4.4 Article

Phytoplankton assemblage response to changing nutrients in Florida Bay: Results of mesocosm studies

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jembe.2017.05.006

关键词

Mesocosms; Nutrient; Phytoplankton; Everglades restoration; N:P stoichiometry; N form

资金

  1. South Florida Water Management District

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The ongoing restoration of the Florida Everglades has changed the hydrology in south Florida and increasing freshwater discharge has contributed to a shift in nutrients and phytoplankton in northern Florida Bay. To understand the effect of the changing nitrogen (N) forms and nitrogen:phosphorus (N:P) ratios on phytoplankton biomass and assemblage composition, five mesocosm experiments were conducted. Nutrient additions included a matrix of different forms of N (NO3-, NH4+, and DON) and P (as sodium beta(-)glycerophosphate pentahydrate) in differing N:P molar ratios (4, 16, 32), a P alone addition, and a control. In general, chlorophyll a increased threefold in the + P treatments and ten-fold in the + N + P treatments, while it did not increase in the + N treatments. Typically the + N + P treatments, particularly the + NO3- +P at the N:P molar ratio of 32, promoted high concentrations of fucoxanthin (generally indicative of diatoms) relative to chlorophyll a. While chlorophyll a did not increase significantly in the + N alone treatments, there was a change in the phytoplankton assemblage. The + N treatments, when N was in the form of + NH4+ yielded proportionally higher zeaxanthin (generally indicative of picocyanobacteria). When the + N:P ratio increased, the relative concentrations of fucoxanthin and alloxanthin (generally indicative of cryptophytes) to chlorophyll a increased, whereas the relative concentrations of zeaxanthin and dinoflagellates (generally indicative of photosynthetic dinoflagellates) declined. This study highlights the importance of dual P and N control, particularly N in the forms of NH4+ and DON if picocyanobacterial blooms are to be controlled.

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

4.4
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