Michael L Parsons Coastal Watershed Institute Florida Gulf Coast University Phytoplankton microalgae Cyanobacteria Microcystis Diatom Pseudonitzschia Diatom Actinoptychus ID: 365610
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Phytoplankton" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Phytoplankton
Michael L. Parsons
Coastal Watershed Institute
Florida Gulf Coast UniversitySlide2
Phytoplankton (microalgae)
Cyanobacteria (
Microcystis
)
Diatom (
Pseudo-nitzschia
)
Diatom (
Actinoptychus
)
Dinoflagellate (
Karenia brevis
)
Dinoflagellate (
Gambierdiscus
)
Chlorophyte
Silicoflagellate
Haptophyte
Diatom (
Chaetoceros
)Slide3
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 sickSlide4
Food WebSlide5
Phytoplankton Growth Requirements
Light
Nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus,
carbon, other compounds)Can serve as indicators of nutrient loading and light availabilitySlide6
The Good
nutrients
plankton
phytoplankton
fishSlide7
The BadSlide8
The UglySlide9
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 phytoplanktonresidence time phytoplankton
salinity assemblage shiftSlide10
flow nutrients phytoplankton
Doering
et al. 2006Slide11
flow
residence time
phytoplankton
Wan et al. 2013Slide12
Doering
et al. 2006Slide13
flow
residence time
phytoplankton
Wan et al. 2013Slide14
flow salinity
assemblage shiftSlide15Slide16
Andresen 2011Slide17
Andresen 2011Slide18
Brand, unpub.
Red Tides and Caloosahatchee DischargesSlide19
Brown et al. 2006Slide20Slide21
“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”Slide22
Workshop Questions
What
driver is the indicator sensitive to
?Nutrients, salinity, lightWhat constitutes a healthy population of the indicator?Low/moderate cell concentrations; more diatoms and less cyanobacteria and flagellatesIs the indicator a valued component of the Caloosahatchee system
?Should be!What metrics are appropriate for assessing this indicator?Chlorophyll concentrations; species identificationsSlide23
Workshop Questions
What
are the strengths and limitations of this indicator
?Chlorophyll is an easy (and strong) response variable to measureCofounding 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 tidesCould our use of this indicator be improved to address additional drivers/stressors?Yes – can help to optimize flow regimes in different conditionsNext steps?River and red tidesAssemblage shifts versus flow