4.7 Article

Scale-Specific Patterns of the Production of the Charophyte Chara aspera in the Brackish Baltic Sea: Linking Individual and Community Production and Biomass Growth

期刊

FRONTIERS IN MARINE SCIENCE
卷 8, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fmars.2021.674014

关键词

benthic ecology; macroalgae; photosynthesis; primary production; environmental forcing; seasonal variability

资金

  1. Estonian Science Foundation [9439]
  2. Interreg Central Baltic Programme Project MAREA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that light and temperature are key factors influencing the production and growth of Chara aspera, and there are differences in production levels at different scales, indicating the importance of shelf-shading and below-ground processes in natural plant assemblages.
An understanding of the nature of scale-dependence in macroalgal production and to quantify how primary production is incorporated into autotrophic biomass requires an assessment of primary production at multiple scales. In this study we experimentally estimated seasonal variability in individual photosynthesis, community production and growth in biomass of the charophyte Chara aspera in the Baltic Sea together with the key environmental variables known to regulate the production of macroalgae. The experiments suggested that the production and growth of C. aspera was defined largely by light and temperature at all studied scales. However, the algal production at the same light levels was systematically lower at the community than an individual level, suggesting the importance of shelf-shading and below-ground processes in natural plant assemblages. Moreover, the observation scale also defined response types between the environment, plant production and growth. This implies that the patterns of variability of the production and growth of macrophytes should always be interpreted in the context of scale and any multiscale model development should involve experimental validation at all important scales.

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

4.7
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