ArticleScientific reports2021
Mixoplankton interferences in dilution grazing experiments.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Low rates of bacterivory enhances phototrophy and competitive advantage for mixoplankton growing in oligotrophic waters.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Article
- Spatial variability of microzooplankton grazing on phytoplankton in coastal southern Florida, USA.PeerJ · 2022Article
- Mixoplankton and mixotrophy: future research priorities.Journal of plankton researchReview
- Beyond the bottle: exposing the identity-rate gap in microzooplankton ecology.Journal of plankton researchReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It remains unclear as to how mixoplankton (coupled phototrophy and phagotrophy in one cell) affects the estimation of grazing rates obtained from the widely used dilution grazing technique. To address this issue, we prepared laboratory-controlled dilution experiments with known mixtures of phyto-, protozoo-, and mixoplankton, operated under different light regimes and species combinations. Our results evidenced that chlorophyll is an inadequate proxy for phytoplankton when mixoplankton are present. Conversely, species-specific cellular counts could assist (although not fully solve) in the integration of mixoplanktonic activity in a dilution experiment. Moreover, cell counts can expose prey selectivity patterns and intraguild interactions among grazers. Our results also demonstrated that whole community approaches mimic reality better than single-species laboratory experiments. We also confirmed that light is required for protozoo- and mixoplankton to correctly express their feeding activity, and that overall diurnal grazing is higher than nocturnal. Thus, we recommend that a detailed examination of initial and final plankton communities should become routine in dilution experiments, and that incubations should preferably be started at the beginning of both day and night periods. Finally, we hypothesize that in silico approaches may help disentangle the contribution of mixoplankton to the community grazing of a given system.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.