Cited by 297Aquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton DynamicsFish Ecology and Management StudiesEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies

INTRASPECIFIC VARIATION IN A PREDATOR AFFECTS COMMUNITY STRUCTURE AND CASCADING TROPHIC INTERACTIONS

Post, David M., Palkovacs, Eric P., Schielke, Erika G., Dodson, Stanley I.·2008·Ecology

Abstract

Intraspecific phenotypic variation in ecologically important traits is widespread and important for evolutionary processes, but its effects on community and ecosystem processes are poorly understood. We use life history differences among populations of alewives, Alosa pseudoharengus, to test the effects of intraspecific phenotypic variation in a predator on pelagic zooplankton community structure and the strength of cascading trophic interactions. We focus on the effects of differences in (1) the duration of residence in fresh water (either seasonal or year-round) and (2) differences in foraging morphology, both of which may strongly influence interactions between alewives and their prey. We measured zooplankton community structure, algal biomass, and spring total phosphorus in lakes that contained landlocked, anadromous, or no alewives. Both the duration of residence and the intraspecific variation in foraging morphology strongly influenced zooplankton community structure. Lakes with landlocked alewives had small-bodied zooplankton year-round, and lakes with no alewives had large-bodied zooplankton year-round. In contrast, zooplankton communities in lakes with anadromous alewives cycled between large-bodied zooplankton in the winter and spring and small-bodied zooplankton in the summer. In summer, differences in feeding morphology of alewives caused zooplankton biomass to be lower and body size to be smaller in lakes with anadromous alewives than in lakes with landlocked ale…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1890/07-1216.1

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Post, D. M., Palkovacs, E. P., Schielke, E. G., & Dodson, S. I.
Affiliations
  • Yale University (US)
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
Venue
Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-07
Volume
89
Issue
7
Pages
2019-2032
ISSN
0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2145211517
Cited by
297
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 13
FWCI
11.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Ecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DukeSpace (Duke University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Aquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Fish Ecology and Management Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Keywords
intraspecific phenotypic variation, alewife, zooplankton community structure, trophic cascades, zooplankton body size, zooplankton biomass, algal biomass, phosphorus, lake food webs, predator-prey interactions
MeSH terms
Animals, Connecticut, Fishes, Fresh Water, Predatory Behavior, Seawater, Zooplankton, Food Chain

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review