Phytoplankton size structure in lakes with different trophic status using the morphological functional groups classification

Authors

  • Anastasia Yu. Karpaeva НПЦ по биоресурсам , The Scientific and Practical Center of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus for Bioresources

Keywords:

phytoplankton, trophic status, size fractions, MBFG, Belarusian Lake Region

Abstract

 This study addresses the problem of methodological inconsistency in assessing phytoplankton size structure, which limits the comparability of results among hydrobiological studies. The aim of the study was to analyze the size-structural organization of phytoplankton communities in the lakes of the Belarusian Lakeland using the Morphology-Based Functional Groups (MBFG) approach and to identify relationships between community structure and lake trophic status. In the first stage of the study, phytoplankton abundance, biomass, water transparency, and community-weighted mean cell volume were assessed. Despite the wide range of variation in community-weighted mean cell volume, its relationship with trophic indicators was weak, reflecting differences in phytoplankton morphological organization and biomass formation mechanisms. The size-functional organization of phytoplankton communities was evaluated using the MBFG classification. Correlation analysis revealed significant relationships between the relative biomass of MBFGs and trophic indicators. The proportions of small unicellular (MBFG I) and small flagellated (MBFG II) taxa were negatively correlated with phytoplankton biomass and positively correlated with water transparency. In contrast, the filamentous cyanobacteria group (MBFG III) was positively associated with phytoplankton biomass and negatively associated with water transparency, reflecting its increasing importance under eutrophic conditions. Seasonal dynamics showed that filamentous forms (MBFG III) dominated throughout the growing season in hypertrophic lakes, reaching a maximum contribution of up to 83 % in late summer. In mesotrophic lakes and lakes exhibiting oligotrophic characteristics, MBFG I and MBFG II predominated, particularly during summer. MBFG IV–VII showed no consistent relationship with trophic status, likely reflecting their ecological plasticity and dependence on seasonal succession. The results demonstrate that phytoplankton size structure should be assessed not only by cell volume but also by morphological and functional traits, which provide a more reliable basis for evaluating community responses to eutrophication and seasonal environmental changes.

Author Biography

  • Anastasia Yu. Karpaeva, НПЦ по биоресурсам, The Scientific and Practical Center of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus for Bioresources

    junior researcher at the laboratory of hydrobiology

References

  1. Erdoğan S., Beklİoğlu M., Litchman E. , Miller E.T., Levі E.E., Bucak T., Tavşanoğlu Ül. N. Determinants of phytoplankton size structure in warm, shallow lakes. Journal of Plankton Research. 2021; 43 (3): 353–366. https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/fbab035
  2. Sieburth J., Smetacek V., Lenz J. Pelagic ecosystem structure: Heterotrophic compartments of the plankton and their relationship to plankton size fractions. Limnology and Oceanography. 1978; 23 (6): 1256–1263.
  3. Ignatiades L. Redefinition of cell size classification of phytoplankton – a potential tool for improving the quality and assurance of data interpretation. Mediterranean Marine Science. 2015; 17 (1): 56–64.
  4. Kruk C., Huszar V.L.M., Peeters E.T. H. M., Bonilla S., Costa L., Rling M.L., Reynolds C. S., Scheffer M. A morphological classification capturing functional variation in phytoplankton. Freshwater Biology. 2010; (3): 614–627. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2427.2009.02298.x
  5. Мордухай-Болтовский Ф. Д. Методика изучения биогеоценозов внутренних водоемов. Москва: Наука; 1975. 240 с.
  6. Mikheyeva T.M. Methods of quantitative enumeration of nanophytoplankton (review). Hydrobiological Jornal. 1989;. 25: 3–21.
  7. Голлербах М.М [и др.]. Определитель пресноводных водорослей СССР (14 томов). Ленинград : Наука, Ленингр. отд-ние; 1951-1983.
  8. Komárek J., Anagnostidis K.. Süßwasserflora von Mitteleuropa. Cyanoprokaryota. Oscillatoriales. München : Elsevier Spektrum Akademischer Verlag; 2005. 759 p.
  9. Михеева Т. М. Флора водорослей Беларуси: Таксономический каталог (справочное пособие). Минск: БГУ; 1999. 396 с.
  10. Китаев С.П. Экологические основы биопродуктивности озёр разных природных зон. Москва : Наука; 1984. 207 с.
  11. Irwin A. J., Finkel Z. V., Schofield O. M.E., Falkowski P. G.. Scaling-up from nutrient physiology to the size-structure of phytoplankton communities. Journal of Plankton Research. 2026; 28 (5): 459–471. https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/fbi148
  12. Litchman Е., Klausmeier C. Trait-Based Community Ecology of Phytoplankton. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics. 2008; 39: 615–639. DOI:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.39.110707.173549
  13. Wang Z., Akbar S., Sun Yu., Gu L., Zhang L., Lyu K., Huang Yu., Yang Zh. Cyanobacterial dominance and succession: factors and mechanisms. Journal of Environmental Management. 2021; 287: 112321. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112321.
  14. Reynolds C.S. The Ecology of Phytoplankton. New York : Cambridge University Press; 2006. 535 p.
  15. Sommer U., Gliwicz Z.M., Lampert W., Duncan A. The PEG-model of seasonal succession of planktonic events in fresh watersю Hydrobiologie. 1986; 106 (4): 433–471. DOI:10.1127/archiv-hydrobiol/106/1986/433
  16. References
  17. Erdoğan S., Beklİoğlu M., Litchman E. , Miller E.T., Levі E.E., Bucak T., Tavşanoğlu Ül. N. Determinants of phytoplankton size structure in warm, shallow lakes. Journal of Plankton Research. 2021; 43 (3): 353–366. https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/fbab035
  18. Sieburth J., Smetacek V., Lenz J. Pelagic ecosystem structure: Heterotrophic compartments of the plankton and their relationship to plankton size fractions. Limnology and Oceanography. 1978; 23 (6): 1256–1263.
  19. Ignatiades L. Redefinition of cell size classification of phytoplankton – a potential tool for improving the quality and assurance of data interpretation. Mediterranean Marine Science. 2015; 17 (1): 56–64.
  20. Kruk C., Huszar V.L.M., Peeters E.T. H. M., Bonilla S., Costa L., Rling M.L., Reynolds C. S., Scheffer M. A morphological classification capturing functional variation in phytoplankton. Freshwater Biology. 2010; (3): 614–627. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2427.2009.02298.x
  21. Mordechai-Boltovsky F. D. Metodika izucheniya biogeocenozov vnutrennih vodoemov [Methodology for studying biogeocenoses of inland water bodies]. Moscow: Nauka; 1975: 240 p. Russian
  22. Mikheyeva T.M. Methods of quantitative enumeration of nanophytoplankton (review). Hydrobiological Jornal. 1989;. 25: 3–21.
  23. Gollerbach M.M. [et al.]. Opredelitel' presnovodnyh vodoroslej SSSR (14 tomov) [Key to freshwater algae of the USSR (14 volumes)]. Leningrad : Nauka, Leningr. otd-nie; 1951-1983.
  24. Komárek J., Anagnostidis K.. Süßwasserflora von Mitteleuropa. Cyanoprokaryota. Oscillatoriales. München : Elsevier Spektrum Akademischer Verlag; 2005. 759 p.
  25. Miheeva T. M. Flora vodoroslej Belarusi: Taksonomicheskij katalog (spravochnoe posobie) [Algal flora of Belarus: Taxonomic catalogue (reference manual)]. Minsk: BSU; 1999. 396 p.
  26. Kitaev S.P. Ekologicheskie osnovy bioproduktivnosti ozyor raznyh prirodnyh zon [Ecological foundations of bioproductivity of lakes in different natural zones]. Moscow: Nauka; 1984. 207 p.
  27. Irwin A. J., Finkel Z. V., Schofield O. M.E., Falkowski P. G.. Scaling-up from nutrient physiology to the size-structure of phytoplankton communities. Journal of Plankton Research. 2026; 28 (5): 459–471. https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/fbi148
  28. Litchman Е., Klausmeier C. Trait-Based Community Ecology of Phytoplankton. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics. 2008; 39: 615–639. DOI:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.39.110707.173549
  29. Wang Z., Akbar S., Sun Yu., Gu L., Zhang L., Lyu K., Huang Yu., Yang Zh. Cyanobacterial dominance and succession: factors and mechanisms. Journal of Environmental Management. 2021; 287: 112321. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112321.
  30. Reynolds C.S. The Ecology of Phytoplankton. New York : Cambridge University Press; 2006. 535 p.
  31. Sommer U., Gliwicz Z.M., Lampert W., Duncan A. The PEG-model of seasonal succession of planktonic events in fresh watersю Hydrobiologie. 1986; 106 (4): 433–471. DOI:10.1127/archiv-hydrobiol/106/1986/433

Downloads

Published

2026-11-11

Issue

No. 3 (2026): ЖУРНАЛ БЕЛОРУССКОГО ГОСУДАРСТВЕННОГО УНИВЕРСИТЕТА ЭКОЛОГИЯ

Section

General Ecology and Geo-ecology (ecology of plants, animals and microorganisms, population ecology, biogeocenology, ecology of atmosphere, land, water objects, etc.)

How to Cite

[1]
Karpaeva, A.Y. 2026. Phytoplankton size structure in lakes with different trophic status using the morphological functional groups classification. Journal of the Belarusian State University. Ecology. 3 (Nov. 2026).