4.5 Article

Diatom Response to Global Warming in Douhu Lake, Southeast China

期刊

ACTA GEOLOGICA SINICA-ENGLISH EDITION
卷 95, 期 2, 页码 638-647

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/1755-6724.14294

关键词

diatom; global warming; Douhu Lake; China

资金

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2017YFA0603400]
  2. National Basic Research Program of China [2015CB953801]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41772379]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Many lacustrine sedimentary records indicate that global warming and increasing lake trophic level are the main factors leading to changes in diatom communities. By studying a lake located at a low latitude, researchers found a direct relationship between diatom changes and temperature.
A large number of lacustrine sedimentary records indicate that global warming is the main factor leading to significant changes in diatom communities in lakes of the northern hemisphere. However, due to the intensification of human activities since 1850, some scholars have emphasized that the increasing lake trophic level may be the main reason for the changes in diatom communities. The debate is ongoing. In order to avoid falling into the complex relationship between diatom changes and the seasonal cycle that characterizes lakes in mid and high latitudes, we chose a lake located at a low latitude, where the relationship between diatoms and temperature is not indirect but direct. The diatom record spans the past ca. 100 years and reveals that the abundance of Aulacoseira granulata increased from 1900 until 1985, replacing the previously dominant Aulacoseira ambigua. These changes are in agreement with the increasing trend in global temperature. Since 1985, the percentages of the small-celled Discostella stelligera and the benthic diatom Navicula heimansioides have increased, while Aulacoseira granulata has decreased. This latest shift is caused by further global warming. We conclude that warming is the main factor leading to changing diatom communities in Douhu Lake.

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

4.5
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