Advertisement

Hydrobiologia

, Volume 333, Issue 3, pp 151–159 | Cite as

The relationship of floods, drying, flow and light to primary production and producer biomass in a prairie stream

  • Walter K. Dodds
  • Ruth E. Hutson
  • Angela C. Eichem
  • Michelle A. Evans
  • Dolly A. Gudder
  • Ken M. Fritz
  • Lawarence Gray
Article

Abstract

Factors related to autochthonous production were investigated at several sites along a prairie stream at Konza Prairie Research Natural Area. Primary production, algal biomass, litter input, and ability of floods to move native substrate were measured. Additional experiments were conducted to establish the influence of light and water velocity on primary production rates and recovery of biomass following dry periods. The study period encompassed two extreme (> 50 year calculated return time) floods, thus we were able to analyze the effects of scour on periphyton biomass and productivity. Biomass of sedimentary algae was reduced greatly by flooding and did not reach preflood amounts during the 2 months following the first flood. Rates of primary production associated with sediments recovered to levels above preflood rates within 2 weeks. Biomass of epilithic periphyton was not affected as severely as that of sedimentary algae. Little relationship was observed between water velocity and photosythetic rates. Production reached maximum rates at 25% of full sun light. Epilithic chlorophyll levels recovered within eight days following a dry period, and chl a was an order of magnitude greater on rocks than sediments 51 days after re-wetting. Estimated annual rates of primary production were 2.6 times greater in the prairie than in the forest reaches of the stream. The ratio of annual autochthonous:allochthonous carbon input was 4.81 for prairie and 0.32 for the forest. Periphyton production in prairie streams is resilient with regard to flooding and drought and represents a primary carbon source for the system.

Key words

periphyton flood primary production autochthonous light water velocity 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. APHA, 1989. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 17th edn. American Public Health Association, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
  2. Busch, D. E. & S. C. Fisher, 1981. Metabolism of a desert stream. Freshwat. Biol. 11: 301–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clement, R. W., 1987. Floods in Kansas and techniques for estimating their magnitude and frequency on unregulated streams. United States Geological Survey, Water-Resources Investigations Report 87–4008, 50 pp.Google Scholar
  4. Dodds, W. K., 1991. Community interactions between the filamentous alga Cladophora glomerata (L.) Keutzing, its epiphytes and epiphyte grazers. Oecologia 85: 572–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dodds, W. K. & D. A. Gudder, 1992. The ecology of Cladophora. J. Phycol. 28: 415–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fisher, S. G., L. J. Gray, N. B. Grimm & D. E. Busch, 1982. Temporal succession in a desert stream ecosystem following flash flooding. Ecol. Monogr. 52: 93–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fisher, S. G. & N. B. Grimm, 1988. Disturbance as a determinant of structure in a Sonoran Desert stream ecosystem. Verh. Int. Ver. Theor. Angewandte Limnol. 23: 1183–1189.Google Scholar
  8. Fisher, S. G. & G. E. Likens, 1973. Energy flow in Bear Brook, New Hampshire: An integrative approach to stream metabolism. Ecol. Mongr. 43: 421–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gelroth, J. V. & G. R. Marzolf, 1978. Primary production and leaflitter decomposition in natural and channelized portions of a Kansas stream. Am. Midl. Nat. 99: 238–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gurtz, M. E. & C. M. Tate, 1988. Hydrologic influences on leaf decomposition in a channel and adjacent bank of a gallery forest stream. Am. Midl. Nat. 120: 11–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gurtz, M. E., G. R. Marzolf, K. T. Killingbeck, D. L. Smith & J. V. McArthur, 1988. Hydrologic and riparian influences on the import and storage of coarse particulate organic matter in a prairie stream. Can. J. Fish. aquat. Sci. 45: 655–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hooker, K. L., 1987. Factors affecting the nitrate removal potential of sediments from a tallgrass prairie stream. PhD dissertation, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, 107 pp.Google Scholar
  13. Knight, C. L., J. M. Briggs & M. D. Nellis, 1994. Expansion of gallery forest on Konza Prairie Research Natural Area, Kansas, USA. Landscape Ecol. 9: 117–125.Google Scholar
  14. LaBarbera, M. & S. Vogel, 1976. An inexpensive thermistor flow meter for aquatic biology. Limnol. Oceanogr. 21: 750–756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lohman, K. J., J. R. Jones & B. D. Perkins, 1992. Effects of nutrient enrichment and flood frequency on periphyton biomass in northern Ozark streams. Can. J. Fish. aquat. Sci. 49: 1198–1205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Matthews, W. J., 1988. North American prairie streams as systems for ecological study. J. No. Am. Benthol. Soc. 7: 387–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. McBrayer, J. F. & K. Cromack, Jr., 1980. Effect of snow pack on lake-litter breakdown and nutrient release in a Minnesota forest. Pedobiologia 20: 47–54.Google Scholar
  18. Peterson, C. G. & R. J. Stevenson, 1990. Post-spate development of epilithic algal communities in different current environments. Can. J. Bot. 68: 2092–2102.Google Scholar
  19. Peterson, C. G. & R. J. Stevenson, 1992. Resistance and resilience of lotic algal communities: importance of disturbance timing and current. Ecology 73: 1445–1461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Power, M. E. & A. J. Stewart, 1987. Disturbance and recovery of an algal assemblage following flooding in an Oklahoma stream. Am. Midl. Nat. 117: 333–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Tate, C. M. & M. E. Gurtz, 1986. Comparison of mass loss, nutrients, and invertebrates associated with elm leaf litter decomposition in perennial and intermittent reaches of tallgrass prairie streams. Southwest. Nat. 31: 511–520.Google Scholar
  22. Tate, C. M., 1990. Patterns and controls of nitrogen in tallgrass prairie streams. Ecology 71: 2007–2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Wetzel, R. G. & G. E. Likens, 1991. Limnological Analysis, 2nd edition. Springer-Verlag, New York.Google Scholar
  24. Whittaker, R. H., 1975. Communities and Ecosystems, 2nd edition. Macmillan Publishing Co., New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Walter K. Dodds
    • 1
  • Ruth E. Hutson
    • 1
  • Angela C. Eichem
    • 1
  • Michelle A. Evans
    • 1
  • Dolly A. Gudder
    • 1
  • Ken M. Fritz
    • 1
  • Lawarence Gray
    • 2
  1. 1.Division of BiologyKansas State UniversityManhattanUSA
  2. 2.Department of BiologyOttawa UniversityOttawaUSA

Personalised recommendations