Fast microzooplankton grazing on fast-growing, low-biomass phytoplankton: a case study in spring in Chesapeake Bay, Delaware Inland Bays and Delaware Bay

Dilution experiments were performed to examine the growth and grazing mortality rates of picophytoplankton (< 2 mu m), nanophytoplankton (2-20 mu m), and microphytoplankton (> 20 mu m) at stations in the Chesapeake Bay (CB), the Delaware Inland Bays (DIB) and the Delaware Bay (DB), in early spring 2005. At station CB microphytoplankton, including chain-forming diatoms were dominant, and the microzooplankton assemblage was mainly composed of the tintinnid Tintinnopsis beroidea. At station DIB, the dominant species were microphytoplanktonic dinoflagellates, while the microzooplankton community was mainly composed of copepod nauplii and the oligotrich ciliate Strombidium sp. At station DB, nanophytoplankton were dominant components, and Strombidium and Tintinnopsis beroidea were the co-dominant microzooplankton. The growth rate and grazing mortality rate were 0.13-3.43 and 0.09-1.92 d(-1) for the different size fractionated phytoplankton. The microzooplankton ingested 73, 171, and 49% of standing stocks, and 95, 70, and 48% of potential primary productivity for total phytoplankton at station CB, DIB, and DB respectively. The carbon flux for total phytoplankton consumed by microzooplankton was 1224.11, 100.76, and 85.85 mu g C 1(-1) d(-1) at station CB, DIB, and DB, respectively. According to the grazing mortality rate, carbon consumption rate and carbon flux turn over rates, microzooplankton in study area mostly preferred to graze on picophytoplankton, which was faster growing but was lowest biomass component of the phytoplankton. The faster grazing on Fast-Growing-Low-Biomass (FGLB) phenomenon in coastal regions is explained as a resource partitioning strategy. This quite likely argues that although microzooplankton grazes strongly on phytoplankton in these regions, these microzooplankton grazers are passive.

Dilution experiments were performed to examine the growth and grazing mortality rates of picophytoplankton (< 2 mu m), nanophytoplankton (2-20 mu m), and microphytoplankton (> 20 mu m) at stations in the Chesapeake Bay (CB), the Delaware Inland Bays (DIB) and the Delaware Bay (DB), in early spring 2005. At station CB microphytoplankton, including chain-forming diatoms were dominant, and the microzooplankton assemblage was mainly composed of the tintinnid Tintinnopsis beroidea. At station DIB, the dominant species were microphytoplanktonic dinoflagellates, while the microzooplankton community was mainly composed of copepod nauplii and the oligotrich ciliate Strombidium sp. At station DB, nanophytoplankton were dominant components, and Strombidium and Tintinnopsis beroidea were the co-dominant microzooplankton. The growth rate and grazing mortality rate were 0.13-3.43 and 0.09-1.92 d(-1) for the different size fractionated phytoplankton. The microzooplankton ingested 73, 171, and 49% of standing stocks, and 95, 70, and 48% of potential primary productivity for total phytoplankton at station CB, DIB, and DB respectively. The carbon flux for total phytoplankton consumed by microzooplankton was 1224.11, 100.76, and 85.85 mu g C 1(-1) d(-1) at station CB, DIB, and DB, respectively. According to the grazing mortality rate, carbon consumption rate and carbon flux turn over rates, microzooplankton in study area mostly preferred to graze on picophytoplankton, which was faster growing but was lowest biomass component of the phytoplankton. The faster grazing on Fast-Growing-Low-Biomass (FGLB) phenomenon in coastal regions is explained as a resource partitioning strategy. This quite likely argues that although microzooplankton grazes strongly on phytoplankton in these regions, these microzooplankton grazers are passive.