Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-rngvg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-06T08:16:30.725Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Recovery of Antarctic stream epilithon from simulated scouring events

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 March 2015

Tyler J. Kohler*
Affiliation:
Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, University of Colorado, 1560 30th Street, Boulder, CO 80303, USA
Ethan Chatfield
Affiliation:
Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, University of Colorado, 1560 30th Street, Boulder, CO 80303, USA
Michael N. Gooseff
Affiliation:
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Colorado State University, 1372 Campus Delivery, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA
John E. Barrett
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1405 Perry Street, Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA
Diane M. McKnight
Affiliation:
Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, University of Colorado, 1560 30th Street, Boulder, CO 80303, USA
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Microbial mats are common in polar streams and often dominate benthic biomass. Climate change may be enhancing the variability of stream flows in the Antarctic, but so far studies investigating mat responses to disturbance have been limited in this region. Mat regrowth was evaluated following disturbance by experimentally scouring rocks from an ephemeral McMurdo Dry Valley stream over two summers (2001–02 and 2012–13). Mats were sampled at the beginning and resampled at the end of the flow season. In 2012–13, mats were additionally resampled mid-season along with previously undisturbed controls. In 2001–02 rocks regained 47% of chlorophyll a and 40% of ash-free dry mass by the end of the summer, while in 2012–13 rocks regrew 18% and 27%, respectively. Mat stoichiometry differed between summers, and reflected differences in biomass and discharge. Oscillatoria spp. were greatest on scoured rocks and Phormidium spp. on undisturbed rocks. Small diatoms Humidophila and Fistulifera spp. increased throughout the summer in all mats, with the latter more abundant in scoured communities. Collectively, these data suggest that mats are variable intra-annually, responsive to hydrology and require multiple summers to regrow initial biomass once lost. These results will aid the interpretation of long-term data, as well as inform Antarctic Specially Managed Area protocols.

Information

Type
Biological Sciences
Copyright
© Antarctic Science Ltd 2015 
Figure 0

Fig. 1 Detail of the Lake Fryxell basin within Taylor Valley, Antarctica. The black circles indicate gaging stations operated by the MCM LTER, and the black arrow points to the Green Creek study site.

Figure 1

Fig. 2 a. Total calculated discharge taken from the Green Creek gage (F9) for each summer for 1993–94 through 2012–13. Darkened bars indicate summers highlighted in this study. b. & c. Hydrograph of the continuous discharge measurements taken from the Green Creek stream gage (F9) during the 2001–02 and 2012–13 summers, respectively. Dotted lines indicate dates epilithon was sampled.

Figure 2

Table I Values for physical and chemical parameters opportunistically sampled from Green Creek stream water during the 2001–02 and 2012–13 summers.

Figure 3

Fig. 3 Average a. chl a, b. ash-free dry mass (AFDM) and c. autotrophic index (AI=chl a:AFDM) for monitored orange mats sampled at the downstream Green Creek transect as part of the MCM LTER for each summer, 1993–94 through 2012–13. Where bars are absent samples were not taken. See Stanish et al. (2011) for detailed collection and analytical methods.

Figure 4

Fig. 4 Recovery of epilithic biomass (a. chl a and b. ash-free dry mass (AFDM)) and stoichiometry (c. C:N, d. C:P and e. N:P) from rock samples measured at the beginning and end of the 2001–02 and 2012–13 summers. Error bars indicate standard error.

Figure 5

Fig. 5 Biomass as a. chl a, b. ash-free dry mass (AFDM), c. autotrophic index (AI=chl a:AFDM) and d. the percent organic material for each group of rocks and associated controls for the 2012–13 summer. Grey bars indicate the primary samples and white bars indicate regrowth. Samples are arranged by date. Error bars indicate standard error.

Figure 6

Fig. 6 Nutrient composition of epilithon for each group of rocks and associated controls for the 2012–13 summer: a. %C, b. %N and c. %P, and e. C:N, f. C:P and g. N:P. Grey bars indicate the primary samples and white bars indicate regrowth. Samples are arranged by date. Error bars indicate standard error.

Figure 7

Fig. 7 a. Overall epilithic community by percent biovolume and b. relative abundance of major groups of diatoms. For the composite figure, Wilmottia spp. and Leptolyngbya spp. are combined. Cmole=Craticula molestiformis (Hustedt) Mayama, Humi spp=Humidophila spp., Harcua=H. arcuata, Haust=H. australis, Fpell=Fistulifera pelliculosa, Hant spp=Hantzschia spp., Luti spp=Luticola spp., Maya spp=Mayamaea spp., Muel spp=Muelleria spp., Ppapi=Psammothidium papilio, Slati=Stauroneis latistauros and Ccyma=Chamaepinnularia cymatopleura (West & West) Cavacini.

Figure 8

Fig. 8 Redundancy analysis (RDA) of a. composite and b. diatom communities separated by disturbance treatment. Cmole=Craticula molestiformis, Fpell=Fistulifera pelliculosa, Hamph=Hantzschia amphioxys (Ehrenberg) Grunow, Humisp=Humidophila spp., Harcua=H. arcuata, Haust=H. australis, Laustr=L. austroatlantica, Lmutic=L. muticopsis, Matom=Mayamaea atomus (Kützing) Lange-Bertalot, Mpera=Muelleria peraustralis (West & West) Spaulding & Stoermer, Ppapi=Psammothidium papilio and Slati=Stauroneis latistauros.

Figure 9

Fig. 9 Redundancy analysis (RDA) of diatom communities as a function of sample date with a. all species and b. excluding the small diatom Fistulifera pelliculosa. Abbreviations for diatom taxa are given in the caption for Fig. 8.