Abstract
Several species of the predatory rotifer Asplanchna exhibit dramatic diet-induced trimorphism. The three morphotypes differ greatly in body shape and size, attributes that should affect predation ability. It has been hypothesized that these morphotypes evolved to exploit different prey assemblages in different environments. Here I compare the predatory behavior of the campanulate morphotype (the largest) to that of the cruciform morphotype (the intermediate) using crustacean and conspecific prey. These prey are known to induce production of the greatest proportion of campanulates. I hypothesize that the campanulate is better able to exploit these relatively large prey than are cruciforms. The campanulates did have higher ingestion rates with conspecific prey, but the ingestion rates of the morphotypes were not different with the crustacean prey, due to the campanulate’s relatively low probability of attacking the crustacean prey. The campanulate attack probability is higher with both conspecific and crustacean prey than has been previously reported for campanulate A. silvestrii with smaller rotifer prey. While the campanulate handles both relatively large prey with comparative ease, and is more likely to attack these prey than smaller rotifer prey, the campanulate morphotype seems most effective at cannibalism due to its high preference for congeneric prey.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Birky, C. W. & J. A. Power, 1969. The developmental genetics of polymorphism in the rotifer Asplanchna. J. exp. Zool. 170: 157–168.
Commins, M. L. & G. W. Salt, 1988. Some patterns of predation and prey selection by the rotifer Asplanchna girodi in replicated outdoor tanks. Verh. int. Ver. Limnol. 23: 2028–2032.
Conde-Porcuna, J. M., R. Morales-Baquero & L. Cruz-Pizarro, 1993. Effectiveness of the caudal spine as a defense mechanism in Keratella cochlearis. Hydrobiologia 255/256: 283–287.
Conde-Porcuna, J. M., & S. S. S. Sarma, 1995. Prey selection by Asplanchna girodi (Rotifera): the importance of prey defence mechanisms. Freshwat. Biol. 33: 341–348.
Gilbert, J. J., 1973. The induction and ecological significance of gigantism in the rotifer Asplanchna sieboldi. Science 181: 64–66.
Gilbert, J. J., 1975. Polymorphism in the rotifer Asplanchna sieboldi: Variability in the body-wall-outgrowth response to dietary tocopherol. Physiol. Zool. 48: 409–419.
Gilbert, J. J., 1976. Selective cannibalism in the rotifer Asplanchna sieboldi: contact recognition of morphotype and clone. Proc. natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 73: 3233–3237.
Gilbert, J. J., 1978. Selective feeding and its effect on polymorphism and sexuality in the rotifer Asplanchna sieboldi. Freshwat. Biol. 8: 43–50.
Gilbert, J. J., 1980a. Developmental polymorphism in the rotifer Asplanchna sieboldi. Am. Sci. 68: 636–646.
Gilbert, J. J., 1980b. Feeding in the rotifer Asplanchna: behavior, cannibalism, selectivity, prey defenses, and impact on rotifer communities. In W. C. Kerfoot (ed.), Evolution and Ecology in Zooplankton Communities. The University Press of New England, Hanover (NH): 158–172.
Gilbert, J. J. & J. L. Confer, 1986. Gigantism and the potential for interference competition in the rotifer genus Asplanchna. Oecologia 70: 549–554.
Gilbert, J. J. & J. D. Jack, 1993. Rotifers as predators on small ciliates. Hydrobiologia 255/256: 247–253.
Gilbert, J. J. & R. S. Stemberger, 1985. The costs and benefits of gigantism in polymorphic species of the rotifer Asplanchna. Arch. Hydrobiol. 21: 185–192.
Gilbert, J. J. & C. E. Williamson, 1978. Predator-prey behavior and its effect on rotifer survival in associations of Mesocyclops edax, Asplanchna girodi, Polyarthra vulgaris, and Keratella cochlearis. Oecologia 37: 13–22.
Green, J. & O. B. Lan, 1974. Asplanchna and the spines of Brachionus calyciflorus in two Javanese sewage ponds. Freshwat. Biol. 4: 223–226.
Hampton, S. E. & P. L. Starkweather, in press. Differences in prédation among morphotypes of the rotifer Asplanchna silvestrii. Freshwat. Biol.
Hurlbert, S. H., M. S. Mulla & H. R. Willson, 1972. Effects of an organophosphorus insecticide on the phytoplankton, zooplankton, and insect populations of fresh-water ponds. Ecol. Monogr. 42: 269–299.
Iyer, N. & T. R. Rao, 1996. Responses of the predatory rotifer Asplanchna intermedia to prey species differing in vulnerability: laboratory and field studies. Freshwat. Biol. 36: 521–533.
Powers, J. H., 1912. A case of polymorphism in Asplanchna simulating a mutation. Am. Nat. 46: 441–462, 526–552.
Salt, G. W., 1977. An analysis of the diets of five sympatric species of Asplanchna. Arch. Hydrobiol. 8: 123–125.
Sarma, S. S. S., 1993. Feeding responses of Asplanchna brightwelli (Rotifera): laboratory and field studies. Hydrobiologia 255/256: 275–282.
Starkweather, P. L. & E. J. Walsh, 1989. Influence of cyanobacterial diet on Asplanchna predation risk in Brachionus calyciflorus. Hydrobiologia, 186/187: 35–38.
Stemberger, R. S., 1981. A general approach to the culture of planktonic rotifers. Can. J. Fish, aquat. Sci. 38: 721–724.
Urabe, J., 1992. Midsummer succession of rotifer plankton in a shallow eutrophic pond. J. Plankton Res. 14: 851–866.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1998 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this paper
Cite this paper
Hampton, S.E. (1998). Morphotype-specific predation in the trimorphic rotifer Asplanchna silvestrii . In: Wurdak, E., Wallace, R., Segers, H. (eds) Rotifera VIII: A Comparative Approach. Developments in Hydrobiology, vol 134. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-4782-8_56
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-4782-8_56
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-6009-7
Online ISBN: 978-94-011-4782-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive