Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Flow velocity and primary production influences carbon utilization in nascent epilithic stream biofilms

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Aquatic Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In small streams, the majority of carbon turnover is due to microbial activity in biofilms. Flow velocity is a key factor influencing biofilm function, and nascent biofilms with high energy need for growth might be especially sensitive to hydrodynamics. The major part of carbon supply is allochthonous but algae can provide easily available exudates for biofilm bacteria. In this study, epilithic biofilms were grown for 2 weeks in a third order stream in Thuringia, Germany, and then incubated in replicate flow channels in climate-controlled chambers. Glucose and arbinose were added immediately to all channels, and the effects of flow velocity and light availability on rates of sugar removal were examined. Phosphate addition did not influence sugar decrease rates. Flow velocities of either 0.3 m s−1 or 0.7 m s−1 resulted in 1.3 to 3.1 times higher decrease rates under the higher flow velocity. Light exclusion resulted in a 2.2 to 2.6 times faster sugar decrease but only a 0.5 times dissolved organic carbon increase compared to channels with light input, suggesting a strong internal coupling of primary producers and heterotrophs. Our results indicate that carbon uptake from the water column is fostered at higher flow velocities and that primary production is an important internal carbon source in nascent epilithic biofilms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Augspurger C, Gleixner G, Kramer C, Küsel K (2008) Tracking carbon flow in a 2-week-old and 6-week-old stream biofilm food web. Limnol Oceanogr 53:642–650

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Battin TJ, Kaplan LA, Newbold JD, Cheng X, Hansen C (2003) Effects of current velocity on the nascent architecture of stream microbial biofilms. Appl Environ Microbiol 69:5443–5452

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Besemer K, Singer G, Limberger R, Chlup A-K, Hochedlinger G, Hödl I, Baranyi C, Battin TJ (2007) Biophysical controls on community succession in stream biofilms. Appl Environ Microbiol 73:4966–4974

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Beyenal H, Lewandowski Z (2002) Internal and external mass transfer in biofilms grown at various flow velocities. Biotechnol Prog 18:55–61

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boston HL, Hill WR (1991) Photosynthesis light relations of stream periphyton communities. Limnol Oceanogr 36:644–656

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Carr GM, Morin A, Chambers PA (2005) Bacteria and algae in stream periphyton along a nutrient gradient. Freshw Biol 50:1337–1350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clesceri LS, Greenberg AE, Eaton AD (1998) Standard methods: for the examination of water and wastewater, 20th edn. American Public Health Association, Washington, DC, 1325 pp

  • Costerton JW, Lewandowski Z, Caldwell DE, Korber DR, Lappin-Scott HM (1995) Microbial biofilms. Annu Rev Microbiol 49:711–745

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer H, Sachse A, Steinberg CEW, Pusch M (2002) Differential retention and utilization of dissolved organic carbon by bacteria in river sediments. Limnol Oceanogr 47:1702–1711

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher M (1986) Measurement of glucose utilization by Pseudomonas fluorescens that are free-living and that are attached to surfaces. Appl Environ Microbiol 52:672–676

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fukuda M, Ashida A, Tomaru Y, Nakano S (2004) An improved method for collecting heterotrophic microorganisms living on pebbles in streams. Limnology 5:41–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gantzer CJ, Rittmann BE, Herricks EE (1988) Mass transport to streambed biofilms. Water Res 22:709–722

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Geesey GG, Mutch R, Costerton JW, Green RB (1978) Sessile bacteria—important component of microbial population in small mountain streams. Limnol Oceanogr 23:1214–1223

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hoppe H-G (1983) Significance of exoenzymatic activities in the ecology of brakish water: measurements by means of methylumbelliferyl-substrates. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 11:299–308

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt AP, Parry JD (1998) The effect of substratum roughness and river flow rate on the development of a freshwater biofilm community. Biofouling 12:287–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones SE, Lock MA (1993) Seasonal determinations of extracellular hydrolytic activities in heterotrophic and mixed heterotrophic/autotrophic biofilms from two contrasting rivers. Hydrobiologia 257:1–16

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan LA, Newbold JD (2002) The role of monomers in stream ecosystem metabolism. In: Findlay SEG, Sinsabaugh RL (eds) Aquatic ecosystems: interactivity of dissolved organic matter. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 97–119

    Google Scholar 

  • Magilligan FJ, Nislow K (2001) Long-term changes in the regional hydrologic regime following impoundment in a humic-climate watershed. J Am Water Resour Assoc 37:1551–1570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mindl B, Sonntag B, Pernthaler J, Vrba J, Psenner R, Posch T (2005) Effects of phosphorus loading on interactions of algae and bacteria: reinvestigation of the ‘phytoplankton-bacteria paradox’ in a continuous cultivation system. Aquat Microb Ecol 38:203–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pohlon E, Augspurger C, Risse-Buhl U, Arle J, Willkomm M, Halle S, Küsel K (2007) Querying the obvious: lessons from a degraded stream. Restor Ecol 15:312–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter KG, Feig YS (1980) The use of DAPI for identifying and counting aquatic microflora. Limnol Oceanogr 25:943–948

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiche M, Torburg G, Küsel K (2008) Competition of Fe(III) reduction and methanogenesis in an acidic fen. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 65:88–101

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Romaní AM, Sabater S (1999) Epilithic ectoenzyme activity in a nutrient-rich Mediterranean river. Aquat Sci 61:122–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romaní AM, Guasch H, Muñoz I, Ruana J, Vilata E, Schwartz T, Emtiazi F, Sabater S (2004) Biofilm structure and function and possible implications for riverine DOC dynamics. Microb Ecol 47:316–328

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Spänhoff B, Augspurger C, Küsel K (2007) Comparing field and laboratory breakdown rates of coarse particulate organic matter: sediment dynamics mask the impacts of dissolved nutrients on CPOM mass loss in streams. Aquat Sci 69:495–502

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sundh I, Bell RT (1992) Extracellular dissolved organic carbon released from phytoplankton as a source of carbon for heterotrophic bacteria in lakes of different humic content. Hydrobiologia 229:93–106

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tank JL, Dodds WK (2003) Nutrient limitation of epilithic and epixylic biofilms in ten North American streams. Freshw Biol 48:1031–1049

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wetzel RG (1992) Gradient-dominated ecosystems: sources and regulatory functions of dissolved organic matter in freshwater ecosystems. Hydrobiologia 229:181–198

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are thankful to Anne Huchel, Andrea Scheibe and Pascal Weigand for assistance in both field and laboratory, and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments. Sven Rau provided excellent technical support for the phosphatase activity measurement. This work was supported by a grant from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft DFG (266/3).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Limnology Research Group, Institute of Ecology, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Dornburger-Str. 159, 07743, Jena, Germany

    Clemens Augspurger & Kirsten Küsel

  2. Department of Freshwater Ecology, University of Vienna, c/o WasserKluster Lunz, Biologische Station GmbH, Dr. Carl Kupelwieser Promenade 5, 3293, Lunz am See, Austria

    Clemens Augspurger

Authors
  1. Clemens Augspurger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kirsten Küsel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Clemens Augspurger.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Augspurger, C., Küsel, K. Flow velocity and primary production influences carbon utilization in nascent epilithic stream biofilms. Aquat. Sci. 72, 237–243 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00027-009-0126-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00027-009-0126-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation