Inland Water Biology

, Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 96–104 | Cite as

Effect of glass roughness on the formation of fouling communities and monocultures

  • K. A. Korlyakov
  • D. Y. Nokhrin
  • N. Y. Arsentyeva
Methods of Investigations


The peculiarities of colonization by periphyton of uneven glass relief in the gradient of the depression 7–270 μm and 2–10 mm have been studied. An increase in numbers, biomass, and diversity of several times of different organisms on an uneven glass surface in comparison with an even surface is revealed. Depressions differing in size serve as “cells” for colonization by mobile and attached forms with different specializations. Even the smallest irregularities of the glass relief hereinafter a more complex structure of periphyton communities.


glass depressions biomass numbers periphyton 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Gorlenko, V.M., Dubinina, G.A., and Kuznetsov, S.I., Ekologiya vodnykh mikroorganizmov (Ecology of Aquatic Organisms), Moscow: Nauka, 1977.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zaletaev, V.S., Structural organization of ecotones in the context of control in Ekotony v biosfere (Ecotones in the Biosphere), Moscow: RASKhN, 1997, pp. 5–30.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zevina, G.V., Obrastaniya v moryakh SSSR (Fouling in the seas of the USSR), Moscow: Izd. Mosk. Univ., 1972.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ivanova, A.V. and Mikhailova, N.A., Svoistva stekla i mineral’nykh vyazhushchikh veshchestv (Properties of Glass and Mineral Binders), Yekaterinburg: Ural. Gos. Tekhn. Univ., 2005.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Komulainen, S.F., Metodicheskie rekomendatsii po izucheniyu fitoperifitona v malykh rekakh (Guidelines for the Study Phytoperiphyton in Small Rivers), Petrozavodsk: Karel. Nauch. Tsentr RAN, 2003.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Korlyakov, K.A., Method of “scratched” fouling glasses to optimize the study of biodiversity and structural and functional characteristics of the communities living on the “liquid-solid” interface, in Nauchnaya industriya evropeiskogo kontinenta, 2012: Mater VII mezhdunar. nauch.-prakt. konf. no. 20: Biologicheskaya nauka. Khimiya i khimicheskie tekhnologii. Zemel’naya geologiya (Scientific Industry of the European Continent-2012: Proc. VII Intern. Sci.-Pract. Conf. No. 20: Biological Sciences. Chemistry and Chemical Technology. Land Geology), Prague, 2012, pp. 62–63.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Korlyakov, K.A., Arsent’eva, N.Yu., and Nokhrin, D.Yu., Effect of glass relief complexity on the formation of monocultures of microorganisms, Vestn. Ural. Med. Akad. Nauki, 2011, no. 4/1 (38), p. 35.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Metodika izucheniya biogeotsenozov vnutrennikh vodoemov (Method of Study Biogeocenosis Inland Waters), Moscow: Nauka, 1975.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Metodicheskie rekomendatsii po sboru i obrabotke materialov pri gidrobiologicheskikh issledovaniyakh na presnovodnykh vodoemakh: zoobentos i ego produktsiya (Guidelines for the Collection and Processing of Materials in Hydrobiological Studies in Freshwater Bodies: Zoobenthos and Its Production), Leningrad: Gos.NII Ozer. Rech. Ryb. Khoz., 1984.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Metodicheskie ukazaniya po izucheniyu fitomikrobentosa i fitoperifitona (Guidelines for Study of Phytomicrobenthos and Phytoperiphyton), Odessa: Odes. Nats. Univ., 2012.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Montgomeri, D.K., Planirovanie eksperimenta i analiz dannykh (Experiment Planning and Data Analysis), Leningrad: Sudostroenie, 1980.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Oleinik, G.N., Bacterioplankton and bakteriobentos in ecotone ecosystems, Gidrobiol. Zh., 1997, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 51–62.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Oleskin, A.V., Colonial organization and cell-cell communication in microorganisms, Mikrobiologiya, 2000, vol. 69, no. 3, pp. 309–327.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Protasov, A.A., Presnovodnyi perifiton (Freshwater Periphyton), Kiev: Nauk. Dumka, 1994.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rukovodstvo po gidrobiologicheskomu monitoringu presnovodnykh ekosistem (Guide Hydrobiological Monitoring of Freshwater Ecosystems), St. Petersburg: Gidrometeoizdat, 1992.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Solov’eva, V.V. and Rozenberg, G.S., The modern idea of ecotones or the theory of ecotones, Usp. Sovrem. Biol., 2006, vol. 126, no. 6, pp. 531–549.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kharchenko, T.A., The concept of ecotones in hydrobiology, Gidrobiol. Zh., 1991, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 3–10.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jarvis, B., Statistical Aspects of the Microbiological Examination of Foods, London: Elsevier Acad. Press, 2008.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yamamura, K., Transformation using (x + 0.5) to stabilize the variance of population, Res. Popul. Ecol., 1999, vol. 41, pp. 229–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yoshioka, K., KyPlot—a user-oriented tool for statistical data analysis and visualization, Computational Statistics, 2002, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 425–437.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    ZoBell, C.E., The effect of solid surfaces upon bacterial activity, J. Bacteriol., 1943, vol. 46, pp. 39–56.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    ZoBell, C.E. and Anderson, D.Q., Observations on the multiplication of bacteria in different volumes of stored sea water and the influence of oxygen tension and solid surfaces, Biol. Bull., 1936, vol. 71, pp. 324–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. A. Korlyakov
    • 1
  • D. Y. Nokhrin
    • 1
  • N. Y. Arsentyeva
    • 1
  1. 1.Chelyabinsk State UniversityChelyabinskRussia

Personalised recommendations