Cited by 10Crustacean biology and ecologyIsotope Analysis in EcologyInvertebrate Taxonomy and Ecology

Size dependent differences in litter consumption of isopods: preliminary results

Open access
Vilisics, Ferenc, Szekeres, Sándor, Hornung, Elizabeth·2012·ZooKeys

Abstract

A series of experiments were applied to test how leaf orientation within microcosms affect consumption rates (Experiment 1), and to discover intra-specific differences in leaf litter consumption (Experiment 2) of the common isopod species Porcellio scaber and Porcellionides pruinosus. A standardised microcosm setup was developed for feeding experiments to maintain standard conditions. A constant amount of freshly fallen black poplar litter was provided to three distinct size class (small, medium, large) of woodlice. We measured litter consumption after a fortnight. We maintained appr. constant isopod biomass for all treatments, and equal densities within each size class. We hypothesized that different size classes differ in their litter consumption, therefore such differences should occur even within populations of the species. We also hypothesized a marked difference in consumption rates for different leaf orientation within microcosms. Our results showed size-specific consumption patterns for Porcellio scaber: small adults showed the highest consumption rates (i.e. litter mass loss / isopod biomass) in high density microcosms, while medium-sized adults of lower densities ate the most litter in containers. Leaf orientation posed no significant effect on litter consumption.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3897/zookeys.176.2470

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 37 · Cited by 10

Authors
Vilisics, F., Szekeres, S., & Hornung, E.
Affiliations
  • University of Helsinki (FI)
  • Magyar Agrár- és Élettudományi Egyetem (HU)
Venue
ZooKeys
Published
2012-03-20
Volume
176
Issue
176
Pages
247-259
ISSN
  • 1313-2970 (ISSN-L)
  • 1313-2989
OpenAlex
W2077278000
Cited by
10
References
37
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2014: 1
FWCI
0.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • ZooKeys (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ZooKeys (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Biodiversity Heritage Library (Smithsonian Institution) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Työväentutkimus Vuosikirja (submittedVersion)
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Crustacean biology and ecology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Isotope Analysis in Ecology
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Invertebrate Taxonomy and Ecology
Keywords
Isopoda, Porcellio scaber, Porcellionides pruinosus, body size, intraspecific variation, feeding rate, leaf orientation, microcosm experiments, terrestrial isopods, population density

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