, Volume 58, Issue 3, pp 245–260 | Cite as

Phytoplankton dynamics, primary productivity and community metabolism in a north-central Texas pond

  • M. H. Kelly
  • L. C. Fitzpatrick
  • W. D. Pearson


Phytoplankton diversity, primary productivity and community metabolism were measured for 1 year in a 0.94 ha pond located in north-central Texas. Gross primary production ranged from 4.5 to 46.8 kcal m−2 day−1 (\(\bar X\)=22.0 kcal m−2 day−1) and community metabolism ranged from 7.3 to 32.4 kcal m−2 day−1 (\(\bar X\)=14.8 kcal m−2 day−1). Average production/respiration ratio (1.5) showed that the pond was principally autotrophic. Photosynthetic efficiency (gross primary production/0.5 total solar radiation) ranged from 0.32 to 2.8 with a mean of 1.2. Phytoplankton diversity based on numbers and biomass fluctuated greatly. Highest gross primary productivity occurred during Cyanophyta blooms in late summer-early fall when species diversity was minimal. Water temperature and turbidity, which governed light penetration, were the principal determinants of primary production.


primary productivity community metabolism phytoplankton dynamics physico-chemistry diversity 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. American Public Health Association. 1971. Standard methods for examination of water and wastewater including bottom sediments and sludges (13th ed.) APHA, Inc., New York, 874p.Google Scholar
  2. Benson, D., Fitzpatrick, L. C. & Pearson, W. D. 1977. Production and energy flow in benthic insect populations in a small pond. MS.Google Scholar
  3. Berman, T. & Pollingher, U. 1974. Annual and seasonal variations of phytoplankton, chlorophyll, and photosynthesis in Lake Kinneret. Limnol. Oceanogr. 19: 31–54.Google Scholar
  4. Comita, G. W. & Schindler, D. W. 1963. Calorific values of microcrustacea. Science 140: 1394–1396.Google Scholar
  5. Cummins, K. W. 1967. Calorific equivalents for studies in ecological energetics. Mimeo. Pymatuning Laboratory for Ecology, Univ. of Pitts., Pittsburg, Penn. 50 p.Google Scholar
  6. Dineen, C. F. 1953. An ecological study of a Minnesota pond. Am. Midland Nat. 50: 349–376.Google Scholar
  7. Golley, F. B. 1960. Energy dynamics of a food chain of an old-field community. Ecol. Monogr. 30: 187–206.Google Scholar
  8. Hach. 1973. Water analysis handbook. Hach Chemical Co., Ames, Iowa.Google Scholar
  9. Healy, F. P. 1973. Inorganic nutrient uptake and deficiency in algae. CRC Critical Reviews in Microbiology 3 (1): 69–113.Google Scholar
  10. Jones, F. V., Pearson, W. D. & Fitzpatrick, L. C. 1977a. Production dynamics of seven fishes in a pond. Env. Biol. Fish. In Press.Google Scholar
  11. Jones, F. V., Pearson, W. D. & Fitzpatrick, L. C. 1977b. Yield estimates derived from active and passive creel surveys of a small pond fishery. Tex. J. Sci. In Press.Google Scholar
  12. Keenan, V. D. & Auer, M. T. 1974. The influence of phosphorus luxury uptake on algal bioassays. J. WPCF 46 (3): 532–542.Google Scholar
  13. Kerr, P. C., Brockway, D. L. Paris, D. F. & Barnett, J. T. Jr. 1972. The interrelation of carbon and phosphorus in regulating heterotrophic and autotrophic populations in an aquatic ecosystem, Shriner's pond. In G. E. Likens (ed.), Nutrients and eutrophication: the binding nutrient controversy. Limnol. Oceanogr., Special Symposia 1: 41–62.Google Scholar
  14. Lindeman, R. L. 1942. The trophic-dynamic aspect of ecology. Ecology 23: 399–418.Google Scholar
  15. Maier, W. J. & McConnell, H. L. 1974. Carbon measurements in water quality monitoring. J. Water Poll. Con. Fed. 46: 623–633.Google Scholar
  16. Margalef, R. 1965. Ecological correlations and relationships between primary productivity and community structure. p. 355–364. In C. R. Goldman (ed.), Primary Productivity in Aquatic Environments, Mem. Ist. Ital. idrobiol., 18 Suppl., Univ. Calif. Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  17. McDaniel, M. D. 1972. Trophogenic ecology of selected southwestern reservoirs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation Depart. Biology, North Texas State Univ., Denton, Texas, 174 p.Google Scholar
  18. Nie, N. H., Hull, C. H., Jenkins, J. G., Steinbrenner, K. & Bent, D. H. 1975. SPSS: Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York. 675 p.Google Scholar
  19. Odum, H. T. & Hoskin, C. M. 1958. Comparative studies on the metabolism of marine waters. Publs. Inst. Mar. Sci. Univ. Tex. 5: 15–46.Google Scholar
  20. Palmer, C. M. & Maloney, T. T. 1954. A new counting slide for nannoplankton. Spec. Publ. Limnol. Oceanogr. Soc. Amer. 21: 1–6.Google Scholar
  21. Pielou, E. C. 1966. The measurement of diversity in different types of biological collections. J. Theoret. Biol. 13: 131–144.Google Scholar
  22. Prowse, G. A. 1972. Some observations on primary and fish production in experimental fish ponds in Malaccia, Malaysia. Proc. IBP Symp. (1970): 555–561.Google Scholar
  23. Shannon, C. E. & Weaver, W. 1949. The mathematical theory of communication. Univ. Illinois Press, Urbana. 125 p.Google Scholar
  24. Smith, G. A., Fitzpatrick, L. C. & Pearson, W. D., 1977. Metabolic rates in two copepods. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. (In press).Google Scholar
  25. Smith, G. A., Fitzpatrick, L. C. & Pearson, W. D. 1978. Structure and dynamics of a zooplankton community in a small northcentral texas pond ecosystem. Southwest. Nat. (In press).Google Scholar
  26. Sreenivasan, A. 1976. Limnological studies of and primary production in temple pond ecosystems. Hydrobiologia 48 (2):117–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Talling, J. F. 1962. Freshwater Algae. In R. A. Lewin, Physiology and biochemistry of algae. Academic Press, Inc., New York. p. 743–757.Google Scholar
  28. Teal, J. M. 1957. Community metabolism of a temperate cold spring. Ecol. Monogr. 27: 284–302.Google Scholar
  29. Teal, J. M. 1962. Energy flow in the salt marsh ecosystem of Georgia. Ecology 43: 614–624.Google Scholar
  30. Wetzel, R. G. 1975. Limnology, W. B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia, 743 p.Google Scholar
  31. Wilhm, J. L., & Dorns, T. R. 1968. Biological parameters for water quality criteria. Bio Science 18: 477–481.Google Scholar
  32. Wilhm, J. L. & Dorris, T. C. 1968a. Biomass units versus numbers of individuals in species diversity indices. Ecology 49: 153–156.Google Scholar
  33. Winberg, G. G. (ed.). 1971. Symbols, units, and conversion factors in studies of freshwater productivity. IBP Central Office, London. 23 p.Google Scholar
  34. Young, W. C., Hannan, H. H. & Tatune, J. W. 1972. The physicochemical limnology of a stretch of the Guadalupe River, Texas, with five mainstream impoundments. Hydrobiologia 40 (3): 297–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Dr. W. Junk b. v. publishers 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. H. Kelly
    • 1
  • L. C. Fitzpatrick
    • 2
  • W. D. Pearson
    • 3
  1. 1.Cooperative Wildlife Research LaboratorySouthern Illinois UniversityCarbondale
  2. 2.Dept. Biological Sciences and Institute of Applied SciencesNorth Texas State UniversityDenton
  3. 3.Water Resources LaboratoryUniversity of LouisvilleLouisville

Personalised recommendations