Published online December 16, 2022
https://doi.org/10.5141/jee.22.065
Journal of Ecology and Environment (2022) 46:31
Dongwoo Yang1 , Seonah Jeong2
, Jihee Kim3
and Sangkyu Park2*
1Department of Ecology and Conservation, National Marine Biodiversity Institute of Korea, Seocheon 33662, Republic of Korea
2Department of Biological Science, Ajou University, Suwon 16499, Republic of Korea
3Invasive Alien Species Team, National Institute of Ecology, Seocheon 33657, Republic of Korea
Correspondence to:Sangkyu Park
E-mail daphnia@ajou.ac.kr
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Background: Filter-feeding zooplankton has limited food resources owing to their habitat. Consequently, it is crucial for them to acquire all essential compounds, such as fatty acids (FAs) and amino acids, from confined diets. To elucidate the trophic transfer of FAs to filter feeders, the primary consumers in freshwater ecosystems, we compared the FA accumulation patterns of two species of filter-feeding zooplankton,
Results: Principal component analysis showed that the FA profiles of zooplankton were well-grouped by species and diet. Although diet affects the FA profiles of consumers, they exhibit different FA accumulation patterns.
Conclusions: This study showed that two primary consumers,
Keywords: 18C MUFAs, 18C-ω3 polyunsaturated fatty acids, Branchinella kugenumaensis, Daphnia magna, Fatty acid, Filter feeder
The diet of filter-feeding zooplankton is limited because they consume seston, which is a suspended particulate matter found in aquatic ecosystems. Therefore, they are assumed to have adaptive strategies to accumulate essential compounds, such as fatty acids (FAs) and amino acids, from their constricted diet in order to survive (Müller-Navarra 2008). Notably, animals cannot synthesize ω3 polyunsaturated FAs (PUFA), and the conversion rates of C18ω3 PUFA to highly unsaturated FAs are low (Cook and McMaster 2002). Thus, consumers should obtain essential FAs from their diets, and their FA profiles should reflect those of their diets (Brett et al. 2006). Many laboratory and field studies have been conducted to elucidate trophic transfers between consumers and their diets in aquatic ecosystems (Burns et al. 2011; Kainz et al. 2009).
Previous studies have examined the transfer rates and accumulation patterns of dietary compounds such as FAs in clams (Caers et al. 1999), cladocerans (Brett et al. 2006; Masclaux et al. 2012; Taipale et al. 2011), and fairy shrimp (Mura et al. 1994, 1997a; Yang et al. 2016). Moreover, most studies have focused on cladocerans and copepods, comparing the FA compositions of diets and consumers in laboratories (Brett et al. 2006; Masclaux et al. 2012; Taipale et al. 2011; Weers et al. 1997) and pelagic lakes (Persson and Vrede 2006; Smyntek et al. 2008) to understand their feeding strategies and metabolic needs. However, few studies have experimentally compared the feeding traits of cladocerans and other filter-feeding zooplankton species, such as anostracans (e.g., fairy shrimp,
In this study, we used two filter feeders—a freshwater anostracan,
The purpose of this study was to compare the accumulation patterns of FAs between filter feeders, cladocerans, and anostracans through indoor experiments and field samples. Our hypothesis was that these filter-feeding zooplankton would exhibit species-specific FA compositions, even though both were fed the same diet or under the same environment. To test this, we conducted a feeding experiment in which two filter feeders (
Representative strains of phytoplankton were obtained from the Culture Collection of Algae at the University of Texas at Austin, USA (UTEX) and the Korea Marine Microalgae Culture Center (KMMCC):
The feeding experiment began by using monoclonal cohorts of
Daphnids (not including
The frozen samples were dried using a freeze dryer (Heto Model FD2.5; Heto Lab Equipment, Allerød, Denmark). Whole samples of
The percentage values of each FA type with respect to the total FA amount were compiled to produce a data matrix. We used log transformation (log [x + 1]) to ensure the homogeneity of variance (Poerschmann et al. 2004). A value of zero was assigned if there was no matching peak. Log-transformed data were subtracted from the mean of each FA variable and divided by the square root of their standard deviation (Pareto scaling) prior to principal component analysis (PCA) (Van den Berg et al. 2006).
PCA was performed using covariance data matrices to reduce dimensionality. We examined the variance of each mode using several selection criteria, including the scree test (Cattell 1966), Kaiser’s criterion, and rule N (Overland and Preisendorfer 1982; Termonia 2001), and chose the subspace dimension (m) (Jassby 2000). The loading factors were rotated using varimax rotation after PCA (Everitt, 2006M). We checked for normality of the data sets using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. Statistical analyses, including PCA and analysis of variance (ANOVA), were performed using S-Plus 6 for Windows (Insightful Corp., Seattle, WA, USA). Partial least square discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) was conducted using R with the PLS package (http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/pls/index.html) (Mevik and Wehrens 2007) to compare the FA profiles of
The mixed phytoplankton diets had distinct FA profiles based on the dominant phytoplankton species related to their taxonomic groups (Table. 1). Diet 1 was dominated by 16:0 and 18:4ω3 FA contents and had higher contents of 20:5ω3 (docosahexaenoic acid, DHA) and 22:6ω3 (eicosapentaenoic acid, EPA) than the other diets. The FA composition of Diet 2 was dominated by 16:0, 18:0, and 18:3ω6. Diet 4 had remarkable FA content of 16:1ω7 and Diet 5 was dominated by 16:0, 16:1ω7 and 18:3ω3 (ALA). Moreover, in the two-species mixed phytoplankton diet, Diet 3 contained high proportions of 16:0 and 18:4ω3, whereas Diet 6 had high ALA and 16:0. The initial diet of
The PCA of the FA profiles of the two filter feeders,
The S-plot based on PLS-DA results suggested that ALA and 16:1ω7 were abundant in
Two-way ANOVA revealed that the content of several FAs, such as 18:0, 18:1ω7, and 18:4ω3, was significantly different between consumers fed the same diet and those fed different diets of the same species (
Table 2 . Results of two-way analysis of variance for the essential fatty acid categories of
Source | df | SS | Variance explained (%) | Source | df | SS | Variance explained (%) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
16:1ω7 | 18:4ω3 | ||||||||
Species | 1 | 887.7 | < 0.001 | 33.1 | Species | 1 | 296.5 | < 0.001 | 45.7 |
Diet | 5 | 1,428.9 | < 0.001 | 53.3 | Diet | 5 | 260.9 | < 0.001 | 40.2 |
Species × Diet | 5 | 327.8 | < 0.001 | 12.2 | Species × Diet | 5 | 82.9 | < 0.001 | 12.8 |
Error | 40 | 38.0 | 1.4 | Error | 40 | 8.7 | 1.3 | ||
18:0 | 20:5ω3 (Eicosapentaenoic acid)* | ||||||||
Species | 1 | 559.5 | < 0.001 | 88.2 | Species | 1 | 118.9 | < 0.001 | 15.7 |
Diet | 5 | 25.6 | 0.001 | 4.0 | Diet | 5 | 585.9 | < 0.001 | 77.1 |
Species x Diet | 5 | 12.7 | 0.030 | 2.0 | Species × Diet | 5 | 27.8 | < 0.001 | 3.7 |
Error | 40 | 36.6 | 5.8 | Error | 40 | 27.1 | 3.6 | ||
18:1ω9 | 20:4ω6 (Arachidonic acid ) | ||||||||
Species | 1 | 136.9 | < 0.001 | 45.2 | Species | 1 | 162.7 | < 0.001 | 39.3 |
Diet | 5 | 135.4 | < 0.001 | 44.7 | Diet | 5 | 204.5 | < 0.001 | 49.4 |
Species × Diet | 5 | 17.5 | < 0.001 | 5.8 | Species × Diet | 5 | 20.8 | < 0.001 | 5.0 |
Error | 40 | 13.1 | 4.3 | Error | 40 | 26.0 | 6.3 | ||
18:1ω7 | ω3/ω6 fatty acid ratio | ||||||||
Species | 1 | 185.9 | < 0.001 | 81.7 | Species | 1 | 19.1 | < 0.001 | 39.0 |
Diet | 5 | 30.0 | < 0.001 | 13.2 | Diet | 5 | 25.0 | < 0.001 | 51.0 |
Species × Diet | 5 | 2.6 | 0.058 | 1.2 | Species × Diet | 5 | 3.8 | < 0.001 | 7.8 |
Error | 40 | 8.9 | 3.9 | Error | 40 | 1.1 | 2.2 | ||
18:3ω3 | |||||||||
Species | 1 | 708.4 | < 0.001 | 22.8 | |||||
Diet | 5 | 2,124.0 | < 0.001 | 68.3 | |||||
Species × Diet | 5 | 228.0 | < 0.001 | 7.3 | |||||
Error | 40 | 50.2 | 1.6 |
Percent variance is the percent of the total sum of squares explained by that term.
df: degree of freedom; SS: sum of squares.
*The sum of the percentage does not equal 100% because of rounding.
The 18:0 content was significantly higher in
The present study showed that the FA compositions of the two filter feeder species,
Our results highlighted that, while the FA profiles of the two filter feeders were similar to those of their diets after being fed mixed phytoplankton diets, the FA profiles of
Although
Although affected by feeding diets, especially diets dominated by
Table 1 . Fatty acid content (%) of mixed diets and an initial diet in the feeding experiment.
Diet 1 ( | Diet 2 ( | Diet 3 ( | Diet 4 ( | Diet 5 ( | Diet 6 ( | Diet 7 (initial; | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Fatty acid | |||||||
14:0 (myristic acid) | 2.3 | 1.7 | 2.0 | 4.3 | 3.8 | 2.2 | 2.8 |
16:0 (palmitic acid) | 17.4 | 30.9 | 23.2 | 24.5 | 21.0 | 19.2 | 17.0 |
16:1ω7 (palmitoleic acid) | 4.3 | 6.0 | 2.2 | 28.2 | 19.9 | 5.3 | 0.5 |
18:0 (stearic acid) | 9.1 | 13.9 | 10.7 | 10.8 | 11.1 | 11.3 | 0.4 |
18:1ω9 (oleic acid) | 3.1 | 4.2 | 2.9 | 4.2 | 5.6 | 6.4 | 14.5 |
18:1ω7 (vaccenic acid) | 2.2 | 2.8 | 2.1 | 1.4 | 2.1 | 2.8 | 1.2 |
18:2ω6 (linoleic acid) | 9.2 | 7.2 | 8.9 | 2.9 | 3.2 | 6.3 | 12.6 |
18:3ω6 ( | 1.5 | 12.2 | 6.9 | 2.0 | 0.9 | 2.2 | 1.1 |
18:3ω3 ( | 12.5 | 7.6 | 9.2 | 5.6 | 19.1 | 26.5 | 32.2 |
18:4ω3 (stearidonic acid) | 16.4 | 5.4 | 13.3 | 3.6 | 4.4 | 7.7 | 8.4 |
20:4ω6 (Arachidonic acid) | ND | ND | ND | 1.2 | 0.7 | 0.7 | ND |
20:5ω3 (Eicosapentaenoic acid) | 13.6 | 3.3 | 10.4 | 7.1 | 3.9 | 2.9 | ND |
22:6ω3 (Docosahexaenoic acid) | 2.8 | 0.7 | 2.1 | 0.9 | 0.1 | 0.5 | ND |
Given phytoplankton species indicate the abundant species in each diet group.
ND: not detected.
Furthermore, the present study shows that few
Several studies have asserted that zooplankton require DHA for overwintering (Farkas et al. 1984, Smyntek et al. 2008). In natural waters,
This study showed that
Although the ALA content in animals was more influenced by diet than by species in this study, we selected species-specific FAs, such as 18C-MUFAs (18:1ω9 and 18:1ω7), in high concentrations in
Table 3 . Ratios of ∑18C MUFA (18:1ω7 and 18:1ω9) to ∑18C-ω3 PUFA (18:3ω3 and 18:4ω3) contents in anostracan and cladoceran species on this study and references.
Anostracan | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Feeding experiment | ||||||
Species | Diet (Dominant* or Single) | Taxonomic group | n | ∑18C MUFA/ ∑18C-ω3 PUFA | Reference | |
Cryptophyceae | 5 | 1.85±0.4 | this study | |||
Cyanophyceae | 4 | 3.90±0.59 | ||||
5 | 2.59±0.14 | |||||
Chlorophyceae | 5 | 1.45±0.17 | ||||
Bacillariophyceae | 4 | 4.71±0.45 | ||||
1 | 1.66 | |||||
Chlorophyceae | 6 | 2.75±1.00 | Yang et al. 2016 | |||
Cyanophyceae | 5 | 13.37±3.76 | ||||
Chlorophyceae | - | 2.29 | Mura et al. 1997a | |||
Yeast/Saccharomycetes | - | 14.07 | ||||
HUFA enriched dried yeast | - | 10.20 | ||||
Chlorophyceae | - | 1.71 | ||||
yeast | - | 29.49 | ||||
HUFA enriched dried yeast | - | 11.50 | ||||
Prymnesiophyceae | - | 1.69 | Zhukova et al. 1998 | |||
Bacillariophyceae | - | 12.31 | ||||
Eustigmatophyceae | - | 7.00 | ||||
Yeast | - | 10.15 | ||||
Field study | ||||||
Species | Sampling site | n | ∑18C MUFA/ ∑18C-ω3 PUFA | Reference | ||
Rice paddy fields | 6 | 3.16±1.09 | this study | |||
Temporary plain pools | - | 3.57 | Mura et al. 1997b | |||
Astatic pools | - | 2.40 | Mura et al. 1994 | |||
Temporary plain pools | - | 2.09 | Mura et al. 1997b | |||
Astatic pools | - | 0.57 | Mura et al. 1994 | |||
Astatic high-level lake | - | 0.42 | Mura et al. 1997b | |||
Mountain pool | - | 5.31 | ||||
A volcanic plateau | - | 2.75 | ||||
Anostracan | ||||||
Feeding experiment | ||||||
Species | Diet (Dominant* or Single) | Taxonomic group | n | ∑18C MUFA/ ∑18C-ω3 PUFA | Reference | |
Cryptophyceae | 4 | 0.55±0.07 | this study | |||
Cyanophyceae | 5 | 0.96±0.16 | ||||
5 | 0.74±0.01 | |||||
Chlorophyceae | 5 | 0.44±0.05 | ||||
Bacillariophyceae | 5 | 1.54±0.27 | ||||
4 | 0.57±0.08 | |||||
Chlorophyceae | - | 0.60 | Müller‐Navarra 2006 | |||
Cryptophyceae | - | 0.31 | ||||
Bacillariophyceae | - | 0.96 | ||||
Field study | ||||||
Species | Sampling site | n | ∑18C MUFA/ ∑18C-ω3 PUFA | Reference | ||
Daphnids | rice paddy fields | 10 | 1.66±0.74 | this study | ||
sub-alpine oligotrophic lakes | - | 0.72 | Persson and Vrede 2006 | |||
astatic pools | - | 0.96 | ||||
temporary plain pools | - | 0.92 | ||||
astatic pools | - | 1.73 |
We calculated the ratios using mean values of fatty acid contents from Mura et al. (1994) and Persson and Vrede (2006). 18:1ω9 content from Persson and Vrede (2006) included 18:1ω6 content.
MUFA: monounsaturated fatty acid; PUFA: polyunsaturated fatty acid; -: not available.
In conclusion, this study showed that two primary consumers,
We would like to thank farmers who provide sites to collect zooplankton samples in rice paddy fields, Hongseong-gun, Chungcheongnam-do, Korea.
ALA: α-linolenic acid
ANOVA: Analysis of Variance
ARA: Arachidonic acid
DHA: Docosahexaenoic acid
EPA: Eicosapentaenoic acid
FA: Fatty acid
FAME: Fatty acid methyl ester
GC: Gas chromatography
KMMCC: Korea Marine Microalgae Culture Center
MSD: Mass spectrometry detector
MUFA: Monounsaturated fatty acid
ND: Not detected
PCA: Principal component analysis
PLS-DA: Partial least square discriminant analysis
PUFA: Polyunsaturated fatty acid
SAFA: Saturated fatty acid
UTEX: University of Texas at Austin
DY performed the experiment and the analysis, and wrote the manuscript. SJ and JK maintained cultured phytoplankton strains and zooplankton for the experiment. SP planned this study and edited the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
This study was supported by a grant from the National Marine Biodiversity Institute of Korea (2022M00300) and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIT) (No. NRF-2021R1A6A1A10044950).
The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |