Strategies of zooplanktivory shape the dynamics and diversity of littoral plankton communities: a mesocosm approach
Planktivorous fish can exert strong top‐down control on zooplankton communities. By incorporating different feeding strategies, from selective particulate feeding to cruising filter feeding, fish species target distinct prey. In this study, we investigated the effects of two species with different f...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Ecology and evolution 2015-05, Vol.5 (10), p.2021-2035 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 2035 |
---|---|
container_issue | 10 |
container_start_page | 2021 |
container_title | Ecology and evolution |
container_volume | 5 |
creator | Helenius, Laura K. Aymà Padrós, Anna Leskinen, Elina Lehtonen, Hannu Nurminen, Leena |
description | Planktivorous fish can exert strong top‐down control on zooplankton communities. By incorporating different feeding strategies, from selective particulate feeding to cruising filter feeding, fish species target distinct prey. In this study, we investigated the effects of two species with different feeding strategies, the three‐spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus (L.)) and roach (Rutilus rutilus (L.)), on a low‐diversity brackish water zooplankton community using a 16‐day mesocosm experiment. The experiment was conducted on a small‐bodied spring zooplankton community in high‐nutrient conditions, as well as a large‐bodied summer community in low‐nutrient conditions. Effects were highly dependent on the initial zooplankton community structure and hence seasonal variation. In a small‐bodied community with high predation pressure and no dispersal or migration, the selective particulate‐feeding stickleback depleted the zooplankton community and decreased its diversity more radically than the cruising filter‐feeding roach. Cladocerans rather than copepods were efficiently removed by predation, and their removal caused altered patterns in rotifer abundance. In a large‐bodied summer community with initial high taxonomic and functional diversity, predation pressure was lower and resource availability was high for omnivorous crustaceans preying on other zooplankton. In this community, predation maintained diversity, regardless of predator species. During both experimental periods, predation influenced the competitive relationship between the dominant calanoid copepods, and altered species composition and size structure of the zooplankton community. Changes also occurred to an extent at the level of nontarget prey, such as microzooplankton and rotifers, emphasizing the importance of subtle predation effects. We discuss our results in the context of the adaptive foraging mechanism and relate them to the natural littoral community.
We used mesocosm experiments to examine the contrasting effects of two fish predators with different feeding strategies on two seasonally distinct zooplankton communities. The selective particulate feeding stickleback was found to deplete the spring community and decrease its diversity to a greater extent than the cruising roach, while both predators had an effect on competition between zooplankton species. Predation effects on the summer community were less dependent on predator type. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/ece3.1488 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4449756</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2290266638</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5138-2fef031806ab1ad6230979654eda218c08506850c87bfb890bd1fc5f08de17d83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kUtr3DAUhUVoacI0i_6BIuimWUyihy3LWQTCMH1AoIu2ayFL1xmltuVK8gT311fuJCEtVCAkuN89nMNB6A0l55QQdgEG-DktpDxCJ4wU5bqqSvni2f8YncZ4R_IRhBWkeoWOmcjDuuQnKH5NQSe4dRCxb_Ev78dODz-S2_sw47jTI-C0A2znQffORKwHi63bQ4guzctK51LyQXf4sOgHbHzfT4NLWfMSa9xD9MbHHutxDF6b3Wv0stVdhNOHd4W-f9h-23xa33z5-HlzfbM2JeVyzVpoCaeSCN1QbQXjpK5qURZgNaPSEFkSka-RVdM2siaNpa0pWyIt0MpKvkJXB91xanqwBoactVNjcL0Os_Laqb8ng9upW79XRVHUVSmywPsHgeB_ThCT6l000OWg4KeoqJCioJXkLKPv_kHv_BSGHE8xVhMmhOCLo7MDZYKPMUD7ZIYStbSpljbV0mZm3z53_0Q-dpeBiwNw7zqY_6-ktpst_yP5G2Jwq38</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2290266638</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Strategies of zooplanktivory shape the dynamics and diversity of littoral plankton communities: a mesocosm approach</title><source>Wiley Online Library Open Access</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Helenius, Laura K. ; Aymà Padrós, Anna ; Leskinen, Elina ; Lehtonen, Hannu ; Nurminen, Leena</creator><creatorcontrib>Helenius, Laura K. ; Aymà Padrós, Anna ; Leskinen, Elina ; Lehtonen, Hannu ; Nurminen, Leena</creatorcontrib><description>Planktivorous fish can exert strong top‐down control on zooplankton communities. By incorporating different feeding strategies, from selective particulate feeding to cruising filter feeding, fish species target distinct prey. In this study, we investigated the effects of two species with different feeding strategies, the three‐spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus (L.)) and roach (Rutilus rutilus (L.)), on a low‐diversity brackish water zooplankton community using a 16‐day mesocosm experiment. The experiment was conducted on a small‐bodied spring zooplankton community in high‐nutrient conditions, as well as a large‐bodied summer community in low‐nutrient conditions. Effects were highly dependent on the initial zooplankton community structure and hence seasonal variation. In a small‐bodied community with high predation pressure and no dispersal or migration, the selective particulate‐feeding stickleback depleted the zooplankton community and decreased its diversity more radically than the cruising filter‐feeding roach. Cladocerans rather than copepods were efficiently removed by predation, and their removal caused altered patterns in rotifer abundance. In a large‐bodied summer community with initial high taxonomic and functional diversity, predation pressure was lower and resource availability was high for omnivorous crustaceans preying on other zooplankton. In this community, predation maintained diversity, regardless of predator species. During both experimental periods, predation influenced the competitive relationship between the dominant calanoid copepods, and altered species composition and size structure of the zooplankton community. Changes also occurred to an extent at the level of nontarget prey, such as microzooplankton and rotifers, emphasizing the importance of subtle predation effects. We discuss our results in the context of the adaptive foraging mechanism and relate them to the natural littoral community.
We used mesocosm experiments to examine the contrasting effects of two fish predators with different feeding strategies on two seasonally distinct zooplankton communities. The selective particulate feeding stickleback was found to deplete the spring community and decrease its diversity to a greater extent than the cruising roach, while both predators had an effect on competition between zooplankton species. Predation effects on the summer community were less dependent on predator type.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2045-7758</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2045-7758</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/ece3.1488</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26045953</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: John Wiley & Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Animal behavior ; Baltic Sea ; Biodiversity ; Brackish water ; Communities ; Community structure ; Copepoda ; Crustaceans ; Dispersal ; Ecosystems ; Environmental impact ; Feeding ; feeding strategy ; Fish ; Food chains ; Foraging behavior ; Gasterosteus aculeatus ; Hypotheses ; Littoral environments ; mesocosm ; Nutrients ; Original Research ; Particulates ; Predation ; Pressure ; Prey ; Resource availability ; Rutilus rutilus ; Seasonal variations ; Species composition ; Species diversity ; Summer ; Taxonomy ; Zooplankton</subject><ispartof>Ecology and evolution, 2015-05, Vol.5 (10), p.2021-2035</ispartof><rights>2015 The Authors. published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>2015. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2015 The Authors. published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5138-2fef031806ab1ad6230979654eda218c08506850c87bfb890bd1fc5f08de17d83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5138-2fef031806ab1ad6230979654eda218c08506850c87bfb890bd1fc5f08de17d83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4449756/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4449756/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,1411,11541,27901,27902,45550,45551,46027,46451,53766,53768</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26045953$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Helenius, Laura K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aymà Padrós, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leskinen, Elina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lehtonen, Hannu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nurminen, Leena</creatorcontrib><title>Strategies of zooplanktivory shape the dynamics and diversity of littoral plankton communities: a mesocosm approach</title><title>Ecology and evolution</title><addtitle>Ecol Evol</addtitle><description>Planktivorous fish can exert strong top‐down control on zooplankton communities. By incorporating different feeding strategies, from selective particulate feeding to cruising filter feeding, fish species target distinct prey. In this study, we investigated the effects of two species with different feeding strategies, the three‐spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus (L.)) and roach (Rutilus rutilus (L.)), on a low‐diversity brackish water zooplankton community using a 16‐day mesocosm experiment. The experiment was conducted on a small‐bodied spring zooplankton community in high‐nutrient conditions, as well as a large‐bodied summer community in low‐nutrient conditions. Effects were highly dependent on the initial zooplankton community structure and hence seasonal variation. In a small‐bodied community with high predation pressure and no dispersal or migration, the selective particulate‐feeding stickleback depleted the zooplankton community and decreased its diversity more radically than the cruising filter‐feeding roach. Cladocerans rather than copepods were efficiently removed by predation, and their removal caused altered patterns in rotifer abundance. In a large‐bodied summer community with initial high taxonomic and functional diversity, predation pressure was lower and resource availability was high for omnivorous crustaceans preying on other zooplankton. In this community, predation maintained diversity, regardless of predator species. During both experimental periods, predation influenced the competitive relationship between the dominant calanoid copepods, and altered species composition and size structure of the zooplankton community. Changes also occurred to an extent at the level of nontarget prey, such as microzooplankton and rotifers, emphasizing the importance of subtle predation effects. We discuss our results in the context of the adaptive foraging mechanism and relate them to the natural littoral community.
We used mesocosm experiments to examine the contrasting effects of two fish predators with different feeding strategies on two seasonally distinct zooplankton communities. The selective particulate feeding stickleback was found to deplete the spring community and decrease its diversity to a greater extent than the cruising roach, while both predators had an effect on competition between zooplankton species. Predation effects on the summer community were less dependent on predator type.</description><subject>Animal behavior</subject><subject>Baltic Sea</subject><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Brackish water</subject><subject>Communities</subject><subject>Community structure</subject><subject>Copepoda</subject><subject>Crustaceans</subject><subject>Dispersal</subject><subject>Ecosystems</subject><subject>Environmental impact</subject><subject>Feeding</subject><subject>feeding strategy</subject><subject>Fish</subject><subject>Food chains</subject><subject>Foraging behavior</subject><subject>Gasterosteus aculeatus</subject><subject>Hypotheses</subject><subject>Littoral environments</subject><subject>mesocosm</subject><subject>Nutrients</subject><subject>Original Research</subject><subject>Particulates</subject><subject>Predation</subject><subject>Pressure</subject><subject>Prey</subject><subject>Resource availability</subject><subject>Rutilus rutilus</subject><subject>Seasonal variations</subject><subject>Species composition</subject><subject>Species diversity</subject><subject>Summer</subject><subject>Taxonomy</subject><subject>Zooplankton</subject><issn>2045-7758</issn><issn>2045-7758</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kUtr3DAUhUVoacI0i_6BIuimWUyihy3LWQTCMH1AoIu2ayFL1xmltuVK8gT311fuJCEtVCAkuN89nMNB6A0l55QQdgEG-DktpDxCJ4wU5bqqSvni2f8YncZ4R_IRhBWkeoWOmcjDuuQnKH5NQSe4dRCxb_Ev78dODz-S2_sw47jTI-C0A2znQffORKwHi63bQ4guzctK51LyQXf4sOgHbHzfT4NLWfMSa9xD9MbHHutxDF6b3Wv0stVdhNOHd4W-f9h-23xa33z5-HlzfbM2JeVyzVpoCaeSCN1QbQXjpK5qURZgNaPSEFkSka-RVdM2siaNpa0pWyIt0MpKvkJXB91xanqwBoactVNjcL0Os_Laqb8ng9upW79XRVHUVSmywPsHgeB_ThCT6l000OWg4KeoqJCioJXkLKPv_kHv_BSGHE8xVhMmhOCLo7MDZYKPMUD7ZIYStbSpljbV0mZm3z53_0Q-dpeBiwNw7zqY_6-ktpst_yP5G2Jwq38</recordid><startdate>201505</startdate><enddate>201505</enddate><creator>Helenius, Laura K.</creator><creator>Aymà Padrós, Anna</creator><creator>Leskinen, Elina</creator><creator>Lehtonen, Hannu</creator><creator>Nurminen, Leena</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><general>BlackWell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201505</creationdate><title>Strategies of zooplanktivory shape the dynamics and diversity of littoral plankton communities: a mesocosm approach</title><author>Helenius, Laura K. ; Aymà Padrós, Anna ; Leskinen, Elina ; Lehtonen, Hannu ; Nurminen, Leena</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5138-2fef031806ab1ad6230979654eda218c08506850c87bfb890bd1fc5f08de17d83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Animal behavior</topic><topic>Baltic Sea</topic><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Brackish water</topic><topic>Communities</topic><topic>Community structure</topic><topic>Copepoda</topic><topic>Crustaceans</topic><topic>Dispersal</topic><topic>Ecosystems</topic><topic>Environmental impact</topic><topic>Feeding</topic><topic>feeding strategy</topic><topic>Fish</topic><topic>Food chains</topic><topic>Foraging behavior</topic><topic>Gasterosteus aculeatus</topic><topic>Hypotheses</topic><topic>Littoral environments</topic><topic>mesocosm</topic><topic>Nutrients</topic><topic>Original Research</topic><topic>Particulates</topic><topic>Predation</topic><topic>Pressure</topic><topic>Prey</topic><topic>Resource availability</topic><topic>Rutilus rutilus</topic><topic>Seasonal variations</topic><topic>Species composition</topic><topic>Species diversity</topic><topic>Summer</topic><topic>Taxonomy</topic><topic>Zooplankton</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Helenius, Laura K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aymà Padrós, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leskinen, Elina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lehtonen, Hannu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nurminen, Leena</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library Open Access</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Ecology and evolution</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Helenius, Laura K.</au><au>Aymà Padrós, Anna</au><au>Leskinen, Elina</au><au>Lehtonen, Hannu</au><au>Nurminen, Leena</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Strategies of zooplanktivory shape the dynamics and diversity of littoral plankton communities: a mesocosm approach</atitle><jtitle>Ecology and evolution</jtitle><addtitle>Ecol Evol</addtitle><date>2015-05</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>5</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>2021</spage><epage>2035</epage><pages>2021-2035</pages><issn>2045-7758</issn><eissn>2045-7758</eissn><abstract>Planktivorous fish can exert strong top‐down control on zooplankton communities. By incorporating different feeding strategies, from selective particulate feeding to cruising filter feeding, fish species target distinct prey. In this study, we investigated the effects of two species with different feeding strategies, the three‐spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus (L.)) and roach (Rutilus rutilus (L.)), on a low‐diversity brackish water zooplankton community using a 16‐day mesocosm experiment. The experiment was conducted on a small‐bodied spring zooplankton community in high‐nutrient conditions, as well as a large‐bodied summer community in low‐nutrient conditions. Effects were highly dependent on the initial zooplankton community structure and hence seasonal variation. In a small‐bodied community with high predation pressure and no dispersal or migration, the selective particulate‐feeding stickleback depleted the zooplankton community and decreased its diversity more radically than the cruising filter‐feeding roach. Cladocerans rather than copepods were efficiently removed by predation, and their removal caused altered patterns in rotifer abundance. In a large‐bodied summer community with initial high taxonomic and functional diversity, predation pressure was lower and resource availability was high for omnivorous crustaceans preying on other zooplankton. In this community, predation maintained diversity, regardless of predator species. During both experimental periods, predation influenced the competitive relationship between the dominant calanoid copepods, and altered species composition and size structure of the zooplankton community. Changes also occurred to an extent at the level of nontarget prey, such as microzooplankton and rotifers, emphasizing the importance of subtle predation effects. We discuss our results in the context of the adaptive foraging mechanism and relate them to the natural littoral community.
We used mesocosm experiments to examine the contrasting effects of two fish predators with different feeding strategies on two seasonally distinct zooplankton communities. The selective particulate feeding stickleback was found to deplete the spring community and decrease its diversity to a greater extent than the cruising roach, while both predators had an effect on competition between zooplankton species. Predation effects on the summer community were less dependent on predator type.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</pub><pmid>26045953</pmid><doi>10.1002/ece3.1488</doi><tpages>15</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2045-7758 |
ispartof | Ecology and evolution, 2015-05, Vol.5 (10), p.2021-2035 |
issn | 2045-7758 2045-7758 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4449756 |
source | Wiley Online Library Open Access; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central |
subjects | Animal behavior Baltic Sea Biodiversity Brackish water Communities Community structure Copepoda Crustaceans Dispersal Ecosystems Environmental impact Feeding feeding strategy Fish Food chains Foraging behavior Gasterosteus aculeatus Hypotheses Littoral environments mesocosm Nutrients Original Research Particulates Predation Pressure Prey Resource availability Rutilus rutilus Seasonal variations Species composition Species diversity Summer Taxonomy Zooplankton |
title | Strategies of zooplanktivory shape the dynamics and diversity of littoral plankton communities: a mesocosm approach |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-30T07%3A59%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Strategies%20of%20zooplanktivory%20shape%20the%20dynamics%20and%20diversity%20of%20littoral%20plankton%20communities:%20a%20mesocosm%20approach&rft.jtitle=Ecology%20and%20evolution&rft.au=Helenius,%20Laura%20K.&rft.date=2015-05&rft.volume=5&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=2021&rft.epage=2035&rft.pages=2021-2035&rft.issn=2045-7758&rft.eissn=2045-7758&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/ece3.1488&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2290266638%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2290266638&rft_id=info:pmid/26045953&rfr_iscdi=true |