More about measuring biomass …

The previous post showed how the proportions of green algae and diatoms changed as the total quantity of algae in the River Ehen waxed and waned over the course of a year.   The BenthoTorch, however, also measures “blue-green algae” and so let’s look at how this group changes in order to complete the picture.

Before starting, though, we need to consider one of the major flaws of the BenthoTorch: its algorithms purport to evaluate the quantities of three major groups of algae yet, in my posts about the River Ehen I have also talked about a fourth group, the red algae, or Rhodophyta (most recently in “The only way is up …”).  Having pointed a BenthoTorch at numerous stones with thick growths of Audouinella,we can report that Rhodophyta seem to be bundled in with the blue-green alga signal, which is no great surprise given the similarity in their pigments.  It is, however, one of a number of examples of the need to interpret any BenthoTorch results with your brain fully engaged, and not just to treat outputs at face value. Similar questions need to be asked of the Xanthophyta and Chrysophyta, though the latter tend not to be common in UK streams.

cyanos_in_Ehen

Relationship between the proportion of “blue-green algae” (Cyanobacteria and Rhodophyta) and the total quantity of benthic algae (expressed as chlorophyll concentration) in the River Ehen (c.) and Croasdale Beck (d.).  The blue lines show quantile regression fits at p = 0.8, 0.5 and 0.2.  

In contrast to the green algae and diatoms, the Cyanobacteria/Rhodophyta signal shows a strong negative relationship as biomass increases though, again, there is enough scatter in this relationship to make it necessary to approach this graph with caution.  I suspect, for example, that the data points on the upper right side of the data cloud represents samples rich in Audouinella, which tends to occur in winter when biomass, generally, is much greater.   On the other hand, Croasdale Beck, in particular, has a lot of encrusting Chamaesiphon fuscus colonies which are pretty much perennial (see “a bigger splash …”) but whose relative importance in the BenthoTorch output will be greatest when the other two groups of algae are sparse.   I suspect that encrusting members of this genus are favoured by conditions that do not allow a high biomass of other algae to develop, as these will reduce the amount of light that the Chamaesiphonreceives.

Thicker biofilms in the River Ehen often have some narrow Phormidium-type filaments as well as small bundles of nitrogen-fixing Calothrix, but the overall proportion is generally low relative to the mass of diatoms and green algae that predominate.    But that is not really telling us the whole story.  I finished my previous post with a graph showing how the variation in biomass increases as the biomass increases.  The heterogeneity of stream algal communities, however, cannot be captured fully at the spatial scale at which the BenthoTorch works: there is a patchiness that is apparent to the naked eye: one of our sites has distinct mats of Phormidium autumnale towards one margin, and dense Lemaneagrowths in the fastest-flowing sections, largely attached to unmovable boulders, which makes biomass measurement very difficult. I’ve also written about distinct growths of Tolypothrix and its epiphytes (see “River Ehen … again”), another alga which forms discrete colonies at a few locations. I try to collect a random sample of stones from a site but there are constraints, including accessibility, especially when the river rises above base flow.   In the River Ehen we also have to take care not to disturb any mussels whilst removing stones.

Whilst our sampling cannot really be described as “random” I do think that there is sufficient consistency in the patterns we see for the results to be meaningful. We could spend a lot more time finessing the sampling design yet for little extra scientific gain.   I prefer to think of these measurements as one part of a complex jigsaw that is slowly revealing the interactions between the constituents of the dynamic ecosystem of the River Ehen.   The important thing is to not place too much faith in any single strand of evidence, and to have enough awareness of the broader biology of the stream to read beyond the face value indications.

Advertisements

The complexities of measuring mass…

Benthotorch_in_action

Once upon a time, measuring the quantity of algae growing on the beds of streams and rivers was a painstaking, slow process that invariably revealed large amounts of spatial and temporal variation that, very often, obscured the ecological signals you were looking for. That has changed in the last decade thanks to the availability of field fluorimeters such as the BenthoTorch.  This makes it much quicker and easier to measure chlorophyll concentrations, the usual proxy for algal quantity.  Thanks to devices such as this it is now much easier to discover that your ecological signal is masked by spatial and temporal variation.

We’ve generated a lot of data about the fluxes of algae in the River Ehen using a BenthoTorch over the past five years and are in a position where we can start to make some generalisations about how the quantity of algae vary over the course of a year.  In broad terms, the results I showed in “The River Ehen in January” back in 2014 have not varied greatly over subsequent years, with peak biomass in mid-winter and low biomass in the summer (due, we presume, to intense grazing by invertebrates).  Curiously, we see a much less distinctive seasonal pattern in the nearby Croasdale Beck, but that is a story for another day….

The BenthoTorch uses an algorithm to partition the fluorescence signal between three major algal groups and, though this is not without issues (see below), I thought it might be interesting to see how these groups varied with biomass trends, and consider how this links to ecological theory.  The first group I’m considering are the green algae which, in this river, are mainly filamentous forms.   The general pattern, seen in the graph below, is for a gradual increase in the proportion of green algae, which fits with the current understanding of thicker biofilms having greater structural complexity with filamentous algae out-competing attached single celled algae to create a “canopy” of algae that are more effective at capturing light and other resources.  The relationship is, however, strongly wedge-shaped so, whilst many of the thickest biofilms have a lot of green algae, there are also thick biofilms where green algae are scarce or even non-existent.  Croasdale Beck shows a similar, but less pronounced, trend.

green_algae_in_Ehen

Relationship between the proportion of green algae and the total quantity of benthic algae (expressed as chlorophyll concentration) in the River Ehen (a.) and Croasdale Beck (b.).   The blue lines show quantile regression fits at p = 0.8, 0.5 and 0.2.   The image at the top of the post shows Ben Surridge using a BenthoTorch to measure algal biomass beside Croasdale Beck in Cumbria.

The second graph shows that this pattern of a gradual increase in proportion is also the case for diatoms and, once again, there is a broad wedge of points with an upward trend.  But, once again, there are also samples where biomass is high but diatoms are present in very low numbers or are even absent.   What is going on?

The problem is clear I think, if one looks at the final image in “The only way is up …” where the very patchy nature of algal communities in the River Ehen (and, indeed, many other rivers).   There are plenty of algae on this boulder, but not organised in a homogeneous manner: some zones on the boulder are almost pure diatom whilst others are almost pure green algae (and there are also zones that are almost pure Lemanea– I’ll come to that in a future post).   We try to sample the stones as randomly as possible so you can see the potential for getting very different numbers depending on where, on a stone, we point the BenthoTorch’s sensor.

diatoms_in_the_Ehen

Relationship between the proportion of diatoms and the total quantity of benthic algae (expressed as chlorophyll concentration) in the River Ehen (c.) and Croasdale Beck (d.).   The blue lines show quantile regression fits at p = 0.8, 0.5 and 0.2.  

With experience, you can make an educated guess about the types of algae present in a biofilm.  I’ve tried to capture this with my watercolours, using washes of raw sienna for the diatoms and a grass-green for the green algae, which roughly matches the colour of their respective growths in the photo in my earlier post.   The two groups of algae a are relatively distinct on that particular boulder.   The top row roughly matches the upper “edge” of the graph showing variation in diatoms, whilst the bottom row emulates the upper “edge” of the graph showing variation in green algae.  These are the two extreme situations; however, we also often see darker brown growths in the field, which can be recreated by mixing the raw sienna and grass-green together.  When I peer through a microscope I often see green algae smothered in diatoms: genera such as Oedogoniumare particularly prone as they have less mucilage than some of the others we find in the Ehen. Their filaments often host clusters of Fragilariacells as well as Achnanthidium minutissimum, whilst stalked Gomphonemaand chains of Tabellaria flocculosaoften grow through the tangle of green filaments.   The dark brown colour is deepened yet further by the colour of the underlying rock, so my effort on white watercolour paper is a little misleading.

colour_patches

A colour chart showing how different proportions of green algae and diatoms influence the colour of biofilms.

The final graph shows how, as the average biomass increases in the River Ehen, so the variability in biomass also increases.   The River Ehen is one of the cleanest rivers I know but I suspect that this pattern in benthic algal quantity could be reproduced in just about any river in the country. What I would not expect to see in any but the purest and most natural ecosystems is quite so much variation in the types of algae present.   Once there is a little enrichment, so I would expect the algae to become more of a monoculture of a dominant filamentous alga plus associated epiphytes.  Like much that happens in the microscopic world of rivers, it is easier to describe than it is to measure.

That, however, is only part of the story but I’ll come back to explain the patterns in the other main groups of algae in the Ehen and Croasdale Beck in my next post.

mean_biomass_by_stdev

The relationship between mean chlorophyll density and the standard deviation (based on measurements from five separate stones) for samples from the River Ehen and Croasdale Beck. 

 

The only way is up …

Ehen_Mill_Feb19

How does an alga move upstream?   I’m curious because, I am now seeing populations of Lemanea fluviatilisabout four kilometres further upstream in the River Ehen than when I first started my regular visits in 2013.   I can explain the presence of the organism partly through changes in the hydrology of the river: a small tributary, Ben Gill, that had been diverted into the lake in Victorian times was reconnected to the river in 2014 and this introduced periodic pulses of intense energy to the river that had immediate effects on the substrate composition.  Lemanea fluviatilisis a species that thrives in the fastest-flowing sections of streams so I am quite prepared to believe that even a small shift in the hydrology of this very regulated river might make the habitat more conducive.

But that does not explain how it got there in the first place.   If the alga was occurring a few kilometres further downstream we would not have any such problems: the upstream populations would provide innocula and, if the habitat conditions changed at the downstream location, then some of those propagules might be able to establish at the downstream locations.   But what about movement in the other direction?

There has been relatively little published on this topic in recent years.  I have a review by Jørgen Kristiansen from 1996 that considers the dispersal of algae but most of the references that he cites are quite a lot older than this and I have not seen much published subsequently.   He lists our options: dispersal by water, by organisms, by air currents and by human activity.   Let’s consider each in the context of Lemaneain the River Ehen.   Lemanea, like most red algae, has a complicated life cycle with the potential for dispersal in both the haploid and diploid phases, but that is probably more detail than we need right now.  We’ll just outline the options in broad terms:

Water:the linear flow of the river means that it is almost impossible for the downstream population to provide inocula for the new upstream locations.  It may be possible for populations from further upstream in the catchment to seed the new locations.  I have not seen Lemaneain any of the streams that flow into Ennerdale Water (from which the Ehen emerges) but my knowledge of the catchment is not exhaustive.   Likelihood: very low to low.

Lemanea_at_Mill_Feb19

Young shoots of Lemanea fluviatillis(bottom right) growing on a submerged boulder in the River Ehen at a location where I have not previously seen it.   These are growing alongside thick growths of diatoms (yellow-brown in colour) and patches of green filamentous algae.

Organisms:much of the older literature is concerned with the possibility of living algae or their propagules being transported in mud attached to bird’s feet or feathers and this cannot be ruled out.   There is also a recent study showing how mink may act as a vector for Didymosphenia geminata in Chile.  The Ehen also has aquatic mammals (such as otters) that could be acting as vectors for Lemanea, as well as migratory fish such as salmon and trout that could move propagules upstream.   There is also some evidence that some algae can survive passage through mammalian and invertebrate guts, and this, too, may provide a means for Lemaneato spread upstream.    Likelihood: low to medium.

Air currents / wind:quite a lot has been written about airborne dispersal of algae, with even Darwin making a contribution (see reference in Kristiansen).  The key hazard in airborne dispersal is desiccation so, in the case of Lemanea, the most likely lifecycle stages that could be dispersed in this way would be the diploid carpospores or haploid monospores. This, however, would assume that there were times during the year when the relevant life-cycle stages were exposed and, as Lemaneais a species that I usually find in the Ehen only fully-submerged, this is not very feasible.  Likelihood: low.

Human activity:there is evidence that Didymosphenia geminatacan be transported between sites attached to waders and new records often correspond with patterns of recreational use (references in Bergey & Spaulding – see below).   When we work in the Ehen we prefer to move downstream in order to minimise the risk of moving organisms on our kit, and we also clean our kit before we start.   However, a lot of people work in this part of the Ehen and it only takes one dirty wader to introduce a propagule.   Likelihood: low to medium.

We’ll almost certainly never know for sure why Lemanea fluviatilisis now thriving four kilometres further upstream than it was five years ago.  It is, however, worth bearing in mind that, given enough time, even a low probability may yield a positive result.   So none of the four hypotheses can be ruled out for sure.   Three of the possibilities are entirely natural, with one – movement by the stream itself – being constrained by the direction of flow.  Biological vectors look like a very plausible means of moving algal propagules around catchments but, for this to work, we need wildlife-friendly corridors around the river to support the animals and birds.  The upper Ehen has these, but many other rivers do not.

Actually, having a number of options all with a relatively low likelihood adds to the sense of mystery that every ecologist should have when they approach the natural world.  When cause and effect are too predictable, we tend to focus on engineering the right “solution”.  The truth, in our muddled and unpredictable world, is often that nudging several factors in the right direction will give us a more resilient outcome, even though we may have to wait longer for it to happen.

Reference

Bergey, E.A. & Spaulding, S.A. (2015). Didymosphenia: it’s more complicated.  BioScience65: 225.

Kristiansen, J. (1996).  Dispersal of freshwater algae – a review.  Hydrobiologia336: 151-157.

Leone, P.B., Cerda, J., Sala, S. & Reid, B. (2014).  Mink (Neovision vision) as a natural vector in the dispersal of the diatom Didymosphenia geminataDiatom Research29: 259-266.

Raven, J.A. (2009).  The roles of the Chantransia phase of Lemanea (Lemaneaceae, Batrachospermales, Rhodophyta) and of the ‘Mushroom’ phase of Himanthalia (Himanthaliaceae, Fucales, Phaeophyta).  Botanical Journal of Scotland46: 477-485.

Mystery, wonder and joy

My Advent reading this year was Michael McCarthy’s The Moth Snowstorm: Nature and Joy (John Murray, 2015), a meditation on the reasons why humans love the natural world, and how engagement with nature can, in turn, be beneficial for our wellbeing.   His personal fascinations with butterflies, moths and birds provide most of the examples but, as I was reading this book at the same time as I was writing the previous post on “little round green things”.  As a result, I found myself reflecting on my own fascinations with the microscopic world.

A characteristic of ecologists, I have realised, is that there is almost always a tension between their scientific training and a primeval emotional response to nature.   This is not unique to ecology: geologists and astronomers certainly share it, but it is not a universal trait of scientists.  In those disciplines where it occurs, however, interactions with the natural world occasionally transcend strictly dispassionate objective observation and spill over into the language of joy and wonder.   “Joy” being, in McCarthy’s words, “concentrated happiness” whilst “wonder” is “a sort of astonished cherishing or veneration … often involving an element of mystery”.   We are straying away from the language of science and towards a religious and spiritual dimension that many ecologists would, I suspect, be reluctant to acknowledge.

“Mystery” is the word that ties together the disparate worlds of science and religion.   It implies “missing knowledge”, but much more than just an absence of necessary facts.   Every time I peer at samples from the River Ehen through my microscope I get the full gamut of joy-wonder-mystery-related emotions even though I have seen similar views many times before.   Part of this can be attributed to “missing knowledge” but not all.  I am acutely aware of my own shortcomings as I struggle to identify the organisms that I see, as well as the limitations of the taxonomic literature on which I depend.  I am, in addition, perpetually astonished that so much diversity can live on such a small scale and, even when I have done my best to name the algae present, I still struggle to explain why the communities differ over the space of a few metres and between our monthly visits.

Ehen_Mill_181212

Regular visits for five years have not diminished my wonder at the microscopic world of the River Ehen: this submerged boulder has obvious patches of brown diatoms and green algae, but also gaps where the algae are much less abundant. We can make coarse predictions about which species are likely to be found in particular locations, but the factors that determine their distribution on much finer scales are still shrouded in mystery.

The word “mystery” in short, carries an emotional heft that simply “not knowing” does not.  It rises above ignorance, partly because mystery, by definition, implies an awareness of this lack of knowledge.   The word “mystery”, in a modern, scientific context, also links to the concept of complexity, recognising that interactions between variables is often such that it is very difficult to predict outcomes.   That “astonished cherishing” that forms part of McCarthy’s definition of wonder needs to include an element of wariness.  We approach – or, at least, we should approach – ecosystems in the same cautious manner that Moses approached the burning bush.   Whether or not you believe in a higher power, recognition of both the complexity of nature and our limited understanding of this is humbling.   Humility, in turn, generates reverence, and we have completed the journey from the hard, dispassionate language of science to the fringes of spirituality and religion.

None of this precludes trying to improve our understanding of the natural world, nor of using this knowledge to inform decision-making.   What I have written above is no more than the Precautionary Principle, albeit expressed in quasi-mystical language.   Whilst the Precautionary Principle is an instrument of policy, my interpretation is more personal.   Each of us, individually, should be finding time to revel in the wonder of nature which, in turn, will fuel the sense of mystery and, in turn, temper any inclination to rush to intemperate conclusions.

Ehen_181212_diatoms

Some of the diatoms that are abundant in the River Ehen.  Top left: colonies of Gomphonema(see “Diatoms and dinosaurs” for more about this species); top right: colonies of Fragilaria tenera, which shares the habitat with at least two other similar representatives of the same genus; bottom left: Tabellaria flocculosa.  Genetic studies suggest that this, too, is probably a complex of morphologically-similar species.   Scale bar: 20 micrometres (= 1/50thof a millimetre).

We should, however, never assume that joy, wonder and a sense of mystery are ever-presents in the make-up of ecologists.   McCarthy makes the point that a love of nature is not a universal human attribute, although a propensity to love nature may be.   Just as that propensity can be nurtured through adolescence into an adult appreciation of the natural world, so a failure to exercise that appreciation as an adult can lead to it withering again.   I am acutely conscious that ecologists of middling seniority and above often spend more time staring at spreadsheets and in teleconferences than they do engaging directly with nature.  Within government agencies the reduction of time available for field ecology since the onset of austerity in the UK means that I often now deal with people who are unable to conjure visual images from the words and numbers that populate their datasets.  And, in my own work, I have to consciously make time to observe the natural world beyond the tight constraints of my professional life.

Above all, never forget that this love of nature exists in the first person, present tense or not at all. Natural history documentaries on the television and (dare I say) blogs such as mine are the herbs and spices that enliven your diet, but the naturalist’s basic sustenance needs a commitment that goes beyond staring at a spreadsheet or sitting on a couch.

 

Transitory phenomena …

Fieldwork in the River Ehen has been an unusually pleasurable experience over the past few months, even to the extent of abandoning waders altogether and wearing just a thin pair of neoprene beach shoes and shorts as I worked.   Curiously, there were few obvious signs of the prolonged period of low flow here, but that is partly due to the pumps installed by United Utilities to keep the river running whilst the lake was drawn down (see “Life in the deep zone …”).   I did, however, find some intriguing green patches on fine sediments at the margins.

Most of the bed in this part of the river consists of much coarser sediments than these which are, I suspect, silt and sand deposited on the occasions when Ben Gill (which joins the Ehen immediately below Ennerdale Water) is flowing.   Current velocity is lower at the edges of the river, allowing fine sediments to settle out and create temporary sandbanks.   One decent spate will be all that is needed, I suspect, to wash much of this downstream.  However, there has not been a period of prolonged high flow for several months and there is, as a result, a thin green mat of algae growing on the upper surface of this sediment.

Mats of Oscillatoria on fine sediments beside the River Ehen just downstream from Ennerdale Water, August 2018.   The total length of the mats in the left hand photograph is about one metre. 

I scraped up a small sample to examine under my microscope.  I was expecting to see the broad filaments of the cyanobacterium Phormidium autumnale which I often find at a site about five kilometres downstream (see “’Signal’ or ‘noise’?”) but what I saw was much narrower filaments, some of which were slowly gliding forwards and backwards.   These belong to a species of Oscillatoria, a relative of Phormidium that is common in the plankton.  A few species, however, do live on surfaces and can, as I could see in the Ehen, form mats.  I have, in fact, described a different mat-forming species of Oscillatoria (O. limosa) from the River Wear close to my home (see “More from the River Wear”) and this, too, had been favoured by a long period of warm weather and low flow.   The filaments in the River Ehen were much narrower – just a couple of micrometres wide – and had relatively long cells (two or three times longer than wide) but, in other respects, they clearly belonged to the same genus.

Microscopic views of Oscillatoria filaments from the River Ehen, August 2018.   The upper photograph was taken at medium magnification (400x) and the lower image was taken at 1000x.  The constant motion of the filaments means that it is not possible to use stacking software to obtain a crisp image.  Scale bar: 10 micrometres (= 1/100th of a millimetre). 

The motion that I could see is thought to be due to a layer of tiny fibres (“microfibrils”) which wind around the inner layer of the cell wall in tight spirals.   Movement is caused by waves that are propagated along these fibres, meaning that the filament actually rotates as it moves (though this is almost impossible to see with a light microscope).   The filaments can move either towards or away from light, depending on the intensity, at a speed of up to 11 micrometres per second (that’s about a millimetre a day or, for any petrolheads who are reading, 0.00004 kilometres per hour).  This allows the filaments can adjust their position so that they are neither in the dark nor exposed to so much light that they are likely to do damage to their photosynthetic apparatus (see “Good vibrations under the Suffolk sun” for more about this).   The result is that filaments will tend to converge, Goldilocks-style, at the point where light conditions are “just right”.  You can see some sediment particles settling on the top of the mat in one of the images and we can expect the filaments to gradually adjust their positions, incorporating these particles, over time.

Last year, I wrote about Microcoleus, a relative of Oscillatoria, which formed mats on saltmarshes and explained how this could be the first stage of colonisation of damp habitats by plants (see “How to make an ecosystem”).   We are seeing the same processes happening here, but the life expectancy of these mats is much lower.  They may well be gone next time I visit, depending on how the Cumbrian climate behaves over the next couple of weeks.   They are transitory phenomena, here today and gone tomorrow but, like the subjects of some of my other recent posts, particularly favoured by the long period of settled weather that we have enjoyed over recent weeks.

Reference

Halfen, L.F. & Castenholz, R.W. (1971).  Gliding motility in the blue-green alga Oscillatoria princeps.  Journal of Phycology 7: 133-145.

Note: you can read more about how the heatwave has affected fresh water in the Lake District in Ellie’s MacKay’s recent post on Freshwaterblog

More about Platessa oblongella and Odontidium mesodon

As my last post used the conventions of figurative art to describe algal ecology, I thought I would stick to graphs – science’s very own school of abstract art – for this one.   I spent some time in “Small details in the big picture” discussing the ecology of Platessa oblongella (including P. saxonica) but without saying very much about the types of streams where these species were found.  So I am going to take a step away from the Ennerdale catchment in this post and, instead, collate environmental data a large number of sites to get a broader understanding of their habitat preferences.  As these species are often associated with Odontidium mesodon (see “A tale of two diatoms …”), I will summarise the preferences of this species at the same time (but see Annex 1 for a graph of this species’ preferences for still versus standing water).

The first set of graphs show the response of these species to pH and alkalinity and establish both as species typical of circumneutral soft water.  Platessa oblongella can be abundant in more acid conditions (i.e. to the left of the green vertical lines) but most of the records where it is abundant have pH values between 6.5 and 7.5.   Note that P. oblongella can also be found in humic waters, where lower pH thresholds apply (see Annex 2).

Distribution of Odontidium mesodon and Platessa oblongella (including P. saxonica) to pH and alkalinity in UK streams.   Vertical lines for pH indicate threshold values that should support high (blue), good (green), moderate (orange) and poor (red) ecological status classes.  See Annex 2 for more explanation.

The second set of graphs shows how these species respond to inorganic nutrients.   Both are most abundant when inorganic nutrients are present in low concentrations, though the trend is stronger for phosphorus than it is for nitrate-nitrogen.   The graphs for Platessa oblongella, however, both have a few outliers.   I have seen P. oblongella in a few situations where I did not expect it – I remember finding it in the Halebourne, a stream draining heathland around Aldershot and Bagshot in Surrey, where the water was well buffered (mean alkalinity: 61.3 mg L-1 CaCO3) and nutrient concentration were high (mean total oxidised nitrogen: 4.01 mg L-1; dissolved phosphorus: 0.25 mg L-1) and Carlos Wetzel and colleagues note some other anomalous records from the literature in their paper (cited in my earlier post), including a few from high conductivity and even brackish environments.   So we should treat these plots as indicative of the ecological preferences rather than definitive.

Distribution of Odontidium mesodon and Platessa oblongella (including P. saxonica) to nitrate-N and dissolved phosphorus in UK streams.   Vertical lines indicate threshold values that should support high (blue), good (green), moderate (orange) and poor (red) ecological status classes.  See Annex 2 for more explanation.

The final pair of plots show how the relative abundance of these two species changes over the course of the year.  These plots show the months when each taxon is abundant, by the standards of that taxon.  Because Platessa oblongella tends to be very numerous in samples, the threshold for this taxon (the 90th percentile of all records) is higher than that for O. mesodon.   This reveals a very clear pattern of O. mesodon thriving in Spring whilst P. oblongella is abundant throughout the year, but with a slight preference for summer and autumn.  We need to reconcile these patterns with the observations in A tale of two diatoms that show that P. oblongella is associated with thinner biofilms than O. mesodon and try to work out whether season is driving the patterns or whether the seasonal patterns are the manifestation of other forces.   My suspicion is that P. oblongella is a classic pioneer species but also has a low-growing prostrate habit which means that it should be resistant to heavy grazing, which may confer an advantage in the summer and autumn when grazers are most active.  However, I may be getting ahead of myself, as we are in the process of analysing data on grazer-algae interactions in the River Ehen and Croasdale Beck that may throw more light on this.  There are clearly more layers to this story yet to be revealed …

Distribution of Odontidium mesodon (i.) and Platessa oblongella (j., including P. saxonica). The solid lines represent relative sampling effort (i.e. the proportion of samples in the dataset collected in a particular month) and the vertical bars represent samples where the relative abundance of taxon in question exceeded the 90th percentile for that taxon (20% for P. oblongella/P. saxonica and 5% for O. mesodon).

Reference

The dataset used for these analyses is that used in:

Kelly, M.G., Juggins, S., Guthrie, R., Pritchard, S., Jamieson, B.J., Rippey, B, Hirst, H & Yallop, M.L. (2008). Assessment of ecological status in UK rivers using diatoms. Freshwater Biology 53: 403-422.

Annex 1: Odontidium mesodon’s preference for still or standing water

As I included a graph showing the preference of Platessa oblongella / P. saxonica for still or standing water in “A tale of two diatoms …”, I have included a similar graph for Odontidium mesodon here.   I have not included any data from the streams that flow into Ennerdale Water’s north-west corner in this graph as this would give a distorted picture.  To date, I have only seen a single valve of O. mesodon during analyses of 14 samples from these streams but I have not yet sampled these in spring which, as the graph above shows, is the time when O. mesodon is most abundant.   Like Platessa oblongella, O. mesodon is predominately a species of running, rather than standing waters.

Differences in percentage of Odontidium mesodon in epilithic samples from Ennerdale Water and associated streams.  Data collected between 2012 and 2018.

Annex 2: notes on species-environment plots

These are based on interrogation of a database of 6500 river samples collected as part of DARES project.  Vertical lines show UK environmental standards for conditions necessary to support good ecological status: blue = high status; green = good status, orange = moderate status and red = poor status.  Note that there are no environmental standards for alkalinity and the vertical lines show a rough split of the gradient into low alkalinity (“soft water”: < 10 mg L-1 CaCO3), low/moderate alkalinity (³ 10, < 75 mg L-1 CaCO3), moderate/high alkalinity (³ 75, < 150 mg L-1 CaCO3) and high alkalinity (“hard water”: ³ 150 mg L-1 CaCO3).

pH thresholds are for clear water (see UK TAG’s Acidification Environmental Standards.  The corresponding thresholds for humic waters are lower (high/good: 5.1; good/moderate: 4.55; moderate/poor: 4.22; poor/bad: 4.03).

Phosphorus thresholds are based on UK TAG’s A Revised Approach to Setting WFD Phosphorus Standards.   Current UK phosphorus standards are site specific, using altitude and alkalinity as predictors.  This means that a range of thresholds applies, depending upon the geological preferences of the species in question.  The plots here show the position of boundaries based on the average alkalinity and altitude measurements in the DARES database.

Note, too, that phosphorus analyses use the Environment Agency’s standard measure, which is unfiltered molybdate reactive phosphorus.  This approximates to “soluble reactive phosphorus” or “phosphorus as orthophosphate” in most circumstances but the reagents will react with phosphorus attached to particles that would have been removed by membrane filtration.

Nitrate-nitrogen: There are, currently, no UK standards for nitrates in rivers.  Values plotted here are derived in the same way as those for phosphorus (see “This is not a nitrate standard”)

 

What a difference a storm makes …

I was back at Croasdale Beck last week and noticed a rather dramatic change to the meander just upstream from our regular sampling spot.   If you look at the photograph that heads the post “A tale of two diatoms …”, you’ll see the stream flowing around this meander.  Now, however, it has cut a new, shorter channel that bypasses the meander altogether.   We visited the stream just a few days after Storm Ophelia had passed through although, judging by the grass growing on the gravel of the abandoned meander, it was not necessarily this particular event that reshaped the stream.

Croasdale Beck is an unruly tributary of the River Ehen, rising on the fells above Ennerdale Water and tumbling down across rough grazing land and some semi-improved pasture (as in the picture above) before joining the Ehen in Ennerdale Bridge.   This is not the first time that we have seen conspicuous changes in the channel after a storm.  The magnitude of the flood is illustrated by the hydrograph below, which went off-scale for a period, as the discharge exceeded 3000 mega litres per day (300 MLD is the approximate limit for safe wading, in my experience).   I noticed that there was much less green algae present than we usually record at this time of year, although the diatom film was still quite thick.   Some of the stones that I picked up to sample had the slimy biofilm on the underside, suggesting that they had been recently rolled by the flooded river.   Croasdale Beck has no lake to buffer the rise and fall of the floodwaters and a huge amount of energy is carried down in a short period of time as the water surges downstream.

By the time we had arrived, the floodwaters had subsided and the sheep were contentedly grazing the surrounding land.  The stream itself was almost back to base flow (in contrast to the River Ehen which was still only just wadable).  Only the meander looked different …

The hydrograph for the River Ehen, as the aftereffects of Storm Ophelia make their way downstream.