Studies on Some Long Island Sound Littoral Communities of Microorganisms and Their Primary Productivity

Burkholder, Paul R.; Repak, Arthur J.; Sibert, John

doi:10.2307/2483839

Cited by 21 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…3), suggesting that the sediment algae are better adapted to high light illumination levels than are the plankton. A similar result has been found in intertidal areas (Burkholder et a!. 1965, Gargas 1971.…”

Section: Light and Temperature Effectssupporting

confidence: 89%

Environmental Control of Primary Productivity in Alaskan Tundra Ponds

Stanley¹,

Daley²

1976

Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The photosynthetic response of tundra pond algae to various combinations of temperature, light intensity, and phosphate concentration was measured at weekly intervals during the 1973 summer. In these small (50 m diam by 20 em deep) ponds near Barrow, Alaska the epipelic algae had a higher temperature optimum (> 20°C) for photosynthesis than did the phytoplankton (14°C) but the epipelic O,o (2.5°-l2.5°C) for photosynthesis was only 2.2, compared to a value of 3.0 for the planktonic algae. Thus the epipelic algae seemed to be adapted to the sediment environment where temperatures were usually higher than temperatures in the water. The plankton algae, in contrast, appeared to consist of species which photosynthesized more efficiently at the lower temperatures of the pond water. The photosynthetic half-saturation light intensity, lo.s, was temperature dependent, increasing as much as threefold in the epipelic experiments (from 0.04 to 0.12 ly · min-1 ) over a tO-degree temperature range. No diurnal change in lo.s was observed but it declined steadily for both algal groups throughout the summer in response to declining illumination. This decrease in Io.• probably resulted from an increase in the chlorophyll-to-carbon ratio of the algae. Light inhibition was common at low temperatures in the planktonic experiments but never occurred in the epipelic experiments. Short-term phosphate enrichment experiments resulted in no detectable response in either plankton or epipelic algal photosynthesis. However, after whole pond fertilizations large increases in algal biomass and productivity occurred within several days. Thus, the ponds were phosphate-limited but there was a time lag in the response to the nutrient addition.

show abstract

Section: Light and Temperature Effectssupporting

confidence: 89%

Environmental Control of Primary Productivity in Alaskan Tundra Ponds

Stanley¹,

Daley²

1976

Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The epipelic /05 was higher than the planktonic /05 at all experimental temperatures throughout most of 1973 (e.g., at 8°C, Figure [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17], suggesting that the sediment algae are better adapted to high light intensities than are the phytoplankton. Similar results come from intertidal areas (Burkholder et al 1965, Gargas 1971. However, it is our view that such comparisons may be invalid because of the necessary presence of sediment particles in the epipelic samples used for our ^''C measurements (see Stanley 1976a).…”

Section: Lightsupporting

confidence: 52%

Limnology of tundra ponds, Barrow, Alaska

Hobbie¹

1980

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bac terivorous Ciliates 0.2 mg C Zoof lagellates 35 mg C T 0.05 mg C T Bac teria 1500 mg C 15 mg C '-'0.5 mg C Algivorous Ciliates 1 mg C 0.15 mg C Algae 700 mg C MicromeCazoa 35 mg Cto work on areas of research that were still poorly-understood: (T.Fenchel, protozoan ecology; D. Kangas, zooplankton respiration; S. Dodson, invertebrate predation.) The summer of 1974 was spent in preparing reports. Modus OperandiTo reach the goals of the project we first used traditional limnological techniques to identify and measure the important pathways of carbon and energy flow in the tundra ponds. Next, the modeling was begun and used both to plan future experimental research on the processes and to evaluate the importance of proposed research. The philosophy we have followed in modeling is as follows:The Barrow soils have a strong thermal gradient during summer when the surface may reach 25°C while at the same time the horizons at 20 or 30 cm are below 2''C. This surface warming dries out the surface layers but the lack of drainage keeps the soil moisture contents at depths below 4 cm at greater than 85% of water-holding capacity. Consequently, vascular plants rarely lack moisture. On the other hand, the abundant moisture combined with low pore volume in mineral layers causes the deeper horizons to become anaerobic early in the summer.Chemically, most of the soils are highly organic, strongly acid, and not very fertile (Bunnell et al. 1975). Apparently, the base nutrients are usually sufficient for plant needs; N and P, although stored in large quantities, are released only slowly from the organic matter. Primary ProducersPlant production in the Barrow tundra has been extensively studied for many years; the data and results are reviewed in Bunnell et al. (1975), Tieszen (1978a), and Brown et. al. (in press).In summer, the coastal tundra vegetation resembles a yellow-brown grassland, relieved only by strips of greener vegetation in troughs between polygons or at the edges of ponds. The yellow-brown color results from the large accumulation of dead plant parts of grasses and sedges. All plants are short ( 1 to 1 5 cm high) and many have broad, flat stems.Compared with most ecosystems, the Barrow tundra is indeed uniform. Although there are 100 species of vascular plants (plus 96 bryophyte and 57 lichen species), the low relief of the coastal region produces only small environmental differences between lowlands and uplands. The result is that all species of the extensive marshes also occur on the uplands and most of the species of the driest upland sites are also found whenever hummocks appear in the wetter areas (Bunnell et al. 1975). Webber (1978) has divided this continuum of vegetation at the IBP site into eight plant assemblages. Five of these cover 9 1 % of the area. They are: mesic Salix rotundifolia heath in dry, low-center polygons (7%); mesic Carex aquatilis/Poa arctica meadow on dry, flat, polygonized areas Unlike the situation in many tundra areas, at Barrow the vertebrates consume few lichens. Lemming stomachs, ...

show abstract

“…Light and temperature forcing of the photosynthetic capacity (pB) of PAB Relationship between microphytobenthic community photosynthetic rate and light Microphytobenthic communities generally do not exhibit photoinhibition (Burkholder et al 1965, Cargas 1971, Rasmussen et al 1983). Blanchard & CariouLe Gall (1994) have nevertheless shown that microalgae, isolated from the sediment and experimentally maintained at high light levels for 3 h, exhibit photoinhibition.…”

Section: Processes Controlling Primary Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamic model of the short-term variability of microphytobenthic biomass on temperate intertidal mudflats

Guarini¹,

Blanchard²,

Gros³

et al. 2000

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the present paper, we list and document the relevant behavioral and physiological processes controlling primary productivity of epipelic microalgae on intertidal mudflats in order to develop a simplified model. We first propose, in an attempt to characterize the 'photosynthetically active biomass' of the epipelic community, a new approach to describe the photic environment at the sediment surface, by substituting a discrete 2-layer model in place of continuous vertical light distribution. This concept thus allows us to build a functional representation of the distribution of the photosynthetically active biomass in the sediment and, by then integrating the light and temperature forcing of the latter biomass, to predict the dynamics of the whole epipelic community on short-term time scales. The model then clearly reveals an oscillatory behavior of the total biomass at the surface of the sediment, consistent with field biomass daily measurements performed during a spring-neap tidal cycle. Biomass increases occur during the diurnal emersion phase, in alternation with decreases during the submersion and nocturnal emersion phases; the dynamics of intertidal microphytobenthos is thus controlled by the night/day cycle and tidal hydrodynamic forcing, which determines the fast changes in environmental conditions (light and nutrient availability, temperature) which epipelic microalgae experience. The similarity between model simulations and field observations leads us to conclude that the conceptual framework of the model is valid.

show abstract

Studies on Some Long Island Sound Littoral Communities of Microorganisms and Their Primary Productivity

Cited by 21 publications

References 48 publications

Environmental Control of Primary Productivity in Alaskan Tundra Ponds

Environmental Control of Primary Productivity in Alaskan Tundra Ponds

Limnology of tundra ponds, Barrow, Alaska

Dynamic model of the short-term variability of microphytobenthic biomass on temperate intertidal mudflats

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About