Marie-Louise Meijer's scientific contributions

... Such food web manipulation (biomanipulation) is usually understood as manipulation of fish populations in order to diminish the unwanted effects of fish on the water quality. Lately, numerous studies on the effects of the mass removal of fish have been carried out (Søndergaard et al., 1990;Hamrin, 1993;Meijer et al., 1993). In such trials, it is essential to find out the responses of the fish stocks to the intensive exploitation. ...

... transport of nutrients from the littoral to the pelagic via fish excretion) and insensitivity of algal standing crop to phosphorus fluctuations (Carpenter et al. 1987DeMelo et al. 1992). In many more cases, nutrient concentrations could not be reduced to levels required to limit algal growth (Marsden 1989;Meijer et al. 1989;Van Donk et al. 1989;Perrow et al. 1999). ...

... For example, there is now almost universal agreement that shallow lakes capable of growing extensive macrophyte beds, are very likely to show improvements in water clarity following fish manipulations. In some cases this is due to zooplankton-phytoplankton interactions (TIMMS & Moss 1984, SONDERGAARD et al. 1990, JEPPESEN et al. 1997, in others to the direct effects of macrophytes and in still others, to reductions in bioturbation by fish (GULATI et al. 1990, MEIJER et al. 1990, 1994a, 1994b. There is also substantial agreement that some of the deep lake biomanipulations (Lake Michigan -ScAVIA et al. 1986, LEHMAN 1988, SAND-GREN & LEHMAN 1990, Ev ANS 1992, SCHELSKE & STOERMER 1994) (Lake Mendota - KITCH-ELL 1992, MATTMILLER 1995, have failed to enhance grazer control of phytoplankton; and that a variety of the complex interactions; mediated by lake size and the availability of spatial refuges, are responsible for these outcomes. ...

... As described above, after a period of severe eutrophication, the aquatic vegetation of Lake Veluwe, in the Netherlands, began to recover, showing dramatic increases in Chara cover and enabling colonisation by invasive zebra mussels. The presence of both forms (i.e. a dense charophyte vegetation canopy and an abundant filter-feeding bivalve) contributed to creating a clear water column and supporting the further rapid expansion of macrophyte beds dominated by Chara aspera (Lammens et al., 2004). The presence of such previously absent food sources consequently attracted large numbers of specialist waterbird species exploiting Chara as a food resource, or sources of food associated with dense Chara beds (Noordhuis et al., 2002; see Section III.3). ...

... rubble areas near structures , but they would be less frequent consumers of worms that we collected from intertidal sand flats , subtidal sand plains , or seagrass beds without adjacent structures . However , because feeding preferences of bluehead wrasse com - monly parallel preferences of other generalist consumers ( see Lindquist and Hay 1996 , McClintock et al . 1996 , Bullard and Hay 2002 , Burns et al . 2003 ) , and because this wrasse has commonly been used as a model generalist consumer in other investigations of inverte - brate chemical defenses ( e . g . , Pawlik et al . 1995 , Lindquist and Hay 1996 , Kubanek et al . 2002 , Pisut and Pawlik 2002 ) we used this species for our bioassays of pal ...

... Было отмечено, что трофический каскад эффективен в озерах с невысоким трофическим статусом и малоэффективен в эвтрофных водоемах (McQueen et al., 1992). Однако дальнейшие тщательные исследования не подтвердили это мнение (Гладышев, 2001 (McQueen et al., 1992;Гладышев, 2001;Бульон, 2002;Голубков, 2006 (Scheffer et al., 1993, с изменениями) продлении на длительное время весенней фазы «прозрачной воды» в сезонной динамике планктона (Hosper et al., 2005). St. Petersburg, 199034, Russia The review of the role of consumers in forming of the structure and functioning of water ecosystems is presented. ...

... High densities of small cyprinids like roach (Rutilus rutilus L.) often harm water quality as they consume large quantities of herbivorous zooplankton and increase water turbidity while scavenging the littoral sediments for plants, residue, and invertebrates (Brabrand et al., 1990;Horppila, 1994). Meanwhile, a high abundance of large, opportunistic benthivorous cyprinids like bream (Abramis brama L.) and carp (Cyprinus carpio L.) may degrade the water quality by preventing sediment consolidation (Scheffer et al., 2003) and suspending large quantities of loose sediments and particle-bound nutrients (Meijer et al., 1990;Breukelaar et al., 1994;Huser et al., 2022). Moreover, they may deplete benthic prey populations (Zambrano et al., 2001) and dislodge macrophytes while searching for benthic invertebrates (Lammens et al., 2002). ...

... Ideally, fish thinning should serve as a 'shock therapy' that induces a regime shift from an algae-dominated lake ecosystem favoring cyprinids to a stable, top-down food web regulated by piscivorous fish (Hansson et al., 1998). Such an environment can be stimulated by removing >75 % (Perrow et al., 1997) of fish biomass quickly, within one to three years (Hansson et al., 1998), either alone or combined with the stocking of predatory fish (Jurajda et al., 2016). Manipulation of fish populations may be directed towards thinning adult and juvenile fish, as well as removing fish larvae and egg strips manually (Jurajda et al., 2016). ...

... Fish can play a significant role in grazing cyanobacteria, both through the direct effects of grazing as well as indirectly through cascading effects by increasing the grazing pressure of zooplankton. This indirect effect of fish through changing the ratio of piscivorous to zooplanktivorous fish has been applied in a widely used shallow lake management strategy coined biomanipulation, with success varying depending on the intensity of fish reduction (Meijer et al., 1999), and the complexity or degree of omnivory in the food web (Elser, 1999). ...

... For example, there is now almost universal agreement that shallow lakes capable of growing extensive macrophyte beds, are very likely to show improvements in water clarity following fish manipulations. In some cases this is due to zooplankton-phytoplankton interactions (TIMMS & Moss 1984, SONDERGAARD et al. 1990, JEPPESEN et al. 1997, in others to the direct effects of macrophytes and in still others, to reductions in bioturbation by fish (GULATI et al. 1990, MEIJER et al. 1990, 1994a, 1994b. There is also substantial agreement that some of the deep lake biomanipulations (Lake Michigan -ScAVIA et al. 1986, LEHMAN 1988, SAND-GREN & LEHMAN 1990, Ev ANS 1992, SCHELSKE & STOERMER 1994) (Lake Mendota - KITCH-ELL 1992, MATTMILLER 1995, have failed to enhance grazer control of phytoplankton; and that a variety of the complex interactions; mediated by lake size and the availability of spatial refuges, are responsible for these outcomes. ...