Checklist of Commonly Occurring Phytoplankton and Zooplankton Genera of Urban and Rural Ponds of...
-
Upload
koushik-roy -
Category
Environment
-
view
269 -
download
0
Transcript of Checklist of Commonly Occurring Phytoplankton and Zooplankton Genera of Urban and Rural Ponds of...
1 International Journal of Research in Biological Sciences 2016; 6(1): 1-6
ISSN 2249–9687
Original Article
Checklist of Commonly Occurring Phytoplankton and Zooplankton Genera of
Urban and Rural Ponds of Raipur, Chhattisgarh
Koushik Roy1, Sandipan Gupta2 and Saurav Kumar Nandy2
1Department of Fisheries, IGKV Raipur, Chhattisgarh- 492012, India 2ICAR-Central Inland Fisheries Research Institute, Barrackpore, Kolkata-700120, India
Received 14 December 2016; accepted 20 January 2016
Abstract
Phytoplankton and zooplankton are integral part of any aquatic ecosystem. They not only serve as food for aquatic animals,
but also play important role in maintaining the biological balance and quality of the aquatic ecosystem. Raipur is a district
of Chhattisgarh which is having about 58,514 ponds covering an area of about 0.744 lakh ha and these ponds have high
plankton diversity. The present work has been conducted to enlist phytoplankton and zooplankton genera occurring in a
few perennial unmanaged urban and rural ponds of Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Among phytoplankton, a total of 67 algal genera
belonging to the classes Chlorophyceae (29 genera), Bacillariophyceae (18 genera), Cyanophyceae (15 genera),
Chrysophyceae (2 genera), Euglenophyceae (2 genera) and Dinophyceae (1 genus) have been recorded from the studied
ponds while among zooplankton, a total of 24 genera belonging to the classes Rotifera (11 genera), Copepoda (7 genera),
Protozoa (3 genera), Cladocera (2 genera) and Ostracoda (1 genus) have been recorded during the study period. Results of
the present study depict that the studied ponds have high plankton diversity.
© 2016 Universal Research Publications. All rights reserved
Keywords:- Biodiversity; Phytoplankton; Zooplankton; Freshwater ponds; Raipur; Chhattisgarh.
INTRODUCTION Pond is relatively a shallow body of standing water; an
aquatic ecosystem which is generally rich in biodiversity.
On the other hand, plankton are the integral part of any
aquatic ecosystem. The term plankton refers to organisms
which have drifting habitat and includes all forms of both
macro and microscopic life which floats free in water or if
motile, are unable to swim against currents. The plankton
community is comprised of phytoplankton and zooplankton
[1].
Phytoplankton are free floating unicellular, filamentous and
colonial autotrophic forms of aquatic habitat whose
movement is more or less dependent on water currents [2].
They are the major primary producer in many aquatic
systems forming the first trophic level in the food chain and
are the important food source for other organisms of that
system [3]. They not only serve as food for aquatic animals,
but also play an important role in maintaining the
biological balance and quality of the aquatic ecosystem
[4,5]. The qualitative and quantitative studies of
phytoplankton have been successfully utilized to assess the
quality of water [6-9]. Several phytoplankton species have
served as bio-indicators [10-13] and it is a well suited tool
for understanding water pollution studies [14]. On the other
hand, zooplankton are integral components of aquatic food
webs and contribute significantly to aquatic productivity in
freshwater ecosystems; they are having the ability to swim
or move freely. They constitutes important food item for
many fishes; the larva of carps feed mostly on zooplankton
[15]. Zooplankton also play an important role in the food
chain as they are second in trophic level as primary
consumers and also contribute to the next trophic level
[16]. Phytoplankton are being fed by zooplankton and
facilitates the conversion of plant material into animal
tissue and in turn constitute the basic food for higher
animals including fishes, particularly their larvae.
Zooplankton are the major mode of energy transfer
between phytoplankton and fish [17]. Zooplanktons have
been considered to be the ecological indicators of water
bodies [18] and their biomass abundance and species
diversity have been used to determine the conditions of
aquatic environment [19].
Chhattisgarh (17o46'- 24o5' N latitude and 80o15'- 84o20' E
longitude) is a state of central India. Raipur is a district of
Chhattisgarh; the climate of the region is hot and sub
humid. This particular region receives 1200-1400 mm of
annual rainfall normally, out of which about 85% is
received during the rainy season (late June to October) and
15% during the winter season (November to January). The
maximum temperature ranges from 17-45.2°C and
Available online at http://www.urpjournals.com
International Journal of Research in Biological Sciences
Universal Research Publications. All rights reserved
2 International Journal of Research in Biological Sciences 2016; 6(1): 1-6
minimum from 8-22°C during the year. May is the hottest
and December is the coolest month of the year. Raipur
constitutes around 58,514 ponds covering an area of about
0.744 lakh ha and these are having high plankton diversity
[20].
The primary objective of the present study was to record
and disseminate the information on plankton biodiversity
existing within some freshwater ponds of Raipur,
Chhattisgarh in order to serve as an updated and
contemporary biodiversity database for future references.
MATERIALS AND METHODS The survey was conducted intermittently during 2012-2014
in total seven perennial unmanaged urban and rural ponds
of Raipur, Chhattisgarh to enlist phytoplankton and
zooplankton genera commonly available there. Details
of the sampling sites have been presented in Table 1 and
Table 1: Details of the study sites
Pond Location coordinates Size
Urban ponds
Telibandha talab (P1) 21°14’21.55”N, 81°39’33.57”E 97810.5 m2
Raja talab (P2) 21°14'52.2''N, 81°39'17.3''E 80000 m2
Budha talab (P3) 21°13'57.5''N, 81°38'02''E 302500 m2
Katora talab (P4) 21°14'05.27"N, 81°39'19.06" E 8335 m2
Rural ponds
Jora talab (P5) 21°14’27.8”N, 81°42’44.8”E 22570 m2
Labhandi talab (P6) 21°14'58.13" N, 81°43'15.56" E 10100 m2
Dharampura.talab.(P7) 21°12'58.44" N, 81°42'38.24" E 12007 m2
Figure 1. Plankton samples were collected during early
morning. 10 liters of water sampled from different areas
and depths of the pond was filtered through 25 μ mesh
plankton net. The collected sample was then concentrated
in 30 ml receptacle glass tube, attached at the end of the
plankton net. Plankton samples were then preserved in
phosphate buffered formalin @ 3% concentration along
with one drop of glycerin. After that the preserved samples
were kept in refrigerated condition for further analysis.
Plankton was identified up to generic level following
earlier documented plankton identification key and
monographs [1, 21-25]. Phytoplankton was classified under
different classes: Cyanophyceae, Chlorophyceae,
Bacillariophyceae, Dinophyceae, Euglenophyceae and
Chrysophyceae [25] while zooplankton was classified
under the following classes: Protozoa, Copepoda, Rotifera,
Cladocera and Ostracoda [21]. All plankton samples were
identified under LABOMED TCM-400 compound light
emission binocular microscope. Microphotographs were
obtained intermittently from collaborative institutions viz.
Central Inland Fisheries Research Institute, Barrackpore;
Central Inland Fisheries Education, Salt Lake and
Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata through submitted
plankton samples. Microphotography was done with
CATCAM microscope photographic attachment and with
Plankton Identifier software v1.1.
Fig.1.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Phytoplankton A total of 67 algal genera belonging to the classes
Chlorophyceae (29 genera), Bacillariophyceae (18 genera),
Cyanophyceae (15 genera), Chrysophyceae (2 genera),
Euglenophyceae (2 genera) and Dinophyceae (1 genus)
have been recorded from the studied ponds of Raipur,
Chhattisgarh during the study period. On the basis of
number of genera encountered in this study, Chlorophyceae
constituted the largest group among phytoplankton
followed by Bacillariophyceae and Cyanophyceae. Details
of the identified phytoplankton genera have been presented
below:
Bacillariophyceae: Achnanthidium sp., Amphipleura sp.,
Aulacoseira sp., Cocconeis sp., Craticula sp., Cyclotella
sp., Cymbella sp., Diatoma sp., Epithemia sp., Eunotia sp.,
Frustulia sp., Melosira sp., Navicula sp., Nitzschia sp.,
Pinnularia sp., Pleurosigma sp., Synedra sp. and
Tabellaria sp.
Chlorophyceae: Ankistrodesmus sp., Botryococcus sp.,
Chaetophora sp., Chlamydomonas sp., Chlorella sp.,
Chlorococcum sp., Closterium sp., Coelastrum sp.,
Cosmarium sp., Crucigenia sp., Dictyochloris sp.,
Dictyosphaerium sp., Euastrum sp., Eudorina sp.,
Micractinium sp., Micrasterias sp., Monoraphidium sp.,
Mougeotia sp., Oedogonium sp., Oocystis sp., Pandorina
sp., Pediastrum sp., Scenedesmus sp., Spirogyra sp.,
Tetraedron sp., Tetrastrum sp., Ulothrix sp., Volvox sp.,
Zygnema sp.
Chrysophyceae: Dinobryon sp., Synura sp.
Cyanophyceae: Anabaena sp., Aphanocapsa sp.,
Arthrospira sp., Aulosira sp., Chroococcus sp.,
Coelosphaerium sp., Cylindrospermopsis sp.,
Gomphosphaeria sp., Lyngbya sp., Merismopedia sp.,
Microcystis sp., Nostoc sp., Oscillatoria sp., Phormidium
sp., Spirulina sp.
Dinophyceae: Ceratium sp.
Euglenophyceae: Euglena sp., Phacus sp.
Zooplankton A total of 24 zooplankton genera belonging to the classes
Rotifera (11 genera), Copepoda (7 genera), Protozoa (3
genera), Cladocera (2 genera) and Ostracoda (1 genus)
have been recorded during the study period. On the basis of
number of genera encountered, Copepoda and Rotifera
constituted the major group among the zooplankton
community. Details of the identified zooplankton genera
3 International Journal of Research in Biological Sciences 2016; 6(1): 1-6
Fig. 2. Phytoplankton
4 International Journal of Research in Biological Sciences 2016; 6(1): 1-6
Fig.3. Phytoplankton
have been presented below:
Cladocera: Ceriodaphnia sp., Moina sp.
Copepoda: Acanthocyclops sp., Aglaodiaptomus sp.,
Cyclops sp., Diacyclops sp., Eucyclops sp., Leptodiaptomus
sp., Microcyclops sp.
Rotifera: Anuraeopsis sp., Asplanchna sp., Brachionus sp.,
Euchlanis sp., Filinia sp., Keratella sp., Lecane sp.,
Monostyla sp., Notholca sp., Polyarthra sp., Rotaria sp.
Ostracoda: Cyclocypris sp.
Protozoa: Amoeba sp., Paramaecium sp., Trinema sp.
Therefore, the results of the present study are depicting the
presence of high diversity of both phytoplankton and
zooplankton in the studied rural and urban ponds of Raipur,
Chhattisgarh and in this way also suggesting a healthy
ecosystem available in these ponds. The phytoplankton
diversity which has been observed in the present study is in
close resemblance to the earlier observation made by [20]
who reported a total of 52 algal genera belonging to the
classes Chlorophyceae (21 genera), Cyanophyceae (12
genera), Bacillariophyceae (16 genera) and Eugleno-
-phyceae (3 genera) from the urban and rural ponds of
Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Algal genera belonging to two
classes i.e. - Chrysophyceae (Dinobryon sp. and Synura
sp.) and Dinophyceae (Ceratium sp.) observed in the
present study was not reported earlier by [20], thus giving
first time evidence of their presence in this region. These
algal classes are indicative of the accumulation of organic
load in the bottom sediment of water bodies and are often
considered undesirable for fishes due to their associated
toxins when they bloom [25]; though in this study no such
algal bloom of these classes has been observed.
On the other hand, the zooplankton diversity observed
in the present study is quite different from the observation
earlier made by [20]; most of the genera under protozoa
(Zoothamnium sp., Arcella sp., Diffugia sp. and
Centrophyxis sp.) and cladocera (Bosmina sp.,
Diaphanosoma sp., Moinodaphnia sp., Macrothrix sp. and
Alona sp.) reported earlier by [20] have not been observed
5 International Journal of Research in Biological Sciences 2016; 6(1): 1-6
in the present study. However, the generic diversity of
copepods and rotifers are almost similar as reported by [20]
and [26] earlier from the same area.
Current study though has been conducted in some selected
rural and urban ponds of Raipur, this will help to get an
overall idea about the phytoplankton and zooplankton
diversity present here and will surely help for further study
related to this field. Studies alike will help to create region
wise plankton biodiversity maps and provide knowledge
regarding the types of plankton that can be expected in a
particular region of India. Moreover, the mere existence or
unavailability of a particular plankton community or genera
can be related with the prevailing agro-climatic conditions
of any region, if similar studies will be extensively
conducted throughout India or published reports are
compiled into region specific and time framed plankton
databases.
Fig 4. Zooplankton
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The first author expresses his heartfelt gratitude to the
faculties of fisheries department, IGKV, Raipur,
Chhattisgarh for supporting this freelance investigation as
an extended part of his M.F.Sc. (Aquaculture) Thesis work.
REFERENCES 1. Battish, S.K. (1992) Freshwater zooplankton of India.
Oxford and IBH Publishing Co., New Delhi.
2. Millman, M., Cherrier, C. and Ramstack, J. (2005) The
seasonal succession of the phytoplankton community
in Ada Hayden Lake, North Basin, Ames, Iowa.
Limnology Laboratory, Iowa State University, Ames,
Iowa.
3. Gupta, T. and Dey, M. (2012) Hydro biological
characteristics of some semi-intensive fish culture
ponds of Lumding town of Nagaon district, Assam.
Curr World Environ 8(1): 30-39.
4. Pandey, B.N., Hussain, S., Ambasta, O.P. and Poddar,
S.K. (2004) Phytoplankton and its correlation with
certain physicochemical parameters of Ramjan river of
Krishanganj, Bihar. Environ Ecol 22: 804-809.
5. Benarjee, G. and Narasimha, R.K. (2013) Physico-
chemical factors influenced plankton biodiversity and
fish abundance- a case study of Nagaram tank of
Warangal, Andhra Pradesh. Int J Life Sci Biotechnol
Pharma Res 2(2): 248-260.
6. Adoni, A., Joshi, D.G., Ghosh, K., Chourasia, S.K.,
Vaishya, A.K., Yadav, M. and Verma, H.G. (1985)
Work Book on Limnology. Pratibha Publishers, Sagar.
7. Chaturvedi, R.K., Sharma, K.P. and Sharma, S.
(1999) Plankton community of polluted water around
6 International Journal of Research in Biological Sciences 2016; 6(1): 1-6
Sanganer, Jaipur. J Environ Pollut 61: 77-84.
8. Ponmanickam, P., Rajagopal, T., Rajan, M.K.,
Achiraman, S. and Palanivelu, K. (2007) Assessment
of drinking water quality of Vembakottai reservoir,
Virudhunagar district, Tamil Nadu. J Exp Zool, India
10: 485-488.
9. Shekhar, R.T., Kiran, B.R., Puttaiah, E.T., Shivaraj, Y.
and Mahadevan, K.M. (2008) Phytoplankton as index
of water quality with reference to industrial pollution. J
Environ Biol 29: 233-236.
10. Vareethiah, K. and Haniffa, M.A. (1998)
Phytoplankton pollution indicators of coir retting. J
Environ Pollut 3: 117-122.
11. Bianchi, F., Acri, F., Aubry, F.B., Berton, A., Boldrin,
A., Camatti, E., Cassin, D. and Comaschi, A. (2003)
Can plankton communities be considered as bio-
indicators of water quality in the lagoon of Venice?
Mar Pollut Bull 46: 964-971.
12. Tiwari, A. and Chauhan, S.V. (2006) Seasonal
phytoplanktonic diversity of Kitham Lake, Agra. J
Environ Biol 27: 35-38.
13. Hoch, M.P., Dillon, K.S., Coffin, R.B. and Cifuentes,
L.A. (2008) Sensitivity of bacterioplankton nitrogen
metabolism to eutrophication in sub-tropical coastal
water of Key West. Florida. Mar Pollut Bull 56: 913-
926.
14. Ahmad, M.S. (1996) Ecological survey of some algal
flora of polluted habitats of Darbhanga. J Environ
Pollut 3:147-151.
15. Jhingran, V.G. (1985) Fish and fisheries of India.
Hindustan Publishing Corporation (India), Delhi.
16. Aarti, D., Sharma, K.K., Sharma, A. and Antal, N.
(2013) Zooplankton diversity and physico-chemical
conditions of a temple pond in Birpur (J & K, India).
Int Res J Environ Sci 2(5): 25-30.
17. Howick, G.L. and Wilhm, J. (1984) Zooplankton and
benthic macro invertebrates in lake Carl Blackwell.
Proc Oklahoma Acad Sci 64: 63-65.
18. Gajbhiye, S.N. and Desai, B.N. (1981) Zooplankton
variability in polluted and unpolluted waters off
Bombay. Mahasagar- Bull Natl Inst Oceanogr 4: 173-
182.
19. Marine Biology Organisation (MBO) (2007)
Zooplankton Retrieved 29th September, 2006.
Retrieved from: http://www.marinebiocom /oceans/
zooplankton.asp.62k.
20. Sarkar, T. (2010) Phytoplankton and periphyton
diversity in four ponds or minor reservoirs in Raipur
city, Chhattisgarh. M.F.Sc. (Inland Fisheries) Thesis,
IGKV, Raipur.
21. APHA (1998) Standard Methods for the Examination
of Water and Wastewater, 20th edition. American
Public Health Association, Washington, D.C.
22. Needham, J.G. and Needham, P.R. (1966) To guide to
the study of freshwater biology, 5th Edition, Holden-
Day Lnc. San Francisco, California, USA.
23. Tonapi, G.T. (1980) Freshwater Biology. National
Book Trust of India, New Delhi.
24. Bellinger, E.G. (1992) A Key to Common Algae:
Freshwater, Estuarine and Some Coastal Species. The
Institute of Water and Environment Management,
London, UK.
25. van Vuuren, S.J., Taylor, J., Gerber, A. and Van
Ginkel, C.E. (2006) Easy identification of the most
common freshwater algae: a guide for the
identification of microscopic algae in South Africa.
University of North-West and Department of Water
Affairs and Forestry.
26. Kumar, N. (2006) Limnological studies on a sewage
fed tank of Raipur, Telibandha. M.F. Sc. (Inland
Fisheries) Thesis, IGKV, Raipur.
"The authors are associated as research fellows at ICAR-Central Inland Fisheries Research Institute, Barrackpore, Kolkata-120 under NICRA project. This is the sole content of the authors and is not a
part of the project conducted by the institute".