Phytoplankton

23
Phytoplankton Michael L. Parsons Coastal Watershed Institute Florida Gulf Coast University

description

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. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of Phytoplankton

Page 1: Phytoplankton

PhytoplanktonMichael L. Parsons

Coastal Watershed InstituteFlorida Gulf Coast University

Page 2: Phytoplankton

Phytoplankton (microalgae)

Cyanobacteria (Microcystis)Diatom (Pseudo-nitzschia) Diatom (Actinoptychus)

Dinoflagellate (Karenia brevis)

Dinoflagellate (Gambierdiscus)

Chlorophyte

Silicoflagellate

Haptophyte

Diatom (Chaetoceros)

Page 3: Phytoplankton

OverviewThe Good: phytoplankton are the base of the

foodwebThe Bad: too much can have negative impactsThe Ugly: some phytoplankton can produce

toxins that can kill animals and make people sick

Page 4: Phytoplankton

Food Web

Page 5: Phytoplankton

Phytoplankton Growth RequirementsLightNutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus, carbon,

other compounds)Can serve as indicators of nutrient loading

and light availability

Page 6: Phytoplankton

The Good

nutrients plankton

phyto

pla

nkt

on

fish

Page 7: Phytoplankton

The Bad

Page 8: Phytoplankton

The Ugly

Page 9: Phytoplankton

Phytoplankton and the CaloosahatcheeMany 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 phytoplanktonsalinity assemblage shift

Page 10: Phytoplankton

flow nutrients phytoplankton

Doering et al. 2006

Page 11: Phytoplankton

flow residence time phytoplankton

Wan et al. 2013

Page 12: Phytoplankton

Doering et al. 2006

Page 13: Phytoplankton

flow residence time phytoplankton

Wan et al. 2013

Page 14: Phytoplankton

flow salinity assemblage shift

Page 15: Phytoplankton
Page 16: Phytoplankton

Andresen 2011

Page 17: Phytoplankton

Andresen 2011

Page 18: Phytoplankton

Brand, unpub.

Red Tides and Caloosahatchee Discharges

Page 19: Phytoplankton

Brown et al. 2006

Page 20: Phytoplankton

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 100000

7

14

21

28

35Red tide frequency versus S79 N loading

mg N/cf/s

% o

f sam

ples

>10

0,00

Kar

enia

bre

vis

per l

iter

Page 21: Phytoplankton

“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”

Page 22: Phytoplankton

Workshop QuestionsWhat 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

Page 23: Phytoplankton

Workshop QuestionsWhat 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