4.3 Article

Plankton relationships under small water level fluctuations in a subtropical reservoir

期刊

AQUATIC ECOLOGY
卷 43, 期 2, 页码 371-381

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10452-008-9197-4

关键词

Phytoplankton; Zooplankton; Reservoir management; Spillway outflow; Water-level stability

资金

  1. Nucleoelectrica Argentina Sociedad Anonima
  2. CONICET

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In reservoirs, variations in water level may affect plankton biomass and species composition. Studies on the effect of water-level fluctuations are scarce and restricted to Europe and Australia. In the Rio Tercero Reservoir (Argentina), the management policies of a nuclear-power plant require a minimum depth of 650 m. During periods of excessive rainfall, however, the input is such that the excess passes over the spillway, thus causing a high turnover of water. Phytoplankton, zooplankton, and physicochemical variables were monitored over 2 years at three sampling stations during a period with annual precipitation higher than the historical annual mean. Different hydrological situations occurred based on precipitation, spillway outflow, and water-renewal rate. At high renewal rates, phyto- and zoo-plankton diversities peaked. During high outflow periods phytoplankton biomass peaked through the contribution of Ceratium hirundinella. Once the spillway outflow ceased, stable conditions (low renewal rates) were achieved, thus allowing the onset of biological interactions. Maximum phytoplankton density (mainly Actinocyclus normanii) was reached at such times, and efficient grazers (Daphnia laevis) with long life cycles dominated in terms of biomass. The structure and dynamics of the plankton community could be altered by changes in hydrological conditions (renewal rate and spillway outflow) that act to compromise the apparent stability imposed by steady water levels. These variables must be considered to identify disturbance conditions and improve knowledge of reservoir environments, so as to implement appropriate management practices.

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

4.3
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