Hydrobiological Bulletin

, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp 109–118 | Cite as

A comparison of algal periphyton composition on eleven species of submerged macrophytes

  • Eva Pip
  • G. G. C. Robinson


The composition of algal periphyton was examined on eleven species of submerged macrophytes collected at a depth of 0.25 m in Sewell Lake, southwestern Manitoba, a shallow nitrogen and phosphorus rich lake. There were substantial differences in the periphyton on all macrophyte species. Diatom subcommunities were the most similar, while the green algal subcommunities were the most dissimilar on different plant hosts.Potamogeton zosteriformis differed the most from all other macrophytes with respect to the composition of its periphyton. These results and a comparison of the literature suggest that the composition and structure of periphyton communities on living substrates is a product of the interaction of many variables, determined by the characteristics of the host plant, the external environment and the algae themselves. Studies of periphyton at a given site must take into account the various substrates available.


Nitrogen Phosphorus Host Plant External Environment Submerged Macrophyte 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. ALLANSON, B.R., 1973. The fine structure of the periphyton ofChara sp. andPotamogeton natans from Wytham Pond, Oxford and its significance to the macrophyte-periphyton metabolic model of R.G. Wetzel and H.L. Allen. Freshwat. Biol., 3: 535–542.Google Scholar
  2. ALLEN, H.L., 1971. Primary productivity, chemo-organotrophy, and nutritional interactions of epiphytic algae and bacteria on macrophytes in the littoral of a lake. Ecol. Monogr., 41: 97–127.Google Scholar
  3. ALLEN, H.L., and B.T. OCEVSKI, 1981. Comparative primary productivity of algal epiphytes on three species of macrophyte in the littoral zone of Lake Ohrid, Yugoslavia. Holarctic Ecol., 4: 155–160.Google Scholar
  4. A.P.H.A., 1971. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, American Public Health Association, New York.Google Scholar
  5. BARKO, J.W., D.G. HARDIN and M.S. MATTHEWS, 1982. Growth and morphology of submersed freshwater macrophytes in relation to light and temperature. Can. J. Bot., 60: 877–887.Google Scholar
  6. BOWNIK, L.J., 1970. The periphyton of the submerged macrophytes of Mikolajskie Lake. Ekol. Polska, 18: 503–520.Google Scholar
  7. BROWN, H.D., 1976. A comparison of the attached algal communities of a natural and an artificial substrate. J. Phycol., 12: 301–306.Google Scholar
  8. BUTCHER, R.W., 1946. Studies in the ecology of river IV. The growth in certain highly calcareous streams. J. Ecol., 33: 268–283.Google Scholar
  9. CASTENHOLZ, R.W., 1960. Seasonal changes in the attached algae of freshwater and saline lakes in the Lower Grand Coulee Washington. Limnol. Oceanogr., 5: 1–28.Google Scholar
  10. CATTANEO, A., 1978. The microdistribution of epiphytes on the leaves of natural and artificial macrophytes. Br. phycol. J. 13: 183–188.Google Scholar
  11. CATANEO, A. and J. KALFF, 1978. Seasonal changes in the epiphyte community of natural and artificial macrophytes in Lake Memphremagog (Que. & Vt.). Hydrobiol., 60: 135–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. COLT, L.C. jr. and C.B. HELLQUIST, 1974. The role of some Haloragaceae in algal ecology. Rhodora, 74: 446–456.Google Scholar
  13. DELBECQUE, E.J.P., 1983. A comparison of the periphyton ofNuphar lutea andNymphaea alba. In: Periphyton of Freshwater Ecosystems, R.G. Wetzel, ed. Dr. W. Junk Publ., The Hague, p. 41–47.Google Scholar
  14. EMINSON, D. and B. MOSS, 1980. The composition and ecology of periphyton communities in freshwaters. I. The influence of host type and external environment on community composition. Br. phycol. J., 15: 429–446.Google Scholar
  15. FOERSTER, J.W. and H.E. SCHLICHTING, jr., 1965. Phyco-periphyton in an oligotrophic lake. Amer. microsc. Soc. Trans., 84: 485–502.Google Scholar
  16. GODWARD, M. B., 1934. An investigation of the causal distribution of algal epiphytes. Beih. bot. Zbl. A, 52: 506–539.Google Scholar
  17. GODWARD, M.B., 1937. An ecological and taxonomic investigation of the littoral algal flora of Lake Windermere. J. Ecol., 25: 496–568.Google Scholar
  18. GONS, H.J., 1979. Periphyton in Lake Vechten, with emphasis on biomass and production of epiphytic algae. Hydrobiol. Bull., 13: 116. (Abstract).Google Scholar
  19. GOUGH, S.B. and W.J. WOELKERLING, 1976. Wisconsin desmids. II. Aufwuchs and plankton communities of selected soft water lakes, hard water lakes and calcareous spring ponds. Hydrobiol., 49: 3–25.Google Scholar
  20. HOWARD-WILLIAMS, C. and B.R. DAVIES, 1978. The influence of periphyton on the surface structure of aPotamogeton pectinatus L. leaf (an hypothesis). Aquatic Bot., 5: 87–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. HUSTEDT, F., 1930. Bacillariophyta (Diatomeae). Süsswasser-Flora Mitteleuropas. 10: VIII. G. Fischer, Jena.Google Scholar
  22. HUTCHINSON, G.E., 1975. A Treatise on Limnology. Vol. III. Limnological Botany. Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  23. KESLER, D.H., 1981. Periphyton grazing byAmnicola limosa: an enclosure-exclosure experiment. J. Freshwat. Ecol., 1: 51–59.Google Scholar
  24. LAKATOS, G., 1978. Comparative analysis of biotecton (periphyton) samples collected from natural substrate in waters of different trophic state. Acta Bot. Acad. Scien. Hung., 24: 285–299.Google Scholar
  25. MORGAN, K.C. and J. KALFF, 1979. Effect of light and temperature interactions on growth ofCryptomonas erosa (Cryptophyceae). J. Phycol., 15: 127–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. MOSS, B., 1976. The effects of fertilization and fish on community structure and biomass of aquatic macrophytes and epiphytic algal populations: an ecosystem experiment. J. Ecol., 64: 313–342.Google Scholar
  27. McROY, C.P. and J.J. GOERING, 1974. Nutrient transfer between the seagrassZostera marina and its epiphytes. Nature, 248: 173–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. MILLIE, D.F. and R.L. LOWE, 1983. Studies on Lake Erie's littoral algae: Host specificity and temporal periodicity of epiphytic diatoms. Hydrobiol., 99:7–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. ODUM, H.T., 1957. Trophic structure and productivity of Silver Springs, Florida. Ecol. Monogr., 27:55–112.Google Scholar
  30. ORLOCI, L., 1966. Geometric models in ecology. I. The theory and application of some ordination methods. J. Ecol., 54: 193–216.Google Scholar
  31. PATRICK, R. and C.W. REIMER, 1966. The Diatoms of the United States. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil., Monogr. No. 13, 1: 1–688.Google Scholar
  32. PATRICK, R. and C.W. REIMER, 1975. The Diatoms of the United States. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil., Monogr. No. 13, 2: Part 1, 1–213.Google Scholar
  33. PHILLIPS, G.L., D. EMINSON and B. MOSS, 1978. A mechanism to account for macrophyte decline in progressively eutrophicated freshwaters. Aquatic Bot., 4: 103–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. PIECZYNSKA, E., 1970. Periphyton in the trophic structure of freshwater ecosystems. Pol. Arch. Hydrobiol., 17: 141–147.Google Scholar
  35. PIP, E. and G.G.C. ROBINSON, 1982a. A study of the seasonal dynamics of three phycoperiphytic communities using nuclear track autoradiography. I. Inorganic carbon uptake. Arch. Hydrobiol., 94: 341–371.Google Scholar
  36. PIP, E., and G.G.C. ROBINSON, 1982b. A study of the seasonal dynamics of three phycoperiphytic communities using nuclear track autoradiography. II. Organic carbon uptake. Arch. Hydrobiol., 96: 47–64.Google Scholar
  37. PRESCOTT, G.W., 1962. Algae of the western Great Lakes Area. Wm. C. Brown Co., Dubuque, Iowa.Google Scholar
  38. PROWSE, G.A., 1959. Relationship between epiphytic algal species and their macrophytic hosts. Nature, 183: 1204–1205.Google Scholar
  39. RHO, J. and H.B. GUNNER, 1978. Microfloral response to aquatic weed decomposition. Wat. Res., 12: 165–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. SZCZEPANSKI, A., 1968. Production of reed periphyton in various types of lakes. Bull. Acad. Pol. Sci., 16: 359–362.Google Scholar
  41. SIVER, P.A., 1977. Comparison of attached diatom communities on natural and artificial substrates. J. Phycol., 13: 402–406.Google Scholar
  42. STEEMAN-NIELSEN, E., 1947. Photosynthesis of aquatic plants with special reference to carbon-sources. Dansk Bot. Arkiv., 12: 1–71.Google Scholar
  43. SUMNER, W.T. and C.D. McIntire, 1982. Grazer-periphyton interactions in laboratory streams. Arch. Hydrobiol., 93: 135–157.Google Scholar
  44. TIPPETT, R., 1970. Artificial surfaces as a method of studying populations of benthic micro-algae in fresh water. Br. Phycol. J., 5: 187–199.Google Scholar
  45. TITUS, J.E. and W.H. STONE, 1982. Photosynthetic response of two submersed macrophytes to dissolved inorganic carbon concentration and pH. Limnol. Oceanogr., 27: 151–160.Google Scholar
  46. WETZEL, R.G., 1969. Factors influencing photosynthesis and excretion of dissolved organic matter by aquatic macrophytes in hard-water lakes. Verh. Int. Ver. Limnol., 17: 72–85.Google Scholar
  47. WETZEL, R.G. and B.A. MANNY, 1972. Secretion of dissolved organic carbon and nitrogen by aquatic macrophytes. Verh. Int. Ver. Limnol., 18: 162–170.Google Scholar
  48. WHITFORD, L.A., 1956. The communities of algae in the springs and spring streams of Florida. Ecology, 37: 433–442.Google Scholar
  49. WILLER, A., 1923. Der Aufwuchs der Unterwasserpflanzen. Verh. Int. Ver. Limnol., 1: 37–57.Google Scholar
  50. WIUM-ANDERSEN, S., U. ANTHONI, C. CHRISTOPHERSEN and G. HOUEN, 1982. Allelopathic effects on phytoplankton by substances isolated from aquatic macrophytes (Charales). Oikos, 39: 187–190.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Netherlands Hydrobiological Society 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eva Pip
    • 1
  • G. G. C. Robinson
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of BiologyUniversity of WinnipegWinnipegCanada
  2. 2.Department of BotanyUniversity of ManitobaWinnipegCanada

Personalised recommendations