ACTIVITY: ALIEN ALGAE Tracing the origins of the quick-growing Caulerpa taxifola alga that is threatening the Mediterranean required some scientific sleuthing. Biologists first had to identify the alien species and its origin, then explore the adaptations that enabled it to survive in the Mediterranean ecosystem. Then they hypothesized and tried ways to control the algae. A unique control has been suggested in the form of a sea slug, but that solution raises other questions. In this activity, you will determine how temperature can affect the growth of algae and perhaps discover a way to control it. MATERIALS * 3 medium-sized jars or beakers with covers * culture of freshwater algae added to tap water that has been allowed to stand for a few days (If that is not available, pond water may be used, but be aware that microscopic organisms other than algae will be present. Cultured algae may be purchased through scientific supply companies or aquarium supply stores.) * journal for recording purposes * microscope * slides * slide covers * droppers PROCEDURE 1. Observe the water containing the algae culture. What does it look like? Can you see anything unusual? What color is the water? 2. Prepare a slide with a drop of the water containing algae. Observe it under a microscope. Conduct a population count by counting the number of cells visible in the field of view. Record this number. 3. Divide the algae solution into three separate sterilized jars. Place one solution in a warm area like the top of a refrigerator or radiator, one in a cool area (inside the refrigerator) and the third at room temperature. Make certain each jar has an available light source. (Algae are photosynthetic and cannot survive without light.) Jars should be loosely covered to permit a gas exchange but prevent evaporation. 4. Create a hypothesis about what you think will happen to the algae culture in each of the jars over a three-week period. 5. Observe the jars of algae for a period of three weeks. Conduct a population count twice each week following the exact procedure you used for your first count. Record this information and your observations in the journal. QUESTIONS 1. Which jar grew the most algae? Do you think temperature has an effect on growth of algae? What effect did you observe? What effects could global warming have on the presence of algae throughout Earth's waters? 2. The algae you grew in this activity are different from C. taxifola. List the differences and similarities between the types of algae. Unique characteristics of the algae species in the Mediterranean include its enormous size, its ability to adapt to the Mediterranean's climate and its ability to reproduce asexually. (The algae seen in this story actually form one huge cell.) EXTENSIONS 1. Who owns the Mediterranean Sea? Identify the countries bordering the sea and brainstorm or role-play scenarios as suggested by Alan Alda's questions about releasing the slugs into the Mediterranean to address the problem of the Caulerpa's proliferation. What if one country doesn't want to release the slugs? Is releasing slugs a good idea? What might be some consequences of a deliberate release? 2. Research how algae are controlled in aquariums. Using your jars of algae, try to discover a non-toxic way to get rid of the algae. 3. Research other invasive algae and how they are being controlled. Red tide has invaded estuaries along coastal areas of the U.S. Its toxic blooms can kill many dolphins and other marine mammals. In California, biologists at the Monterey Bay Aquarium have reported an algal bloom with a fatal neurotoxin that has killed hundreds of sea lions. 4. Simulation models of algae may be seen online at http://www.isima.fr/ecosim/ct.html. 5. Research the biology and strategies for controlling the algae in the Mediterranean, then prepare your recommendations. 6. Compare the biology of green algae and plants. How are they different? Similar? See http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/alllife/eukaryotasy.html. Course description: The course covers aspects of the biology and ecology of freshwater, marine and soil algae. We will also examine their cultivation for human and animal consumption and as a renewable natural resource. The course will include short field trips to local aquatic environments during the class period and a weekend trip to a marine site in Mexico. Course objectives: The goals of this course are: i) to provide an overview of the biology of algae, ii) use the study of algae to provide a basis for understanding the evolutionary pathways to higher plants, iii) much of the biochemistry, reproductive biology, ecology and culture of plants can be best understood by studying the simpler systems in algae, iv) understand the role of algae in freshwater, marine and soil environments as primary producers, suppliers of nutrition and cover to animals and as resources for humans, v.) develop the knowledge and skills to identify and cultivate various algae species. The lab activities will focus on developing techniques specific to the identification and culture of algae as well as developing generalized lab skills including use of hemocytometers, various microscopes, spectrophotometers, and good lab practices. Instructors: Dr. Kevin Fitzsimmons ph. 626-3324 and Dr. Edward Glenn ph. 626-2664 Teaching Assistant - Shawna Chantrand Instructors e-mail: kevfitz@ag.arizona.edu and eglenn@ag.arizona.edu Textbook: Algae. Authors: Graham and Wilcox Field Trip to Guaymas, Sonora, MEXICO APRIL 16-18, 2004 (Note: put on schedule now). Exams: will be comprehensive and questions will come from lectures, textbooks, labs, student presentations, handouts and field trips. (Hint: topics which arise in two or more of these areas are the most likely to show up on exams.) Mid-terms will be reviewed in the class period following the exam. Short field trips may be conducted during the class period and attendance is required. Grading: 2 mid-terms (higher score counts for 20%, lower score 15%) final 20% papers 20% labs 15% presentation & participation 10% 575 Research Project: Design, conduct and report a field or lab experiment developed with the instructors. Research Paper: Pick subject, run keyword search in library, read pertinent literature on topic, prepare review paper 475 - two papers, one presented to the class 575 - two papers, both presented to the class 575 - one of above papers will be experimental project write-up We expect the term paper to be a review of a topic of interest within the fields of freshwater, marine or soil algae. The paper should be prepared on a word processor with a double-spaced hard copy of the report submitted on the scheduled dates. The sources of information should include at least three journal articles. Part of the exercise is to become familiar with the peer-reviewed literature. Books and web-sites can be used for background and graphics, but the bulk of material should come from the professional journals. The format should include a short Abstract which will introduce the topic and provide a synopsis of the rest of the paper. The Introduction of the paper should discuss the topic in more detail and present some background information. The important literature should be brought up at this point, both text and journal articles would be appropriate. The Discussion section should be your interpretation of how all this information fits together. You should provide a synthesis of information you have found from various sources. It is expected that not all of the references will deal with your exact subject. The point is that you are examining the literature to extract bits and pieces from various sources and studies to better understand and update one specific topic. By looking at the basic published information and incorporating ancillary information from the most current literature you should be able to prepare a report which is completely up to date. The goal is to cover the topic with a well written paper, rather than a certain number of words or pages. But since several people will ask this anyway, we would expect the paper will take eight to ten pages of double spaced text with at least three referenced articles and three or more non-journal sources. Graphics are fine to include, either original or copies from literature. In fact tables or graphs generated from various studies are an excellent tool for a review paper. Class participation: Much of the learning from this course comes from discussions during labs, field trips and during student presentations. Students who do not take part in these activities will be at a disadvantage to students who do take part in discussions and activities. The 10% of the grade devoted to participation and presentation will be graded on the oral presentation and participation during labs. Late and missed assignments: Scores on assignments turned in late will be reduced 10% per day. Lectures, labs, field trips and student presentations are integral to the course structure and exam questions will come from all these aspects. In case of missed lectures, labs, or field trips, handouts will be provided but student is responsible for getting class notes. For extenuating circumstances, call and leave message at 626-3324. Course grades: Course grades will be determined on a 90 - 100 = A 80 - 89 = B 70 - 79 = C 60 - 69 = D basis. Class Schedule - Spring 2004 Lectures (Lec) generally will be held from 9:00-10:00 a.m. Laboratory exercises (Lab) will usually be held from 10:00-11:30 a.m. Date Lecture Lab (* Reports due) Readings - Graham & Wilcox or others Jan 15 Introductions - Classifications Microscopes Chapters 1 and 2 Jan 20 Blue-greens Cyanobacteria Calibrating microscopes Chapters 5 & 6 Jan 22 Cyanobacteria Counting cells (*) Chapter 5 & 6 Jan 27 Cyanobacteria Stains (*) Chap. 7 Jan 29 Green algae- Chlorophyta Identification and keys Chap. 7 & 17 Feb. 3 Green algae Identification and keys(*) Chap. 18 & 19 Feb. 5 Green algae Chap. 20 & 21 Feb 10 Euglenoids, Cryptomonads and Haptophytes Isolations and culture Chap. 8, 9, and 10 Feb 12 Diatoms - Bacillariophyceae Isolations and culture(*) Chap. 12 Feb 17 Ochrophytes Productivity and DO Chap. 13 & 14 Feb 19 Brown algae - Phaeophyceae Productivity and BOD(*) Chap. 15 Feb 24 Brown algae - Phaeophyceae First paper due (Student presentations Grads) Chap. 15 Feb 26 Brown algae - Phaeophyta Student presentations A-M Chap. 4 Mar 2 Brown algae - Phaeophyta Student presentations N-Z - Review for exam Chap. 23 Mar. 4 Mid-term Handout Mar 9 Dinoflagellates Chap. 11 Mar 11 Dinoflagellates Chap. 3 Mar 13 - 21 Mar 13 - 21 Spring break Fun Fun Mar 23 Red algae - Rhodophyta Agars and gels (*) Chap. 16, Searles paper Mar 25 Red algae - Rhodophyta Pigments (*) Chap. 16 Mar 30 Red algae - Rhodophyta Chap. 23 Apr 1 Red algae - Rhodophyta Chromotography (*) Chap. 23 and handouts Apr 6 Red algae - Rhodophyta Spectrophotometry Chap. 23 Apr 8 Phytoplankton Spectrophotometry (*) Chapter 22 Apr 13 Second exam Apr 15 Benthic ecology, Algae of Mexico Mexico prep Handouts Apr 16-18 Field trip to Guaymas, Mexico Field Trip Read handouts in van Apr 20 Phytoplankton Chap. 22 Apr 22 Limnology Finish papers Chap. 22 Apr 27 Second paper due Student presentations Grad students Outlines April 29 Student presentations Student presentations N-Z Outlines May 4 Review for final Student presentations A-M Outlines May 11 TUESDAY 8:00 - 10:00 Final Exam 8:00 - 10:00 SUMMARY OF WRITTEN LAB EXERCISE REPORTS These exercises were designed to provide 1) instruction in some important techniques useful in studying algae (and other organisms), 2) experience in technical writing, 3) and numeracy practice. You might encounter similar assignments in your future occupation if you are asked to prepare technical reports or grant proposals. Due dates to be announced. Exercise 1. Use of the Sedgewick-Rafter Cell and Inverted Microscope/Settling Chamber (Utermöhl) Techniques for Counting Algae in Mixed Samples. Follow the instructions in I A and I B of "Quantitative Determination of Algal Density and Growth" (with modifications and additional advice supplied by TA) to count the algae in the mixed assemblage provided, by two methods. You will have to take turns using our single inverted microscope. You can work in pairs, sharing the counting effort, and reporting results as a team. Turn in a written statement of at least a page in length, with counts, and a statement of your perception of the pros/cons of using the Sedgewick-Rafter vs the inverted microscope method for counting algae in mixed assemblages. 20 points. Exercise 2. Algal Collections from Lake Mendota and Hook Lake Turn in 5 separate sheets of drawing paper, each with a single large (i.e. fill the whole page) drawing of an identified algal genus from Hook Lake collection. Instructors will help with identifications, on request. Label distinguishing characteristics such as chloroplast(s), flagella, trichocysts, mucilaginous sheaths, or heterocysts. The point of this exercise is to foster observational powers and an appreciation of diversity differences in eutrophic and dystrophic waterbodies. Put your name on each sheet and staple the sheets together. Compare with your collection from L. Mendota. Write at least half a page on your impressions of diversity in the two waterbodies. Were any of the genera you found in other collections also present in L. Mendota and vice versa? 20 points. Exercise 3. Comparison of the Use of the Hemacytometer vs Coulter Counter Method for Counting Algal Cells in Unialgal Cultures. Use the instructions in II B in "Quantitative Determination of Algal Density and Growth" to make a hemacytometer count of the algae in a cultured sample that we will provide. You will have to take turns, because we do not have enough chambers for everyone to do this exercise at the same time. Be sure to mix the sample well before removing an aliquot! Do at least 5 replicate counts. Now, with the aid of the instructor, count the same sample, on the same day, with the Coulter Counter--the whole class can use the same 5 replicate counts. Pairs of students may share the counting efforts and preparation of the report. Turn in a statement at least one page in length of the comparative counts (are they significantly different?), and your perception of the pros/cons and potential sources of error for the two methods. 20 points. Exercise 4. Algal Isolation & Culture Techniques. Read "Isolation and Culture of Algae," and watch demonstrations for: 1) pulling micropipettes, 2) spraying plates, 3) streaking plates, 4) single cell/colony/filament isolation, 5) making algal culture media & use of the autoclave, & 6) function of the algal growth room/chambers. These demonstrations will be done on a continuous basis by both instructors. Make sure that you have heard all 6 demonstrations. Now, from one of your field collections (preferably the one from Hook Lake because various algal taxa are big enough to micropipette easily, but other collections are ok), use the media provided to make several single-alga isolations. You can choose to isolate desmids, chrysophytes, cryptomonads, diatoms, or blue-greens. You will need to make a supply of micropipettes. These don't need to be autoclaved because the heat of pulling them sterilizes them, but use a separate pipette for each organism. Also try the spraying technique. You will need to check your isolates for growth and contamination at various points in the semester; you may need to subculture isolates. Turn in at least one unialgal culture, identified to genus, with information on origin, date isolated, and isolator (you) written on the tube/dish with Sharpie. Each individual should turn in at least one culture. The culture should be accompanied by a single page description of the isolation process and interesting aspects of the organism. 20 points. Exercise 5. Diatoms of Lake Wingra. Read "Sample Preparation, Methods, and Literature for Diatoms." The most effective method for assaying many diatoms from natural collections requires cleaning, because distinctive frustule markings are obscured by cell contents (chloroplast, etc.). The most effective methods for making permanent mounts of diatoms require use of strong acids, which we prefer not to attempt in this course, because of safety considerations. Therefore, we have assembled a collection of permanent slides made from L. Wingra collection for your use. First, examine a fresh collection of L. Wingra diatoms (mostly members of the periphyton associated with water milfoil). Make a list of the genera that you can confidently identify on the basis of cell or colony shape, or presence of stalks (as with Cymbella.). Use the Prescott key to start. Consult other references as needed. Now, examine the prepared slides, and make a list of all the species that you can confidently identify on the basis of frustule shape or ornamentation. You will want to use the notebooks of photos of identified L. Wingra diatoms. The photos were made from the same cleaned preparations that you are using. This exercise should be done individually. Turn in the two lists, together with a brief statement of a page or so comparing the lists and explaining why they might be different. 20 points. Marine Biotoxins and Harmful Algae: A National Plan III. BLOOM BIOLOGY AND ECOLOGY 1. Bloom Dynamics 1.1 Background The impacts from harmful or toxic blooms are necessarily linked to the population size and distribution of the causative algae. Efforts to manage fisheries resources affected by algal blooms or to assess the possible impacts of anthropogenic influences on harmful species requires an understanding of bloom biology and ecology. The growth and accumulation of individual harmful algal species in a mixed planktonic assemblage are, however, exceedingly complex processes involving an array of chemical, physical, and biological interactions. Blooms can occur over wide geographic areas and may involve long-distance transport to affected resources. Harmful blooms can also occur on the ocean bottom, caused by either microscopic or macroscopic algal species. Macroalgal blooms need not produce toxins to be hamful. They can dominate planktonic or benthic communities, changing food web structure and altering habitats for many marine organisms. Our level of knowledge about each of the many harmful algal species varies significantly, and even the best-studied remain poorly characterized with respect to bloom or population dynamics. Resolution of various rate processes integral to the population dynamics (e.g., input and losses due to growth, grazing, encystment, excystment, and physical advection) has not been accomplished, but is fundamental to the long-term management of fisheries resources or marine habitats affected by harmful algae. Many of the processes are difficult to quantify in the field because harmful species are often only a small fraction of the biomass in natural samples. The end result is that there are no predictive models of population development, transport, and toxin accumulation for any of the major harmful algal species in the United States. Within the past two decades, the incidence of toxic blooms caused by formerly undetected taxa (the so-called "hidden flora") has increased (Anderson, 1989; Smayda, 1990). The basic biology and environmental triggers for toxic activity of these cryptic species have not been characterized. U.S. coastal waters are generally becoming nutrient enriched, often because of human influences. The impact of increased nutrients on harmful algal bloom events remains uncertain, however, and the relative importance of natural variance vs anthropogenic influences on blooms is not known (Smayda, 1990). To further confuse the issue, global changes and trends in several physical and chemical parameters, such as temperature and UV radiation, as well as nutrient enrichment, may also affect harmful algal blooms. The long-anticipated potential of remote sensing is becoming a reality in the study of harmful bloom dynamics. Near real-time sea surface temperatures have been used successfully to identify oceanic features and water masses associated with blooms of two harmful species in two different hydrographic regimes (Keafer & Anderson, in press; Tester et al., 1991). This approach needs further refinement and should be extended to other species and regions of the United States. There is a serious deficiency in our understanding of the physiology and genetics of toxin production. Potentially harmful algae exhibit genetic variability to the extent that toxic and non-toxic strains occur within individual species, and toxic species exhibit a range of inherent potencies. These differences in toxin composition and content are genetically and environmentally regulated, and increase the difficulty in identifying and evaluating the harmful effects of these algae. Development of molecular probes and other techniques for genetic characterization would aid in the identification and separation of harmful algae present in mixed natural populations. 1.2. Impediments and Recommendations The Bloom Biology and Ecology working group identified five major impediments to progress in the area of algal population dynamics, biology, and ecology, and one impediment in the area of phytoplankton monitoring. The group recommended solutions to these impediments. IMPEDIMENT: Adequate documentation of harmful algal events is difficult because of the lack of rapid, species-specific methods for counting and separating cells from natural samples. RECOMMENDATION: Support cooperative development of molecular probes (nucleic acid and antibody-based) and other techniques for genetic characterization. Provide access to appropriate facilities and equipment; disseminate technology and probes. Harmful and benign organisms are currently difficult to distinguish in a timely fashion. This restricts identification and separation of harmful algae for their rapid quantification and analysis within multi-species planktonic assemblages. Nucleic acid and antibody probes, which target different cellular components, offer high flexibility and specificity in their design and application. Some laboratories which have the appropriate skills, expertise, and equipment can provide training and support for others that have the need for probes but lack these resources. Equipment should be made available for the analysis of field and laboratory samples, perhaps through a dedicated facility with a flow cytometer and equipment for nucleic acid and protein analysis. Probes are in an early stage of development for several harmful species, but for most species, there is no sequence information or other biochemical characterization that can be used to design specific probes. Knowledge about one species can frequently be applied to closely related species, greatly accelerating the rate at which unstudied species can be characterized. With immediate support, species-specific probes for several harmful algae could be available within one to two years. A battery of probes against many harmful species could follow within 5 years. Once the genes involved in toxin production are identified and characterized, probes can be developed to identify only toxic species. The use of such probes in quantifying target cells requires additional studies of the physiological variability of their molecular targets under different environmental conditions. IMPEDIMENT: Population dynamics, including the rate processes required in predictive models of harmful blooms, cannot be adequately described or predicted, although this information is of fundamental importance to effective resource management. RECOMMENDATION: Determine biological rate processes and initiate studies of coastal hydrography and water circulation for development of physically/biologically coupled models at temporal and spatial scales appropriate to harmful algal blooms. Despite the fundamental importance of predictive models for harmful algal blooms in different regions, no such models exist for U.S. problem species. Knowledge of the rate processes that determine the net accumulation of cells and physical models of the regional hydrographic features that influence the initiation, distribution and maintenance of blooms are both indispensable to such models. Information on bloom dynamics can be gained through laboratory and field studies that define nutrient uptake kinetics, growth rates, loss terms, and life cycle dynamics. While field conditions such as circulation, meteorology, and water chemistry have long been recognized as critical elements in blooms of some toxic species, neither the initial boundary conditions, nor the hydrographic regimes within which harmful blooms occur are clearly understood. Regional multi-disciplinary field efforts, adequate to characterize the physical circulation models, are needed. Ideally, these would be 3-5 year programs. The ultimate goal is to couple population dynamics with physical circulation models for a given hydrographic regime, and to refine the physically/biologically coupled models using field bloom observations and toxicity patterns. Laboratory studies could be accomplished within about 2 years per species. Field studies can be greatly facilitated by timely accessibility to archived and in situ environmental information. IMPEDIMENT: Competitive outcomes in species selection and succession cannot be predicted, nor can the relative effects of natural vs. anthropogenic factors be resolved. RECOMMENDATION: Undertake experimental studies on factors regulating selection and succession, emphasizing grazing, nutrients and related anthropogenic variables, and allelopathic effects of toxins. Prediction of harmful species occurrences and evaluation of potential stimulation by anthropogenic influences are essential for effective resource management. The few available long-term data sets strongly suggest a link between nutrient enrichment and increasing occurrences of known harmful species as well as formerly undetected taxa ("hidden flora"). Prediction of the outcomes of competitive interactions between harmful algae and other food web components depends upon understanding the processes regulating growth, toxicity, and encystment of individual harmful species. Laboratory experiments (2-3 years) can be used to examine growth across gradients of nutrients (i.e., absolute concentrations and variable supply ratios), temperature, salinity, light, mixing, and grazing by appropriate predators. Given this knowledge, experiments can be expanded to include natural communities (e.g., in mesocosms, field enclosures; 5 years) in order to examine competition, grazing, allelochemical effects, and other influences on selection and succession of harmful algae. These field data can be used to estimate rate constants for accumulation and loss terms which, in turn, would enable construction of mathematical models needed to assess mitigation strategies under variable environmental conditions. Understanding the influence of anthropogenic effects will require analysis of data bases for phytoplankton communities and tractable anthropogenic variables such as inputs of nutrients and other pollutants. Initiation or expansion of long-term monitoring programs of at least 10-years duration must include both episodic events and nutrient time-series studies. Short-term and long-term correlations between pollutant inputs and abundances of harmful algal species, together with information from the autecological studies, will provide a basis for mesocosm-scale experiments. These experiments (3-5 years duration) are needed to test potential mitigation strategies and strengthen interpretations about the influences of anthropogenic variables on bloom species selection and succession. IMPEDIMENT: There is insufficient knowledge of the physiology of algal growth and toxin production in response to environmental variables. RECOMMENDATION: Conduct experimental studies of organism physiology, emphasizing environmental tolerances and factors which influence growth and toxin production. Expand culture collections to include broad geographical representation of all potentially harmful species; include multiple clones from single populations. Tolerance ranges and optima for growth and toxin production in response to environmental variables such as salinity, temperature, and light must be determined for multiple toxic and non-toxic (if available) clones of each species in batch culture. In addition, classical steady-state analyses of nutrient requirements and uptake rates and toxin physiology (including content and composition) of each species are necessary. This work will depend upon a supply of appropriate isolates, our ability to manipulate them in culture, and the availability of sensitive and reliable methods of toxin analysis. Physiological experiments can be carried out in tandem with studies of tolerance ranges and optima once the basic individual growth requirements are determined, and will take 3 yrs to complete for each species. Individual clones of a single species exhibit marked variation in numerous characteristics, including growth and toxin production (Maranda et al., 1985; Bomber, et al., 1989; Cembella et al., 1987; Hayhome et al., 1989), and thus may not be representative of local or regional populations. A few laboratories in the United States have initiated "syndrome-based" culture collections of harmful marine microalgae. Presently, isolates housed in these collections do not adequately represent the full range of variants characteristic of each harmful species. It is essential that new clones be established from throughout the geographical range of each harmful species. Establishment of clones should be accompanied by basic screening programs in order to select ideal clones for physiological and toxicological studies. Production of toxins in quantities sufficient for their purification and characterization requires identification and culture of "high performance" clones and knowledge of their growth requirements. Such collections could be established within a 3-year period. Completion of basic screenings may extend each project into a fourth year. There are anecdotal and circumstantial accounts of bacterial involvement in toxin production by harmful algal species, but only one set of published data demonstrates bacterial synthesis of PSP toxins (Kodama, 1990). The existence of toxigenic bacteria and their association with harmful algal species must be investigated. This work will rely on the isolation of bacteria and the development of techniques that optimize our ability to detect toxin production. Verification of toxigenic bacteria will take about one year for each species of harmful algae once methods are accepted for unequivocally demonstrating the presence or absence of the bacteria. 2. Phytoplankton Monitoring 2.1. Background Testing shellfish and other seafood for possible toxins is expensive and time-consuming. Further, current seafood monitoring efforts are often limited by cost and geographic area covered and may not even test the food product most affected by a particular toxin. An easier and possibly more effective approach involves regular, routine sampling and analysis of phytoplankton samples, especially in areas where aquaculture and/or recreational harvesting are common. If potentially toxic phytoplankton species are found, then more expensive seafood testing must be done. Routine phytoplankton monitoring would provide long-term data on the occurrence of harmful algal species and foster the development of testable hypotheses and insights into the status and trends in harmful algal bloom events. Retrospective analyses of the few existing historical data sets and initiation of time-series will allow assessment of the role of improved monitoring programs and strategies. This information will also promote development of badly needed mitigation methods. 2.2. Impediments and Recommendations IMPEDIMENT: Coastal environmental programs are inadequate for bloom detection, monitoring and mitigation of bloom effects. RECOMMENDATION: Identify regional expertise and facilities. Establish species-specific monitoring programs on a regional scale, using shipboard techniques and remote sensing where appropriate. Identify sentinel species appropriate for each specific toxin and habitat type. Organize regional response teams and logistical support for unexpected events, and reporting centers to accommodate rapid response. Develop practical response protocols for protecting aquaculture sites on a regional and/or species-specific basis. Coordinate and develop national and regional training programs (e.g., sampling and identification methods). Develop and disseminate adequate reference materials. Adequate phytoplankton monitoring programs can serve as early warning systems to moderate the effects of blooms on public health, aquaculture, and fisheries. Response teams, organized by region using existing expertise and maintained as part of a national program, should augment species-specific monitoring programs in areas of recurring bloom events. In-water monitoring and remote sensing provide the early warning systems needed by the aquaculture industry and government officials. Further, long-term data sets are needed for trend analyses. These recommendations are a high priority and must be implemented through federal/state/ academic/private industry partnerships. A network of sentinel sites might be composed of local residents and user groups who are often the first to recognize a bloom event and notify local government agencies. Other sentinel sites could be located at coastal aquaculture facilities. Government and/or industry personnel must be able to sample and quickly identify the causative organism and determine whether it is a known or potentially toxic species. Samples must be sent to taxonomic experts for verification. Technical training will provide the expertise needed for early warning systems and local response. Training should be structured at several levels. These recommendations should be implemented immediately and continue indefinitely, although possibly on a somewhat reduced level after 5 years, depending on trend analysis and local needs. The Canadian domoic acid experience has shown that phytoplankton monitoring can be an effective component in a program to protect seafood consumers from marine biotoxins. IMPEDIMENT: The causes and effects of harmful blooms of benthic and planktonic macroalgal species are poorly understood. RECOMMENDATION: Evaluate the manner in which macroalgal species composition can be influenced by nutrient enrichment, coastal erosion, and other human activities. Determine the effects on habitats and food-chain structure that are associated with macroalgal blooms. Much of the focus in this program is on microscopic algal species which bloom in surface waters, but harmful blooms of macroalgae also occur. These can cause harm by altering benthic habitats through the displacement of indigenous species, and by changing food-chain structure and dynamics. One manifestation of coastal nutrient enrichment is the enhancement of benthic (and, on occasion, planktonic) macroalgal abundance, with certain opportunistic species often dominating. Not only will studies of benthic algal species succession and dominance be necessary for effective management of coastal resources, but the changing distribution and abundance of these species through time and space may provide strong evidence of the extent of human impacts on algal populations in general. AQUA 1009 Live Feed Culture Students will be able to identify and apply micro culture techniques. This includes algae, rotifers, and artemia and their relationship to hatchery bivalve feeding regimes. AQUA 1006 Shellfish Disease Prevention and Control Students will examine the common shellfish diseases that may be encountered in Atlantic Canada. They will identify the methods of prevention and control, which would include sponges, tunicates, and toxic algae and their affects associated with bivalve culture in the regions of Atlantic Canada and globally. Algae Aquarium algae are not really bad. In fact, algae have many of the same benefits as live plants in an aquarium: they produce oxygen and consume excess nutrients. If you can tolerate the appearance, algae is best left alone. There are various kinds of algae you may find in your tank. None are a cause for alarm. The most common kinds are green or brown algae that grow on the glass and other surfaces of the tank. Less common is suspended algae, or "green water". You may also see stringy, filamentous algae, or algae that grows in tufts or small round dots. The kind of algae you have can tell you things about your water quality. For specific examples of algae types, and how to deal with them, here are two good articles: Algae in a Planted Tank and Living with Algae. The most annoying kind of algae is blue-green algae. This algae is actually a bacterium, and has many unusual characteristics. It has a slightly blue-green color. It forms flat sheets that can often be peeled off. It often has small bubbles associated with it. Blue-green algae is very difficult to get rid of. Antibiotics, while they can be effective, should be avoided. The only real cure is sterilation of the tank. Tanks that have been set up and running for a period of time usually do not have serious algae problems, unless the water quality is poor. Here are some practical methods for reducing the amount of algae in your tank: * Reduce the amount of light. Either move the tank away from a window or run the fluorescent light for fewer hours per day. * Do partial water changes more often. This will help reduce the level of nitrates in the water, thus providing less fertilizer for the algae. * Roll up your sleeves. Sometimes the only reasonable way to remove algae is to pull it out or wipe it off by hand. An aquarium cleaning pad will remove most algae, but some kinds require a straight-edge razor blade to scrape it off. * Get a snail. However, snails tend to be somewhat selective about what kinds of algae they will eat, and some algae kinds of algae (such as black brush algae) will escape them. * Be patient, and keep up with regular tank maintenance. After a tank is well established, algae problems usually subside. Do NOT use "Algae Destroyer" products. They are a needless expense, and nobody knows for certain if these products are safe for newts. Better safe than sorry, especially considering that the algae itself is completely harmless. Do NOT try to solve an algae problem by getting a catfish or other algae-eating fish. Some of these have been known to injure or kill newts. Newts and frogs have been impaled by the spines of cory catfish. Snails Small snails are harmless in an aquarium. Some people think they are a plague, but they cause no harm to newts. The only harm done by snails is that some will eat aquarium plants. But in most cases, small snails eat only debris and the dead parts of the plants. There have been cases of snails crawling on top of newts, or even laying their eggs on a newt. I have heard of these things happening, but never heard of any harm coming to the newt as a result. Some newts like to eat small snails. Large snails may pose some danger to newts. If they close down hard on a newt's foot or head, injury can result. Avoid large decorative snails that are able to clamp down hard. The best way to control a snail population is simply to pick them off and throw them away. But if your tank is producing a lot of snails, you should think about why. Is there more algae in your tank recently? And, if so, is it being caused by too much light or a high level of waste in the water? If all debris is cleaned up regularly and water quality is good, snail populations will remain manageable. Worms and Other Critters A healthy aquarium may be a host to many kinds of organisms, including all sorts of invertebrates. They can range from microscopic to an inch long, and are often seen crawling or sticking along the glass on the inside of the tank. One kind is called the hydra, which looks like a tiny sea anemone. Other common types are planaria and limpets. Some kinds of worms may swim freely or make tiny tunnels along the bottom of the tank. Live blackworms can come with small leeches, but these do not infect newts. As with snails, if you have a lot of these pest creatures, you need to think about why. Is there more debris in the tank lately? Is your nitrate level high? Planaria: small flat worms that cling to glass. Limpets: tiny shelled micro-organisms that cling to glass. Most tank critters do not cause any harm. The only time you should be alarmed is if you see micro-organisms hanging directly on your newts. Newts can get ick and other external parasites, and these are cause for concern and treatment. If you have access to a microscope, take some samples of your tank debris. You will likely be shocked by the variety of creatures you see. For pictures and more specific descriptions of tank critters, see: * Microscopy-UK Guide to Pond Life. Links to photos of all kinds of pond critters, many of which also show up in aquariums. * Larva Tech Critter Page. Descriptions of tank critters. Includes an offer to identify if you can send a photo. ***Bu yazı DEEP NATURE rehberlerinden Koray Yeşiladalı tarafından yazılmıştır. Göllerde Ötrofikasyon Ötrofikasyon kısaca durgun bir su ortamında kanalizasyondan verilen aşırı azot ve fosfor etkisiyle fazlaca gelişen alglerin ölmeye başlamasıyla birlikte su ortamındaki oksijeni tüketerek kokuşmaya yol açmasıdır. Ötrofikasyon su ortamını ekolojik ve ekonomik açıdan olumsuz etkiler. A) Ötrofikasyonun Ekolojik Açıdan Olumsuz Etkileri 1. Su yataklarına ötrofik hale gelmesiyle bazı planktonik su altı ve su üstü bitkileri aşırı derecede çoğalmaktadır. Bunun sonucunda bazı türler aşırı derecede artmakta, ekolojik denge bozulmakta ve besin zinciri yoluyla bundan doğan hayat zarar görmektedir. 2. Ötrofik seviyenin artmasıyla balıkların beslendikleri organizmalar ve balık türleri azalmaktadır. Bu olumsuz etki ötrofikasyonun düşük seviyede olması durumunda görülür. İleri derece ötrofik hale gelmiş su yataklarında balıklarda yaşamamaktadır. 3. Su yataklarının tabanında taban çamurunun birikmesi sonucu zamanla su ortamında canlılara olumsuz etki yapabilecek kirleticiler aşırı dercede çoğalmaktadır. 4. Bakteri sayısı anormal dercede artmaktadır. 5. Aşırı derecede çoğalan canlı organizmaların ayrışması sırasında su yataklarınnın alt tabakalırnda aşırı oksijen tüketimi olmakta ve oksijensiz ortam oluşmaktaır. 6. Özellikle sahil kesimlerinde bitkiler, çamur olşumunun hızlanması sonucu yok olmaktadır. 7. Su yüzeyi canlılara zehirleyici etki yapan mavi-yeşil alglerle kaplanmaktadır. 8. Aşırı dercede çoğlamış alglerin dalgaları kırması sonucu su yatağının atmosferden oksijen kazanımı azalmaktadır. 9. Sivrisinek ve böcek üremesinde hızlanma meydana gelmektedir. B) Ötrofikasyonun İçme Suyu Ve Halk Sağlığı Açıdan Olumsuz Etkileri 1. Ötrofik seviye arttıkça daha fazla zararlı alg türleri gelişmektedir. 2. Suyun renk, tat ve koku gibi özellikleri bozulmaktadır. 3. Fitoplankton, zooplankton ve bakteri gibi mikroorganizmaların sayıısında aşırı derecede artışlar meydana gelmektedir. 4. Alg özellikli kompleks bileşikler meydanan gelmektedir. 5. Sıcaklık tabakalaşması olan göllerin alt kısımlarında anaerobik ortamlar oluşmakta ve sudan CH4(metan), H2S(hidrojen sülfür) gibi oksijensiz ortam ayrışma ürünü gazlar çıkmaktadır. H2S çürük yumurta kokusunda olup çevreyi rahatsız etmektedir 6. Ötrofik seviye ilerledikçe su kaynağındaki amonyak iyonu artmakta, bu da zehirlenme ve guatr hastalıklarına yol açmaktadır. 7. Demir ve mangan konsantrasyonu artarak suyun renk ve tadını bozmaktadır. 8. Su iletim hatalrında asidik yapıya sahip olan CO2(karbondioksit) dolayısıyla hasarlar oluşmaktadır. 9. Kanser ve ülser hastalıklarında artış görülmektedir. 10. Allerjik hastalıklar artmaktadır. 11. Ortaya çıkan parazitler yeni hastalıklara yol açmaktadır.