The relative importance of light and nutrient limitation of phytoplankton growth: a simple index of coastal ecosystem sensitivity to nutrient enrichment

被引:216
作者
James E. Cloern
机构
[1] United States Geological Survey,
[2] MS496,undefined
关键词
estuaries; eutrophication; resource management;
D O I
10.1023/A:1009952125558
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Anthropogenic nutrient enrichment of the coastal zone is now a well-established fact. However, there is still uncertainty about the mechanisms through which nutrient enrichment can disrupt biological communities and ecosystem processes in the coastal zone. For example, while some estuaries exhibit classic symptoms of acute eutrophication, including enhanced production of algal biomass, other nutrient-rich estuaries maintain low algal biomass and primary production. This implies that large differences exist among coastal ecosystems in the rates and patterns of nutrient assimilation and cycling. Part of this variability comes from differences among ecosystems in the other resource that can limit algal growth and production – the light energy required for photosynthesis. Complete understanding of the eutrophication process requires consideration of the interacting effects of light and nutrients, including the role of light availability as a regulator of the expression of eutrophication. A simple index of the relative strength of light and nutrient limitation of algal growth can be derived from models that describe growth rate as a function of these resources. This index can then be used as one diagnostic to classify the sensitivity of coastal ecosystems to the harmful effects of eutrophication. Here I illustrate the application of this diagnostic with light and nutrient measurements made in three California estuaries and two Dutch estuaries.
引用
收藏
页码:3 / 15
页数:12
相关论文
共 109 条
[1]  
Alpine AE(1988)Phytoplankton growth rates in a light-limited environment, San Francisco Bay Mar Ecol Prog Ser 44 167-173
[2]  
Cloern JE(1992)Trophic interactions and direct physical effects control phytoplankton biomass and production in an estuary Limnol Oceanogr 37 946-955
[3]  
Alpine AE(1995)Long-term nutrient enrichment of an estuarine system: Ythan, Scotland (1958–1993) Environ Pollut 90 311-321
[4]  
Cloern JE(1990)Phytoplankton biomass and potential nutrient limitation of phytoplankton development in the southeastern North Sea in spring 1985 and 1986 Neth J Sea Res 25 131-142
[5]  
Balls PW(1986)Seasonal and annual variation in Neth J Sea Res 20 29-36
[6]  
Macdonald A(1994) (Haptophyceae) in the westernmost inlet of the Wadden Sea during the 1973 to 1985 period Limnol Oceanogr 39 580-596
[7]  
Pugh K(1994)Recognition of nutrient and light limitation in turbid mixed layers: three approaches compared in the Paraná floodplain (Argentina) Est Coast Shelf Sci 39 529-548
[8]  
Edwards AC(1982)Modelling eutrophication events in a coastal ecosystem. Sensitivity analysis Mar Ecol Prog Ser 9 191-202
[9]  
Bauerfeind E(1985)Does the benthos control phytoplankton biomass in South San Francisco Bay? Hydrobiologia 129 153-176
[10]  
Hickel W(1987)Temporal dynamics of estuarine phytoplankton: a case study of San Francisco Bay Cont Shelf Res 7 1367-1382