Вестник Томского государственного университета. Биология. 2020; 1: 128-148
Экологическое состояние малых водоемов различного природоохранного статуса (Самарская область)
https://doi.org/10.17223/19988591/49/7Аннотация
Список литературы
1. Barinova S., Gabyshev V., Boboev M., Kukhaleishvili L., Bilous O. Algal indication of climatic gradients // American Journal of Environmental Protection. 2015. Vol. 4 (3–1). PP. 72–77. doi: 10.11648/j.ajep.s.2015040301.22
2. Liu J., Kattel G., Arp H.P.H., Yang H. Towards threshold-based management of freshwater ecosystems in the context of climate change // Ecological Modelling. 2015. № 318. PP. 265−274. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2014.09.010
3. Chernova E., Russkikh I., Voyakina E., Sidelev S., Babanazarova O., Romanov R., Kotovshchikov A., Mazur-Marzec H. Dolichospermum and Aphanizomenon as neurotoxins producers in some Russian freshwaters // Toxicon. 2017. Vol. 130. PP. 47−55. doi: 10.1016/j. toxicon.2017.02.016
4. Babanazarova O.V., Sidelev S.I., Aleksandrina E.M., Sakharova E.G., Kurmayer R. Phytoplankton structure and microcystine concentration in the highly eutrophic Nero Lake // Water Resources. 2011. Vol. 38, № 2. PP. 229−236. doi: 10.1134/S0097807811020023
5. Barinova S., Krupa E., Tsoy V., Ponamareva L. The application of phytoplankton in ecological assessment of the Balkhash lake (Kazakhstan) // Applied Ecology and Environmental Research. 2018. Vol. 16, № 3. PP. 2089−2111. doi: 10.15666/aeer/1603_20892111
6. Sakharova E.G., Korneva L.G. Phytoplankton in the littoral and pelagial zones of the Rybinsk Reservoir in years with different temperature and water level regimes // Inland Water Biology. 2018.Vol. 11 (1). PP. 6–12. doi: 10.1134/S1995082918010157
7. Komulaynen S. Algal protection, conservation areas and Red Data Book of the Republik of Karelia // Oceanological and Hydrobiological Studies. 2010. Vol. 39 (2). PP. 147−152. doi: 10.2478/v10009-010-0028-2
8. Snit’ko L.V., Snit’ko V.P. Phytoplankton as an indicator in assessing long-term variations in water quality of lakes Bolshoye Miassovo and Turgoyak, the South Urals // Water Resources. 2014. Vol. 41, № 2. PP. 210−217. doi: 10.1134/S0097807814020146
9. Korneva L.G. Changes in phytoplankton diversity in the Volga basin waterbodies // Inland Water Biology. 2010. Vol. 3(4). PP. 322–328. doi: 10.1134/S1995082910040048
10. Голубая книга Самарской области: редкие и охраняемые гидробиоценозы / ред. Г.С. Розенберг, С.В. Саксонов. Самара : СамНЦ РАН, 2006. 200 с.
11. Протисты и бактерии озер Самарской области / ред. В.В. Жариков. Тольятти : Кассандра, 2009. 240 с.
12. Gelashvili D.B., Iudin D.I., Yakimov V.N., Solntsev L.A., Shurganova G.V., OkhapkinA.G., Startseva N.A., Pukhnarevich D.A., Snegireva M.S., Rozenberg G.S. Multifractal analysis of the species structure of freshwater hydrobiocenoses // Biology Bulletin. 2012. Vol. 39, № 3. PP. 271−278. doi: 10.1134/S1062359012010037
13. Корнева Л.Г. Фитопланктон водохранилищ бассейна Волги. Кострома : Костромской печатный дом, 2015. 284 с.
14. Трифонова И.С. Экология и сукцессия озерного фитопланктона. Л. : Наука, 1990. 183 с.
15. Митрошенкова А.Е., Ясюк В.П. Современное состояние экосистемы Яицких озер левобережной поймы реки Самары // Научный диалог. 2014. №1(25). С. 115–128.
16. Кривина Е.С., Тарасова Н.Г. Трансформация альгофлоры техногенных озер (на примере г. Тольятти) // Вода и экология: проблемы и решения. 2017. № 3(17). С. 203−209. doi: 10.23968/2305-3488.2017.21.3.13-34
17. Китаев С.П. Основы лимнологии для гидробиологов и ихтиологов. Петрозаводск : Карельский науч. центр Российской акад. наук, Ин-т биологии, 2007. 394 с.
18. Методика изучения биогеоценозов внутренних водоемов / под ред. Ф.Д. МордухайБолтовского. М.: Наука, 1975. 240 с.
19. Lund J.W.G., Kipling C., Le Cren E.O. The inverted microscope method ofestimating algal numbers and the statistical basis of estimations by counting // Hydrobiology. 1958. Vol. 11. PP. 143–170. doi: 10.1007/BF00007865
20. Вассер С.П., Кондратьева Н.В., Масюк Н.П., Паламарь-Мордвинцева Г.М., Ветрова З.И., Кордюм Е.Л., Мошкова Н.А., Приходькова Л.П., Коваленко О.В., Ступина В.В., Царенко П.М., Юнгер В.П., Радченко М.И., Виноградова О.Н., Бухтиярова Л.Н., Разумна Л.Ф. Водоросли : справочник. Киев : Наукова думка, 1989. 608 с.
21. Дедусенко-Щеголева Н.Т., Матвиенко А.М., Шкорбатов Л.А. Зеленые водоросли. Класс Вольвоксовые. Chlorophyta: Volvocineae // Определитель пресноводных водорослей СССР. М. ; Л. : Наука, 1959. Вып. 8. 223 с.
22. Дедусенко-Щеголева Н.Т., Голлербах М.М. Желтозеленые водоросли // Определитель пресноводных водорослей СССР. М. ; Л. : Наука, 1962. Вып. 5. 272 с.
23. Царенко П.М. Краткий определитель хлорококковых водорослей Украинской ССР / АН УССР. Ин-т ботаники им. Н.Г. Холодного ; отв. ред. Г.М. Паламарь-Мордвинцева. Киев : Наукова думка, 1990. 208 с.
24. Komarek J., Anagnostidis K. Cyanoprokaryota. Teil 1: Chroococcales // Süsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa. Jena ; Stuttgart ; Lübeck ; Ulm, 1998. Bd. 19/1. 548 p.
25. Komarek J., Anagnostidis K. Cyanoprokaryota. Teil 2: Oscillatoriales // Süsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa. München, 2005. Bd. 19/2. 759 p.
26. Krammer K., Lange-Bertalot H. Bacillariophyceae. Teil 1: Naviculaceae // Die Süsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa. Stuttgart ; New York : Gustav Fischer Verlag, 1986. Bd. 2/1. 876 p.
27. Krammer K., Lange-Bertalot H. Bacillariophyceae. Teil 3: Centrales, Fragilariaceae, Eunotiaceae // Die Süsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa. Stuttgart ; Jena : Gustav Fischer Verlag, 1991. Bd. 2/3. 576 p.
28. Reynolds C.S., Huszar V., Kruk C., Naselli-Flores L., Melo S.Towards a functional classification of the freshwater phytoplankton // Journal of Plankton Research. 2002. 24. PP. 417–428. doi: 10.1093/plankt/24.5.417
29. Мегурран Е. Экологическое разнообразие и его измерение. М. : Мир, 1992. 184 с.
30. Sládeček V. System of water quality from the biological point of view // Ergebnisse der Limnologie. 1973. Bd. 7. P. 1–218.
31. Wegl R. Index für die Limnosaprobität // Wasser und Abwasser. 1983. Bd. 26. PP. 1–175.
32. Barinova S.S., Klochenko P.D., Belous Y.P. Algae as indicators of the ecological state of water bodies: methods and prospects // Hydrobiological Journal. 2015. Vol. 51 (6). PP. 3–21. doi: 10.1615/HydrobJ.v51.i6.10
33. Горохова О.Г. Водоросли планктона малых водоемов юга лесостепного Поволжья (количественная характеристика фитопланктона) // Известия Самарского научного центра РАН. 2017. Т. 19 (5). С. 192–199.
34. Яценко-Степанова Т.Н. Оценка экологического состояния некоторых озер поймы реки Урал в Оренбургской области // Вестник Оренбургского государственного университета. 2017. № 11 (211). С. 125–128.
35. Горохова О.Г., Паутова В.Н. Водоросли планктона малых водоёмов юга лесостепного Поволжья (альгофлора: сравнительная характеристика озёр по составу планктона) // Известия Самарского научного центра Российской академии наук. 2015. Т. 17, № 4. С. 194–202.
36. Okhapkin A.G., Scharagina E.M., Vodeneeva E.L., Genkal S.I. Structure and dynamics of phytoplankton in the kOka river mouth at the beginning of the 21th century // Inland Water Biology. 2014. Vol. 7 (4). PP. 357–365. doi: 10.1134/S1995082914040142
37. Barinova S. The effect of altitude on distribution of freshwater algae in continental Israel // Current Topic of Plant Biology. 2011. Vol. 4. PP. 89–95.
38. Дрозденко Т.В., Михалап С.Г. Структурно-таксономическое разнообразие и экологические особенности фитопланктона дельты реки Великой (Псковская область) // Вестник Томского государственного университета. Биология. 2018. № 41. С. 118–134. doi: 10.17223/19988591/41/7
Tomsk State University Journal of Biology. 2020; 1: 128-148
Ecological condition of small reservoirs of different nature protection status (Samara region)
https://doi.org/10.17223/19988591/49/7Abstract
Currently, the conservation of the unique ecosystems of small water bodies located within cultural landscapes and/or in areas with limited nature protection status is of urgent issue. It is such hydrobiocenoses that are the most susceptible to increasing anthropogenic impact. Phytoplankton is a good indicator of the ecological situation in the reservoir. The aim of the work was to analyze the composition and structure of phytoplankton of some small urbanized lakes of Samara region with different levels of protection and degree of anthropogenic load.
Here, this is the first time we present an analysis of the current ecological state of three small water bodies having various nature protection statuses: Lake Yaitskoe (53°10ꞌ85ꞌꞌN,50°17ꞌ46ꞌꞌE), the regional natural monument; Lake Gatnoe (53°14ꞌ93ꞌꞌN, 50°11ꞌ83ꞌꞌE), Samara region natural heritage site; and Lake Bolshoe Vasilievskoe (53°54ꞌ40ꞌꞌN, 49°53ꞌ24ꞌꞌE), the suburban lake located in the transition zone of the Middle Volga complex biosphere reserve (See Table 1). We collected samples for phytoplankton study and basic physical and chemical measurements in the growing season from 2013 to 2014 (See Table 2). We sampled the algae with a Ruttner bathometer. The material was fixed with 40% formalin solution. The cell count was carried out in the chamber “Uchinskaya” (Russia) with a volume of 0.01 ml. This chamber is a glass plate with low sides, the bottom of which is equipped with a special counting grid, optimized for counting plankton. Organisms are counted twice in 20 bands. Species identification of algae and counting of their cells were carried out on the microscope “BIOLAR PI” (limited liability company “Biolar”, Poland) with an increase of 600 times. To determine the species of algae, we used reference guides from the series “Determinants of freshwater algae of the USSR” and “Susswasserflora von Mitteleuropa”. The classification of Reynolds and co-authors was used to differentiate phytoplankton into functional groups. S1 -type (planktotrichete type) consisted of filamentous non-heterocyst forms of cyanoprokaryotes that previously belonged to genus Oscillatoria, M-type contained representatives of genus Microcystis, H1 -type contained representatives of genera Anabaena and Aphanizomenon. The similarity of the algae species composition of lakes was estimated with the Sorensen coefficient (Ks). The level of cenotic diversity and the degree of community alignment were assessed using Shannon (H) and Pielu (E) indices, respectively, taking into account the standard deviation. The dominant species were those whose number and biomass was 10% or more of the total value. The Simpson dominance index (S) was used to estimate the degree of dominance of individual species. Assessment of saprobity of waters was carried out by the method of Pantle and Bucc in the modification of Sladechek, using known indicator values of saprobity of individual species.
The general state of ecosystems of the studied lakes was analyzed on the basis of the qualitative composition and quantitative development of phytoplankton from 2013 to 2014. In all lakes, the species richness of phytoplankton was quite high and contributed mainly by chlorophytes, diatoms and cyanoprokaryota species (See Table 3 and Fig. 1). Floristic analysis revealed signs of imbalance in lake ecosystems, probably caused by anthropogenic impact and/or lack of biogenic limitation (See Table 4). This situation is especially unfavorable for ecosystems of water bodies of protected nature areas. Ecological and geographical analysis did not reveal significant differences between the algal flora of the studied reservoirs (See Table 5). The level of similarity of the species composition of the studied reservoirs was quite high (See Table 6). Perhaps this was due not only to similar abiotic parameters of the environment, but also to a high level of identical anthropogenic load. Quantitative phytoplankton development was high in all water bodies, the highest one was observed in Lake Bolshoe Vasilievskoe, and the lowest in lake Gatnoe (See Fig. 3). According to average algal biomass over the study period, Lake Bolshoe Vasilievskoe corresponds to the hypertrophic state, while lakes Gatnoe and Yaitskoe are eutrophic. Phytoplankton species diversity and alignment were highest in lake Gatnoe, and smallest in lake Yaitskoe. According to saprobity, the studied water bodies were β-mezosaprobic which corresponds to the water quality class III. Analysis of the floristic composition, the ratio of taxonomic ranks, indicators of quantitative development and the structure of the dominant species complex revealed signs of an imbalance in ecosystems and the development of “oscillatory” disease in all studied lakes, regardless of their conservation status due to anthropogenic impact and lack of biogenic restriction.
The paper contains 3 Figures, 6 Tables and 38 References.
The Authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Barinova S., Gabyshev V., Boboev M., Kukhaleishvili L., Bilous O. Algal indication of climatic gradients // American Journal of Environmental Protection. 2015. Vol. 4 (3–1). PP. 72–77. doi: 10.11648/j.ajep.s.2015040301.22
2. Liu J., Kattel G., Arp H.P.H., Yang H. Towards threshold-based management of freshwater ecosystems in the context of climate change // Ecological Modelling. 2015. № 318. PP. 265−274. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2014.09.010
3. Chernova E., Russkikh I., Voyakina E., Sidelev S., Babanazarova O., Romanov R., Kotovshchikov A., Mazur-Marzec H. Dolichospermum and Aphanizomenon as neurotoxins producers in some Russian freshwaters // Toxicon. 2017. Vol. 130. PP. 47−55. doi: 10.1016/j. toxicon.2017.02.016
4. Babanazarova O.V., Sidelev S.I., Aleksandrina E.M., Sakharova E.G., Kurmayer R. Phytoplankton structure and microcystine concentration in the highly eutrophic Nero Lake // Water Resources. 2011. Vol. 38, № 2. PP. 229−236. doi: 10.1134/S0097807811020023
5. Barinova S., Krupa E., Tsoy V., Ponamareva L. The application of phytoplankton in ecological assessment of the Balkhash lake (Kazakhstan) // Applied Ecology and Environmental Research. 2018. Vol. 16, № 3. PP. 2089−2111. doi: 10.15666/aeer/1603_20892111
6. Sakharova E.G., Korneva L.G. Phytoplankton in the littoral and pelagial zones of the Rybinsk Reservoir in years with different temperature and water level regimes // Inland Water Biology. 2018.Vol. 11 (1). PP. 6–12. doi: 10.1134/S1995082918010157
7. Komulaynen S. Algal protection, conservation areas and Red Data Book of the Republik of Karelia // Oceanological and Hydrobiological Studies. 2010. Vol. 39 (2). PP. 147−152. doi: 10.2478/v10009-010-0028-2
8. Snit’ko L.V., Snit’ko V.P. Phytoplankton as an indicator in assessing long-term variations in water quality of lakes Bolshoye Miassovo and Turgoyak, the South Urals // Water Resources. 2014. Vol. 41, № 2. PP. 210−217. doi: 10.1134/S0097807814020146
9. Korneva L.G. Changes in phytoplankton diversity in the Volga basin waterbodies // Inland Water Biology. 2010. Vol. 3(4). PP. 322–328. doi: 10.1134/S1995082910040048
10. Golubaya kniga Samarskoi oblasti: redkie i okhranyaemye gidrobiotsenozy / red. G.S. Rozenberg, S.V. Saksonov. Samara : SamNTs RAN, 2006. 200 s.
11. Protisty i bakterii ozer Samarskoi oblasti / red. V.V. Zharikov. Tol'yatti : Kassandra, 2009. 240 s.
12. Gelashvili D.B., Iudin D.I., Yakimov V.N., Solntsev L.A., Shurganova G.V., OkhapkinA.G., Startseva N.A., Pukhnarevich D.A., Snegireva M.S., Rozenberg G.S. Multifractal analysis of the species structure of freshwater hydrobiocenoses // Biology Bulletin. 2012. Vol. 39, № 3. PP. 271−278. doi: 10.1134/S1062359012010037
13. Korneva L.G. Fitoplankton vodokhranilishch basseina Volgi. Kostroma : Kostromskoi pechatnyi dom, 2015. 284 s.
14. Trifonova I.S. Ekologiya i suktsessiya ozernogo fitoplanktona. L. : Nauka, 1990. 183 s.
15. Mitroshenkova A.E., Yasyuk V.P. Sovremennoe sostoyanie ekosistemy Yaitskikh ozer levoberezhnoi poimy reki Samary // Nauchnyi dialog. 2014. №1(25). S. 115–128.
16. Krivina E.S., Tarasova N.G. Transformatsiya al'goflory tekhnogennykh ozer (na primere g. Tol'yatti) // Voda i ekologiya: problemy i resheniya. 2017. № 3(17). S. 203−209. doi: 10.23968/2305-3488.2017.21.3.13-34
17. Kitaev S.P. Osnovy limnologii dlya gidrobiologov i ikhtiologov. Petrozavodsk : Karel'skii nauch. tsentr Rossiiskoi akad. nauk, In-t biologii, 2007. 394 s.
18. Metodika izucheniya biogeotsenozov vnutrennikh vodoemov / pod red. F.D. MordukhaiBoltovskogo. M.: Nauka, 1975. 240 s.
19. Lund J.W.G., Kipling C., Le Cren E.O. The inverted microscope method ofestimating algal numbers and the statistical basis of estimations by counting // Hydrobiology. 1958. Vol. 11. PP. 143–170. doi: 10.1007/BF00007865
20. Vasser S.P., Kondrat'eva N.V., Masyuk N.P., Palamar'-Mordvintseva G.M., Vetrova Z.I., Kordyum E.L., Moshkova N.A., Prikhod'kova L.P., Kovalenko O.V., Stupina V.V., Tsarenko P.M., Yunger V.P., Radchenko M.I., Vinogradova O.N., Bukhtiyarova L.N., Razumna L.F. Vodorosli : spravochnik. Kiev : Naukova dumka, 1989. 608 s.
21. Dedusenko-Shchegoleva N.T., Matvienko A.M., Shkorbatov L.A. Zelenye vodorosli. Klass Vol'voksovye. Chlorophyta: Volvocineae // Opredelitel' presnovodnykh vodoroslei SSSR. M. ; L. : Nauka, 1959. Vyp. 8. 223 s.
22. Dedusenko-Shchegoleva N.T., Gollerbakh M.M. Zheltozelenye vodorosli // Opredelitel' presnovodnykh vodoroslei SSSR. M. ; L. : Nauka, 1962. Vyp. 5. 272 s.
23. Tsarenko P.M. Kratkii opredelitel' khlorokokkovykh vodoroslei Ukrainskoi SSR / AN USSR. In-t botaniki im. N.G. Kholodnogo ; otv. red. G.M. Palamar'-Mordvintseva. Kiev : Naukova dumka, 1990. 208 s.
24. Komarek J., Anagnostidis K. Cyanoprokaryota. Teil 1: Chroococcales // Süsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa. Jena ; Stuttgart ; Lübeck ; Ulm, 1998. Bd. 19/1. 548 p.
25. Komarek J., Anagnostidis K. Cyanoprokaryota. Teil 2: Oscillatoriales // Süsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa. München, 2005. Bd. 19/2. 759 p.
26. Krammer K., Lange-Bertalot H. Bacillariophyceae. Teil 1: Naviculaceae // Die Süsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa. Stuttgart ; New York : Gustav Fischer Verlag, 1986. Bd. 2/1. 876 p.
27. Krammer K., Lange-Bertalot H. Bacillariophyceae. Teil 3: Centrales, Fragilariaceae, Eunotiaceae // Die Süsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa. Stuttgart ; Jena : Gustav Fischer Verlag, 1991. Bd. 2/3. 576 p.
28. Reynolds C.S., Huszar V., Kruk C., Naselli-Flores L., Melo S.Towards a functional classification of the freshwater phytoplankton // Journal of Plankton Research. 2002. 24. PP. 417–428. doi: 10.1093/plankt/24.5.417
29. Megurran E. Ekologicheskoe raznoobrazie i ego izmerenie. M. : Mir, 1992. 184 s.
30. Sládeček V. System of water quality from the biological point of view // Ergebnisse der Limnologie. 1973. Bd. 7. P. 1–218.
31. Wegl R. Index für die Limnosaprobität // Wasser und Abwasser. 1983. Bd. 26. PP. 1–175.
32. Barinova S.S., Klochenko P.D., Belous Y.P. Algae as indicators of the ecological state of water bodies: methods and prospects // Hydrobiological Journal. 2015. Vol. 51 (6). PP. 3–21. doi: 10.1615/HydrobJ.v51.i6.10
33. Gorokhova O.G. Vodorosli planktona malykh vodoemov yuga lesostepnogo Povolzh'ya (kolichestvennaya kharakteristika fitoplanktona) // Izvestiya Samarskogo nauchnogo tsentra RAN. 2017. T. 19 (5). S. 192–199.
34. Yatsenko-Stepanova T.N. Otsenka ekologicheskogo sostoyaniya nekotorykh ozer poimy reki Ural v Orenburgskoi oblasti // Vestnik Orenburgskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. 2017. № 11 (211). S. 125–128.
35. Gorokhova O.G., Pautova V.N. Vodorosli planktona malykh vodoemov yuga lesostepnogo Povolzh'ya (al'goflora: sravnitel'naya kharakteristika ozer po sostavu planktona) // Izvestiya Samarskogo nauchnogo tsentra Rossiiskoi akademii nauk. 2015. T. 17, № 4. S. 194–202.
36. Okhapkin A.G., Scharagina E.M., Vodeneeva E.L., Genkal S.I. Structure and dynamics of phytoplankton in the kOka river mouth at the beginning of the 21th century // Inland Water Biology. 2014. Vol. 7 (4). PP. 357–365. doi: 10.1134/S1995082914040142
37. Barinova S. The effect of altitude on distribution of freshwater algae in continental Israel // Current Topic of Plant Biology. 2011. Vol. 4. PP. 89–95.
38. Drozdenko T.V., Mikhalap S.G. Strukturno-taksonomicheskoe raznoobrazie i ekologicheskie osobennosti fitoplanktona del'ty reki Velikoi (Pskovskaya oblast') // Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Biologiya. 2018. № 41. S. 118–134. doi: 10.17223/19988591/41/7
