4.5 Article

Ingestion, fecundity and population growth of Harpacticus sp (Harpacticoida, copepod) fed on five species of algae

Journal

AQUACULTURE RESEARCH
Volume 48, Issue 5, Pages 2209-2220

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/are.13057

Keywords

Algae; copepod; effects; fecundity; ingestion; population

Categories

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation for Creative Research Groups [41521064]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province [ZR2011DQ005]
  3. Major International Joint Research Project of NSFC [41320104008]
  4. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41030858]
  5. Chang-jiang Scholars Program, Ministry of Education of China and the Taishan Scholars Program of Shandong Province

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We investigated the ingestion, fecundity and population growth of Harpacticus sp. fed on monodiet or mixed diets to evaluate the effects of different algae on Harpacticus sp. Harpacticus sp. fed on diatoms (Skeletonema costatum and Chaetoceros curvisetus) had higher ingestion and pellet production. Time to attain 100% in proportions of gravid females differed, with quickest to slowest: S. costatum, C. curvisetus, Gymnodinium sp. and Heterosigma akashiwo, with the exception of Prymnesium parvum (16.67%). S. costatum or C. curvisetus produced higher populations than the other three diets, supported complete development to adulthood, and resulted in doubling copepod population within four days, while no population growth occurred for the other three diets. Mixed-diet experiments showed that egg production and gross growth efficiencies reduced significantly when fed on H. akashiwo, Gymnodinium sp. or P. parvum mixed with Isochrysis galbana, in comparison with 100% I. galbana. Thus, S. costatum and C. curvisetus were beneficial foods while the other three diets were potentially toxic for Harpacticus sp. The data in this article provide further recognition of nutrient deficiency or toxicity of different algae on copepods.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available