Perceiving the algae: How feeding-current feeding copepods detect their nonmotile prey
- Autores
- Gonçalves, Rodrigo Javier; Kiørboe, Thomas
- Año de publicación
- 2015
- Idioma
- inglés
- Tipo de recurso
- artículo
- Estado
- versión publicada
- Descripción
- Feeding-current feeding copepods detect and capture prey individually, but the mechanism by which nonmotile prey is detected has been unclear. Early reports that copepods detect phytoplankton prey at distances of one body length or more led to the hypothesis that solutes leaking from the prey would be carried to the copepod by the sheared feeding current and arrive prior to the prey, thus allowing the copepod to adjust the feeding current to bring the prey within reach of the feeding appendages. Many subsequent studies have been interpreted assuming this mechanism, which appears currently to be the main accepted view. Here, we review the observations available in the literature and add our own data to show that in most cases the prey, whether phytoplankton cells or inert particles, has to be within a few prey radii from the setae of the feeding appendages to elicit a capture response. We further demonstrate that (1) long-range chemical detection is incompatible with known algal leakage rates and reasonable assumptions of sensitivity, (2) that near-field chemical detection is constrained by diffusion across the boundary layer of the sensor and takes longer than observed near-contact times, and (3) that most reported detection distances are well predicted by models of fluid mechanical signal generation and detection. We conclude that near-field mechanoreception is the common prey detection mode in pelagic copepods. Prey detection distances are thus governed mainly by the reach of the feeding appendages, in contrast to the strong prey size-dependency implied by remote chemical prey detection.
Fil: Gonçalves, Rodrigo Javier. Technical University Of Denmark. National Institute For Aquatic Resources. Section Of Ocean Ecology And Climate; Dinamarca. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Fundación Playa Unión. Estación de Fotobiología Playa Unión; Argentina
Fil: Kiørboe, Thomas. Technical University Of Denmark. National Institute For Aquatic Resources. Section Of Ocean Ecology And Climate; Dinamarca - Materia
-
ZOOPLANKTON
PREY CAPTURE
FEEDING
PREY DETECTION - Nivel de accesibilidad
- acceso abierto
- Condiciones de uso
- https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
- Repositorio
- Institución
- Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
- OAI Identificador
- oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/98844
Ver los metadatos del registro completo
id |
CONICETDig_12f98f3a96e243bff02835aaa7bb4f01 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/98844 |
network_acronym_str |
CONICETDig |
repository_id_str |
3498 |
network_name_str |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
spelling |
Perceiving the algae: How feeding-current feeding copepods detect their nonmotile preyGonçalves, Rodrigo JavierKiørboe, ThomasZOOPLANKTONPREY CAPTUREFEEDINGPREY DETECTIONhttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/1.6https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1Feeding-current feeding copepods detect and capture prey individually, but the mechanism by which nonmotile prey is detected has been unclear. Early reports that copepods detect phytoplankton prey at distances of one body length or more led to the hypothesis that solutes leaking from the prey would be carried to the copepod by the sheared feeding current and arrive prior to the prey, thus allowing the copepod to adjust the feeding current to bring the prey within reach of the feeding appendages. Many subsequent studies have been interpreted assuming this mechanism, which appears currently to be the main accepted view. Here, we review the observations available in the literature and add our own data to show that in most cases the prey, whether phytoplankton cells or inert particles, has to be within a few prey radii from the setae of the feeding appendages to elicit a capture response. We further demonstrate that (1) long-range chemical detection is incompatible with known algal leakage rates and reasonable assumptions of sensitivity, (2) that near-field chemical detection is constrained by diffusion across the boundary layer of the sensor and takes longer than observed near-contact times, and (3) that most reported detection distances are well predicted by models of fluid mechanical signal generation and detection. We conclude that near-field mechanoreception is the common prey detection mode in pelagic copepods. Prey detection distances are thus governed mainly by the reach of the feeding appendages, in contrast to the strong prey size-dependency implied by remote chemical prey detection.Fil: Gonçalves, Rodrigo Javier. Technical University Of Denmark. National Institute For Aquatic Resources. Section Of Ocean Ecology And Climate; Dinamarca. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Fundación Playa Unión. Estación de Fotobiología Playa Unión; ArgentinaFil: Kiørboe, Thomas. Technical University Of Denmark. National Institute For Aquatic Resources. Section Of Ocean Ecology And Climate; DinamarcaAmerican Society of Limnology and Oceanography2015-03info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/98844Gonçalves, Rodrigo Javier; Kiørboe, Thomas; Perceiving the algae: How feeding-current feeding copepods detect their nonmotile prey; American Society of Limnology and Oceanography; Limnology and Oceanography; 60; 4; 3-2015; 1286-12971939-5590CONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lno.10102/abstractinfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1002/lno.10102info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-29T09:50:52Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/98844instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-29 09:50:52.723CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Perceiving the algae: How feeding-current feeding copepods detect their nonmotile prey |
title |
Perceiving the algae: How feeding-current feeding copepods detect their nonmotile prey |
spellingShingle |
Perceiving the algae: How feeding-current feeding copepods detect their nonmotile prey Gonçalves, Rodrigo Javier ZOOPLANKTON PREY CAPTURE FEEDING PREY DETECTION |
title_short |
Perceiving the algae: How feeding-current feeding copepods detect their nonmotile prey |
title_full |
Perceiving the algae: How feeding-current feeding copepods detect their nonmotile prey |
title_fullStr |
Perceiving the algae: How feeding-current feeding copepods detect their nonmotile prey |
title_full_unstemmed |
Perceiving the algae: How feeding-current feeding copepods detect their nonmotile prey |
title_sort |
Perceiving the algae: How feeding-current feeding copepods detect their nonmotile prey |
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv |
Gonçalves, Rodrigo Javier Kiørboe, Thomas |
author |
Gonçalves, Rodrigo Javier |
author_facet |
Gonçalves, Rodrigo Javier Kiørboe, Thomas |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Kiørboe, Thomas |
author2_role |
author |
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
ZOOPLANKTON PREY CAPTURE FEEDING PREY DETECTION |
topic |
ZOOPLANKTON PREY CAPTURE FEEDING PREY DETECTION |
purl_subject.fl_str_mv |
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1.6 https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1 |
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv |
Feeding-current feeding copepods detect and capture prey individually, but the mechanism by which nonmotile prey is detected has been unclear. Early reports that copepods detect phytoplankton prey at distances of one body length or more led to the hypothesis that solutes leaking from the prey would be carried to the copepod by the sheared feeding current and arrive prior to the prey, thus allowing the copepod to adjust the feeding current to bring the prey within reach of the feeding appendages. Many subsequent studies have been interpreted assuming this mechanism, which appears currently to be the main accepted view. Here, we review the observations available in the literature and add our own data to show that in most cases the prey, whether phytoplankton cells or inert particles, has to be within a few prey radii from the setae of the feeding appendages to elicit a capture response. We further demonstrate that (1) long-range chemical detection is incompatible with known algal leakage rates and reasonable assumptions of sensitivity, (2) that near-field chemical detection is constrained by diffusion across the boundary layer of the sensor and takes longer than observed near-contact times, and (3) that most reported detection distances are well predicted by models of fluid mechanical signal generation and detection. We conclude that near-field mechanoreception is the common prey detection mode in pelagic copepods. Prey detection distances are thus governed mainly by the reach of the feeding appendages, in contrast to the strong prey size-dependency implied by remote chemical prey detection. Fil: Gonçalves, Rodrigo Javier. Technical University Of Denmark. National Institute For Aquatic Resources. Section Of Ocean Ecology And Climate; Dinamarca. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Fundación Playa Unión. Estación de Fotobiología Playa Unión; Argentina Fil: Kiørboe, Thomas. Technical University Of Denmark. National Institute For Aquatic Resources. Section Of Ocean Ecology And Climate; Dinamarca |
description |
Feeding-current feeding copepods detect and capture prey individually, but the mechanism by which nonmotile prey is detected has been unclear. Early reports that copepods detect phytoplankton prey at distances of one body length or more led to the hypothesis that solutes leaking from the prey would be carried to the copepod by the sheared feeding current and arrive prior to the prey, thus allowing the copepod to adjust the feeding current to bring the prey within reach of the feeding appendages. Many subsequent studies have been interpreted assuming this mechanism, which appears currently to be the main accepted view. Here, we review the observations available in the literature and add our own data to show that in most cases the prey, whether phytoplankton cells or inert particles, has to be within a few prey radii from the setae of the feeding appendages to elicit a capture response. We further demonstrate that (1) long-range chemical detection is incompatible with known algal leakage rates and reasonable assumptions of sensitivity, (2) that near-field chemical detection is constrained by diffusion across the boundary layer of the sensor and takes longer than observed near-contact times, and (3) that most reported detection distances are well predicted by models of fluid mechanical signal generation and detection. We conclude that near-field mechanoreception is the common prey detection mode in pelagic copepods. Prey detection distances are thus governed mainly by the reach of the feeding appendages, in contrast to the strong prey size-dependency implied by remote chemical prey detection. |
publishDate |
2015 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2015-03 |
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/98844 Gonçalves, Rodrigo Javier; Kiørboe, Thomas; Perceiving the algae: How feeding-current feeding copepods detect their nonmotile prey; American Society of Limnology and Oceanography; Limnology and Oceanography; 60; 4; 3-2015; 1286-1297 1939-5590 CONICET Digital CONICET |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/98844 |
identifier_str_mv |
Gonçalves, Rodrigo Javier; Kiørboe, Thomas; Perceiving the algae: How feeding-current feeding copepods detect their nonmotile prey; American Society of Limnology and Oceanography; Limnology and Oceanography; 60; 4; 3-2015; 1286-1297 1939-5590 CONICET Digital CONICET |
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lno.10102/abstract info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1002/lno.10102 |
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/ |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/ |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
American Society of Limnology and Oceanography |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
American Society of Limnology and Oceanography |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET) instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
reponame_str |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
collection |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
instname_str |
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar |
_version_ |
1844613566973345792 |
score |
13.070432 |