1 / 23

Phytoplankton

Phytoplankton. Michael L. Parsons Coastal Watershed Institute Florida Gulf Coast University. Phytoplankton (microalgae). Cyanobacteria ( Microcystis ). Diatom ( Actinoptychus ). Chlorophyte. Diatom ( Pseudo-nitzschia ). Dinoflagellate ( Karenia brevis ). Silicoflagellate.

isaiah-myers
Download Presentation

Phytoplankton

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Phytoplankton Michael L. Parsons Coastal Watershed Institute Florida Gulf Coast University

  2. Phytoplankton (microalgae) Cyanobacteria (Microcystis) Diatom (Actinoptychus) Chlorophyte Diatom (Pseudo-nitzschia) Dinoflagellate (Karenia brevis) Silicoflagellate Diatom (Chaetoceros) Dinoflagellate (Gambierdiscus) Haptophyte

  3. Overview • The Good: phytoplankton are the base of the foodweb • The Bad: too much can have negative impacts • The Ugly: some phytoplankton can produce toxins that can kill animals and make people sick

  4. Food Web

  5. Phytoplankton Growth Requirements • Light • Nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus, carbon, other compounds) • Can serve as indicators of nutrient loading and light availability

  6. The Good fish phytoplankton nutrients plankton

  7. The Bad

  8. The Ugly

  9. Phytoplankton and the Caloosahatchee • Many factors that affect the growth of phytoplankton in the Caloosahatchee are controlled/influenced by the flow of the river. • As flow increases: • nutrients  phytoplankton • residence time  phytoplankton • salinity  assemblage shift

  10. flow  nutrients  phytoplankton Doering et al. 2006

  11. flow  residence time  phytoplankton Wan et al. 2013

  12. Doering et al. 2006

  13. flow  residence time  phytoplankton Wan et al. 2013

  14. flow  salinity  assemblage shift

  15. Andresen 2011

  16. Andresen 2011

  17. Red Tides and Caloosahatchee Discharges Brand, unpub.

  18. Brown et al. 2006

  19. “The combined flux of N and P from TB, CH, and the Caloosahatchee River could theoretically supply 11–50% of the N and 11–57% of the P required to support growth of the measured population abundance for each of the three blooms”

  20. Workshop Questions • What driver is the indicator sensitive to? • Nutrients, salinity, light • What constitutes a healthy population of the indicator? • Low/moderate cell concentrations; more diatoms and less cyanobacteria and flagellates • Is the indicator a valued component of the Caloosahatchee system? • Should be! • What metrics are appropriate for assessing this indicator? • Chlorophyll concentrations; species identifications

  21. Workshop Questions • What are the strengths and limitations of this indicator? • Chlorophyll is an easy (and strong) response variable to measure • Cofounding factors (salinity and nutrients; flow and residence time) • What are the relevant gaps and uncertainties in our understanding of the relationship between drivers/stressor and indicator response? • Teasing out nutrient loading versus residence time • Role of Caloosahatchee in red tides • Could our use of this indicator be improved to address additional drivers/stressors? • Yes – can help to optimize flow regimes in different conditions • Next steps? • River and red tides • Assemblage shifts versus flow

More Related