| Literature DB >> 31993033 |
Carmen Espinosa1,2, Meritxell Abril1, Helena Guasch3,4, Núria Pou3, Lorenzo Proia1, Marta Ricart1, Marc Ordeix2, Laia Llenas1.
Abstract
Hydro-morphological alterations in water bodies caused by climate change and human activities affects the ecosystem functioning and generate important water quality problems. Some of these alterations can generate an increase in cyanobacterial blooms, which are associated with the appearance of bad taste and odorous compounds such as geosmin. The factors that trigger their production are still unclear, and this inability to predict geosmin episodes provokes economic problems for water supply companies. This study aims to evaluate the effects of water flow and light availability on biofilm development and intracellular geosmin formation. A mesocosm experiment was performed between February-April, 2019. The mesocosms were a set of 10 outdoor 3 m long flumes, with a continuous water supply from the Ter river (Catalonia, NE Spain). Two light intensities were established: natural light and light reduced to 80%, combined with five gradual water flows from 0.09 to 1.10 L/s. Water samples were taken to analyze nutrients, and biofilm samples, to analyze geosmin concentration, chlorophyll a and the community. Geosmin in biofilm was detected in those treatments in which Oscillatoria sp. appeared. The concentration of intracellular geosmin was higher at lower water flows (0.09 and 0.18 L/s), and the highest (2.12 mg/g) was found in the flume with the lowest water flow (0.09 L/s) and irradiation (20%). This flume was the one that presented a greater concentration of Oscillatoria sp. (21% of the community). It stands out that, when geosmin in biofilm was found, the dissolved inorganic nitrogen and soluble reactive phosphorus ratio decreased, from an average of 417:1 to 14:1. This was mainly due to an increase in inorganic phosphorus concentration generated by a change in the nutrient uptake capacity of the community's biofilm. The results obtained in this study indicated the potential implications for stream ecosystem management to control geosmin appearance. Likewise, they could be used as an early warning system, establishing that in times of drought, which lead to a general decrease in river water flow, the situation could be optimal for the appearance and development of geosmin producing cyanobacteria in low-flow areas near the river banks.Entities:
Keywords: biofilm; geosmin; light availability; mesocosms; water flow
Year: 2020 PMID: 31993033 PMCID: PMC6971175 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.03002
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
FIGURE 1Experimental rivers representation. (A) Three-dimensional representation, (B) scheme of the experimental design carried out where F1 = 0.09 L/s; F2 = 0.18 L/s; F3 = 0.36 L/s; F4 = 0.72 L/s; and F5 = 1.10 L/s. The dark represented flumes are those covered during the experiment for the Low Light treatment.
Mean value and standard deviation of the physicochemical variables evaluated in the flumes throughout the experiment (n = 84), under low light (LL) and high light (HL) conditions for the different flow treatments (F): pH, water temperature (°C), electrical conductivity (EC) (μS/cm), dissolved oxygen (DO) (mg/L), oxygen saturation (%), water flow (L/s), light irradiance (μmol photons/m2⋅s), ammonium (μg N-NH /L), nitrite (μg N-NO /L), nitrate (mg N-N03+/L) and phosphate concentration (μg P-PO /L).
| pH | 8.3 ± 0.3 | 8.4 ± 0.2 | 8.4 ± 0.2 | 8.4 ± 0.2 | 8.4 ± 0.2 | 8.4 ± 0.2 | 8.3 ± 0.3 | 8.4 ± 0.2 | 8.4 ± 0.2 | 8.4 ± 0.2 |
| Water temperature (°C) | 10 ± 3 | 10 ± 3 | 9 ± 3 | 10 ± 3 | 10 ± 3 | 10 ± 3 | 10 ± 3 | 10 ± 3 | 10 ± 3 | 10 ± 3 |
| EC (μS/cm) | 332 ± 58 | 339 ± 50 | 337 ± 55 | 335 ± 54 | 333 ± 56 | 333 ± 50 | 336 ± 52 | 336 ± 53 | 334 ± 59 | 340 ± 55 |
| DO (mg/L) | 10.8 ± 1.5 | 11.4 ± 0.9 | 11.3 ± 0.8 | 11.3 ± 0.9 | 11.3 ± 0.9 | 11.1 ± 1.1 | 11.3 ± 0.8 | 11.4 ± 0.8 | 11.3 ± 0.7 | 11.4 ± 0.7 |
| Saturation (%) | 95 ± 13 | 100 ± 6 | 99 ± 6 | 99 ± 8 | 99 ± 6 | 98 ± 9 | 100 ± 6 | 100 ± 6 | 99 ± 5 | 99 ± 7 |
| Water flow (L/s) | 0.09 ± 0.00 | 0.18 ± 0.00 | 0.31 ± 0.02 | 0.61 ± 0.04 | 1.20 ± 0.09 | 0.09 ± 0.01 | 0.17 ± 0.01 | 0.33 ± 0.03 | 0.60 ± 0.07 | 1.14 ± 0.02 |
| Light irradiance (μmol photons/m2⋅s) | 110 ± 15 | 118 ± 13 | 114 ± 16 | 109 ± 21 | 112 ± 15 | 509 ± 32 | 516 ± 18 | 519 ± 22 | 512 ± 17 | 511 ± 28 |
| N-NH | 74 ± 62 | 74 ± 62 | 75 ± 60 | 78 ± 70 | 76 ± 59 | 78 ± 70 | 73 ± 59 | 78 ± 70 | 74 ± 62 | 75 ± 60 |
| N-NO | 8 ± 5 | 6 ± 4 | 9 ± 7 | 7 ± 4 | 7 ± 6 | 8 ± 7 | 6 ± 4 | 6 ± 4 | 6 ± 3 | 7 ± 5 |
| N-NO | 0.9 ± 0.3 | 0.9 ± 0.3 | 0.9 ± 0.3 | 0.8 ± 0.3 | 0.9 ± 0.3 | 0.9 ± 0.2 | 0.9 ± 0.2 | 0.8 ± 0.2 | 0.9 ± 0.2 | 0.9 ± 0.3 |
| P-PO | 19 ± 6 | 10 ± 2 | 14 ± 4 | 13 ± 5 | 10 ± 3 | 12 ± 4 | 12 ± 2 | 13 ± 6 | 12 ± 5 | 14 ± 2 |
FIGURE 2Results obtained in the different treatments for the different structural biofilm descriptors measured at the end of the experiment (t = 41 days): (A) ash free dry mass (AFDM) (g/m2), (B) Chl a (μg/cm2), (C) Autotrophic Index (AI) (AFDM/Chl a), and (D) Margalef Index (MI) (Abs. 430 nm/Abs. 665 nm).
FIGURE 3Biovolume (in%) of algae, diatoms and cyanobacteria present in the biofilm of each treatment, from the lowest flow (F1) to the highest (F5), under conditions of natural light (HL) and reduced (LL).
FIGURE 4Principal component analysis (PCA) showing flumes distribution based on biofilm species. Axes 1 and 2 combined explain 66.98% of the variance. Cyanobacteria: Osc = Oscillatoria sp. and Gom = Gomontiella sp.; diatoms: Mel = Melosira sp.; Cmb = Cymbella sp.; Nit = Nitzschia sp.; Gomp = Gomphonema sp.; Coc = Cocconeis sp.; Nav = Navicula sp.; Ach = Achnantes sp.; Gyr = Gyrosigma sp.; Sur = Surirella sp.; Pin = Pinnularia sp.; Han = Hantzschia sp.; Cym = Cymatopleura sp.; Fra = Fragilaria sp.; and green algae: Sce = Scenedesmus sp.
FIGURE 5Uptake/release capacity values for different treatments: (A) ammonium (mg N-NH /m2), (B) nitrate (mg N-NO /m2), and (C) phosphate (mg P-PO /m2).
FIGURE 6Mean values and standard deviation for intracellular geosmin concentration (ng/g) in biofilm of each treatment, from the lowest flow (F1) to the highest (F5), under conditions of natural light (HL) and reduced (LL), at the end of the experiment (t = 41 days).