Advertisement

Microbial Ecology

, Volume 48, Issue 1, pp 51–65 | Cite as

Plankton Diversity in the Bay of Fundy as Measured by Morphological and Molecular Methods

  • M.C. SavinEmail author
  • J.L. Martin
  • M. LeGresley
  • M. Giewat
  • J. Rooney-Varga
Article

Abstract

Phytoplankton have traditionally been identified based on morphological characteristics. However, identifications based on morphology are time-consuming, require expertise in taxonomy, and often fail to distinguish differences among the multitudes of minute, nondescript planktonic organisms. Molecular techniques, which have revealed new insights into bacterial and picoplankton communities, may also enhance our knowledge of the diversity among communities of larger plankton. We compared plankton identifications and community assessments based on the two types of techniques (morphological vs molecular) for surface seawater samples collected on 2 May, 31 July and 25 September 2000 from several sampling stations in the Bay of Fundy. Phytoplankton captured in surface bucket samples were quantified and identified based on morphology. DNA was extracted from plankton communities (5–100 μm in diameter) collected by filtration, and 18S rRNA gene fragments were amplified with primers specific for eukaryotes. Denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE) was used to develop DNA profiles of eukaryotic phylogenetic diversity and to select cloned 18S rDNA fragments for sequencing. Both morphological and molecular methods showed great community diversity. However, the communities identified with the two different types of techniques were starkly different. Morphological abundances and taxon richness were lowest in the May samples, whereas the number of DGGE bands was highest in May and July. Morphological identifications showed a succession of dominant organisms through time. Whereas neither diatoms nor dinoflagellates were dominant in May, diatoms and a few dinoflagellates were dominant in July and September. In contrast, few 18S rDNA sequences were related to rDNA sequences of known identity, and furthermore, few diatoms were identified in the molecular analyses. Molecular phylogenetic analysis indicated the presence of many novel organisms, several of which were most closely related to other unidentified sequences from diverse marine environments representing new lineages. Our results support the ideas that we are just beginning to uncover the diversity of eukaryotic marine organisms and that there may be many more ubiquitous, microeukaryotic plankton than previously realized. Our results suggest that both types of methods capture only a portion of the community. Morphological methods may be more adept at capturing the phototrophic organisms within the community. However, just as for bacteria and picoplankton, molecular techniques can enhance our understanding of plankton diversity, particularly by detecting previously unidentified organisms.

Keywords

Dinoflagellate Clone Sequence Skeletonema Costatum Eukaryotic Community Eukaryotic Diversity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Michael Ferrier for his assistance in sample collection for molecular phylogenctic analyses. Captain Wayne Miner and Danny Loveless of the Pandalus III aided in sample collection. This work was supported by Grants NA97FE0401 (UMass-CMER) and NA86RG0074 (MIT Sea Grant) from the U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and Award OCE-0117820 from the National Science Foundation. The views and conclusions contained herein are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies or endorsements either expressed or implied of the U.S. Department of Commerce (NOAA) or the U.S. Government.

References

  1. 1.
    Altschul, SF, Gish, W, Miller, W, Myers, E, Lipman, DJ 1990Basic Local Alignment Search Tool.J Mol Biol215403410CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anderson, DM, Kulis, DM, Doucette, GJ, Gallagher, JC, Balech, E 1994Biogeography of toxic dinoflagellates in the genus Alexandrium from the northeastern U.S. and Canada.Mar Biol120467478Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ansotegui, A, Trigueros, JM, Orive, E 2001The use of pigment signatures to assess phytoplankton assemblage structure in estuarine waters.Estuar Coast Shelf Sci52689703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bray, DF, Bagu, JR, Koegler, P 1993A comparison of HMDS, Peldri II, and critical point drying methods for SEM of biological specimens.Microsc Res Technique26489495Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Daugbjerg, N, Hansen, G, Larsen, J, Moestrup, Ø 2000Phylogeny of some major genera of dinoflagellates based on ultrastructure and partial LSU rDNA sequence data, including the erection of three new genera of unamoured dinoflagellates.Phycologia39302317Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dawson, SC, Pace, NR 2002Novel kingdom-level eukaryotic diversity on anoxic environments.Proc Natl Acad Sci USA9983248329CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Díez, B, Pedrós-Alió, C, Massana, R 2001Study of genetic diversity of eukaryotic picoplankton in different oceanic regions by small-subunit rRNA gene cloning and sequencing.Appl Environ Microbiol6729322941CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Díez, B, Pedrós-Alió, C, Marsh, T, Massana, R 2001Application of denaturant gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE) to study the diversity of marine picoplankton assemblages and comparison of DGGE with other molecular techniques.Appl Environ Microbiol6729422951CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Don, RH, Cox, PT, Wainwright, BJ, Baker, K, Mattick, JS 1991“Touchdown” PCR to circumvent spurious priming during gene amplification.Nucleic Acids Res194008PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Edgcomb, VP, Kysela, DT, Teske, A, de Vera Gomez, A, Sogin, ML 2002Benthic eukaryotic diversity in the Guaymas Basin hydrothermal vent environment.Proc Natl Acad Sci USA9976587662CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Farrelly, V, Rainey, FA, Stackebrandt, E 1995Effect of genome size and rrn gene copy number on PCR amplification of 16S rRNA genes from a mixture of bacterial species.Appl Environ Microbiol6127982801PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hasle, GR, Fryxell, GA 1970Diatoms: cleaning and mounting for light and electron microscopy.Trans Am Microsc Soc89469474Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Head, IM, Saunders, JR, Pickup, RW 1998Microbial evolution, diversity, and ecology: A decade of ribosomal RNA analysis of uncultivated microorganisms.Microb Ecol35121CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kaczmarksa, I, Bates, SS, Ehrman, JM, Leger, C 2000Fine structure of the gamete, auxospore and initial cell in the pennate diatom Pseudo-nitzschia multiseries (Bacillariophyta).Nova Hedwigia71337357Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    López-García, P, Rodríguez-Valera, F, Pedrós-Alió, C, Moreira, D 2001Unexpected diversity of small eukaryotes in deep-sea Antarctic plankton.Nature409603607CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Maidak, BL, Cole, JR, Lilburn, TG, Parker Jr, CT, Saxman, PR, Farris, RJ, Garrity, GM, Olsen, GJ, Schmidt, TM, Tiedje, JM 2001The RDP-1I (Ribosomal Database Project).Nucleic Acids Res29173174CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Massana, R, Guillou, L, Díez, B, Pedrós-Alió, C 2002Unveiling the organisms behind novel eukaryotic ribosomal DNA sequences from the ocean.Appl Environ Microbiol6845544558CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Moon-van der Staay, SY, De Wachter, R, Vaulot, D 2001Oceanic 18S rDNA sequences from picoplankton reveal unsuspected eukaryotic diversity.Nature409607610CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rappé, MS, Suzuki, MT, Vergin, KL, Giovannoni, SJ 1998Phylogenetic diversity of ultraplankton plastid small-subunit rRNA genes recovered in environmental nucleic acid samples from the Pacific and Atlantic coasts of the United States.Appl Environ Microbiol64294303PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rizzo, PJ 1985Biochemistry of the dinoflagellate nucleus.Taylor, FJR eds. The Biology of DinoflagellatesBlackwell ScientificOxford, UK143173Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Scholin, CA, Hallegraeff, GM, Anderson, DM 1995Molecular evolution of Alexandrium tamarense ‘species complex’ (Dinophyceae): dispersal in the North American and West Pacific regions.Phycology34472485Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    van Hannen, EJ, van Agterveld, MP, Gons, HJ, Laanbroek, HJ 1998Revealing genetic diversity of eukaryotic microorganisms in aquatic environments by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis.J Phycol34206213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    van Hannen, EJ, Mooij, W, van Agterveld, MP, Gons, HJ, Laanbroek, HJ 1999Detritus-dependent development of the microbial community in an experimental system: qualitative analysis by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis.Appl Environ Microbiol6524782484PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    White, AW, Sheath, RG, Hellebust, JA 1977A red tide caused by the marine ciliate Mesodinium rubrum in Passamaquoddy Bay, including pigment and ultrastructure studies of the ensosymbiont.J Fish Res Board Can34413416Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • M.C. Savin
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • J.L. Martin
    • 3
  • M. LeGresley
    • 3
  • M. Giewat
    • 2
  • J. Rooney-Varga
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Crop, Soil, and Environmental SciencesUniversity of ArkansasFayettevilleUSA
  2. 2.Department of Biological SciencesUniversity of Massachusetts LowellLowellUSA
  3. 3.Fisheries and Oceans CanadaBiological StationSt. AndrewsCanada

Personalised recommendations