Acceso abierto

Is zooplankton an indicator of the water trophic level in dam reservoirs?

Agnieszka Pociecha
Agnieszka Pociecha
, 
Irena Bielańska-Grajner
Irena Bielańska-Grajner
, 
Hanna Kuciel
Hanna Kuciel
 y 
Agata Z. Wojtal
Agata Z. Wojtal
   | 21 sept 2018
Oceanological and Hydrobiological Studies's Cover Image
Acerca de este artículo
Artículo anterior
Artículo siguiente
Cite
Article Category: Original research paper
Publicado en línea: 21 sept 2018
Páginas: 288 - 295
Recibido: 18 sept 2017
Aceptado: 12 ene 2018
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ohs-2018-0027
© 2018 Faculty of Oceanography and Geography, University of Gdańsk, Poland
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Figure 1

Location of the zooplankton sampling sites in Poland. Geographical regions: I - Southern Baltic Sea Coasts, Eastern Baltic Sea Coasts and Pomeranian Lakelands; II - Southern Baltic Lakelands and Eastern Baltic Lakelands; III - Central Poland Lowlands, Wysoczyzny Podlasko-Białoruskie high plains and Polesie Region; IV - Silesian-Kraków Upland, Małopolska Upland, Lublin-Lviv Upland and Carpathian Mts.; V - Sudety Mts. and Sudety Foreland; Dam reservoirs: 1 – Łapińskie Nowe Lake, 2 – Mylof Dam Reservoir, 3 – Koronowskie Lake, 4 – Zygmunt August Lake, 5 – Siemiatyckie Zalewy Reservoir, 6 – Próba Dam Reservoir, 7 – Wióry Dam Reservoir, 8 – Chańcza Dam Reservoir, 9 – Leśniańskie Lake (Leśniański Dam Reservoir), 10 – Lubachowski Dam Reservoir (Bystrzyckie Lake)
Location of the zooplankton sampling sites in Poland. Geographical regions: I - Southern Baltic Sea Coasts, Eastern Baltic Sea Coasts and Pomeranian Lakelands; II - Southern Baltic Lakelands and Eastern Baltic Lakelands; III - Central Poland Lowlands, Wysoczyzny Podlasko-Białoruskie high plains and Polesie Region; IV - Silesian-Kraków Upland, Małopolska Upland, Lublin-Lviv Upland and Carpathian Mts.; V - Sudety Mts. and Sudety Foreland; Dam reservoirs: 1 – Łapińskie Nowe Lake, 2 – Mylof Dam Reservoir, 3 – Koronowskie Lake, 4 – Zygmunt August Lake, 5 – Siemiatyckie Zalewy Reservoir, 6 – Próba Dam Reservoir, 7 – Wióry Dam Reservoir, 8 – Chańcza Dam Reservoir, 9 – Leśniańskie Lake (Leśniański Dam Reservoir), 10 – Lubachowski Dam Reservoir (Bystrzyckie Lake)

Figure 2

The number of zooplankton taxa in the studied dam reservoirs in 2012. 1 – Łapińskie Nowe Lake, 2 – Mylof Dam Reservoir, 3 – Koronowskie Lake, 4 – Zygmunt August Lake, 5 – Siemiatyckie Zalewy Reservoir, 6 – Próba Dam Reservoir, 7 – Wióry Dam Reservoir, 8 – Chańcza Dam Reservoir, 9 – Leśniańskie Lake, 10 – Lubachowski Dam Reservoir
The number of zooplankton taxa in the studied dam reservoirs in 2012. 1 – Łapińskie Nowe Lake, 2 – Mylof Dam Reservoir, 3 – Koronowskie Lake, 4 – Zygmunt August Lake, 5 – Siemiatyckie Zalewy Reservoir, 6 – Próba Dam Reservoir, 7 – Wióry Dam Reservoir, 8 – Chańcza Dam Reservoir, 9 – Leśniańskie Lake, 10 – Lubachowski Dam Reservoir

Figure 3

Rotifera (A) and Crustacea (B) (a – Copepoda; b – Cladocera) density (ind. l−1) in the studied dam reservoirs in 2012. 1 – Łapińskie Nowe Lake, 2 – Mylof Dam Reservoir, 3 – Koronowskie Lake, 4 – Zygmunt August Lake, 5 – Siemiatyckie Zalewy Reservoir, 6 – Próba Dam Reservoir, 7 – Wióry Dam Reservoir, 8 – Chańcza Dam Reservoir, 9 – Leśniańskie Lake, 10 – Lubachowski Dam Reservoir
Rotifera (A) and Crustacea (B) (a – Copepoda; b – Cladocera) density (ind. l−1) in the studied dam reservoirs in 2012. 1 – Łapińskie Nowe Lake, 2 – Mylof Dam Reservoir, 3 – Koronowskie Lake, 4 – Zygmunt August Lake, 5 – Siemiatyckie Zalewy Reservoir, 6 – Próba Dam Reservoir, 7 – Wióry Dam Reservoir, 8 – Chańcza Dam Reservoir, 9 – Leśniańskie Lake, 10 – Lubachowski Dam Reservoir

Indices calculated on the basis of density and species structure of Rotifera in the studied dam reservoirs: A – value after conversion, B – value of the indices

Indices Reservoirs (according to order in Fig.1)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
A B A B A B A B A B A B A B A B A B A B
Number of rotifers (N, ind. l−1) 152 46 39 39 180 47 3313 63 1455 58 13436 70 2453 61 2641 62 1069 57 818 55
Total biomass (B, mg w.w. l−1) 0.14 53 0.02 42 0.06 49 0.63 62 1.21 65 3 64 1 64 1.2 65 0.2 55 0.1 53
Percentage of bacterivores in total number (BAC, %) 13 47 26 50 54 57 78 62 0.5 44 7 46 41 54 34 52 56 57 90 65
Percentage of tecta in the population of Keratella cochlearis (TECTA, %) 45 59 12 53 5 51 97 68 4 50 77 65 38 57 86 66 90 67 65 62
Ratio of biomass to the number (B:N, mg w.w. ind.−1) 0.0009 36 0.0005 43 0.0003 49 0.0002 59 0.0008 37 0.0002 53 0.0004 46 0.0004 44 0.0002 58 0.0002 62
Percentage of species indicative of high trophy in the indicative group (IHT, %) 100 60 100 60 57 51 100 60 93 59 100 60 65 53 57 52 96 59 96 59

Numerical trophic state indices for dam reservoirs, irrespective of their trophic type (TSIRot) and (TSICR); the indices use species composition and density of Rotifera and Crustacea (according to Ejsmont-Karabin 2013)

No. Indices Regression coefficient Formulas
1 Number of rotifers (N, ind. l−1) R2 = 0.60 WSTRot1 = 5.38ln(N) + 19.28
2 Total biomass (B, mg w.w. l−1) R2 =0.47 WSTRot2 = 5.63ln(B) + 64.47
3 Percentage of bacterivores in the total number (BAC, %) R2 = 0.34 WSTRot3= 0.23BAC + 44.30
4 Percentage of tecta in the population of Keratella cochlearis (TECTA, %) R2 = 0.54 WSTRot4 =0.187TECT + 50.38
5 Ratio of biomass to the number (B:N, mg w.w. l−1: ind. l−1) R2= 0.50 WSTROt5 = 3.85 (B:N)-0.318
6 Percentage of species indicative of high trophy in the indicative group (IHT, %) R2= 0.67 WSTRot6 = 0.203 IHT + 40.0
7 Number of Crustacea (N, ind. l−1) R2= 0.32 WSTCR1 = 25.5N 0.142
8 Biomass of Cyclopoida (B, mg w.w. l−1) R2= 0.35 WSTCR2 = 57.6B 0.081
9 Percentage of cyclopoid biomass in total biomass of Crustacea (CB,%) R2= 0.30 WSTCR3 = 40.9CB 0.097
10 Ratio of cyclopoid biomass to Cladocera biomass (CY/CL) R2= 0.37 WSTCR4= 58.3(CY/CL) 0.071
11 Percentage of species indicative of high trophy in the indicative group (IHT,%) R2= 0.30 WSTCR5 = 43.8e0.004(IHT)

Indices calculated on the basis of density and species structure of Crustacea in the studied dam reservoirs: A – value after conversion, B – value of the indices

Indices Reservoirs (according to order in Fig.1)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
A B A B A B A B A B A B A B A B A B A B
Number of Crustacea (N, ind. l−1) 12 36 26 40 154 52 1402 71 197 54 626 64 557 62 207 54 1082 69 135 51
Biomass of Cyclopoida (B, mg w.w. l−1) 0.03 44 0.04 45 1.7 60 7.5 68 1.5 60 4.3 65 2.7 62 3.5 64 7.2 67 1 57
Percentage of cyclopoid biomass in total biomass of Crustacea (CB,%) 35 58 15 53 36 58 65 61 19 54 66 61 33 57 25 56 76 62 12 52
Ratio of cyclopoid biomass to Cladocera biomass (CY/CL) 0.54 56 0.33 54 0.75 57 1.9 61 0.24 51 2 61 1.2 59 0,37 54 0.8 57 0.6 56
Percentage of species indicative of high trophy in the indicative group (IHT,%) 50 53 80 60 58 55 97 64 55 54 90 63 41 52 14 46 18 47 79 60

Trophic state of the studied dam reservoirs corresponding to the value of indices calculated on the basis of density and species structure of Rotifera and Crustacea.

Reservoirs Rotifera indices of trophic state Crustacea indices of trophic state
Łapińskie Nowe Lake low eutrophic low meso-eutrophic
Mylof Dam Reservoir high meso-eutrophic low meso-eutrophic
Koronowskie Lake high meso-eutrophic high meso-eutrophic to low eutrophic
Zygmunt August Lake high eutrophic to polytrophic high eutrophic to polytrophic
Siemiatyckie Zalewy Reservoir mesotrophic to high eutrophic high meso-eutrophic to low eutrophic
Próba Dam Reservoir high eutrophic to polytrophic high eutrophic
Wióry Dam Reservoir high eutrophic low to high eutrophic
Chańcza Dam Reservoir high eutrophic to polytrophic high meso-eutrophic to high eutrophic
Leśniańskie Lake low to high eutrophic low eutrophic to polytrophic
Lubachowski Dam Reservoir low to high eutrophic low eutrophic

Selected physicochemical parameters of water in the studied dam reservoirs (after Pociecha & Bielańska-Grajner 2015)

Parameters Reservoirs (according to order in Fig. 1)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
SD m 1.4 3.4 2.7 0.3 1.2 0.8 1.3 1.0 1.6 2.3
WT °C 12.6 14.8 14.6 19.2 19.2 21.3 21.7 22.4 16.7 16.1
EC μS cm−1 372 274 326 335 359 376 402 254 135 246
pH 7.7 7.6 7.5 7.6 8.1 8.5 8.0 7.7 5.6 7.8
DO mg l−1 11.2 8.5 5.9 3.1 14.8 13.1 8.8 14.1 8.2 6.6
No3 − 3.1 0.5 0.5 0.08 0.04 0.03 0.21 0.1 2.05 2.4
po4 3− 0.4 0.3 0.5 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.07 0.25
NH4 + 0.04 0.1 0.2 0.03 0.1 0.02 0.28 0.1 0.1 0.06
Cl- 17.3 10.2 12.7 11.9 12.8 31.2 26.7 12.4 8.1 17.6
Mg2+ 8.0 4.9 6.8 11.75 10.2 10.2 16.8 6.9 2.65 11.1
Ca2+ 62.05 48.9 56.75 55.7 58.1 53.0 45.7 43.6 12.9 28.3

Characteristics of the studied dam reservoirs in Poland (nd – no data)

Name of dam reservoir Łapinskie Nowe Lake Mylof Dam Reservoir Koronowskie Lake Zygmunt August Lake Siemiatyckie Zalewy Reservoir Próba Dam Reservoir Wióry Dam Reservoir Chańcza Dam Reservoir Leśniańskie Lake Lubachowski Dam Reservoir
Location Kolbudy Zapora Koronowo Czechowizna Siemiatycze Próba Pawłów, Knurów Chańcza Leśna Lubachów
Coordinates 54°17′25″N 18°26′47″E 53°47′38″N 17°40′32″E 53°32′34″N 17°58′01″E 53°27′36″N 22°53′39″E 52°26′12″N 22°52′10″E 51°30′41″N 18°39′24″E 50°56′48″N 21°10′12″E 50°38′40″N 21°03′18″E 51°01′52″N 15°18′10″E 50°45′02″N 16°25′34″E
Year of creation 1925 1848 1960 1559 70’s XX age 2001 1980 1984 1905 1917
River Radunia Brda Brda Nereśl Kamionka Żeglina Świślina Czarna Staszowska Kwisa Bystrzyca
Area 0.35 km 2 10.5 km 2 13.5 km 2 4.85 km 2 0.33 km 2 0.21 km 2 4. 15 km 2 4.7 km 2 1.4 km 2 0.51 km 2
Capacity 2.5 M m3 16.2 M m3 80. 6 M m3 no data 0. 59 M m3 no data 35 M m3 20.59 M m3 15 M m3 8 M m3
Max depth 15.4 m 12 m 21.2 m 3.5 m 5.1 m 4 m 10 m 11 m 12 m 36 m
Catchment forest forest agroforestry agriculture agroforestry forest agriculture forest forest forest
Function retention, energy, fishing retention, energy, fishing retention, energy, fishing, recreation fish farming retention, fishing, recreation retention, fishing, recreation retention, energy, fishing, recreation retention, energy, fishing, recreation retention, energy, fishing, recreation retention, energy, fishing, recreation
Retention time (in days) nd 12.5 38 nd nd nd nd 218 37.8 54.8

Dominant species of zooplankton (%) in the studied dam reservoirs in 2012

Dominant species Reservoirs (according to the order in Fig. 1)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Rotfera
Conochilus unicornis 17
Keratella cochlearis 30 12 43 27 41 38 57
Keratella tecta 14 45 33 24 28
Keratella quadrata 10
Lecane closterocerca 15
Polyartdra dolichoptera 17
Polyartdra longiremis 16
Polyartdra major 22
Polyartdra vulgaris 16
Pompholyx sulcata 40
Synchaeta oblonga 13
Trichocerca pusilla 50
Trichocerca similis 10 16
Cladocera
Bosmina longirostris 15 61 76 18 53 73
Ceriodaphnia quadralunga 16 13 10
Chydorus sphaericus 15 30 25 12
Daphnia ambigua 13
Daphnia cucullata 26 15 19 10 36
Daphnia galeata 25 18
Diaphanosoma brachyurum 46 19
Eubosmina coregoni 50 11
Eubosmina crassicornis 38
Eubosmina gibbera 15
Eubosmina tdersities
Copepoda
Eudiaptomus gracilis 13
Tdermocyclops crassus 10
Tdermocyclops oitdnoides 17

The trophic state of dam reservoirs corresponding to the value of indices calculated on the basis of density and species structure of Rotifera and Crustacea (after Ejsmont-Karabin 2013)

Zooplankton value of trophic state indices Trophic state
Below 35 Oligotrophic
From 35 to 45 Mesotrophic
From 45 to 50 Low meso-eutrophic
From 50 to 55 High meso-eutrophic
From 55 to 60 Low eutrophic
From 60 to 65 High eutrophic
Above 65 Polytrophic
eISSN:
1897-3191
Idioma:
Inglés
Calendario de la edición:
4 veces al año
Temas de la revista:
Chemistry, other, Geosciences, Life Sciences
RSS Feed de revista