search

soilfoodwebontology / sfwo

The Soil Food Web Ontology is a formal conceptual model of soil trophic ecology.
7 stars 0 forks source link

Explicit concepts of feeding mechanisms: scrape, suck, chew, swallow #82

Open AntonCollembola opened 2 years ago

AntonCollembola commented 2 years ago

There are few groups in the ontology now which refer to the way food is ingested: 'scraper', ‘sucker’, ’shredder’. They are positioned in different places, and insidespecific trophic groups. It makes sense to me to define them independently of trophic groups as 'feeding mechanisms'. For example, scrapers can be some rotifers (microbial biofilms) or rock-dwelling springtails (algae/lichens); suckers can be nematodes feeding on plants, fungi, other animals, but also some springtails, mites, millipedes, thrips, hemipterans, spiders, centipedes... shredders (chewers) are both detritivores and predators. We also have swallowers such as earthworms (ecosystemivores doi: 10.1016/s0038-0717(96)00180-0).

Archilegt commented 2 years ago

We may have to consider the parent term itself. One option to feeding mechanism is feeding behavior.

There is a list of feeding behaviors without sources in Wikipedia. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_feeding_behaviours

nleguillarme commented 2 years ago

I also found the terms feeding strategies, mode of nutrition, method of nutrition, food acquisition method

nleguillarme commented 2 years ago

Still, feeding strategies (grazing, sucking...) are processes, but we have to deal with the organism equivalent (grazer, sucker...). Should they be subclasses of heterotroph? Or should we create a new parent term?

AntonCollembola commented 2 years ago

Well, they are subclasses of heterotroph, because the classification is not relevant to autotrophs. There can be both the process and the animal. The animal (group) is more important to introduce than the process.

nleguillarme commented 2 years ago

Proposal:

nleguillarme commented 1 year ago

Here is what ecotaxonomy has to say about feeding mechanism. It would be cool to stick with existing classifications.

Feeding mechanism

Values: Absent : e.g. not eating adult Chewing : Chewing mouthparts, solid food, e.g. beetles, oribatid and mesostigmatid mites, springtails Piercing-sucking : Stilet for piercing and sucking, e.g. Hemiptera Catching-sucking : Claws for catchin and killing and sucking pump, e.g. Araneae, Chilopoda Swallowing : No special features, swallowing the food, e.g. earthworms, amoeba

Description: Mechanism of food consumption. In combination with feeding guild is usefull in food web modelling.

AntonCollembola commented 1 year ago

I'm in for that. We had some discussions on this in Ecotax, but there is a room for re-evaluation now. So please add ideas if any.

Archilegt commented 1 year ago

At which stage of implementation are we with this issue? I already want to add notes to feeding behaviors by mode of ingestion, particularly to fluid feeding/feeder. We already have fluid feeder in the SFWO version on the Agroportal, but I only see it containing sucker. Technically, sangivore/hematophage, nectarivore, and plant sap feeder belong there. I would like to work a bit on fungivore fluid feeder. Does the latter term or similar already exist?

nleguillarme commented 1 year ago

Currently, concepts related to feeding mechanisms that have been implemented in the ontology are

I think there is room for improvement, here: some terms are missing, and the position of certain terms in the hierarchy of classes should be re-evaluated. Does anyone want to propose a new organisation?

AntonCollembola commented 1 year ago

As mentioned above scrapers can be some rotifers (microbial biofilms) or rock-dwelling springtails (algae/lichens). So a scraper is not a subclass of herbivore since many scrapers (including aquatic ones) are also microbivores.

nleguillarme commented 1 year ago

Ok so I will move scraper to subClassOf heterotroph, until we look further into the matter.