4.6 Article

Phytoplankton richness is related to nutrient availability, not to pool size, in a subarctic rock pool system

期刊

HYDROBIOLOGIA
卷 740, 期 1, 页码 137-145

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10750-014-1949-7

关键词

Generalized linear models; Moran's correlograms; Nutrient supply; Productivity-diversity theory; Species-area relationship; Subarctic aquatic ecosystems

资金

  1. Academy of Finland [263880]
  2. Academy of Finland (AKA) [263880, 263880] Funding Source: Academy of Finland (AKA)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In small aquatic ecosystems, communities are strongly affected by environmental filtering such as disturbances and fine-scale heterogeneity of physicochemical properties. Aim of this study was to examine the effects of abiotic variables on phytoplankton richness in 30 subarctic rock pools in Finnish Lapland and further to test species-area and productivity-diversity relationships. We used Moran's correlograms to examine if phytoplankton richness and explanatory variables show spatial autocorrelation. We then related phytoplankton richness to physical, chemical and spatial variables (derived from Principal Coordinates of Neighbor Matrices based on either overland or water course distances) using generalized linear model (GLM). Correlograms did not indicate clear gradient-like spatial structures in the data. According to the best-approximating GLM, phytoplankton richness showed a highly significant positive relationship with total P concentrations, which differed by one magnitude among the pools, and showed also a marginally significant negative relationship with conductivity. Richness scaled nonsignificantly with pool volume. We conclude that rock pools with higher nutrient availability are capable of supporting more phytoplankton species in this low-energy ecosystem. We did not find any support for the species-area relationship across the pools possibly because the pools were similarly affected by random disturbances irrespective of their volume.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据