|
|
|
| |
|
|
| 本文已被：浏览 17次 下载 8次 |
码上扫一扫！ |
|
|
| 流清河湾浮游生物群落对近海河口环境变化的不同响应及其关键驱动因素 |
|
翁辰施,李志祥,王英哲,丁东生,崔正国,曲克明,胡海燕,魏玉秋
|
|
1.海水养殖生物育种与可持续产出全国重点实验室(中国水产科学研究院黄海水产研究所) 山东 青岛 266071;2.浙江海洋大学海洋科学与技术学院 浙江 舟山 316022;3.青岛海洋科技中心海洋渔业科学与食物产出过程功能实验室 山东 青岛 266237;4.青岛海洋科技中心海洋渔业科学与食物产出过程功能实验室 山东 青岛 266238;5.青岛海洋科技中心海洋渔业科学与食物产出过程功能实验室 山东 青岛 266239
|
|
| 摘要: |
| 近海河流和海洋环境之间存在着紧密的交互关系，因此，近海河口生态系统在生物多样性进化过程中扮演着重要角色。浮游植物和浮游动物已经被证实是近海河口生态系统中水质状况的重要生物指标。因此，综合评价多重环境因素对近海河口生态系统中浮游植物和浮游动物群落的影响至关重要。目前，关于流清河湾浮游生物群落及环境因子影响的研究相对空白，本研究于2021年3月(春季)、8月(夏季)和10月(秋季)采集了流清河湾海域7个站位的水样，获得了生物(即浮游植物和浮游动物)数据及相关环境因子数据。研究结果显示，3个航次共鉴定出浮游植物3门94种，以硅藻(Bacillariophyta)为主，其丰度及碳生物量在夏季达到最大值[(242.50±136.40)×103 cells/m3; (946.89± 810.66) µg C/m3]]；浮游动物共10类48种，桡足类(Copepods)出现次数最多，但春季最优势浮游动物为夜光虫(Noctiluca miliaris)浮游幼虫，且其丰度及生物量在春季最大[(5 665.71±4 576.32) ind./m3; (431.55±298.80) mg/m3]]。通过冗余分析(RDA)和Pearson相关性分析探究了环境因子对浮游生物优势种和组成的影响。结果表明，流清河湾浮游生物存在显著的时空变化，其中，春、夏季浮游生物优势种的主要影响因素是温度和营养盐浓度；影响秋季浮游生物优势种的主要驱动力是温度、盐度及营养盐，并且春、秋季存在发生赤潮的风险。此外，洋流、陆地径流及气象灾害等也是影响浮游生物优势种群落组成的重要因素。本研究的结果有助于提高对近海河口生态系统浮游生物群落的了解，为更深入了解近海浮游生物群落变化的环境影响机制提供理论基础，也为科学管理流清河湾生态环境提供数据参考。 |
| 关键词: 流清河湾 浮游植物 浮游动物 环境变化 驱动因素 响应机制 |
| DOI：10.19663/j.issn2095-9869.20240702003 |
| 分类号: |
| 基金项目:国家自然科学基金(42206103)和山东省自然科学基金(ZR2022QD133)共同资助 |
|
| Differential responses of plankton communities to environmental changes in the Liuqinghe Bay estuary |
|
WENG Chenshi1,2,3, LI Zhixiang1,3, WANG Yingzhe1,2,3, DING Dongsheng1,3, CUI Zhengguo4,5, QU Keming6,7, HU Haiyan2, WEI Yuqiu1,3
|
|
1.State Key Laboratory of Mariculture Biobreeding and Sustainable Goods, Yellow Sea Fisheries Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Fishery Sciences, Qingdao 266071, China;2.College of Marine Science and Technology, Zhejiang Ocean University, Zhoushan 316022, China;3.Laboratory for Marine Fisheries Science and Food Production Processes, Qingdao Marine Science and Technology Center, Qingdao 266237, China;4.State Key Laboratory of Mariculture Biobreeding and Sustainable Goods, Yellow Sea Fisheries Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Fishery Sciences, Qingdao 266072, China;5.Laboratory for Marine Fisheries Science and Food Production Processes, Qingdao Mar쀀䐎㾀￦⸒⸒⸒槡⸒槡;6.State Key Laboratory of Mariculture Biobreeding and Sustainable Goods, Yellow Sea Fisheries Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Fishery Sciences, Qingdao 266073, China;7.Laboratory for Marine Fisheries Science and Food Production Processes, Qingdao Mar
|
| Abstract: |
| Estuarine ecosystems play an important role in biodiversity due to the close interrelationship between riverine and marine environments. Phytoplankton and zooplankton serve as ecological indicators of water quality in estuarine ecosystems. Therefore, an integrated evaluation of the effects of multiple environmental factors on the phytoplankton and zooplankton communities in estuarine ecosystems is essential. Previous studies have often been limited to the interaction between a single phytoplankton or zooplankton species and environmental factors, whereas studies on the mechanism of the overall planktonic response to environmental factors are lacking. Therefore, we collected water samples from seven stations in the waters of the Liuqinghe Bay in March (spring), August (summer), and October (autumn) 2021. Redundancy analysis and Pearson’s correlation analysis were used to explore the effects of environmental factors on dominant phytoplankton and zooplankton species and communities. The results showed that there were large seasonal differences in water temperature in the study area, with the highest (23.70±0.17 °C) in summer and the lowest (5.91±0.03 °C) in spring. Changes in the mean salinity of offshore estuarine waters—with variations ranging from 30.29 to 31.70—were usually caused by inputs from estuarine runoff, showing obvious seasonal characteristics, and salinity among different stations did not show significant differences. The pH decreased with increasing water temperature. Compared with the first three hydrological parameters, chemical oxygen demand, Chl a, and nutrient salts did not show obvious seasonal patterns. In 2021, 94 phytoplankton species from three phyla were identified during the three cruises, with 80 Bacillariophyta spp. being the most abundant, followed by 13 Pyrrophyta spp. and 1 Chrysophyta sp.—it is worth mentioning that the same Chrysophyta sp. was identified in all the 3 cruises. The spring cruise in 2021 identified 44 species from three phyla, the summer cruise had the richest community composition, with 58 species from three phyla, and the autumn cruise identified 55 species from three phyla. In addition, the mean abundance of phytoplankton in Liuqinghe Bay in 2021 reached its maximum in summer (242.50×103±136.40×103 cells/m3), with the mean abundance in spring (19.38±12.23 cells/m3) at the lowest level. However, the seasonal variation of mean phytoplankton biomass in 2021 in Liuqinghe Bay showed the same abundance trend, with a maximum carbon biomass (946.89±810.66 µg C/m3) in summer and the lowest carbon biomass (31.15±20.96 µg C/m3) in spring. A total of 48 zooplankton species were identified in 10 groups, with copepods being the most numerous (15 species), followed by pelagic larvae and hydroidomedusa (11 species each), tunicates (3 species), chaetognaths and cladocera (2 species each), and one species each of jellyfish, amphipoda, mysidacea, and euphausia. A total of 14 zooplankton species from five taxa were identified during the spring cruise, 28 species from seven taxa during the summer cruise, and 25 species from eight taxa during the autumn cruise. Copepods and pelagic larvae had the highest occurrence frequency in the samples from each seasonal cruise; however, the frequency of Hydroidomedusae gradually increased over time. Moreover, the mean zooplankton abundance in the study area showed a clear seasonal pattern ranging from (55.00±12.52) – (5 665.71±4 576.32) ind./m3, with the maximum and minimum mean abundances in spring and autumn, respectively. Biomass exhibited a seasonal pattern like that of abundance, showing an overall decreasing trend. In 2021, the phytoplankton Shannon–Wiener diversity index (H′) and Pielou’s evenness index (J) in Liuqinghe Bay varied greatly among the three seasons, and there were significant differences among different stations. The average J of phytoplankton did not differ significantly among seasons, especially in spring and summer, but it fluctuated greatly among different stations. In general, phytoplankton biodiversity was the highest in summer and lowest in spring, whereas the evenness index was relatively evenly distributed in spring and summer and more scattered in autumn. The zooplankton H′ and J showed very similar trends, being generally higher in summer and autumn than in spring, and the H′ fluctuation in summer and autumn was also stronger than that in spring. The overall trend was higher in the summer than in the autumn. Overall, there were significant spatial and temporal variations in plankton in Liuqinghe Bay, in which the main influences on plankton-dominant species in spring and summer were temperature and nutrient salt concentration, while the main drivers affecting plankton-dominant species in autumn were temperature, salinity, and nutrient salts, and there was a potential for red tides to occur in spring and autumn. In addition, ocean currents, land runoff, and meteorological hazards are important factors that influence the community composition of dominant zooplankton species. The results of this study will help improve the understanding of plankton communities in estuarine ecosystems. It will also provide a theoretical basis for the scientific management of the ecological environment of Liuqinghe Bay and an in-depth understanding of the mechanisms of plankton community changes in the Bay. |
| Key words: Liuqinghe Bay Phytoplankton Zooplankton Environmental change Driving factors Response mechanisms |
|
|
|
|