Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
The role of predation and pesticides in shaping phytoplankton dynamics in a short microcosms experiment
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
The role of predation and pesticides in shaping phytoplankton dynamics in a short microcosms experiment
Do you wish to request the book?
The role of predation and pesticides in shaping phytoplankton dynamics in a short microcosms experiment
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
The role of predation and pesticides in shaping phytoplankton dynamics in a short microcosms experiment
2024
Overview
Aquatic organisms are subject to various forcing factors that affect their structure, some of which are natural, while others result from human activities, both having variable effects. This study aimed to determine the importance of a natural stressor (zooplankton) and an herbicide (atrazine) on phytoplankton density and morphological composition in a microcosm experiment. A natural phytoplankton assemblage was exposed to two zooplankton predators: a copepod (Argyrodiaptomus falcifer) and a cladoceran (Ceriodaphnia dubia), and to atrazine (27 µg L−1), in three combinations of factors (zooplankton treatments (Z), atrazine treatment (A), the combination of both (ZA)) plus a Control. The experiment lasted 48 h. Samples were taken at the beginning and the end of the experiment, and relevant limnological variables, including inorganic nutrient concentrations, were considered. Results indicated differences in phytoplankton densities when treatments were compared with Control. In this respect, Chlorophyceae, Euglenophyceae, and Bacillariophyceae exhibited more changes than other phytoplankton classes. Chlorophyceae densities tended to be higher in the Control than in the treatments; the combination of zooplankton and atrazine favored Euglenophyceae, while atrazine favored Bacillariophyceae densities. Regarding morphological groups, unicellular and small colonies (<35 µm), showed differences between the Control and particularly with Z treatment, colonial-cenobia forms were negatively affected by atrazine and silica forms were favored by both stressors combined. It is concluded that interactions among natural and anthropogenic stressors could be complex, influencing factors such as phytoplankton taxonomical affinities, morphological groups, and the nature of the stressor applied.
