@article{LukasFrostWacker2013,
  author    = {Lukas, Marcus and Frost, Paul C. and Wacker, Alexander},
  title     = {The neonate nutrition hypothesis - early feeding affects the body stoichiometry of Daphnia offspring},
  series = {Freshwater biology},
  volume    = {58},
  journal   = {Freshwater biology},
  number    = {11},
  publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell},
  address   = {Hoboken},
  issn      = {0046-5070},
  doi       = {10.1111/fwb.12213},
  pages     = {2333 -- 2344},
  year      = {2013},
  abstract  = {Aquatic herbivores consume variable quantities and qualities of food. In freshwater systems, where phosphorus (P) is often a primary limiting element, inadequate dietary P can slow maternal growth and reduce body P content. There remains uncertainty about whether and how dietary effects on mothers are transferred to offspring by way of egg provisioning. Using the keystone herbivore Daphnia, we tested a novel explanation (the neonate nutrition hypothesis') to determine whether the early nutrition of newborns affects their elemental composition and whether the indications of differences in maternal P nutrition found previously might be overestimated. We thus examined the P content of mothers and their eggs from deposition through development to the birth of neonates. We examined further whether very short periods of ingestion (3h) by the offspring alter the overall P content of juvenile Daphnia. We showed that strong dietary P effects on mothers were not directly transferred to their eggs. Irrespective of the supply of P in the maternal diet, the P content of eggs in different developmental stages and in (unfed) neonates did not differ. This indicates that Daphnia mothers do not reduce the quality (in terms of P) of newly produced offspring after intermittent periods (i.e. several days) of poor nutrition. In contrast, the P content of neonates reflected that of their food after brief periods of feeding, indicating that even temporary exposure to nutrient poor food immediately after birth may strongly affect the elemental composition of neonates. Our results thus support the neonate nutrition hypothesis, which, like differential maternal provisioning, is a possible explanation for the variable elemental quality of young Daphnia.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{WagnerHillebrandWackeretal.2013,
  author    = {Wagner, Nicole D. and Hillebrand, Helmut and Wacker, Alexander and Frost, Paul C.},
  title     = {Nutritional indicators and their uses in ecology},
  series = {Ecology letters},
  volume    = {16},
  journal   = {Ecology letters},
  number    = {4},
  publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell},
  address   = {Hoboken},
  issn      = {1461-023X},
  doi       = {10.1111/ele.12067},
  pages     = {535 -- 544},
  year      = {2013},
  abstract  = {The nutrition of animal consumers is an important regulator of ecological processes due to its effects on their physiology, life-history and behaviour. Understanding the ecological effects of poor nutrition depends on correctly diagnosing the nature and strength of nutritional limitation. Despite the need to assess nutritional limitation, current approaches to delineating nutritional constraints can be non-specific and imprecise. Here, we consider the need and potential to develop new complementary approaches to the study of nutritional constraints on animal consumers by studying and using a suite of established and emerging biochemical and molecular responses. These nutritional indicators include gene expression, transcript regulators, protein profiling and activity, and gross biochemical and elemental composition. The potential applications of nutritional indicators to ecological studies are highlighted to demonstrate the value that this approach would have to future studies in community and ecosystem ecology.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{TiegsCostelloIskenetal.2019,
  author    = {Tiegs, Scott D. and Costello, David M. and Isken, Mark W. and Woodward, Guy and McIntyre, Peter B. and Gessner, Mark O. and Chauvet, Eric and Griffiths, Natalie A. and Flecker, Alex S. and Acuna, Vicenc and Albarino, Ricardo and Allen, Daniel C. and Alonso, Cecilia and Andino, Patricio and Arango, Clay and Aroviita, Jukka and Barbosa, Marcus V. M. and Barmuta, Leon A. and Baxter, Colden V. and Bell, Thomas D. C. and Bellinger, Brent and Boyero, Luz and Brown, Lee E. and Bruder, Andreas and Bruesewitz, Denise A. and Burdon, Francis J. and Callisto, Marcos and Canhoto, Cristina and Capps, Krista A. and Castillo, Maria M. and Clapcott, Joanne and Colas, Fanny and Colon-Gaud, Checo and Cornut, Julien and Crespo-Perez, Veronica and Cross, Wyatt F. and Culp, Joseph M. and Danger, Michael and Dangles, Olivier and de Eyto, Elvira and Derry, Alison M. and Diaz Villanueva, Veronica and Douglas, Michael M. and Elosegi, Arturo and Encalada, Andrea C. and Entrekin, Sally and Espinosa, Rodrigo and Ethaiya, Diana and Ferreira, Veronica and Ferriol, Carmen and Flanagan, Kyla M. and Fleituch, Tadeusz and Shah, Jennifer J. Follstad and Frainer, Andre and Friberg, Nikolai and Frost, Paul C. and Garcia, Erica A. and Lago, Liliana Garcia and Garcia Soto, Pavel Ernesto and Ghate, Sudeep and Giling, Darren P. and Gilmer, Alan and Goncalves, Jose Francisco and Gonzales, Rosario Karina and Graca, Manuel A. S. and Grace, Mike and Grossart, Hans-Peter and Guerold, Francois and Gulis, Vlad and Hepp, Luiz U. and Higgins, Scott and Hishi, Takuo and Huddart, Joseph and Hudson, John and Imberger, Samantha and Iniguez-Armijos, Carlos and Iwata, Tomoya and Janetski, David J. and Jennings, Eleanor and Kirkwood, Andrea E. and Koning, Aaron A. and Kosten, Sarian and Kuehn, Kevin A. and Laudon, Hjalmar and Leavitt, Peter R. and Lemes da Silva, Aurea L. and Leroux, Shawn J. and Leroy, Carri J. and Lisi, Peter J. and MacKenzie, Richard and Marcarelli, Amy M. and Masese, Frank O. and Mckie, Brendan G. and Oliveira Medeiros, Adriana and Meissner, Kristian and Milisa, Marko and Mishra, Shailendra and Miyake, Yo and Moerke, Ashley and Mombrikotb, Shorok and Mooney, Rob and Moulton, Tim and Muotka, Timo and Negishi, Junjiro N. and Neres-Lima, Vinicius and Nieminen, Mika L. and Nimptsch, Jorge and Ondruch, Jakub and Paavola, Riku and Pardo, Isabel and Patrick, Christopher J. and Peeters, Edwin T. H. M. and Pozo, Jesus and Pringle, Catherine and Prussian, Aaron and Quenta, Estefania and Quesada, Antonio and Reid, Brian and Richardson, John S. and Rigosi, Anna and Rincon, Jose and Risnoveanu, Geta and Robinson, Christopher T. and Rodriguez-Gallego, Lorena and Royer, Todd V. and Rusak, James A. and Santamans, Anna C. and Selmeczy, Geza B. and Simiyu, Gelas and Skuja, Agnija and Smykla, Jerzy and Sridhar, Kandikere R. and Sponseller, Ryan and Stoler, Aaron and Swan, Christopher M. and Szlag, David and Teixeira-de Mello, Franco and Tonkin, Jonathan D. and Uusheimo, Sari and Veach, Allison M. and Vilbaste, Sirje and Vought, Lena B. M. and Wang, Chiao-Ping and Webster, Jackson R. and Wilson, Paul B. and Woelfl, Stefan and Xenopoulos, Marguerite A. and Yates, Adam G. and Yoshimura, Chihiro and Yule, Catherine M. and Zhang, Yixin X. and Zwart, Jacob A.},
  title     = {Global patterns and drivers of ecosystem functioning in rivers and riparian zones},
  series = {Science Advances},
  volume    = {5},
  journal   = {Science Advances},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {American Assoc. for the Advancement of Science},
  address   = {Washington},
  issn      = {2375-2548},
  doi       = {10.1126/sciadv.aav0486},
  pages     = {8},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {River ecosystems receive and process vast quantities of terrestrial organic carbon, the fate of which depends strongly on microbial activity. Variation in and controls of processing rates, however, are poorly characterized at the global scale. In response, we used a peer-sourced research network and a highly standardized carbon processing assay to conduct a global-scale field experiment in greater than 1000 river and riparian sites. We found that Earth's biomes have distinct carbon processing signatures. Slow processing is evident across latitudes, whereas rapid rates are restricted to lower latitudes. Both the mean rate and variability decline with latitude, suggesting temperature constraints toward the poles and greater roles for other environmental drivers (e.g., nutrient loading) toward the equator. These results and data set the stage for unprecedented "next-generation biomonitoring" by establishing baselines to help quantify environmental impacts to the functioning of ecosystems at a global scale.},
  language  = {en}
}