Trophic basis of invertebrate production in 2 streams at the Hubbard Brook experimental forest

Jr Hall; G. E. Likens; H. M. Malcom

doi:10.2307/1468040

Trophic basis of invertebrate production in 2 streams at the Hubbard Brook experimental forest

Jr Hall
, G. E. Likens
, H. M. Malcom

Flathead Lake Biological Station

University of Wyoming

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

136 Scopus citations

Abstract

Many forest stream food webs have leaf litter as the primary food resource, but instream primary production can also be quantitatively important, in part because it is more easily assimilated. We estimated the trophic basis of invertebrate production in 2 streams at Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest: Bear Brook (BB), a 2nd-order closed canopy stream, and Main Hubbard Brook (HB), a 5th-order open-canopy stream. We combined secondary production measurements for 1 y with gut content analyses to estimate the fraction of total secondary production derived from various food sources. Secondary production was low in both streams: 4.2 g ash-free dry mass (AFDM) m^-2 ^y-1 in BB and 3.0 g AFDM m^-2y^-1 in HB. The amount of primary consumer secondary production derived from algae was 5% in BB and 28% in HB, with the remainder derived from organic detritus. Higher algal availability and lower benthic organic matter storage resulted in a higher fraction of algal consumption in HB relative to BB. Predators consumed ∼72 to 92% of total secondary production, producing high predatory losses of insect production. Algal production was not a large food source in either stream because of low availability, possibly caused by shading in BB and possibly nutrient limitation in both streams.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	432-447
Number of pages	16
Journal	Journal of the North American Benthological Society
Volume	20
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.2307/1468040
State	Published - 2001

Funding

E. Evans assisted with sorting invertebrates. M. Carmona and K. Macneale braved winter field sampling. Thanks to M. Paul and P. Mul-holland who supplied metabolism data for HB and BB, respectively. J. B. Wallace provided data for Fig. 4. Comments from M. Marshall, K. Mac-neale, J. McCutchan, J. Feminella, and 2 anonymous reviewers improved early drafts of the manuscript. This paper is a contribution to the Hubbard Brook Ecosystem Study and to the program of the Institute of Ecosystem Studies. The Northeastern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, operates and maintains HBEF. Financial support was provided by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation to G. E. Likens. E. Evans assisted with sorting invertebrates. M. Carmona and K. Macneale braved winter field sampling. Thanks to M. Paul and P. Mul-holland who supplied metabolism data for HB and BB, respectively. J. B. Wallace provided data for Fig. 4. Comments from M. Marshall, K. Macneale, J. McCutchan, J. Feminella, and 2 anonymous reviewers improved early drafts of the manuscript. This paper is a contribution to the Hubbard Brook Ecosystem Study and to the program of the Institute of Ecosystem Studies. The Northeastern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, operates and maintains HBEF. Financial support was provided by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation to G. E. Likens.

Keywords

Algae
Detritus
Food webs
Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest
Macroinvertebrates
Organic matter flow
Secondary production

Access to Document

10.2307/1468040

Cite this

@article{815cbb397ba04ffd8d139d7dbc4c18b2,

title = "Trophic basis of invertebrate production in 2 streams at the Hubbard Brook experimental forest",

abstract = "Many forest stream food webs have leaf litter as the primary food resource, but instream primary production can also be quantitatively important, in part because it is more easily assimilated. We estimated the trophic basis of invertebrate production in 2 streams at Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest: Bear Brook (BB), a 2nd-order closed canopy stream, and Main Hubbard Brook (HB), a 5th-order open-canopy stream. We combined secondary production measurements for 1 y with gut content analyses to estimate the fraction of total secondary production derived from various food sources. Secondary production was low in both streams: 4.2 g ash-free dry mass (AFDM) m-2 y-1 in BB and 3.0 g AFDM m-2y-1 in HB. The amount of primary consumer secondary production derived from algae was 5\% in BB and 28\% in HB, with the remainder derived from organic detritus. Higher algal availability and lower benthic organic matter storage resulted in a higher fraction of algal consumption in HB relative to BB. Predators consumed ∼72 to 92\% of total secondary production, producing high predatory losses of insect production. Algal production was not a large food source in either stream because of low availability, possibly caused by shading in BB and possibly nutrient limitation in both streams.",

keywords = "Algae, Detritus, Food webs, Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest, Macroinvertebrates, Organic matter flow, Secondary production",

author = "Jr Hall and Likens, \{G. E.\} and Malcom, \{H. M.\}",

note = "Funding Information: E. Evans assisted with sorting invertebrates. M. Carmona and K. Macneale braved winter field sampling. Thanks to M. Paul and P. Mul-holland who supplied metabolism data for HB and BB, respectively. J. B. Wallace provided data for Fig. 4. Comments from M. Marshall, K. Mac-neale, J. McCutchan, J. Feminella, and 2 anonymous reviewers improved early drafts of the manuscript. This paper is a contribution to the Hubbard Brook Ecosystem Study and to the program of the Institute of Ecosystem Studies. The Northeastern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, operates and maintains HBEF. Financial support was provided by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation to G. E. Likens. Funding Information: E. Evans assisted with sorting invertebrates. M. Carmona and K. Macneale braved winter field sampling. Thanks to M. Paul and P. Mul-holland who supplied metabolism data for HB and BB, respectively. J. B. Wallace provided data for Fig. 4. Comments from M. Marshall, K. Macneale, J. McCutchan, J. Feminella, and 2 anonymous reviewers improved early drafts of the manuscript. This paper is a contribution to the Hubbard Brook Ecosystem Study and to the program of the Institute of Ecosystem Studies. The Northeastern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, operates and maintains HBEF. Financial support was provided by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation to G. E. Likens.",

year = "2001",

doi = "10.2307/1468040",

language = "English",

volume = "20",

pages = "432--447",

journal = "Journal of the North American Benthological Society",

issn = "0887-3593",

publisher = "North American Benthological Society",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Trophic basis of invertebrate production in 2 streams at the Hubbard Brook experimental forest

AU - Hall, Jr

AU - Likens, G. E.

AU - Malcom, H. M.

N1 - Funding Information: E. Evans assisted with sorting invertebrates. M. Carmona and K. Macneale braved winter field sampling. Thanks to M. Paul and P. Mul-holland who supplied metabolism data for HB and BB, respectively. J. B. Wallace provided data for Fig. 4. Comments from M. Marshall, K. Mac-neale, J. McCutchan, J. Feminella, and 2 anonymous reviewers improved early drafts of the manuscript. This paper is a contribution to the Hubbard Brook Ecosystem Study and to the program of the Institute of Ecosystem Studies. The Northeastern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, operates and maintains HBEF. Financial support was provided by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation to G. E. Likens. Funding Information: E. Evans assisted with sorting invertebrates. M. Carmona and K. Macneale braved winter field sampling. Thanks to M. Paul and P. Mul-holland who supplied metabolism data for HB and BB, respectively. J. B. Wallace provided data for Fig. 4. Comments from M. Marshall, K. Macneale, J. McCutchan, J. Feminella, and 2 anonymous reviewers improved early drafts of the manuscript. This paper is a contribution to the Hubbard Brook Ecosystem Study and to the program of the Institute of Ecosystem Studies. The Northeastern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, operates and maintains HBEF. Financial support was provided by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation to G. E. Likens.

PY - 2001

Y1 - 2001

N2 - Many forest stream food webs have leaf litter as the primary food resource, but instream primary production can also be quantitatively important, in part because it is more easily assimilated. We estimated the trophic basis of invertebrate production in 2 streams at Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest: Bear Brook (BB), a 2nd-order closed canopy stream, and Main Hubbard Brook (HB), a 5th-order open-canopy stream. We combined secondary production measurements for 1 y with gut content analyses to estimate the fraction of total secondary production derived from various food sources. Secondary production was low in both streams: 4.2 g ash-free dry mass (AFDM) m-2 y-1 in BB and 3.0 g AFDM m-2y-1 in HB. The amount of primary consumer secondary production derived from algae was 5% in BB and 28% in HB, with the remainder derived from organic detritus. Higher algal availability and lower benthic organic matter storage resulted in a higher fraction of algal consumption in HB relative to BB. Predators consumed ∼72 to 92% of total secondary production, producing high predatory losses of insect production. Algal production was not a large food source in either stream because of low availability, possibly caused by shading in BB and possibly nutrient limitation in both streams.

AB - Many forest stream food webs have leaf litter as the primary food resource, but instream primary production can also be quantitatively important, in part because it is more easily assimilated. We estimated the trophic basis of invertebrate production in 2 streams at Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest: Bear Brook (BB), a 2nd-order closed canopy stream, and Main Hubbard Brook (HB), a 5th-order open-canopy stream. We combined secondary production measurements for 1 y with gut content analyses to estimate the fraction of total secondary production derived from various food sources. Secondary production was low in both streams: 4.2 g ash-free dry mass (AFDM) m-2 y-1 in BB and 3.0 g AFDM m-2y-1 in HB. The amount of primary consumer secondary production derived from algae was 5% in BB and 28% in HB, with the remainder derived from organic detritus. Higher algal availability and lower benthic organic matter storage resulted in a higher fraction of algal consumption in HB relative to BB. Predators consumed ∼72 to 92% of total secondary production, producing high predatory losses of insect production. Algal production was not a large food source in either stream because of low availability, possibly caused by shading in BB and possibly nutrient limitation in both streams.

KW - Algae

KW - Detritus

KW - Food webs

KW - Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest

KW - Macroinvertebrates

KW - Organic matter flow

KW - Secondary production

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/0034888078

U2 - 10.2307/1468040

DO - 10.2307/1468040

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0034888078

SN - 0887-3593

VL - 20

SP - 432

EP - 447

JO - Journal of the North American Benthological Society

JF - Journal of the North American Benthological Society

IS - 3

ER -

Trophic basis of invertebrate production in 2 streams at the Hubbard Brook experimental forest

Abstract

Funding

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this