scholarly journals A model of chlorophyll a destruction by Calanus spp. and implications for the estimation of ingestion rates using the gut fluorescence method

1998 ◽  
Vol 171 ◽  
pp. 187-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
CJ Stevens ◽  
EJH Head
2013 ◽  
Vol 726-731 ◽  
pp. 1411-1415 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fei Peng ◽  
Shi Bo Liu ◽  
Hai Yan Xu ◽  
Zhi Qun Li

This paper investigated three chlorophyll-a analysis methods in water sample. The UV-VIS spectrophotometry method followed SL88-2012 standard procedure, the results showed the detection limit of chlorophyll-a was 0.22 μg/L, with the lower detection limit of 1.0 μg/L. The detection range of the vivo chlorophyll-a fluorescence method was 0.1-300μg/L, the ratios of different algae matched that prepared in water samples. The detection limits and quantification limits for HPLC by using UVD and FLD were respectively 0.013 and 0.004 μg/L, 0.040 and 0.013μg/L. FLD was more sensitive than UVD for chlorophyll-a analysis, and the recovery of standard addition was in the range of 90.2% to 103.9% with UVD and FLD. Given the different pretreatment procedures of the sample, equipment conditions, correction and precision, vivo chlorophyll-a fluorescence method was the best on-site monitoring and the emergency monitoring method. Spectrophotometer was suitable for routine laboratory determination of chlorophyll-a, especially for bulk water samples. HPLC method had high precision and sensitivity, so this method applied to the determination of exact requirements, microanalysis and pigment separation.


1997 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 159-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Takatsuji ◽  
K. Hamasaki ◽  
T. Toda ◽  
S. Taguchi

2005 ◽  
Vol 62 (10) ◽  
pp. 2371-2385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie H Bundy ◽  
Henry A Vanderploeg ◽  
Peter J Lavrentyev ◽  
Paul A Kovalcik

Feeding rates of the calanoid copepod Leptodiaptomus sicilis on natural assemblages of phytoplankton and microzooplankton were evaluated during late winter and early spring in Lake Michigan. Microzooplankton were the preferred food source for this copepod, and larger size fractions of phytoplankton were preferred to smaller size fractions. Ingestion rates of total chlorophyll a ranged from 2 to 14 ng·copepod–1·day–1, while ingestion rates of micro zoo plank ton biomass ranged from 0.04 to 0.15 µg C·copepod–1·day–1. In these experiments, microzooplankton carbon accounted for 22%–74% of the total carbon ingested. Clearance rates of microzooplankton carbon were positively related to the larger size fractions of chlorophyll a and to total suspended solids. Measured ingestion rates of microzooplankton and phyto plankton carbon suggest that calanoid copepod populations have the potential to control microzooplankton production in late winter and early spring, and even with an abundance of phytoplankton carbon, food availability may limit the reproduction of L. sicilis. Because microzooplankton contribute significantly to the diet of these copepods, stimulation of the microbial food web by terrigenous inputs of nutrients and carbon may be transmitted to higher trophic levels (i.e., mesozooplankton and their predators) through heterotrophic flagellates and protozoans.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document