We Utrics prefer Lobster thank you very much!

From: r.jobson@botany.uq.edu.au
Date: Fri Sep 08 2000 - 07:49:01 PDT


Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2000 00:49:01 +1000
From: r.jobson@botany.uq.edu.au
To: cp@opus.hpl.hp.com
Message-Id: <aabcdefg2752$foo@default>
Subject: We Utrics prefer Lobster thank you very much!

Paul Temple wrote :
<< After all, it was Peter Taylor (anyone going to dispute his
pedigree?) who argued that most Utricularia derive most of the
trapped nutrient from alga and microscopic plants or diatoms, not
animals. >>

Hate to sound like a smart Alex, but yes. We looked at traps of 3
species of Utricularia, a suspended aquatic, a sub-
aquatic/terrestrial, and a terrestrial, over 15 months and across four
sites; about 4500 traps all up. These suction bladders are highly
specialized for trapping aquatic meiofauna - especially
crustaceans. This has been documented many times and a good
summary of early studies is that of Skutch (1928). As for diatoms,
algae, protists and other microfauna and muck, very little was
found. It has recently been demonstrated that trapping of protists
(Euglena), if they multiply, tax Utricularia and reduce growth.
Traps of U. purpurea studied in the Everglades contained lots of
muck and algae, but were still very efficient meiofaunal trappers.
Notice U. purpurea does not have antennae or wings around the
trap mouth - a rare exception in the genus.

Just wondering if there are any easy to get to cp day trip sites
around Los Angeles, and also is there any one who lives in or near
Bangkok Thailand who knows of Utricularia sites for a quick day
trip? Otherwise I will just drink a beer.
Best,
Richard.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:35:13 PST