Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Experimental design.

A and B refer to the leaf discs from the permanent and intermittent streams, respectively. Each microcosm contained individual shredders and 12 leaf discs. Ten microcosms were used per treatment.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

Means ± SEM of the initial chemical leaf litter composition (n = 5) and aquatic hyphomycetes richness (n = 6) and t-tests results for the quality of the leaves in both treatments (A and B).

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Results of the indicator species analysis (IndVal), maximum IV significance (IV is the individual value), associated stream class for each species and the frequency of appearance (A and B, permanent and intermittent streams).

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Results of one-way ANOVA (factor treatment) of the effects of leaf quality on consumer consumption and growth.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 2.

Shredder consumption and growth.

Total consumption (A), relative consumption rate (RCR) (B); instantaneous growth rate of the head width (IGR) (C); relative growth rate of the head width (RGR) (D); total lipid content (E) and, oxygen consumption (F) of P. latipennis, where t1 = 100% A, t2 = 100% B, t3 = 50% A and 50% B, t4 = 75% A and 25% B and t5 = 25% A and 75% B. The different letters indicate significant differences (Tukey HSD post hoc test, p< 0.05) among treatments for each variable.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

The observed consumption (black bars) of A leaf discs compared with the expected consumption (grey bars).

The expected A leaf discs as the initial proportion of A discs at each treatment: t3 = 50%, t4 = 75% and t5 = 25%). N = 5 (t3, t4) and N = 4 (t5).

More »

Fig 3 Expand