Comparison of periphyton communities on natural and artificial macrophytes with contrasting morphological structures
Comparison of periphyton communities on natural and artificial macrophytes with contrasting morphological structures
复制标题
具有对比形态结构的天然和人工大型植物的附生植物群落比较
DOI：
10.1111/fwb.12991
复制
发表时间：
2017-10-01
影响因子：
2.7
通讯作者：
Li, Wei
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hao, Beibei;Wu, Haoping;Li, Wei
人工水生植物是否是研究湖泊附着生物丰度和组成的天然水生植物的良好替代物仍然是一个悬而未决的问题。在冬季（植物生长较低时）进行了围隔实验，同时比较了3种叶结构复杂程度不同（叶分形维数分别为1.12，1.17和1.37）的沉水植物（Potamogeton lucens，Vallisneria sp.和Cabomba caroliniana）和3种形态与天然植物相似的人工植物上的附着生物群落。我们还比较了处理间的差异，浮游植物采样围隔。
无论是天然还是人工水生植物，叶绿素a（Chl-a）与叶片分形维数均呈正相关。虽然天然和人工植物的形态结构和水的物理化学特征相似，但天然和人工水生植物之间的附着生物群落存在差异，这种差异取决于水生植物叶片结构的复杂性。对于结构简单的叶片，天然和人工植物上的附着生物的丰度和组成没有统计学差异。此外，自然亮叶近轴侧的着生生物Chl-a、密度和生物量均高于远轴侧，而人工叶片两侧的着生生物Chl-a、密度和生物量差异不大。
对于具有中等结构复杂性的叶片，附着生物的丰度在自然植物上低于人工植物，并且硅藻占总群落的比例不同。对于结构复杂度较高的叶片，人工植物的附着生物Chl-a显著高于天然植物，而附着生物密度、生物量以及硅藻和绿色藻类的比例均无显著差异。
附着生物属组成的排列多变量分析证实，人工植物（中，高叶结构复杂性）的附着生物组成是不同的整体从天然植物。
浮游植物叶绿素a，密度，生物量和多样性没有表现出任何显着的差异处理。
我们的研究结果表明，人工水生植物不能完全取代天然植物，即使它们是形态相似。因此，在调查水生植物上的附着生物群落时，应谨慎使用人工水生植物。
It remains an open question whether or not artificial macrophytes are good alternatives to natural macrophytes in studies of periphyton abundance and composition in lakes. Here, a mesocosm experiment was conducted in winter (when plant growth is low) to compare simultaneously the periphyton community on three submerged macrophytes (Potamogeton lucens, Vallisneria sp. and Cabomba caroliniana) with contrasting leaf structural complexities (leaf fractal dimension = 1.12, 1.17 and 1.37, respectively) and on three types of artificial macrophytes with similar morphologies as the natural plants. We also compared intertreatment differences in phytoplankton sampled from mesocosms.
Both for natural and artificial macrophytes, the periphyton chlorophyll a (Chl-a) was positively associated with leaf fractal dimension. Although the morphological structure of natural and artificial plants and the physicochemical characteristics of the water were similar, the periphyton community differed between natural and artificial macrophytes, with the difference being dependent on the leaf structural complexity of the macrophytes. For leaves with a simple structural complexity, the abundance and composition of periphyton on natural and artificial plants were not statistically different. In addition, periphyton Chl-a, density and biovolume were higher on the adaxial side than on the abaxial side of natural P. lucens leaves, but no differences were found between sides of the artificial leaves.
For leaves with a medium structural complexity, the abundance of periphyton was lower on the natural than artificial plants, and the proportion of diatoms to the total community differed. For leaves with a high structural complexity, periphyton Chl-a of the artificial plants was notably higher than on the natural plants, while no significant differences were found for periphyton density, biovolume, and the proportion of diatoms and green algae.
Permutational multivariate analysis of periphyton genus composition confirmed that periphyton composition on the artificial plants (medium and high leaf structural complexities) was different overall from that on the natural plants.
Phytoplankton Chl-a, density, biovolume, and diversity did not show any pronounced differences among treatments.
Our results suggest that artificial macrophytes cannot fully substitute for natural plants even when they are morphologically similar. Artificial macrophytes should therefore be used with caution when investigating the periphyton community on macrophytes.