<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:contributor>M. R. Burkart</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>G.D. Bubenzer</dc:contributor>
  <dc:creator>C.A. Onstad</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>1991</dc:date>
  <dc:description>&lt;p id="p-2"&gt;ime courses for ingest~on, retention and release via feces of microbial food was investigated&lt;br&gt;using 2 b~valves w~th d~fferent feeding strategies, Potamocorbula amurensis and Macoma&lt;br&gt;balthica. The results showed 2 pathways for the uptake of food material in these clams. The first is&lt;br&gt;represented by an initlal label pulse in the feces. The second pathway operates over longer time&lt;br&gt;periods. Inert "Cr-labeled beads were used to determine time frames for these pathways. The first&lt;br&gt;pathway, involving extracellular digestion and intestinal uptake, is relatively inefficient In the&lt;br&gt;digestion of bacter~al cells by P amurensis but more efficient in M. balthica. The second pathway,&lt;br&gt;involving intracellular digestion withln the digestive gland of both clams, was highly efficient in&lt;br&gt;absorb~ng bacterial carbon, and was responsible for most chromium uptake. Differences in the overall&lt;br&gt;retention of microbial "Cr and I4C relate not to gut-passage times but to the processing and release&lt;br&gt;strategies of the food material by these 2 clams. &lt;/p&gt;</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <dc:publisher>Soil and Water Conservation Society</dc:publisher>
  <dc:title>Agricultural research to improve water quality</dc:title>
  <dc:type>article</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>