English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Trophic interactions in the pelagic area of lakes and the opposing effects of fish feeding (top-down) and phytoplankton biomass (bottom-up) on zooplankton communities are central topics in limnology. We hypothesized that zooplankton size distributions should be a more sensitive approach to disentangle top-down and bottom-up effects than the commonly measured zooplankton biomass. We examined zooplankton size distributions from 148 samples collected during summer months in the upper and lower pelagic layers of a deep mesotrophic lake among 13 years of sampling. Top-down effects, namely fish size and biomass, and bottom-up effects, including water temperature and total phosphorus and chlorophyll a concentrations, were considered. To add robustness to our analyses, we expressed the zooplankton size distributions as size spectra based on log-binning, as continuous size spectra and by the size diversity, a measure that has been developed to mimic taxonomic diversity indices. Among numerous regressions tested, significant top-down or bottom-up effects could rarely been detected. Our results indicate that the overall zooplankton size distribution was not significantly affected by fish predation and lake productivity measured as total phosphorus or chlorophyll a concentration. However, we found negative correlations between fish biomass and the preferred zooplankton prey, including  Bosmina longirostris, Daphnia cucullata  and nauplii in the upper depth layer. However, due to their small body size, low biomass and therefore relative small contribution to the zooplankton size distribution, predation on preferred zooplankton species did not translate into a statistically significant modification of the entire size spectrum. Consequently, the size spectrum seems to be relatively robust against predation effects, but might reflect the lake-wide energy availability and transfer efficiency in the food web.

Top-down and bottom-up effects on zooplankton size distribution in a deep stratified lake