School of Engineering and Science - Jacobs University
School of Engineering and Science - Jacobs University
School of Engineering and Science - Jacobs University
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
DISCUSSION<br />
a high diversity <strong>of</strong> nutritional strategies in the microzooplankton (Sherr & Sherr, 2002),<br />
interactions between microzooplankters can be as variable as the players themselves<br />
comprising different nuances <strong>of</strong> competition as well as predation or neutralism.<br />
Investigations on possible interactions are made difficult by problems with culturing<br />
microzooplankton, particularly ciliates (Gifford, 1985).<br />
During one part <strong>of</strong> this thesis I focused on the interactions between small heterotrophic<br />
din<strong>of</strong>lagellates <strong>and</strong> large ciliates <strong>and</strong> succeeded in taking them into culture. The<br />
experimental organisms, according to the monitoring data “key” model species at<br />
Helgol<strong>and</strong> Roads, were isolated from North Sea samples <strong>and</strong> cultures were established.<br />
As a result <strong>of</strong> their preferred prey size, small heterotrophic din<strong>of</strong>lagellates potentially<br />
compete with bigger planktonic ciliates for prey (Jakobsen & Hansen, 1997). The<br />
system I investigated included the possibility <strong>of</strong> intraguild predation realized when the<br />
ciliate preys on the smaller din<strong>of</strong>lagellate. Other studies with the same interactive<br />
conditions <strong>of</strong> the predators have dealt with two competing ciliates (Stoecker & Evans,<br />
1985) or with a ciliate <strong>and</strong> a din<strong>of</strong>lagellate species (Jakobsen & Hansen, 1997). Unlike<br />
such studies, results presented in Chapter IV <strong>of</strong> this study showed that interactions<br />
between intraguild prey <strong>and</strong> predator are more complex <strong>and</strong> not just a combination <strong>of</strong><br />
competition <strong>and</strong> predation between the predators.<br />
Diehl & Feissel (2000) developed a theoretical framework for three-level food chains<br />
including omnivory. One fundamental condition in this is that the intraguild prey must<br />
be the superior resource competitor, otherwise it will be outcompeted by the intraguild<br />
predator. My experiments with both predators as single grazers suggested that the<br />
intraguild predator was the superior competitor. Against all expectations <strong>and</strong> theoretical<br />
suggestions (Diehl & Feissel, 2000, Diehl & Feissel, 2001) no negative effect on the<br />
intraguild prey was detected in the three-species treatments conducted during my thesis.<br />
The small heterotrophic din<strong>of</strong>lagellate grew even faster in the presence <strong>of</strong> its competing<br />
intraguild predator. Looking closer into the interactive patterns I found a kind <strong>of</strong><br />
commensalistic relationship preceding other possibilities <strong>of</strong> interaction. The small<br />
din<strong>of</strong>lagellate was promoted by pre-conditioned prey items produced by the ciliate <strong>and</strong><br />
showed the same growth rates as its competitor. Due to a faster growing predator<br />
biomass this led to a more efficient use <strong>of</strong> the resource in the system. Theoretical<br />
assumptions suggest that the promotion <strong>of</strong> the intraguild prey is <strong>of</strong> such magnitude that<br />
it can potentially favor a stable coexistence <strong>of</strong> both predators which is <strong>of</strong> further<br />
relevance as both predators co-occur in the same environment.<br />
135