Appendix S1
Supporting Tables and Figures
Table S1 Information for all lakes involved in the experiment. Data was collected from May 2012 to
August 2012 (SE Arnott, unpublished data). Lake Opinicon was the source of all mesocosm water and
zebra mussels, while zooplankton and phytoplankton samples were taken from the other five lakes.
Lake
Elbow
Lindsay
Long
Opinicon
Round
Warner
Latitude (N)
Longitude (W)
44°28'37.0"
-76°25'40.8"
44°32'14.2"
-76°23'25.1"
44°31'40.5"
-76°24'10.0"
44°33'35.4"
-76°19'41.0"
44°32'16.9"
-76°24'00.3"
44°31'41.4"
-76°22'53.0"
Area
(ha)
Max Depth
(m)
pH
DOC
-1
(mg L )
Cond.
Av. TP
(μS cm )
(μg L-1)
-1
15.5
10.6
7.69
7.50
77.0
11.7
31.5
10.9
8.09
6.65
230.5
8.6
15.5
26.0
8.23
4.30
182.0
5.0
788.0
11.3
8.17
6.37
192.0
13.3
15.0
30.1
8.14
4.00
164.0
6.0
9.2
6.4
8.03
7.05
246.0
10.4
Table S2 Full species names, abbreviations, size group, habitat within a lake, and diet for all zooplankton
important to differentiating between communities in Figure 4. Other zooplankton were present (e.g.
Daphnia spp.), but were either ubiquitous over all communities, or not abundant enough to be useful for
differentiation.
Species
Abbreviation
Acroperus harpae
Alona rectangula
Alona guttata
Alona quadrangularis
Bosmina liederi/freyi
Camptocercus rectirostris
Ceriodaphnia quadrangula
Chydorus sphaericus
Graptoleberis testudinaria
Pleuroxus denticulatus
Pleuroxus truncatus
Polyphemus pediculus
Calanoid copepodid
Cyclopoid copepodid
Calanoid nauplii
Cyclopoid nauplii
Cyclops scutifer
Cyclops vernalis
Mesocyclops edax
Keratella cochlearis
Keratella serrulata
Lecane inermis
Lecane mira
Monostyla copeis
Monstyla closterocerca
Mytilina ventralis
Polyartha remata
Trichocerca rattus
Trichocerca pusilla
A.h.
A.r.
A.g.
A.q.
B.l/f.
C.r.
C.q.
C.s.
G.t.
P.d.
P.t.
P.p.
Ca.c.
Cy.c.
Ca.n.
Cy.n.
Cy.s.
Cy.v.
M.e.
K.c.
K.s.
L.i.
L.m.
M.co.
M.cl.
M.v.
P.r.
T.r.
T.p.
Group
Size
Habitat
Diet
Cladoceran
Cladoceran
Cladoceran
Cladoceran
Cladoceran
Cladoceran
Cladoceran
Cladoceran
Cladoceran
Cladoceran
Cladoceran
Cladoceran
Copepod
Copepod
Copepod
Copepod
Copepod
Copepod
Copepod
Rotifer
Rotifer
Rotifer
Rotifer
Rotifer
Rotifer
Rotifer
Rotifer
Rotifer
Rotifer
Small
Small
Small
Small
Small
Small
Small
Small
Small
Small
Small
Small
Juvenile
Juvenile
Juvenile
Juvenile
Small
Large
Large
Small
Small
Small
Large
Small
Small
Large
Small
Large
Large
Littoral
Littoral
Littoral
Littoral
Pelagic
Littoral
Both
Littoral
Littoral
Littoral
Littoral
Pelagic
Herbivorous
Herbivorous
Herbivorous
Herbivorous
Herbivorous
Herbivorous
Herbivorous
Herbivorous
Herbivorous
Herbivorous
Herbivorous
Carnivorous
Herbivorous
Herbivorous
Herbivorous
Herbivorous
Omnivorous
Carnivorous
Omnivorous
Herbivorous
Herbivorous
Herbivorous
Herbivorous
Herbivorous
Herbivorous
Herbivorous
Herbivorous
Herbivorous
Herbivorous
Both
Both
Both
Pelagic
Pelagic
Littoral
Littoral
Littoral
Littoral
Littoral
Pelagic
Littoral
Littoral
Figure S1 Change in community location (represented by PCoA Axis 1 and 2 scores) with increasing
nutrients for each mussel treatment. Best fit lines are shown in the treatments whose PCoA location is
correlated with nutrient level and only when P < 0.1. Note log scale used on y-axes.
Figure S2 Relationship between nutrient treatment and abundance (abund.) or concentration of rotifers
(Rot.), copepods (Cop.), cladocerans (Clad.) and large phytoplankton (L. phyto., measured as total minus
edible chlorophyll a) in the 0.0, 0.25, 0.5 and 1.0 mussels L-1 treatment densities. Best fit lines are shown
in the treatments whose abundance or concentration is significantly correlated to nutrient level (P < 0.05).
Note the break in the y-axis for rotifer abundance and the log-scale on the y-axis for large phytoplankton
concentration.