Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-rdgjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T03:08:35.084Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Temporal patterns of phytoplankton assemblages, size spectra and diversity during the wane of a Phaeocystis globosa spring bloom in hydrologically contrasted coastal waters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 June 2008

Mathilde Schapira*
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide SA 5001, Australia
Dorothee Vincent
Affiliation:
Laboratoire Ecosystèmes Littoraux et Côtiers, Maison de la Recherche en Environnement Naturel, CNRS FRE 2816 ELICO, Université du Littoral-Côte d'Opale, 32 Avenue Foch, 62930 Wimereux, France
Valerie Gentilhomme
Affiliation:
Laboratoire Ecosystèmes Littoraux et Côtiers, Station Marine de Wimereux, CNRS FRE 2816 ELICO, Université des Sciences et Technologies de Lille 1, 28 Avenue Foch BP-80, 62930 Wimereux, France
Laurent Seuront
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide SA 5001, Australia Laboratoire Ecosystèmes Littoraux et Côtiers, Station Marine de Wimereux, CNRS FRE 2816 ELICO, Université des Sciences et Technologies de Lille 1, 28 Avenue Foch BP-80, 62930 Wimereux, France South Australian Research and Development Institute, Aquatic Sciences, West Beach, SA 5022, Australia
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: Mathilde Schapira School of Biological Sciences, Flinders UniversityGPO Box 2100, Adelaide SA 5001, Australia email: mathilde.schapira@flinders.edu.au
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The space–time dynamic of phytoplankton diversity and succession was investigated during the wane of a Phaeocystis globosa spring bloom in four distinct hydrological sub-systems of the eastern English Channel. Nutrients, chlorophyll-a concentrations, and phytoplankton composition, standing stocks, size spectra and diversity were monitored during three key periods in 2003: late spring, early summer and summer. Two consecutive diatom assemblages were observed, respectively dominated by: (i) small colonial species (<100 μm; Melosira sp., Diploneis sp. and Navicula transitans) in April; and (ii) large fine-walled cells (>200 μm; Guinardia striata and Rhizosolenia imbricata) in May and July. This shift in diatom composition appeared to be related to the potentially limitating silicic acid in early summer. Specific phytoplankton assemblages identified in distinct water masses have evolved from a mature/senescent community towards a relatively homogeneous aestival structure of dominant species that might have been triggered by the wane of the P. globosa bloom. Our results also identified a strong heterogeneity in the distribution of secondary species between distinct water masses during the summer period, suggesting that the magnitude of the observed patterns was intrinsically related to the hydrological properties prevailing in each sub-system. The identification of distinct temporal patterns in phytoplankton species diversity and succession following the wane of a spring bloom at relatively small spatial scales (i.e. <10 km) is discussed in the framework of P. globosa blooms in particular and phytoplankton blooms in general and is suggested to have potentially strong consequences on food web dynamics and the carbon cycle in coastal ecosystems.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2008
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Study area and location of the sampling stations (), Sin (50°48′N–1°34′E), Soff (50°48′N–1°27′8″E), Nin (50°14′39″N–1°26′47″E) and Noff (50°20′33″N–1°1′053″E).

Figure 1

Table 1. In situ conditions at the sampling periods: locations, dates, depths, tidal and wind conditions.

Figure 2

Fig. 2. Daily Somme river inputs (m3 s−1) recorded on the study site from April to July 2003. Black arrows correspond to sampling periods.

Figure 3

Table 2. Vertically averaged (±SE) salinity (S) and temperature (T). Nitrite + nitrate (NO2− + NO3−), ammonium (NH4+), silicic acid (Si(OH)4), phosphate (HPO42−) concentrations (μM) and chlorophyll-a ([Chl a]) surface concentrations (μg l−1) recorded on the sampling stations Nin, Noff, Sin and Soff during the survey. No data were available for Soff in May. DL, detection limit.

Figure 4

Fig. 3. Si:N:P molar ratios in April (◊), May (▴) and July (★). In each area delimited by the Brzezinski (1985) ratio and the Redfield et al. (1963) ratio (Si:N:P = 16:16:1), the potential limiting nutrients are reported in order of priority. No data were available for Soff in May.

Figure 5

Table 3. Abundance ‘A’ (103 cell l−1) and biomass ‘B’ (μg C l−1) of major auto- and hetero/mixotrophic protists identified from Lugol's iodine-preserved samples collected on the four sampling stations Nin, Noff, Sin and Soff during the survey. No data were available for Soff in May.

Figure 6

Fig. 4. Results of the factorial correspondence analysis conducted on phytoplankton taxa. Observations (stations) and variables (phytoplankton taxa; see Table 4 for details of the species codes) are presented separately. The plan on the first 3 axes described 68.1% of the total inertia. Projections of observations (A) and variables (B) in the two-dimensional plan defined by axes 1 and 2. Projections of observations (C) and variables (D) in the two-dimensional plan defined by axes 1 and 3. (█) Characteristic spring (April) and (□) summer (May/July) community. Specific taxa of Noff -April and Noff -May (▴).

Figure 7

Table 4. Code (used to identify species in factorial correspondence analysis), length (μm), presence (+)/absence (−), first (1)/secondary (2) dominant phytoplankton taxa identified from Lugol's iodine-preserved samples collected on the four sampling stations Nin, Noff, Sin and Soff during the survey. No data were available for Soff in May.

Figure 8

Fig. 5. Time course evolution of relative phytoplankton abundance (%) on the four sampling stations (Nin, Noff, Sin and Soff) in April (A), May (B) and July (C), through five major size-categories: ≤10 μm, 10–20 μm, 20–100 μm, 100–200 μm, >200 μm. No data were available for Soff in May.

Figure 9

Fig. 6. Rank–frequency diagrams of phytoplankton species for the four sampling stations (Nin, Noff, Sin and Soff) in April (dotted line), May (continuous line) and July (bold line). No data were available for Soff in May.

Figure 10

Table 5. Species richness (S), diversity index (H′) and evenness (J′) of phytoplankton community, on the four sampling stations Nin, Noff, Sin and Soff during the survey. No data were available for Soff in May.

Figure 11

Table 6. Distance (d) between rank distributions of phytoplankton species identified on 2 distinct sampling sites during the survey. d(Nin–Noff) and d(Sin–Soff): distances between inshore and offshore waters within the same studied site; d(Nin–Sin) and d(Noff–Soff): distances between inshore/offshore waters of both studied sites. No data were available for Soff in May.