-52.

4.

Carey MP, Maloney KO, Chipps SR, Wahl DH. 2010. Effects of littoral habitat complexity and sunfish composition on fish production. Ecol Freshw Fish 19: 466-476.

5.

Dejen E, Vijverberg J, Nagelkerke LAJ, Sibbing FA. 2004. Temporal and spatial distribution of microcrustacean zooplankton in relation to turbidity and other environmental factors in a large tropical lake (L. Tana, Ethiopia). Hydrobiologia 513: 39-49.

6.

Escribano R, Hidalgo P. 2000. Spatial distribution of copepods in the North of the Humboldt Current region off Chile during coastal upwelling. J Mar Biol Ass UK. 80: 283-290.

7.

Hirche HJ. 1987. Temperature and plankton. II. Effect on respiration and swimming activity in copepods from the Greenland Sea. Mar biol 94: 347-356.

8.

Hoffmeyer MS. 1994. Seasonal succession of Copepoda in the Bahía Blanca estuary. Hydrobiologia 292/293: 303-308.

9.

Huq A, West PA, Small EB, Huq MI, Colwell RR. 1984. Influence of water temperature, salinity, and pH on survival and growth of toxigenic Vibrio cholerae serovar 01 associated with live copepods in laboratory microcosms. Appl Environ Microbiol 48: 420-424.

10.

Jang MH, Joo GJ, Lucas MC. 2006. Diet of introduced largemouth bass in Korean rivers and potential interactions with native fishes. Ecol Freshw Fish 15: 315-320.

11.

Kuczyńska-Kippen NM, Nagengast B. 2006. The influence of the spatial structure of hydromacrophytes and differentiating habitat on the structure of rotifer and cladoceran communities. Hydrobiologia 559: 203-212.

12.

Manatunge J, Asaeda T, Priyadarshana T. 2000. The influence of structural complexity on fish–zooplankton interactions: a study using artificial submerged macrophytes. Environ Biol Fish 58: 425-438.

13.

Marneffe Y, Descy JP, Thome JP. 1996. The zooplankton of the lower river Meuse, Belgium: Seasonal changes and impact of industrial and municipal discharges. Hydrobiologia 319: 1-13.

14.

Mizuno T, Takahashi E. 1999. An illustrated guide to freshwater zooplankton in Japan. Tokai University press, Tokyo.

15.

Robinson WR, Peters RH, Zimmermann J. 1983. The effects of body size and temperature on metabolic rate of organisms. Can J Zool 61: 281-288.

16.

Roff JC, Middlebrook K, Evans F. 1988. Long-term variability in North Sea zooplankton off Northumberland coast: productivity of small copepods and analysis of trophic interactions. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 68: 143-164.

17.

Sand‐Jensen K, Søndergaard M. 1981. Phytoplankton and epiphyte development and their shading effect on submerged macrophytes in lakes of different nutrient status. Int Rev Ges Hydrobiol Hydrogr 66: 529-552.

18.

Ter Braak CJF, Smilauer P. 1998. CANOCO reference manual and user’s guide to CANOCO for Windows: Software for canonical community ordination. Version 4. Microcomputer Power, Ithaca, New York, USA.

19.

Theel HJ, Dibble ED. 2008. An experimental simulation of an exotic aquatic macrophyte invasion and its influence on foraging behavior of bluegill. J Freshwater Ecol 23: 79-89.

20.

Turner JT. 1984. The feeding ecology of some zooplankters that are important prey items of larval fish. NOAA Technical Report NMFS 7. NOAA, Washington, DC.

21.

Van Donk E, Van de Bund WJ. 2002. Impact of submerged macrophytes including charophytes on phyto- and zooplankton communities: allelopathy versus other mechanisms. Aquat Bot 72: 261–274.

22.

Wetzel RG, Likens GE. 2000. Limnological Analyses. 3rd ed. Springer, New York, pp 20-70.

Journal of Ecology and Environment

e-Submission OA Policy