Advertisement

Factors influencing seaweed responses to eutrophication: some results from EU-project EUMAC

  • Winfrid Schramm
Article

Abstract

Seaweed responses to eutrophication and their role in coastal eutrophication processes were compared at 8 different sites along the European coasts from the Baltic to the Mediterranean as part of the EU-ENVIRONMENT Project Marine Eutrophication and benthic Macrophytes (EUMAC). Structural and functional changes of marine benthic vegetation typical of eutrophic waters, in particular mass development (blooms) of certain seaweeds, are not merely the result of increased nutrient loading, but must be attributed to complex interactions of primary and secondary effects during the eutrophication process. Due to species-specific physiological properties of the algae (nutrient kinetics, growth potential, light, temperature requirements), the combined effects of abiotic and biotic factors on juvenile or adult developmental stages control the development of algal blooms in different ways. In particular the role of light, temperature, water motion and oxygen depletion, as well as of grazers, on early and adult developmental stages of the algae are considered. The result are discussed in the context of coastal eutrophication control and management.

seaweed algal blooms eutrophication general mechanisms management 

References

  1. Breuer G, Schramm W (1988) Changes in macroalgal vegetation in Kiel Bight (western Baltic) during the past 20 years. Kieler Meeresforsch. Sonderheft 6: 241–255.Google Scholar
  2. De Casabianca ML, Laugier T, Mariho-Soriano E (1997) Seasonal changes of nutrients in water and sediment in a Mediterranean lagoon with shellfish farming activity (Thau lagoon-France). ICES J. mar. Sci. 54: 905–916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. De Casabianca ML, Laugier T, Soriano E, Posada F, Rigollet V, Pryor M (1996) Analysis of the principal macrophyte systems, Zostera, Ulva and Gracilaria, in a eutrophicated lagoon (Thau, France). In Rijstenbil JW, Kamermans P, Nienhuis PH (eds), EUMAC Synthesis Report and Proceedings. 2nd EUMAC Workshop, Sete, France: 139–175.Google Scholar
  4. De Casabianca M-L, Posada F (1998) Analysis of environmental parameters responsible for growth of Ulva rigida (Thau lagoon, France). Bot. mar. 41: 157–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. De Vries I, Hopstaken CF (1984) Nutrient cycling and ecosystem behaviour in a saltwater lake. Neth. J. Sea Res. 18: 221–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. De Vries I, Philippart CJM, DeGroodt EG, Van der Tol MWM (1996) Coastal eutrophication and marine vegetation: a model analysis. In Schramm W, Nienhuis PH (eds), Marine Benthic Vegetation: Recent Changes and the Effects of Eutrophication. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin: 79–113.Google Scholar
  7. Dion P, Le Bozec S (1996) Eutrophication on the European coasts: the French Atlantic coasts. In Schramm W, Nienhuis PH (eds), Marine Benthic Vegetation: Recent Changes and the Effects of Eutrophication. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg: 251–264.Google Scholar
  8. Duarte CM (1995) Submerged aquatic vegetation in relation to different nutrient regimes. Ophelia 41: 87–112.Google Scholar
  9. Foldager-Pedersen M, Borum J (1997) Nutrient control of estuarine algae: growth strategy and the balance between nitrogen requirements and uptake. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 161: 135–163.Google Scholar
  10. Kautsky N, Kautsky H, Kautsky U, Waern M (1986) Decreased depth penetration of Fucus vesiculosus (L.) since the 1940s indicates eutrophication of the Baltic Sea. Mar. Ecol. Progr. Ser. 28: 1–8.Google Scholar
  11. Kautsky N, Wallentinus I (1980) Nutrient release from a Baltic Mytilus-red algal community and its role in benthic and pelagic productivity. Ophelia (Suppl.) 1: 17–30.Google Scholar
  12. Lotze HK (1998) Population dynamics and species interactions in macroalgal blooms: abiotic versus biotic control at different lifecycle stages. Dissertation, University Kiel, Germany. Ber. Inst. Meereskunde Nr. 303. 134 pp.Google Scholar
  13. Lotze HK, Schramm W, Worm B (1998) Control of macroalgal blooms at early developmental stages: Pilayella littoralis versus Enteromorpha spp. Oekologia (in press).Google Scholar
  14. Menesguen A (1992) Modeling coastal eutrophication: the case of the French Ulva blooms. In Vollenweider RA, Marchetti R, Viviani R (eds), Marine Coastal Eutrophication. Proc. Int. Conf. Bologna, Italy, 1990. Elsevier, Amsterdam: 979–992.Google Scholar
  15. Menesguen A, Salomon JC (1988) Eutrophication modelling as a tool for fighting against Ulva mass blooms. In Schrefler BA, Zienkiewicz OC (eds), Computer Modelling in Ocean Engineering. Balkema, Rotterdam: 443–264.Google Scholar
  16. Neundorfer JV, Kemp WM (1993) Nitrogen versus phosphorus enrichment of brackish waters: response of submerged plant Potamogeton perfoliatus and its associated algal community. Mar. Ecol. Progr. Ser. 94: 71–82.Google Scholar
  17. Nienhuis PH (1989) Eutrophication of estuaries and brackish lagoons in the south-west Netherlands. In Hooghart JC, Posthumus CWS (eds), Hydroecological Relations in the Delta Waters of the South-West Netherlands. TNO Com. Hydrol. Res. Proc. Infrom. 41: 49–70.Google Scholar
  18. Nienhuis PH (1992) Ecology of coastal lagoons in the Netherlands (Veerse Meer and Grevelingen). Vie Milieu 42: 59–72.Google Scholar
  19. Officer CB, Smayda JH, Mann R (1982) Benthic filter feeding: a natural eutrophication control. Mar. Ecol. Progr. Ser. 9: 203–210.Google Scholar
  20. Piriou JY, Menesguen A (1992) Environmental factors controlling the Ulva sp. blooms in Britanny (France). In Colombo G, Ferrari I, Ceccherelli VU, Rossi R (eds), Marine Eutrophication and Population Dynamics. 25th Eur. Mar. Biol. Symp. Oben & Olsen, Milwaukee: 117–122.Google Scholar
  21. Sand-Jensen K, Borum J (1991) Interactions among phytoplankton, periphyton, and macrophytes in temperate freshwater and estuaries. Aquat. Bot. 41: 137–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Schories D (1995) Population ecology and mass development of Enteromorpha spp. (Chlorophyta) in the Wadden Sea intertidal at the island of Sylt (North Sea). Ber. Inst. Meereskunde, Univ. Kiel. No. 271. 145 pp.Google Scholar
  23. Schramm W, Nienhuis HP (eds) (1996) Marine Benthic Vegetation: Recent Changes and the Effects of Eutrophication. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 470 pp.Google Scholar
  24. Schramm W, Lotze H, Schories D (1996) Eutrophication and macroalgal blooms in inshore waters of the German Baltic coasts: The Schlei Fjord, a case study. In Rijstenbil JW, Kamermans P, Nienhuis PH (eds), EUMAC Synthesis Report and Proceedings. 2nd EUMAC Workshop, Sete, France: 18–73.Google Scholar
  25. Sfriso A, Marcomini A (1996a) Italy – The lagoon of Venice. In Schramm W, Nienhuis PH (eds), Marine Benthic Vegetation: Recent Changes and the Effects of Eutrophication. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin: 339–368.Google Scholar
  26. Sfriso A, Marcomini A (1996b) Macrophytes and nutrient cycles in the lagoon of Venice. In Rijstenbil JW, Kamermans P, Nienhuis PH (eds), EUMAC Synthesis Report and Proceedings. 2nd EUMAC Workshop, Sete, France: 221–248.Google Scholar
  27. Sfriso A, Marcomini A (1996c). Decline of Ulva growth in the lagoon of Venice. Bioresource Technology 58: 299–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Twilley RR, Kemo WM, Staver KW, Stevensen JC, Boynton WR (1985) Nutrient enrichment of estuarine submerged vascular plant communities: I. Algal growth and effects on production of plants and associated communities. Mar. Ecol. Progr. Ser. 23: 179–191.Google Scholar
  29. Vogt H, Schramm W (1991) Conspicuous decline of Fucus in Kiel Bay (western Baltic): what are the causes? Mar. Ecol. Progr. Ser. 69: 189–194.Google Scholar
  30. Wallentinus I (1984) Comparison of nutrient uptake rates for Baltic macroalgae with different thallus morphologies. Mar. Biol. 80: 215–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Winfrid Schramm
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Marine ScienceUniversity of KielKielGermany

Personalised recommendations