Cargando…

Ecological value of macrophyte cover in creating habitat for microalgae (diatoms) and zooplankton (rotifers and crustaceans) in small field and forest water bodies

Due to their small area and shallow depth ponds are usually treated as a single sampling unit, while various microhabitats offer different environmental conditions. Thus, we tested the effect of different habitat types typically found within small ponds on the microalgae and zooplankton communities....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Celewicz-Gołdyn, Sofia, Kuczyńska-Kippen, Natalia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5417703/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28472138
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177317
_version_ 1783233937757175808
author Celewicz-Gołdyn, Sofia
Kuczyńska-Kippen, Natalia
author_facet Celewicz-Gołdyn, Sofia
Kuczyńska-Kippen, Natalia
author_sort Celewicz-Gołdyn, Sofia
collection PubMed
description Due to their small area and shallow depth ponds are usually treated as a single sampling unit, while various microhabitats offer different environmental conditions. Thus, we tested the effect of different habitat types typically found within small ponds on the microalgae and zooplankton communities. We found that submerged macrophytes have the strongest impact on microalgae and zooplankton communities out of all the analysed habitats. Some epontic diatoms (e.g. Fragilaria dilatata, Cymbella affinis) and littoral-associated zooplankton species (e.g. Simocephalus vetulus, Lecane bulla) were significantly related to elodeids. However, pelagic species (e.g. bosminids) preferred less complex helophytes, which suggests that the most heterogeneous elodeid habitats were not an anti-predator shelter for cladocerans. Selection of different macrophyte types by taxonomically various organisms suggests that it is not only macrophyte cover that is desired for healthy aquatic environment but that a level of habitat mosaic is required to ensure the well-being of aquatic food webs. Species-specific preferences for different types of macrophytes indicate the high ecological value of macrophyte cover in ponds and a potential direction for the management of small water bodies towards maintaining a great variation of aquatic plants. Moreover, the type of surrounding landscape, reflecting human-induced disturbance (28 field ponds) and natural catchment (26 forest ponds), significantly influenced only zooplankton, while diatoms were affected indirectly through the level of conductivity. Nutrient overload (higher content of TRP) and increased conductivity in the field landscape contributed to a rise in microalgae (e.g. Amphora pediculus, Gomphonema parvulum) and zooplankton (e.g. Thermocyclops oithonoides, Eubosmina coregoni) abundance. An awareness of the responses of both components of plankton communities to environmental factors is necessary for maintaining the good state of small water bodies in various types of landscape.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5417703
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54177032017-05-14 Ecological value of macrophyte cover in creating habitat for microalgae (diatoms) and zooplankton (rotifers and crustaceans) in small field and forest water bodies Celewicz-Gołdyn, Sofia Kuczyńska-Kippen, Natalia PLoS One Research Article Due to their small area and shallow depth ponds are usually treated as a single sampling unit, while various microhabitats offer different environmental conditions. Thus, we tested the effect of different habitat types typically found within small ponds on the microalgae and zooplankton communities. We found that submerged macrophytes have the strongest impact on microalgae and zooplankton communities out of all the analysed habitats. Some epontic diatoms (e.g. Fragilaria dilatata, Cymbella affinis) and littoral-associated zooplankton species (e.g. Simocephalus vetulus, Lecane bulla) were significantly related to elodeids. However, pelagic species (e.g. bosminids) preferred less complex helophytes, which suggests that the most heterogeneous elodeid habitats were not an anti-predator shelter for cladocerans. Selection of different macrophyte types by taxonomically various organisms suggests that it is not only macrophyte cover that is desired for healthy aquatic environment but that a level of habitat mosaic is required to ensure the well-being of aquatic food webs. Species-specific preferences for different types of macrophytes indicate the high ecological value of macrophyte cover in ponds and a potential direction for the management of small water bodies towards maintaining a great variation of aquatic plants. Moreover, the type of surrounding landscape, reflecting human-induced disturbance (28 field ponds) and natural catchment (26 forest ponds), significantly influenced only zooplankton, while diatoms were affected indirectly through the level of conductivity. Nutrient overload (higher content of TRP) and increased conductivity in the field landscape contributed to a rise in microalgae (e.g. Amphora pediculus, Gomphonema parvulum) and zooplankton (e.g. Thermocyclops oithonoides, Eubosmina coregoni) abundance. An awareness of the responses of both components of plankton communities to environmental factors is necessary for maintaining the good state of small water bodies in various types of landscape. Public Library of Science 2017-05-04 /pmc/articles/PMC5417703/ /pubmed/28472138 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177317 Text en © 2017 Celewicz-Gołdyn, Kuczyńska-Kippen http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Celewicz-Gołdyn, Sofia
Kuczyńska-Kippen, Natalia
Ecological value of macrophyte cover in creating habitat for microalgae (diatoms) and zooplankton (rotifers and crustaceans) in small field and forest water bodies
title Ecological value of macrophyte cover in creating habitat for microalgae (diatoms) and zooplankton (rotifers and crustaceans) in small field and forest water bodies
title_full Ecological value of macrophyte cover in creating habitat for microalgae (diatoms) and zooplankton (rotifers and crustaceans) in small field and forest water bodies
title_fullStr Ecological value of macrophyte cover in creating habitat for microalgae (diatoms) and zooplankton (rotifers and crustaceans) in small field and forest water bodies
title_full_unstemmed Ecological value of macrophyte cover in creating habitat for microalgae (diatoms) and zooplankton (rotifers and crustaceans) in small field and forest water bodies
title_short Ecological value of macrophyte cover in creating habitat for microalgae (diatoms) and zooplankton (rotifers and crustaceans) in small field and forest water bodies
title_sort ecological value of macrophyte cover in creating habitat for microalgae (diatoms) and zooplankton (rotifers and crustaceans) in small field and forest water bodies
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5417703/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28472138
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177317
work_keys_str_mv AT celewiczgołdynsofia ecologicalvalueofmacrophytecoverincreatinghabitatformicroalgaediatomsandzooplanktonrotifersandcrustaceansinsmallfieldandforestwaterbodies
AT kuczynskakippennatalia ecologicalvalueofmacrophytecoverincreatinghabitatformicroalgaediatomsandzooplanktonrotifersandcrustaceansinsmallfieldandforestwaterbodies