Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-rdgjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T02:50:22.589Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Species composition and spatial distribution of abundances and biomass of phytoplankton and ciliates during summer stratification in the Gulf of Hammamet (Tunisia)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2011

Imen Hannachi
Affiliation:
Université de Sfax, Faculté des Sciences de Sfax, Département des Sciences de la Vie, Unité de recherche 00/UR/0907 Ecobiologie, Planctonologie and Microbiologie des Ecosystèmes Marins, Route Soukra Km 3.5 BP 1171 CP 3000 Sfax, Tunisie
Zaher Drira
Affiliation:
Université de Sfax, Faculté des Sciences de Sfax, Département des Sciences de la Vie, Unité de recherche 00/UR/0907 Ecobiologie, Planctonologie and Microbiologie des Ecosystèmes Marins, Route Soukra Km 3.5 BP 1171 CP 3000 Sfax, Tunisie
Malika Bel Hassen
Affiliation:
Institut National des Sciences et Technologie de la Mer, 2025 Salambô Tunis, Tunisie
Asma Hamza
Affiliation:
Institut National des Sciences et Technologie de la Mer, Centre de Sfax BP 1035 Sfax 3018, Tunisie
Habib Ayadi
Affiliation:
Université de Sfax, Faculté des Sciences de Sfax, Département des Sciences de la Vie, Unité de recherche 00/UR/0907 Ecobiologie, Planctonologie and Microbiologie des Ecosystèmes Marins, Route Soukra Km 3.5 BP 1171 CP 3000 Sfax, Tunisie
Lotfi Aleya*
Affiliation:
Université de Franche-Comté, Chrono-Environnement, UMR CNRS 6249 1, Place Leclerc, F-25030 Besançon cedex, France
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: L. Aleya, Université de Franche-Comté, Laboratoire de Chrono-Environnement, UMR CNRS 6249 1, Place Leclerc, F-25030, Besançon cedex, France email: lotfi.aleya@univ-fcomte.fr
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We studied the distribution of phytoplankton and ciliate communities in relation to environmental factors at 6 stations sampled between 28 and 31 July 2006 during the summer water stratification in the Gulf of Hammamet (Tunisia, eastern Mediterranean Sea). A strong thermocline was established at 30 m, and, on average, the N/P ratio was lower than the Redfield ratio (16), suggesting a potential N limitation. The inshore location was numerically dominated by dinoflagellates (55%) represented essentially by members of the genera Protoperidinium, Gymnodinium, and cryptic Scrippsiella trochoidea and on the offshore by diatoms (68%). The phytoplankton assemblage was largely dominated by the diatoms Thalassionema nitzshioides and Rhizosolenia styliformis, while the ciliate community was numerically dominated by small taxa such as Lohmanniella oviformis (6 × 102 cells l−1) and Uronema marinum (5.50 × 102 cells l−1). The total phytoplankton abundance increased from the coastal area (5.26 × 102 ± 4.48 × 102) to the open sea (10.33 ×102 ± 28.06 × 102) and decreased from the surface to the bottom, inversely to the ciliate abundance. Total phytoplankton and abundances showed similar patterns. Total ciliate biomass decreased from the inshore (0.25 ± 0.58) to the offshore (0.06 ± 0.10) areas but increased from the surface to the bottom. The diversity index of both phytoplankton and ciliate communities showed a decrease with a coastal–open sea gradient. The relationships between phytoplankton and ciliates suggest planktonic micro-heterotrophs were implicated in the channelling of matter and energy through the microbial loop in the Gulf of Hammamet.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2011
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Geographical map focusing on ciliate and phytoplankton sampling stations in the Gulf of Hammamet.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Vertical distribution of water temperature, salinity, sigma-t and dissolved oxygen in the different sampling stations.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Vertical distribution (mean ± SD) of nutrient compounds (silicate, nitrite + nitrate, ammonium and orthophosphate) in the different sampling stations.

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Vertical distribution (mean ± SD) of N/P ratio in the different sampling stations.

Figure 4

Fig. 5. Spatial distribution of the diversity index of phytoplankton and ciliate communities in the different sampling stations.

Figure 5

Fig. 6. Spatial distribution of the dominance index of phytoplankton with the two most abundant species.

Figure 6

Fig. 7. Relative contribution of different groups to phytoplankton abundance (A1) and biomass (B1) and to ciliate abundance (A2) and biomass (B2) in the different sampling stations.

Figure 7

Table 1. List of the main phytoplankton species found in the coastal and open sea areas of the Gulf of Hammamet during stratification (-, not detected; + 50-1000 cells l−1; *** > 1000 cells l−1).

Figure 8

Table 2. Min (minimum), max (maximum) and mean ± SD of physico-chemical and biological parameters in the Gulf of Hammamet.

Figure 9

Fig. 8. Spatial distribution of abundance and biomass (mean ± SD) of total phytoplankton (A) and ciliates (B) in the different sampling stations.

Figure 10

Table 3. List of the main phytoplankton species found in the coastal and open sea areas in the Gulf of Hammamet during stratification (-, not detected; + 50–1000 cells l−1; *** > 1000 cells l−1).

Figure 11

Fig. 9. Canonical correspondence analysis made on the biological parameters and different environmental factors in different stations during the summer cruise.