4.5 Article

Can we predict diatoms herbicide sensitivities with phylogeny? Influence of intraspecific and interspecific variability

期刊

ECOTOXICOLOGY
卷 26, 期 8, 页码 1065-1077

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10646-017-1834-z

关键词

Bacillariophyta; Cryptic diversity; Ecological assessment; EC50; Micropollutant; Species boundaries

资金

  1. Onema (Office National de l'Eau et des Milieux Aquatiques)
  2. INRA (Projet Innovant Comipho)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Diatoms are used as indicators of freshwater ecosystems integrity. Developing diatom-based tools to assess impact of herbicide pollution is expected by water managers. But, defining sensitivities of all species to multiple herbicides would be unattainable. The existence of a phylogenetic signal of herbicide sensitivity was shown among diatoms and should enable prediction of new species sensitivity. However, diatoms present a cryptic diversity that may lead to variation in their sensitivity to herbicides that would need to be taken into account. Using bioassays, the sensitivity to four herbicides (Atrazine, Terbutryn, Diuron, Isoproturon) was evaluated for 11 freshwater diatom taxa and intraspecific variability was assessed for two of them (Nitzschia palea and Achnanthidium spp.). Intraspecific variability of herbicide sensitivity was always smaller than interspecific variability, but intraspecific variability was more important in N. palea than in Achnanthidium spp. Indeed, one species showed no intraspecific phylogenetic signal (N. palea) whereas the other did (Achnanthidium spp.). On one hand, species boundaries are not set properly for Achnanthidium spp. which encompass several taxa. On the other hand, there is a higher phenotypic plasticity for N. palea. Finally, a phylogenetic signal of herbicide sensitivity was measured at the interspecific level, opening up prospects for setting up reliable biomonitoring tools based on sensitivity prediction, insofar as species boundaries are correctly defined.

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