SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Turkish Journal of Botany / 2005 / Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 2

Colonisation of Epipelic Diatoms on the Littoral Sediments of İzmit Bay

Yelda AKTAN
Güler AYKULU
Pages
83–94
Publication Date
2005-02-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In addition to marine diatoms, freshwater species were also recorded in the epipelic diatom assemblages.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Seasonal variations in the composition, density and diversity of the epipelic diatom assemblages were investigated monthly from March, 1999, to September, 2000, at 8 sampling sites chosen in the littoral of İzmit Bay.
📊
Key Findings & Data:During the study period, 3 centric and 41 pennate diatoms were recorded in the epipelic diatom flora of the bay.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In addition to marine diatoms, freshwater species were also recorded in the epipelic diatom assemblages.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2000 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Epipelic diatom · density · species diversity

Abstract

Seasonal variations in the composition, density and diversity of the epipelic diatom assemblages were investigated monthly from March, 1999, to September, 2000, at 8 sampling sites chosen in the littoral of İzmit Bay. The main physical and chemical parameters, which affected species composition and density, were also measured on every sampling date. During the study period, 3 centric and 41 pennate diatoms were recorded in the epipelic diatom flora of the bay. Achnanthes Bory spp., Amphora exigua W.Greg. and Navicula tripunctata (O.Müll.) Bory were dominant in terms of frequency and density. In general, the bay showed a small species diversity in epipelic diatoms (annual mean 1.46 ± 0.44 bits ind-1). In addition to marine diatoms, freshwater species were also recorded in the epipelic diatom assemblages.

Özet

Seasonal variations in the composition, density and diversity of the epipelic diatom assemblages were investigated monthly from March, 1999, to September, 2000, at 8 sampling sites chosen in the littoral of İzmit Bay. The main physical and chemical parameters, which affected species composition and density, were also measured on every sampling date. During the study period, 3 centric and 41 pennate diatoms were recorded in the epipelic diatom flora of the bay. Achnanthes Bory spp., Amphora exigua W.Greg. and Navicula tripunctata (O.Müll.) Bory were dominant in terms of frequency and density. In general, the bay showed a small species diversity in epipelic diatoms (annual mean 1.46 ± 0.44 bits ind-1). In addition to marine diatoms, freshwater species were also recorded in the epipelic diatom assemblages.

🔖

Cite This Article

AKTAN, Y., AYKULU, G. (2005). Colonisation of Epipelic Diatoms on the Littoral Sediments of İzmit Bay. Turkish Journal of Botany, Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 2, 83–94. https://ajindex.com/articles/183718

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Aktan Y & Aykulu G (2003). Epiphytic diatoms of different host plants in the İzmit Bay (Marmara Sea, Turkey). In: Oray IK, Çelikkale MS & Özdemir G (eds.) International Symposium of Fisheries and Zoology, pp. 201-218. Istanbul: Istanbul University Press.
  2. APHA (1985). Standard methods for examination of water and wastewater. Washington: American Public Health Association. Aysel V & Guner H (1979). Ege ve Marmara Denizindeki alg toplulukları üzerinde kalitatif ve kantitatif çalıflmalar. 3. Gracilaria verrucosa (Hudson) Papenfuss topluluğu. Ege Univ Fen Fak Derg Ser B 3: 111-118. Aysel V & Güner H (1980). Ege ve Marmara Denizindeki alg toplulukları üzerinde kalitatif ve kantitatif çalıflmalar. 4. Gelidium capillaseum (Gmelin) Kütz. topluluğu. Ege Univ Fen Fak Derg Ser B 4: 141- 153. Aysel V & Güner H (1982). Ege ve Marmara Denizindeki alg toplulukları üzerinde kalitatif ve kantitatif çalıflmalar. 6. Laurencia obtusa (Hudson) Lamour var. obtusa topluluğu (Rhodomeleceae, Ceramiales, Rhodophyta). Do?a Bilim Derg Temel Bilimler 3: 97- 103. Aysel V, Guner H & Dural B (1991). Türkiye Marmara denizi florası I. Cyanophyta ve Chlorophyta. Ege Univ Su Ürünleri Semp, pp. 74- 112. Izmir: Ege University, Fisheries Faculty Press. Aysel V & Guner H, Dural B (1993). Türkiye Marmara denizi florası II. Phaeophyta ve Rhodophyta. Ege Univ Su Ürünleri Fak Derg 10: 115-168.
  3. Aysel V, Erdoğan H, Sukatar A & Güner H (1996).
  4. Bartın deniz algleri, Karadeniz, Türkiye. Turk J Bot 20: 251-258. Aysel V (1997a). Türkiye’nin Akdeniz kıyılarının deniz florası, 1. Kırmızı Algler (=Rhodophyta). Turk J Bot 21: 329-334. Aysel V (1997b). Türkiye’nin Akdeniz kıyılarının deniz florası, 2. Kahverengi Algler (Fucophyceae=Phaeophyceae). Turk J Bot 21: 329-334. Aysel V, fienkardefller A, Aysel F & Alpaslan M. (2000). Çanakkale Boğazı (Marmara denizi, Türkiye) deniz florası. In: Öztürk B, Kadıo?lu M & Öztürk H (eds.) Marmara Denizi 2000
  5. Sempozyumu Bildiriler Kitabı. TÜDAV, Yayın No.5: 436-449, İstanbul:
  6. Ofis Grafik Mat. Cupp EE (1943). Marine plankton diatoms of the west coast of north America. California: University of California Press.
  7. Dural B (1988).
  8. Çandarlı Körfezi, Ulvales ordosu üzerinde taksonomik çalıflmalar. Doğa TU Biyol. Derg 12: 176-182.
  9. Erduğan H, Aysel V & Güner H (1996).
  10. Rize-Sarp arası deniz algleri, Karadeniz-Türkiye. Turk J Bot 20: 103-108. Guner H & Aysel V (1978). Ege ve Marmara Denizindeki alg toplulukları üzerinde kalitatif ve kantitatif çalıflmalar. 1. Ulva lactuca Linnaeus toplul