Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 5 – uploaded by Joanna Smakulska

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Figure 5. Changes of the angle between H and D-B axis of summer D. cucullata in the Siemianowka Reservoir in 1994— 2001.

Figure 5 Changes of the angle between H and D-B axis of summer D. cucullata in the Siemianowka Reservoir in 1994— 2001.

Related Figures (6)

Table 1. Mean summer water volume, surface area and the trophic parameters of the lower part of the Siemianowka reservoir (1994— 2001) “TSI data from Gorniak et al., 2000 and Gorniak, unpublished.
Table 1. Mean summer water volume, surface area and the trophic parameters of the lower part of the Siemianowka reservoir (1994— 2001) “TSI data from Gorniak et al., 2000 and Gorniak, unpublished.
Figure 1. Morphological measurements on Daphnia cucullata: D — body length, H — height of head, B— carapace length, G — width of head, S — width of carapace, K — tail spine length.
Figure 1. Morphological measurements on Daphnia cucullata: D — body length, H — height of head, B— carapace length, G — width of head, S — width of carapace, K — tail spine length.
Figure 3. Multiannual tendencies of D. cucullata height of the head (H), the body length (D) and the tail spine length (4K), in the Siemianowka Reservoir in 1994-2001.
Figure 3. Multiannual tendencies of D. cucullata height of the head (H), the body length (D) and the tail spine length (4K), in the Siemianowka Reservoir in 1994-2001.
Figure 2. Multiannual changes of Daphniidae biomass (mg/l) and the proportion of Daphniidae in the cladoceran biomass, in the Siemianowka Reservoir, in the years 1994-2001.
Figure 2. Multiannual changes of Daphniidae biomass (mg/l) and the proportion of Daphniidae in the cladoceran biomass, in the Siemianowka Reservoir, in the years 1994-2001.
Table 2. One-way ANOVA testing differences (+, significant, — non significant) between morphological measurements on Daphnia cucullata in years 1994-2001: D—body legth, H — height of head, B— carapace length, G — width of head, S— width of carapace, K — tail spine length (R? = 0.37) were negatively correlated with D. cucullata head inclination (p < 0.01). (Fig. 3), but also by a decrease in the maximal values of almost all analysed morphological traits. The comparisons of annual changes of D. cucullata abundance and biomass also confirmed this ten- dency (Fig. 2).
Table 2. One-way ANOVA testing differences (+, significant, — non significant) between morphological measurements on Daphnia cucullata in years 1994-2001: D—body legth, H — height of head, B— carapace length, G — width of head, S— width of carapace, K — tail spine length (R? = 0.37) were negatively correlated with D. cucullata head inclination (p < 0.01). (Fig. 3), but also by a decrease in the maximal values of almost all analysed morphological traits. The comparisons of annual changes of D. cucullata abundance and biomass also confirmed this ten- dency (Fig. 2).
Figure 4. Relationship between the carapace length (B), height of the head (H), the tail spine length (K) and the body length (D), in the Siemianowka Reservoir (1994-2001).
Figure 4. Relationship between the carapace length (B), height of the head (H), the tail spine length (K) and the body length (D), in the Siemianowka Reservoir (1994-2001).
Related topics:
Earth Sciences
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved