Skip to main content
Log in

Ecosystem development in different types of littoral enclosures

  • Part Five: Macrophytes
  • Published:
Hydrobiologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Macrophyte growth was studied in two enclosure types (gauze and polythene) in a homogeneousPotamogeton pectinatus bed in Lake Veluwe (The Netherlands). The gauze was expected to allow for sufficient exchange with the lake to maintain similar seston densities, the polythene was expected to exclude fish activity and most water exchange. Polythene enclosures held higher totalP. pectinatus biomass (ash-free dry weight, AFDW) than the lake, gauze enclosures were intermediate. The enclosures had a higher abundance of other macrophyte species (Chara sp.,Potamogeton pusillus) than the lake. Seston ash content was not but seston AFDW, periphyton ash content and AFDW were lower in polythene than in gauze enclosures. The difference in plant biomass between gauze and polythene may be attributed to a difference in periphyton density and in seston AFDW due to zooplankton grazing (Rotatoria andDaphnia densities were higher in polythene enclosures). Since seston and periphyton AFDW and ash content were similar in lake and gauze enclosures, the intermediate macrophyte biomass in the gauze enclosures may be explained by reduced wave action and mechanical stress. Alternatively, phytoplankton inhibition by allelopathic excretions from the macrophytes may have caused the high macrophyte biomass in the polythene, and an absence of sediment-disturbing fish the intermediate biomass in the gauze enclosures. Creation of sheltered areas may favour macrophyte growth through both mechanisms and we conclude that this can be an important tool in littoral biomanipulation.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, M. G., 1978. Distribution and production of Sago Pondweed (Potamogeton pectinatus L.) on a northern prairie marsh. Ecology 59: 154–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersson, G., H. Berggren, G. Cronberg & C. Gelin, 1978. Effects of planktivorous and benthivorous fish on organisms and water chemistry in eutrophic lakes. Hydrobiologia 59: 9–15.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bloesch, J., P. Bossard, H. Bührer, H. R. Bürgi & U. Uehlinger, 1988. Can results from limnocorral experiments be transferred to in situ conditions? (Biomanipulation in limnocorrals VI). Verh. int. Ver. Limnol. 23: 762–763.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brabrand, Å., B. Faafeng & J. P. M. Nilssen, 1987. Pelagic predators and interfering algae: stabilizing factors in temperate eutrophic lakes. Arch. Hydrobiol. 110: 533–552.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, S. R., J. F. Kitchell & J. R. Hodgson, 1985. Cascading trophic interactions and lake productivity. BioScience 35: 634–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duarte, C. M. & J. Kalff, 1988. Influence of lake morphometry on the response of submerged macrophytes to sediment fertilization. Can. J. Fish. aquat. Sci. 45: 216–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godmaire, H. & D. Planas, 1983. Potential effect ofMyriophyllum spicatum on the primary production of phytoplankton. In R. G. Wetzel (ed.), Periphyton of freshwater ecosystems. Junk, The Hague: 227–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosper, S. H., 1989. Biomanipulation, new perspectives for restoration of shallow eutrophic lakes in The Netherlands. Hydrobiol. Bull. 23: 5–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jupp, B. P. & D. H. N. Spence, 1977. Limitations of macrophytes in a eutrophic lake, Loch Leven. II. Wave action, sediments and waterfowl grazing. J. Ecol. 65: 431–446.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kautsky, L., 1987. Life-cycles of three populations ofPotamogeton pectinatus L. at different degrees of wave exposure in the Askö area, northern Baltic proper. Aquat. Bot. 27: 177–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keddy, P. A., 1982. Quantifying within-lake gradients of wave energy: interrelationships of wave energy, substrate particle size and shoreline plants in Axe Lake, Ontario. Aquat. Bot. 14: 41–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuiper, J., 1977. Development of North Sea coastal plankton communities in separate plastic bags under identical conditions. Mar. Biol. 44: 97–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lack, T. W. & J. W. G. Lund, 1974. Observations on the phytoplankton of Blelham Tarn, English Lake District. I. The experimental tubes. Freshwat. Biol. 4: 399–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leah, R. T., B. Moss & D. E. Forrest, 1978. Experiments with large enclosures in a fertile, shallow, brackish lake, Hickling Broad, Norfolk, United Kingdom. Int. Revue ges. Hydrobiol. 63: 291–310.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lund, J. W. G., 1972. Preliminary observations on the use of large experimental tubes in lakes. Verh. int. Ver. Limnol. 18: 71–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, M., 1979. Predation, competition, and zooplankton community structure: an experimental study. Limnol. Oceanogr. 24: 253–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, M. & J. Shapiro, 1981. Predation, enrichment, and phytoplankton community structure. Limnol. Oceanogr. 26: 86–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCauley, E. & F. Briand, 1979. Zooplankton grazing and phytoplankton species richness: field tests of the predation hypothesis. Limnol. Oceanogr. 24: 243–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • McQueen, D. J. & J. R. Post, 1988. Limnocorral studies of cascading trophic events. Verh. int. Ver. Limnol. 23: 729–747.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moss, B. & R. T. Leah, 1982. Changes in the ecosystem of a guanotrophic and brackish shallow lake in Eastern England: potential problems in its restoration. Int. Revue ges. Hydrobiol. 67: 625–659.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Norusis, M. J., 1986. SPSS-PC+ manual. SPSS Inc., Chicago, USA, 559 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, G. L., D. Eminson & B. Moss, 1978. A mechanism to account for macrophyte decline in progressively eutrophicated freshwaters. Aquat. Bot. 4: 103–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Post, J. R. & D. J. McQueen, 1987. The impact of planktivorous fish on the structure of a plankton community. Freshwat. Biol. 17: 79–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riemann, B. & M. Søndergaard, 1986. Regulation of bacterial secondary production in two eutrophic lakes and in experimental enclosures. J. Plankton Res. 8: 519–536.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, J. & D. W. Wright, 1984. Lake restoration by biomanipulation: Round Lake, Minnesota, the first two years. Freshwat. Biol. 14: 371–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steel, R. G. D. & J. H. Torrie, 1980. Principles and procedures of statistics, a biometrical approach. 2nd edition. McGraw Hill, New York, 633 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ten Winkel, E. H. & J. T. Meulemans, 1984. Effects of fish upon submerged vegetation. Hydrobiol. Bull. 18: 157–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vermaat, J.E., Hootsmans, M.J.M. & van Dijk, G.M. Ecosystem development in different types of littoral enclosures. Hydrobiologia 200, 391–398 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02530356

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02530356

Key words

Navigation