The relative importance of shading and nutrients on algal production in subtropical streams

1. We used artificial substrata in forested and open streams in South-East Queensland, Australia, to determine the relative importance of shading from riparian vegetation and of nutrients on periphyton growth, and whether nitrogen and/or phosphorus limited algal productivity. 2. Nutrient-diffusing substrata consisting of agar enriched with N, P and N + P, and controls without nutrients, were deployed in duplicate at 15 sites in headwater streams with riparian canopy cover ranging from 0 to 88%. 3. Shading was the over-riding factor controlling periphyton biomass accrual on the artificial substrata, with nutrients playing a relatively minor role. Microscopic examination of periphyton scrapings taken after 7 weeks revealed that diatoms dominated on the artificial substrata in shaded streams, whereas filamentous green algae dominated the algal assemblage in the more open canopy streams. 4. Whilst nutrients had little effect on the accrual of algal biomass compared with riparian shading, there was evidence that nitrogen, and not phosphorus, stimulated periphyton production in streams with sufficient light.

[1]  M. G. Ryon,et al.  Light limitation in a stream ecosystem: responses by primary producers and consumers , 1995 .

[2]  D. Hurwood,et al.  Genetic differentiation among populations of Caridinazebra (Decapoda: Atyidae) in tropical rainforest streams, northern Australia , 1996 .

[3]  D. Blinn,et al.  IMPORTANCE OF PHYSICAL VARIABLES ON THE SEASONAL DYNAMICS OF EPILITHIC ALGAE IN A HIGHLY SHADED CANYON STREAM 1 , 1989 .

[4]  J. Hobbie,et al.  A continuous‐flow periphyton bioassay: Tests of nutrient limitation in a tundra stream1 , 1983 .

[5]  Ann Louise Heathwaite,et al.  Nitrate:processes, patterns and management , 1995 .

[6]  S. Bunn,et al.  Ecosystem measures of river health and their response to riparian and catchment degradation , 1999 .

[7]  Robert W. Day,et al.  Comparisons of Treatments After an Analysis of Variance in Ecology , 1989 .

[8]  Jennifer G. Winter,et al.  Epilithic diatoms as indicators of stream total N and total P concentration , 2000, Journal of the North American Benthological Society.

[9]  W. Hill,et al.  Periphyton Responses to Higher Trophic Levels and Light in a Shaded Stream , 1990 .

[10]  D. Spencer,et al.  PHYSIOLOGICAL RESPONSES TO TEMPERATURE AND IRRADIANCE IN SPIROGYRA (ZYGNEMATALES, CHAROPHYCEAE)1 , 1995 .

[11]  Patrick J. Mulholland,et al.  Seasonally shifting limitation of stream periphyton: response of algal populations and assemblage biomass and productivity to variation in light, nutrients, and herbivores , 2000 .

[12]  A. Hershey,et al.  Spatial and Temporal Variability of Nutrient Limitation in 6 North Shore Tributaries to Lake Superior , 1999, Journal of the North American Benthological Society.

[13]  John R. Jones,et al.  Experimental Evidence for Nitrogen Limitation in a Northern Ozark Stream , 1991, Journal of the North American Benthological Society.

[14]  W. Richardson,et al.  Algal Periphyton Growth on Nutrient‐Diffusing Substrates: An in situ Bioassay , 1985 .

[15]  J. Webster,et al.  Periphyton Response to Nutrient Manipulation in Streams Draining Clearcut and Forested Watersheds , 1986, Journal of the North American Benthological Society.

[16]  John Parslow,et al.  Modelling of nutrient impacts in Port Phillip Bay : a semi-enclosed marine Australian ecosystem , 1999 .

[17]  S. Bunn,et al.  Population dynamics and life history of Paratya australiensis Kemp, 1917 (Decapoda:Atyidae) in upland rainforest streams, south-eastern Queensland, Australia , 1997 .

[18]  J. Quinn,et al.  LAND USE EFFECTS ON HABITAT, WATER QUALITY, PERIPHYTON, AND BENTHIC INVERTEBRATES IN WAIKATO, NEW ZEALAND, HILL-COUNTRY STREAMS , 1997 .

[19]  S. Bunn,et al.  Temporal patterns of rainforest stream epilithic algae in relation to flow-related disturbance , 1997 .

[20]  W. Dodds,et al.  Developing nutrient targets to control benthic chlorophyll levels in streams: A case study of the Clark Fork River , 1997 .

[21]  S. Fisher,et al.  Nitrogen Limitation in a Sonoran Desert Stream , 1986, Journal of the North American Benthological Society.

[22]  A. Rosemond,et al.  SPECIES‐SPECIFIC CHARACTERISTICS EXPLAIN THE PERSISTENCE OF STIGEOCLONIUM TENUE (CHLOROPHYTA) IN A WOODLAND STREAM 1 , 1996 .

[23]  W. Hill,et al.  NUTRIENT AND LIGHT LIMITATION OF ALGAE IN TWO NORTHERN CALIFORNIA STREAMS 1 , 1988 .

[24]  E. Welch,et al.  Establishing nutrient criteria in streams , 2000, Journal of the North American Benthological Society.

[25]  S. Bunn,et al.  Effects of shade and nutrient manipulation on periphyton growth in a subtropical stream , 1999 .

[26]  J. Quinn,et al.  Shade effects on stream periphyton and invertebrates: An experiment in streamside channels , 1997 .

[27]  A. Steinman,et al.  EFFECTS OF IRRADIANCE AND GRAZING ON LOTIC ALGAL ASSEMBLAGES 1 , 1989 .

[28]  A. E. Greenberg,et al.  Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater : supplement to the sixteenth edition , 1988 .

[29]  Timothy R. Parsons,et al.  A manual of chemical and biological methods for seawater analysis , 1984 .

[30]  C. Pringle,et al.  An In Situ Substratum Fertilization Technique: Diatom Colonization on Nutrient-Enriched, Sand Substrata , 1984 .

[31]  K. Cummins,et al.  Structure and Function of Stream Ecosystems , 1974 .

[32]  C. Langdon.  On the causes of interspecific differences in the growth-irradiance relationship for phytoplankton. II. A general review , 1988 .

[33]  M. Winterbourn.  Interactions among nutrients, algae and invertebrates in a New Zealand mountain stream , 1990 .