Search for: All records

Aquatic ecologists are integrating mixotrophic plankton – here defined as microorganisms with photosynthetic and phagotrophic capacity – into their understanding of marine food webs and biogeochemical cycles. Understanding mixotroph temporal and spatial distributions, as well as the environmental conditions under which they flourish, is imperative to understanding their impact on trophic transfer and biogeochemical cycling. Mixotrophs are hypothesized to outcompete strict photoautotrophs and heterotrophs when either light or nutrients are limiting, but testing this hypothesis has been hindered by the challenge of identifying and quantifying mixotrophs in the field. Using field observations from a multi-decadal northern North Atlantic dataset, we calculated the proportion of organisms that are considered mixotrophs within individual microplankton samples. We also calculated a “trophic index” that represents the relative proportions of photoautotrophs (phytoplankton), mixotrophs, and heterotrophs (microzooplankton) in each sample. We found that the proportion of mixotrophs was positively correlated with temperature, and negatively with either light or inorganic nutrient concentration. This proportion was highest during summertime thermal stratification and nutrient limitation, and lowest during the North Atlantic spring bloom period. Between 1958 and 2015, changes in the proportion of mixotrophs coincided with changes in the Atlantic Multi-decadal Oscillation (AMO), was highest when the AMO was positive, and showed a significant uninterrupted increase in offshore regions from 1992-2015. This study provides an empirical foundation for future experimental, time series, and modeling studies of aquatic mixotrophs. 

Protist plankton can be divided into three main groups: phytoplankton, zooplankton, and mixoplankton.In situmethods for studying phytoplankton and zooplankton are relatively straightforward since they generally target chlorophyll/photosynthesis or grazing activity, while the integration of both processes within a single cell makes mixoplankton inherently challenging to study. As a result, we understand less about mixoplankton physiology and their role in food webs, biogeochemical cycling, and ecosystems compared to phytoplankton and zooplankton. In this paper, we posit that by merging conventional techniques, such as microscopy and physiological data, with innovative methods likein situsingle-cell sorting and omics datasets, in conjunction with a diverse array of modeling approaches ranging from single-cell modeling to comprehensive Earth system models, we can propel mixoplankton research into the forefront of aquatic ecology. We present eight crucial research questions pertaining to mixoplankton and mixotrophy, and briefly outline a combination of existing methods and models that can be used to address each question. Our intent is to encourage more interdisciplinary research on mixoplankton, thereby expanding the scope of data acquisition and knowledge accumulation for this understudied yet critical component of aquatic ecosystems. 

Abstract Phago-mixotrophy, the combination of photoautotrophy and phagotrophy in mixoplankton, organisms that can combine both trophic strategies, have gained increasing attention over the past decade. It is now recognized that a substantial number of protistan plankton species engage in phago-mixotrophy to obtain nutrients for growth and reproduction under a range of environmental conditions. Unfortunately, our current understanding of mixoplankton in aquatic systems significantly lags behind our understanding of zooplankton and phytoplankton, limiting our ability to fully comprehend the role of mixoplankton (and phago-mixotrophy) in the plankton food web and biogeochemical cycling. Here, we put forward five research directions that we believe will lead to major advancement in the field: (i) evolution: understanding mixotrophy in the context of the evolutionary transition from phagotrophy to photoautotrophy; (ii) traits and trade-offs: identifying the key traits and trade-offs constraining mixotrophic metabolisms; (iii) biogeography: large-scale patterns of mixoplankton distribution; (iv) biogeochemistry and trophic transfer: understanding mixoplankton as conduits of nutrients and energy; and (v) in situ methods: improving the identification of in situ mixoplankton and their phago-mixotrophic activity.