Areal Production vs. Time

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Time (months)

Are

al P

rod

uct

ion

(m

g C

m-2

hr-

1)

0.5 psu

2.0 psu

5.0 psu

0.5 psu Areal Production

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Time (weeks)

Are

al P

rodu

ctio

n (m

g C

m-2

hr-

1)

< 5 um

>5 um

2.0 psu Areal Production

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Time (weeks)

Are

al P

rodu

ctio

n (m

g C

m-2

hr

-1)

<5um cells

>5um cells

5.0 psu Areal Production

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Time (weeks)

Are

al P

rodu

ctio

n (m

g C

m-2

hr

-1)

<5um cells

>5um cells

Foodweb support for the threatened Delta smelt:Foodweb support for the threatened Delta smelt:Phytoplankton production within the low salinity zonePhytoplankton production within the low salinity zone

Ulrika LidströmUlrika Lidström11, Anne Slaughter, Anne Slaughter11, Risa Cohen, Risa Cohen22, Edward Carpenter, Edward Carpenter11

1 1 Romberg Tiburon Center for Environmental Sciences, San Francisco State University, Tiburon, CARomberg Tiburon Center for Environmental Sciences, San Francisco State University, Tiburon, CA2 2 Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, GAGeorgia Southern University, Statesboro, GA

[MAXIMUM ~300 words] – NO IDEA AT THIS POINT

• Phytoplankton biomass was generally higher (?) in spring than summer (how much more??)

• Springtime phyto biomass at 0.5psu was made up of more large (>5um) than small (<5um) cells compared to 2 and 5psu (ummm … sorta?) – switch in community composition with salinity AND with seasonal (spring to summer)

• Phyto assemblages at 0.5 psu tended to be dominated by smaller (<5um) cells whereas 2 and 5 psu assemblages were more often dominated by larger (>5um) cells

• Picoplankton were more abundant (~20%) at 0.5 psu than 2 or 5 psu (?) – what’s their overall contribution to the phyto community? This could be important

•

Results

Total Photic Zone Primary Production

This collaborative research program is underway to characterize the foodweb of the low salinity zone (LSZ) of the northern San Francisco Estuary (SFE). Recent evidence indicates that several species of estuarine fish, including Delta Smelt (and their copepod prey), may be food limited, suggesting a link between their declines and changes at lower trophic levels.

Field Collection• weekly cruises March 14 to August 23, 2006• surface water collected by bucket at 0.5, 2.0 and 5.0 psu (nominal salinities), transported to laboratory in dark, cool carboys and processed for phytoplankton biomass, primary production and picoplankton abundance• water column profiles performed using a CTD with attached PAR sensor

Sample Processing & AnalysesPhytoplankton biomass (chlorophyll a, ref?) – 50-100mL water sample filtered onto 25mm GF/F and 5µm filters (n=3), stored in dark freezer (-20°C), extracted 24h in 90% acetone and read on Turner 10 fluorometer before and after acidification (ref for chl method?)Primary production (14C method, JGOFS 1994) – 6h (?) incubations at ten light levels (100, 50, 25, 15, 10, 6, 4, 3, 1, and 0.1% of ambient light); photic zone areal production calculated using measured production values and extinction coefficients determined from field PAR valuesPicoplankton – 10mL water sample filtered onto 25mm 0.6µm polycarbonate filters, preserved (2% formalin), mounted on a slide and frozen (-20°C) until analysis; cells counted on a Zeiss epifluoresence microscope under 1000x magnification and green light excitation (causing autofluorescence of picoplankton cells)

Picoplankton Abundance

The authors wish to thank Captain David Morgan and David Bell for their assistance aboard R/V Questuary. Funding for this project was provided by CALFED Science Program Grant # SCI-05-C107.

JGOFS. 1994. etc etcChlorophyll method?

Conclusions and implications

Materials and methods

Introduction

Acknowledgments

Literature cited

Ulrika Lidstrom lidstrom@sfsu.edu

Further information

Phytoplankton are considered major contributors of organic carbon to the Delta foodweb, providing support for secondary consumers (e.g. copepods, the major prey of Delta Smelt) and bacterial production. Previous studies have shown that light availability is a major factor limiting phytoplankton production due to the turbid nature of the LSZ.

These data result from the first year of a 2-year field sampling program that focuses on weekly sampling cruises during two periods when larval, juvenile, and adult delta smelt are present.

Photic Zone ProductionSan Francisco Bay and Delta

Suisun BaySan Pablo

Bay

Sacramento River

San Joaquin

RiverSa

n Fra

ncisco

0 20

Kilometers

CarquinezStrait

CA

sampling area0.5-5 psu

Mar-Aug 2006

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

3/1

4

3/2

1

3/2

8

4/4

4/1

1

4/1

8

4/2

5

5/2

5/9

5/1

6

5/2

3

5/3

0

6/6

6/1

3

6/2

0

6/2

7

7/4

7/1

1

7/1

8

7/2

5

8/1

8/8

8/1

5

8/2

2

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 <5um cells>5um cells

5.0 psu Picoplankton Density

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

Time (weeks)

De

ns

ity

(c

ells

/mL

)

2.0 psu Picoplankton Density

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

Time (weeks)

De

ns

ity

(c

ells

/mL

)

0.5 psu Picoplankton Densities

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

Time (weeks)

De

ns

ity

(c

ell/

mL

)

Phytoplankton Biomass

0.5 psu

5.0 psu

0.5psu

2.0psu

5.0psu

chlo

rop

hyl

l a (

µg

L-1)

date

2.0 psu