Premium
On the ecology of the rotifer Cephalodella hoodi from an extremely acidic lake
Author(s) -
WEITHOFF GUNTRAM
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
freshwater biology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.297
H-Index - 156
eISSN - 1365-2427
pISSN - 0046-5070
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2427.2005.01423.x
Subject(s) - biology , rotifer , ecology , habitat , functional response , chlamydomonas , brachionus , zoology , reproduction , zooplankton , phenotypic plasticity , botany , predation , predator , biochemistry , gene , mutant
Summary 1. The biovolume‐specific carbon content, relative egg volume (a measure of per‐offspring reproductive investment), growth and grazing rates, and the gross growth efficiency (GGE) of the rotifer Cephalodella hoodi , isolated from an extremely acidic habitat (pH 2.65), were determined and compared with literature values for rotifers living in circum‐neutral habitats in order to reveal potential special features or adaptations related to the extreme habitat of C. hoodi . 2. Of the two dominant phytoflagellates ( Ochromonas sp. and Chlamydomonas acidophila ) that occur in the natural habitat of C. hoodi , only C. acidophila promoted positive growth and reproduction and, thus, the following results were obtained with C. acidophila as a food alga. 3. The body volume‐specific carbon content of C. hoodi is in the range of that found in rotifers from circum‐neutral lakes, suggesting that no costly carbon investment, brought about by the thickening of the lorica, for example, was required to withstand low pH. 4. The egg volume of C. hoodi exhibited no phenotypic plasticity dependent on the food concentration and, thus, C. hoodi allocated a constant, absolute amount of energy to each individual offspring. No adaptation to low food densities was found. 5. A dome‐shaped type II functional response curve was found to describe the ingestion of Chlamydomonas as a source of food. 6. Compared with other rotifers, C. hoodi had a high threshold and half‐saturating food concentration (=low affinity) but also a high maximum growth rate and a relatively high GGE, suggesting no severe adverse effect of low pH.