The use of a deep tank in plankton ecology. 2. Efficiency of a planktonic food chain1
Michael M. Mullin, Pamela M. Evans
Abstract
Michael M. Mullin, Pamela M. Evans
Abstract
Populations of copepods and ctenophores were maintained in a quasi‐steady state in a 70‐m3 tank supplied with phytoplankton and harvested regularly for several months. Paracalanus parvus replaced Acartia tonsa as the dominant copepod; in the absence of ctenophores, the yield of copepods was 10.4–12.5% of the phytoplankton supplied as food. When the carnivorous ctenophores were present, their yield was 2.6% of the phytoplankton supplied but could have been as high as 3.2% had not copepods been harvested simultaneously.
OpenAlex reports 60 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Populations of copepods and ctenophores were maintained in a quasi‐steady state in a 70‐m3 tank supplied with phytoplankton and harvested regularly for several months. Paracalanus parvus replaced Acartia tonsa as the dominant copepod; in the absence of ctenophores, the yield of copepods was 10.4–12.5% of the phytoplankton supplied as food. When the carnivorous ctenophores were present, their yield was 2.6% of the phytoplankton supplied but could have been as high as 3.2% had not copepods been harvested simultaneously.
Key concepts: Acartia tonsa, Copepod, Phytoplankton, Plankton, Biology, Ecology, Zooplankton, Yield (engineering)