Advertisement

Journal of Paleolimnology

, Volume 62, Issue 3, pp 245–257 | Cite as

Environmental and spatial drivers of diatom assemblages in the water column and surface sediment of tropical reservoirs

  • Elaine C. R. BartozekEmail author
  • Angela M. da Silva-Lehmkuhl
  • Irene Gregory-Eaves
  • Denise C. Bicudo
Original paper
  • 570 Downloads

Abstract

The relative contribution of environmental and spatial drivers of community structure has been the focus of many ecological studies. In the context of metacommunity theory, diatoms have been associated mainly with local environmental factors, but in some cases spatial factors have also been identified as important drivers. This study aimed to determine the relative importance of environmental and spatial drivers as predictors of surface sediment and water column diatom assemblages in tropical reservoirs. Sampling was carried out in 33 reservoirs in southeast Brazil, which range in trophic state from oligotrophic to hypereutrophic, and span five hydrological basins. We performed a partial RDA between the predictor matrices (environmental and spatial predictors) and the response matrix (either surface sediment or water column diatom assemblages) to identify the main environmental drivers, and used variation partitioning to assess the relative contribution of environmental and spatial predictors of diatom assemblages. In general, diatom assemblages were structured by a combination of environmental and spatial drivers. Comparisons of results between surface sediment and water column ordinations demonstrated that the assemblages were structured by similar environmental variables (productivity-related variables such as total phosphorus, water transparency and pH) and by a similar set of diatom species, mainly centric diatoms like Aulacoseira granulata var. granulata, A. tenella, Discostella stelligera and Spicaticribra kingstonii. Overall, surface sediment diatoms were more strongly associated with environmental factors than were water-column assemblages, probably because they integrate information in space and time, confirming that surface sediment assemblages are robust indicators of environmental conditions.

Keywords

Algae Environmental predictors Environmental gradient Metacommunity Spatial predictors 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was carried out within the framework of the AcquaSed project supported by funds from FAPESP (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo, AcquaSed Project, No. 2009/53898-9) and was undertaken as part of ECRB’s Ph.D. thesis (FAPESP doctoral fellowship No. 2013/14337-7 to ECRB) at the Institute of Botany (São Paulo, Brazil). Funds were also provided by CNPq (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico, Grant 310404/2016-9 to DCB). We thank FAPEAM (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Amazonas) for AMSL’s Ph.D. scholarship. We are also grateful to Amanda Winegardner for her valuable comments on an earlier version of this manuscript. We appreciate the valuable assistance of personnel from the agency in charge of the public water supply in São Paulo—SABESP (Companhia de Saneamento do Estado de São Paulo), Barco Escola da Natureza Association, Companhia Energética Salto do Lobo, Floresta Nacional do Ipanema and Votorantin Energia for their valuable logistical support during the fieldwork. We sincerely thank all the students from the Department of Ecology who were involved in field and laboratory work and those who collaborated in the construction of the AcquaSed database.

Supplementary material

10933_2019_83_MOESM1_ESM.docx (42 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 42 kb)

References

  1. Alahuhta J, Johnson LB, Olker J, Heino J (2014) Species sorting determines variation in the community composition of common and rare macrophytes at various spatial extents. Ecol Complex 20:61–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Almeida PD, Bicudo DC (2014) Diatomáceas planctônicas e de sedimento superficial em represas de abastecimento da Região Metropolitana de São Paulo, SP, Sudeste do Brasil. Hoehnea 41:187–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alvarez CA, Stape JL, Sentelhas PC, Gonçalves JLM, Sparovek G (2014) Köppen’s climate classification map for Brazil. Meteorol Z 22:711–728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. APHA - American Public Health Association (2005) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. Am Public Health Assoc, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  5. Astorga A, Oksanen J, Luoto M, Soininen J, Virtanen R, Muotka T (2012) Distance decay of similarity in freshwater communities: do macro- and microorganisms follow the same rules? Global Ecol Biogeogr 21:365–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bartozek ECR, Zorzal-Almeida S, Bicudo DC (2018) Surface sediment and phytoplankton diatoms across a trophic gradient in tropical reservoirs: new records for Brazil and São Paulo State. Hoehnea 45:69–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Battarbee RW, Jones VJ, Flower RJ, Cameron NG, Bennion H, Carvalho L, Juggins S (2001) Diatoms. In: Smol JP, Birks HJB, Last WM (eds) Tracking environmental change using lake sediments: terrestrial, algal, and siliceous indicators, vol 3. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 155–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Becker V, Huszar VL, Crossetti LO (2009) Responses of phytoplankton functional groups to the mixing regime in a deep subtropical reservoir. Hydrobiologia 628:137–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Beisner BE, Peres-Neto PR, Lindström ES, Barnett A, Longhi ML (2006) The role of environmental and spatial processes in structuring lake communities from bacteria to fish. Ecology 87:2985–2991CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bennet JR, Cumming BF, Ginn BK, Smol JP (2010) Broad-scale environmental response and niche conservatism in lacustrine diatom communities. Global Ecol Biogeogr 19:724–732Google Scholar
  11. Bicudo DC, Tremarin PI, Almeida PD, Zorzal-Almeida S, Wengrat S, Faustino SB, Costa LF, Bartozek ECR, Rocha ACR, Bicudo CEM, Morales EA (2016) Ecology and distribution of Aulacoseira species (Bacillariophyta) in tropical reservoirs from Brazil. Diatom Res 31:199–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Blanchet FG, Legendre P, Borcard D (2008) Forward selection of explanatory variables. Ecology 89:2623–2632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Borcard D, Legendre P (2002) All-scale spatial analysis of ecological data by means of principal coordinates of neighbour matrices. Ecol Model 153:51–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Borcard D, Avois-Jacquet C, Tuomisto H (2004) Dissecting the spatial structure of ecological data at multiple scales. Ecology 85:1826–1832CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Borcard D, Gillet F, Legendre P (2011) Numerical ecology with R. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Brown BL, Sokol ER, Skelton J, Tornwall B (2017) Making sense of metacommunities: dispelling the mythology of a metacommunity typology. Oecologia 183:643–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Comte J, Monier A, Crevecoeur S, Lovejoy C, Vincent WF (2015) Microbial biogeography of permafrost thaw ponds across the changing northern landscape. Ecography 38:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Costa LF, Wengrat S, Bicudo DC (2017) Diatoms from distinct habitats of a highly heterogeneous reservoir, Billings Complex, southeastern Brazil. Hoehnea 44:559–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cumming BF, Laird KR, Gregory-Eaves I, Simpson KG, Sokal MA, Nordin R, Walker IR (2015) Tracking past changes in lake-water phosphorus with a 251-lake calibration dataset in British Columbia: tool development and application in a multiproxy assessment of eutrophication and recovery in Osoyoos Lake, a transboundary lake in western North America. Front Ecol Evol 3:84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Declerck SAJ, Coronel JS, Legendre P, Brendonck L (2011) Scale dependency of processes structuring metacommunities of cladocerans in temporary pools of High-Andes wetlands. Ecography 34:296–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Departamento de Águas e Energia Elétrica (2019) Bando de dados hidrológicos. http://www.hidrologia.daee.sp.gov.br/Default.aspx. Accessed 10 Jan 2019
  22. Dong X, Bennion H, Battarbee R, Yang X, Yang H, Liu E (2008) Tracking eutrophication in Taihu Lake using the diatom record: potential and problems. J Paleolimnol 40:413–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dong X, Li B, He F, Gu Y, Sun M, Zhang H, Tan L, Xiao W, Liu S, Cai Q (2016) Flow directionality, mountain barriers and functional traits determine diatom metacommunity structuring of high mountain streams. Sci Rep 6:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Donohue I, Jackson AL, Pusch MT, Irvine K (2009) Nutrient enrichment homogenizes lake benthic assemblages at local and regional scales. Ecology 90:3470–3477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dray S, Legendre P, Peres-Neto PR (2006) Spatial modelling: a comprehensive framework for principal coordinate analysis of neighbour matrices (PCNM). Ecol Model 196:483–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Dray S, Legendre P, Blanchet G (2016) Package ‘packfor’. https://R-Forge.R-project.org/projects/sedar/. Accessed 10 Nov 2016
  27. Finkelstein SA, Bunbury J, Gajewski K, Wolfe AP, Adams JK, Devlin JE (2014) Evaluating diatom-derived Holocene pH reconstructions for Arctic lakes using an expanded 171-lake training set. J Quat Sci 29:249–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Governo do Estado de São Paulo (2000) Relatório de situação dos recursos hídricos do Estado de São Paulo—síntese. http://www.daee.sp.gov.br/acervoepesquisa/perh/perh2000/r0estadual/sintese/r0e_sintese.htm. Accessed 03 Dec 2018
  29. Gregory-Eaves I, Beisner BE (2011) Palaeolimnological insights for biodiversity science: an emerging field. Freshwater Biol 56:2653–2661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Heino J, Mendoza G (2016) Predictability of stream insect distributions is dependent on niche position, but on biological traits or taxonomic relatedness of species. Ecography 39:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Heino J, Bini LM, Karjalainen SM, Mykra H, Soininer J, Vieira LCG, Diniz-Filho JAF (2010) Geographical patterns of micro-organismal community structure: Are diatoms ubiquitously distributed across boreal streams? Oikos 119:129–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Heino J, Grönroos M, Soininen J, Virtanen R, Muotka T (2012) Context dependency and metacommunity structuring in boreal headwater streams. Oikos 121:537–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Heino J, Melo AS, Siqueira T, Soininen J, Valanko S, Bini LM (2015) Metacommunity organisation, spatial extent and dispersal in aquatic systems: patterns, processes and prospects. Freshwater Biol 60:845–869CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Husson F, Josse J, Le S, Mazet J (2016) Package ‘Facto-MineR’. http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/FactoMineR/FactoMineR.pdf. Accessed 17 Nov 2016
  35. Lecointe C, Coste M, Prygiel J (1993) “Omnidia”: software for taxonomy, calculation of diatom indices and inventories management. Hydrobiologia 209:509–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Legendre P, Legendre L (2012) Numerical ecology. Elsevier Science, LondonGoogle Scholar
  37. Leibold MA, Holyoak M, Mouquet N, Amarasekare P, Chase JM, Hoopes MF, Holt RD, Shurin JB, Law R, Tilman D, Loureau M, Gonzalez A (2004) The metacommunity concept: a framework for multi-scale community ecology. Ecol Lett 7:601–613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Levi EE, Çakiroğlu AI, Bucak T, Odgaard BV, Davidson TA, Jeppensen E, Beklioğlu M (2014) Similarity between contemporary vegetation and plant remains in the surface sediment in Mediterranean lakes. Freshwater Biol 59:724–736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Logue JB, Mouquet N, Peter H, Hillebrand H, The Metacommunity Working Group (2011) Empirical approaches to metacommunities: a review and comparison with theory. Trends Ecol Evol 26:482–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Marquardt GC, Blanco S, Bicudo CEM (2017) Distance decay as a descriptor of the diatom compositional variation in tropical reservoirs. Mar Freshwater Res 69:105–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Marquardt GC, Padial AA, Bicudo CEM (2018) Variance partitioning of deconstructed tropical diatom communities in reservoirs cascade. Aquat Sci 80:17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mittelbach GG, Schenske DW, Cornell HV, Allen AP, Brown JM, Bush MB, Harrison SP, Hurlbert AH, Knowlton N, Lessios HA, McCain CM, McCune AR, McCade LA, McPeek MA, Near TJ, Price TD, Ricklefs RE, Roy K, Sax DF, Schluter D, Sobel JM, Turelli M (2007) Evolution and the latitudinal diversity gradient: speciation, extinction and biogeography. Ecol Lett 10:315–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Moresco GA, Bortolini JC, Dias JD, Pineda A, Jati S, Rodrigues LC (2017) Drivers of phytoplankton richness and diversity components in Neotropical floodplain lakes, from small to large spatial scales. Hydrobiologia 799:203–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, Minchin PR, O’hara RB, Simpson GL, Solymos P, Stevens MHH, Szoecs E, Wagner H (2017) Package ‘vegan’. http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/vegan/vegan.pdf. Accessed 11 Jan 2017
  45. Padial AA, Ceschin F, Declerck SAJ, Meester L, Bonecker CC, Lansac-Tôha FA, Rodrigues L, Train S, Velho LFM, Bini LM (2014) Dispersal ability determines the role of environmental, spatial and temporal drivers of metacommunity structure. PLoS ONE 9:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pappas JL, Stoermer EF (1996) Quantitative method for determining a representative algal sample count. J Phycol 32:393–696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Peres-Neto PR, Legendre P (2010) Estimating and controlling for spatial structure in the study of ecological communities. Global Ecol Biogeogr 19:174–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Potapova MG, Charles DF, Ponader KC, Winter DM (2004) Quantifying species indicator values for trophic diatom indices: a comparison of approaches. Hydrobiologia 517:25–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. R Core Team (2016) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.r-project.org/
  50. Saros JE, Strock KE, McCue J, Hogan E, Anderson J (2014) Response of Cyclotella species to nutrients and incubation depth in Arctic lakes. J Plankton Res 36:450–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sartory DP, Grobbelaar JU (1984) Extraction of chlorophyll a from freshwater phytoplankton for spectrophotometric analysis. Hydrobiologia 114:177–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Smol JP (2008) Pollution of lakes and rivers: a paleoenvironmental perspective. Blackwell Publishing, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  53. Soininen J (2007) Environmental and spatial control of freshwater diatoms—a review. Diatom Res 22:473–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Soininen J, Paavola R, Muotka T (2004) Benthic diatom communities in boreal streams: community structure in relation to environmental and spatial gradients. Ecography 27:330–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Soininen J, McDonald R, Hillebrand H (2007) The distance decay of similarity in ecological communities. Ecography 30:3–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Telford RJ, Birks HJB (2005) The secret assumption of transfer functions: problems with spatial autocorrelation in evaluating model performance. Quat Sci Rev 24:2173–2179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Telford RJ, Birks HJB (2011) A novel method for assessing the statistical significance of quantitative reconstructions inferred from biotic assemblages. Quat Sci Rev 30:1272–1278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Thomaz SM, Bini LM, Bozelli RL (2007) Floods increase similarity among aquatic habitats in river-floodplain systems. Hydrobiologia 579:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Vilar AG, Van Dam H, Van Loon EE, Vonk JA, Van Der Geest HG, Admiraal W (2014) Eutrophication decreases distance decay of similarity in diatom communities. Freshwater Biol 59:1522–1531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Winegardner AK, Beisner BE, Legendre P, Gregory-Eaves I (2015) Are the landscape-level drivers of water column and surface sediment diatoms different? Freshwater Biol 60:267–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Zorzal-Almeida S, Soininen J, Bini LM, Bicudo DC (2017a) Local environment and connectivity are the main drivers of diatom species composition and trait variation in a set of tropical reservoirs. Freshwater Biol 62:1551–1563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Zorzal-Almeida S, Bicudo DC, Lamparelli MC, Faustino SB, Ferragut C, Bicudo CEM (2017b) Avaliação do Índice de Estado Trófico e sua aplicação na represa Guarapiranga em longa série temporal. In: Bicudo CEM, Bicudo DC (eds) 100 anos da represa Guarapiranga: lições e desafios. CRV, Curitiba, pp 401–428Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departamento de EcologiaInstituto de BotânicaSão PauloBrazil
  2. 2.Instituto de BiociênciasUniversidade Estadual PaulistaRio ClaroBrazil
  3. 3.Instituto de Ciências Sociais, Educação e ZootecniaUniversidade Federal do AmazonasParintinsBrazil
  4. 4.Department of BiologyMcGill UniversityMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations