More green algae from the River Wear

Having discussed some of the recent name changes in green algae in the previous post, I thought that I would continue this theme using some of the other taxa that I found in the samples I collected from the River Wear a couple of weeks ago.   The plate below shows some specimens that, 20 years ago, I would not have hesitated to call Scenedesmus, characterised by coenobia of either four cells or a multiple of four cells arranged in a row.   Over 200 species, and 1200 varieties and forms have been recognised although there were also concerns that many of these so-called “species” were, in fact, variants induced by environmental conditions.  A further problem is that Scenedesmus and relatives do not have any means of sexual reproduction.  This means that any mutation that occurs and which does not have strong negative effects on the organism will be propagated rather than lost through genetic processes.  Working out what differences are really meaningful is always a challenge, especially when dealing with such tiny organisms.

Scenedesmus and Desmodemus species from the River Wear, Wolsingham, September 2018.  a. and b. Scenedesmus cf ellipticus; c. Desmodesmus communis.   Scale bar: 20 micrometres (= 1/50th of a millimetre).

The onset of the molecular era shed some new light onto these problems but, in the process, recognised differences within the genus itself that necessitated it being split into three, two of which are on the plate below.  Scenedesmus, in this modern sense, has cells with obtuse (rounded) apices and mucilage surrounding the cells whilst Desmodesmus has distinct spines at the apices of marginal cells and, sometimes, shorter ones elsewhere too.   In addition to these there is Acutodesmus, which is similar to Scenedesmus (i.e. without spines) but whose cells have more pointed (“acute”) ends and which does not have any surrounding mucilage.   A further genus, Pectinodesmus, has been split away from Acutodesmus on the basis of molecular studies, although there do not seem to be any features obvious under the light microscope which can differentiate these.

The genera Ankistrodesmus and Monoraphidium present a similar situation.  In the past, these long needle- or spindle-shaped cells would all have been considered to be Ankistrodesmus.   Some formed small bundles whilst others grew singly and this, along with a difference in their reproductive behaviour, was regarded as reason enough for splitting them into two separate genera.   Both were present in the Wear this summer, but only Monoraphidium presented itself to me in a manner that could be photographed.  Two species are shown in the plate below.   Recent molecular studies seem to not just support this division but also suggest that each of these could, potentially, be divided into two new genera, so we’ll have to watch out for yet more changes to come.

Monoraphidium species from the River Wear, Wolsingham, September 2018.  a. and b.: M. griffthii; c. M. arcuatum.  Scale bar: 20 micrometres (= 1/50th of a millimetre).

The final illustration that I managed to obtain is of another common coenobium-forming alga, Coelastrum microporum.   Though the three-dimensional form makes it a little harder to see, cell numbers, as for Pediastrum, Scenedesmus and Desmodesmus, are multiples of four.  I apologise if the picture is slightly out of focus, but it is a struggle to use high magnification optics on samples such as these.  The oil that sits between the lens and the coverslip conveys the slight pressure from fine focus adjustments directly to the sample, meaning that the cells move every time I try to get a crisper view.  That means it is impossible to use my usual “stacking” software.   The answer is to use an inverted microscope so that the lens was beneath the sample.  However, I do this type of work so rarely that the investment would not be worthwhile.

That’s enough for now.   I’m off on holiday for a couple of weeks, so the next post may be from Portugal and perhaps I will also find time to sample the River Duoro as well as the products of the vineyards in it’s catchment…

Coelastrum microporum from the River Wear,Wolsingam, Septmber 2018.  Scale bar: 20 micrometres (= 1/50th of a millimetre).


An, S.S., Friedl, T. & Hegewald, E. (2008).  Phylogenetic relationships of Scenedesmus and Scenedesmus-like coccoid green algae as inferred from ITS-2 rDNA sequence comparisons.   Plant Biology 1: 418-428.

Hegewald, E., Wolf, M., Keller, A., Friedl, T. & Krienitz, T. (2010).  ITS2 sequence-structure phylogeny in the Scenedesmaceae with special reference to Coelastrum (Chlorophyta, Chlorophyceae), including the new genera Comasiella and Pectinodesmus.   Phycologia 49: 325-355.

Krienitz, L. & Bock, C. (2012).  Present state of the systematics of planktonic coccoid green algae of inland waters.   Hydrobiologia 698: 295-326.

Krienitz, L., Bock, C., Nozaki, H. & Wolf, M. (2011).   SSU rRNA gene phylogeny of morphospecies affiliated to the bioassay alga “Selanastrum capricornutum” recovered the polyphyletic origin of crescent-shaped Chlorophyta.  Journal of Phycology 47: 880-893.

Trainor, F.R. & Egan, P.F. (1991).  Discovering the various ecomorphs of Scenedesmus: the end of a taxonomic era.   Archiv für Protistenkunde 139: 125-132.


Keeping the cogs turning …

A few algae lift my soul when I see them under the microscope through their beauty.   To see such intricate yet symmetrical organisation in something too small to be visible with the naked eye never ceases to amaze and delight me.   One of the genera that has that effect is the green alga Pediastrum, which forms cog-like colonies: flat plates of cells whose outer members bear horn-like projections.   One of its representatives, Pediastrum boryanum, was common in the River Wear when I visited recently (see previous post).   You can see, from the illustration above (the scale bar is 20 micrometres – 1/50th of a millimetre – long), the characteristic disc-like arrangement of cells, always in multiples of four (there are 16 in the colony above).   There are many species of Pediastrum, differing in the shape of both the inner and marginal cells, and the number and length of the horns.

I have found Pediastrum on many occasions in the Wear in the past, but never quite as abundant as it was in my most recent samples.  Pediastrum boryanum is the species I find most often, here and elsewhere, but other species occur too.  I have also found Pediastrum in some unusual places, including deep in lake sediments when I was searching for fossil pollen grains and there is evidence that the cell walls of Pediastrum contain both silica and a sporopollenin-like material (sporopollenin is the extremely tough material found in the outer walls of pollen grains (which probably explains why it had survived the fierce mix of chemicals that we used to prepare the lake sediments for pollen analysis).   I am guessing that the sporopollenin and silica both add some structural integrity to the cells.   There are references in the literature to Pediastrum being planktonic but I often find it in samples from submerged surfaces and associated with submerged macrophytes, so I suspect that it is one of those species that moves between different types of habitat.  It should not really be a surprise that a relatively large colonial alga with a payload of silica and sporopollenin in addition to the usual cellulose cell wall, is going to be common in benthic films in a river towards the end of a long, dry summer.

Pediastrum is another genus that has been shaken up in recent years as a result of molecular studies.  According to these, Pediastrum boryanum should now be called Pseudopediastrum boryanum although the Freshwater Algal Flora of the British Isles continues to use the old name.   Not everyone agrees with this split (see McManus and Lewis’ paper in the list below) but the divisions suggested by molecular data do also seem to match differences in morphological characteristics of the group (see Table below).

Pediastrum is part of the family Hydrodictyaceae and, as I was writing this, it occurred to me that I have never written about another interesting member of this family, Hydrodictyon reticulatum.  As I like to accompany my posts with my own photographs, I spent part of yesterday afternoon tramping around a location where I have found Hydrodictyon in the past.   All I got for my troubles, however, was two damp feet, so that post will have to wait for another day.


Differentiating characteristics of Pediastrum and similar genera (after Krienitz & Bock, 2011).

Genus Features
Pediastrum Flat coenobia with intercellular spaces, marginal cells with two lobes
Lacunastrum Flat coenobia with large intercellular spaces, marginal cells with two lobes
Monactinus Flat coenobia with large intercellular spaces, marginal cells with one lobes
Parapediastrum Flat coenobia with intercellular spaces, marginal cells with two lobes, each divided into two projections
Pseudopediastrum Flat coenobia without intercellular spaces, marginal cells with two lobes, each with a single projection
Sorastrum Three-dimensional coenobia, each cell with two or four projections.
Stauridium Flat coenobia without intercellular spaces, marginal cells “trapezoid”* with deep incision to create two lobes, each with a concave surface, though the lobes are not really extended into “projections”

* not all of the illustrations show marginal cells that are strictly “trapezoid” (e.g. with at least one pair of parallel sides).


Buchheim, M., Buchheim, J., Carlson, T., Braband, A., Hepperle, D., Krienitz, L., Wolf, M. & Hegewald, E. (2005).  Phylogeny of the Hydrodictyaceae (Chlorophyceae): inferences from rDNA data.  Journal of Phycology 41: 1039-104.

Good, B.H. & Chapman, R.L. (1978).  The ultrastructure of Phycopeltis (Chroolepidaceae: Chlorophyta). I. Sporopollenin in the cell walls.  American Journal of Botany 65: 27-33.

Jena, M., Bock, C., Behera, C., Adhikary, S.P. & Krienitz, L. (2014).  Strain survey on three continents confirms the polyphyly of the genus Pediastrum (Hydrodictyaceae, Chlorophyceae).  Fottea, Olomouc 14: 63-76.

Krienitz, L. & Bock, C. (2012).  Present state of the systematics of planktonic coccoid green algae of inland waters.   Hydrobiologia 698: 295-326.

McManus, H.A. & Lewis, L.A. (2011).  Molecular phylogenetic relationships in the freshwater family Hydrodictyaceae (Sphaaeropleales, Chlorophyceae), with an emphasis on Pediastrum duplex.   Journal of Phycology 47: 152-163.

Millington, W.F. & Gawlik, S.R. (1967).  Silica in the wall of PediastrumNature (London) 216: 68.

Talking about the weather …

September is here.  When I visited this site two months ago we were in the midst of the heatwave and the samples I collected from the Wear at Wolsingham were different to any that I have seen at this location before, dominated by small green algae (see “Summertime blues …”).   As I drove to Wolsingham this time, I could see the first signs of autumn in the trees and the temperatures are more typical of this time of year.   We have had rain, but there has not been a significant spate since April and this means that there has been nothing to scour away these unusual growths and return the river to its more typical state.

That does not mean, however, that there have been no changes in the algae on the submerged stones.  Some of these differences are apparent as soon as I pick up a stone.  Last month, there was a thin crust on the surface of the stones; that is still here but now there are short algal filaments pushing through, and the whole crust seems to be, if anything, more consolidated than in July, and I can see sand grains amidst the filaments.   Biofilms in healthy rivers at this time of year are usually thin, due to intense grazing by invertebrates, so I’m curious to know what is going on here this year.

A cobble from the River Wear at Wolsingham, showing the thick biofilm interspersed with short green filaments.   Note, too, the many sand grains embedded in the biofilm.  The bare patch at the centre was created when I pulled my finger through it to show how consolidated it had become.  The cobble is about 20 centimetres across.

Many of the organisms that I can see when I peer at a drop of my sample through my microscope are the same as those I saw back in July but there are some conspicuous differences too.   There are, for example, more desmids, some of which are, by the standards of the other algae in the sample, enormous.   We normally associate desmids with soft water, acid habitats but there are enough in this sample to suggest they are more than ephemeral visitors.   And, once I had named them, I saw that the scant ecological notes that accompanied the descriptions referred to preferences for neutral and alkaline, as well as nutrient-rich conditions.  Even if I have not seen these species here before, others have seen them in similar habitats, and that offers me some reassurance.    In addition to the desmids, there were also more coenobia of Pediastrum boryanum and Coelastrum microporum compared to the July sample.

A view of the biofilm from the River Wear at Wolsingham on 1 September 2019. 

There were also more diatoms present than in my samples from July – up from about 13 percent of the total in July to just over 40 per cent in September.   The most abundant species was Achnanthidium minutissimum, but the zig-zag chains of Diatoma vulgare were conspicuous too.  The green filaments turned out to be a species of Oedogonium, not only a different species to the one I described in my previous post but also with a different epiphyte: Cocconeis pediculus this time, rather than Achnanthidium minutissimum.   I explained the problems associated with identifying Oedogonium in the previous post but, even though I cannot name the species, I have seen this form before (robust filaments, cells 1.5 to 2 times as long as broad) and associate it with relatively nutrient-rich conditions.  That would not normally be my interpretation of the Wear at Wolsingham but this year, as I have already said, confounds our expectations.   I did not record any Cladophora in this sample but am sure that, had I mooched around for longer in the pools at the side of the main channel, I would have found some filaments of this species too.

Desmids and other green algae from the River Wear at Wolsingham, 1 September 2019.  a. Closterium cf. acerosum; b. Closteriumcf. moniliferum; c. Cosmarium cf. botrysis; d. Closterium cf. ehrenbergii; e. Coelastrum microporum; f. Pediastrum boryanum.   Scale bar: 50 micrometres (= 1/20th of a millimetre).  

It is not just the differences between months this year that I’m curious about.  I did a similar survey back in 2009 and, looking back at those data, I see that my samples from August and September in that year had a very different composition.   There was, I remember, a large spate in late July or early August, and my August sample, collected a couple of weeks later had surprised me by having a thick biofilm dominated by the small motile diatom Nitzschia archibaldii.   My hypothesis then was that the spate had washed away many of the small invertebrates that grazed on the algae, meaning that there were few left to feed on those algae that survived the storm (or which had recolonised in the aftermath)..   As the algae divided and re-divided, so they started to compete for light, handing an advantage to those that could adjust their position within the biofilm.   This dominance by motile diatoms was, in my experience of the upper Wear, as uncommon as the assemblages I’m encountering this summer, though probably for different reasons.

Other algae from the River Wear at Wolsingham, September 2018.    The upper image shows Diatoma vulgare and the lower image is Oedogonium with epiphytic Cocconeis pediculus.   Scale bar: 20 micrometres (= 1/50th of a millimetre).

I suspect that it is the combination of high temperatures and low flows (more specifically, the absence of spates that might scour away the attached algae) that is responsible for the present state of the river.  This, along with my theory behind the explosion of Nitzschia archibaldii in August 2009, both highlight the importance of weather and climate in generating some of the variability that we see in algal communities in rivers (see “How green is my river?”).   The British have a reputation for talking about the weather.   I always scan the weather forecasts in the days leading up to a field trip, mostly to plan my attire and make sure that I will, actually, be able to wade into the river.  Perhaps I also need to spend more time thinking about what this weather will be doing to the algae I’m about to sample.

A hitchhiker’s guide to algae …

One of the recurring themes of this blog is the hidden delights of natural history for anyone prepared to take a closer look at unprepossessing locations, so it is appropriate that we have found some quite rich habitats within walking distance of our home in County Durham.   I’ve written before about visits to Crowtrees, a local nature reserve (see “More pleasures in my own backyard” and “Natural lenses”) and Heather is also writing a series of posts about the ever-changing flora of this small vale at the foot of the Permian limestone escarpment (see “Crowtrees LNR July 2018 part 2: gentians to grasses” for the most recent and links back to previous ones).   I visited again last week, taking Brian Whitton along for company.

His interest was the red alga Chroothece ricteriana, which I described in one of my earlier posts about Crowtrees but we did not find it on this particular visit.   Instead, my eye was drawn to soft clouds of green filaments that floated just above the bed of the pond.   When I looked closely under my microscope, I saw that these were thin filaments of Oedogonium.  Typically, these had no reproductive organs, so cannot be named (see “Love and sex in a tufa-forming stream” for a rare exception), but all showed characteristic “cap cells” (see lower illustration).

Growths of Oedogonium in Crowtrees pond, August 2018.   The frame width is about 30 centimetres.   The photograph at the top of the post shows Brian Whitton searching for algae during our visit.

The diatom Achnanthidium minutissimum was growing on small stalks attached to the Oedogonium filaments, often alone but also in pairs and stacks of four, as the diatom cells divided and re-divided.  Oedogonium is a rougher alga to the touch than filamentous genera such as Draparnaldia, Stigeoclonium and Spirogyra, and often carries epiphytes, and I presume the lack of mucilage is a factor in this.   Achnanthidium minutissimum is a diatom that is very common on the upper surface of submerged stones in both lakes and rivers, but it is not fussy and I often see it as an epiphyte if conditions are right.  In this case, I suspect that the very hard water of Crowtrees Pond is a factor: calcium carbonate is constantly being precipitated from the water to create a thin layer of “marl” (see photo in “Pleasures in my own backyard”).   This makes life difficult for a tiny diatom that cannot move, so hitch-hiking a ride on the back of a filamentous alga that floats about the lake bottom makes a lot more sense.

Oedogonium filaments with epiphytic Achnanthidium minutissimum, from Crowtrees pond, August 2018.  Scale bar: 20 micrometres (= 1/50th of a millimetre).  

Oedogonium is an adaptable genus.  It is also common in the River Ehen (soft water, low nutrients) and I also find it in lowland polluted rivers too.  Being able to name the species would, I am sure, help us to better understand the ecology but this is, as I have already mentioned, problematic (see “The perplexing case of the celibate alga”).   However, in each of the cases I’ve mentioned, the epiphytes are different (Achnanthidium minutissimum here, Tabellaria flocculosa and Fragilaria species in the Ehen, Rhoicosphenia and Cocconeis placentula in enriched lowland rivers) and I suspect that these might offer an easier way to interpret the habitat than the filaments themselves, at least until someone finds a stress-free way of naming them.