2012
DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.45.1.1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

<strong>Checklist of diatoms (Bacillariophyta) from Lake Ohrid and Lake Prespa (Macedonia), and their watersheds</strong>

Abstract: A century of diatom research on Lakes Ohrid and Prespa (Macedonia) has yielded 900 different taxonomic entities including species, varieties and unidentified species. This checklist is based on a comprehensive compilation of diatom names sourced from all available published data. The intention is to provide a basis for future diatom research on these diverse ancient lakes and their watersheds. The checklist is organized around the classification in Round et al. (1990), with a few minor modifications.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
28
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

3
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
2
28
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The latter process might explain the prevalence of benthic species at 243 m water depth. Almost all of the identified benthic taxa have been reported from contemporary communities in the littoral zones (0-60 m water depth) of Lake Ohrid (Levkov et al, 2007;Levkov and Williams, 2012;Jovanovska et al, 2013;Pavlov et al, 2013). The benthic species slightly increased in abundance with the onset of the H4, indicating the possibility of intensified wind transport and mixing of the water column during the H4 stadial (40.4-38.4 ka).…”
Section: Diatom Responses To Disturbances In Lake Ohridmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The latter process might explain the prevalence of benthic species at 243 m water depth. Almost all of the identified benthic taxa have been reported from contemporary communities in the littoral zones (0-60 m water depth) of Lake Ohrid (Levkov et al, 2007;Levkov and Williams, 2012;Jovanovska et al, 2013;Pavlov et al, 2013). The benthic species slightly increased in abundance with the onset of the H4, indicating the possibility of intensified wind transport and mixing of the water column during the H4 stadial (40.4-38.4 ka).…”
Section: Diatom Responses To Disturbances In Lake Ohridmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Concerning the endemic diatom taxa, earlier studies (Levkov et al, 2007a;Levkov & Williams, 2012) noticed several spatial levels of their distribution in the whole watershed area, including Lake Prespa where taxa are (i) restricted to only one of the lakes, (ii) common to both lakes and iii) restricted to the spring area and/or Lake Ohrid. Our results show that some endemic taxa, like Amphora ohridana Levkov, Caloneis acuta Levkov, Sellaphora krsticii Levkov, Nakov & Metzeltin appeared to have limited distribution in the littoral zone, while others, such as Caloneis biconstrictoides Levkov, Cymbopleura juriljii Levkov & Metzeltin and Sellaphora macedonica Levkov & Metzeltin were restricted to the sublittoral zone of the lake.…”
Section: Diatom Diversity and Community Patternsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the next step, widespread taxa were removed from the analyses and Bray-Curtis similarity was calculated with endemic taxa percentages only, to assess potential subdivisions among the endemic diversity over the sampled area. Criteria and species classification into widespread and endemic followed Levkov & Williams (2012).…”
Section: Statistical Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Europe: Germany (Hasle 1977, Kiss et al 1990, Ludwig and Schnittler 1996, Täuscher 2014, Hungary (Kiss et al 1990, Kiss et al 2012, France (Kiss et al 1990), Britain (Belcher and Swale 1979, Hartley et al 1986, Hartley et al 1996, Whitton et al 2003, Russia (Kiss et al 1990, Genkal 1992 (Europe) (Aysel 2005), Czech Republic (Kiss et al 1990, Kaštovský et al 2010, Netherlands (Dijkman and Kromkamp 2007), Albania (Kupe et al 2010), Macedonia (Levkov and Williams 2012), Spain (Pérez et al 2009), Romania (Caraus 2002, Caraus 2012). (Fig.…”
Section: Distributionmentioning
confidence: 99%