Advertisement

Aquatic Sciences

, 81:30 | Cite as

Seasonal variations overwhelm temperature effects on microbial processes in headwater streams: insights from a temperate thermal spring

  • Alice GossiauxEmail author
  • Jérémy Jabiol
  • Pascal Poupin
  • Eric Chauvet
  • François Guérold
Research Article

Abstract

Carbon cycling in headwater streams is mostly driven by the decomposition of allochthonous organic matter, and to a lesser extent by primary production. Quantifying the influence of temperature on these processes is therefore essential to better anticipate the consequences of global warming for stream ecological functioning. In this study, we measured alder litter microbial decomposition and associated fungal biomass and diversity, using leaf discs enclosed in fine-mesh bags along a natural geothermal temperature gradient, in both spring and winter. We monitored the chlorophyll-a accrual in biofilms growing on ceramic tiles. The temperature gradient, from upstream to downstream, ranged from 15.3 to 14.2 °C in spring and 18.2 to 13.2 °C in winter. Autotrophs and heterotrophs exhibited contrasting responses to temperature. The expected positive effect of temperature was actually observed for chlorophyll-a accrual only, while an apparent temperature-independence of litter decomposition rate was found. Moreover, temperature effects on heterotrophic and autotrophic organisms depended on the season, with higher litter decomposition rates, sporulation rates, fungal biomass and chlorophyll-a in spring, despite a lower mean water temperature than in winter. Together, these results suggest that the influence of temperature remained largely overrode by seasonal effects. This result is likely due to annual variations in light availability, and may involve indirect positive interactions between microbial primary producers and decomposers.

Keywords

Decomposition Headwater streams Microbial Seasons Temperature 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank P. Rousselle and D. Lambrigot for water and ergosterol analyses, respectively, and P. Wagner, M. Odinot, and F. Louis for valuable help in the field. We are grateful to Christopher Swan, Stuart Findlay and two anonymous reviewers who provided excellent feedback and suggestions to improve this manuscript. The present study was funded by the French National Research Agency (ANR-14-CE01-0009) and the French National Program EC2CO (2016–2017).

Supplementary material

27_2019_627_MOESM1_ESM.docx (669 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 668 KB)

References

  1. Allen AP, Gillooly JF, Brown JH (2005) Linking the global carbon cycle to individual metabolism. Funct Ecol 19:202–213.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2435.2005.00952.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bärlocher F (1985) The role of fungi in the nutrition of stream invertebrates. Bot J Linn Soc 91:83–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bärlocher F (2005) Sporulation by aquatic hyphomycetes. In: Methods to study litter decomposition. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 185–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baudoin J-M (2007) Biodiversité et fonctionnement de cours d’eau forestiers de tête de bassin: effet de l’acidification anthropique et d’une restauration. PhD Thesis, Université de MetzGoogle Scholar
  5. Benfield EF (2006) Decomposition of leaf material. In: Hauer FR, Lamberti GA (eds) Methods in stream ecology, 2nd edn. Academic Press/Elsevier, San Diego, pp 711–720Google Scholar
  6. Besemer K (2015) Biodiversity, community structure and function of biofilms in stream ecosystems. Res Microbiol 166:774–781.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resmic.2015.05.006 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Boyero L, Pearson RG, Gessner MO et al (2011) A global experiment suggests climate warming will not accelerate litter decomposition in streams but might reduce carbon sequestration. Ecol Lett 14:289–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boyero L, Pearson RG, Hui C et al (2016) Biotic and abiotic variables influencing plant litter breakdown in streams: a global study. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 283:20152664.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2015.2664 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bradford MA, Davies CA, Frey SD et al (2008) Thermal adaptation of soil microbial respiration to elevated temperature. Ecol Lett 11:1316–1327.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01251.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Brown JH, Gillooly JF, Allen AP et al (2004) Toward a metabolic theory of ecology. Ecology 85:1771–1789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Canhoto C, de Lima JLMP, de Almeida AT (2013) Warming up a stream reach: design of a hydraulic and heating system. Limnol Oceanogr Methods 11:410–417.  https://doi.org/10.4319/lom.2013.11.410 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Casas JJ, Larrañaga A, Menéndez M et al (2013) Leaf litter decomposition of native and introduced tree species of contrasting quality in headwater streams: How does the regional setting matter? Sci Total Environ 458:197–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Clivot H, Danger M, Pagnout C et al (2013) Impaired leaf litter processing in acidified streams: learning from microbial enzyme activities. Microb Ecol 65:1–11.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-012-0107-x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Cornut J, Clivot H, Chauvet E et al (2012) Effect of acidification on leaf litter decomposition in benthic and hyporheic zones of woodland streams. Water Res 46:6430–6444.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2012.09.023 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Dang CK, Schindler M, Chauvet E, Gessner MO (2009) Temperature oscillation coupled with fungal community shifts can modulate warming effects on litter decomposition. Ecology 90:122–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Danger M, Cornut J, Chauvet E et al (2013) Benthic algae stimulate leaf litter decomposition in detritus-based headwater streams: a case of aquatic priming effect? Ecology 94:1604–1613.  https://doi.org/10.1890/12-0606.1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Dangles O, Gessner MO, Guérold F, Chauvet E (2004) Impacts of stream acidification on litter breakdown: implications for assessing ecosystem functioning. J Appl Ecol 41:365–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Delgado C, Almeida SFP, Elias CL et al (2017) Response of biofilm growth to experimental warming in a temperate stream. Ecohydrology.  https://doi.org/10.1002/eco.1868 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Díaz-Villanueva V, Font J, Schwartz T, Romaní AM (2011) Biofilm formation at warming temperature: acceleration of microbial colonization and microbial interactive effects. Biofouling 27:59–71.  https://doi.org/10.1080/08927014.2010.538841 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Durance I, Ormerod SJ (2007) Climate change effects on upland stream macroinvertebrates over a 25-year period. Glob Change Biol 13:942–957.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2007.01340.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fenoy E, Casas JJ, Díaz-López M et al (2016) Temperature and substrate chemistry as major drivers of interregional variability of leaf microbial decomposition and cellulolytic activity in headwater streams. FEMS Microbiol Ecol.  https://doi.org/10.1093/femsec/fiw169 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Fernandes I, Pascoal C, Guimarães H et al (2012) Higher temperature reduces the effects of litter quality on decomposition by aquatic fungi: effects of temperature and litter quality on litter decomposition. Freshw Biol 57:2306–2317.  https://doi.org/10.1111/fwb.12004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fernandes I, Seena S, Pascoal C, Cássio F (2014) Elevated temperature may intensify the positive effects of nutrients on microbial decomposition in streams. Freshw Biol 59:2390–2399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ferreira V, Canhoto C (2014) Effect of experimental and seasonal warming on litter decomposition in a temperate stream. Aquat Sci 76:155–163.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00027-013-0322-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ferreira V, Canhoto C (2015) Future increase in temperature may stimulate litter decomposition in temperate mountain streams: evidence from a stream manipulation experiment. Freshw Biol 60:881–892.  https://doi.org/10.1111/fwb.12539 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ferreira V, Chauvet E (2011a) Synergistic effects of water temperature and dissolved nutrients on litter decomposition and associated fungi. Glob Change Biol 17:551–564.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02185.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ferreira V, Chauvet E (2011b) Future increase in temperature more than decrease in litter quality can affect microbial litter decomposition in streams. Oecologia 167:279–291.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-011-1976-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Ferreira V, Chauvet E, Canhoto C (2014) Effects of experimental warming, litter species, and presence of macroinvertebrates on litter decomposition and associated decomposers in a temperate mountain stream. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 72:206–216.  https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfas-2014-0119 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fleituch T (2001) Beech leaf breakdown and POM storage along an altitudinal stream gradient. Int Rev Hydrobiol 86:515–525.  https://doi.org/10.1002/1522-2632(200107)86:4/5%3C515::AID-IROH515%3E3.0.CO;2-P CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Frainer A, Primicerio R, Kortsch S et al (2017) Climate-driven changes in functional biogeography of Arctic marine fish communities. Proc Natl Acad Sci 114:12202–12207.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1706080114 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Friberg N, Dybkjaer JB, Ólafsson JS et al (2009) Relationships between structure and function in streams contrasting in temperature. Freshw Biol 54:2051–2068.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2427.2009.02234.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Geraldes P, Pascoal C, Cássio F (2012) Effects of increased temperature and aquatic fungal diversity on litter decomposition. Fungal Ecol 5:734–740.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.funeco.2012.05.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gessner MO (2005) Ergosterol as a measure of fungal biomass. In: Methods to study litter decomposition. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 189–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gessner MO, Chauvet E (1993) Ergosterol-to-biomass conversion factors for aquatic hyphomycetes. Appl Environ Microbiol 59:502–507PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. Gessner MO, Newell SY (2002) Biomass, growth rate, and production of filamentous fungi in plant litter. Manual Environ Microbiol 390–408Google Scholar
  36. Giardina CP, Ryan MG (2000) Evidence that decomposition rates of organic carbon in mineral soil do not vary with temperature. Nature 404:858–861.  https://doi.org/10.1038/35009076 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Gonçalves AL, Graça MA, Canhoto C (2013) The effect of temperature on leaf decomposition and diversity of associated aquatic hyphomycetes depends on the substrate. Fungal Ecol 6:546–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Halvorson HM, Scott EE, Entrekin SA et al (2016) Light and dissolved phosphorus interactively affect microbial metabolism, stoichiometry and decomposition of leaf litter. Freshw Biol 61:1006–1019.  https://doi.org/10.1111/fwb.12763 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Huey RB, Stevenson RD (1979) Integrating thermal physiology and ecology of ectotherms: a discussion of approaches. Integr Comp Biol 19:357–366Google Scholar
  40. IPCC (2001) Climate change 2001: the scientific basis. In: JT Houghton et al. (eds) Contribution of working group I to the third assessment report of the Intergovernemental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USAGoogle Scholar
  41. IPCC (2014) Summary for policymakers. In: CB Field et al. (eds) Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part A: global and sectoral aspects. Contribution of working group II to the fifth assessment report of the Intergovernemental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp 1–32Google Scholar
  42. Iqbal SH, Webster J (1973) Aquatic hyphomycetes spora of the river exe and its tributaries. Trans Br mycol Soc 61:331–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kahlert M, McKie BG (2014) Comparing new and conventional methods to estimate benthic algal biomass and composition in freshwaters. Env Sci Process Impacts 16:2627–2634.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C4EM00326H CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kuehn KA, Francoeur SN, Findlay RH, Neely RK (2014) Priming in the microbial landscape: periphytic algal stimulation of litter-associated microbial decomposers. Ecology 95:749–762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Langan SJ, Johnston L, Donaghy MJ et al (2001) Variation in river water temperatures in an upland stream over a 30-year period. Sci Total Environ 265:195–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Manning DWP, Rosemond AD, Gulis V et al (2018) Nutrients and temperature additively increase stream microbial respiration. Glob Change Biol 24:e233–e247.  https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13906 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Martínez A, Larrañaga A, Pérez J et al (2014) Temperature affects leaf litter decomposition in low-order forest streams: field and microcosm approaches. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 87:257–267.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1574-6941.12221 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Mas-Martí E, Muñoz I, Oliva F, Canhoto C (2015) Effects of increased water temperature on leaf litter quality and detritivore performance: a whole-reach manipulative experiment. Freshw Biol 60:184–197.  https://doi.org/10.1111/fwb.12485 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. O’Gorman EJ, Benstead JP, Cross WF et al (2014) Climate change and geothermal ecosystems: natural laboratories, sentinel systems, and future refugia. Glob Change Biol 20:3291–3299.  https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12602 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Olapade OA, Leff LG (2005) Seasonal response of stream biofilm communities to dissolved organic matter and nutrient enrichments. Appl Environ Microbiol 71:2278–2287.  https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.71.5.2278-2287.2005 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. Padfield D, Lowe C, Buckling A et al (2017) Metabolic compensation constrains the temperature dependence of gross primary production. Ecol Lett 20:1250–1260.  https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12820 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Pilgrim JM, Fang X, Stefan HG (1998) Stream temperature correlations with air temperatures in Minnesota: implications for climate warming. JAWRA 34:1109–1121Google Scholar
  53. Pozo J, Colino R (1992) Decomposition processes of Spartina maritima in a salt marsh of the Basque Country. Hydrobiologia 231:165–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rajashekhar M, Kaveriappa KM (2000) Effects of temperature and light on growth and sporulation of aquatic hyphomycetes. Hydrobiologia 441:149–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Romaní A (2010) Freshwater biofilms. In: Dürr S, Thomason J (eds) Biofouling, 1st edn. Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester, West Sussex [England]; Ames, Iowa, pp 137–153Google Scholar
  56. Romaní AM, Borrego CM, Díaz-Villanueva V et al (2014) Shifts in microbial community structure and function in light- and dark-grown biofilms driven by warming: Warming and light effects on biofilms. Environ Microbiol 16:2550–2567.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1462-2920.12428 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Schnurr PJ, Allen DG (2015) Factors affecting algae biofilm growth and lipid production: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 52:418–429.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.090 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Song C, Dodds WK, Rüegg J et al (2018) Continental-scale decrease in net primary productivity in streams due to climate warming. Nat Geosci 11:415–420.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-018-0125-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Stefan HG, Sinokrot BA (1993) Projected global climate change impact on water temperatures in five north central US streams. Clim Change 24:353–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Suberkropp K (1984) Effect of temperature on seasonal occurrence of aquatic hyphomycetes. Trans Br Mycol Soc 82:53–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Unterseher M, Siddique AB, Brachmann A, Peršoh D (2016) Diversity and composition of the leaf mycobiome of beech (Fagus sylvatica) are affected by local habitat conditions and leaf biochemistry. PLOS One 11:e0152878.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0152878 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  62. Walther G-R, Post E, Convey P et al (2002) Ecological responses to recent climate change. Nature 416:389–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wei H, Guenet B, Vicca S et al (2014) Thermal acclimation of organic matter decomposition in an artificial forest soil is related to shifts in microbial community structure. Soil Biol Biochem 71:1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2014.01.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Weitzel RL (1979) Periphyton measurement and applications. In: Weitzel RL (ed) Methods and measurements of periphyton communities: a review, ASTM International. pp 3–33Google Scholar
  65. Woodward G, Dybkjaer JB, Ólafsson JS et al (2010) Sentinel systems on the razor’s edge: effects of warming on Arctic geothermal stream ecosystems: Impacts of warming on Icelandic stream ecosystems. Glob Change Biol 16:1979–1991.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2009.02052.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Ylla I, Canhoto C, Romaní AM (2014) Effects of warming on stream biofilm organic matter use capabilities. Microb Ecol 68:132–145.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-014-0406-5 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Yvon-Durocher G, Jones JI, Trimmer M et al (2010) Warming alters the metabolic balance of ecosystems. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 365:2117–2126.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2010.0038 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LIEC-Laboratoire Interdisciplinaire des Environnements ContinentauxUniversité de Lorraine, UMR 7360MetzFrance
  2. 2.EcoLab-Laboratoire Ecologie Fonctionnelle et EnvironnementUniversité de Toulouse, CNRS, UPS, INPTToulouseFrance

Personalised recommendations