大庆新华湖藻类植物群落结构与环境因子的相关性

doi:10.11983/CBB15094

植物学报 ›› 2016, Vol. 51 ›› Issue (3): 353-362.DOI: 10.11983/CBB15094 cstr: 32102.14.CBB15094

大庆新华湖藻类植物群落结构与环境因子的相关性

肖智顺, 林聪, 杨双, 刘妍, 范亚文^*()

哈尔滨师范大学生命科学与技术学院, 植物学省级重点实验室, 哈尔滨 150025

收稿日期:2015-06-01 接受日期:2015-09-25 出版日期:2016-05-01 发布日期:2016-05-24
通讯作者: 范亚文
作者简介:
? 共同第一作者
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金(No.31270250,No.31470308)和黑龙江省大学生创新创业训练计划(No.201410231001)

Community Structure of Phytoplankton and Its Relation with Environmental Factors in Xinhua Lake of China

Zhishun Xiao, Cong Lin, Shuang Yang, Yan Liu, Yawen Fan^*

Provincial Key Laboratory of Botany, College of Life Sciences and Technology, Harbin Normal University, Harbin 150025, China

Received:2015-06-01 Accepted:2015-09-25 Online:2016-05-01 Published:2016-05-24
Contact: Fan Yawen
About author:
? These authors contributed equally to this paper

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 2014年5-10月对大庆新华湖藻类植物群落结构与环境因子的关系进行了初步研究, 为湖泊状况的动态监测提供基本数据。调查期间, 共发现藻类植物135种, 隶属5门63属, 其中硅藻门56种, 绿藻门49种, 蓝藻门15种, 裸藻门12种, 甲藻门3种。新华湖优势种共24种, 包括绿藻门14种, 蓝藻门6种, 硅藻门3种, 裸藻门1种, 且季节更替明显, 可以初步推断新华湖藻类植物群落组成为绿藻-硅藻型。新华湖藻类植物细胞丰度变化范围为37.57×10⁶-72.37×10⁶ cells·L^-1, 平均值为52.13×10⁶ cells·L^-1。多样性指数变化为: Simpson生态优势度指数(D)在0.642-0.928之间, Shannon-Weaver多样性指数(H')在1.698-3.1之间, Pielou均匀度指数(J)在0.324-0.561之间, 3种指数变化趋势一致, 均在秋季最高, 春季最低。研究表明, 水温、pH值、总磷、生化需氧量、溶解氧和水动力是影响新华湖藻类植物群落结构的主要因子。

null

Abstract: We investigated the community structure of phytoplankton in Xinhua Lake from May to October in 2014, and analyzed its relationship with environmental factors. Basic data were provided for dynamically monitoring the lake condi- tion. A total of 135 phytoplankton taxa belonging to 5 phyla and 63 genera were observed: 56 Bacillariophyta, 49 Chlorophyta, 15 Cyanophyta, 12 Euglenophyta, and 3 Pyrrhophyta. We found 24 dominant taxa: 14 Chlorophyta, 6 Cyanophyta, 3 Bacillariophyta, and only 1 Euglenophyta. All these dominant taxa showed seasonal alteration in preva- lence. Xinhua Lake was dominated by Chlorophyta and Bacillariophyta. The cell density of the phytoplankton ranged from 37.57×10⁶ to 72.37×10⁶ cells·L^-1, and the mean phytoplankton abundance was 52.13×10⁶ cells·L^-1. The Simpson, Shan- non and Pielou indexes for the phytoplankton community were 0.642-0.928, 1.698-3.1, and 0.324-0.561, respectively. These three indexes showed the same variation tendency, with the highest value found in autumn and the lowest in spring. Water temperature, pH, total phosphorus, biochemical oxygen demand, dissolved oxygen and hydrodynamic force were the main environmental factors affecting the phytoplankton community structure in this lake.

肖智顺, 林聪, 杨双, 刘妍, 范亚文. 大庆新华湖藻类植物群落结构与环境因子的相关性. 植物学报, 2016, 51(3): 353-362.

Zhishun Xiao, Cong Lin, Shuang Yang, Yan Liu, Yawen Fan. Community Structure of Phytoplankton and Its Relation with Environmental Factors in Xinhua Lake of China. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2016, 51(3): 353-362.

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://www.chinbullbotany.com/CN/10.11983/CBB15094

https://www.chinbullbotany.com/CN/Y2016/V51/I3/353

图/表 8

图1 新华湖采样点分布

Fig. 1 The locations of the sampling site in Xinhua Lake

表1 新华湖各采样点的理化指标

Table 1 Physicochemical indexes of sampling sites in Xinhua Lake

Season	Sampling sites	SD (cm)	Tempera- ture (°C)	SpCond (μS·cm^-1)	DO (mg·L^-1)	Chlorophyll a (mg·L^-1)	NH₃-N (mg·L^-1)	TN (mg·L^-1)	TP (mg·L^-1)	COD (mg·L^-1)	BOD (mg·L^-1)	pH
Spring	I	19	32.5	3770	4.18	10.20	0.64	2.9	0.56	8.56	21.00	9.06
	II	18	31.4	3930	3.74	11.31	0.72	2.75	0.36	9.53	20.30	9.08
	III	16	33.7	3710	3.34	10.35	0.84	3.24	0.75	9.87	19.80	8.97
	IV	18	28.6	3370	3.02	15.40	0.70	2.70	0.38	10.31	17.90	8.91
	V	17	33.3	3730	4.33	11.65	0.70	3.55	0.42	9.00	18.30	9.01
	VI	20	27.4	3550	4.27	11.58	0.68	2.57	0.45	9.00	17.88	8.83
Summer	I	23	29.6	3850	5.75	13.90	0.65	2.64	1.12	8.73	9.50	9.41
	II	22	32.2	3850	7.61	12.70	0.69	2.55	0.71	9.01	10.20	9.39
	III	24	28.5	4010	6.70	14.80	0.84	3.52	0.94	11.4	18.10	9.42
	IV	23	32.6	3990	6.24	16.50	0.45	3.02	0.9	11.9	20.80	9.39
	V	18	33.6	3990	7.35	12.10	0.84	3.31	0.86	9.59	11.30	9.45
	VI	26	31.2	3960	8.20	11.80	0.83	3.15	0.82	9.01	8.70	9.43
Autumn	I	18	11.6	3860	6.25	11.90	0.63	2.88	0.67	10.3	20.60	8.39
	II	18	13.4	3940	6.05	12.80	0.75	2.95	0.45	10.2	18.10	7.79
	III	16	16.8	4100	5.54	12.90	0.84	3.01	0.76	14.2	23.90	8.45
	IV	16	14.0	3450	5.54	14.30	0.95	4.02	0.60	10.0	18.90	7.45
	V	16	13.5	4100	7.90	11.20	0.56	2.58	0.47	10.4	21.50	7.95
	VI	18	13.2	4050	7.96	12.00	0.53	2.49	0.58	10.6	20.10	7.96

图2 新华湖藻类植物的种类组成

Fig. 2 Species composition of phytoplankton in Xinhua Lake

图3 新华湖春、夏和秋3季各藻类种数变化（Chl: 绿藻门; Eug: 裸藻门; Cya: 蓝藻门; Pyr: 甲藻门; Bac: 硅藻门）

Fig. 3 The seasonal variations of the phytoplankton species in Xinhua Lake（Chl: Chlorophyta; Eug: Euglenophyta; Cya: Cyanophyta; Pyr: Pyrrhophyta; Bac: Bacillariophyta）

表2 新华湖藻类植物优势种

Table 2 Dominant species of phytoplankton in Xinhua Lake

Phylum	Species
Bacillariophyta	Cyclotella meneghiniana Kützing
	Coscinodiscus lacustris Grun.
	Nitzschia palea (Kütz.) W. Smith
Cyanophyta	Anabaena azotica Ley.
	Raphidiopsis curvata Fritsch et Rich
	Chroococcus minutus (Kütz.) Näg.
	Arthrospira maxima Setch. et Gardner
	Merismopedia minima G. Beck
	Anabaenopsis circularis (G. S. West) Wolosz. et Miller
Chlorophyta	Tetraëdron minimum (A. Braun) Hansgirg
	Cosmarium depressum (Näg.) Lundell
	Scenedesmus bijuga (Turp.) Lagerheim
	Kirchneriella lunaris (Kirch. ) Moebius
	S. abundans (Kirchn.) Chodat
	Chlorella vulgaris Beijerinck
	C. subprotumidum Nordstedt
	Pediastrum boryanum (Turp.) Meneghini
	Oocystis elliptica W. West
	O. solitaria Wittrock
	S. quadricauda (Turp.) Brébisson
	S. protuberans Fritsch.
	Ankistrodesmus angustus Bernard
	O. parva West & West
Euglenophyta	Euglena viridis Ehrenberg

图4 新华湖不同采样点藻类植物丰度变化(A)和藻类植物丰度季节变化(B)（I-VI同表1; Bac、Pry、Cya、Eug和Chl同图3。）

Fig. 4 The variations of phytoplankton abundance in different sampling sites (A) and the seasonal variations of phytoplankton abundance (B) in Xinhua Lake（I-VI see Table 1. Bac, Pry, Cya, Eug and Chl see Figure 3.）

表3 新华湖藻类植物多样性指数的季节变化

Table 3 Seasonal variations of biodiversity indexes in Xinhua Lake

Season	Index	Sampling sites						Average value
Season	Index	I	II	III	IV	V	VI	Average value
Spring	H′	2.407	2.205	2.144	1.845	1.698	2.005	2.051
	D	0.808	0.792	0.763	0.670	0.642	0.734	0.735
	J	0.469	0.426	0.390	0.342	0.324	0.382	0.389
Summer	H′	2.345	2.510	2.236	2.097	2.471	2.111	2.295
	D	0.810	0.851	0.779	0.779	0.771	0.859	0.748
	J	0.441	0.493	0.432	0.406	0.499	0.412	0.447
Autumn	H′	2.876	3.065	2.899	3.100	3.082	2.936	2.993
	D	0.900	0.925	0.915	0.928	0.927	0.911	0.918
	J	0.487	0.535	0.561	0.534	0.549	0.541	0.534

图5 优势种与环境因子之间的典范对应分析(CCA) (F-ratio= 3.091, P-value=0.018)（BOD: 生化需氧量; DO: 溶解氧; TP: 总磷; WT: 水温; pH: 酸碱度; S1: 扁鼓藻; S2: 丰富栅藻; S3: 环圈拟鱼腥藻; S4: 双对栅藻; S5: 蹄形藻; S6: 微小四角藻; S7: 梅尼小环藻; S8: 小球藻; S9: 固氮鱼腥藻; S10: 湖沼圆筛藻; S11: 近膨胀鼓藻; S12: 谷皮菱形藻; S13: 短棘盘星藻; S14: 椭圆卵囊藻; S15: 弯形小尖头藻; S16: 微小色球藻; S17: 绿色裸藻; S18: 极大节旋藻; S19: 单生卵囊藻; S20: 四尾栅藻; S21: 隆顶栅藻; S22: 细小平裂藻; S23: 狭形纤维藻; S24: 小形卵囊藻）

Fig. 5 Canonical correspondence analysis (CCA) biplot of phytoplankton species and environmental factors in Xinhua Lake (F-ratio=3.091, P-value=0.018)（BOD: Biochemical oxygen demand; DO: Dissolved oxygen; TP: Total phosphorus; WT: Water temperature; pH: pH value; S1: Cosmarium depressum; S2: Scenedesmus abundans; S3: Anabaenopsis circularis; S4: S. bijuga; S5: Kirchneriella lunaris; S6: Tetraëdron minimum; S7: Cyclotella meneghiniana; S8: Chlorella vulgaris; S9: Anabaena azotica; S10: Coscinodiscus lacustris; S11: C. subprotumidum; S12: Nitzschia palea; S13: Pediastrum boryanum; S14: Oocystis elliptica; S15: Raphidiopsis curvata; S16: Chroococcus minutus; S17: Euglena viridis; S18: Arthrospira maxima; S19: O. solitaria; S20: S. quadricauda; S21: S. protuberans; S22: Merismopedia minima; S23: Ankistrodesmus angustus; S24: O. parva）

参考文献 43

[1]	陈家长, 王菁, 裘丽萍, 孟顺龙, 范立民, 宋超 (2014). pH对鱼腥藻和普通小球藻生长竞争的影响. 生态环境学报 23, 289-294.
[2]	陈立婧, 吴竹臣, 胡忠军, 彭自然, 刘其根 (2011). 上海崇明岛明珠湖浮游植物群落结构. 应用生态学报 22, 1599-1605.
[3]	国家环境保护总局 (2002). 水和废水监测分析方法(第四版). 北京: 中国环境科学出版社. pp. 200-284.
[4]	韩欢欢, 范亚文 (2012). 黑龙江省安兴湿地秋季浮游植物群落结构. 湖泊科学 24, 577-585.
[5]	胡鸿钧, 魏印心 (2006). 中国淡水藻类——系统、分类及生态. 北京: 科学出版社. pp. 23-900.
[6]	金相灿, 屠清瑛 (1990). 湖泊富营养化调查规范(第2版). 北京: 中国环境科学出版社. pp. 239-244.
[7]	况琪军, 马沛明, 胡征宇, 周广杰 (2005). 湖泊富营养化的藻类生物学评价与治理研究进展. 安全与环境学报 5(2), 87-91.
[8]	李德亮, 张婷, 肖调义, 余建波, 王红权, 陈开健, 刘安民, 李祖军 (2011). 大通湖浮游植物群落结构及其与环境因子关系. 应用生态学报 22, 2107-2113.
[9]	李慧, 刘妍, 范亚文, 国超旋 (2014). 三江平原湿地同江地区水域夏季浮游植物群落结构特征. 植物学报 49, 440-449.
[10]	梁培瑜, 王烜, 马芳冰 (2013). 水动力条件对水体富营养化的影响. 湖泊科学 25, 455-462.
[11]	林秋奇, 胡韧, 韩博平 (2003). 流溪河水库水动力学对营养盐和浮游植物分布的影响. 生态学报 23, 2278-2284.
[12]	刘春光, 金相灿, 孙凌, 钟远, 戴树桂, 庄源益 (2005). pH值对淡水藻类生长和种类变化的影响. 农业环境科学学报 24, 294-298.
[13]	陆欣鑫, 刘妍, 范亚文 (2014). 呼兰河湿地夏、秋两季浮游植物功能分组演替及其驱动因子. 生态学报 34, 1264-1273.
[14]	钱奎梅, 陈宇炜, 宋晓兰 (2008). 太湖浮游植物优势种长期演化与富营养化进程的关系. 生态科学 27(2), 65-70.
[15]	沈韫芬, 章宗涉, 龚循矩, 顾曼如, 施之新, 魏印心 (1990). 微型生物监测新技术. 北京: 中国建筑工业出版社. pp. 119-139.
[16]	田永强, 俞超超, 王磊, 黄邦钦 (2012). 福建九龙江北溪浮游植物群落分布特征及其影响因子. 应用生态学报 23, 2559-2565.
[17]	王华, 逄勇 (2008). 藻类生长的水动力学因素影响与数值仿真. 环境科学 29, 884-889.
[18]	王全喜, 曹建国, 刘妍, 钦娜 (2008). 上海九段沙湿地自然保护区及其附近水域藻类图集. 北京: 科学出版社. pp. 55-70.
[19]	吴世凯, 谢平, 倪乐意, 王松波, 徐军 (2014). 长江中下游地区湖泊中蓝藻及其与氮磷浓度的关系. 水生态学杂志 35(3), 19-25.
[20]	吴晓辉, 李其军 (2010). 水动力条件对藻类影响的研究进展. 生态环境学报 19, 1732-1738.
[21]	徐海, 刘兆普, 袁兰, 杨林章 (2009). pH对几种淡水藻类生长的影响. 环境科学与技术 32, 27-30.
[22]	许海, 秦伯强, 朱广伟 (2012). 太湖不同湖区夏季蓝藻生长的营养盐限制研究. 中国环境科学 32, 2230-2236.
[23]	颜润润, 逄勇, 赵伟, 李瑞玲, 晁建颖 (2008). 环流型水域水动力对藻类生长的影响. 中国环境科学 28, 813-817.
[24]	杨宏伟, 高光, 朱广伟 (2012). 太湖蠡湖冬季浮游植物群落结构特征与氮、磷浓度关系. 生态学杂志 31(1), 1-7.
[25]	朱广伟, 赵林林, 陈伟民, 谢纯刚, 高荣平 (2011). 低水位运行对天目湖水库水质与生态的影响. 生态与农村环境学报 27(4), 87-94.
[26]	APHA (1998). Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater 20th Edition. Washington:APHA-AWWA- WEF. pp. 2810-3010.
[27]	Belaoussoff S, Kevan PG, Murphy S (2003). Assessing tillage disturbance on assemblages of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) by using a range of ecological indices.Biodivers Conserv 12, 851-882.
[28]	Camdevyren H, Demyr N, Kanik A (2005). Use of principal component scores in multiple linear regression models for prediction of chlorophylla in reservoirs.Ecol Model 181, 581-589.
[29]	Cardinale BJ, Palmer MA, Collins SL (2002). Species diversity enhances ecosystem functioning through interspecific facili- tation.Nature 415, 426-429.
[30]	Krammer K, Lange-Bertalot H (1997a). Bacillariophyceae 1. Teil: Naviculaceae. Berlin: Spektrum Akademischer Verlag Heidelberg. pp. 488-857.
[31]	Krammer K, Lange-Bertalot H (1997b). Bacillariophyceae. 2. Teil: Bacillariophyceae, Epithemiaceae, Surirellaceae. Berlin: Spektrum Akademischer Verlag Heidelberg. pp. 224-585.
[32]	Krammer K, Lange-Bertalot H (1997c). Bacillariophyceae. 3. Teil: Centrales, Fragilariaceae, Eunotiaceae. Berlin: Spek- trum Akademischer Verlag Heidelberg. pp. 232-560.
[33]	Krammer K, Lange-Bertalot H (1997d). Bacillariophyceae. 4. Teil: Achnanthaceae, Kritische Ergänzunge zu Achnanthes s.l., Navicula s. str., Gomphonema Gesamtliteraturverzei- chnis Teil 1-4. Berlin: Spektrum Akademischer Verlag Heidel- berg. pp. 250-425.
[34]	Lazorchak JM, Klemm DJ, Peck DV (1998). Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program—Surface Waters: Field Operations and Methods for Measuring the Ecological Condition of Wadeable Streams. Washington, D.C: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. pp. 119-120.
[35]	Lepistö L, Holopainen AL, Vuoristo H (2004). Type-specific and indicator taxa of phytoplankton as a quality criterion for assessing the ecological status of Finnish boreal lakes.Limnologica 34, 236-248.
[36]	Marchetto A, Padedda BM, Marinani M (2009). Anumerical index for evaluation phytoplankton response to changes in nutrient levels in deep mediterranean reservoirs.J Limnol 68, 106-121.
[37]	Naselli-Flores L (2000). Phytoplankton assemblages in twenty one Sicilian reservoirs: relationship between species com- position and environment factors.Hydrobiologia 424, 1-11.
[38]	Naselli-Flores L, Barone R (1998). Phytoplankton dynamics in two reservoirs with different trophic state (Lake Rosamarina and Lake Arancio, Sicily, Italy).Hydrobiologia 369, 163-178.
[39]	Nwankwo DI, Akinsoji A (1992). Epiphyte community of water hyacinth, Eichhornia crassipes (Mart) Solms in coastal waters of southwestern Nigeria.Archiv Für Hydrobiologie 124, 501-511.
[40]	Ortega-Mayagoitia E, Rojo C, Rodrigo MA (2003). Controlling factors of phytoplankton assemblages in wetlands: an exper- imental approach.Hydrobiologia 502, 177-186.
[41]	Parinet B, Lhote A, Legube B (2004). Principal component analysis: an appropriate tool for water quality evaluation and management application to a tropical lake system.Ecol Model 178, 295-311.
[42]	Reynolds CS (1998). What factors influence the species composition of phytoplankton in lakes of different trophic status.Hydrobiologia 369, 11-26.
[43]	Singh PK, Malik A, Mohan D (2004). Multivariate statistical techniques for the evaluation of spatial and temporal variations in water quality of Gomti River (India) a case study.Water Res 38, 3980-3992.

大庆新华湖藻类植物群落结构与环境因子的相关性

Community Structure of Phytoplankton and Its Relation with Environmental Factors in Xinhua Lake of China

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

被引次数

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 8

参考文献 43

相关文章 0

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价