GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

feed icon rss

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
  • 00DEQ029; ASC-1992; ASC-1993; ASC-1995; Atlantic, Vineyard Sound; Basin Scale Analysis, Synthesis and Integration; Bucket, plastic; Carbon per cell; CCMP1834; Cell biovolume; Dinoflagellata, cell biovolume; Dinoflagellata equivalent spherical diameter; East China Sea; Equivalent spherical diameter; EURO-BASIN; EUR-OCEANS; European network of excellence for Ocean Ecosystems Analysis; Event label; EXP; Experiment; FEEDEXP_2005; FEEDEXP_DINO_2000; FEEDEXP_DINO_2005; Geum_Estuary; Geum, Korea, Asia; Golf of Mexico; GPSMK0209; Grazing rate as carbon per individual; Gross growth efficiency; Gwangyang_offshore; GWS_BUESUM_1993; GYRE1994_GM; HARIMA_GD; HTMS0402; IESHIMA_GD; Inner Oslofjord; Kattegat; Kattegat_PNET; Latitude of event; Longitude of event; LpSIO95; MASAN_BAY_2003; MASAN_BAY_2004; MASAN_BAY_2005; Net; NET; OSLOFJORD_DL_1994; P_piscicida_FEEDEXP; Pacific Ocean; PDHMS0206; PLA; Plankton net; PMCJH99; Port Aransas, Aransas ship channel; Prey/Predator, carbon per cell ratio; Prey/Predator, cell biovolume ratio; Prey/Predator, equivalent spherical diameter ratio; PUGET_SOUND_2005; Puget Sound, Salish Sea; Reference/source; Scripps_P_Fragilidium; Scripps_P_Proto; Seto Inland Sea; Taxon/taxa; TISO_NCM; TOKYO_BAY_GD; Tokyo Bay; Treatment: temperature; Uniform resource locator/link to reference; VS_MS_1993; Wadden Sea, North Sea, Germany; Water sample; WB; WS  (1)
  • Food web dynamic  (1)
Document type
Keywords
Publisher
Years
  • 1
    Publication Date: 2024-01-26
    Description: The present data compilation includes dinoflagellates growth rate, grazing rate and gross growth efficiency determined either in the field or in laboratory experiments. From the existing literature, we synthesized all data that we could find on dinoflagellates. Some sources might be missing but none were purposefully ignored. We did not include autotrophic dinoflagellates in the database, but mixotrophic organisms may have been included. This is due to the large uncertainty about which taxa are mixotrophic, heterotrophic or symbiont bearing. Field data on microzooplankton grazing are mostly comprised of grazing rate using the dilution technique with a 24h incubation period. Laboratory grazing and growth data are focused on pelagic ciliates and heterotrophic dinoflagellates. The experiment measured grazing or growth as a function of prey concentration or at saturating prey concentration (maximal grazing rate). When considering every single data point available (each measured rate for a defined predator-prey pair and a certain prey concentration) there is a total of 801 data points for the dinoflagellates, counting experiments that measured growth and grazing simultaneously as 1 data point.
    Keywords: 00DEQ029; ASC-1992; ASC-1993; ASC-1995; Atlantic, Vineyard Sound; Basin Scale Analysis, Synthesis and Integration; Bucket, plastic; Carbon per cell; CCMP1834; Cell biovolume; Dinoflagellata, cell biovolume; Dinoflagellata equivalent spherical diameter; East China Sea; Equivalent spherical diameter; EURO-BASIN; EUR-OCEANS; European network of excellence for Ocean Ecosystems Analysis; Event label; EXP; Experiment; FEEDEXP_2005; FEEDEXP_DINO_2000; FEEDEXP_DINO_2005; Geum_Estuary; Geum, Korea, Asia; Golf of Mexico; GPSMK0209; Grazing rate as carbon per individual; Gross growth efficiency; Gwangyang_offshore; GWS_BUESUM_1993; GYRE1994_GM; HARIMA_GD; HTMS0402; IESHIMA_GD; Inner Oslofjord; Kattegat; Kattegat_PNET; Latitude of event; Longitude of event; LpSIO95; MASAN_BAY_2003; MASAN_BAY_2004; MASAN_BAY_2005; Net; NET; OSLOFJORD_DL_1994; P_piscicida_FEEDEXP; Pacific Ocean; PDHMS0206; PLA; Plankton net; PMCJH99; Port Aransas, Aransas ship channel; Prey/Predator, carbon per cell ratio; Prey/Predator, cell biovolume ratio; Prey/Predator, equivalent spherical diameter ratio; PUGET_SOUND_2005; Puget Sound, Salish Sea; Reference/source; Scripps_P_Fragilidium; Scripps_P_Proto; Seto Inland Sea; Taxon/taxa; TISO_NCM; TOKYO_BAY_GD; Tokyo Bay; Treatment: temperature; Uniform resource locator/link to reference; VS_MS_1993; Wadden Sea, North Sea, Germany; Water sample; WB; WS
    Type: Dataset
    Format: text/tab-separated-values, 2584 data points
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    Publication Date: 2022-05-25
    Description: © The Author(s), 2013. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Ecological Modelling 261-262 (2013): 43–57, doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2013.04.006.
    Description: Dynamic Green Ocean Models (DGOMs) include different sets of Plankton Functional Types (PFTs) and equations, thus different interactions and food webs. Using four DGOMs (CCSM-BEC, PISCES, NEMURO and PlankTOM5) we explore how predator–prey interactions influence food web dynamics. Using each model's equations and biomass output, interaction strengths (direct and specific) were calculated and the role of zooplankton in modeled food webs examined. In CCSM-BEC the single size-class adaptive zooplankton preys on different phytoplankton groups according to prey availability and food preferences, resulting in a strong top-down control. In PISCES the micro- and meso-zooplankton groups compete for food resources, grazing phytoplankton depending on their availability in a mixture of bottom-up and top-down control. In NEMURO macrozooplankton controls the biomass of other zooplankton PFTs and defines the structure of the food web with a strong top-down control within the zooplankton. In PlankTOM5, competition and predation between micro- and meso-zooplankton along with strong preferences for nanophytoplankton and diatoms, respectively, leads to their mutual exclusion with a mixture of bottom-up and top-down control of the plankton community composition. In each model, the grazing pressure of the zooplankton PFTs and the way it is exerted on their preys may result in the food web dynamics and structure of the model to diverge from the one that was intended when designing the model. Our approach shows that the food web dynamics, in particular the strength of the predator–prey interactions, are driven by the choice of parameters and more specifically the food preferences. Consequently, our findings stress the importance of equation and parameter choice as they define interactions between PFTs and overall food web dynamics (competition, bottom-up or top-down effects). Also, the differences in the simulated food-webs between different models highlight the gap of knowledge for zooplankton rates and predator–prey interactions. In particular, concerted effort is needed to identify the key growth and loss parameters and interactions and quantify them with targeted laboratory experiments in order to bring our understanding of zooplankton at a similar level to phytoplankton.
    Description: This work was supported with funding from Palmer LTER (NSF OPP-0823101) and C-MORE (NSF EF-0424599).
    Keywords: Dynamic Green Ocean Model ; Plankton Functional Types ; Zooplankton ; Food web dynamic ; Predator–prey interactions
    Repository Name: Woods Hole Open Access Server
    Type: Article
    Format: application/pdf
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...