Can space-for-time-substitution surveys represent zooplankton biodiversity patterns and their relationship to environmental drivers?

Space-for-Time-Substitution surveys (SFTS) are commonly used to describe zooplankton community dynamics and to determine lake ecosystem health. SFTS surveys typically combine single point observations from many lakes to evaluate the response of zooplankton community structure and dynamics (e.g., species abundance and biomass, diversity, demographics and modeled rate processes) to spatial gradients in hypothesized environmental drivers (e.g., temperature, nutrients, predation), in lieu of tracking such responses over long time scales. However, the reliability and reproducibility of SFTS zooplankton surveys have not yet been comprehensively tested against empirically-based community dynamics from longterm monitoring efforts distributed worldwide. We use a recently compiled global data set of more than 100 lake zooplankton time series to test whether SFTS surveys can accurately capture zooplankton diversity, and the hypothesized relationship with temperature, using simulated SFTS surveys of the time series data. Specifically, we asked: (1) to what degree can SFTS surveys capture observed biodiversity dynamics; (2) how does timing and duration of sampling affect detected biodiversity patterns; (3) does biodiversity ubiquitously increase with temperature across lakes, or vary by climate zone or lake type; and (4) do results from SFTS surveys produce comparable biodiversity-temperature relationship(s) to empirical data within and among lakes? Testing biodiversity-ecosystem function (BEF) relationships, and the drivers of such relationships, requires a solid data basis. Our work provides a global perspective on the design and usefulness of (long-term) zooplankton monitoring programs and how much confidence we can place in the zooplankton biodiversity patterns observed from SFTS surveys

Lakes as sentinels of climate change

While there is a general sense that lakes can act as sentinels of climate change, their efficacy has not been thoroughly analyzed. We identified the key response variables within a lake that act as indicators of the effects of climate change on both the lake and the catchment. These variables reflect a wide range of physical, chemical, and biological responses to climate. However, the efficacy of the different indicators is affected by regional response to climate change, characteristics of the catchment, and lake mixing regimes. Thus, particular indicators or combinations of indicators are more effective for different lake types and geographic regions. The extraction of climate signals can be further complicated by the influence of other environmental changes, such as eutrophication or acidification, and the equivalent reverse phenomena, in addition to other land-use influences. In many cases, however, confounding factors can be addressed through analytical tools such as detrending or filtering. Lakes are effective sentinels for climate change because they are sensitive to climate, respond rapidly to change, and integrate information about changes in the catchment.

Phenotypic plasticity in pigmentation in Daphnia induced by UV radiation and fish kairomones.

1. Planktonic organisms are exposed to harmful ultraviolet (UV) radiation. Pigmentation offers protection but at the same time increases visibility, and therefore vulnerability, to visually orienting predators such as fish. As an adaptation against fish predation, zooplankton should be transparent, though this would leave them less protected against UV radiation. Thus both adaptations would appear to be mutually exclusive. However, phenotypic plasticity in pigmentation could allow flexible adaptation to both environmental situations. 2. We tested the hypothesis that Daphnia should be able to change their level of pigmentation in response to fish kairomone and/or UV radiation using four species of Daphnia. 3. Daphnia hyalina Leydig increased pigmentation under UV radiation and D. pulex Leydig reduced pigmentation in the fish kairomone treatment. Both species live in habitats with variable UV and fish impact. 4. Daphnia cucullata Sars and D. middendorffiana Fischer showed no reaction, probably because of their extreme adaptations: D. middendorffiana is strongly pigmented and seems to be adapted to high UV-B impact and an absence of fish in its arctic habitat. In contrast, D. cucullata has evolved in coexistence with fish. It can afford being nearly transparent because it lives in eutrophic lakes where UV-B is not relevant. 5. Our data on four species suggest that plasticity in pigmentation might be common in Daphnia adapted to environments with contrasting or variable selection pressures