, Volume 240, Issue 1–3, pp 121–131 | Cite as

Epilithic chlorophyll a, photosynthesis, and respiration in control and fertilized reaches of a tundra stream

  • William B. Bowden
  • Bruce J. Peterson
  • Jacques C. Finlay
  • Jane Tucker


Photosynthesis and respiration by the epilithic community on cobble in an arctic tundra stream, were estimated from oxygen production and consumption in short-term (4–12 h), light and dark, chamber incubations. Chlorophyll a was estimated at the end of each incubation by quantitatively removing the epilithon from the cobble.

Fertilization of the river with phosphate alone moderately increased epilithic chlorophyll a, photosynthesis, and respiration. Fertilization with ammonium sulfate and phosphate, together, greatly increased each of these variables. Generally, under both control and fertilized conditions, epilithic chlorophyll a concentrations (mg m−2), photosynthesis, and respiration (mg O2 m−2, h−1) were higher in pools than in riffles. Under all conditions, the P/R ratio was consistent at ∼ 1.8 to 2.0. The vigor of epilithic algae in riffles, estimated from assimilation coefficients (mg O2 [mg Chl a]−1 h−1) was greater than the vigor of epilithic algae in pools. However, due to the greater accumulation of epilithic chlorophyll a in pools, total production (and respiration) in pools exceeded that in riffles. The epilithic community removed both ammonium and nitrate from water in chambers. Epilithic material, scoured by high discharge in response to storm events and suspended in the water column, removed ammonium and may have increased nitrate concentrations in bulk river water. However, these changes were small compared to the changes exerted by attached epilithon.

Key words

streams arctic tundra epilithon photosynthesis respiration 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. APHA, 1985. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 16th edition. Greenberg, A. E., R. R. Trussell & L. S. Clesceri (Eds.). American Public Health Association, Washington.Google Scholar
  2. Bendschneider, K. & R. J. Robinson, 1952. A new spectrophotometric method for the determination on nitrite in sea water. J. mar. Res. 11: 87–96.Google Scholar
  3. Bott, T. L., J. R. Brock, C. E. Cushing, S. V. Gregory, D. King & R. C. Petersen, 1978. A comparison of methods for measuring primary productivity and community respiration in streams. Hydrobiologia 60: 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Craig, P. C. & P. J. McCart, 1975. Classification of stream types in Beauford Sea drainages between Prudhoe Bay, Alaska and the Mackenzie Delta, N.W.T., Canada. Arctic and Alpine Res. 7: 183–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Duff, J. H., K. C. Stanley & R. J. Avanzino, 1984. The use of photosynthesis-respiration chambers to measure nitrogen flux in epilithic algal communities. Verh. int. Ver. Limnol. 22:1436–1443.Google Scholar
  6. Elliot, R. J. & A. G. Porter, 1971. A rapid cadmium reduction method for the determination of nitrate in bacon and curing brines. Analyst 96: 522–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Grasshoff, K. & J. Johannsen, 1972. A new sensitive and direct method for the automatic determination of ammonia in seawater. J. Cons. int. Explor. Mer. 34: 516–521.Google Scholar
  8. Groeger, A. W. & B. L. Kimmel, 1989. Relationship between photosynthetic and respiratory carbon metabolism in freshwater phytoplankton. Hydrobiologia 173: 107–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jones, M. N., 1984. Nitrate reduction by shaking with cadmium. Wat. Res. 18: 643–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. King, D. K., 1982. Community metabolism and autotrophicheterotrophic relationships of woodland stream riffle sections. Ph.D. Thesis. Michigan State University, East Lansing. 356 pp.Google Scholar
  11. King, D. K. & K. W. Cummins, 1989a. Autotrophic-heterotrophic community metabolism relationships of a woodland stream. J. Freshwat. Ecol. 5: 205–218.Google Scholar
  12. King, D. K. & K. W. Cummins, 1989b. Factors affecting autotrophic-heterotrophic relationships of a woodland stream.J. Freshwat. Ecol. 5: 219–230.Google Scholar
  13. Lock, M. A., T. E. Ford, D. M. Fiebig, M. C. Miller, M. Hullar, J. R. Vestal, B. J. Peterson & J. E. Hobbie, 1989. A biogeochemical survey of rivers and streams in the mountains and foot-hills province of arctic Alaska. Arch. Hydrobiol. 115: 499–521.Google Scholar
  14. Lock, M. A., R. R. Wallace, J. W. Costerton, R. M. Ventullo & S. E. Charlton, 1984. River epilithon: toward a structuralfunctional model. Oikos 42: 10–22.Google Scholar
  15. MacKereth, F. J. H., J. Heron & T. F. Talberg, 1978. Nitrate. In: MacKereth, F. J. H., J. Heron & T. F. Talberg (Eds.), Water analysis: some revised methods for limnologists, Freshwater Biological Association, Windermere, U.K.: 72–73.Google Scholar
  16. Minshall, G. W., 1978. Autotrophy in stream ecosystems. BioScience 28: 767–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Murphy, M. L., 1984. Primary production and grazing in freshwater and intertidal reaches of a coastal stream, southeast Alaska. Limnol. Oceanogr. 29: 805–815.Google Scholar
  18. Naiman, R. J., 1983. The annual pattern and spatial distribution of aquatic oxygen metabolism in boreal forest watersheds. Ecol. Monogr. 53: 73–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Naiman, R. J. & J. R. Sedell, 1980. Relationships between metabolic parameters and stream order in Oregon. Can. J. Fish. aquat. Sci. 37: 834–847.Google Scholar
  20. Odum, H. T., 1956. Primary production in flowing rivers. Limnol. Oceanogr. 1: 102–117.Google Scholar
  21. Pennak, R. W. & J. W. Lavelle, 1979. In situ measurements of net primary production in a Colorado mountain stream. Hydrobiologia 66: 227–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Peterson, B. J., J. E. Hobbie & T. L. Corliss, 1983. A continuous flow periphyton bioassay: tests of nutrient limitation in a tundra stream. Limnol. Oceanogr. 28: 583–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Peterson, B. J., J. E. Hobbie & T. L. Corliss, 1986. Carbon flow in a tundra stream ecosystem. Can. J. Fish. aquat. Sci. 43: 1259–1270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Peterson, B. J., J. E. Hobbie, A. E. Hershey, M. A. Lock, T. E. Ford, J. R. Vestal, V. L. McKinley, M. A. H. Hullar, M. C. Miller, R. M. Ventullo & G. S. Volk, 1985. Transformations of a tundra river from heterotrophy to autotrophy by addition of phosphorus. Science 229: 1383–1386.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Vannote, R. L., K. W. Cummins, G. W. Minshall, J. R. Sedell & C. E. Cushing, 1980. The river continuum concept. Can. J. Fish. aquat. Sci. 37: 130–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • William B. Bowden
    • 1
  • Bruce J. Peterson
    • 2
  • Jacques C. Finlay
    • 1
  • Jane Tucker
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Natural ResourcesUniversity of New HampshireDurhamUSA
  2. 2.The Ecosystems CenterMarine Biological LaboratoryWoods HoleUSA

Personalised recommendations