3.8 Article Proceedings Paper

Auto- and heterotrophic nanoplankton and filamentous bacteria of guanabara bay (RJ, Brazil): Estimates of cell/filament numbers versus carbon

Journal

BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF OCEANOGRAPHY
Volume 55, Issue 2, Pages 133-143

Publisher

INST OCEANOGRAFICO, UNIV SAO PAULO
DOI: 10.1590/S1679-87592007000200006

Keywords

Estuary; Guanabara Bay; nanoplankton; filamentous bacteria; autotrophs heterotrophs; biomass; cell density

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Variations of nanoplankton (2-20 mu m) and flamentous bacteria (diameter: 0.5-2.0 mu m) of Guanabara Bay (RJ, Brazil) are presented, considering cell density and carbon content of auto- and heterotrophs. Our goal is to contribute to future modeling of local trophic dynamics. Subsurface water samples were taken weekly during the year 2000 at two sites: Urca (close to the entrance, more saline, eutrophic) and Ramos (inner area, less saline, hypertrophic). Microscopic analysis was done by epifluorescence and cell density was converted to biomass through cell biovolume. Total nanoplankton was about 10(8) cells.l(-1) in most samples (>57%), and total filamentous bacteria densities varied from 10(5) to 10(8) fil.l(-1). Autotroph density was one order of magnitude higher at Ramos, both for nanoplankton (Md: 10(8)cells.l(-1) at Ramos and 10(7) cells.l(-1) at Urca) and for filamentous bacteria (Md: 10(6) fil.l(-1) at Ramos and 10(5) fil.l(-1) at Urca). The same was observed for autotrophic biomass (Md: 10(3) mu gC.l(-1) at Ramos and 10(1)mu gC.l(-1) at Urca for nanoplankton; Md: 28 mu gC.l(-1) at Ramos and 1.4 mu gC.l(-1) at Urca for filamentous bacteria). The relative contribution of autotrophs increased after conversion to biomass. Seasonal variation was conspicuous for filamentous bacteria at both sites and for nanoplankton only at Ramos, with maximum autotrophic abundances during the rainy period (spring-summer).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available