Use and misuse in the application of the phytoplankton functional classification: a critical review with updates

Abstract

Since its publication, the article ‘Towards\ud a functional classification of the freshwater phytoplankton’ (Reynolds et al., J Plankton Res 24: 417–428, 2002), has attracted the attention of dozens of phytoplankton ecologists worldwide. These numerous applications of the functional classification to describe phytoplankton patterns in various aquatic ecosystems allowed the recognition of some uncertain features of this concept originating from various reasons. In this article, we attempt to facilitate the application of the functional classification, by providing a detailed description of the typical misplacements and by modifying some of the original habitat templates and species allocations. Furthermore, we discuss in this review those coda that were additionally described after the publication of the original article, and attempt giving an overview, as complete as possible, of the state of art

Responses of phytoplankton functional groups to the hydrologic regime in the Daning River, a tributary of Three Gorges Reservoir, China

“…The group, characterized by Cryptomonas spp., dominated in the midstream and estuary throughout the year. This group is well adapted to live in almost all lentic ecosystems when grazing pressure is low (Padisák et al, 2009;Reynolds et al, 2002). The relatively high surface/volume ratio of cryptomonads facilitates their rapid absorption of nutrients and fast growth (Bovo-Scomparin and Train, 2008).…”

“…Species selectivity in the turbid kinetic habitats was likely to favor diatoms, especially those with high surface/volume ratios and which show adaptability to low light, such as species of group MP (Reynolds, 1994). This group, including Melosira and pennate diatoms, such as Navicula, Nitzschia and Stauroneis, includes all the meroplanktonic (mostly diatoms) autotrophic organisms which can adapt to frequently mixed, inorganic, turbid habitats (Bovo-Scomparin and Train, 2008;Padisák et al, 2009). We showed that group MP was negatively correlated with Zeu/Zmix and RWCS (Spearman correlation analysis (Table 5), and CCA analysis (Fig.…”

“…Species contributing more than 5% to the total biomass were classified into functional groups, using the criteria of Reynolds et al (2002) and Padisák et al (2009).…”

Diel dynamic of phytoplankton functional groups in a tropical water supply, Extremoz Lake, northeastern Brazil

“…Compared to individual species responses, functional characteristics provide a better understanding of how communities respond to the environment (Souza et al, 2008) and vice versa. Therefore, the approach to classification of phytoplankton functional groups proposed by Reynolds et al (2002) had been commonly utilized, with more than 130 citations reviewed in Padisák et al (2009). These groups are often polyphyletic and share adaptive features, based on the physiological, morphological and ecological attributes of the species.…”

Algas planctônicas flageladas e cocoides verdes de um lago no Parque Beija-Flor, Goiânia, GO, Brasil

“…Chlorophyta cocoides e flageladas em ambientes de águas continentais, apresentam preferências ambientais presentes em pequenos lagos urbanos eutróficos (Padisák et al 2009). A biodiversidade em ambientes aquáticos urbanos é fortemente influenciada pela ação antropogênica associada à remoção de vegetação marginal (Hassall 2014).…”