Freshwater Algae: Identification and Use as Bioindicators

More documents

Recommendations

Info

124 3 ALGAE AS BIOINDICATORSTable 3.9 Comparison of the Diatom Floras Monitored by Lange-Bertalot, Watanabe and Roundfor Severely-Polluted and Moderately-Polluted River SitesLange-Bertalot Watanabe RoundSevere nutrient pollution: most tolerant diatom species.Group 1 Saprophilic* Zone 5Amphora venetaGomphonema parvulumNavicula accomodaNavicula atomusNavicula goeppertianaNavicula saprophilaNavicula seminulumNitzschia communisNitzschia paleaSynedra ulnaNavicula minimaNavicula frugalisNavicula permitisNavicula twymanianaNavicla umbonataNavicula thermalisNavicula goeppertianaAchnanthes minutissimavar saprophilaNavicula minimaNavicula muticaNavicula seminulaNitzschia paleaAmphora venetaGomphonema augurNavicula accomodaSmall NaviculaSmall NitzschiaModerate nutrient pollution: Less-tolerant diatom species.Group IIa Eurysaprobic* Zone 4Achnanthes lanceolataCymbella ventricosaDiatoma elongatumFragilaria vaucheriaeFragilaria parvulumNavicula avenaceaNavicula gregariaNavicula halophilaNitzschia amphibianSurirella ovalisSynedra pulchellaAchnanthes lanceolataCocconeis placentulaGomphonema parvulumNavicula atomusNitzschia frustulumAmphora pediculusReimeria sinuata= Cymbella sinuataGomphonema sp.Adapted from Round, 1993.*Saprophilic (preference for high soluble organic nutrient levels), Eurysaprobic (tolerant of a range of solubleorganic nutrient levels). Species present in two or more of the lists area shown in bold.using sediment analysis. Diatom sediment analysisis not generally appropriate for rivers, however, sincethere is little sedimentation of phytoplankton, thesediment is liable to disturbance by water flow andthe oxygenated conditions minimize preservation ofbiological material.An alternative strategy, in the quest for a baselinestate, is to locate an equivalent ecological site that hasa natural original community – unaffected by humanactivity. This is not straightforward, however, sincelocal variations in environment and species within aparticular ecoregion make it difficult to define what is
3.4 RIVERS 125Table 3.10 Benthic Diatom Community Analysis of Finnish Rivers (Soininen et al., 2004) Showing Some of theMajor Community GroupsGroup Ecoregion Stream Water Quality Characteristic TaxaA Eastern Finland Polyhumic, acid Eunotia rhomboideaEunotia exiguaB Eastern Finland, woodland Oligotrophic, neutral Fragilaria construens,Gomphonema exilissimumGomphonema gragileAchnanthes linearisAulacoseira italica*Rhizosolenia longiseta*C South Finland, small foreststreamsSlightly acid, low conductivity,humicD South Finland ConnectlakesE Mid-boreal Mesotrophic, neutral, humic Achnanthes bioretiiAulacoseira subarcticaF North boreal Oligotrophic, clear water, neutral Caloneis tenuisGomphonema clavatumH Arctic-alpine Achnanthes kryophilaEunotia arcusJ South Finland, many smalllakes and pondsPolluted: eutrophic, high organiccontentK South Finland Polluted: eutrophic – treatedsewage, diffuse agriculturalloading*Planktonic diatoms. Groups A–K selected from 13 ecoregions.Aulacoseira ambigua*Cyclotella meneghiniana*Motile biraphid species – e.g.Surirella brebissoniiNitzschia pusillaactually meant by a natural original community. Thisis evident in the studies of Eloranta and Soininen(2002) on Finnish rivers, for example, where diatomspecies composition of undisturbed benthic communitiesvaried with river substrate, turbidity and localhydrology (Table 3.11).In an objective assessment of human impact onnatural communities, Tison et al. (2005) analysed836 diatom samples from sites throughout the Frenchhydrosystem using an unsupervised neural network,the self-organizing map. Eleven different communitieswere identified, five corresponding to naturalTable 3.11 Diatom Adaptations to Local Environmental Conditions in Finnish Rivers(Eloranta and Soininen, 2002)EnvironmentSubstrateHard substratesSoft substratesTurbidityClear watersClay-turbid watersHydrologyLake and pond inflowsTypical DiatomsAttached epilithic and epiphytic taxaPinnularia, Navicula and NitzschiaAchnanthesSurirrella ovalis, Melosira varians and Navicula spp.Aulacoseira spp., Cyclotella spp. and Diatoma tenuis
Page 1 and 2: 3Algae as BioindicatorsBiological i
Page 3 and 4: 3.1 BIOINDICATORS AND WATER QUALITY
Page 5 and 6: Table 3.3 Lake Trophic Status: Phyt
Page 8 and 9: 106 3 ALGAE AS BIOINDICATORSDirecti
Page 11 and 12: 3.2 LAKES 109sites (Fig. 3.3 A, B,
Page 13 and 14: 3.2 LAKES 111Phytoplankton net prod
Page 15 and 16: 3.2 LAKES 113and hypertrophic (Pedi
Page 17 and 18: 3.2 LAKES 115Table 3.5 Organic Poll
Page 19 and 20: 3.2 LAKES 117Table 3.7 Bioindicator
Page 21 and 22: 3.3 WETLANDS 119therefore directly
Page 23 and 24: 3.4 RIVERS 1213.4 RiversUntil recen
Page 25: 3.4 RIVERS 123Gomphonema parvulum t
Page 29 and 30: 3.4 RIVERS 127Palmer’s Index (Pal
Page 31 and 32: 3.4 RIVERS 129any irregular conclus
Page 33 and 34: 3.4 RIVERS 131Case study 3.3Compari
Page 35 and 36: individual analysts can be measured
Page 37 and 38: 3.5 ESTUARIES 135potential role of

Freshwater Algae: Identification and Use as Bioindicators

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?