Comparison of periphyton communities on natural and artificial macrophytes with contrasting morphological structures

Abstract

It remains an open question whether or not artificial macrophytes are good alternatives to natural macrophytes in studies of periphyton abundance and composition in lakes. Here, a mesocosm experiment was conducted in winter (when plant growth is low) to compare simultaneously the periphyton community on three submerged macrophytes (Potamogeton lucens, Vallisneria sp. and Cabomba caroliniana) with contrasting leaf structural complexities (leaf fractal dimension = 1.12, 1.17 and 1.37, respectively) and on three types of artificial macrophytes with similar morphologies as the natural plants. We also compared intertreatment differences in phytoplankton sampled from mesocosms. Both for natural and artificial macrophytes, the periphyton chlorophyll a (Chl‐a) was positively associated with leaf fractal dimension. Although the morphological structure of natural and artificial plants and the physicochemical characteristics of the water were similar, the periphyton community differed between natural and artificial macrophytes, with the difference being dependent on the leaf structural complexity of the macrophytes. For leaves with a simple structural complexity, the abundance and composition of periphyton on natural and artificial plants were not statistically different. In addition, periphyton Chl‐a, density and biovolume were higher on the adaxial side than on the abaxial side of natural P. lucens leaves, but no differences were found between sides of the artificial leaves. For leaves with a medium structural complexity, the abundance of periphyton was lower on the natural than artificial plants, and the proportion of diatoms to the total community differed. For leaves with a high structural complexity, periphyton Chl‐a of the artificial plants was notably higher than on the natural plants, while no significant differences were found for periphyton density, biovolume, and the proportion of diatoms and green algae. Permutational multivariate analysis of periphyton genus composition confirmed that periphyton composition on the artificial plants (medium and high leaf structural complexities) was different overall from that on the natural plants. Phytoplankton Chl‐a, density, biovolume, and diversity did not show any pronounced differences among treatments. Our results suggest that artificial macrophytes cannot fully substitute for natural plants even when they are morphologically similar. Artificial macrophytes should therefore be used with caution when investigating the periphyton community on macrophytes.

The effect of epiphytic macroinvertebrates on microbial communities in different types of macrophyte-dominated shallow lakes

“…Moreover, during the summer, S. aloides often floats on the water and has a potential shading effect on algae. In addition, previous studies have indicated that phytoplankton species are more sensitive than periphyton to allelochemicals (Gross, 2003), and that cyanobacteria are more sensitive than green algae and diatoms to allelopathic substrates (Hao et al, 2017). However, in our study, the cyanobacteria biomass and the composition of periphyton did not show clear differences between Potamogeton-and Ceratophyllum-dominated lakes.…”

“…The periphyton assemblage associated with macrophytes is a complex structure composed of algae, bacteria, fungi, protozoa, small metazoans, and macroinvertebrates. In general, both the structure and abundance of periphyton communities are affected by available resources (nutrients and light) and by predation by higher trophic levels (grazing) (Kairesalo et al, 2000;Zhang et al, 2013;Hao et al, 2017). However, little is known about the periphytic microbial communities inhabiting lakes dominated by different types of macrophytes.…”

Warming Effects on Periphyton Community and Abundance in Different Seasons Are Influenced by Nutrient State and Plant Type: A Shallow Lake Mesocosm Study

“…Plant-type had a significant effect on periphyton abundances in autumn and winter, periphyton Chla and densities being significantly higher on natural/artificial E. canadensis than on natural/artificial P. crispus. It is to be expected that complex structure not only offers a larger surface area but also maximizes access to light for the growth of periphyton (Taniguchi et al, 2003;Tunca et al, 2014;Pettit et al, 2016;Hao et al, 2017). Besides, Tramonte et al (2019) revealed that periphyton consumption by herbivores was greater in simplified than in complex habitats, which may explain the observed lower periphyton density on natural/artificial P. crispus whose habitat structural complexity was simple compared with natural/artificial E. canadensis.…”

“…Habitat structure complexity, here expressed as the architecture and morphological characteristics of the host that provides attachment sites for periphyton, can influence the establishment and development of periphyton (Morin, 1986;Gosselain et al, 2005;Casartelli and Ferragut, 2018). Numerous studies have revealed that high habitat structure complexity leads to high periphyton biomass (Ferreiro et al, 2013;Pettit et al, 2016;Hao et al, 2017;Casartelli and Ferragut, 2018) and significantly affects the taxonomic composition of the periphyton attached to its surface (Blindow, 1987;Tunca et al, 2014;Hao et al, 2017). Hao et al (2017) studied periphyton communities on natural and artificial macrophytes (plastic imitations of similar size and morphology as the real plants) with contrasting morphological structures during winter and found that although the periphyton composition differed significantly between the natural and artificial macrophytes, periphyton chlorophyll a (Chla) was positively related to their structural complexity.…”

“…Numerous studies have revealed that high habitat structure complexity leads to high periphyton biomass (Ferreiro et al, 2013;Pettit et al, 2016;Hao et al, 2017;Casartelli and Ferragut, 2018) and significantly affects the taxonomic composition of the periphyton attached to its surface (Blindow, 1987;Tunca et al, 2014;Hao et al, 2017). Hao et al (2017) studied periphyton communities on natural and artificial macrophytes (plastic imitations of similar size and morphology as the real plants) with contrasting morphological structures during winter and found that although the periphyton composition differed significantly between the natural and artificial macrophytes, periphyton chlorophyll a (Chla) was positively related to their structural complexity. However, it is an open question whether periphyton responds in a similar way to the structural complexity of natural/artificial macrophytes in other seasons.…”