Apr 3, 2018 - This is important for the future construction of a monitoring system of the. Israeli Rivers, in which diatoms ...... Horton, R.K. 1965. .... 1992. Field Manual for Water Quality Monitoring. Dexter,. Michigan: Thomson-Shore Printers.
Microscopic Algae in Monitoring of the Yarqon River
CONTENTS LIST OF ABBREVIATION ………………………………………………………. CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION …………………………………………….…... Israel's coastal rivers ………….…….…………………..……………………..…….. The Yarqon River ………………….…………………..……………………..……... Algal and cyanobacteria ecology ……………………...………….............................. Algal and cyanobacteria of the Yarqon River………....………….............................. Algae and cyanobacteria as Ecological Bio-indicators................................................ Use algae and cyanobacteria for monitoring water quality of the river …….………. Periphyton ecology ……………………………………………….............................. Diatom ecology ………………….………………………………............................... Algae and cyanobacteria Data Base ……………………………………………..…... pH-classification system according to Hustedt (1938-39) …………………..……… Salinity classification system according to Hustedt (1957) ……...……………..…… The Saprobic system …………..…………………………………………………..… Environmental Pollution Index (EPI) ……………………………………………...... Statistical approach: Canonical Correspondence Analysis (CCA) …………….....… Bio-assessment of water quality (bio-test)…………………………………………... Water Quality Index (WQI) ……………………………………………………..….. Bioluminescence Bioassay (bio-test) ……………………………………………….. Algal vegetative activity (in vitro) experimental definition by the glass slide method ……………………………………………………………………………………….. Objectives of the study………………………………………………………………. CHAPTER 2. MATERIAL AND METHODS…………………………..…........... Material ……………………………………………………………………………… Description of the sampling stations in the Yarqon River ………………….……….. Equipments………………………………………………………..……….………… The taxonomical identification ……………………………………………………… Algal flora of coastal rivers comparison …………………………………………….. Methods ....……………………………………………………………………………
7 9 11 12 17 19 20 21 22 24 25 26 27 28 31 32 34 34 35 36 38 39 39 39 42 43 44 44 3
S. Barinova, M. Tavassi, E. Nevo
The indices of saprobity (S) calculation ..…………………………………………… Sládeček model ............................…………………………………………………… Environmental Pollution Index (EPI) …………………………………………...…... Integral index of river pollution (RPI) ………………………………………..……... Water Ecosystem State Index (WESI)……… ………………………………..……... Canonical Correspondence Analysis (CCA) ……………………………..…….....… Bioassay Methods……………………………………………………………….…… Water Quality Index (WQI) ……………………………………………………...….. Bioassay by Bacteria species…………..………………………………………….…. Algal vegetative activity examination by the Glass Slide method (in vitro)……..….. Chlorophyll measurement……………………………………………………….…... CHAPTER 3. ALGAL DIVERSITY AND ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF WATER QUALITY IN THE YARQON RIVER ................................................... Water quality conditions …………………………………………...…....................... Taxonomic composition ………………………………………………....................... Temperature induce change of algal communities composition ……………………. Israel's coastal rivers aquatic communities' comparison ……………….…………… Algal and cyanobacteria bio-indication of water quality…………………………….. Ecological indicators of temperature ……………………………….….…………..... Bio-indication of pH level …………………………………………………..……… Bio-indication of salinity level ………………………………………………. …….. Ecological indicators of streaming and oxygenation ……………………….……..… Ecological indicators of algal habitats (substrate preferences) . ..………………….... Ecological indicators of organic pollution (after Watanabe) ………………………... Water quality category based on saprobity of Sládeček model ….…………….……. Discussion on algal bio-indication ………………………………………..…………. Dynamics of species diversity in algal communities ……………………………...… Dynamics of algal indicators of pH …………………………………………………. Dynamics of algal indicators of salinity ………………………………..…………… Dynamics of algal indicators of water quality based on the saprobity index ..……… Dynamics of algal indicators of water quality based on Watanabe’s classification ………………………………………………………………………………………... 4
44 45 45 47 47 48 48 48 52 52 54 57 57 59 62 63 66 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 76 77 78 79
Microscopic Algae in Monitoring of the Yarqon River
Saprobity index S …………………………………………………………..………... Environmental Pollution Index (EPI) ………………………………………..……… River Pollution Indices (RPI) ………………………………………………...……… Water Ecosystem State Index (WESI) ……………………………..………… Saprobity Model …………………………………………………………...………… CANONICAL CORRESPONDENCE ANALYSIS (CCA) …………..………… WATER QUALITY INDEX (WQI) AND BIOLUMINESCENT BIOASSAY... Water Quality Index (WQI)…………………..……………………………………… Bioluminescence bioassay…………………..……………………………………….. ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF SELF-PURIFICATION INTENSITY BY GLASS SLIDE METHOD ……………..………………………………………….. Statistical analysis of Chlorophyll data ….………………………………………….. Statistical analysis of biological data ……………………………………………….. Experiment conclusions ………………………………...…………………………… CHAPTER 4. ECOLOGICAL CONCLUSION …………………………….…… Species richness in the Yarqon River ……………………………………………….. Algal species composition: spatial and temporal ………………………………..…... Comparison of algal flora in the coastal rivers of Israel ………………………..…… The Yarqon River water quality ……………………………………………….……. Bio-indication …………………………………………………………………….…. Water Ecosystem State Index (WESI) …………………………………………..…... Water quality bioassay …………………………………………………………..…... Canonical Correspondence Analysis (CCA): Biosensor species …………………..... Glass slides method experiment of diversity dynamic .…………………………..…. Summary of all used methods ………………………………………………………. Final statements …………………………………………………………………...… Acknowledgements ………………………………………………………...………. REFERENCES ……………………………………………………………….……. APPENDIX I. Algal indicators of environment in the Yarqon River with its ecological preferences ………………………………………………………………. APPENDIX II. Atlas of algae and cyanobacteria species from the Yarqon River communities ……………………………………………………………..…………...
81 83 84 85 86 87 108 108 108 111 113 116 123 125 125 125 126 126 127 128 129 129 130 130 134 134 135 157 173 5
S. Barinova, M. Tavassi, E. Nevo
6
Microscopic Algae in Monitoring of the Yarqon River
LIST OF ABBREVIATION AChe - Acetylcholinesterase B-IBI - Biological Integrity Bi - Bioluminescence Index BOD - Biochemical Oxygen Demand CCA - Canonical Correspondence Analysis CO2 - Carbon dioxide COD - Chemical Oxygen Demand Ec - Electrical Conductivity EPI - Environment Pollution Index FeS - Iron sulfide H2S - Hydrogen sulfide NH3 - Ammonia NO2 - Nitrit O2% - Oxygen saturation P - Phosphorus PAHs - Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons PCBs - Polychlorinated Biphenyls RPI - River Pollution Index S - Saprobity Index TDS - Total Dissolved Solids TSS - Total Suspend Solids WESI - Water Ecosystem Sustainable Index WQI - Water Quality Index
7
S. Barinova, M. Tavassi, E. Nevo
8
Chapter I. Introduction
INTRODUCTION Rivers and streams constitute complex ecosystems in which many environmental factors vary on different spatial and temporal scales. These variables range from climate, land use, and geomorphology in the watershed to the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of rivers and streams. In most environmental studies, as many variables as possible should be measured in order to infer environmental conditions in a habitat. Measurement of all chemical and physical factors that may constitute important determinants of ecosystem integrity is impractical. Biological indicators respond to altered chemical and physical conditions that may not have been measured. Biological indicators, based on organisms living from one day to several years, provide an integrated assessment of environmental conditions in streams and rivers that are spatially and temporally highly variable (Dokulil, 2003). Biological monitoring and assessment methods are important tools to support decision-making within river management. The biotic component of an aquatic ecosystem may indeed be considered as an ‘integrating-information-unit’ for assessment of its quality. Biological communities also integrate the effect of mixed types of stress and, in certain cases, respond before analytical detection allows (De Pauw and Hawkes, 1993). Nearly all countries in the European Union have a national monitoring program for rivers, generally based on physical, chemical, and microbiological monitoring (Mancini, 2006). The European Water Framework Directive operates with five different ecological classes assessed by using a wide array of biotic variables including phytoplankton, macrophytes, invertebrates, and fish (Søndergaard et al., 2005). Israel Ministry of Environmental Protection has recommendations for effluent quality standards for unrestricted irrigation and for discharge to rivers (www.sviva.gov.il; Table 1.1), which lack biological parameters of water quality.
9
S. Barinova, M. Tavassi, E. Nevo
Table 1.1. Israel Ministry of Environmental Protection proposed maximum levels for dissolved and suspended elements and compounds for unrestricted irrigation and for discharge to the rivers (www.sviva.gov.il). Parameter Conductivity BOD TSS COD Ammonia Total Nitrogen Total Phosphorus Chloride Fluoride Sodium E. Coli Dissolved Oxygen pH Chlorine Anion detergent Total Oil Boron Arsenic Barium Mercury Chromium Nickel Selenium Lead Cadmium Zinc 10
Units ms/cm mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l Per 100 ml mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l
Unrestricted Irrigation 1.4 10 10 100 20 20 5 250 2 150 10 1 mg/l). The polluted section suffered from low-water quality because of the effluents and sewage, which enter the Yarqon via the Qane tributary. 16
Chapter I. Introduction
Palevitch (2002) monitored the quality of Yarqon water using two biomarkers in teleosts: (i) the inhibition of acetylcholinesterase (AChe) indicate exposure to pesticide. (ii) The induction of hepatic cytochrome P4501A and its typical catalytic activity, and EROD (7-ethoxyresorufin Odeethylase) in response to exposure to toxic and carcinogenic environmental contaminants, i.e., polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). The study indicated that the Yarqon’s water contains toxic pollutants in amounts that are significant, i.e., Tilapia fish that were exposed to water from the central section of the Yarqon River usually died within a few hours. These biomarkers point to a chronic pollution of the river’s central and salty section by residues of pesticides and toxic industrial waste. Wastewater treatment plants contribute to the pollution as well by discharging highly toxic compounds. The Rosh Ha’Ayin reservoir contains a chronic low level of toxic hydrocarbons and is occasionally contaminated by pesticides. Hershkowitz (2002) estimated the Yarqon River biological integrity (B-IBI) using macroinvertebrate assemblage composition as a bio-monitor. The values of the B-IBI ranged between 1 (“very poor”) and 5 (“very good”). The Yarqon River was divided into three levels of river impairment: a. relatively unimpacted site with B-IBI > 3.5 at the upper section (stations 13 and 14) b. slightly impacted site with B-IBI 2-3 at the lower site of the upper clean section –Abu-Rhabach (station 12) and at the lower site of the central section at “10 mills” and “7 mills” stations, c. highly impacted sites with B-IBI
