Peculiarities of the structure of zooplankton communities in floodplain water bodies of the Middle Ob

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

The zooplankton of the caught floodplain lakes of the Middle Ob, located at various distances from the main riverbeds, was studied. It is shown that the development of the summer complex of zooplankton in floodplain lakes begins simultaneously with the passage of the flood; a significant diversity of species and the largest biomass increase in them in the summer months. The more often the floodplain lakes is filled with hollow waters, the higher the species diversity and the calculated indicators of plankton are in it. The factors that register the signs of zooplankton development in the caught lakes are revealed: the frequency of flooding, water temperature, the content of consumption for a number of taxa — the gas regime. Studies have shown that that the zooplankton of the caught reservoirs is subject to increased impact of the communities of the special territory of rivers and lakes of the above-floodplain terrace of the distribution of faunal diversity, increased species richness and specific species structure.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

N. I. Yermolaeva

Institute for Water and Environmental Problems of Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences

Author for correspondence.
Email: hope413@mail.ru
Russian Federation, Barnaul

Yu. A. Noskov

Institute of Systematics and Ecology of Animals of Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences; Tomsk State University

Email: hope413@mail.ru
Russian Federation, Novosibirsk; Tomsk

I. V. Kritskov

Tomsk State University

Email: hope413@mail.ru
Russian Federation, Tomsk

References

  1. Андроникова И.Н. 1996. Структурно-функциональная организация зоопланктона озерных экосистем разных трофических типов. СПб.: Наука.
  2. Ермолаева Н.И., Двуреченская С.Я. 2013. Региональные индексы индикаторной значимости зоопланктонных организмов в водоемах юга Западной Сибири // Экология. № 6. С. 476. https://doi.org/10.7868/S0367059713060061.
  3. Ермолаева Н.И. 2020. Факторы пространственно-временной организации сообществ зоопланктона озер юга Западной Сибири: Автореф. дис. … докт. биол. наук.
  4. Крылов А.В., Жгарева Н.Н. 2016. Влияние поемности на летний зоопланктон малых озер // Изв. РАН. Сер. геогр. № 1. C. 58. https://doi.org/10.15356/0373-2444-2016-1-58-66.
  5. Литош Т.А., Цыганкова Ю.В., Визер Л.С., Цапенков А.В. 2021. Зоопланктонные и зообентосные сообщества пойменных озер реки Иртыш в пределах Омской области // Рыб-во и рыбн. хоз-во. № 6. С. 17. https://doi.org/10.33920/sel-09-2106-02
  6. Мяэметс А.Х. 1980. Изменения зоопланктона // Антропогенное воздействие на малые озера. Л.: Наука. С. 54.
  7. Подшивалина В.Н. 2022. Весенний зоопланктон пойменных озер: разнообразие, структура и особенности формирования в связи с изменчивостью гидрологического режима// Экология. Т. 60. № 3. С. 234. https://doi.org/10.31857/S036705972203009X
  8. Руководство по гидробиологическому мониторингу пресноводных экосистем. 1992. СПб.: Гидрометео­издат.
  9. Савичев О.Г. 2010. Влияние крупных притоков на химический состав вод средней Оби // Вестн. Томск. гос. ун-та. № 340. С. 222.
  10. Семенова Л.А., Алексюк В.А. 2009. Зоопланктон Нижней Оби // Вестн. экологии, лесоведения и ландшафтоведения. № 10. С. 156.
  11. Современное состояние водных ресурсов и функцио­нирование водохозяйственного комплекса бассейна Оби и Иртыша. 2012. Новосибирск: Изд-во Сиб. отд. РАН.
  12. Суставов А.А. 2019. Особенности структуры и обилие сообществ зоопланктона водоемов пойменно-руслового комплекса Нижнего Иртыша // Всерос. молодежная науч. конф. “Актуальные проблемы экологии Волжского бассейна”. № 1. С. 434.
  13. Хромых В.С. 2007. Динамика ландшафтов поймы средней Оби // Вестн. Томск. гос. ун-та. № 300 (I). С. 223.
  14. Шурганова Г.В., Жихарев В.С., Кудрин И.А. и др. 2018. Зоопланктон пойменных озeр реки Керженец (Керженский заповедник, Нижегородская область) // Самар. науч. вестник. Т. 7. № 2(23). С. 138.
  15. Albrektiene R., Rimeika M., Zalieckiene E. et al. 2012. Determination of organic matter by UV absorption in the ground water // J. Environ. Eng. Landsc. Manag. V. 20. P. 163. https://doi.org/10.3846/16486897.2012.674039
  16. Amoros C., Bornette G. 2002. Connectivity and biocomplexity in water bodies of riverine floodplains // Freshwatеr Biol. V. 47. P. 761.
  17. Baranyi C., Hein T., Holarek C. et al. 2002. Zooplankton biomass and community structure in a Danube River floodplain system: Effects of hydrology // Freshwatеr Biol. V. 47. P. 473.
  18. Chaparro G., Horvath Z., O’Farrel I. et al. 2018. Plankton metacommunities in floodplainwetlands under contrasting hydrological conditions // Freshwatеr Biol. V. 63. P. 380.
  19. Chaparro G., Kandus P., O’Farrel I. 2015. Effect of spatial heterogeneity on zooplankton diversity: Amultiscale habitat approximation in a floodplain lake // River Res. Appl. V. 31. P. 85.
  20. Chaparro G., Mariani M., Hein T. 2021. Diversity of dormant and active zooplankton stages: spatial patterns across scales in temperate riverine floodplains // J. Plankton Res. V. 43. № 1. P. 61. https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/fbaa063
  21. Dembowska E., Napiórkowski P.A. 2015. Case study of the planktonic communities in two hydrologically different oxbow lakes (Vistula River, Central Poland) // J. Limnol. V. 74. P. 346.
  22. Dias J.D., Simões N.R., Meerhoff M. et al. 2016. Hydrological dynamics drives zooplankton matacommunity structure in a Neotropical floodplain // Hydrobiologia. V. 781. P. 109.
  23. Dittrich J., Dias J.D., Bonecker C.C. et al. 2016. Importance of temporal variability at different spatial scales for diversity of floodplain aquatic communities // Freshwatеr Biol. V. 61. P. 316.
  24. Funk A., Reckendorfer W., Kucera-Hirzinger V. et al. 2009. Aquatic diversity in a former floodplain: Remediation in an urban context // Ecol. Eng. V. 35. P. 1476.
  25. Górski K., Collier K.J., Duggan I.C. et al. 2013. Connectivity and complexity of floodplain habitats govern zooplankton dynamics in a large temperate river system // Freshwatеr Biol. V. 58. P. 1458.
  26. Gruberts D., Druvietis I., Parele J. et al. 2007. Impact of hydrology on aquatic communities of floodplain lakes along the Daugava River (Latvia) // Shallow lakes in a changing world. Developments in hydrobiology. V. 196. Dordrecht: Springer. P. 223. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6399-2_21
  27. Hammer Ø., Harper D.A.T., Ryan P.D. 2001. Past: Paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis // Palaeontol. Electron. V. 4. http://palaeo-electronica.org/2001_1/past/issue1_01.htm
  28. Hein T., Baranyi C., Reckendorfer W., Schiemer F. 2004. The impact of surface water exchange on the nutrient and particle dynamics in side-arms along the River Danube, Austria // Sci. Total Environ. V. 328.0. Iss. 1–3. P. 207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2004.01.006
  29. Junk W.J., Bayley P.B., Sparks R.E. 1989. The flood pulse concept in river-floodplain systems // Can. Spec. Publ. Fish Aquat. Sci. V. 106. P. 110.
  30. Kobayashi T., Ralph T.J., Ryder D.S. et al. 2015. Spatial dissimilarities in plankton structure and function during flood pulses in a semi-arid floodplain wetland system // Hydrobiologia. V. 747. P. 19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-014-2119-7
  31. Legendre P., Legendre L. 2012. Numerical Ecology. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
  32. Liu B., Zhou C., Zheng L. et al. 2022. Metacommunity concepts provide new insights in explaining zooplankton spatial patterns within large floodplain systems // Water. V. 14. P. 93. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14010093
  33. Namour P., Jaffrezic N. 2010. Sensors for measuring biodegradable and total organic matter in water // Trends in Anal. Chem. V. 29(8). P. 848. https://doi.org/ff10.1016/j.trac.2010.04.013ff.ffhal-00547575f
  34. Napiórkowski P., Bąkowska M., Mrozińska N. et al. 2019. The effect of hydrological connectivity on the zooplankton structure in floodplain lakes of a regulated large river (the Lower Vistula, Poland) // Water. V. 11(9). P. 1924. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11091924
  35. Obolewski K., Glińska-Lewczuk K., Bąkowska M. 2018. From isolation to connectivity: the effect offloodplain lake restoration on sediments as habitats for macroinvertebrate communities // Aquat. Sci. V. 80. № 4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00027-017-0556 x
  36. Obolewski K., Glińska-Lewczuk K., Ożgo M., Astel A. 2016. Connectivity restoration of floodplain lakes: Anassessment based on macroinvertebrate communities // Hydrobiologia. V. 774. P. 23.
  37. Paidere J. 2009. Influence of flooding frequency on zooplankton in the floodplains of the Daugava River (Latvia) // Acta Zool. Lit. V. 19. P. 306.
  38. Paillex A., Castella E., zu Ermagassen P.S.E. et al. 2017. Large river floodplain as a natural laboratory: non-native macroinvertebrates benefit from elevated temperatures // Ecosphere. V. 8. № 10. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.1972
  39. Saitou N., Nei M. 1987. The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees // Mol. Biol. Evol. № 4. P. 406.
  40. Schöll K., Kiss A., Dinka M., Berczik A. 2012. Flood-Pulse effects on zooplankton assemblages in ariver-floodplain system (Gemenc Floodplain of the Danube, Hungary) // Int. ReV. Hydrobiol. V. 97. P. 41.
  41. Sladeček V. 1973. System of water quality from the biological point of view // Arch. Hydrobiol. Ergebn. Limnol. № 3.
  42. Szerzyna S., Mołczan M., Wolska M. et al. 2017. Absorbance based water quality indicators as parameters for treatment process control with respect to organic substance removal // E3S Web of Conferences. V. 17. Article 00091. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/20171700091
  43. TerBraak C.J.F. 1995. Non-linear methods for multivariate statistical calibration and their use in palaeoecology: A comparison of inverse (k-Nearest Neighbours, PLS and WA-PLS) and classical approaches // Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. V. 28. P. 165.
  44. Thomaz S.M., Bini L.M., Bozelli R.L. 2007. Floods increase similarity among aquatic habitats in River-floodplain systems // Hydrobiologia. V. 579. P. 1.
  45. Vorobyev S.N., Pokrovsky O.S., Kirpotin S.N. et al. 2015. Flood zone biogeochemistry of the Ob River middle course // Appl. Geochem. V. 63. P. 133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeochem.2015.08.005
  46. Wantzen K.M., Junk W.J., Rothhaupt K.O. 2008. An extension of the floodpulse concept (FPC) for lakes // Ecological Effects of Water-Level Fluctuations in Lakes. Developments in Hydrobiology. V. 204. Dordrecht: Springer. P. 151. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9192-6_15
  47. Yermolaeva N., Dvurechenskaya S., Kirillov V., Puzanov A. 2021. Dependence of long-term dynamics of zooplankton in the Ob River on interannual changes in hydrological and hydrochemical parameters // Water. V. 13. P. 1910. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13141910
  48. Zhang K., Xu M., Wu Q. et al. 2018. The response of zooplankton communities to the 2016 extreme hydrological cycle in floodplain lakes connected to the Yangtze River in China // Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. V. 25. P. 23286.
  49. Zuur A.F., Ieno E.N., Elphick C.S. 2010. A protocol for data exploration to avoid common statistical problems // Methods of Ecology and Evolution. № 1. P. 3. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-210X.2009.00001.x

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download
2. Fig. 1. Map-scheme of the location of the studied lakes. 1 – temporary reservoir (sogra), 2 – Lake Inkino, 3 – Ishtanskoye swamp, 4 – Lake Shchuchye, 5 – Ob River.

Download (375KB)
Indexing metadata
3. Fig. 2. Display of multidimensional scaling (nMDS) results in the space of two scales obtained on the basis of Euclidean distances between environmental conditions in the studied water bodies. 1 – temporary water body (sogra), 2 – Lake Inkino, 3 – Ishtanskoye swamp, 4 – Lake Shchuchye, 5 – Ob River. T – temperature, O2 – concentration of dissolved oxygen, CO2 – concentration of dissolved carbon dioxide, Cond – electrical conductivity, UV 245 and UV 254 – UV absorption at wavelengths of 245 and 254 nm and pH. (Stress: 0.0011).

Download (233KB)
Indexing metadata
4. Fig. 3. Abundance (N, thousand specimens/m3) and biomass (B, mg/m3) (a, c, d, g, i) and the ratio of taxonomic groups of zooplankton (% of total abundance) (b, d, f, h, j) during the open water period in water bodies: a, b — Lake Inkino; c, d — Sogra; d, f — Ishtanskoye swamp; g, h — Ob River; i, j — Lake Shchuchye. 1 — abundance, 2 — biomass, 3 — Rotifera, 4 — Cladocera, 5 — Copepoda.

Download (583KB)
Indexing metadata
5. Fig. 4. Dendrogram of biocenotic similarity of zooplankton of the studied water bodies based on the values ​​of the Bray–Curtis measure (grouping according to the principle of Neigbour joining clustering (Saitou & Nei, 1987)). 1 – temporary water body (sogra), 2 – Lake Inkino, 3 – Ishtanskoye swamp, 4 – Lake Shchuchye, 5 – Ob River.

Download (104KB)
Indexing metadata
6. Fig. 5. Annual dynamics of abundance (N, thousand specimens/m3) and number of species (n) of zooplankton of the floodplain Lake Inkino (a) and the mainland Lake Shchuchye (b). 1 – Copepoda, 2 – Cladocera, 3 – Rotifera, 4 – number of species.

Download (143KB)
Indexing metadata

Copyright (c) 2024 The Russian Academy of Sciences

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies