The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Regulation of bacterial biomass and community structure by metazoan and protozoan predation
Abstract
We performed food web manipulation experiments in three eutrophic Daphnia‐dominated ponds, to compare the predation impact on planktonic bacteria exerted by metazoan and protozoan bacterial consumers. We analyzed the bacterial morphological composition by image analysis and the taxonomic composition by fluorescent in situ hybridization with group‐specific oligonucleotide probes. The removal of Daphnia always resulted in a microbial succession in which first free‐living bacteria and then heterotrophic nanoflagellates (HNFs) increased. Distinct stages of bacterial grazing either exclusively by Daphnia or by HNFs allowed a quantitative and qualitative comparison of their predation impact on the bacterial assemblage. Both bacterial consumers showed a strong size‐selective impact that shifted the free‐living bacterial community structure toward small cells. Suppression of bacterial biomass below the carrying capacity was similar with Daphnia or HNFs in one experiment and was significantly stronger with Daphnia as bacterial consumer in two experiments. This was due to the fact that bacteria that were resistant to protozoan predation partially compensated grazing mortality. Bacteria attached to aggregates and detrital particles were more important as grazing‐resistant forms than bacterial filaments and constituted up to 50% of total bacterial biomass at the end of the experiments. Changes in predation pressure were also associated with shifts in bacterial community composition. Bacteria belonging to the beta subclass of the class Proteobacteria and to the Cytophaga/Flavobacterium group dominated originally. The latter were most strongly reduced by HNF grazing, whereas other groups, in two experiments the alpha sublass (ALF) of Proteobacteria and in one experiment bacteria hybridizing with the probe for Archaea, even increased during HNF grazing. The composition also differed between bacteria associated with aggregates and freely suspended bacteria, the most obvious being the dominance of ALF growing on detrital aggregates. The experiments demonstrated that predation is a major structuring force for planktonic bacterial communities and that changes in predation regime probably have a much stronger impact on the structure of the bacterial community than on bacterial abundance and biomass.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Brooks, J. L., & Dodson, S. I. (1965) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.150.3692.28 · Cited by 3,280
Cited by
Assessment of the toxicity of ash-loaded runoff from a recently burnt eucalypt plantation
Campos, I., Abrantes, N., Vidal, T., Bastos, A. C., Gonçalves, F., & Keizer, J. J. (2012) · European Journal of Forest Research · doi:10.1007/s10342-012-0640-7 · Cited by 101
Metadata
- Authors
- Langenheder, S., & Jürgens, K.
- Venue
- Limnology and Oceanography
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2001-01
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 121-134
- ISSN
- 0024-3590 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-5590
- OpenAlex
- W2115087904
- Cited by
- 167
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 15.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Regulation of bacterial biomass and community structure by metazoan and protozoan predation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4319/lo.2001.46.1.0121
- The paper
- Langenheder, S., & Jürgens, K. (2001). Regulation of bacterial biomass and community structure by metazoan and protozoan predation. Limnology and Oceanography. https://doi.org/10.4319/lo.2001.46.1.0121
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.