Estimating δ15N fractionation and adjusting the lipid correction equation using Southern African freshwater fishes

PLoS One. 2017 May 24;12(5):e0178047. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0178047. eCollection 2017.

Abstract

Stable isotope analysis is an important tool for characterising food web structure; however, interpretation of isotope data can often be flawed. For instance, lipid normalisation and trophic fractionation values are often assumed to be constant, but can vary considerably between ecosystems, species and tissues. Here, previously determined lipid normalisation equations and trophic fractionation values were re-evaluated using freshwater fish species from three rivers in the Upper Zambezian floodplain ecoregion in southern Africa. The parameters commonly used in lipid normalisation equations were not correct for the 18 model species (new D and I parameters were estimated as D = 4.46‰ [95% CI: 2.62, 4.85] and constant I = 0 [95% CI: 0, 0.17]). We suggest that future isotopic analyses on freshwater fishes use our new values if the species under consideration do not have a high lipid content in their white muscle tissue. Nitrogen fractionation values varied between species and river basin; however, the average value closely matched that calculated in previous studies on other species (δ15N fractionation factor of 3.37 ± 1.30 ‰). Here we have highlighted the need to treat stable isotope data correctly in food web studies to avoid misinterpretation of the data.

MeSH terms

  • Africa, Southern
  • Animals
  • Carbon Isotopes / analysis
  • Fishes
  • Fresh Water
  • Lipid Metabolism*
  • Lipids / analysis*
  • Nitrogen Isotopes / analysis*

Substances

  • Carbon Isotopes
  • Lipids
  • Nitrogen Isotopes

Grants and funding

Funding was provided by the Southern African Scientific Service Centre for Climate Change and Adaptive Land Management and Nedbank Namibia Go Green Fund which was channelled through the NNF-EU Community Conservation in Fisheries in KAZA Project. Personal funding was provided by the Joint Research Committee of Rhodes University and the National Research foundation of South Africa (UID: 74015; 77444). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.