| Literature DB >> 30402104 |
Maria L Schmitz Fontes1,2, Heloísa Fernandes3, Manoela Brandão1, Mariana Coutinho Hennemann1, Raquel Aparecida Loss4, Valdelúcia Maria Alves de Souza Grinevicius5, Denise Tonetta1, Karina Cesca4, Mônica Hessel Silveira1, Mara Bedin1, Derce Recouvreux4, Regina Vasconcellos Antônio6.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate whether the bacterioplankton activity in the meso-eutrophic Conceição Lagoon would increase significantly under allochthonous inputs ofEntities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30402104 PMCID: PMC6192085 DOI: 10.1155/2018/3209605
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Microbiol
Figure 1Location of the Conceição Lagoon (grey), Santa Catarina Island, Florianópolis, Brazil. Sampling site is represented by a star symbol (adapted from Fontes and Abreu [19]).
Figure 2Bacterial abundance (mean ± standard error) in the three treatments during the 72 h incubation period. Treatments: dark-control = control, 14 h light/10 h dark cycle = light, and dark C + N + P enrichment = nutrients.
Figure 3Epifluorescence microphotographs (1000x) of bacteria stained with DAPI at 12 h (a) and 72 h (b) of the experiments in the C + N + P treatment.
Figure 4Filamentous bacterial abundance (mean ± standard error) (a) in the three treatments during the 72 h incubation period. Treatments: dark-control = control, 14 h light/10 h dark cycle = light, and dark C + N + P enrichment = nutrients. Examples of filamentous bacteria (b) and cyanobacteria (c) present in the dark-control treatment at the 48 h. (b) DAPI-stained cells, heterotrophic filamentous bacteria (indicated by white arrows). (c) Autofluorescence of cyanobacteria in red (indicated by grey arrows).
Figure 5Cellular biovolume in µm3 (mean ± standard error) in the three treatments during the 72 h incubation period. Treatments: dark-control = control, 14 h light/10 h dark cycle = light, and dark C + N + P enrichment = nutrients.
Results of one-way ANOVA performed to test the effect of different treatments (dark-control, light, and dark C + N + P) on bacterial abundance, biovolume, and biomass.
| Parameter | DF | MS |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Density (cells·L−1) | Treatment | 2 | 0.4710 | 5.3 | 0.0154 |
| Error | 18 | 0.0890 | |||
| Biovolume ( | Treatment | 2 | 0.0031 | 0.3 | 0.7467 |
| Error | 18 | 0.0105 | |||
| Biomass (mg·L−1) | Treatment | 2 | 0.4734 | 4.6 | 0.0235 |
| Error | 18 | 0.1017 | |||
DF = degrees of freedom.
Figure 6Bacterial biomass (mg·C·L−1 + standard error) in the three treatments during the 72 h incubation period. Treatments: dark-control = control, 14 h light/10 h dark cycle = light, and dark C + N + P enrichment = nutrients.
Bacterial growth rates (hour−1 and day−1) and coefficient of determination (R2), production rates (hour−1 and day−1) and coefficient of determination (R2), and doubling time for light, dark-control, and dark C + N + P treatments. Bacterial growth and production rates were determined from the slope of the linear regression of ln-transformed bacterial abundance or biomass versus time (from time zero to the end of the exponential growth phase).
| Treatment | Growth rate (h−1) | Growth rate (d−1) |
| Production rate (h−1) | Production rate (d−1) |
| Doubling time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Light | 0.026b | 0.626 | 0.86 | 0.018b | 0.437 | 0.98 | 1.106 |
| Dark-control | 0.033b | 0.789 | 0.74 | 0.021a,b | 0.500 | 0.62 | 0.878 |
| Dark C + N + P | 0.056a | 1.346 | 0.74 | 0.047a | 1.128 | 0.67 | 0.515 |
Superscript letters indicate the result of ANCOVA and Tukey test for difference among slopes-q 0.05.