Morpho-Functional Groups and phytoplankton development in two deep lakes (Lake Garda, Italy and Lake Stechlin, Germany)

Page created by Kent Franklin
 
CONTINUE READING
Hydrobiologia (2007) 578:97–112
DOI 10.1007/s10750-006-0437-0

 P H Y T O P L A N K T O N W O RK S H O P

Morpho-Functional Groups and phytoplankton
development in two deep lakes (Lake Garda, Italy
and Lake Stechlin, Germany)
Nico Salmaso Æ Judit Padisák

 Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Abstract Phylogenetic classifications of plants             Lake Garda, southern Alps, zmax = 350 m; bien-
often do not reflect their ecological functions. In         nium 2002–2003) and Lake Stechlin (north-east
fact, the functional mechanisms of biological com-          Germany, zmax = 67 m; 1995, 1998 and 2001). In
munities may be better understood if species are            both lakes, the temporal evolution of the phyto-
pooled into groups having similar characteristics.          plankton communities within individual years fol-
The objective of this work is to evaluate, with the use     lowed a regular annual cycle, with the exception of
of multivariate methods, classifications based on the       Lake Stechlin in 1998, when an irregular phyto-
morphological and functional characteristics (size          plankton pattern was caused by a sudden mass
and form, mobility, potential mixotrophy, nutrient          appearance of Planktothrix rubescens in the spring
requirements, presence of gelatinous envelopes) of          and summer months, resulting in a collapse of the
cyanobacteria and eukaryotic algae to explain the           whole community in autumn. Overall, the temporal
seasonal dynamic of the phytoplankton community.            developments of the phytoplankton communities
The analyses involve data from two deep lakes:              obtained on the basis of patterns of the morpho-
                                                            functional groups appeared highly comparable
                                                            with those obtained, in the single years, on the
Guest editors: M. Albay, J. Padisák & L. Naselli-Flores    basis of the original phytoplankton species matri-
Morphological plasticity of phytoplankton under different   ces. The comparison of the morpho-functional
environmental constraints
                                                            groups of the lakes Garda and Stechlin showed
N. Salmaso (&)                                              important differences in the abundance and sea-
Natural Resources Department, Limnology and Fish            sonality of the dominant phytoplankton types.
Research Unit, IASMA Research Center,                       The results obtained in this study underline that
Via E. Mach, 1, I-38010
S. Michele a/Adige (Trento), Italy                          the use of classifications based on the adaptive
e-mail: nico.salmaso@iasma.it                               strategies of the single species may represent a
                                                            useful tool to investigate the community evolution
J. Padisák                                                 and to compare phytoplankton assemblages of
Department of Limnology, University of Veszprém,
Egyetem u. 10, Veszprem H-8200, Hungary                     different lakes, overcoming problems related to
e-mail: padisak@almos.vein.hu                               possible differences of taxonomic accuracy and
                                                            identification.
J. Padisák
Leibniz-Institut für Gewässerökologie und
Binnenfischerei, Alte Fischerhütte 2, D-16775              Keywords Phytoplankton  Morpho-Functional
Stechlin-Neuglobsow, Germany                                groups  Seasonal cycles  Deep lakes

                                                                                                      123
98                                                                           Hydrobiologia (2007) 578:97–112

Introduction                                           ciations, with each comprising species that coexist
                                                       and increase or decrease in numbers simulta-
The need to understand relationships between           neously. The species of a particular association
structural and functional properties of the eco-       share common ecological attributes so that they
systems has initiated a number of classifications of   may potentially dominate or co-dominate. Suc-
aquatic biota on basis of their taxonomy or            cessively, this approach was refined and expanded
functional and structural characteristics. Such        (Reynolds, 1997; Padisák & Reynolds, 1998). At
classifications are of practical use for generalisa-   present, the system comprises 31 associations
tions across species and represent necessary tools     accomodated on the basis of expert judgement
for scientific communication and water-body            and experience (Reynolds et al., 2002). Subse-
analysis (Körner, 1993).                              quent studies defined three further associations
   The taxonomic classification of the living          (Padisák et al., 2003a, 2006).
organisms recently has benefited from the use             Reynolds (1988) defined another system of
of genetic and molecular techniques. However,          classification based on the functional properties of
despite the support of these recent methods and        the phytoplankton species. Adapting the C–R–S
the refinement of the phylogenetic classifications,    concept formulated by Grime (1977) for the
ecologists have often been dissatisfied with the       terrestrial plants, he classified the phytoplankton
taxonomic assemblages because they do not              species into three groups based on their suscep-
always and necessarily reflect the perceived           tibility to disturbance, stress and utilisation of
ecological functions (Solbrig, 1993). A taxo-          limited resources. In this model, the C-strategists
nomic unit may be composed, especially at              (competitive species) dominate in lakes with low
higher taxonomic levels (e.g., classes), by species    intensity of disturbance and stress. The S-strate-
possessing very different structural and func-         gists (stress-tolerant species) develop in situations
tional properties. Considering phytoplankton, we       of low disturbance and high stress, whereas the R-
may refer to examples from Chlorophyceae               strategists (‘‘ruderals’’) dominate at high distur-
which include types characterised by very differ-      bance intensity and low stress.
ent structure and life strategies, ranging from           The different groups defined in these classifi-
single picoplanktonic cells (Stockner & Antia,         cations generally include species with common
1986) to long filaments and large multicellular        features (Reynolds et al., 2002), indicating that
colonies. To overcome these problems, ecologists       the algae belonging to a specific group have
have tried to group organisms with similar             common morphological characteristics which are
structural and functional characteristics with the     powerful predictors of optimum dynamic perfor-
aim to obtain a better understanding, and              mance (Reynolds & Irish, 1997). In fact, the
possibly generalisation, of the functioning of         different strategies of different phytoplankton
the ecosystems. The functional groups may be           organisms are strongly related to differences in
defined utilising elements that bear a certain set     geometrical dimensions and shapes. Morpholog-
of common structural and/or functional features.       ical characteristics are essential features that
These include quality criteria (size/form, physi-      influence sinking properties (Padisák et al.,
ological and life strategy characteristics), tempo-    2003b, d; Salmaso, 2003), growth rates (Sommer,
ral appearance and distributional characteristics,     1981; Tang, 1995), efficiency of nutrients and light
whereas, at the species level, the functional          utilisation (Sommer, 1984; Tilzer, 1984), and
groups may include taxonomic units as well             susceptibility to grazing (Lehman, 1988). These
(Körner, 1993).                                       elements, together with the ability to regulate
   One of the first formal attempts to define a        buoyancy, the requirement for specific resources
system of classification based on the functional       (e.g., silica) and the ability to obtain alternative
properties of the phytoplankton was proposed by        carbon and nutrient sources, represent strong
Reynolds (1980, 1984). Utilising long series of        selective factors that are able to select the best
phytoplankton observations from a group of lakes       competitors under different environmental con-
in Northwest England, he distinguished 14 asso-        straints (Weithoff, 2003).

123
Hydrobiologia (2007) 578:97–112                                                                        99

   In this work we evaluate, with the use of          Materials and methods
multivariate methods, classifications based on the
morphological and functional characteristics of       Methods in the field and laboratory
cyanobacteria and eukaryotic algae to capture
much of the seasonal phytoplankton variations in      In Lake Garda, samples were collected every
two deep lakes located at the southern border of      4 weeks between January 2002 and December
the Alps (Lake Garda) and in north-east Ger-          2003 at the deepest zone of the lake (out of
many (Lake Stechlin).                                 Brenzone; zmax = 350 m); sampling was not car-
                                                      ried out in January 2003. The average values of
                                                      the chemical variables and phytoplankton abun-
Study sites                                           dance in the upper 20 m were estimated from
                                                      samples collected at the integrated depths of 0–
Detailed hydrological, morphological as well as       2 m, 9.5–11.5 m and 19–21 m. Phytoplankton
limnological descriptions of these large and deep     samples were fixed with acetic Lugol’s solution
water bodies can be found in Salmaso (2003,           and counting was performed with inverted micro-
2005) and Koschel & Adams (2003).                     scopes following the criteria reported by Lund et
   Concentrations of total phosphorus (TP) in the     al. (1958). Biovolumes were calculated from
euphotic layer (0–20 m) of Lake Garda show            recorded abundances and specific biovolumes
typical seasonal fluctuations from around 5 lg l–1    approximated to simple geometric solids (Rott,
(summer) to 20 lg l–1 (spring overturn); corre-       1981). Zooplankton was collected by vertical tows
sponding fluctuations of Soluble Reactive Phos-       from 0 to 50 m using nets with mesh size of 80 lm
phorus (SRP) range from below detection limit         (Salmaso & Naselli-Flores, 1999). Zooplankton
up to 10 lg l–1 (Salmaso, 2005). During summer,       biomass was computed according to de Bernardi
the nitrate concentrations in the productive layers   & Canale (1995). Euphotic depths (zeu) were
may decrease to very low levels (down to              estimated from direct measurements made with a
100 lg l–1). NH4–N concentrations are generally       radiometer LiCor, model Li-192SA. A detailed
below 20 lg l–1. Thermal stratification begins in     description of the analytical methods used in the
May (10–12C at the surface), and strong thermal      laboratory was reported by Salmaso (2002, 2005).
stratification persists from June to September           The phytoplankton patterns selected for this
(20–25C). Winter euphotic depths (zeu) are           study from Lake Stechlin include 3 years: 1995,
around 25–40 m, whereas, during summer, the           1998 and 2001. Phytoplankton abundances were
lower limit of zeu is between 15 and 20 m             estimated from pooled samples collected from six
(Salmaso, 2003).                                      depths evenly distributed within the 0–25 m layer.
   The annual average TP concentrations in Lake       Sampling frequency was weekly between March
Stechlin vary between 12 and 21 lg l–1. SRP in        and October, and biweekly throughout the rest of
the euphotic layer is below the limit of detection    the year. The statistical analyses were carried out
(1–2.5 lg l–1) with maximum values (4–5 lg l–1)       using monthly averages of the phytoplankton
after the autumnal overturn. Dissolved inorganic      biovolumes. Phytoplankton samples were treated,
nitrogen (DIN: NOx–N + NH4–N) in the eupho-           counted, and biomass was estimated as described
tic zone is rather low, varying from the detection    for Lake Garda. To make the data comparable to
limit to around 100 lg l–1 (with occasional peaks     those from Lake Garda, picophytoplankton was
up to 150 lg l–1). The DIN/SRP ratios in the          removed from the data-set. Samples for chemical
euphotic zone vary between 2 and 159 (average:        analyses were collected from 0 to 25 m and
30). Low values occur typically in the period July–   analysed according to the OECD standards and
October. Thermal stratification begins in May         standards of Deutsche Einheitsverfahren. Crusta-
(10–12C at the surface) and begins to be strongly    cean zooplankton was collected by vertical tows
pronounced in July, lasting to middle September       from 0 to 22 m using nets with mesh size of
(20–25C). Euphotic depth during the stratified       90 lm. Biomass of the single individuals was
period extends to the upper 25 m.                     estimated following Bottrell et al. (1976) and

                                                                                                123
100                                                                                   Hydrobiologia (2007) 578:97–112

Kasprzak (1984). Euphotic depths were estimated              light and nutrient conditions in heterogeneous
from zs, the Secchi disk depths (zeu = zs · 2.7).            environments (Reynolds, 1997). Within flagel-
Detailed description of the analytical methods               lates, the second division separates the large
was reported by Padisák et al. (2003c). The                 group of the Phytomonadina from the other
chemical and trophic characteristics of the two              (large and small) flagellates; this division corre-
lakes during the examined periods are summar-                sponds roughly to the separation of the potential
ised in Table 1.                                             mixotrophs from mostly autotrophic algae (Isaks-
   In both lakes, relative thermal resistance                son, 1998; Jones, 2000), though, at present, no
(RTR) was computed by the density difference                 complete information exists about the importance
in the examined strata (0–20 m, Garda and 0–                 of mixotrophy for the single species. As for the
25 m, Stechlin) compared to the density differ-              other non-flagellated organisms, a further division
ence between 4 and 5C (Kalff, 2002); water                  separates the cyanobacteria and diatoms from the
densities were estimated from temperature val-               remaining groups. Cyanobacteria are prokaryotes
ues.                                                         and exhibit defined morphological and physiolog-
                                                             ical differences compared with the eukaryotic
Identification of the Morpho-Functional                      phytoplankton. Among these, the ability to reg-
groups                                                       ulate the vertical position through the formation
                                                             of gas-vescicles (aerotopes) and the ability to fix
The list of the Morpho-Functional Groups                     atmospheric nitrogen constitute a set of unique
(MFG) is reported in Table 2. The criteria                   features (Whitton & Potts, 2000). Similarly, the
adopted to discriminate the groups include motil-            siliceous walls of the diatoms distinguishes these
ity, the potential capacity to obtain carbon and             organisms from other taxa and causes severe
nutrients by mixotrophy, specific nutrient require-          survival problems in stratifyed pelagic environ-
ments, size and shape, and presence of gelatinous            ments due to the enhanced susceptibility to
envelopes (Weithoff, 2003). These criteria, along            sinking losses of the heavier cells (Padisák et al.,
with the separation of the Cyanobacteria from the            2003d). Further subdivisions (3rd column of
other algae and a further subdivision based                  Table 2) were based on size and shape. In this
considering different life strategies, resulted in           work, the separation of the large and small taxa
differentiation of 31 groups.                                has been based on the susceptibility to grazing.
   The first division is based on the presence or            However, a clear-cut delimitation of the graze-
absence of flagella. Despite their small size, many          able fraction for the entire phytoplankton com-
flagellates can move vertically within the water             munity is not possible. On practical grounds,
column for tens of centimeters to several meters             single cells and small colonies with linear dimen-
daily (Wetzel, 2001). Motility offers the ability to         sions
Hydrobiologia (2007) 578:97–112                                                                               101

Table 2 Morpho Functional groups (MFG; see explanation in the text)
Flagellates   Potential       1 Large (colonial or    1a Large Chrysophytes/Haptophytes              1a-
                mixotrophs      unicellular)                                                           LargeChry
                                                      1b Large Dinophytes                            1b-
                                                                                                       LargeDino
                                                      1c Large Euglenophytes                         1c-LargeEugl
                              2 Small (unicellular)   2a Small Chrysophytes/Haptophytes              2a-
                                                                                                       SmallChry1
                                                      2b Small Dinophytes                            2b-SmallDino
                                                      2c Small Euglenophytes                         2c-SmallEugl
                                                      2d Cryptophytes                                2d-Crypto
              Mostly          3 Phytomonadina         3a Unicellular Phytomonadina                   3a-UnicPhyto
                autotrophs                            3b Colonial Phytomonadina                      3b-ColoPhyto
Without       Cyanobacteria   4 Unicellular           4 Unicellular cyanobacteria                    4-UnicCyano
 flagella                     5 Colonies              5a Thin filaments (Oscillatoriales)            5a-FilaCyano
                                                      5b Large vacuolated Chroococcales              5b-
                                                                                                       LargeVacC
                                                      5c Other large colonies, mostly non-vacuolated 5c-
                                                        Chroococcales                                  OtherChroo
                                                      5d Small colonies, Chroococcales               5d-
                                                                                                       SmallChroo
                                                      5e Nostocales                                  5e-Nostocales
              Diatoms         6 Large                 6a Large Centrics                              6a-LargeCent
                                                      6b Large Pennates                              6b-LargePenn
                              7 Small                 7a Small Centrics                              7a-SmallCent
                                                      7b Small Pennates                              7b-SmallPenn
              Others—         8 Large                 8a Large unicells—Unicellular                  8a-
               Unicellular                              Conjugatophytes/Chlorophytes                   LargeCoCh
                                                      8b Large unicells—Other groups                 8b-LargeUnic
                              9 Small                 9a Small unicells—Conjugatophytes              9a-SmallConj
                                                      9b Small unicells—Chlorococcales               9b-SmallChlor
                                                      9c Small Chrysophytes                          9c-
                                                                                                       SmallChry2
                                                      9d Small unicells—Other groups                 9d-SmallUnic
              Others—         10 Filaments            10a Filaments—Chlorophytes                     10a-
               Colonial                                                                                FilaChlorp
                                                      10b Filaments—Conjugatophytes                  10b-FilaConj
                                                      10c Filaments—Xanthophytes                     10c-FilaXant
                              11 Non filament.        11a Chlorococcales—Naked colonies              11a-
                                colonies                                                               NakeChlor
                                                      11b Chlorococcales—Gelatinous colonies         11b-
                                                                                                       GelaChlor
                                                      11c Other colonies                             11c-OtherCol

Besides grazing, size and shape are important for          in the dynamic evolution of different taxonomic
influencing losses from suspension (Padisák et al.,       groups sharing common morphological features.
2003b). The final list of MFG in Table 2 inte-
grates other two discriminant elements, i.e. the           Data analysis
presence of large gelatinous envelopes, with the
separation of the naked and gelatinous Chloro-             Phytoplankton matrices (taxa · sampling dates)
coccales, and taxonomy. As for this last point, the        were analysed considering the original data (the
subdivisions were carried out considering the              biomass of the single species) and two synthetic
existence of different life strategies; in turn, this      matrices obtained by considering the Morpho
gives the opportunity to identify real differences         Functional Groups and the phylogenetic algal

                                                                                                        123
102                                                                                   Hydrobiologia (2007) 578:97–112

classes. The three matrices were ordinated sepa-             using the program CANOCO 4.5 with focus on
rately, for every lake and year, by applying Non             interspecies distances and biplot scaling (ter
Metric Multidimensional Scaling (NMDS). The                  Braak & Šmilauer, 2002). Before the computa-
ordinations were applied to Bray & Curtis’                   tion, the biovolumes of the single MFG were log-
dissimilarity matrices (Podani, 2000). Before                transformed to reduce the weight of the most
computation, the data were transformed by dou-               abundant groups. The significance of the axes
ble square root to reduce the weight of the more             obtained by the CCA analysis was tested by
abundant taxa/groups (Salmaso, 1996). The re-                means of Monte Carlo permutations (ter Braak &
sults of the ordinations obtained from the MFG               Šmilauer, 2002).
and the algal classes were compared with those
obtained utilising the phytoplankton data. As in
NMDS the orientation of the axes is arbitrary,               Results
before the comparison the configurations ob-
tained from the MFG and the classes were                     Dominant classes and phytoplankton
rotated and transposed by orthogonal Procrustes
rotation to maximise their fit with the corre-               The temporal development of the algal classes in
sponding phytoplankton ordinations (Podani,                  the lakes Garda and Stechlin is reported in Fig. 1.
2000). Axes I and II from the phytoplankton,                 The dominant classes in Lake Garda were the
MFG and classes ordinations were compared by                 cyanobacteria, diatoms and chlorophytes. These
parametric and non-parametric correlations.                  three classes were dominated by Planktothrix
   The comparison of the phytoplankton commu-                rubescens, Fragilaria crotonensis and Mougeotia
nities of the lakes Garda and Stechlin was carried           sp., respectively. The cyanobacteria showed their
out considering the differences in the structure of          maximum development in summer and/or au-
their respective MFG. The common matrix,                     tumn (Fig. 1a). Besides Planktothrix, other
including the biovolumes of the MFG of the two               important cyanobacteria were large colonies of
lakes, was analysed by Principal Components                  Aphanothece/Aphanocapsa. Also, in the 2 years
Analysis calculated from the correlation matrix,             studied Anabena lemmermannii developed epi-
followed by orthogonal rotation (varimax meth-               sodic oligotrophic blooms (sensu Salmaso, 2000)
od). Before computation, the data were log-                  strictly localised to the upper few centimetres of
transformed, Yi = log(Xi + 1), to reduce the                 the water column and with low overall biovo-
weight of the most abundant taxa. The ordination             lumes (
Hydrobiologia (2007) 578:97–112                                                                     103

spp. In the successive year, despite the lack of a   teria were between 8 and 23 mm3 m–3 in all
discernible spring peak, the diatoms developed       3 years. Apart from the cryptophytes (developing
seasonally with the same pool of species. The        irregularly with Cryptomonas erosa/ovata, Rho-
chlorophytes showed a comparable development         domonas lens and R. minuta), the remaining
in the 2 years studied, with a small spring          classes developed substantial biovolumes and
increase, followed by large early and mid-summer     showed repetitive patterns in the three studied
growth. Though with low biovolumes, besides          years. Chlorophytes were mainly present from
Mougeotia other chlorophytes showed a notice-        early spring to early autumn; the most abundant
able development from early summer to late           were Neocystis policocca, Pseudosphaerocystis
summer/early autumn (Ankyra judayi, Coela-           lacustris and Scenedesmus costato-granulatus.
strum spp., other coccal greens and Chlorococ-       The contribution of dinophytes was mainly due
cales). The remaining classes developed lower        to Ceratium hirundinella and Gymnodinium hel-
biovolumes. The xanthophytes (Tribonema sp.)         veticum. In the 3 years considered here, the
showed their maximum development from April          biovolume of the chrysophytes and haptophytes
to the end of June, whereas the chrysophytes         was mainly provided by Chrysochromulina parva,
mainly occurred in late spring (Dinobryon diver-     Dinobryon sociale and Ochromonas sp. Xantho-
gens, D. sociale and Ochromonadaceae). The           phyceae and Euglenophyceae showed low occur-
dinophytes showed a greater biovolume peak           rences and low biovolumes.
from late summer to early autumn (Ceratium
hirundinella); Gymnodinium helveticum was            Phytoplankton ordinations—single lakes
detectable also during the spring months. The
cryptophytes (mainly Plagioselmis nannoplanctica     The configurations of the phytoplankton samples
and Rhodomonas minuta) showed a more irreg-          of Lake Garda obtained by mean of NMDS are
ular distribution over the 2 years.                  reported in Fig. 2. For the 2 years considered,
   The temporal development of the phytoplank-       the configurations obtained utilising the phyto-
ton in Lake Stechlin showed a different pattern      plankton classes and the MFG were superim-
(Fig. 1b). The two more abundant classes in the      posed to the corresponding configurations
examined period were the diatoms and the             obtained utilising the phytoplankton species.
cyanobacteria. However, the diatoms peaked high      The stress values (Kruskal & Wish, 1978) of
in 1995 and 2001, whereas the cyanobacteria,         the six NMDS configurations ranged between
largely Planktothrix rubescens, showed a conspic-    0.05 and 0.13. The configurations obtained with
uous development exclusively in 1998, from           the phytoplankton species showed an ordered
January to September; in October Planktothrix        and cyclic development. In 2002, the annual
underwent a complete breakdown and the com-          development based on the phytoplankton classes
munity was composed exclusively of a few             followed a different pattern compared with the
diatoms and chlorophytes. The spring peaks of        ordination based on the phytoplankton samples;
the diatoms in 1995 and 2001 were due to             the differences were marked along the first axis,
different species, namely Cyclotella spp., and       whereas the ordination of the samples along the
Aulacoseira islandica with a minor contribution      second axis showed a comparable ranking
of Cyclotella spp., respectively. Moreover, the      between the two configurations (Fig. 2a; Ta-
annual development of the diatoms in 2001 was        ble 3). Though less evident, the differences
also characterised by Asterionella formosa in        between the two ordinations were detected also
spring and Fragilaria crotonensis in early autumn.   in 2003, but with the major discrepancies being
Excluding Planktothrix, the contribution of the      present along the second axis (Fig. 2b; Table 3).
other cyanobacteria was always very low. Anaba-      In contrast, the ordinations obtained on the basis
ena lemmermannii was detected with low abun-         of the Morpho-Functional Groups (MFG)
dances (annual peaks of ca. 20–100 mm3 m–3)          matched those achieved from the complete
between June/July and August/October. The            phytoplankton matrices very closely (Fig. 2c, d;
annual biovolume peaks of the other cyanobac-        Table 3).

                                                                                              123
104                                                                                                                Hydrobiologia (2007) 578:97–112

Fig. 2 Lake Garda.                                               Phytoplankton species
Ordination of                                                    Classes
phytoplankton samples in                                                                                              5
the two-dimensional Non                           1                                  7               1
Metric Multidimensional
Scaling configurations; the                                  4              6                                                                   7
                                                                     5

                                    NMDS Axis 2
arabic numbers indicate                                                                  7
                                                                                                                                                    9
the month of sampling.                            0              3                               9             4
a, c: 2002; b, d: 2003                                                              10                                                 6
                                                                      1                              0                                      10
                                                             2                                                                                          8
                                                                                             8                                     1       11
                                                  -1                 12 11                                                 3
                                                       (a)                                                 (b)                 2           12
                                                                                                     -1
                                                             -1                 0        1                -2          -1               0            1

                                                                     Phytoplankton species
                                                                     MFG
                                                  1                                                  1
                               NMDS Axis 2

                                                  0
                                                                                                     0

                                                  -1
                                                       (c)                                                 (d)
                                                                                                     -1
                                                             -1              0        1                -2            -1         0                   1
                                                                          NMDS Axis 1                                      NMDS Axis 1

   The NMDS ordinations of the Lake Stechlin                                        distribution of the data) showed a better agree-
samples are reported in Fig. 3. In 1995 and 2001,                                   ment between the phytoplankton species and
the temporal succession of the samples based on                                     MFG configurations.
the phytoplankton data followed a clear cyclic
pattern (Fig. 3a, c; black circles), whereas in 1998                                Phytoplankton ordinations—joint analysis
the seasonal evolution was strongly typified by
the separation of the October sample from the                                       The results of the ordination of the samples of the
remaining ones (Fig. 3b). This sample, as dis-                                      lakes Garda and Stechlin by PCA are reported in
cussed above, was characterised by a sudden                                         Fig. 4 and Table 4. The analysis does not include
collapse of Planktothrix rubescens and other                                        the data recorded in Lake Stechlin in 1998, in
dominant seasonal phytoplankton species. As in                                      order to simplify the interpretation of the ordi-
the case of the Lake Garda, in 1995 and 2001 the                                    nation diagram. A two factor solution explaining
ordinations of the MFG agreed more closely with                                     40% of the total variance was computed. (Ta-
those for the phytoplankton species as did those                                    ble 4). In addition to the significant proportion of
based on the algal classes; however, the algal                                      the explained variance, this solution was chosen
classes performed better than for the Lake Garda                                    because it yielded the most straightforward inter-
samples, as evidenced by the high significance of                                   pretation without loss of significant information.
the relationships between the couples of axes                                       The relative position of the single samples in
(Table 3). As for the 1998 configurations, in                                       Fig. 4 was confirmed by the application of the
which the parametric correlations were strongly                                     NMDS ordination (figure not shown); after
determined by the October sample, the Spearman                                      orthogonal Procrustes rotation of the NMDS
correlations (which are independent from the                                        configuration, the first and second axis of the

123
Hydrobiologia (2007) 578:97–112                                                                                                                                                                                 105

Table 3 Correlation coefficients between the first two                                                                     species (Phyto) and the corresponding NMDS axes
axes of the Non Metric Multidimensional Scaling (NMDS)                                                                     obtained with the algal classes and Morpho-Functional
configurations obtained on the basis of the phytoplankton                                                                  Groups

                                                                         A                                                                                           B

Lake Garda                                                               Axes classes                                      Axes MFG                                  Axes classes                          Axes MFG
2002                         Axis      1   Phyto                         0.35                                              0.99                                      0.48                                  0.99
                             Axis      2   Phyto                         0.96                                              0.99                                      0.97                                  0.99
2003                         Axis      1   Phyto                         0.87                                              0.99                                      0.81                                  0.99
                             Axis      2   Phyto                         0.41                                              0.87                                      0.30                                  0.83
                                                                         C                                                                                           D
Lake Stechlin                                                            Axes classes                                      Axes MFG                                  Axes classes                          Axes MFG
1995          Axis                     1   Phyto                         0.83                                              0.98                                      0.67                                  0.97
              Axis                     2   Phyto                         0.90                                              0.95                                      0.90                                  0.94
1998          Axis                     1   Phyto                         0.98                                              0.99                                      0.55                                  0.64
              Axis                     2   Phyto                         0.77                                              0.90                                      0.50                                  0.80
2001          Axis                     1   Phyto                         0.93                                              0.97                                      0.92                                  0.94
              Axis                     2   Phyto                         0.80                                              0.87                                      0.82                                  0.85
For example, in the first column, the entries 0.35 and 0.96 refer to the correlations between Axis 1 Phyo and Axis 1 Classes,
and Axis 2 Phyo and Axis 2 Classes, respectively. A,C: Pearson correlations; B,D: Spearman correlations. The significant
correlations are reported in bold (P < 0.01) and italics (P < 0.05)

                                                                                                                     Phytoplankton species
                             1                                                                 1
                                               5        6                                                            Classes
                                       4                                                                 4-9                                               1                                   6
                                                                                                                                                                             3 4
                                 3                          7                                                                      10                                                                  7
                                                                     8                                                                                                                5
              NMDS Axis 2

                                                                                 NMDS Axis 2

                                                                                                                                             NMDS Axis 2
                             0                                                                 0                                                                         2
                                                                                                          3                                                0
                                 2        1
                                                                 9                                        2                                                                                            8
                                                                                                               1                                                     1                    10
                                              12                                                                                                                                                   9
                                                                                                                                                                              12 11
                                                        10                                               11                                                -1
                            -1                     11                                          -1
                                 (a)                                                                 (b)       12                                                (c)
                                                                                                                                                           -2
                                     -1            0         1               2                      -1         0       1      2      3                          -2       -1           0            1

                                                                                                                     Phytoplankton species
                            1                                                                  1
                                                                                                                     MFG
                                                                                                                                                           1
             NMDS Axis 2

                            0                                                                  0                                                           0

                                                                                                                                                           -1
                            -1                                                                 -1
                                 (d)                                                                 (e)                                                         (f)
                                                                                                                                                           -2
                                     -1         0       1                    2                      -1         0      1      2       3                       -2          -1     0                  1
                                              NMDS Axis 1                                                           NMDS Axis 1                                            NMDS Axis 1

Fig. 3 Lake Stechlin. Ordination of phytoplankton samples in the two-dimensional Non Metric Multidimensional Scaling
configurations; the arabic numbers indicate the month of sampling. a, d: 1995; b, e: 1998; c, f: 2001

PCA ordination showed a strong and significant                                                                             to Lake Stechlin (right panel). In both cases, the
(P < 0.01) correlation with the corresponding                                                                              annual development of the samples followed a
NMDS axes (r = 0.93 and r = 0.88, respectively).                                                                           cyclical pattern, although less evident compared
   Two main differences became apparent in the                                                                             to those reported in the analyses of the single
spatial arrangement of the samples of the two                                                                              years (Figs. 2, 3). The cyclical patterns of the two
lakes (Fig. 4). The samples formed two distinct                                                                            lakes followed a common direction only along the
groups belonging to Lake Garda (left panels) and                                                                           second axis, and an opposite direction along the

                                                                                                                                                                                                           123
106                                                                                             Hydrobiologia (2007) 578:97–112

Table 4 Principal components analysis with varimax                        3         Garda 2002
rotation: percentage of explained variance and correla-                             Garda 2003
tions between the first two factors and the input variables                         Stechlin 1995
                                                                          2         Stechlin 2001
PCA Axis                         I                   II

Variance explained               23.2%               16.7%                1
9d—SmallUnic                      0.84               –0.11

                                                                 Axis 2
7b—SmallPenn                      0.76               –0.10
2b—SmallDino                      0.74                0.27                0
2a—SmallChry1                     0.63                0.32
10a—FilaChlorp                    0.56                0.13
7a—SmallCent                      0.52                0.25                -1
11a—NakeChlor                     0.48                0.57
5a—FilaCyano                     –0.84               –0.07
10b—FilaConj                     –0.74               –0.14                -2
3a—UnicPhyto                     –0.71                0.22                     -2          -1         0        1        2
8a—LargeCoCh                     –0.61                0.11                                          Axis 1
10c—FilaXant                     –0.60               –0.10
6b—LargePenn                     –0.49               –0.12     Fig. 4 Ordination of the samples by principal components
5e—Nostocales                    –0.09                0.86     analysis with varimax rotation. The arrows indicate the
5c—OtherChroo                    –0.07                0.66     direction of the temporal sequences. Succession of the
1b—LargeDino                     –0.27                0.61     months as in Figs. 2 and 3
11c—OtherCol                      0.22                0.60
9c—SmallChry2                     0.36                0.59
11b—GelaChlor                     0.34                0.56     Garda stood out for the presence of large func-
9a—SmallConj                      0.14                0.54
                                                               tional units, both filamentous or unicellular. The
1a—LargeChry                     –0.09                0.52
3b—ColoPhyto                     –0.06                0.48     second axis showed a strong and positive corre-
6a—LargeCent                      0.19               –0.58     lation with 11 MFG; these groups assumed a
9b—SmallChlor                    –0.36                0.25     progressive and greater importance from the
5b—LargeVacC                     –0.30                0.15
                                                               winter to the summer samples. In contrast, the
2c—SmallEugl                      0.06                0.31
5d—SmallChroo                     0.09                0.24     large centric chain-forming diatoms showed a
2d—Crypto                         0.24               –0.23     negative correlation with the second axis (Ta-
The significant correlations are reported in bold (P < 0.01)
                                                               ble 4). This second set of MFG included phyto-
and italics (P < 0.05). Variables are abbreviated as in        plankton types with more comparable temporal
Table 2. Underlining of Morpho-Functional Groups               patterns in the two lakes.
indicates high abundance (see text)                                The more abundant MFG in Table 4 are
                                                               underlined. These groups reached biovolume
first axis. This shows that the spring and summer              peaks greater or equal than 100 mm3 m–3 at least
samples were characterised by the greater differ-              in one lake and in 1 year. With this criterion it
ences, with a major comparability of the phyto-                was possible to discriminate the eleven groups
plankton features during the autumn and early                  represented in Fig. 5. Among the ‘‘discriminat-
winter months.                                                 ing’’ MFG, the small centric diatoms showed a
    The analysis of the factor loadings (Table 4)              different seasonal development in the two lakes,
allowed to interpret in terms of MFG composi-                  whereas the filamentous cyanobacteria, conju-
tion the different patterns observed in the two                gatophytes and xanthophytes, and the large pen-
lakes. The first axis showed a strong correlation              nate diatoms were typically present in the
with thirteen MFG; among these, only the naked                 plankton of Lake Garda. However, as for the
Chlorococcales showed a positive correlation also              filamentous cyanobacteria, it is important to
with the second axis. This first set of MFG                    emphasise that this analysis does not include the
constituted the discriminant phytoplankton types               contribution of the 1998 data for Lake Stechlin,
in the two lakes. In particular, the MFG typical of            which is characterised by a huge development of
the Lake Stechlin were represented by small and                Planktothrix rubescens. The remaining groups in
mostly unicellular species, whereas the Lake                   Fig. 5 are represented by ‘‘common’’ MFG;

123
Hydrobiologia (2007) 578:97–112                                                                                                       107

                       300                                    600
                                               7a-SmallCent           5a-FilaCyano            3000                    10b-FilaConj

             -3
                       200                                    400

                mm m
                                                                                              2000

             3
                       100                                    200                             1000
                         0                                      0                                0

                       400
                                              10c-FilaXant    1500          6b-LargePenn       100   5c-OtherChroo
                       300
            -3
                mm m

                                                              1000                              75
                       200
            3

                                                                                                50
                       100                                    500
                                                                                                25
                         0                                      0                                0

                       300     1b-LargeDino                   400           11b-GelaChlor                            1a-LargeChry
                                                                                               300
             -3
                mm m

                       200                                    300                              200
             3

                       100                                     50                              100
                        0                                       0                                0
                                                                                                     J F MA MJ J A SOND
                   1200                       6a-LargeCent    250              2d-Crypto
                                                              200                                          Garda 2002
                   1000
           -3
            mm m

                                                              150                                          Garda 2003
                    800
           3

                    150                                       100                                          Stechlin 1995
                    100                                        50                                          Stechlin 2005
                     50
                                                                0
                             J F MA MJ J A S ON D                    J F MA MJ J A SOND

Fig. 5 Seasonal development of the dominant MFG (abbreviations as in Table 2) in the lakes Garda and Stechlin

among these, some differences were observed in                                  to 0.19 and 0.08, which contributed a percentage
the gelatinous chlorococcales, which showed a                                   of explained variance of 28.5% and 11.2%,
more ample temporal development in Lake                                         respectively. The application of the Montecarlo
Stechlin (spring–early autumn) compared with                                    tests to evaluate the significance of the extracted
Lake Garda (summer–early autumn).                                               axes yielded highly significant results for the
                                                                                whole set of axes and for the first axis
MFG and environmental variables                                                 (P < 0.01). Excluding RTR (linked with the
                                                                                second axis) and, partly, SRP, the first axis was
Figure 6 reports the simultaneous ordination of                                 strongly linked to the whole set of variables. The
the samples and MFG of the lakes Garda (Fig. 6a,                                first axis distinguishes the late winter and spring
b) and Stechlin (Fig. 6c, d) in relation to the                                 samples from the summer and early autumn
principal environmental variables and zooplank-                                 samples; the second axis contributes to separate
ton biomass obtained by the application of                                      the late spring and summer samples from the late
Canonical Correspondence Analysis. As in the                                    autumn ones (Fig. 6a). During the annual cycle,
case of PCA, the CCA analysis applied to Lake                                   from winter to late summer the samples were
Stechlin does not include the data recorded in                                  characterised by a progressive decrease in the
1998. Moreover, the group 2c (small eugleno-                                    nutrient and light availability, and by a progres-
phytes) was excluded, because it was present only                               sive increase of thermal stability and grazing
in two occasions and with very low biovolumes                                   pressure. Figure 6b shows a contraposition be-
(
108                                                                                                                                                         Hydrobiologia (2007) 578:97–112

                                                                                                            1.0
           1.0
                                                      6
                                                                                RTR                                                                                 RTR
                                                                   7   7

                                                                                                                                 10c-FilaXant    1a-LargeChry
                                                               6
                                5                                                        8       Temp.                                                                              Temp.
                                                     11                         7                                                                              5d-SmallChroo
                                                12                                                                                  2a-SmallChry1 11b-GelaChlor
                                                                                                                                                                    5b-LargeVacC
                                        5                                                                                   10b-FilaConj  9b-SmallChlor
                                                                       10                                                                               5e-Nostocales
                                4 1                                                  Biom. Copepoda                             8a-LargeCoCh                          3b-ColoPhyto

                                                                                                            0.0
           0.0

                                                                                                                                                                      Biom. Copepoda
                   DIN           3                                                       7                          DIN        6b-LargePenn
                                                          11                                  9  8                   Reactive-Si                       1b-LargeDino         5c-OtherChroo
                    Reactive-Si Zeu
                                                                                     Biom. Cladocera                             Zeu                                  Biom. Cladocera
                                        4
                                                                                                                                         6a-LargeCent 2b-SmallDino 11a-NakeChlor
                                        2
                           SRP           2                                      10                9                         SRP

                                            3
                                                                                                                    (b)

                                                                                                            -1.0
                    (a)
           -1.0

                                                     12

                   -1.0                                        0.0                                    1.0          -1.0                               0.0                              1.0
            1.0

                                                                                                            1.0
                                                                                     7

                                                           5                         8

                                4                                                                                                                                    1a-LargeChry
                                                                            Biom. Copepoda                                                                     Biom. Copepoda
                             4                                                            RTR                                       9d-SmallUnic                                     RTR
                                        3                                                                                                                        9c-SmallChry2
                           SRP                                                                                       7b-SmallPenn             5d-SmallChroo
                                                                                                 Temp.                                                   8a-LargeCoCh         Temp.
                                                                                                                                  SRP     11b-GelaChlor             3a-UnicPhyto
                          DIN 3                                             6
                                                                                             7                            DIN
            0.0

                                                                                                            0.0

                                                                                                                               6b-LargePenn
                                        1                                            Biom. Cladocera                 6a-LargeCent 7a-SmallCent                 Biom. Cladocera
                                                 12                          6                                                                                               5e-Nostocales
                            2     1                                                  9 9                                                                1b- LargeChry
                                                                                                                                     2d-Crypto                              10b-FilaConj
                                Reactive-Si                                 10                                                                              9b-SmallChlor
                                                         5                                                                      Reactive-Si
                                    2                                                        8                                                  Zeu         5c-OtherChroo 11c-OtherCol
                                                     Zeu
                                                        11                                                                                                    5a-FilaCyano 9a-SmallConj
                                                          11
                                                                                                                                                                            3b-ColoPhyto
                                                      12
            -1.0

                                                                                                            -1.0

                    (c)                                                         10                                  (d)
                   -1.0                                        0.0                                    1.0      -1.0                                   0.0                              1.0

Fig. 6 Ordination of samples (left panels) and Morpho-                                                         indicate the month of sampling. The four MFG without
Functional Groups (right panels) of (a, b) Lake Garda and                                                      labels around the origin in (b) are: 3a-UnicPhyto, 5a-
(c, d) Lake Stechlin in the CCA plane defined by the first                                                     FilaCyano, 7a-SmallCent and 2d-Cryp. The four MFG
two axes. Samples refer to (a) 2002 and 2003 (shaded and                                                       around the origin in (d) are: 2a-SmallChry1, 2b-SmallDi-
empty circles, respectively), and (c) 1995 and 2001 (shaded                                                    no, 10a-FilaChlorp and 11a-NakeChlor. MFG are abbre-
and empty circles). The arabic numbers in (a) and (c)                                                          viated as in Table 2

   As for Lake Stechlin (Figure 6c, d), the eigen-                                                             (which were associated more with the second
values associated to the first two axes were equal                                                             axis), the other variables showed a closer link
to 0.16 and 0.03, which contributes a percentage                                                               with the first axis. An important difference in the
of explained variance of 33.7% and 7.0%, respec-                                                               ordination of the MFG of the two lakes is
tively. The Montecarlo tests to evaluate the                                                                   represented by the position of the filamentous
significance of the extracted axes yielded highly                                                              conjugatophytes (10b) in the two ordination
significant results for the whole set of axes and for                                                          diagrams (Fig. 6b, d); however, in the Lake
the first axis (P < 0.01). With a few differences,                                                             Stechlin this group was always identified with
the ordination of the samples (Fig. 6c) showed a                                                               very low quantities and only in one occasion with
pattern comparable with the results obtained for                                                               moderate biovolumes (June 2001;
Hydrobiologia (2007) 578:97–112                                                                        109

location of the common MFG (i.e. the groups           if they increased or decreased in abundance at the
both present in Fig. 6b, d) along the first axes of   same time and at the same place. With the
the two configurations followed a similar ranking,    deductive approach (see Gitay et al., 1999),
with Pearson and Spearman correlations between        functional classifications are derived from state-
the two set of coordinates equal to 0.57 (P = 0.01)   ments established a priori on the basis of the
and 0.54 (P < 0.05), respectively.                    importance of specific processes (e.g., physiology)
                                                      or properties (e.g., morphology). The C–R–S
                                                      classification of phytoplankton based on morpho-
Discussion                                            logical descriptors of the specific taxa proposed
                                                      by Reynolds (1988: p. 396: Fig. 10-2) conforms to
Functional groups were used in different fields of    this procedure. Moreover, successive refinements
ecological research, including vegetation studies     of the classifications based on the recognition of
(e.g. Leishman & Westoby, 1992; Pillar, 1999),        associations (Reynolds et al., 2002) integrate
prediction of effects of global climate change        some of the elements of the deductive approach.
(Gitay et al., 1999), conservation biology (Gitay     Recognising that the separation of the phyto-
et al., 1999; Pressey et al., 1993), studies of       plankton species on the basis of their morpho-
microorganisms (Meyer, 1993), fungi (Oberwin-         logies coincides with the distributions of the same
kler, 1993), macrophytes (Shipley et al., 1989) and   species in different habitats with different light
macroinvertebrates (Usseglio-Polatera et al.,         and nutrient resources, these authors proposed to
2000). Irrespective of the type of organisms          employ the morphological properties to fit hith-
studied, a common goal was to find classifications    erto functionally unclassified taxa into existing
useful to define and understand the dynamic           functional categories. The results presented here
behaviour of groups of species in relation to         appear to support Reynolds’ approach (see also
environmental variation. This approach assumes        below). The different sets of characters may also
that the characteristics of a community can be        be processed with multivariate techniques to
better understood and managed if species are          group species with similar properties in clusters
grouped into classes that possess similar charac-     (‘‘data-driven approach’’; Gitay et al., 1999).
teristics or behave similarly (Solbrig, 1993).            In the work presented here, the deductive
However, these general statements, though sim-        approach has been used to identify the morpho-
ple to understand and accept on an intuitive basis,   functional groups on the basis of predetermined
prove quite difficult in their practical implemen-    relevant traits that influence essential functional
tation. In fact, the structural and functional        processes and ecological characteristics of the
classifications does not produce exclusive and        phytoplankton organisms. These traits have been
ultimate solutions because the species may be         chosen considering their relevance as proxies for
grouped utilising different criteria.                 population performances and their facility of
   In the context of phytoplankton ecology, it is     measurement or definition, discarding other char-
convenient and simple to distinguish two ap-          acters more difficult to determine or extract from
proaches to obtain functional classifications:        literature (e.g., growth rates; see Weithoff, 2003).
dynamic and deductive. The most straightforward       Some final subdivisions, based on taxonomy and
method of establishing functional groups is based     different life strategies, reflect the actual spectra
on the temporal development of the species:           of algae present in the lakes Garda and Stechlin,
identifying groups that show similar dynamic          so that it could not be exhaustive for lakes with
behaviour; this method is based on the implicit       different characteristics; this would require some
notion of groups of species responding similarly      minor integrations and arrangement of the final
to a set of particular environmental conditions       groups for other specific studies.
(e.g., Fabbro & Duivenvoorden, 2000; Salmaso,             The analyses carried out on the lakes Garda
2003). The phytoplankton associations originally      and Stechlin demonstrate a correspondence
defined by Reynolds (1980, 1984) are essentially      between the seasonal development of the com-
based on this approach. Species were put together     munities based on the MFG and phytoplankton

                                                                                                 123
110                                                                            Hydrobiologia (2007) 578:97–112

species. This suggests that the differentiation        are needed to substantiate the reliability of this
among phytoplankton on the basis of specific           approach.
adaptations, requirements and morphological               In both lakes, the temporal development of
characters determines the formation of groups          phytoplankton within individual years followed a
of species sharing more or less similar ecological     regular annual cycle, with the exception of Lake
characteristics. This might be, in part, confirmed     Stechlin in 1998, due to a sudden mass appearance
by the temporal dynamic of the MFG, which is           of Planktothrix rubescens in the spring and sum-
characterised by delimited temporal develop-           mer months. Reasons for development to Plank-
ments. However, these aspects will require             tothrix dominance have not been clear since water
further in-depth studies regarding specifically        chemical variables did not indicate any conspicu-
the degree of comparability of the ecological          ous foregoing change; the only unusual event prior
requirements of single species belonging to            the dominance of this species was the long lasting
the same MFG in different phytoplankton                ice in the winter of 1995/1996 (Padisák, 2003a).
communities.                                           Excluding the 1998 case documented in Lake
   The CCA analysis showed that some groups—           Stechlin, the regular cycles observed in the other
such as the cyanobacteria (with the exclusion of       years in the two lakes were determined only in
Oscillatoriales), colonial Chlorococcales and Phy-     part by the development of the same dominant
tomonadina, and the large chrysophytes—appeared        MFG. This suggests that if aquatic habitats con-
more adapted to low nutrient concentrations and,       strained by particular combinations of environ-
due to their size, higher grazing pressure. These      mental variables will support more than one likely
groups showed a different sensitivity to the water     MFG with appropriate adaptations, this does not
column stability; the MFG with the higher scores       necessarily imply that these groups will be present
along the RTR gradient showed various adaptations      with similar relative biomasses (or that, in some
against sinking, i.e. the presence of flagella, gas    cases, that they will be there; cf. also Reynolds et
vescicles and large gelatinous envelopes. The late     al., 2002). This aspect raises further questions and
winter and spring MFG were composed also by            perspectives about the identification of alternative
large and potentially rapidly sinking colonies, i.e.   causal factors able to explain the dominance of
organisms that require low stability of the water      different MFG in these two lakes.
column. Moreover, the winter and spring groups            In essence, the identification and use of MFG
developed with conditions of high nutrient avail-      may constitute a useful tool for the synoptic
ability and euphotic depth.                            analysis of phytoplankton communities, particu-
   The ability of the MFG to mimic the seasonal        larly comparing different lakes. However, the
development of the phytoplankton community has         usefulness of this approach in predicting the
important practical consequences and opens inter-      development of probable phytoplankton types
esting perspectives. MFG may represent a useful        as a result of different combinations of environ-
tool to investigate concurrently the community         mental factors needs to be analysed in detail
evolution of different lakes based on the adaptive     considering other lakes with different physio-
strategies of the single species, overcoming           graphic and trophic characteristics.
problems related to the comparison of different
taxa and to the existence of possible differences      Acknowledgements The limnological research in Lake
                                                       Garda was partially funded by the Veneto Region and
of taxonomic accuracy and identification. More-        ARPAV (Veneto Region Environment Protection
over, MFG could contribute to predicting the           Agency). We are grateful to Dr Giorgio Franzini and Dr
development of most probable phytoplankton             Fabio Decet (ARPAV) for their logistic support in the
types as a result of different combinations of         field and laboratory. We thank the technical staff of the
                                                       IGB and especially Mrs Johanna Dalchow, Mrs Elke
environmental factors. In this regard, the com-        Mach, Mrs Monika Papke, Mrs Uta Mallok and Mrs
parable responses of the MFG common to the             Adelheid Scheffler for their careful technical assistance.
lakes Garda and Stechlin to the same set of            We wish also to thank Dr Ingrid Chorus and Dr Luigi
physical, chemical and biological variables con-       Naselli-Flores for helpful comments on the first draft of
                                                       the manuscript.
stitute promising elements, though more studies

123
Hydrobiologia (2007) 578:97–112                                                                                           111

References                                                     Oberwinkler, F., 1993. Evoultion of Functional Groups
                                                                    in Basidiomycetes. (Fungi). In Schulze, E. D. &
Bottrell, H. H, A. Duncan, Z. M. Gliwicz, E. Grygierek,             H. A. Mooney (eds), Biodiversity and Ecosystem
     A. Herzig, A. Hillbricht-Illkowska, H. Kurasawa,               Function. Ecological Studies. Springer-Verlag, Berlin,
     P. Larsson & T. Wenglenska, 1976. A review of some             143–164.
     problems in zooplankton production studies. Norwe-        Padisák, J. & C. S. Reynolds, 1998. Selection of phyto-
     gian Journal of Zoology 24: 419–456.                           plankton associations in Lake Balaton, Hungary, in
de Bernardi, R. & C. Canale, 1995. Ricerche pluriennali             response to eutrophication and restoration measures,
     (1948–1992) sull’ecologia dello zooplancton del Lago           with special reference to the cyanoprokaryotes. Hyd-
     Maggiore. Documenta Istituto Italiano di Idrobiolo-            robiologia 384: 41–53.
     gia 55: 1–68.                                             Padisák, J., G. Borics, G. Fehér, I. Grigorszky, I. Oldal,
Fabbro, L. D. & L. J. Duivenvoorden, 2000. A two-part               A. Schmidt & Z. Zámbóné-Doma, 2003a. Dominant
     model linking multidimensional environmental gradi-            species and frequency of equilibrium phases in late
     ents and seasonal succession of phytoplankton assem-           summer phytoplankton assemblages in Hungarian
     blages. Hydrobiologia 438: 13–24.                              small shallow lakes. Hydrobiologia 502: 157–168.
                                                               Padisák, J., E. _ Soróczki-Pintér & Z. Rezner, 2003b.
Gitay, H., I. R. Noble & J. H. Connell, 1999. Deriving
     functional types for rain-forest trees. Journal of             Sinking properties of some phytoplankton shapes
     Vegetation Science 10: 641–650.                                and the relation of form resistance to morphological
Grime, J. P., 1977. Evidence for the existence of three             diversity of plankton—an experimental study. Hyd-
     primary strategies in plants and its relevance to              robiologia 500: 243–257.
     ecological and evolutionary theory. American Natu-        Padisák, J., W. Scheffler, P. Kasprzak, R. Koschel & L.
     ralist 111: 1169–1194.                                         Krienitz, 2003c. Interannual variability in the phyto-
Isaksson, A., 1998. Phagotrophic phytoflagellates in                plankton composition of Lake Stechlin (1994–2000).
     lakes—a literature review. Archiv für Hydrobiolo-             Archiv für Hydrobiologie/Advances in Limnology 58:
     gie/Advances in Limnologie 51: 63–90.                          101–133.
Jones, R. I., 2000. Mixotrophy in planktonic protists: an      Padisák, J., W. Scheffler, C. Sı́pos, P. Kasprzak, R.
     overview. Freshwater Biology 45: 219–226.                      Koschel & L. Krienitz, 2003d. Spatial and temporal
Kalff, J., 2002. Limnology. Prentice Hall, Prentice Hall,           pattern of development and decline of the spring
     Upper Saddle River, NJ.                                        diatom populations in Lake Stechlin in 1999. Archiv
Kasprzak, P., 1984. Bestimmung des Körperkoohlenstoffs             für Hydrobiologie/Advances in Limnology 58: 135–
     von Planktoncrustaceen. Limnologica 15:191–194.                155.
Körner, C., 1993. Scaling from Species to Vegetation: The     Padisák, J., I. Grigorszky, G. Borics & É. Soróczki-Pintér,
     Usefulness Of Functional Groups. In Schulze, E. D. &           2006. Use of phytoplankton assemblages for monitor-
     H. A. Mooney (eds), Biodiversity and Ecosystem                 ing ecological status of lakes within the Water
     Function. Ecological Studies. Springer-Verlag, Berlin,         Framework Directive: the assemblage index. Hydro-
     117–140.                                                       biologia 553: 1–14.
Koschel, R., D. D. Adams (eds), 2003. Lake Stechlin—An         Pillar, V. D., 1999. On the identification of optimal plant
     approach to Understanding an Oligotrophic Lowland              functional types. Journal of Vegetation Science 10:
     Lake. Archiv für Hydrobiologie/Advances in Limnol-            631–640.
     ogy 58: 1–311.                                            Podani, J., 2000. Introduction to the Exploration of
Kruskal, J. B. & M. Wish, 1978. Multidimensional Scaling.           Multivariate Biological Data. Backhuys, Leiden.
     Sage Publications, Beverly Hills and London.              Pressey, R. L., C. J. Humpheries, C. R. Margules, R. I.
Lehman, J. T., 1988. Selective Herbivory and its Role in            Vane-Wright & P. H. Williams, 1993. Beyond oppor-
     the Evolution of Phytoplankton Growth Strategies. In           tunism: key principles for systematic reserve selection.
     Sandgren, C. D. (ed.), Growth and reproductive                 Trends in Ecology and Evolution 8: 124–128.
     strategies of freshwater phytoplankton. Cambridge         Reynolds, C. S., 1980. Phytoplankton assemblages and
     University Press, Cambridge, 369–387.                          their periodicity in stratifying lake systems. Holarctic
Leishman, M. R. & M. Westoby, 1992. Classifying plants              Ecology 3: 141–159.
     into groups on the basis of associations of individual    Reynolds, C. S., 1984. The Ecology of Freshwater Phyto-
     traits—evidence from Australian semi-arid wood-                plankton. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
     lands. Journal of Ecology 80: 417–424.                         384 pp.
Lund, J. W. G., C. Kipling & E. D. Le Cren, 1958. The          Reynolds, C. S., 1988. Functional morphology and the
     inverted microscope method of estimating algal num-            adaptive strategies of freshwater phytoplankton. In
     bers and the statistical basis of estimations by count-        Sandgren, C. D. (ed.), Growth and Reproductive
     ing. Hydrobiologia 11: 143–170.                                Strategies of Freshwater Phytoplankton. Cambridge
Meyer, O., 1993. Functional Groups of Microorganisms. In            University Press, Cambridge, 388–433.
     Schulze, E. D. & H. A. Mooney (eds), Biodiversity         Reynolds, C. S., 1997. Vegetation Processes in the Pelagic:
     and Ecosystem Function. Ecological Studies. Spring-            A Model for Ecosystem Theory. Ecology Institute,
     er-Verlag, Berlin: 67–96.                                      Oldendorf, 371 pp.

                                                                                                                   123
112                                                                                      Hydrobiologia (2007) 578:97–112

Reynolds, C. S. & A. E. Irish, 1997. Modelling phyto-               H. A. Mooney (eds), Biodiversity and Ecosystem
    plankton dynamics in lakes and reservoirs: the                  Function. Ecological Studies. Springer-Verlag, Berlin:
    problem of in-situ growth rates. Hydrobiologia 349:             97–116.
    5–17.                                                      Sommer, U., 1981. The role of r- and K-selection in the
Reynolds, C. S., V. Huszar, C. Kruk, L. Naselli-Flores & S.         succession of phytoplankton in Lake Constance. Acta
    Melo, 2002. Towards a functional classification of the          Oecologia Generale 2: 327–342.
    freshwater phytoplankton. Journal of Plankton Re-          Sommer, U., 1984. The paradox of the plankton: fluctua-
    search 24: 417–428.                                             tions of phosphorus availability maitain diversity of
Rott, E., 1981. Some results from phytoplankton counting            phytoplankton in flow-through cultures. Limnology
    intercalibrations. Swiss Journal of Hydrology 43: 34–62.        and Oceanography 29: 633–636.
Salmaso, N., 1996. Seasonal variation in the composition       Stockner, J. G. & N. J. Antia, 1986. Algal picoplankton
    and rate of change of the phytoplankton community               from marine and freshwater ecosystems: a multidisci-
    in a deep subalpine lake (Lake Garda, Northern                  plinary perspective. Canadian Journal of Fisheries
    Italy). An application of nonmetric multidimensional            And Aquatic Sciences 43: 2472–2503.
    scaling and cluster analysis. Hydrobiologia 337: 49–68.    Tang, E. P., 1995. The allometry of algal growth rates.
Salmaso, N. & L. Naselli-Flores, 1999. Studies on the               Journal of Plankton Research 17: 1325–1335.
    zooplankton of the deep subalpine Lake Garda.              ter Braak, C. J. F. & P. Šmilauer, 2002. CANOCO
    Journal of Limnology 58: 66–76.                                 reference manual and CanoDraw for Windows user’s
Salmaso, N., 2000. Factors affecting the seasonality and            guide: Software for canonical community ordination
    distribution of cyanobacteria and chlorophytes: a case          (version 4.5). Microcomputer Power (Ithaca, NY,
    study from the large lakes south of the Alps, with              USA).
    special reference to Lake Garda. Hydrobiologia 438:        Tilzer, M. M., 1984. A quantum yield as a fundamental
    43–63.                                                          parameter controlling vetical photosynthetic profiles
Salmaso, N., 2002. Ecological patterns of phytoplankton             of phytoplankton in Lake Constance. Archiv für
    assemblages in Lake Garda: seasonal, spatial and                Hydrobiologie (Supplement) 69: 169–198.
    historical features. Journal of Limnology 61: 95–115.      Usseglio-Polatera, P., M. Bournaud, P. Richoux & H.
Salmaso, N., 2003. Life strategies, dominance patterns and          Tachet, 2000. Biological and ecological traits of
    mechanisms promoting species coexistence in phyto-              benthic freshwater macroinvertebrates: relationships
    plankton communities along complex environmental                and definition of groups with similar traits. Freshwater
    gradients. Hydrobiologia 502: 13–36.                            Biology 43: 175–205.
Salmaso, N., 2005. Effects of climatic fluctuations and        Weithoff, G., 2003. The concepts of ‘‘plant functional
    vertical mixing on the interannual trophic variability          types’’ and ‘‘functional diversity’’ in lake phytoplank-
    of Lake Garda, Italy. Limnology and Oceanography                ton—a new understanding of phytoplankton ecology?
    50: 553–565.                                                    Freshwater Biology 48: 1669–1675.
Shipley, B., P. A. Keddy, D. R. J. Moore & K. Lemky,           Wetzel, R. G., 2001, Limnology. Lake and River Ecosys-
    1989. Regeneration and establishment strategies of              tems, 3rd edn. Academic Press, San Diego, California.
    emergent macrophytes. Journal of Ecology 77: 1093–         Whitton, B. A. & M. Potts (eds), (2000). The Ecology of
    1110.                                                           Cyanobacteria, their Diversity in Time and Space.
Solbrig, O. T., 1993. Plant traits and adaptive strategies:         Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Neth-
    their role in ecosystem function. In Schulze, E. D. &           erlands.

123
You can also read