Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pftt2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-08T22:55:14.724Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

10 - The role of bottom-up and top-down interactions in determining microbial and fungal diversity and function

from Part III - Patterns and Processes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2015

By
Thomas W. Crowther  and
Hans-Peter Grossart
Edited by
Torrance C. Hanley  and
Kimberly J. La Pierre
Thomas W. Crowther
Affiliation:
Yale University
Hans-Peter Grossart
Affiliation:
Department Experimental Limnology
Torrance C. Hanley
Affiliation:
Northeastern University, Boston
Kimberly J. La Pierre
Affiliation:
University of California, Berkeley
Get access

Summary

Background

Microbes (Bacteria, Archaea, and Fungi) are the most diverse and numerous organisms on earth. They are essential components of every ecosystem and occupy almost every trophic position and niche space (i.e., as heterotrophs, photoheterotrophs, chemoautotrophs, and photoautotrophs; see DeLong et al., 2014). Saprotrophic or heterotrophic species are unique in their capacity to break down and mineralize organic matter (OM) that forms the basis of the carbon, nutrient, and energy cycles. As such, they are the biochemical engineers responsible for the mobilization and mineralization of non-living OM in terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, and they contribute extensively to the respiratory exchanges of carbon (mainly CO2 and CH4) between the biosphere and the atmosphere. The overwhelming dominance of microbes in OM decomposition has led to extensive exploration into the top-down and bottom-up processes regulating their biomass and diversity, and their consequences for biogeochemical cycling. These heterotrophic microbes form the basis of the decomposer food web, supporting a wide diversity of detritivorous invertebrates and protists, and in turn, a wide range of vertebrate and invertebrate predators.

Unlike autotrophic food webs, where living plants are the primary trophic level, detrital food webs are based on the production of non-living organic material that cannot grow in response to reduced consumption rates, but can accumulate when introduced from adjacent ecosystems. In this sense, the detritus-based food web (often referred to as the “brown” food web) is a “donor-controlled” system, relying on allochthonous inputs from the autotrophic (plant-based) sub-system. As such, these systems can never be exclusively top-down controlled, because microbial predation cannot directly affect the production of OM. Instead, top-down and bottom-up processes are on a continuum of relative importance, and ultimately, the effects of predation propagate as increased or decreased rates of OM decomposition, and thus OM accumulation. In essence, as microbial activity increases, decomposition rates (i.e., the initial loss of OM) generally increase, but when invertebrate predators (henceforth referred to as “grazers”) exert top-down control of microbial communities, their ability to decompose OM can be altered.

Type
Chapter
Information
Trophic Ecology
Bottom-up and Top-down Interactions across Aquatic and Terrestrial Systems
 , pp. 260 - 287
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

A'Bear, A. D., Boddy, L. and Jones, T. H. (2013). Bottom-up determination of soil collembola diversity and population dynamics in response to interactive climatic factors. Oecologia, 3, 1083–1087.Google Scholar
Aerts, R. and Berendse, F. (1988). The effect of increased nutrient availability on vegetation dynamics in wet heathlands. Vegetatio, 76, 63–69.Google Scholar
Allen, B., Willner, D., Oechel, W. C. and Lipson, D. (2010). Top-down control of microbial activity and biomass in an Arctic soil ecosystem. Environmental Microbiology, 12, 642–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allgaier, M. and Grossart, H. P. (2006). Seasonal dynamics and phylogenetic diversity of free-living and particle-associated bacterial communities in four lakes in northeastern Germany. Aquatic Microbial Ecology, 45, 115–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allison, S. D. (2006). Brown ground: a soil carbon analogue for the green world hypothesis?The American Naturalist, 167, 619–627.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Allison, S. D. (2012). A trait-based approach for modelling microbial litter decomposition. Ecology Letters, 15, 1058–1070.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Attermeyer, K., Premke, K., Hornick, T., Hilt, S. and Grossart, H. P. (2013). Ecosystem-level studies of terrestrial carbon reveal contrasting bacterial metabolism in different aquatic habitats. Ecology, 94, 2754–2766.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Attermeyer, K., Hornick, T., Kayler, Z. E., et al. (2014). Increasing addition of autochthonous to allochthonous carbon in nutrient-rich aquatic systems stimulates carbon consumption but does not alter bacterial community composition. Biogeosciences Discussions, 10, 14261–14300.Google Scholar
Augustin, T., Schlosser, D., Baumbach, R., et al. (2006). Biotransformation of 1-naphthol by a strictly aquatic fungus. Current Microbiology, 52, 216–220.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Azam, F. (1998). Microbial control of oceanic carbon flux: the plot thickens. Science, 280, 694–696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakker, M. G., Bradeen, J. M. and Kinkel, L. L. (2012). Effects of plant host species and plant community richness on streptomycete community structure. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 83, 596–606.Google ScholarPubMed
Baldy, V., Chauvet, E., Charcosset, J. Y. and Gessner, M. O. (2002). Microbial dynamics associated with leaves decomposing in the mainstem and floodplain pond of a large river. Aquatic Microbial Ecology, 28, 25–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bardgett, R. D. (2005). The Biology of Soil. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bardgett, R. D. and Chan, K. F. (1999). Experimental evidence that soil fauna enhance nutrient mineralization and plant nutrient in montane grassland ecosystems. Soil Biology Biochemistry, 31, 23–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bärlocher, F. (1992). The Ecology of Aquatic Hyphomycetes. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barron, G. (1992). Lignolytic and cellulolytic fungi as predators and parasites. In The Fungal Community: Its Organization and Role in the Ecosystem, Vol. 9, 2nd edn, ed. Carroll, G and Wicklow, D.. New York: Marcel Dekker, pp. 311–326.Google Scholar
Bertilsson, S. and Jones Jr., J. B. (2003). Supply of dissolved organic matter to aquatic ecosystems: autochthonous sources. Aquatic ecosystems. In: Interactivity of Dissolved Organic Matter. A volume in Aquatic Ecology, ed. Findlay, S. E. G. and Sinsabaugh, R. L.. Cambridge, MA: Elsevier Inc.Google Scholar
Blackwood, C. B., Waldrop, M. P., Zak, D. R. and Sinsabaugh, R. L. (2007). Molecular analysis of fungal communities and laccase genes in decomposing litter reveals differences among forest types but no impact of nitrogen deposition. Environmental Microbiology, 9, 1306–1316.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bradford, M. A. and Crowther, T. W. (2013). Carbon use efficiency and storage in terrestrial ecosystems. New Phytologist, 199, 7–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briones, M. J. I., Poskitt, J. and Ostle, N. (2004). Influence of warming and enchytraeid activities on soil CO2 and CH4 fluxes. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 3, 1851–1859.Google Scholar
Caron, D. A. (1987). Grazing of attached bacteria by heterotrophic microflagellates. Microbial Ecology, 13, 203–218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chatterjee, A., Vance, G. F., Pendall, E. and Stahl, P. D. (2008). Timber harvesting alters soil carbon mineralization and microbial community structure in coniferous forests. Soil Biology Biochemistry, 40, 1901–1907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chin, W., Orellana, M. V. and Verdugo, P. (1998). Formation of microgels by spontaneous assembly of dissolved marine biopolymers. Nature, 391, 568–572.Google Scholar
Cho, B. C. and Azam, F. (1990). Biogeochemical significance of bacterial biomass in the ocean's euphotic zone. Marine Ecological Progress Series, 63, 253–2259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarholm, M. and Rosswall, T. (1980). Biomass and turnover of bacteria in a forest soil and a peat. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 12, 49–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Claus, H. and Filip, Z. (1998). Degradation and transformation of aquatic humic substances by laccase-producing fungi Cladosporium cladosporioides and Polyporus versicolor. Acta Hydrochimica et Hydrobiologica, 26, 180–185.3.0.CO;2-9>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, J. J., Findlay, S. and Pace, M. L. (1988). Bacterial production in fresh and saltwater ecosystems: a cross-system overview. Marine Ecological Progress Series, 43, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, J. J., Prairie, Y. T., Caraço, N. F., et al. (2007). Plumbing the global carbon cycle: integrating inland waters into the terrestrial carbon budget. Ecosystems, 10, 171–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, D. C., Reid, C. P. P. and Cole, C. V. (1983). Biological strategies of nutrient cycling in soil systems. Advances in Ecological Research, 13, 1–55.Google Scholar
Compte, J., Brucet, S., Gascón, S., et al. (2009). Impact of different developmental stages of Daphnia magna (Straus) on the plankton community under different trophic conditions. Hydrobiologia, 635, 45–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornelissen, J. H. C. and Thompson, K. (1997). Functional leaf attributes predict litter decomposition rate in herbaceous plants. New Phytologist, 135, 109–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornwell, W. K., Cornelissen, J. H., Amatangelo, K., et al. (2008). Plant species traits are the predominant control on litter decomposition rates within biomes worldwide. Ecology Letters, 11, 1065–1071.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crowther, T. W., Boddy, L. and Jones, T. H. (2011a). Species-specific effects of soil fauna on fungal foraging and decomposition. Oecologia, 167, 535–545.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crowther, T. W., Jones, T. H. and Boddy, L. (2011b). Species-specific effects of grazing invertebrates on mycelial emergence and growth from woody resources into soil. Fungal Ecology, 4, 333–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crowther, T. W., Boddy, L. and Jones, T. H. (2011c). Outcomes of fungal interaction are determined by soil invertebrate grazers. Ecology Letters, 14, 1134–1142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crowther, T. W., Boddy, L. and Jones, T. H. (2012a). Functional and ecological consequences of saprotrophic fungus–grazer interactions. The ISME Journal, 6(11), 1992–2001.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crowther, T. W., Littleboy, A., Jones, T. H. and Boddy, L. (2012b). Interactive effects of warming and invertebrate grazing on the outcomes of competitive fungal interactions. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 81, 419–426.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crowther, T. W., Stanton, D., Thomas, S., et al. (2013). Top-down control of soil fungal community composition by a globally distributed keystone species. Ecology, 94, 2518–2528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crowther, T. W., Maynard, D. S., Leff, J. W., et al. (2014). Explaining the vulnerability of soil biodiversity to deforestation: a cross-biome study. Global Change Biology. 20, 2983–2994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crutsinger, G. M., Collins, M. D., Fordyce, J. A., et al. (2006). Plant genotypic diversity predicts community structure and governs an ecosystem process. Science, 313, 966–968.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Currie, D. J., Mittelbach, G. G., Cornell, H. V., et al. (2004). A critical review of species-energy theory. Ecology Letters, 7, 1121–1134.Google Scholar
DeLong, E. F., Franks, D. G. and Alldredge, A. L. (1993). Phylogenetic diversity of aggregate-attached vs. free-living marine bacterial assemblages. Limnology and Oceanography, 38, 924–934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeLong, E. F., Rosenberg, E., Lory, S., Stackebrandt, E. and Thompson, F., eds. (2014). The Prokaryotes, 4th edition, 11 volumes. New York, NY: Springer-Science-Business-Media.Google Scholar
Donnelly, D. P. and Boddy, L. (1998). Developmental and morphological responses of mycelial systems of Stropharia caerulea and Phanerochaete velutina to soil nutrient enrichment. New Phytologist, 138, 519–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dray, M. W., Crowther, T. W., Thomas, S. M., et al. (2014). Effects of elevated CO2 on litter chemistry and subsequent invertebrate detritivore feeding responses. PloS One, 9(1), e86246.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dyer, L. A. and Letourneau, D. (2003). Top-down and bottom-up diversity cascades in detrital vs. living food webs. Ecology Letters, 6, 60–68.Google Scholar
Feinstein, L. M. and Blackwood, C. B. (2013). The spatial scaling of saprotrophic fungal beta diversity in decomposing leaves. Molecular Ecology, 22, 1171–1184.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fierer, N. and Jackson, R. B. (2006). The diversity and biogeography of soil bacterial communities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 103, 626–631.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fierer, N., Bradford, M. A. and Jackson, R. B. (2007). Toward an ecological classification of soil bacteria. Ecology, 88, 1354–1364.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fierer, N., Strickland, M. S., Liptzin, D., Bradford, M. A. and Cleveland, C. C. (2009). Global patterns in belowground communities. Ecology Letters, 12, 1238–1249.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fischer, H., Bergfur, J., Goedkoop, W. and Tranvik, L. (2009). Microbial leaf degraders in boreal streams: bringing together stochastic and deterministic regulators of community composition. Freshwater Biology, 54, 2276–2289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, C., Evans, C. D., Monteith, D. T., Reynolds, B. and Fenner, B. (2001). Export of organic carbon from peat soils. Nature, 412, 785–785.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Galand, P. E., Potvin, M., Casamayor, E. O. and Lovejoy, C. (2010). Hydrography shapes bacterial biogeography of the deep Arctic Ocean. The ISME Journal, 4, 564–576.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gallardo, A. and Schlesinger, W. H. (1994). Factors limiting microbial biomass in the mineral soil and forest floor of a warm-temperate forest. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 26, 1409–1415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garcia, S. L., McMahon, K. D., Martinez-Garcia, M., et al. (2013). Metabolic potential of a single cell belonging to one of the most abundant lineages in freshwater bacterioplankton. The ISME Journal, 1, 137–147.Google Scholar
Gasith, A. and Hasler, A. D. (1976). Airborne litterfall as a source of organic matter in lakes. Limnology and Oceanography, 21, 253–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gessner, M. O. and Van Ryckegem, G. (2003). Water fungi as decomposers in freshwater ecosystems. In Encyclopaedia of Environmental Microbiology, ed. Bitton, G.. New York, NY: Wiley, pp. 1–38.Google Scholar
Gimmler, H. (2001). Mutalistic relationships between algae and fungi (excluding lichens). In Progress in Botany, Vol. 62. ed. Esser, K., Lüttge, U., Kadereit, J. W. and Beyschlag, W.. Berlin: Springer, pp. 194–214.Google Scholar
Gleason, F. H., Kagami, M., Lefèvre, E. and Sime-Ngando, T. (2008). The ecology of chytrids in aquatic ecosystems: roles in food web dynamics. Fungal Biology Reviews, 22, 17–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grime, J. P., Cornelissen, J. H. C., Thompson, K. and Hodgson, J. G. (1996). Evidence of a causal connection between anti-herbivore defence and the decomposition rate of leaves. Oikos, 489–494.Google Scholar
Grossart, H. P. (2010). Ecological consequences of bacterioplankton lifestyles: changes in concepts are needed. Environmental Microbiology, 2, 706–714.Google ScholarPubMed
Grossart, H. P., Levold, F., Allgaier, M., Simon, M. and Brinkhoff, T. (2005). Marine diatom species harbour distinct bacterial communities. Environmental Microbiology, 7, 860–873.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gulis, V., Kuehn, K. A. and Suberkropp, K. (2009). Fungi. In Encyclopedia of Inland Waters, ed. Likens, Gene E. Cambridge, MA: Elsevier Inc., pp. 233–243.Google Scholar
Hairston, N. G., Smith, F. E. and Slobodkin, L. B. (1960). Community structure, population control and competition. American Naturalist, 94, 357–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanlon, R. D. G. and Anderson, J. M. (1979). Effects of collembola grazing on microbial activity in decomposing leaf litter. Oecologia, 38, 93–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hansson, L.-A., Nicolle, A., Granéli, W., et al. (2013). Food-chain length alters community responses to global change in aquatic systems. Nature Climate Change, 3, 228–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harold, S., Tordoff, G. M., Jones, T. H. and Boddy, L. (2005). Mycelial responses of Hypholoma fasciculare to collembola grazing: effect of inoculum age, nutrient status and resource quality. Mycological Research, 109, 927–935.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hedges, J. I. (1992). Global biogeochemical cycles: progress and problems. Marine Chemistry, 39, 67–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedlund, K. and Ohrn, M. S. (2000). Tritrophic interactions in a soil community enhance decomposition rates. Oikos, 88, 585–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ibelings, B. W., Bruin, A. D., Kagami, M., et al. (2004). Host parasite interactions between freshwater phytoplankton and chytrid fungi (Chytridiomycota). Journal of Phycology, 40, 437–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janssen, P. H. (2006). Identifying the dominant soil bacterial taxa in libraries of 16SrRNA and 16SrRNA genes. Applied Environmental Microbiology, 72, 1719–1728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jürgens, K. (1994). Impact of Daphnia on planktonic microbial food webs: a review. Marine Microbiology Food Webs, 8, 295–324.Google Scholar
Kagami, M., de Bruin, A., Ibelings, B. W. and Van Donk, E. (2007). Parasitic chytrids: their effects on phytoplankton communities and food-web dynamics. Hydrobiologia, 578, 113–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kagami, M., Miki, T. and Takimoto, G. (2014). Mycoloop: chytrids in aquatic food webs. Frontiers in Microbiology, 5, 166.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaneko, N., McLean, M. A. and Parkinson, D. (1998). Do mites and Collembola affect pine litter fungal biomass and microbial respiration? Applied Soil Ecology, 9, 209–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerekes, J., Kaspari, M., Stevenson, B., et al. (2013). Nutrient enrichment increased species richness of leaf litter fungal assemblages in a tropical forest. Molecular Ecology, 22, 2827–2838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klironomos, J. N., Widden, P. and Deslandes, I. (1992). Feeding preferences of the collembolan, Folsomia candida, in relation to microfungal successions on decaying litter. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 24, 685–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kneitel, J. M. and Chase, J. M. (2004). Trade-offs in community ecology: linking spatial scales and species coexistence. Ecology Letters, 7, 69–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lampert, W. (1978). Release of dissolved organic carbon by grazing zooplankton. Limnology and Oceanography, 23, 831–834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langenheder, S. and Jürgens, K. (2001). Regulation of bacterial biomass and community structure by metazoan and protozoan predation. Limnology and Oceanography, 46, 121–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lauber, C. L., Hamady, M., Knight, R. and Fierer, N. (2009). Pyrosequencing-based assessment of soil pH as a predictor of soil bacterial community structure at the continental scale. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 75, 5111–5120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leibold, M. A. (1996). A graphical model of keystone predation: effects of productivity on abundance, incidence and ecological diversity in communities. American Naturalist, 147, 784–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenoir, L., Persson, T., Bengtsson, J., Wallander, H. and Wiren, A. (2007). Bottom-up or top-down control in forest soil microcosms? Effects of soil fauna on fungal biomass and C/N mineralisation. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 43, 281–294.Google Scholar
Lepère, C., Domaizon, I. and Debroas, D. (2008). Unexpected importance of potential parasites in the composition of the freshwater small-eukaryote community. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 74, 2940–2949.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lichtwardt, R. (2004). Trichomycetes: fungi in relationship with insects and other arthropods. In Symbiosis Mechanisms and Model Systems, Cellular Origin, Life in Extreme Habitats and Astrobiology, Vol. 4, ed. Seckbach, J.. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 575–588.Google Scholar
Lindahl, B. D., Ihrmark, K. and Boberg, J. (2007). Spatial separation of litter decomposition and mycorrhizal nitrogen uptake in a boreal forest. New Phytologist, 173, 611–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lodge, D. (1997). Factors related to diversity of decomposer fungi in tropical forests. Biodiversity and Conservation, 688, 681–688.Google Scholar
Logan, B. E., Grossart, H. P. and Simon, M. (1994). Direct observation of phytoplankton, TEP and aggregates on polycarbonate filters using brightfield microscopy. Journal of Plankton Research, 16, 1811–1815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martinez, J., Smith, D. C., Steward, G. F. and Azam, F. (1996). Variability in ectohydrolytic enzyme activities of pelagic marine bacteria and its significance for substrate processing in the sea. Aquatic Microbiology Ecology, 10, 223–230.Google Scholar
Masters, M. (1971). The occurrence of Chytridium marylandicum on Botryococcus braunii in School Bay of the Delta Marsh. Canadian Journal of Botany, 49, 1479–1485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGill, B. J., Enquist, B. J., Weiher, E. and Westoby, M. (2006). Rebuilding community ecology from functional traits. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 21, 178–185.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McGuire, K. L., Fierer, N., Bateman, C., Treseder, K. K. and Turner, B. L. (2012). Fungal community composition in neotropical rain forests: the influence of tree diversity and precipitation. Microbial Ecology, 63, 804–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLean, M. A., Kaneko, N. and Parkinson, D. (1996). Does selective grazing by mites and collembola affect litter fungal community structure?Pedobiologia, 40, 97–105.Google Scholar
Mikola, J. and Setälä, H. (1998). Productivity and trophic-level biomasses in a microbial-based soil food web. Oikos, 82, 158–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, J. C., Mccann, K., Setälä, H. and De Ruiter, P. C. (2003). Top-down is bottom-up: does predation in the rhizosphere regulate aboveground dynamics? Ecology, 84, 846–857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore-Kucera, J. and Dick, R. P. (2008). PLFA profiling of microbial community structure and seasonal shifts in soils of a Douglas-fir chronosequence. Microbial Ecology, 55, 500–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moss, B. (2010). Ecology of Freshwaters : A View for the Twenty-first Century. 4th edition. New York, NY: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Newell, K. (1984). Interaction between two decomposer Basidiomycetes and a collembolan under Sitka spruce: grazing and its potential effects on fungal distribution and litter decomposition. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 16, 235–239.Google Scholar
Parkinson, D., Visser, S. and Whittaker, J. B. (1979). Effects of collembolan grazing on fungal colonization of leaf litter. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 11, 529–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pereira, C. R. D., Anderson, N. H. and Dudley, T. (1982). Gut content analysis of aquatic insects from wood substrates. Melanderia, 39, 23–33.Google Scholar
Pernthaler, J. (2005). Predation on prokaryotes in the water column and its ecological implications. National Reviews of Microbiology, 3, 537–546.Google ScholarPubMed
Polis, G. A. and Strong, D. R. (1996). Food web complexity and community dynamics. American Naturalist, 147, 813–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polz, M. F., Hunt, D. E., Preheim, S. P., Weinreich, D. M. and Weinreich, D. M. (2006). Patterns and mechanisms of genetic and phenotypic differentiation in marine microbes. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 361, 2009–2021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ponsard, S., Arditi, R. and Jost, C. (2000). Assessing top-down and bottom-up control in a litter-based soil macroinvertebrate food chain. Oikos, 89, 524–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reisert, P. and Fuller, M. (1962). Decomposition of chitin by chytriomyces species. Mycologia, 54, 647–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riemann, L. (2002). Population dynamics of bacterioplankton: regulation and importance. PhD thesis, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.Google Scholar
Rinnan, R., Michelsen, A. and Bååth, E. (2013). Fungi benefit from two decades of increased nutrient availability in tundra heath soil. PloS One, 8(2), e56532.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rønn, R., McCaig, A. E., Griffiths, B. S. and Prosser, J. I. (2002). Impact of protozoan grazing on bacterial community structure in soil microcosms. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 68, 6094–6105.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ryberg, W. A., Smith, K. G. and Chase, J. M. (2012). Predators alter the scaling of diversity in prey metacommunities. Oikos, 121, 1995–2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sampaio, A., Sampaio, J. P. and Leão, C. (2007). Dynamics of yeast populations recovered from decaying leaves in a nonpolluted stream: a 2-year study on the effects of leaf litter type and decomposition time. FEM Yeast Research, 7, 595–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, R. W. and Wickham, S. A. (1993). Planktonic protozoa and metazoa: predation, food quality and population control. Marine Microbiology Food Webs, 7, 197–223.Google Scholar
Santos, P. F., Phillips, J. and Whitford, W. G. (1981). The role of mites and nematodes in early stages of buried litter decomposition in a desert. Ecology, 62, 664–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, M. W. I., Torn, M. S., Abiven, S., et al. (2011). Persistence of soil organic matter as an ecosystem property. Nature, 478, 49–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Setälä, H., Berg, P. M. and Jones, T. H. (2005). Trophic structure and functional redundancy in soil communities. In Biological Diversity and Function in Soils, ed. Bardgett, R. D., Usher, M. B and Hopkins, D. W. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 236–249.Google Scholar
Sher, D., Thompson, J. W., Kashtan, N., Croal, L. and Chisholm, S. W. (2011). Response of Prochlorococcus ecotypes to co-culture with diverse marine bacteria. The ISME Journal, 5, 1125–1132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simon, M., Grossart, H. P., Schweitzer, B. and Ploug, H. (2002). Microbial ecology of organic aggregates in aquatic ecosystems. Aquatic Microbial Ecology, 28, 175–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shurin, J. B., Gruner, D. S. and Hillebrand, H. (2006). All wet or dried up? Real differences between aquatic and terrestrial food webs. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 273, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sjöstedt, J., Martiny, J. B. H., Munk, P. and Riemann, L. (2014). Abundance of broad bacterial taxa explained by environmental conditions but not water mass in the Sargasso Sea. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 80, 2786–2795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, A. B., Sandel, B., Kraft, N. J. B. and Carey, S. (2013a). Characterizing scale-dependent community assembly using the functional-diversity–area relationship. Ecology, 94, 2392–2402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, M. W., Allen, A. E., Herfort, L. and Simon, H. M. (2013b). Contrasting genomic properties of free-living and particle-attached microbial assemblages within a coastal ecosystem. Frontiers in Microbiology, 4, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sridhar, K. R. and Sudheep, N. M. (2011). Do the tropical freshwater fishes feed on aquatic fungi? Frontiers of Agriculture in China, 5(1), 77–86. DOI: 10.1007/s11703-011-1055-9.
Street, L. E., Subke, J.-A., Sommerkorn, M., et al. (2013). The role of mosses in carbon uptake and partitioning in arctic vegetation. New Phytologist, 199, 163–175.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Strickland, M. S. and Rousk, J. (2010). Considering fungal: bacterial dominance in soils – methods, controls and ecosystem implications. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 42, 1385–1395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strong, D. R. (1992). Are trophic cascades all wet? Differentiation and donor-control in speciose ecosystems. Ecology, 73 747–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stumm, W. (1990). Aquatic Chemical Kinetics. Reaction Rates of Processes in Natural Waters. New York, NY: Wiley-Interscience Publication, John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Suberkropp, K. and Klug, M. J. (1980). The maceration of deciduous leaf litter by aquatic hyphomycetes. Canadian Journal of Botany, 58, 1025–1031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, K. W., Turk, V. and Grossart, H. P. (2010). Zooplankton makes a difference to the microbial world. Aquatic Microbial Ecology, 61, 261–277.Google Scholar
Tilman, D. (1982). Resource Competition and Community Structure. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Torsvik, V., Ovreas, L. and Thingstad, T. F. (2002). Prokaryotic diversity – magnitude, dynamics and controlling factors. Science Signaling, 296, 1064.Google ScholarPubMed
Tranvik, L. J., Downing, J. A., Cotner, J. B., et al. (2009). Lakes and reservoirs as regulators of carbon cycling and climate. Limnology and Oceanography, 54, 2298–2314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U'Ren, J. M., Lutzoni, F., Miadlikowska, J. and Arnold, A. E. (2010). Community analysis reveals close affinities between endophytic and endolichenic fungi in mosses and lichens. Microbial Ecology, 60, 340–353.Google ScholarPubMed
Vander Zanden, M. J. and Gratton, C. (2011). Blowin' in the wind: reciprocal airborne carbon fluxes between lakes and land. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 68, 170–182.Google Scholar
Vannote, R. L., Minshall, G. W., Cummins, K. W., Sedell, J. R. and Cushing, C. E. (1980). The river continuum concept. Canadian Journal of Aquatic Science, 37, 130–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viketoft, M., Palmborg, C., Sohlenius, B., Huss-Danell, K. and Bengtsson, J. (2005). Plant species effects on soil nematode communities in experimental grasslands. Applied Soil Ecology, 30, 90–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walsh, D. A., Lafontaine, J. and Grossart, H. P. (2013). On the eco-evolutionary relationships of fresh and salt water bacteria and the role of gene transfer in their adaptation. In Lateral Gene Transfer in Evolution, ed. Gophna, U.. New York, NJ: Springer Science and Business Media, pp. 55–77.Google Scholar
Wardle, D. A. and Yeates, G. W. (1993). The dual importance of competition and predation as regulatory forces in terrestrial ecosystems: evidence from decomposer food-webs. Oecologia, 93, 303–306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wardle, D. A., Barker, G. M., Bonner, K. I. and Nicholson, K. S. (1998). Can comparative approaches based on plant ecophysiological traits predict the nature of biotic interactions and individual plant species effects in ecosystems? Journal of Ecology, 86, 405–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wardle, D. A., Bardgett, R. D., Klironomos, J. N., et al. (2004). Ecological linkages between aboveground and belowground biota. Science, 304, 1629–1633.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Webster, J. R. and Meyer, J. L. (1997). Organic matter budgets for streams: a synthesis. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 16, 141–161.Google Scholar
Whisler, H. C., Zebold, S. L. and Shemanchuk, J. A. (1975). Life history of Coelomomyces psorophorae. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 72, 693–696.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wurzbacher, C., Bärlocher, F. and Grossart, H. P. (2010). Review: aquatic fungi in lake ecosystems. Aquatic Microbial Ecology, 59, 125–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wurzbacher, C., Kerr, J. and Grossart, H.-P. (2011). Aquatic fungi. In The Dynamical Processes of Biodiversity – Case Studies of Evolution and Spatial Distribution, ed. O. Grillo and G. Venora. InTech, pp. 227–258.
Wyman, R. L. (1998). Experimental assessment of salamanders as predators of detrital food webs: effects on invertebrates, decomposition and the carbon cycle. Biodiversity and Conservation, 7, 641–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yannarell, A. C. and Kent, A. D. (2009). Bacteria, distribution and community structure. In Encyclopedia of Inland Waters, Vol. 3, ed. Likens, G. E.. Cambridge, MA; Elsevier Inc., pp. 201–210.Google Scholar
Zak, D. R., Holmes, W. E., White, D. C., Peacock, A. D. and Tilman, D. (2003). Plant diversity, soil microbial communities, and ecosystem function: are there any links?Ecology, 84, 2042–2050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zheng, D. W., Ågren, G. I. and Bengtsson, J. (1999). How do soil organisms affect total organic nitrogen storage in soils and substrate nitrogen to carbon ratio? A theoretical analysis. Oikos, 86, 430–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×