Planktonic Abundance and Diversity in Great KWA River, Cross River State, Nigeria
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
IJISET - International Journal of Innovative Science, Engineering & Technology, Vol. 2 Issue 9, September 2015. www.ijiset.com ISSN 2348 – 7968 Planktonic Abundance and Diversity In Great KWA River, Cross River State, Nigeria Antai, Ekpo Eyo* and Joseph, Akaninyene Paul Institute of Oceanography, University of Calabar, Calabar, Nigeria ABSTRACTS Studies on the abundance and diversity of plankton (phytoplankton and zooplankton) in Great Kwa River, South Eastern Nigeria, was undertaken bi-weekly for 3 months from July to September 2013. Samples were collected from two stations based on human activities at these stations. The Objective of the study was to determine the abundance and Distribution of various planktonic groups across the sampling stations. Samples were collected using the pour through method. A total of 26 species and 574 phytoplankton individuals belonging to 4 families were observed during the study. The families represented were Bacillariophyceae 49.83%, Chlorophyceae 21.25%, Chrysophyceae 16.55 and Cyanophyceae 12.37. A total of 23 species and 344 Zooplankton individuals belonging to 5 taxonomic groups were also identified during the study. The groups represented were Rotifera 28.49%, Arthropoda 24.71%, Palaemonidae 16.86%, Ciliophora 15.12% and Annelida 14.82%. This study showed diversity in plankton distribution in Great Kwa River and their possible impacts on the local fisheries is discussed KEY WORDS: Phytoplankton, Zooplankton, Abundance, Diversity, Great Kwa River, Calabar. *Corresponding Author. Email: ekpo.eyoa @yahoo.com INTRODUCTION Plankton is any drifting organisms that inhabit the pelagic zone of aquatic ecosystems and they serve as the food base that supports aquatic life. The phytoplankton are the primary producers which serves as food majorly for zooplankton which in turn serves as an important source of food to crustaceans and fish (Thurman, 1997). They therefore, serve as a major source of organic carbon in rivers and may represent an important source of oxygen in low-gradient aquatic ecosystem. An assessment of plankton community and abundance will enhance our understanding of biological productivity and fish population dynamics (Williams 1962, Fagade and Olaniyan 1974, Abohweyere 1990 and Onyema 141 IJISET - International Journal of Innovative Science, Engineering & Technology, Vol. 2 Issue 9, September 2015. www.ijiset.com ISSN 2348 – 7968 2007)). Although phytoplankton distribution and abundance are largely influenced by the light and nutrient, alteration of their natural environment by man can greatly distort this equilibrium. These may explain why plankters are used as bioindicators to monitor aquatic pollution. Zooplankton is ecologically an important group of aquatic organisms that occupy a wide range of habitats. They constitute essential biotic components which influences the efficiency of an aquatic ecosystem such as energy flow through various trophic interactions (Park and Shin, 2007). Copepods have been shown to be the major link between phytoplankton and first level carnivores while arrow worms are the common carnivores in zooplankton (Tse et al., 2007). The species composition, diversity, biomass and season of maximum abundance of zooplanktonic organisms differ in water bodies (FAO, 2006). The study is designed to estimate the abundance of various planktonic groups as well as to assess the variations in abundance and distribution of various planktonic groups across the sampling stations. MATERIALS AND METHODS Study Area and Sample Collection The study was undertaken at 2 locations at the Great kwa River. Great Kwa River is one of the main tributaries of Cross River Estuary in Cross River State, Nigeria. It discharges into the estuary at latitude 4.450N and longitude 8.200E South East Nigeria. Substratum here is covered with sand and clay with an average depth of 0.1m. It is slow flowing and has low to medium transparency. It is located in the thick forested belt of South-East Nigeria and transverses through mangrove to fresh water swamp. The fringes of the river are dominated by the Nypa fruticans that has displaced mangrove plants, elephant grasses (Pennisetun purpureun), palm trees (Elias guineesis) and fan palm (Hyphaene petersiana) supporting an incredible array of animal life. The swampy region is greatly influenced by physical conditions as the tides continually exhibit fluctuations. The climate is governed by two seasons the wet (April to October) and the dry (November to March) 142 IJISET - International Journal of Innovative Science, Engineering & Technology, Vol. 2 Issue 9, September 2015. www.ijiset.com ISSN 2348 – 7968 Samples were collected from 2 stations (Fig. 1) along Great Kwa River, a tributary of Cross River estuary. The stations are impacted by human activities. Station 1 (Esuk Atu) has low transparency and the substratum is mainly sandy clay. Station 2 (Idundu) has medium transparency with substratum of coarse sand and clay. Samplings were undertaken fortnightly in the mornings from July to September 2013 by pour through method. Twenty litres of the water sample were collected just beneath the surface and poured through 55µm mesh size plankton net. These were repeated 5 time to add up to 100 litres. The planktons were immediately fixed with 5% formalin solution in 50 ml sampling bottle and transported to the laboratory for analysis and identification. The samples were concentrated to 10mls to enable analysis. One ml of the preserved sample was taken using a pipette. This was place into Sedgwick- rafter counting chamber and viewed under different magnifications (x100 and x400) using a light binocular microscope (Nikon 400 binocular microscope). These were done in triplicates. The plankton were identified and sorted into different taxonomical groups with the aid of appropriate identification schemes (Mann 2000, Prasad 2000, Castro and Huber 2005). Fig 1: Map of Great Kwa River Showing the Sampling Stations 143 IJISET - International Journal of Innovative Science, Engineering & Technology, Vol. 2 Issue 9, September 2015. www.ijiset.com ISSN 2348 – 7968 Ecological diversity indices In this study, three ecological statistics were used to obtain the estimation of species diversity, species richness and species evenness. Margalef’s Index (d): is a measure of species richness and is expressed as: d = (S – 1)/InN Where; d = Species richness index S = Number of species in the sample N = Number of individuals in the samples (Margalef, 1951) Shannon and Weiner’s Index (H): is a measure of species abundance and evenness and is expressed as: H = (Ni/N log2 Ni/N) Where;∑ N = The total number of individual in the sample. Ni = The total number of individuals of species ith in the sample (Shannon and Weiner’s, 1949). Species Equitability or Evenness (E): is determined by the equation: E =H/In S Where; H = Shannon and Weiner’s index. S = Number of species in samples (Pielou, 1966). RESULTS AND DISCISSION Species Abundance, Diversity Index and Composition of Phytoplankton The species composition and abundance of the various Phytoplankton taxa encountered at the 2 sampling stations is presented in Table 1. A total of 26 species and 574 phytoplankton individuals belonging to 4 families were observed during the study. The most abundant Phytoplankton species was Navicula petersenni (39 individuals), followed by Rhizosolena stiliformis (36 individuals) and then Cyclotella comta (35 individuals). Also, the least abundant Phytoplankton species was 144 IJISET - International Journal of Innovative Science, Engineering & Technology, Vol. 2 Issue 9, September 2015. www.ijiset.com ISSN 2348 – 7968 Micrasterias sp. (8 individuals), followed by Pinnularia borealis (11 individuals) and then Coelosphaelium sp. (13 individuals) (Fig 2). The families represented were Bacillariophyceae, Cyanophyceae, Chlorophyceae and Chrysophyceae. Bacillariophyceae family was the most abundant, having 286 individuals (49.82%), followed by Chlorophyceae which had 122 individuals (21.25%), Chrysophyceae with 95 individuals (16.55%) and Cyanophyceae, having only 71 individuals and a relative abundance of 12.38% (Figs 3 and 4). Diatom dominance of the phytoplankton waters within the Niger delta region has been reported in other studies (Akpan 1997, Chinda and Braide 2004, Ekwu and Sikoki 2006 and Essien-Ibok 2013). Contrary, the dominance of Chlorophyta has been reported in Bonny River (Ajuonu et al 2011). Dimowo (2013) reported the dominance of Cyanophyta and an absesence of diatom in River Ogun. The high number of diatoms notice in this study may not be unrelated to high concentrations of silicate in the Cross River water system. Akapn (1997) reported a strong correlation between silicate and diatom abundance in the waters of Cross River. Commonly, in an aquatic system where there is no heavy nutrient inputs possibly from run-off or human inputs, Bacillariophyceae are usually the predominant, but when nutrient levels is high such that eutrophication occurs, then the Chlorophyceae could become more abundant than Bacillariophyceae (Akin-Oriola, 2003). The high plankton diversity from the study will support fishery in Great kwa River and the adjoining Cross River Estuary. Phytoplankton community structure gives a good evaluation of the stability of aquatic ecosystem and provides a veritable tool for the assessment of biological activities. Table 1: Species composition and Abundance of Phytoplankton in the Study Area S/N Phytoplankton families/ Station 1 Station 2 Total species Species No %RO No No %RO Bacillariophyceae 1 Skeletonema costatum 11 3.82 14 4.89 25 4.36 2 Rhizosolena stiliformis 20 6.94 16 5.59 36 6.27 3 Bidulphia sinensis 12 4.17 8 2.79 20 3.48 4 Coscinodiscus radiates 12 4.17 5 1.75 17 2.96 5 Cyclotella comta 21 7.29 14 4.89 35 6.09 6 Melosira granulate 13 4.51 4 1.39 17 2.96 145 IJISET - International Journal of Innovative Science, Engineering & Technology, Vol. 2 Issue 9, September 2015. www.ijiset.com ISSN 2348 – 7968 7 Navicula patersenni 18 6.25 21 7.34 39 6.79 8 Tabellaria fenestrate 12 4.17 22 7.34 34 5.92 9 Gyrosigma sp. 7 2.43 9 3.15 16 2.78 10 Cymbella sp.