↓ Skip to main content

Reciprocal subsidies in ponds: does leaf input increase frog biomass export?

Overview of attention for article published in Oecologia, May 2012
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
Title
Reciprocal subsidies in ponds: does leaf input increase frog biomass export?
Published in
Oecologia, May 2012
DOI 10.1007/s00442-012-2361-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julia E. Earl, Raymond D. Semlitsch

Abstract

Reciprocal subsidies occur when ecosystems are paired, both importing and exporting resources to each other. The input of subsidies increases reciprocal subsidy export, but it is unclear how this changes with other important factors, such as ambient resources. We provide a conceptual framework for reciprocal subsidies and empirical data testing this framework using a pond-forest system in Missouri, USA. Our experiment used in situ pond mesocosms and three species of anurans: wood frogs, American toads, and southern leopard frogs. We predicted that increases in ambient resources (primary productivity) and detrital subsidy input (deciduous tree leaves) into pond mesocosms would increase reciprocal export (frog biomass) to the surrounding terrestrial ecosystem. In contrast, we found that increases in primary productivity consistently decreased frog biomass, except with leaf litter inputs. With leaf inputs, primary productivity did not affect the export of frogs, indicating that leaf detritus and associated microbial communities may be more important than algae for frog production. We found that subsidy inputs tended to increase reciprocal exports, and thus partial concordance with our conceptual framework.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
France 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 78 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 22%
Researcher 15 18%
Student > Master 9 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 6 7%
Other 16 19%
Unknown 13 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 34 41%
Environmental Science 28 34%
Engineering 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 1%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 13 16%