4.4 Article

Catchment urbanization increases benthic microalgal biomass in streams under controlled light conditions

期刊

AQUATIC SCIENCES
卷 69, 期 4, 页码 511-522

出版社

SPRINGER BASEL AG
DOI: 10.1007/s00027-007-0907-0

关键词

microphytobenthos; stormwater; watershed; fluorescence; Melbourne; Australia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Stormwater from urban land degrades aquatic ecosystems. Nutrients, light and flow regime affect the development of benthic microalgae (microphytobenthos), and all are affected by urban stormwater. The relative influence of these factors on microphytobenthos is unknown and is largely untested. This study investigated the effect of urbanization, controlling for irradiance, on the development of stream microphytobenthos assemblages. Three light levels were achieved (two were comparable) in four streams of different catchment urbanization. Microphytobenthos assemblages were sampled fortnightly from each stream over 79 days in winter. Biomass (chlorophyll a, pheophytin and cell density) increased with catchment urbanization. Light only affected biomass in the more urban streams and scour may have affected microphytobenthos assemblages in the most urban stream. Each stream had distinct assemblages, although time and light had no apparent effect on their composition. Physiological analysis suggested that the microphytobenthos was potentially light-limited in all four streams. However, light limitation was overridden by nutrient limitation in the least urbanized streams. The alleviation of nutrient limitation in one stream under the highest light treatment was attributed to microphytobenthos having sufficient energy to support active uptake of nutrients. Light did not drive differences in microphytobenthos biomass among the four study streams; differences were due to other factors affected by urbanization, most likely nutrient enrichment. To minimize the risk of algal blooms in urban waterways, reducing eutrophication should be a higher management priority than limiting irradiance.

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