Printer Friendly

Spatial and temporal fluctuation of phytoplankton functional groups in a tropical reservoir/Variacao espacial e temporal dos grupos funcionais do fitoplancton em um reservatorio tropical.

Introduction

Relative depth and retention time are the most important physical characteristics of the reservoirs. These factors determine horizontal water quality differentiation, such as: nutrients concentrations, relative importance of inputs of inorganic and organic matter. Furthermore affect stratification conditions and flows, and the retention of both particulate and dissolved material in these systems (STRASKRABA; TUNDISI, 1999).

Horizontal zonation in reservoirs is usually related with the increase in particulate matter sedimentation from river towards the dam (STRASKRABA; TUNDISI, 1999). The establishment of horizontal compartments results in different behavior regarding abiotic factors, which determine the structure and functioning of the phytoplankton community (KIMMEL et al., 1990).

In general, phytoplankton from deep reservoirs presents a horizontal distribution pattern with greater concentrations in the transition zone of the reservoirs. In the fluvial zone, there is light limitation despite nutrient availability, and afterwards, the relative fertility of the mixing zone decreases towards the dam because nutrients supply, introduced by adjective processes, reduces with distance from the river inflow. Therefore, phytoplankton production becomes more dependent on in situ nutrient regeneration (THORNTON, 1990; TUNDISI et al., 1999).

Identify horizontal gradients in reservoirs is crucial to define the different uses of these systems (NOGUEIRA, 2000). By readily indicate environmental conditions and exhibiting conservative characteristics superior to those of physical and chemical variables, the phytoplanktonic species can be efficient in characterization of these gradients (REYNOLDS, 1980; REYNOLDS et al., 2002).

According to the pattern in which species or groups of species dominate a certain environment, phytoplankton species can also be sorted into functional groups characteristic of particular environmental conditions (REYNOLDS et al., 2002; PADISAK et al., 2006, 2009). Studies using this approach for to characterize the horizontal distribution of phytoplankton in reservoirs were registered (TRAIN et al., 2005; RODRIGUES et al., 2005; BORGES et al., 2008; BECKER et al., 2009, 2010), however only Train et al. (2005) and Borges et al. (2008) used the functional groups approach in characterization of fluvial, transition

Because of the few studies using functional groups of phytoplankton along horizontal gradients in reservoirs, this study investigated the occurrence of a horizontal gradient of phytoplankton community in Mourao Reservoir, and identified groups of species that match to functional groups proposed by Reynolds. The hypothesis this study is that highest biomass values are found in transition zone and the phytoplankton functional groups are useful for different zones characterization.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

Material and methods

Study area

Mourao Reservoir was built in 1964, by the damming of the left bank tributary of Ivai River. It is located in the municipality of Campo Mourao, in the boundary region between the Northwest and Southwest of Parana State. Among the soil uses of its basin, there are agricultural activities, mainly soybean crops, which generate high input of clayey matter via surface runoff. The reservoir has an area of 11.3 km2 and a retention time of about 70 days. The mean depth was of approximately 2.7 m in fluvial zone (region of the river inflow), 7.5 m in transition (intermediary region), and 8 m in lacustrine zone (deep lacustrine region near the dam). In the right bank there are remnants of native and secondary forests, and the left bank is occupied by vacation homes (JULIO-JUNIOR et al., 2005).

Quarterly samplings were performed in 2002 during dry (June and September) and rainy seasons (March and December). Samples were taken with a Van Dorn sampler at the fluvial (F), transition (T) and lacustrine (L) zones, in the following water layers: at the subsurface (S); above the lower boundary of the mixing zone ([Z.sub.mix]); above the euphotic zone boundary ([Z.sub.eu]); and at approximately 40 cm of the bottom ([Z.sub.max]). The mixing zone ([Z.sub.mix]) was estimated according to the temperature profile of the water column. Euphotic zone ([Z.sub.eu]) was measured using a radiometer. The [Z.sub.eu]:[Z.sub.mix] ratio was used as a light availability index in the mixing zone.

Transparency was measured with a Secchi disc. Water temperature, pH, electrical conductivity and dissolved oxygen were obtained by portable digital potentiometers; concentrations of total phosphorus, soluble reactive phosphorus were determined following the methods described in Golterman et al. (1978). Total nitrogen, as well as nitrate (N-NO3") and ammonium (N-N[H.sub.4.sup.+]) were determined following the methods described in Mackereth et al. (1978). All abiotic variables were obtained from samples taken simultaneously with the biological ones. Phytoplankton samples were preserved using Lugol's solution.

Phytoplankton quantification followed Utermohl (1958) and APHA (1995) and sedimentation time was set according to Lund et al. (1958). Phytoplankton biomass, estimated using biovolume, was calculated by multiplying the abundance of each species and the average volume of species. The latter were obtained from geometric models similar to tridimensional forms (SUN; LIU, 2003).

Species with contribution to the phytoplankton biovolume greater than 5% to total biovolume were included in functional groups (FGs) according to Reynolds et al. (2002) and Padisak et al. (2006).

Relations between abiotic variables and total phytoplankton biovolume were studied using the Pearson correlation (STATSOFT, 2005). The Permutational Multivariate Analysis of Variance (ANDERSON, 2001) was applied to test differences in biovolume functional groups of reservoirs zones. The relationships between the abiotic data and the phytoplankton biovolume FGs were analyzed through Canonical Correspondence Analysis--CCA (TER BRAAK, 1986). In the CCA analysis were included surface data of seven FGs biovolume, water temperature--WT, pH, alkalinity--Alk, electrical conductivity- Cond, soluble reactive phosphorus SRP, Dissolved inorganic nitrogen--DIN (N-N[O.sub.2.sup.-] + N-N[H.sub.4.sup.+] + N-N[H.sub.3.sup.-]), [Z.sub.max]:[Z.sub.max] ratio and [Z.sub.cu]:[Z.sub.mix] ratio. The null hypothesis of absence of relationship among matrices (biotic and abiotic) was tested through Monte Carlo procedures. All calculations were carried out using PC-ORD software (McCUNE; MEFFORD, 1999) and the R package (r DEVELOPMENT CORE TEAM, 2013).

Results

Water temperature ranged presented the lowest values in September. Conductivity values presented low variability. pH remained around 7 throughout study period (Table 1). Was registered high availability of light, characterized by [Z.sub.eu]:[Z.sub.mix] ratio superior to 1, in transition and lacustrine zones in rain period (Figure 2). In this period occurred a horizontal gradient in light availability, with increase from river towards the dam. In June, dry period, the highest [Z.sub.eu]:[Z.sub.mix] ratio occurred at fluvial zone. In September the [Z.sub.eu]:[Z.sub.mix] ratio was lower than 1, all across horizontal extent of reservoir. Total circulation of the water column at fluvial zone of the reservoir was verified throughout study period, except in June. Water column was stratified in transition and lacustrine zones in most months, except at lacustrine zone, in September (Figure 2).

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

Dissolved oxygen values were higher in dry period, in euphotic zone. TN and DIN concentrations were high principally in dry period (Table 1). TP concentrations were lower than 20 [micro]g [L.sup.-1] in most samples, and evidenced a horizontal gradient from river towards the dam, in December, when values above 30 [micro]g [L.sup.-1] were detected at fluvial zone. SRP values were low, presenting homogeneous values along the horizontal and vertical axes of the reservoir. Greatest concentrations of phosphorus forms occurred at deep layer of the reservoir (Table 1).

A total of 106 taxa were identified, distributed among 9 taxonomic groups. Chlorophyceae was the most representative group (48 taxa). Total phytoplankton biovolume values were low during most of study period, except in March 2002, at epilimnetic layer of lacustrine and transition zones, where we verified values superior to 2 [mm.sup.3] [L.sup.-1].

Horizontal gradient was evidenced for phytoplankton biovolume, with higher values observed in general in the transition zone, as well as a vertical gradient, with greater values at epilimnetic layer, over all reservoir extent (Figure 3), however significant differences between biovolume values of the three zones were not verified (pseudo F = 0.89; p = 0.55).

Zygnemaphyceae was massively dominant in March, at transition and lacustrine zones. Dinophyceae occurred in most samples, being dominant at transition zone, in June and December. Cryptophyceae was present throughout study period, with greater contribution in the transition zone, in September, and in fluvial zone, in December. Bacillariophyceae was the main group in biomass at fluvial zone of the reservoir in March, at transition and lacustrine zones, in June. Chlorophyceae presented greater contribution at transition and lacustrine zones, in December.

Nine functional groups (FG) were reported: N, [L.sub.o], Y, A, C, P, MP, E and W1 (Table 2). FG N (Cosmarium sp.), the most representative in biomass, was dominant in March at transition and lacustrine zones. FG Lo (Peridinium sp.) was dominant in euphotic zone, at the transition zone, in June. FG Y (Cryptomonas sp.) occurred in most samples and was dominant at fluvial zone, in December, and in transition zone, in September. FG C (Asterionella cf. formosa and Aulacoseira ambigua) was dominant, at fluvial zone, in March, and transition and lacustrine zones, in June.

[FIGURE 3 OMITTED] +++ Monte Carlo test of the first canonical axis (p < 0.005), were significant, with a percentage of variance explained 45% of the species-environmental variation. Axis 1 (0.59) which showed the strongest relationship between functional groups and environmental variables (0.99), was principally correlated with [Z.sub.eu]:[Z.sub.mix] rate (0.88), [Z.sub.mix]:[Z.sub.max] rate (-0.23), pH (0.44), water temperature--WT (0.87), dissolved oxygen--DO (0.45), conductivity--Cond. (0,44) and dissolved inorganic nitrogen- DIN (-0.79) (Figure 4).

[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]

CCA diagram evidenced low scores dispersion in relation to horizontal and temporal distribution. To the right of the diagram, transition and lacustrine zones were discriminated from fluvial zone only in March. This result was influenced by higher [Z.sub.eu]:[Z.sub.mix] ratio and higher biomass values of Zygnemaphyceae, represented by FG N . The separation of the others FGs, at left of the diagram, was influenced principally by the higher DIN.

Discussion

The discrete horizontal gradient in phytoplankton biovolume observed for Mourao Reservoir, with the highest values at transition and lacustrine zones may be associated to the high retention time. Shallow and small reservoirs, with longer retention time usually present higher values of phytoplankton biovolume in these regions (RODRIGUES et al., 2005; TRAIN et al., 2005).

Oligotrophic conditions were verified during most of the study period, in all reservoir zones, according to the criteria proposed by Reynolds (1980), considering the values of phytoplankton biovolume. This result may be ascribed to lack of nutrients, especially soluble reactive phosphorus, since Mourao Reservoir presented high light availability ([Z.sub.eu]:[Z.sub.mix] ratio > 1), mainly in transition and lacustrine zones. In these zones, the total biovolume of phytoplankton were positively correlated with the [Z.sub.eu]:[Z.sub.mix] ratio (r= 0.61; p < 0.05, n = 25).

The lower [Z.sub.eu]:[Z.sub.mix] ratio found in the fluvial zone, in most of the study period, can explain the low biovolume values recorded. The fluvial zones of reservoirs are, in general, characterized by high velocity of water flow and low light availability, which are limiting factors for phytoplankton development (KIMMEL et al., 1990; PIVATO et al., 2006; SALMASO; ZIGNIN, 2010). In this way, higher values of phytoplankton biovolume at fluvial zone in June may be assigned to high light availability ([Z.sub.eu]:[Z.sub.mix] = 1) and stability of water column ([Z.sub.eu]:[Z.sub.max] = 0.4), as a result of low rainfall during this period.

Greater values of phytoplankton biovolume observed in rainy period, in transition and lacustrine zones, characterized eutrophic conditions. These values were associated to high light availability. The dominance of the FG N (Cosmarium spp.) in this period, as evidenced by CCA, can be ascribed to survival strategies of this functional group, which is typical of oligo-mesotrophic environments, with high transparence and species sensitive to destratification (REYNOLDS et al., 2002). Cosmarium spp. was grouped in FG [N.sub.A] by Souza et al. (2008), because these authors recorded these taxa in atelomictic condictions. The methodology used for us did not allow assuring that occurred events of atelomixis.

Dominance of the FG [L.sub.0] (Peridinium sp.) in June, at epilimnetic layer of transition zone, was also associated to thermal stratification conditions and discrete nutrients segregation, with higher PSR concentration at [Z.sub.max]. This group is adapted to a wide environmental variability, as established by Reynolds et al. (2002), and is common in lakes medium to large, shallow to deep, and oligotrophic to eutrophic.

Highest biovolume values of the FG Y (Cryptomonas spp.), in three zones, principally in dry period, were related with the low light availability, higher concentrations of DIN, PSR, and high [Z.sub.eu]:[Z.sub.mix] ratio, as evidenced by the CCA, which emphasizes the opportunistic traits of this group, as already reported by several authors (TRAIN et al., 2005; BOVOSCOMPARIN; TRAIN, 2008; BORGES et al., 2008; 2010; SILVA et al., 2005; RODRIGUES et al., 2009).

Conclusion

Results herein obtained evidenced a horizontal gradient in the reservoir, with higher values of phytoplankton biovolume in transition and lacustrine zones, which can be attributed to the proximity and similar environmental characteristics between these zones. So, the hypothesis that highest biovolume of phytoplankton are found in the transition zone was not supported by analysis realized. The phytoplankton structure with dominance of the FGs Y and Lo during most of the study period, characterized the oligotrophy conditions, the pattern of circulation and light availability of the reservoir.

Doi: 10.4025/actascibiolsci.v35i3.12988

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the Nucleo de Pesquisas em Limnologia, Ictiologia e Aquicultura (Nupelia) of Universidade Estadual de Maringa, for logistic support; to researchers from Nupelia Limnology Laboratory; to Agencia Nacional de Aguas (ANA) and Companhia Paranaense de Energia (COPEL); to CNPq/PRONEX for financial support; to CAPES, and to anonymous reviewers for suggestions on the manuscript.

References

APHA-American Public Health Association. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 19th ed. Washington D.C.: APHA, 1995.

ANDERSON, M. J. A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Austral Ecology, v. 26, n. 1, p. 32-46, 2001.

BECKER, V.; CAPUTO, L.; ORDONEZ, J.; MARCE, R.; ARMENGOL, J.; CROSSETTI, L. O.; HUSZAR, V. L. M. Driving factors of the phytoplankton functional groups in a deep Mediterranean reservoir. Water Research, v. 44, n. 11, p. 3345-3354, 2010.

BECKER, V.; HUSZAR, V. L. M.; CROSSETTI, L. O. Responses of phytoplankton functional groups to the mixing regime in a deep subtropical reservoir. Hydrobiologia, v. 628, n. 1, p. 137-151, 2009.

BORGES, P. A. F.; TRAIN, S.; DIAS, J. D.; BONECKER, C. C. Effects of fish farming on plankton structure in a Brazilian tropical reservoir. Hydrobiologia, v. 649, n. 1, p. 279-291, 2010.

BORGES, P. A. F.; TRAIN, S.; RODRIGUES, L. C. Spatial and temporal variation of phytoplankton in two subtropical Brazilian reservoirs. Hydrobiologia, v. 607, n. 1, p. 63-74, 2008.

BOVO-SCOMPARIN, V. M.; TRAIN, S. Long-term variability of the phytoplankton community in an isolated floodplain lake of the Ivinhema river State Park, Brazil. Hydrobiologia, v. 610, n. 1, p. 331-344, 2008.

GOLTERMAN, H. L.; CLYMO, R. S.; OHSTAD, M. A. M. Methods for physical and chemical analysis of freshwater. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publication, 1978.

JULIO-JUNIOR, H. F.; THOMAZ, S. M.; AGOSTINHO, A. A.; LATINI, J. D. Distribuicao e caracterizacao dos reservatorios. In: RODRIGUES, L.; THOMAZ, S. M.; AGOSTINHO, A. A.; GOMES, L. C. (Ed.). Biocenoses em reservatorios: padroes espaciais e temporais. Sao Carlos: Rima, 2005. p. 1-16.

KIMMEL, B. L.; LIND, O. T.; PAULSON, L. J. Reservoir primary production. In: THORNTON, K. W.; KIMMEL, B. L.; PAINE, F. E. (Ed.). Reservoir limnology: ecological perspectives. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1990. p. 133-193.

LUND, J. W. G.; KIPLING, C.; LE CREN, E. D. The inverted microscope method of estimating algal numbers and the statistical basis of estimations by counting. Hydrobiologia, v. 11, n. 2, p. 143-170, 1958.

MACKERETH, F. Y. H.; HERON, J.; TALLING, J. J. Water analysis: some revised methods for limnologist. Ambleside: Freshwater Biology Association, Scientific Publication, 1978.

McCUNE, B.; MEFFORD, M. J. PC-ORD, version 4.0, Multivariate analysis of ecological data, MjM Software Design. Oregon: Gleneden Blach, 1999.

NOGUEIRA, M. G. Phytoplankton composition, dominance and abundance as indicators of environmental compartmentalization in Jurumirim Reservoir (Paranapanema river), Sao Paulo, Brazil. Hydrobiologia v. 431, n. 2-3, p. 115-128, 2000.

PADISAK, J.; BORICS, G.; GRIGORSZKY, I.; SOROCKZI-PINTER, E. Use of phytoplankton assemblages for monitoring ecological status of lakes within the water framework directive: the assemblage index. Hydrobiologia, v. 553, n. 1, p. 1-14, 2006.

PADISAK, J.; CROSSETTI, L. C.; NASELLI-FLORES, L. Use and misuse in the application of the phytoplankton functional classification: a critical review with updates. Hydrobiologia, v. 621, n. 1, p. 1-19, 2009.

PIVATO, B. M.; TRAIN, S.; RODRIGUES L. C. Dinamica nictemeral das assembleias fitoplanctonicas em um reservatorio tropical (reservatorio de Corumba, estado de Goias, Brasil), em dois periodos do ciclo hidrologico. Acta Scientiarum. Biological Sciences, v. 28, n. 1, p. 19-29, 2006.

R DEVELOPMENT CORE TEAM. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2013.

REYNOLDS, C. S. Phytoplankton assemblages and their periodicity in stratifying lake systems. Holartic Ecology, v. 3, n. 3, p. 141-159, 1980.

REYNOLDS, C. S.; HUSZAR, V.; KRUK, C.; NASELLI-FLORES, L.; MELO, S. Towards a functional classification of the freshwater phytoplankton. Journal of Plankton Research, v. 24, n. 5, p. 417-428, 2002.

RODRIGUES, L. C.; TRAIN, S.; BOVO-SCOMPARIN, V. M.; JATI, S.; BORSALLI, C. C. J.; MARENGONI, E. Interannual variability of phytoplankton in the main rivers of the upper Parana River floodplain, Brazil: influence of upstream reservoirs. Brazilian Journal of Biology, v. 69, n. 2, p. 501-516, 2009. (suppl.)

RODRIGUES, L. C.; TRAIN, S.; PIVATO, B. M.; BOVO-SCOMPARIN, V. M.; BORGES, P. A. F.; JATI, S. Assembleias fitoplanctonicas de trinta reservatorios do estado do Parana. In RODRIGUES, L.; THOMAZ, S. M. ; AGOSTINHO, A. A.; GOMES, L. C. (Ed.). Biocenoses em reservatorios: padroes espaciais e temporais. Sao Carlos: Rima, 2005. p. 57-72.

SALMASO, N.; ZIGNIN, A. At the extreme of physical gradients: phytoplankton in highly flushed, large rivers. Hydrobiologia, v. 639, n. 1, p. 21-36, 2010.

SILVA, C. A.; TRAIN, S.; RODRIGUES, L. C. Phytoplankton assemblages in a Brazilian subtropical cascading reservoir systen. Hydrobiologia, v. 537, n. 1-3, p. 99-109, 2005.

SOUZA, M. B. G.; BARROS, C. F. A.; BARBOSA, F.; HAJNAL, E.; PADISAK, J. Role of atelomixis in replacement of phytoplankton assemblages in Dom Helvecio Lake, South-East Brazil. Hydrobiologia, v. 607, n. 1, p. 211-224, 2008.

STATSOFT INC. Statistica (Data Analisys Software System), version 7.1. 2005. Available from: <http://www.statisoft.inc>. Access on: June 31, 2011.

STRASKRABA, M.; TUNDISI, J. G. Theoretical Reservoir Ecology and its Applications. Sao Carlos :International Institute of Ecology, Brazilian Academy of Sciences and Backhuys Publishers, 1999. p. 565-597.

SUN, J.; LIU D. Geometric models for calculating cell biovolume and surface area for phytoplankton. Journal of Plankton Research, v. 25, n. 11, p. 1331-1346, 2003.

TER BRAAK, C. J. F. Canonical correspondence analysis: a new eigenvector technique for multivariate direct gradient analysis. Ecology, v. 67, n. 5, p. 1167-1179, 1986.

THORNTON, K. W. Sedimentary processes. In: THORNTON, K. W.; KIMMEL, B. L.; PAINE, F. E. (Ed.). Reservoir limnology: Ecological perspectives. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1990. p. 133-194.

TRAIN, S.; JATI, S.; RODRIGUES, L. C.; PIVATO, B. M. Distribuicao espacial e temporal do fitoplancton em tres reservatorios da bacia do rio Parana. In: RODRIGUES, L.; THOMAZ, S. M.; AGOSTINHO, A. A.; GOMES, L. C. (Ed.). Biocenoses em reservatorios: padroes espaciais e temporais. Sao Carlos: Rima, 2005. p. 73-85.

TUNDISI, J. G.; MATSUMURA-TUNDISI, T.; ROCHA, O. Theoretical basis for reservoir management. In: TUNDISI, J. G.; STRASKRABA, M. (Ed.), Theoretical reservoir ecology and its applications. Sao Carlos: International Institute of Ecology; Brazilian Academy of Sciences; Backhuys Publishers, 1999. p. 505-528.

UTERMOHL, H. Z. Vervollkommung der quantitativen phytoplankton-methodic. Mitteilungen Internationale Vereinigung fur Theoretische und Angewandte Limnologie, v. 9, n. 1, p. 1-38, 1958.

Received on March 28, 2011.

Accepted on November 18, 2011.

License information: This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Livia Oliveira Ruiz Moreti, Luana Martos, Vania Mara Bovo-Scomparin and Luzia Cleide Rodrigues *

Nucleo de Pesquisas em Limnologia, Ictiologia e Aquicultura, Universidade Estadual de Maringa, Av. Colombo, 5790, 87020-900, Maringa, Parana, Brazil. * Author for correspondence. E-mail: luziac.rodrigues@gmail.com
Table 1. Limnological variables in Mourao Reservoir in 2002.
(AT = air temperature; cond.= electrical conductivity;
DO = dissolved oxygen; WT = water temperature; DIN = dissolved
inorganic nitrogen; TP = total phosphorus; SRP = soluble
reactive phosphorus; TN = total nitrogen.

                        Depth          Secchi    AT
                         (m)            (m)     (%)

Rainy period
March
Fluvial                   S             0.6     25.2
                     [Z.sub.max]

Transition                S             1.2     25.6
                     [Z.sub.mix]
                     [Z.sub.eu] =
                     [Z.sub.max]

Lacustrine                S             1.5     25.6
                     [Z.sub.mix]
                     [Z.sub.eu] =
                     [Z.sub.max]

December                  S
Fluvial              [Z.sub.max]        0.3     24.3

Transition                S             1.7     22.9
                     [Z.sub.eu] =
                    [Z.sub.mix] =
                     [Z.sub.max]

Lacustrine                S             2.6     22.1
                     [Z.sub.max]
                     [Z.sub.max]

Dry period
June
Fluvial                   S             0.3     24.8
                     [Z.sub.eu] =
                     [Z.sub.mix]
                     [Z.sub.max]

Transition                S             0.3     25.9
                         Zeu
                     [Z.sub.mix]
                     [Z.sub.max]

Lacustrine                S             0.5     23.4
                         Zeu
                     [Z.sub.mix]
                     [Z.sub.max]
September
Fluvial                   S             0.5     16.0
Transition                S             0.5     21.4
                     [Z.sub.mix]
                     [Z.sub.max]

Lacustrine                S             1.5     16.8
                     [Z.sub.eu] =
                    [Z.sub.mix] =
                     [Z.sub.max]

                      Cond        pH          DO           WT
                    ([micro]S           (mg [L.sup.-1])   (%)
                  [cm.sup.-1])

Rainy period
March
Fluvial               28.5        6.5         7.6         22.6
                      30.1        6.8         6.8         21.7

Transition            24.4        7.7         7.7         26.7
                      25.7        6.9         5.9         25.2
                      30.1        7.1         4.2         23.5

Lacustrine            24.7        7.0         7.3         26.4
                      24.7        7.1         7.0         26.1
                      24.9        6.5         0.1         24.6

December
Fluvial               23.8        6.9         8.5         24.1
                      22.3        6.5         5.8         21.4
Transition            24.4        6.8         7.6         25.8
                      24.4        7.0         5.9         25.0
                      23.8        6.5         3.4         23.4

Lacustrine            23.7        6.8         7.3         25.6
                      23.9        6.6         5.4         24.6
                      24.1        6.4         2.4         22.4

Dry period
June
Fluvial               24.3        6.9         8.2         19.0
                      25.0        6.9         8.0         18.5
                      24.5        6.8         8.0         18.4

Transition            21.4        7.2         8.5         21.6
                      21.6        6.9         8.1         19.7
                      22.3        6.6         5.9         18.3
                      22.3        6.6         5.9         18.3

Lacustrine            19.7        6.9         8.0         20.1
                      19.7        6.9         8.0         20.1
                      20.7        6.7         7.0         18.6
                      21.0        6.5         6.7         18.3
September
Fluvial               26.6        6.5         8.1         16.7
Transition            25.7        6.7         7.6         22.1
                      26.7        6.5         6.5         20.3
                      28.0        6.0         2.1         19.0

Lacustrine            23.2        6.8         7.7         20.7
                      23.5        6.6         5.2         19.7

                      DIN           TP            SRP           TN
                   ([micro]g     ([micro]g     ([micro]g     ([micro]g
                  [L.sup.-1])   [L.sup.-1])   [L.sup.-1])   [L.sup.-1])

Rainy period
March
Fluvial              121.5          8.5           0.6          208.9
                     146.0          9.8           0.3          196.1

Transition           14.8           9.7           0.6          140.9
                     15.3           9.1           0.5          124.7
                     133.2         12.1           1.3          224.9

Lacustrine            7.7          10.1           0.9          175.9
                      6.8           8.8           0.9          165.3
                     42.9           7.6           1.0          197.8

December
Fluvial              173.0         32.1           1.3          459.7
                     334.3         41.1           1.7          491.0
Transition           115.7          8.6           1.6          307.4
                     156.3          8.5           1.4          333.3
                     162.5         17.4           1.7          382.7

Lacustrine           118.5          5.6           1.4          293.1
                     128.2          5.4           1.4          305.6
                     164.4          5.3           1.4          287.8

Dry period
June
Fluvial              537.1         18.7           0.8          272.1
                     228.5          7.5           0.9          252.3
                     228.4          9.1           1.0          242.5

Transition           312.6         10.4           0.7          367.4
                     322.7          8.6           1.3          340.3
                     300.2          9.2           2.4          342.5
                     300.2                        2.4          343.5

Lacustrine           286.1         10.0           1.0          313.1
                     286.1                        1.0          313.1
                     342.7         18.6           0.9          351.3
                     375.9         22.3           1.2          387.5
September
Fluvial              228.5         16.2           0.7          267.6
Transition           132.8         16.2           0.1          184.1
                     131.6         13.8           0.6          189.5
                     151.7         16.2           2.5          173.1

Lacustrine           99.5          13.4           0.1          167.2
                     101.2         13.5           0.1          171.9

Table 2. Biovolume % (> 5% of total) of principal phytoplankton
taxa and their respective functional groups (FG) in different
zones and sampling depths (S, [Z.sub.eu], [Z.sub.mix], [Z.sub.max];
[Z.sub.eu] = [Z.sub.mix]; [Z.sub.mix] = [Z.sub.max]) in Mourao
reservoir, during study period. (Months= M, J, S, D)

Taxonomic                               Fluvial
groups/species            FG            Region

                                        rainy

BACILLARIOPHYCEAE

Thalassiosira sp.          A          D - S (11)

Uroso'lenta                A       M - [Z.sub.max]
eriensis (H. L. Sm.)               (16); D - S (5)
Round e Craw.

Asterionella cf.           C       M - [Z.sub.max]
formosa Hassal                           (62)

Aulacoseira ambigua        C          M - S (22)
(Grunow) Sim. var.
ambigua

Aulacoseira                P
granulata (Ehrenb.)
Sim. var. granulata

Diatoma sp.               MP

Eunotia sp.               MP          M - S (39)

CHRYSOPHYCEAE

Mallomonas sp.             E

CRYPTOPHYCEAE

Cryptomonas                Y
brasiliensis
Castro, Bic. e Bic.

Cryptomonas                Y       M - [Z.sub.max]
marssonii Skuja                    (12) M - S (6);

Cryptomonas sp.            Y       D - [Z.sub.max]
                                   (5); D - S (25),
                                   [Z.sub.max] (96)

DINOPHYCEAE

Peridinium sp.         [L.sub.o]

Peridinium sp1         [L.sub.o]   M - [Z.sub.max]
                                   (12); D - S (40)

EUGLENOPHYCEAE

Lepocinclis caudata    [W.sub.1]
(Cunha) Conrad

ZYGNEMAPHYCEAE

Cosmarium sp.              N

Staurastrum                N
tetracerum (Kutz.)
Ralfs ex Ralfs

Taxonomic                                           Lacustre
groups/species                                       Region

                               dry                   rainy

BACILLARIOPHYCEAE

Thalassiosira sp.           S - S (9)          D - Zm,x (9), Zma
                                                      (14)

Uroso'lenta
eriensis (H. L. Sm.)
Round e Craw.

Asterionella cf.
formosa Hassal

Aulacoseira ambigua                            D [Z.sub.max] (6)
(Grunow) Sim. var.
ambigua

Aulacoseira
granulata (Ehrenb.)
Sim. var. granulata

Diatoma sp.

Eunotia sp.

CHRYSOPHYCEAE

Mallomonas sp.             J - S (45),        D - [Z.sub.mix] (5)
                         [Z.sub.mix] (27)

CRYPTOPHYCEAE

Cryptomonas                 J - S (6)
brasiliensis
Castro, Bic. e Bic.

Cryptomonas                 J - S (11)
marssonii Skuja

Cryptomonas sp.            J - S (20),        D - [Z.sub.mix] (5)
                        [Z.sub.mix] (18);
                            S - S (17)

DINOPHYCEAE

Peridinium sp.                                    M - S (16),
                                               [Z.sub.mix] (10),
                                              D - [Z.sub.max] (54)

Peridinium sp1              J - S (7);             D - S (27)
                            S - S (22)

EUGLENOPHYCEAE

Lepocinclis caudata    J - [Z.sub.max] (78)
(Cunha) Conrad

ZYGNEMAPHYCEAE

Cosmarium sp.                                     M - S (69),
                                               [Z.sub.mix] (61),
                                                [Z.sub.max] (29)

Staurastrum                                        M - S (8),
tetracerum (Kutz.)                             [Z.sub.mix] (13),
Ralfs ex Ralfs                                  [Z.sub.max] (32)

Taxonomic
groups/species                      Transicao Region

                               dry                   rainy

BACILLARIOPHYCEAE

Thalassiosira sp.          J - S (10),            D - S (12),
                           x Ze" (10),         [Z.sub.max] (32)
                        [Z.sub.mix] (16),
                         [Z.sub.max] (15)

Uroso'lenta                S - S (19),
eriensis (H. L. Sm.)     [Z.sub.max] (12)
Round e Craw.

Asterionella cf.       J - [Z.sub.max] (46)
formosa Hassal          J [Z.sub.eu] (19),

Aulacoseira ambigua     [Z.sub.mix] (17),       M - [Z.sub.max]
(Grunow) Sim. var.      [Z.sub.max] (21);            (12)
ambigua                S - [Z.sub.max] (8)

Aulacoseira                 J - S (9),
granulata (Ehrenb.)      [Z.sub.eu] (12),
Sim. var. granulata     [Z.sub.mix] (28),
                        [Z.sub.max] (13);

Diatoma sp.                 S - S (5)
                            J - S (9),
                         [Z.sub.eu] (11),
                         [Z.sub.mix] (16)

Eunotia sp.

CHRYSOPHYCEAE

Mallomonas sp.             J - S (14),              D S (7)
                          [Z.sub.eu] (5)

CRYPTOPHYCEAE

Cryptomonas                J - S (23),
brasiliensis             [Z.sub.eu] (26),
Castro, Bic. e Bic.      [Z.sub.max] (13)

Cryptomonas                                   D - [Z.sub.max] (6)
marssonii Skuja

Cryptomonas sp.             J - S (9),        D - [Z.sub.max] (6)
                           S - S (14),
                         [Z.sub.max] (12)

DINOPHYCEAE

Peridinium sp.                                    M - S (5),
                                               [Z.sub.mix] (25);
                                                  D - S (27),
                                                [Z.sub.eu] (48)

Peridinium sp1             S - S (20),            M - S (5),
                         [Z.sub.max] (9)       [Z.sub.mix] (7);
                                                  D - S (20),
                                                [Z.sub.eu] (7)

EUGLENOPHYCEAE

Lepocinclis caudata
(Cunha) Conrad

ZYGNEMAPHYCEAE

Cosmarium sp.                                     M - S (71),
                                               [Z.sub.mix] (35)

Staurastrum                                       M - S (9),
tetracerum (Kutz.)                             [Z.sub.mix] (18),
Ralfs ex Ralfs                                 [Z.sub.max] (49)

Taxonomic
groups/species           Transicao Region

                               dry

BACILLARIOPHYCEAE

Thalassiosira sp.        J - [Z.sub.mix]
                               (17)

Uroso'lenta                 S - S (9)
eriensis (H. L. Sm.)
Round e Craw.

Asterionella cf.
formosa Hassal

Aulacoseira ambigua      J - [Z.sub.max]
(Grunow) Sim. var.          (38); S -
ambigua                  [Z.sub.max] (13)

Aulacoseira            J - [Z.sub.mix] (9),
granulata (Ehrenb.)      [Z.sub.max] (25)
Sim. var. granulata

Diatoma sp.            J - [Z.sub.mix] (19)

Eunotia sp.

CHRYSOPHYCEAE

Mallomonas sp.         J - [Z.sub.eu] (8),
                         [Z.sub.mix] (9)

CRYPTOPHYCEAE

Cryptomonas                 J - S (5);
brasiliensis               S - S (14),
Castro, Bic. e Bic.      [Z.sub.mix] (20)

Cryptomonas            S - [Z.sub.mix] (10)
marssonii Skuja          J - [Z.sub.mix]
                        (11), [Z.sub.max]
                               (5);

Cryptomonas sp.            S - S (22),
                        [Z.sub.mix] (23),
                         [Z.sub.max] (8)

DINOPHYCEAE

Peridinium sp.             J - S (64),
                         [Z.sub.eu] (79)

Peridinium sp1             J - S (10),
                         [Z.sub.eu] (5);
                            S - S (6)

EUGLENOPHYCEAE

Lepocinclis caudata
(Cunha) Conrad

ZYGNEMAPHYCEAE

Cosmarium sp.

Staurastrum
tetracerum (Kutz.)
Ralfs ex Ralfs
COPYRIGHT 2013 Universidade Estadual de Maringa
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2013 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Moreti, Livia Oliveira Ruiz; Martos, Luana; Bovo-Scomparin, Vania Mara; Rodrigues, Luzia Cleide
Publication:Acta Scientiarum. Biological Sciences (UEM)
Date:Jul 1, 2013
Words:5002
Previous Article:Early ontogeny of Clarias gariepinus (Siluriformes, Clariidae) and aspects of its invasion potential in natural freshwater environments/Ontogenia...
Next Article:Biochemical and cellularchanges in Oreochromis niloticus related to the water pollution of a degraded river/Alteracoes bioquimicas e celulares em...
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2018 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters