Hydrobiologia

, Volume 337, Issue 1–3, pp 93–106 | Cite as

Existence of a macrophyte-dominated clear water state over a very wide range of nutrient concentrations in a small shallow lake

  • Meryem Beklioglu
  • Brian Moss
Article

Abstract

Little Mere, a small shallow lake, has been monitored for four years, since its main source of nutrients (sewage effluent) was diverted. The lake has provided strong evidence for the persistence of a clear water state over a wide range of nutrient concentrations. It had clear water at extremely high nutrient concentrations prior to effluent diversion, associated with high densities of the large body-sized grazer, Daphnia magna, associated with low fish densities and fish predation. Following sewage effluent diversion in 1991, the nutrient concentrations significantly declined, the oxygen concentrations rose, and fish predation increased. The dominance of large body-sized grazers shifted to one of relatively smaller body-sized animals but the clear water state has been maintained. This is probably due to provision of refuges for grazers by large nymphaeid stands (also found prior to diversion). There has been a continued decrease in nutrient concentrations and expansion of the total macrophyte coverage, largely by submerged plants, following effluent diversion. The grazer community of Little Mere has also responded to this latter change with a decline in daphnids and increase in densities of weed-associated grazers. The presence of large densities of such open water grazers was the apparent main buffer mechanisms of the clear water state until 1994. The lake has, so far, maintained its clear water in the absence of such grazers. Thus, new buffer mechanisms appear to operate to stabilize the ecosystem. Little Mere appears to have shifted from previous top-down controlled clear water state to a bottom-up controlled clear water state.

Key words

sewage effluent Daphnia grazing macrophytes clear water alternative stable states 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson, N. J., 1990. Variability of diatom concentrations and accumulation rates in sediments of a small lake basin. Limnol. Oceanogr. 35: 497–508.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, N. J., B. Rippey & A. C. Stevenson, 1990. Change in diatom assemblage in a eutrophic lake following point source nutrient re-direction: a palaeolimnological approach. Freshwat. Biol. 23: 205–217.Google Scholar
  3. Arnold, D. E., 1971. Ingestion, assimilation, survival and reproduction by Daphnia pulex fed seven species of blue-green algae. Limnol. Oceanogr. 16: 906–920.Google Scholar
  4. Beklioglu, M., 1995. Whole lake and mesocosm studies on the roles of nutrients and grazing in determining phytoplankton crops in a system of shallow and deep lakes. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Liverpool.Google Scholar
  5. Beklioglu, M. & B. Moss, 1995. The impact of pH on interactions among phytoplankton algae, zooplankton and perch (Perca fluviatilis L.) in a shallow, fertile lake. Freshwat. Biol. 33: 497–509.Google Scholar
  6. Beklioglu, M. & B. Moss, 1996. Mesocosm experiments on the interaction of sediment influence, fish predation and aquatic plants on the structure of phytoplankton and zooplankton communities. Freshwat. Biol. (in press)Google Scholar
  7. Bengtsson, L., S. Fleischer, G. Lindmark & W. Ripl, 1975. Lake Trummen restoration project I. Water and sediment chemistry. Verh. int. Ver. theor. angew. Limnol. 19: 1080–1087.Google Scholar
  8. Boyd, C. E., 1971. The limonlogical role of aquatic macrophytes and their relationship to reservoir management. Reserv. Fish. Limnol. 8: 129–135.Google Scholar
  9. Boström, B., M. Jannson & C. Forsberg, 1982. Phosphorus release from sediments. Arch. Hydrobiol. Beih. Ergebn. Limnol. 18: 531.Google Scholar
  10. Brendelbelger, H., 1991. Filter mesh size of cladocerans predicts retention efficiency for bacteria. Limnol. Oceanogr. 36: 884–894.Google Scholar
  11. Carpenter, S. R. & J. F. Kitchell, 1992. Trophic cascade & biomanipulation: interface of research and management — A reply to comment by DeMelo et al., Limnol. Oceanogr. 37: 208–213.Google Scholar
  12. Carvalho, G. R., 1984. Hemoglobin synthesis in Daphnia magna Straus (Crustacea:Cladocera): ecological differentiation between neighbouring populations. Freshwat. Biol. 14: 501–506.Google Scholar
  13. Carvalho, L., 1994. Top-down control of phytoplankton in a shallow hypertrophic lake: Little Mere, England. Hydrobiologia 275/276: 53–63.Google Scholar
  14. Carvalho, L., M. Beklioglu & B. Moss, 1995. Changes in a deep lake following sewage diversion — a challenge to the orthodoxy of external phosphorus control as a restoration strategy. Freshwat. Biol. 34: 399–410.Google Scholar
  15. DeMelo, R., R. France & D. J. McQueen, 1992. Biomanipuladon: Hit or myth. Limnol. Oceanogr. 37: 192–207.Google Scholar
  16. Denny, P., 1972. Sites of nutrient absorption in aquatic macrophytes. J. Ecol. 60: 819–829.Google Scholar
  17. Dillon, P. J. & F. H. Rigler, 1974. The phosphorus-chlorophyll relationship in lakes. Limnol. Oceanogr. 19: 767–773.Google Scholar
  18. Geller, W. & H. Muller, 1981. The filtration apparatus of Cladocera: Filter mesh-sizes and their implications on food selectivity. Oecologia 49: 316–321.Google Scholar
  19. Gliwicz, Z. M., 1990. Why do cladocerans fail to control algal blooms. Hydrobiologia 200/201: 83–97.Google Scholar
  20. Grimm, M. P., 1989. Northern pike (Esox lucius L.) and aquatic vegetation, tools in the management of fisheries and water quality in shallow waters. Hydrobiol. Bull. 23: 59–67.Google Scholar
  21. Gulati, R. D., 1989. Structure and feeding activities of zooplankton community in lake Zwemlust, in the two years after biomanipulation. Hydrobiol. Bull. 23: 35–48.Google Scholar
  22. Gulati, R. D., 1990. Structural and grazing response of zooplankton community to biomanipulation of some Dutch water bodies. Hydorobiologia 200–201/Dev. Hydrobiol. 61: 99–118.Google Scholar
  23. Haslam, S. M., C. A. Sinker & P. A. Wolseley, 1975. British water plants. Field Studies 4: 243–351.Google Scholar
  24. Hosper, H. S. & M.-L. Meijer, 1993. Biomanipulation, will it work for your lake?. A simple test for assessment of chances for clear water, following drastic fish stock reduction in shallow, eutrophic lakes. Ecol. Engineer. 2: 63–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hutchinson, G. E., 1967. A Treatise on Limnology, 2. J. Wiley & Sons, N.Y., 1115 pp.Google Scholar
  26. Jeppesen, E., M. Søndergaard, O. Sortkjaer, E. Mortensen & P. Kristensen, 1990. Interaction between phytoplankton, zooplankton and fish in a shallow, hypertrophic lake: a study of phytoplankton collapses in lake Sobygard, Denmark. Hydrobiologia 191: 149–164.Google Scholar
  27. Kerfoot, W. C., 1980. Commentary: transparency, body size, and prey conspicuousness. In W. C. Kerfoot (ed), Evolution and Ecology of Zooplankton communities. The University Press of New England, Hanover (N.H.); Lond.: 609–617.Google Scholar
  28. Lampert, W., W. Fleckner, R. Hakumat & B. E. Taylor, 1986. Phytoplankton control by grazing zooplankton: A study on the spring clear-water phase. Limnol. Oceanogr. 3: 478–490.Google Scholar
  29. Leah, R. T., B. Moss & D. E. Forrest, 1978. Experiments with large enclosures in a fertile, shallow, brackish lake, Hickling Broad, United Kingdom. Int. Revue ges. Hydrobiol. 63: 291–310.Google Scholar
  30. McQueen, D. J., 1990. Manipulation of lake community structure: Where do we go from here. Freshwat Biol. 23: 613–620.Google Scholar
  31. Meijer, M.-L., E. Jeppesen, E. van Donk, B. Moss, M. Scheffer, V. E. Nes, V. J. A. Berkum, G. I. Jong de, B. A. Faafeng & J. P. Jensen, 1994. Long-term responses to fish-stock reduction in small shallow lakes: interpretation of five-year results of four biomanipulation cases in The Netherlands and Denmark. Hydrobiologia 275/276: 457–466.Google Scholar
  32. Moss, B., 1990. Engineering & biological approaches to restoration from eutrophication of shallow lakes in which aquatic plant communities are important components. Hydrobiologia 200/201 (Dev. Hydrobiol. 61): 367–377.Google Scholar
  33. Moss, B., 1991. The role of nutrients in determining the structure of lake ecosystems and implications for the restoring of submerged plant communities to lakes which have lost them. International Conference on N, P, and organic matter. Contributions by invited International Experts. 75–85. National Agency for Environmental Protection, Copenhagen, Denmark.Google Scholar
  34. Moss, B., M. Beklioglu, L. Carvalho, S. Kilinc, S. McGowan & D. Stephen. Vertically-challenged limnology; contrasts between deep and shallow lakes. Hydrobiologia (in press).Google Scholar
  35. Moss, B., S. McGowan & L. Carvalho, 1994. Determination of phytoplankton crops by top-down and bottom-up mechanisms in a group of English lakes, the West Midland Meres. Limnol. Oceanogr. 39: 1020–1029.Google Scholar
  36. Nizan, S., C. Dimentman & M. Shilo, 1986. Acute toxic effects of the cyanobacterium Microcystis aerginosa on Daphnia magna. Limnol. Oceanogr. 31: 497–502.Google Scholar
  37. Ozimek, T., R. D. Gulati & E. van Donk, 1990. Can macrophytes be useful in biomanipulation of lakes? The lake Zwemlust example. Hydrobiologia 200/201: 399–407.Google Scholar
  38. Perrow, R. M., B. Moss & J. Stansfield, 1994. Trophic interactions in a shallow lake following a reduction in nutrient loading: a long-term study. Hydrobiologia 275/276: 43–52.Google Scholar
  39. Sas, H., 1989. Lake Restoration by Reduction of Nutrient Loadings: Expectations, Experiences, Extrapolations. Academia Verlag Richarz, Sant Augustin.Google Scholar
  40. Scheffer, M., 1990. Multiplicity of stable states in freshwater systems. Hydrobiologia 200/201 (Dev. Hydrobiol. 61): 475–486.Google Scholar
  41. Scheffer, M., S. H. Hosper, M.-L. Meijer, B. Moss & E. Jeppesen, 1993. Alternative equilibria in shallow lakes. TREE 8: 275–279.Google Scholar
  42. Shapiro, J. & D. I. Wright, 1984. Lake restoration by biomanipulation: Round lake, Minnesota, the first two years. Freshwat. Biol. 14: 371–383.Google Scholar
  43. Tilman, D., S. S. Kilham & P. Kilham, 1982. Phytoplankton community ecology: role of limiting nutrients. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 13: 349–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Timms, R. M. & B. Moss, 1984. Prevention of growth of potentially dense phytoplankton by zooplankton grazing, in the presence of zooplanktivorous fish, in a shallow wetland ecosystem. Limnol. Oceanogr. 29: 472–486.Google Scholar
  45. van Donk, E., M. P. Grimm, R. D. Gulati & J. P. G. Klein Breteler, 1990. Whole-lake food-web manipulation as means to study community interactions in a small ecosystem. Hydrobiologia 200/201 (Dev. Hydrobiol. 61): 275–289.Google Scholar
  46. van Donk, E., R. D. Gulati & M. P. Grimm, 1989. Food web manipulation in Lake Zwemlust: positive and negative effects during the first two years. Hydrobiol. Bull. 23: 19–34.Google Scholar
  47. van Donk, E., R. D. Gulati, A. Iedema & J. T. Meulemans, 1993. Macrophyte-releated shifts in the nitrogen and phosphorus contents of the different trophic levels in a biomanipulated shallow lake. Hydrobiologia 251: 19–26.Google Scholar
  48. Wium-Anderson, S., 1987. Allelopathy among aquatic plants. Arch. Hydrobiol. Beih. 27: 167–172.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Meryem Beklioglu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Brian Moss
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Environmental and Evolutionary BiologyThe University of LiverpoolUK
  2. 2.Department of BiologyMiddle East Technical UniversityAnkaraTurkey

Personalised recommendations