I was about to start writing up an account of my latest visit to Castle Eden Dene, when I realised that I had forgotten to describe my previous visit, back in March. I’ve already described a visit in January, when the stream was dry (see “Castle Eden Dene in January” and “Tales from a dry river bed”) and promised regular updates through the year. It seems that, amidst all the travel that filled my life over the last three months, I overlooked the post that I should have written about the visit that I made in early March.
Whereas the river was dry in January, rain during February meant that, when I returned to the Dene on 11 March, some rather turbid water was flowing down the channel on its short journey to the North Sea. There is, finally, something more like a stream habitat from which I can collect some diatoms.
Many of the diatoms that I found in March belonged to taxa that I had also seen in January; however, the proportions were quite different. In some cases, species that were common in January were less common now (e.g. Humidophila contenta*) but there was a small Nitzschia species with a slightly sigmoid outline that was very sparse in the January sample but which was the most abundant species in the March sample. I’ve called this “Nitzschia clausii” but the Castle Eden Dene population does not fit the description of this perfectly. A lot can change in a couple of months, especially when dealing with fast-growing organism such as these, as my posts on the River Wear showed (see “A year in the life of the River Wear”). Castle Eden Burn’s highly variable discharge just adds another layer of complication to this.
Diatoms from Castle Eden Dene, March 2019: a. – e.: Nitzschia cf clausii; f. Tabularia fasiculata; g. Tryblionella debilis; h. Luticola ventricosa; i. Luticola mutica; j. Ctenophora pulchella. Scale bar: 10 micrometres (= 1/100thof a millimetre). The picture at the top of the post shows Castle Eden Burn at the time that the sample was collected.
Nitzschia clausii is described as being “frequent in brackish freshwater habitats of the coastal area and in river estuaries, as well as in inland waters with strongly increased electrolyte content”. A couple of the other species from this sample – Ctenophora pulchella and Tabularia fasiculata (both illustrated in the diagram above) – have similar preferences. My experience is that we do often find a smattering of individuals belonging to “brackish” species in very hard water, as we have in Castle Eden Burn. Average conductivity (based on Environment Agency records) is 884 µS cm-1; however, values as high as 1561 µS cm-1. The fluctuating discharge plays a role here, as any evaporation will serve to concentrate those salts that are naturally present in hard freshwater. This should probably not be a big surprise: life in brackish waters involves adapting to fluctuating osmotic regimes so species that can cope with those conditions are also likely to be able to handle some of the consequences of desiccation.
Average values of other chemical parameters from 2011 to present, based on Environment Agency monitoring are: pH: 8.3; alkalinity: 189 mg L-1 CaCO3; reactive phosphorus: 0.082 mg L-1; nitrate-nitrogen: 1.79 mg L-1; ammonium-nitrogen: 0.044 mg L-1. There is some farmland in the upper catchment, and the burn also drains an industrial estate on the edge of Peterlee but, overall, nutrient concentrations in this stream are not a major concern. The Environment Agency classifies Castle Eden Burn as “moderate status” due to the condition of the invertebrates but does not offer any specific reason for this. I suspect that the naturally-challenging habitat of Castle Eden Burn may confound assessment results.
I’ve also been given some data on discharge by the Environment Agency which shows how patterns vary throughout the year. The two sampling locations are a couple of kilometres above and below the location from which I collect my samples and both have more regular flow. However, we can see a long period between April and September when discharge is usually very low. The slightly higher values recorded in July are a little surprising, but are spread across a number of years. It is also, paradoxically, most common for the burn to be dry in July too: clearly, a month of extremes. As my own visits have shown, it is possible for the burn to be dry at almost any time of the year, depending on rainfall in the preceding period The dots on the graph (representing ‘outliers’ – records that exceed 1.5 x interquartile range) show that it is also possible to record high discharges at almost any time during the year too. I should also add that, as I am not a hydrologist, I am rather outside my comfort zone when trying to explain these patterns. I would have said ‘out of my depth’ though that’s not the most appropriate phrase to use in this particular situation.
Discharge in Castle Eden Burn, as measured by the Environment Agency between 2007 and present. Measurements are from NZ 4136 2885 (‘upstream’) and NZ 45174039 (‘downstream’).
* Note on Humidophila contenta:it is almost impossible to identify this species conclusively with the light microscope as some key diagnostic characters can only be seen with the scanning electron microscope. However, all members of this complex of species share a preference for intermittently wet habitats so these identification issues are unlikely to lead to an erroneous ecological interpretation. It is probably best to refer to this complex as “Humidophila contenta sensu lato” rather than “Humidophilasp.” order to distinguish them from those species within the genus that can be recognised with light microscopy.
Lange-Bertalot, H., Hofmann, G., Werum, M. & Cantonati, M. (2017). Freshwater Benthic Diatoms of Central Europe: over 800 Common Species Used in Ecological Assessment. English edition with updated taxonomy and added species. Edited by M. Cantonati, M.G. Kelly & H. Lange-Bertalot. Koeltz Botanical books, Schmitten-Oberreifenberg.