de.mpg.escidoc.pubman.appbase.FacesBean
English
 
Help Guide Disclaimer Contact us Login
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Journal Article

Neckteeth formation in Daphnia pulex as an example of continuous phenotypic plasticity: morphological effects of Chaoborus kairomone concentration and their quantification

MPS-Authors
http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/cone/persons/resource/persons56972

Tollrian,  Ralph
Department Ecophysiology, Max Planck Institute for Limnology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology, Max Planck Society;

Locator
There are no locators available
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts available
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Tollrian, R. (1993). Neckteeth formation in Daphnia pulex as an example of continuous phenotypic plasticity: morphological effects of Chaoborus kairomone concentration and their quantification. Journal of Plankton Research, 15(11), 1309-1318.


Cite as: http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-000F-E3CD-E
Abstract
Many clones of Daphnia pulex develop morphological changes as antipredator devices in the presence of chemicals released by Chaoborus larvae. The D.pulex clone used in this experiment develops neckteeth until the end of the fourth juvenile instar when exposed to chemical cues from Chaoborus flavicans. This clone develops small neckteeth in the first instar even when it has not been exposed to the chemicals. Neckteeth formation is a continuous process that involves changes in the whole neck region. On the basis of these changes, a scoring method is presented that allows easy classification of the morphological changes. Neckteeth formation was strongest in the second juvenile instar, followed by a slightly weaker response in the third juvenile instar. Neckteeth formation within one instar is concentration dependent and exhibits a saturation curve. The maintenance of neckteeth over several instars is also concentration dependent. At low kairomone concentrations, neckteeth were restricted to the first two instars. This study indicates that neckteeth formation in successive instars is different, probably to optimize costs and benefits by equalizing or reducing vulnerability in successive juvenile instars at different Chaoborus densities.