Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-21T15:41:03.689Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Seasonal changes in diatom biomass, sediment stability and biogenic stabilization in the Severn Estuary

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

Graham J. C. Underwood
Affiliation:
Department of Botany, University of Bristol, Woodland Road, Bristol, BS8 1UG
David M. Paterson
Affiliation:
Gatty Marine Laboratory, The University, St Andrews, Fife, KYI6 8LB

Extract

Epipelic diatoms represented the dominant microphy tobenthos on the intertidal mudflats of the Severn Estuary, south-western Britain. Algal biomass (measured as chlorophyll a concentration) varied over a seasonal cycle and was strongly correlated with sediment shear strength and critical shear stress and therefore with position on the shore. High levels of diatom biomass were positively correlated with the concentration of colloidal carbohydrate within the surface sediments. The critical shear strength for incipient erosion was significantly correlated with position on the shore (moisture content) and with both chlorophyll a and colloidal carbohydrate, the latter being the best biochemical predictor for the incipient erosion threshold. The range of stress required to cause incipient erosion varied from 1.0 to 8.0 N m-2, with the sediment increasing in resistance landwards. Two-way analysis of variance using both moisture content and colloidal carbohydrate as variables explained the stability of the sediment better than individual pair-wise comparisons.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Admiraal, W., 1984. The ecology of estuarine sediment-inhabiting diatoms. Progress in Phycolovical Research, 3, 269322.Google Scholar
Admiraal, W., Peletier, H. & Zomer, H., 1982. Observations and experiments on the population dynamics of epipelic diatoms from an estuarine mudflat. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 14, 471487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aller, R.C. & Aller, J.Y., 1992. Meiofauna and solute transport in marine muds. Limnology and Oceanography, 37, 10181033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amos, C.L., Grant, J., Daborn, G.R. & Black, K., 1992. Sea carousel - a benthic annular flume. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 34, 557577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amos, C.L., Wagoner, N.A. Van & Daborn, G.R., 1988. The influence of subaerial exposure on the bulk properties of fine-grained intertidal sediment from Minas Basin, Bay of Fundy. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 27, 113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boer, P.L. De, 1981. Mechanical effects of micro-organisms on intertidal bedform migration. Sedimentology. Amsterdam, 28, 129132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cadée, G.C. & Hegeman, J., 1974. Primary production of the benthic microflora living on tidal flats in the Dutch Wadden Sea. Netherlands Journal of Sea Research, 8, 260291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cammen, L.M., 1991. Annual bacterial production in relation to benthic microalgal production and sediment oxygen uptake in an intertidal sandflat and an intertidal mudflat. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 71, 1325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cammen, L.M. & Walker, J.A., 1986. The relationship between bacteria and micro-algae in the sediment of a Bay of Fundy mudflat. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 22, 9199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christoffersen, K., Riemann, B., Hansen, L.R., Klysner, A. & Sorensen, H.B., 1990. Qualitative importance of the microbial loop and plankton community structure in a eutrophic lake during a bloom of cyanobacteria. Microbial Ecology, 20, 253272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, J.J., Findlay, S. & Pace, M.L., 1988. Bacterial production in fresh and saltwater ecosystems: a cross-system overview. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 43, 110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colijn, F. & Dijkema, K.S., 1981. Species composition of benthic diatoms and distribution of chlorophyll a on an intertidal flat in the Dutch Wadden Sea. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 4, 921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colijn, F. & Jonge, V.N. De, 1984. Primary production of microphytobenthos in the Ems-Dollard Estuary. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 14, 185196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daborn, G.R.et al., 1993. An ecological cascade effect: migratory birds affect stability of intertidal sediments. Limnology and Oceanography, 38, 225231.Google Scholar
Dade, B.W., Davis, J.D., Nichols, P.D., Nowell, A.R.M., Thistle, D., Trexler, M.B. & White, D.C., 1990. Effects of bacterial exopolymer adhesion on the entrainment of sand. Geomicrobiology Journal,8, 116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Decho, A.W., 1990. Microbial exopolymer secretions in ocean environments: their role(s) in food webs and marine processes. Oceanography and Marine Biology. Annual Review. London, 28, 73153.Google Scholar
Deflaun, M.F. & Mayer, L.M., 1983. Relationships between bacteria and grain surfaces in intertidal sediments. Limnology and Oceanography, 28, 873881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delo, E.A. & Ockenden, M.C., 1992. Estuarine muds manual. Report SR 309. Wallingford: HR Wallingford.Google Scholar
Dubois, M., Gilles, K.A., Hamilton, J.K., Reber, P.A. & Smith, F., 1956. Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances. Analytical Chemistry, 28, 350356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edgar, L.A. & Pickett-Heaps, J.D., 1984. Diatom locomotion. Progress in Phycological Research, 3, 4788.Google Scholar
Findlay, S., Pace, M.L., Lints, D., Cole, J.J., Caraco, N.F. & Peierls, B., 1991. Weak coupling of bacterial and algal production in a heterotrophic ecosystem: the Hudson River Estuary. Limnology and Oceanography, 36, 268278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frostick, L.E. & McCave, I.N., 1979. Seasonal shifts of sediment within an estuary mediated by algal growth. Estuarine and Coastal Marine Science, 9, 569576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grant, J., Bathmann, U.V. & Mills, E.L., 1986. The interaction between benthic diatom films and sediment transport. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 23, 225238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grant, J. & Gust, G., 1987. Prediction of coastal sediment stability from photopigment content from mats of purple sulphur bacteria. Nature, London, 330, 244246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grossmann, S. & Reichardt, W., 1991. Impact of Arenicola marina on bacteria in intertidal sediments. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 77, 8593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobbie, J.E., Daley, R.J. & Jasper, S., 1977. Use of nucleopore filters for counting bacteria by fluorescence microscopy. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 33, 12251228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, A., 1978. Chlorophylls and carotenoids. In Handbookof phycological methods: physiological and biochemical methods (ed. J.A., Hellebust and J.S., Craigie), pp. 5970. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jonge, V.N. De, 1980. Fluctuations in the organic carbon to chlorophyll a ratios for estuarine benthic diatom populations. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 2, 345353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lassen, C., Ploug, H. & Jørgensen, B.B., 1992. Microalgal photosynthesis and spectral scalar irradiance in coastal marine sediments of Limfjorden, Denmark. Limnology and Oceanography, 37, 760772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Little, C., Paterson, D.M., Crawford, R.M., Underwood, G.J.C. & McArthur, J.J., 1992. Algal stabilization of estuarine sediment. Report (May 1992) to the Energy Technology Support Unit, United Kingdom Department of Trade and Industry.Google Scholar
Liu, D., Wong, P.T.S. & Dutka, B.J., 1973. Determination of carbohydrates in lake sediment by a modified phenol-sulfuric acid method. Water Research, 7, 741746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masden, K.N., Nilsson, P. & Sundbäck, K., in press. The influence of benthic microalgae on the stability of a subtidal shallow water sediment. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology.Google Scholar
Meadows, P.S. & Tait, J., 1989. Modification of sediment permeability and shear strength by two burrowing invertebrates. Marine Biology, 101, 7582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montagna, P.A., 1984. In situ measurement of meiobenthic grazing rates on sediment bacteria and edaphic diatoms. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 18, 119130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montagna, P.A., Coull, B.C., Herring, T.L. & Dudley, B.W., 1983. The relationship between abundances of meiofauna and their suspected microbial food (diatoms and bacteria). Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 17, 381394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrisey, D.J., 1988. Differences in effects of grazing by deposit-feeders Hydrobia ulvae (Pennant) (Gastropoda: Prosobranchia) and Corophium arenarium Crawford (Amphipoda) on sediment microalgal populations. II. Quantitative effects. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 118, 4353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paterson, D.M., 1989. Short-term changes in the erodibility of intertidal cohesive sediments related to the migratory behaviour of epipelic diatoms. Limnology and Oceanography, 34, 223234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paterson, D.M., Crawford, R.M. & Little, C., 1990. Subaerial exposure and changes in the stability of intertidal sediments. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 30, 541556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinckney, J. & Zingmark, R.G., 1991. Effects of tidal stage and sun angles on intertidal benthic microalgal productivity. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 76, 8189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reise, K., 1985. Tidal flat ecology: an experimental approach to species interactions. Berlin: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Underwood, G.J.C. & Paterson, D.M., 1993. Recovery of intertidal benthic diatoms after biocide treatment and associated sediment dynamics. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 73, 2545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warwick, R.M., Goss-Custard, J.D., Kirby, R., George, C.L., Pope, N.D. & Rowden, A.A., 1991. Static and dynamic environmental factors determining the community structure of estuarine macrobenthos in south-west Britain: why is the Severn Estuary different? Journal of Applied Ecology, 28, 329345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar