Advertisement

Contemporary Problems of Ecology

, Volume 12, Issue 5, pp 473–481 | Cite as

Structural and Functional Characteristics of the Phytoplankton Community in Coastal Waters of the Black Sea

  • E. S. SolomonovaEmail author
Article
  • 7 Downloads

Abstract—

The results of a study of the structural and functional characteristics of phytoplankton in the coastal region of the Black Sea using flow cytometry are presented. The data on the seasonal variability of the biomass of three algal groups (Synechococcus, pico-eukaryotic phytoplankton, and nanophytoplankton), chlorophyll a content, percentage of living cells, and FDA (diacetate fluorescein) fluorescence characterizing the functional state of algae are obtained. A significantly positive relationship is found between the values (biomass and autofluorescence of chlorophyll) determined on the flow cytometer and the total content of chlorophyll a, calculated using standard methods. The effect of temperature, illumination, and content of nutrients in water on the biomass and the FDA fluorescence of three isolated groups of algae is shown. The nitrate content and temperature have no significant effect on the abundance of pico and nanophytoplankton, while a reliable relationship is established between the biomass of nanophytoplankton and the concentrations of dissolved forms of mineral phosphorus. An inverse statistically significant correlation is found between the light intensity and the biomass of picoeukaryotic phytoplankton. It is demonstrated that the abiotic environmental factors considered in the study do not significantly affect the FDA fluorescence value, except for temperature: in the warm period of the year, the picophytoplankton are most active in the Black Sea, while the cold period of the year is favorable for the development of nanophytoplankton.

Keywords:

flow cytometry Synechococcus picoeukaryotic phytoplankton nanophytoplankton biomass environmental factors fluorescein diacetate chlorophyll a Black Sea 

Notes

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I am grateful to I.M. Mansurova, a researcher of the Department of Ecological Physiology of Algae, Kovalevsky Institute of Marine Biological Research, Russian Academy of Sciences, for kindly presenting data on the chlorophyll а concentration and researchers at the Department of Aquaculture and Marine Pharmacology for determining the content of nutrients.

FUNDING

This study was performed within the framework of a state assignment of the Kovalevsky Institute of Marine Biological Research on the theme “Functional, Metabolic, and Toxicological Aspects of the Existence of Hydrobionts and Their Populations in Habitats with Different Physical and Chemical Regimes (project no. 0828-0003).

REFERENCES

  1. 1.
    Agawin, N.S.R., Duarte, C.M., and Agusti, S., Growth and abundance of Synechococcus sp. in a Mediterranean Bay: seasonality and relationship with temperature, Mar. Ecol.: Prog. Ser., 1998, vol. 170, pp. 45–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Agawin, N.S.R., Duarte, C.M., and Agusti, S., Nutrient and temperature control of the contribution of picoplankton to phytoplankton biomass and production, Limnol. Oceanogr., 2000, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 591–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bentley-Mowat, J.A. Application of fluorescence microscopy to pollution studies on marine phytoplankton, Bot. Mar., 1982, vol. 28, pp. 203–204.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berglund, D.L. and Eversman, S., Flow cytometric measurement of pollutant stresses on algal cells, Cytometry, 1988, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 150–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Burke, I.C., Lauenroth, W.K., and Parton, W.J., Regional and temporal variation in net primary production and nitrogen mineralization in grasslands, Ecology, 1997, vol. 78, no. 5, pp. 1330–1340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cloern, J.E. and Jassby, A.D., Patterns and scales of phytoplankton variability in estuarine–coastal ecosystems, Estuaries Coasts, 2010, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 230–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Davey, H.M. and Kell, D.B., Flow cytometry and cell sorting of heterogeneous microbial populations: the importance of single-cell analyses, Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev., 1996, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 641–696.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dorsey, J., Yentsch, C.M., Mayo, S., and McKenna, C., Rapid analytical technique for the assessment of cell metabolic activity in marine microalgae, Cytometry Part A, 1989, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 622–628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Finenko, Z.Z., Churilova, T.Ya., and Suslin, V.V., Estimation of phytoplankton biomass and primary production in the Black Sea using satellite data, in Promyslovye bioresursy Chernogo i Azovskogo morei (Commercial Biological Resources of the Black Sea and Sea of Azov), Eremeev, V.N., Gaevskaya, A.V., Shul’man, G.E., and Zagorodnyaya, Yu.A., Eds., Sevastopol: EKOSI-Gidrofizika, 2011, pp. 220–236.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Finenko, Z.Z., Stel’makh, L.V., Mansurova, I.M., Georgieva, E.Yu., and Tsilinskii, V.S., Seasonal dynamics of structural and functional indicators of the phytoplankton community in the Sevastopol Bay, Sist. Kontrolya Okruzh. Sredy, 2017, vol. 9, no. 29, pp. 73–83.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Garvey, M., Moriceau, B., and Passow, U., Applicability of the FDA assay to determine the viability of marine phytoplankton under different environmental conditions, Mar. Ecol.: Prog. Ser., 2007, vol. 352, pp. 17–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gilbert, F., Galgani, F., and Cadiou, Y., Rapid assessment of metabolic activity in marine microalgae: application in ecotoxicological tests and evaluation of water quality, Mar. Biol., 1992, vol. 112, no. 2, pp. 199–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Glover, H.E., Keller, M.D., and Spinrad, R.W., The effects of light quality and intensity on photosynthesis and growth of marine eukaryotic and prokaryotic phytoplankton clones, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol., 1987, vol. 105, nos. 2–3, pp. 137–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Heldal, M., Scanlan, D.J., Norland, S., Thingstad, F., and Mann, N.H., Elemental composition of single cells of various strains of marine Prochlorococcus and Synechococcus using X-ray microanalysis, Limnol. Oceanogr., 2003, vol. 48, no. 5, pp. 1732–1743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jeffrey, S.W. and Humphrey, G.F., New spectrophotometric equations for determining chlorophylls a, b, c1 and c2 in higher plants, algae and natural phytoplankton, Biochem. Physiol. Pflanzen., 1975, vol. 167, pp. 191–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jochem, F.J., Morphology and DNA content of bacterioplankton in the northern Gulf of Mexico: analysis by epifluorescence microscopy and flow cytometry, Aquat. Microb. Ecol., 2001, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 179–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Koblents-Mishke, O.I., Photosynthetic primary production, in Biologicheskie resursy okeana (Biological Resources of an Ocean), Moscow, 1985, pp. 48–62.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Latour, D., Giraudet, H., and Berthon, J.L., Frequency of dividing cells and viability of Microcystis aeruginosa in sediment of a eutrophic reservoir, Aquat. Microb. Ecol., 2004, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 117–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Marie, D., Simon, N., and Vaulot, D., Phytoplankton cell counting by flow cytometry, Algal Cult. Techn., 2005, vol. 1, pp. 253–267.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    McQuoid, M.R., Godhe, A., and Nordberg, K., Viability of phytoplankton resting stages in the sediments of a coastal Swedish fjord, Eur. J. Phycol., 2002, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 191–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mikaelyan, A.S., Silkin, V.A., and Pautova, L.A., Coccolithophorids in the Black Sea: their interannual and long-term changes, Oceanology (Engl. Transl.), 2011, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 39–48.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mukhanov, V.S., Rylkova, O.A., Churilova, T.Ya., Sakhon, E.G., and Pimenov, N.V., Structure and seasonal trophodynamics of picophytoplankton in Sevastopol bay and adjacent waters (the Black Sea), Microbiology (Moscow), 2016, vol. 85, no. 5, pp. 553–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Oradovskii, S.G., RD52.10.243-293. Rukovodstvo po khimicheskomu analizu morskikh vod (RD52.10.243-293. Manual for Chemical Analysis of Marine Waters), St. Petersburg: Gidrometeoizdat, 1993.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Osadchaya, T.S., Characterization of the phytoplankton dimensional structure from measurements of chlorophyll a, Ekol. Morya, 2007, vol. 73, pp. 70–74.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Parsons, T., Takahashi, M., and Hargrave, B., Biological Oceanographic Processes, Oxford: Pergamon, 1984, 2nd ed.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Partensky, F., Blanchot, J., and Vaulot, D., Differential distribution and ecology of Prochlorococcus and Synechococcus in oceanic waters: a review, Bull. Inst. Oceanogr. Monaco-Numero Spec., 1999, pp. 457–476.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pick, F.R. and Caron, D.A., Picoplankton and nanoplankton biomass in Lake Ontario: relative contribution of phototrophic and heterotrophic communities, Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci., 1987, vol. 44, no. 12, pp. 2164–2172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shalapenok, L.S. and Shalapenok, A.A., Heterogeneous pigment composition of phycoerythrin-containing picocyanobacteria Synechococcus spp. in the Black Sea, Microbiology (Moscow), 1997, vol. 66, no. 1, pp. 80–84.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Shapiro, J., Current beliefs regarding dominance by blue-greens: the case for the importance of CO2 and pH, Mitt.-Int. Ver. Theor. Angew. Limnol., 1990, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 38–54.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sicko-Goad, L., Stoermer, E.F., and Kociolek, J.P., Diatom resting cell rejuvenation and formation: time course, species records and distribution, J. Plankton Res., 1989, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 375–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Simon, M., Glöckner, F.O., and Amann, R., Different community structure and temperature optima of heterotrophic picoplankton in various regions of the Southern Ocean, Aquat. Microb. Ecol., 1999, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 275–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Solomonova, E.S., Dynamics of physiologically active pico-and nanophytoplankton cells in the coastal waters of the Black Sea, Vestn. S.-Peterb. Univ., Ser. 3: Biol., 2016, vol. 1, pp. 62–72.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Solomonova, E.S. and Akimov, A.I., Evaluation of the functional state of the culture of Chlorella vulgaris Suboblonga using flow cytometry and variable fluorescence, Morsk. Ekol. Zh., 2012, vol. 4, pp. 78–84.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Solomonova, E.S. and Mukhanov, V.S., Flow cytometry for the assessment of the physiological active cells in batch cultures of Phaeodactylum tricornutum and Nitzschia sp., Morsk. Ekol. Zh., 2011, vol. 10, pp. 67–72.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Stel’makh, L.V., The contribution of picoplankton to the primary production and chlorophyll a content in eutrophic waters on the example of the Sevastopol Bay, Okeanologiya (Moscow), 1988, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 127–131.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Stel’makh, L.V., Senicheva, M.I., and Babich, I.I., The ecological and physiological basis of the water blooming caused by Emiliania huxleyi in the Sevastopol Bay, Ekol. Morya, 2009, vol. 77, pp. 28–32.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Takahashi, M., Ichimura, S., Kishino, M., and Okami, N., Shade and chromatic adaptation of phytoplankton photosynthesis in a thermally stratified sea, Mar. Biol., 1989, vol. 100, no. 3, pp. 401–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Uysal, Z., Chroococcoid cyanobacteria Synechococcus spp. In the Black Sea: pigments, size, distribution, growth and diurnal variability, J. Plankton Res., 2001, vol. 23, pp. 175–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Uysal, Z., Pigments, size and distribution of Synechococcus spp. in the Black Sea, J. Mar. Syst., 2000, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 313–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Verity, P.G., Robertson, C.Y., Tronzo, C.R., Andrews, M.G., Nelson, J.R., and Sieracki, M.E., Relationships between cell volume and the carbon and nitrogen content of marine photosynthetic nanoplankton, Limnol. Oceanogr., 1992, vol. 37, no. 7, pp. 1434–1446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wang, Z.H., Fu, Y.H., Kang, W., Liang, J.F., Gu, Y.G., and Jiang, X.L., Germination of phytoplankton resting cells from surface sediments in two areas of the Southern Chinese coastal waters, Mar. Ecol., 2013, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 218–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Worden, A.Z., Nolan, J.K., and Palenik, B., Assessing the dynamics and ecology of marine picophytoplankton: the importance of the eukaryotic component, Limnol. Oceanogr., 2004, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 168–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wyman, M., An in vivo method for the estimation of phycoerythrin concentrations in marine cyanobacteria (Synechoccus spp.), Limnol. Oceanogr., 1992, vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 1300–1306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Zaika, V.E., Shevchenko, V.A., and Bulatov, K.V., Ekologiya morskogo fototrofnogo pikoplanktona (Ecology of Marine Phototrophic Picoplankton), Moscow: Nauchn. Tsentr Biol. Issled., Akad. Nauk SSSR, 1989.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Zaika, V.E., Shalapenok, L.S., and Pokotilov, S.L., Izmenenie chastoty delyashchikhsya tsianobakterii po glubine i vremeni sutok (Changes in the Frequency of Dividing Cyanobacteria by the Depth and Time of Day), Available from VINITI, 1991, Sevastopol, no. 870-V91.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kovalevsky Institute of Marine Biological Research, Russian Academy of SciencesSevastopolRussia

Personalised recommendations