Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T06:20:06.508Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of growth rate on the physiological rates of a chemostat-grown rotifer Encentrum linnhei

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

J. M. Scott
J. M. Scott
Affiliation:
Scottish Marine Biological Association, Dunstaffnage Marine Research Laboratory, P.O. Box 3, Oban, Argyll PA34 4AD
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The physiological rates of a normally omnivorous marine rotifer, Encentrum linnhei, were measured under the steady-state chemostat conditions in which the physiological state of the food-algae was kept constant whilst the rotifer growth rate was changed to preset levels. The specific clearance rate ranged between 50 and 100 μl/μg rotifer C/day (1.5–3.0 μ/rot/day) and varied hyperbolically with growth rate, a similar curve was obtained with the specific ingestion rate which varied between 1–2 μg C/μg rot C/day. A mean respiration rate of 0.45 μg C/μg rot C/day was obtained from oxygen consumption measurements. About 60‰ of ingested energy was found to be egested as paniculate matter and 9–4 °0 dissipated as heat, the latter comparing with a theoretical figure of 4–5‰.

From rates, transfer efficiencies were obtained giving a mean net growth efficiency (K2) of 38‰ and a mean overall growth efficiency (K1 of 15‰. A curvilinear increase of Kl with growth rate contrasts with linear and hyperbolic responses found with brachionid rotifers.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 68 , Issue 1 , February 1988 , pp. 165 - 177
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Boraas, M. E., 1983. Population dynamics of food-limited rotifers in two-stage chemostat culture. Limnology and Oceanography, 28, 546–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calow, P., 1977. Conversion efficiencies in heterotrophic organisms. Biological Reviews, 52, 385–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doohan, M., 1973. An energy budget for adult Brachionus plicatilis Müller (Rotatoria). Oecologia, 13, 351–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Droop, M. R., 1953. On the ecology of flagellates from some brackish and fresh water rockpools of Finland. Acta botanica fennica, 51, 3–52.Google Scholar
Droop, M. R., 1968. Vitamin B12 and marine ecology. IV. The kinetics of uptake, growth and inhibition in Monochrysis lutheri. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 48, 689–733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Droop, M. R. & Scott, J. M., 1978. Steady-state energetics of a planktonic herbivore. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 58, 749–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, A. & Gulati, R. D., 1983. Feeding studies with natural food particles on tropical species of planktonic rotifers. In Limnology of Parakrama Samudra - Sri Lanka (ed. F., Schiemer), pp. 117–125. The Hague: Dr W. Junk Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galkovskaya, G. A., 1963. On the utilization of food for growth and conditions of the highest production yield in Rotatoria, Brachionus calyciflorus Pallas. Zoologicheskii zhurnal, 42, 506–512.Google Scholar
Leimeroth, N., 1980. Respiration of different stages and energy budgets of juvenile Brachionus calyciflorus. Hydrobiologia, 73, 195–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pilarska, J., 1977 a. Eco-physiological studies on Brachionus rubens Ehrbg. (Rotatoria). I. Food selectivity and feeding rate. Polskie archiwum hydrobiologii, 24, 319–328.Google Scholar
Pilarska, J., 1977 b. Eco-physiological studies on Brachionus rubens Ehrbg. (Rotatoria). II. Production and respiration. Polskie archiwum hydrobiologii, 24, 329–341.Google Scholar
Pilarska, J., 1977 c. Eco-physiological studies on Brachionus rubens Ehrbg. (Rotatoria). III. Energy balances. Polskie archiwum Hydrobiologii, 24, 343–354.Google Scholar
Platt, T. & Irwin, B., 1973. Calorific content of phytoplankton. Limnology and Oceanography, 18, 306–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Provasoli, L., McLaughlin, J. J. A. & Droop, M. R., 1957. The development of artificial media for marine algae. Archiv für Mikrobiologie, 25, 392–428.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schlosser, H. J. & Anger, K., 1982. The significance of some methodological effects on filtration and ingestion rates of the rotifer Brachionus plicatilis. Helgolander Meeresuntersuchungen, 35, 215–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, J. M., 1974. A new rotifer of the genus Encentrum. Its morphology and cultivation. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 54, 247–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, J. M., 1983. Rotifer nutrition using supplemented monoxenic cultures. Hydrobiologia, 104, 155–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, J. M., 1987. Further nutritional studies on the marine rotifer Encentrum linnhei. Hydrobiologia, 147, 303–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, J. M. & Marlow, J. A., 1982. A microcalorimeter with a range of 0.1–1.0 calories. Limnology and Oceanography, 27, 585–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walz, N., 1983. Continuous culture of the pelagic rotifers Keratella cochlearis and Brachionus angularis. Archiv für Hydrobiologie, 98, 70–92.Google Scholar
Winberg, G. G. & Duncan, A., 1971. Methods for the Estimation of Aquatic Animals. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar