2006Limnology and OceanographyRequires access

Major contribution from littoral crustaceans to zooplankton species richness in lakes

Bjørn Walseng, Dag O. Hessen, Gunnar Halvorsen, Ann Kristin Schartau

Open publisher page 124 citations

Abstract

A study of pelagic and littoral species richness among microcrustaceans in 2,466 Norwegian lakes recorded 120 crustacean species: 77 cladocerans, 31 cyclopoids, and 12 calanoids, respectively. Very few species were strictly pelagic, and the pelagic crustacean zooplankton species were by far outnumbered by their littoral counterparts. More than two‐thirds of the total crustacean species numbers in lakes were accounted for by species with a littoral preference. A considerable number of species occurred with low frequency, and the median total number of crustacean species in the lakes was only 14. A majority of littoral species also occurred commonly in pelagic samples, and vice versa. Some species are truly both littoral and pelagic, and nearly all species occurring in pelagic samples were also common in littoral samples. A high proportion of the common littoral species was only recorded occasionally in pelagic samples, and should thus be considered strictly littoral. There was no significant correlation between lake area and species richness for pelagic or littoral species. Our findings demonstrate the importance of including littoral species when assessing microcrustacean diversity in lakes, and we question the practice of considering species as either pelagic or littoral, because a majority of the recorded species was common in both habitats. It calls for a further discussion of the term "planktonic", since most of the species are at least partly "semiplanktonic."

About this research paper

What this paper is about

A study of pelagic and littoral species richness among microcrustaceans in 2,466 Norwegian lakes recorded 120 crustacean species: 77 cladocerans, 31 cyclopoids, and 12 calanoids, respectively. Very few species were strictly pelagic, and the pelagic crustacean zooplankton species were by far outnumbered by their littoral counterparts. More than two‐thirds of the total crustacean species numbers in lakes were accounted for by species with a littoral preference. A considerable number of species occurred with low frequency, and the median total number of crustacean species in the lakes was only 14. A majority of littoral species also occurred commonly in pelagic samples, and vice versa. Some species are truly both littoral and pelagic, and nearly all species occurring in pelagic samples were also common in littoral samples. A high proportion of the common littoral species was only recorded occasionally in pelagic samples, and should thus be considered strictly littoral. There was no significant correlation between lake area and species richness for pelagic or littoral species. Our findings demonstrate the importance of including littoral species when assessing microcrustacean diversity in lakes, and we question the practice of considering species as either pelagic or littoral, because a majority of the recorded species was common in both habitats. It calls for a further discussion of the term "planktonic", since most of the species are at least partly "semiplanktonic."

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 124 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

A study of pelagic and littoral species richness among microcrustaceans in 2,466 Norwegian lakes recorded 120 crustacean species: 77 cladocerans, 31 cyclopoids, and 12 calanoids, respectively. Very few species were strictly pelagic, and the pelagic crustacean zooplankton species were by far outnumbered by their littoral counterparts. More than two‐thirds of the total crustacean species numbers in lakes were accounted for by species with a littoral preference. A considerable number of species occurred with low frequency, and the median total number of crustacean species in the lakes was only 14. A majority of littoral species also occurred commonly in pelagic samples, and vice versa. Some species are truly both littoral and pelagic, and nearly all species occurring in pelagic samples were also common in littoral samples. A high proportion of the common littoral species was only recorded occasionally in pelagic samples, and should thus be considered strictly littoral. There was no significant correlation between lake area and species richness for pelagic or littoral species. Our findings demonstrate the importance of including littoral species when assessing microcrustacean diversity in lakes, and we question the practice of considering species as either pelagic or littoral, because a majority of the recorded species was common in both habitats. It calls for a further discussion of the term "planktonic", since most of the species are at least partly "semiplanktonic."

Key concepts: Littoral zone, Pelagic zone, Zooplankton, Species richness, Ecology, Biology, Plankton, Crustacean

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Major contribution from littoral crustaceans to zooplankton species richness in lakes — Research Paper | ScholarLens