Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T18:24:32.717Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Influence of environmental factors on biodiversity, abundance and the distribution pattern of dinoflagellates and ciliates during spring and summer in coastal waters of Algeria (southwestern Mediterranean Sea)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2023

Redha Sidi Ali*
Affiliation:
Pelagic-ecosystem Laboratory, Faculty of Biological Sciences, University of Sciences and Technology Houari Boumediene (USTHB), BP. 32, El-Alia Bab-Ezzouar 16111, Algiers, Algeria
Ghollame Ellah Yacine Khames
Affiliation:
Pelagic-ecosystem Laboratory, Faculty of Biological Sciences, University of Sciences and Technology Houari Boumediene (USTHB), BP. 32, El-Alia Bab-Ezzouar 16111, Algiers, Algeria
Zakia Alioua
Affiliation:
Fisheries Laboratory, Faculty of Biological Sciences, University of Sciences and Technology Houari Boumediene (USTHB), BP. 32, El-Alia Bab-Ezzouar 16111, Algiers, Algeria
Rabea Seridji
Affiliation:
Pelagic-ecosystem Laboratory, Faculty of Biological Sciences, University of Sciences and Technology Houari Boumediene (USTHB), BP. 32, El-Alia Bab-Ezzouar 16111, Algiers, Algeria
*
Corresponding author: Redha Sidi Ali; Email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The objective of this study was to assess the distribution patterns of dinoflagellates and ciliates communities during planktonic bloom and post-bloom development periods, in relation to environmental parameters. Their distribution was studied during spring and summer 2012, in coastal waters of Algeria at six sampling stations (four sampling layers). Overall, 116 species were identified, including 98 dinoflagellates. The species richness of microzooplankton was higher in summer (81 species: 67 dinoflagellates, seven tintinnids and seven ciliates) than in spring (76 species: 72 dinoflagellates, three naked ciliates and one tintinnid). Significant difference in total abundances was observed between spring (median = 145 ind l−1) and summer (median = 90 ind l−1) but no significance (P > 0.05, Mann–Whitney test) in Shannon–Wiener (H′spring: 3.31 bits ind−1; H′summer: 3.70 bits ind−1) and evenness (Espring: 0.77; Esummer: 0.84) indices. The ciliate average abundance was higher in summer (11.3 ind l−1) than in spring (1.95 ind l−1), whereas dinoflagellate average abundance was lower in summer (127.92 ind l−1) than spring (190.19 ind l−1). Non-metric multidimensional scaling was used to identify different sample assemblages. It showed that temperature and salinity influenced the distribution pattern in the canonical correspondence analysis followed by chlorophyll a, silicate and nitrate concentrations. Our framework provides insight regarding trait trade off with implications for feedbacks to ecosystems, aiming to bridge the gap of plankton community ecology in Algeria. It elaborates a taxonomic list of dinoflagellates and ciliates in the marine pelagic ecosystem and performs their ecological characterization in their environment.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom

Introduction

Microzooplankton occupy a key position in marine food-webs as major consumers of primary producers. They act as an intermediate between primary producers and copepods and are key component of the microbial loop (Sherr and Sherr, Reference Sherr and Sherr2002; Calbet and Landry, Reference Calbet and Landry2004; Calbet and Saiz, Reference Calbet and Saiz2005; Calbet, Reference Calbet2008). The microbial loop comprises bacteria, flagellates, ciliates and other microzooplankton (less than 200 μm in diameter) in the water column (Mclachlan and Defeo, Reference Mclachlan and Defeo2018). These heterotrophic and mixotrophic organisms of 20–200 μm include many protists, such as ciliates, dinoflagellates, foraminifera, metazoans (like copepod nauplii and some copepodites) and some meroplanktonic larvae (Calbet, Reference Calbet2008). Microzooplankton are also important contributors to the diet of mesozooplankton (copepods), and have key roles in marine ecosystems as nutrient recyclers, and CO2 producers (Calbet and Alcaraz, Reference Calbet and Alcaraz2007). They are also the main consumers of phytoplankton in tropical and subtropical oligotrophic waters (Calbet, Reference Calbet2008). Their consumption represents about 50% of the phytoplankton biomass per day (Calbet and Landry, Reference Calbet and Landry2004). In Atlantic-influenced polar system, microzooplankton play a significant role in the carbon cycle which has the capacity to control primary production in both ice-covered and open waters (Lavrentyev et al., Reference Lavrentyev, Franzè and Moore2019). Microzooplankton herbivory on average removed 72% (in two experiments >100%) of daily primary production in sea ice cover.

Among planktonic groups, dinoflagellates are known for their species richness, morphological diversity and the heterogeneity of their habitat (Smayda and Reynolds, Reference Smayda and Reynolds2003). They can directly or indirectly have a significant effect on marine ecosystems, as they have important ecological implications in terms of their nutritional status (Smayda and Reynolds, Reference Smayda and Reynolds2003). Some of them can cause harmful algal blooms through their ability to produce toxins, and when they can invade existing ecosystems (Ignatiades and Gotsis-Skretas, Reference Ignatiades and Gotsis-Skretas2010). Ciliates are morphologically very diverse (Lynn, Reference Lynn2008). In the marine food web, they play a major role in grazing picoplankton and nanoplankton while at the same time serving as prey for metazoans; thus, acting as an intermediate for energy transfer to higher trophic levels (Stoecker and Capuzzo, Reference Stoecker and Capuzzo1990). Both dinoflagellates and ciliates are important in the functioning of aquatic ecosystems because they are ubiquitous and abundant in all habitat types (Laybourn-Parry and Parry, Reference Laybourn-Parry and Parry2000). Information on microzooplankton distribution is available, mainly from the western and the central basin of the north part of the Mediterranean Sea (Paraskevi et al., Reference Paraskevi, Giannakourou and Christaki2001). In the southern part, few studies have examined the microzooplankton diversity and abundance with rare evaluations of the species richness, especially in the Algerian coast.

Habibas Islands of Alboran Sea are located at 26 miles from Cape Figalo west of Oran, 10 miles from the port of Bouzedjar and 5.8 miles from the nearest continental point at Madagh II (Figure 1 and Table 1). These Islands are among the most important marine ecosystems in Algeria that constitute an essential habitat of endemic and rare terrestrial and marine species. Executive Decree n°03-147 of March 29th 2003 classifying the Habibas Islands (wilayaof Oran) as a marine nature reserve. Published in Official Journal no. 23, then as Specially Protected Area of Mediterranean Interest (SPAMIs) in 2005, during the Barcelona Convention framework (UNEP/MAP-SPA/RAC, 2020). This biological hotspot is characterized by the presence of various Mediterranean marine protected species (e.g. Lithophyllum lichenoides, Patella ferruginea, Centrostephanus longispinus, Epinephelus marginatus, Pinna nobilis) including marine mammals (e.g. Stenella coeruleoalba) (SPAMI Collaborative Platform, 2019), coralligenous substratum and the presence of underwater caves, dark or semi-obscure, in addition to the fine and/or coarse sand grounds.

Figure 1. Sampling stations in coastal waters of Algeria (southwestern Mediterranean Sea).

Table 1. Sampling station coordinates in coastal waters of Algeria

Some researchers were interested to study the biodiversity of coastal waters of Algeria such as the ecological aspects of endangered species (Larbi Doukara, Reference Larbi Doukara2019), the distribution of the Eleonora's Falcon Falco eleonorae (Peyre et al., Reference Peyre, Telailia, Benhartiga and Beddek2018) and different aspects of gorgonians populations (Benabdi, Reference Benabdi2020). From pelagic organisms, taxonomic studies of zooplankton from coastal waters of Algeria were only performed on mesozooplankton and macrozooplankton (Chaouadi and Hafferssas, Reference Chaouadi and Hafferssas2018; Khames and Hafferssas, Reference Khames and Hafferssas2019; Kherchouche and Hafferssas, Reference Kherchouche and Hafferssas2020) with no information on the microzooplankton in this area. Other research was conducted on microphytoplankton (Drira et al., Reference Drira, Hassen, Hamza, Rebai, Bouain, Ayadi and Aleya2009), prokaryotic and eukaryotic microorganisms (Elloumi et al., Reference Elloumi, Guermazi, Ayadi, Bouain and Aleya2009) and phytoplankton and ciliates (Drira et al., Reference Drira, Hamza, Hassen, Ayadi, Bouain and Aleya2010; Hannachi et al., Reference Hannachi, Drira, Hassen, Hamza, Ayadi and Aleya2011) along the Tunisian coast. However, this study reflects on the pelagic ecosystem in Algeria to bridge the gap of plankton community ecology in coastal waters of Algeria. It provides information on biodiversity and abundance of dinoflagellates and ciliates in an important Mediterranean hotspot, because of its ecological importance in marine food webs.

The main objectives of this paper are as follows: (1) study the composition of dinoflagellates and ciliates; (2) characterize their variations during the development period (planktonic bloom and post-bloom) corresponding to spring and summer according to Hinder et al. (Reference Hinder, Hays, Edwards, Roberts, Walne and Gravenor2012); and (3) analyse the influence of environmental parameters on their structure and distribution pattern.

Materials and methods

Sampling areas

The oceanographic cruise was carried out in coastal waters of Algeria from May 2012 to July 2012. A total of 47 samples were collected by Niskin-Type Plastic Water Sampler (HYDRO6BIOS PWS) at six stations from the surface mixed layer at depths of 5, 15, 30 and 50 m, then subdivided into two sub-samples. The first sub-sample consisted of 1 litre of water fixed in acid Lugol's iodine at 5%, and stored in the dark for subsequent analysis in the laboratory. It was intended for qualitative and quantitative study of microzooplankton. The second sub-sample (100 ml) was immediately frozen at −20 °C. Later it was defrosted, and an auto-analyser (SKALAR SAN PLUS) was used for setting the dosage of nutrients (nitrate, nitrite, silicate, phosphate). Temperature and salinity were instantly measured after sampling using a multi-parameter (HI 9828-12202/Romania). For the chlorophyll a, satellite images were downloaded using the internet website of National Aeronautics and Space Administration (2022). The extraction of the information from these satellite images was performed using ENVI 4.8 software. The results obtained were classified in a spreadsheet for each station.

Microscopic analysis

To identify and quantify microzooplankton, 10 ml was settled in sedimentation chambers after pre-concentration of 1 litre sub-sample for 72 h (Edler and Elbrächter, Reference Edler and Elbrächter2010). These settled samples were examined using a Zeiss Axiovert25 inverted microscope, at a magnification of ×200 and ×400. Dinoflagellates and ciliates were counted and identified to genus or species level using key identification references (Tomas, Reference Tomas1997; Strüder-Kypke et al., Reference Strüder-Kypke, Kypke, Agatha, Warwick and Montagnes2001; Avancini et al., Reference Avancini, Cicero, Di Girolamo, Innamorati and Magaletti2006; Abboud-Abi Saab, Reference Abboud-Abi Saab2008; Dolan et al., Reference Dolan, Montagnes, Agatha, Coats and Stoecker2012a). Furthermore, metazoan microzooplankton were only counted but not identified and classified as other zooplankton.

Data analysis

Microzooplankton abundance was estimated and expressed as number of individuals per litre (LeGresley and McDermott, Reference LeGresley and McDermott2010). Dominance was calculated for each season as follows:

$$Y = \displaystyle{{n_i} \over N} \times f_i, \;$$

where n i represents abundance of the i species, N represents abundance of all species and f i represents occurrence frequency of the i species. According to Xu and Chen (Reference Xu and Chen1989), species is dominant when Y  ≥  0.02.

The commonly used diversity parameters, including species richness, Pielou's evenness (E) and Shannon–Wiener diversity index (H′) (Magurran, Reference Magurran2013), were calculated for each sample. The non-parametric Mann–Whitney test was used to assess the difference of diversity indices between the two seasons.

Non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS), based on the Bray–Curtis distance, was used to identify different samples assemblage. They were compared using analysis of similarity (ANOSIM), a non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance test (Clarke, Reference Clarke1993). The main species responsible for creation of similarity patterns between groups assessed by ANOSIM were identified using similarity percentage analysis (SIMPER) (Clarke, Reference Clarke1993). In order to assess the changes of microzooplankton community through seasons relative to environmental variables, multivariate statistical analyses were used (Borcard et al., Reference Borcard, Gillet and Legendre2018). To check if unimodal constrained ordination methods were appropriate an initial detrended correspondence analysis (DCA) was performed (Smilauer and Leps, Reference Smilauer and Leps2014). The length gradient was more than 3 units of standard deviation, indicating heterogeneous dataset for which canonical correspondence analysis (CCA) were appropriate. The most significant environmental factors (temperature, salinity, chlorophyll a, nitrate, silicate and seasons) were selected among ten initial factors (i.e. temperature, salinity, NO2, NO3, PO4, SiO2, Chlorophyll a, depth, stations and other microzooplankton) using the model-building method to create the best model for CCA (Gardener, Reference Gardener2014). The significance of each environmental variable was tested with a Monte Carlo permutation test (999 permutations). Also, Spearman correlation test was used to evaluate pairwise correlations between species abundances and environmental factors. All statistical analyses were performed using R (R Core Team, 2020) and python (Van Rossum, Reference Van Rossum2021).

Results

Environmental factors

In coastal waters of Algeria, the sea surface temperature ranged between 15.2 and 19.9 °C in spring (average of 16.89 °C) and 17.10 and 24.50 °C in summer (average of 21.55 °C) (Figure 2). The temperature gradient was wider in summer (5–45 m) than in spring (5–20 m) (Figure 3). Statistical difference of sea surface temperature was found between spring and summer (P < 0.05, Mann–Whitney test). For the sea surface salinity, significant differences were noted between the two seasons (P < 0.05, Mann–Whitney test). Values were lower in spring, ranging from 34 to 34.90 with an average of 34.52, than summer with a minimum of 34.70, a maximum of 35.20 and an average value of 35.00 (Figure 2). The vertical variation of salinity was more evident in spring than in summer (Figure 3).

Figure 2. Box plot of physico-chemical parameters (A: temperature, B: salinity, C: nitrite, D: phosphate, E: silicate, F: nitrate) in spring (green) and summer (red). The vertical lines (whiskers) represent the range of the data outside of the central 50% of the data, which is represented by the box. The dots outside of the whiskers represent outliers.

Figure 3. Temperature and salinity contour maps of sampling stations in the coastal waters of Algeria in spring and summer.

Significant differences were observed between spring and summer (P < 0.05, Mann–Whitney test) concentrations of chlorophyll a. Maximum values were in May (0.41–0.47 mg m−3), while minimum was registered in July with values that did not exceed 0.30 mg m−3 (Figure 4). The nitrite concentrations recorded in spring were low (0.02–0.33 μmol l−1) compared to summer (0.04–1.11 μmol l−1) and showed a significant difference between spring and summer (P < 0.05, Mann–Whitney test). For silicate and phosphate concentrations, significant differences were noted between both seasons (P < 0.05, Mann–Whitney test) too. In fact, silicate concentrations during spring were higher (from 2.22 to 3.14 μmol l−1) comparatively to summer (from 1.12 to 2.22 μmol l−1). Phosphate concentrations were also high in spring (from 0.11 to 2.07 μmol l−1) conversely to summer (from 0.013 to 0.17 μmol l−1). The nitrate concentration did not show any significant difference between seasons (P > 0.05, Mann–Whitney test) ranging from 0.05 to 0.99 μmol l−1 in spring and from 0.009 to 1.32 μmol l−1 in summer (Figure 2).

Figure 4. Chlorophyll a of surface layer (5 m) of the six sampling stations in coastal waters of Algeria in spring and summer.

Species composition

A total of 98 dinoflagellates, eight tintinnids and seven naked ciliates were identified during the cruise (Table 2). Species richness recorded 76 species (72 dinoflagellates, three naked ciliates and one tintinnid) in spring and 81 species in summer (67 dinoflagellates, seven tintinnids, seven ciliates). There were only 38.9% of species (41 dinoflagellates and three naked ciliates) that were common between spring and summer, while 61.1% of species were specific to each season (Figure 5).

Table 2. List of microzooplankton taxa recorded per season in coastal waters of Algeria

+, present; −, absent.

Figure 5. Seasonal distribution (Venn diagram) of dinoflagellates and ciliates species in coastal waters of Algeria in spring (green) and summer (red) (values indicate the number of species found in each season).

Total abundances

Abundances of microzooplankton were higher in spring compared to summer (Figure 6 and Table 3). In spring, high microzooplankton abundances were mainly located at 5 m between station 3 (716 ind l−1) and station 6 (305 ind l−1) (Figure 6). The low values were found in layers inferior to 30 m (<200 ind l−1). In summer, microzooplankton abundances between 5 m and 30 m were low (<237 ind l−1). These values increased at 50 m (between 68 and 601 ind l−1) (Figure 6). Therefore, total abundance levels differed significantly between spring and summer (P < 0.05, Mann–Whitney test).

Figure 6. Scatterpie plot of total and relative abundance of microzooplankton groups in coastal waters of Algeria (A: spring, B: summer).

Table 3. Abundances (ind l−1) of microzooplankton with seasons and depths sampled in coastal waters of Algeria

Dinoflagellate abundances were most prevalent in spring (between 595 ind l−1 (50 m) and 1541 ind l−1 (5 m)) and summer (between 434 ind l−1 (5 m) and 1507 ind l−1 (50 m)). Ciliates appeared mostly during summer period, at stations and depths with high abundance (between 43 ind l−1 (15 m) and 79 ind l−1 (5 m)) compared to spring (between 0 ind l−1 (5 m) and 37 ind l−1 (15 m)) (Figure 6 and Table 3).

Community structure

Medians of the three main diversity indices, including species richness (18 and 22.5, respectively in spring and summer), evenness index (E spring: 0.77; E summer: 0.84) and Shannon–Wiener index (H′ spring: 3.31; H′ summer: 3.70 bits ind−1) showed no significant differences between spring and summer (P > 0.05, Mann–Whitney test) (Figure 7). However, we found a significant difference in total abundances between spring (median = 144.9 ind l−1) and summer (median = 89.89 ind l−1) (P < 0.05, Mann–Whitney test). The comparison of median partial abundances of ciliates (spring median = 0, summer median = 6) and dinoflagellates (spring median = 173.65, summer median = 86.33) groups between both seasons showed significant differences too.

Figure 7. Boxplots of the diversity (species richness, evenness and Shannon–Wiener indices) and Logabundance of microzooplankton communities sampled in coastal waters of Algeria during spring (green) and summer (red). The vertical lines (whiskers) represent the range of the data outside of the central 50% of the data, which is represented by the box. The dots outside of the whiskers represent outliers.

The difference in microzooplankton abundances as shown in the NMDS plot (stress of 0.15) (Figure 8) clearly distinguished two groups (spring and summer) and was statistically confirmed by similarity analyses (P < 0.05, ANOSIM test). Average dissimilarity (separation) between spring and summer was high (75.86%, Simper, Table 4). As shown in Table 4, species that contribute to 70% of the dissimilarity were divided according to their dominance in three groups: (1) dominant species in spring and summer (DS) (Alexandrium spp., Tripos furca, Tripos fusus, Dinophysis caudata, Dinophysis ovum, Triadinium polyedricum, Goniodoma sphaericum, Gonyaulax polygramma, Gonyaulax spinifera, Gyrodinium fusiforme, Protoperidinium conicum, Protoperidinium divergens, Protoperidinium globulus, Protoperidinium tuba, Scrippsiella acuminata); (2) dominant species in one season and absent in the other (DA) (Tripos massiliense, Craspedotella pileolus, Diplopsalis lenticula, Gyrodinium spirale, Oxytoxum viride, Prorocentrum balticum, Protoperidinium pellucidum, Strombidium spp., Torodinium robustum); (3) dominant species in one season and rare in the other (DR) (Tripos horridus, Leegaardiella sol, Ornithocercus magnificus, Tryblionella compressa, Protoperidinium oceanicum, Protoperidinium subinerme).

Figure 8. Non-multidimensional scaling ordination (NMDS) of microzooplankton abundances from the 47 samples collected in coastal waters of Algeria.

Table 4. Results of the similarity percentage (SIMPER) analysis and the analysis of similarity (ANOSIM) of variance between two seasons

ANOSIM test: R = 0.597; P value = 0.001; average dissimilarity = 75.86.

DS, dominant species in spring and summer; DA, dominant species in one season and absent in the other; DR, dominant species in one season and rare in the other.

Dominant species in spring and summer were responsible for 42% of the dissimilarity. Species that occurred in one season and absent in the other contributed to 17.91% of the dissimilarity. Dominant species in one season and rare in the other were responsible for 11.01% of the dissimilarity.

In order to identify the relationships between microzooplankton distributions and environmental factors, CCA was illustrated in Figure 9 and Table 5. Six parameters (i.e. temperature, salinity, nitrate, silicate, chlorophyll a and seasons) were selected using the model building for shaping patterns of microzooplankton community. CCA ordination showed that the six factors were able to explain 28.5% (axe 1: 34.6%; axe 22.41%) of the total variability of community composition, across all sampling sites (Figure 9A). The samples collected during the summer period were positively related to water temperature and salinity, while samples performed in spring were positively related to silicate and chlorophyll a (Figure 9A). Ordinated abundances showed that abundances of dinoflagellates were negatively correlated with water temperature and salinity (Figure 9B). However, abundances of ciliates were negatively correlated with silicate and chlorophyll a, but positively correlated with temperature and salinity. Other zooplankton were negatively correlated with water temperature and salinity, but positively correlated with silicates and chlorophyll a.

Figure 9. (A) Canonical correspondence analysis triplot of microzooplankton abundances showing the distribution of the 47 samples (green points: spring samples; red points: summer samples) and environmental variables (blue arrows) in coastal waters of Algeria. The total explained inertia (28.5%), and partial explained inertia (axe 1: 34.6%; axe 22.41%). NO3: nitrate; SiO2: silicate. (B) Scatterpie plot of ordinated total and partial microzooplankton group abundances based on CCA simple scores.

Table 5. ANOVA-like permutation test for constrained correspondence analysis for environmental parameters through seasons and depth of sampling in coastal waters of Algeria

***Very significant, *significant, ns: not significant.

The projection on the ordination plan of dominant dinoflagellates such as S. acuminata, P. globulus, G. fusiforme and T. furca, highlighting a strong dissimilarity (Table 4), showed that abundances of P. globulus and T. furca were significantly abundant in spring, whereas G. fusiform was abundant in summer (P < 0.05, Mann–Whitney test) (Figure 10). S. acuminata did not show any significant difference between spring and summer (P > 0.05, Mann–Whitney test). However, pair-wise Spearman correlations (Figure 11) revealed that S. acuminata and P. globulus were negatively correlated with temperature and salinity, but positively with depth. P. globulus was positively correlated with silicate and phosphate, but negatively with nitrite. G. fusiforme was positively correlated with depth and nitrate but negatively with silicate. Also, a negative correlation was observed for T. furca associated to nitrite and depth whereas positive ones with silicate and phosphate.

Figure 10. Balloon plot of ordinated species abundances based on CCA sample scores sampled in coastal waters of Algeria.

Figure 11. Graphical display of a pairwise Spearman correlation matrix between species abundances and environmental factors of coastal waters of Algeria. Temp: temperature; Sal: salinity; Si(OH)4: silicate; NO3: nitrate; NO2: nitrite.

Discussion

The present assessment contributes to improve knowledge on dinoflagellates and ciliates distribution communities, in Habibas Islands, the first Algerian marine protected area. It elaborates a taxonomic list of these important groups in the marine pelagic ecosystems, with little available taxonomic information in the studied area. For a better understanding of its ecology, the spatial and spring–summer variability of dinoflagellates and ciliates communities was explored according to environmental factors.

Species composition

In this study, 98 species of dinoflagellates were identified belonging to 28 genera. However, a high number corresponding to 181 taxa was observed by Boudjenah et al. (Reference Boudjenah, Mokrane and Soualili2019) along the Algerian coastline. In the western Mediterranean Sea, Gómez (Reference Gómez2003) reported that 151 and 179 dinoflagellates species were recorded respectively in the Algerian and Alboran coasts. In the eastern Mediterranean, 157 species were identified by Lakkis and Novel-lakkis (Reference Lakkis and Novel-lakkis1981) followed by 174 taxa (Polat and Koray, Reference Polat and Koray2007). Moreover, the number of planktonic ciliates (17 species) of this study was the same number found by Rekik et al. (Reference Rekik, Ben Salem, Ayadi and Elloumi2016). However, it was very low than observed in the south coast of Sfax and the Gulf of Gabes (Kchaou et al., Reference Kchaou, Elloumi, Drira, Hamza, Ayadi, Bouain and Aleya2009; Elloumi et al., Reference Elloumi, Drira, Hamza and Ayadi2015; Rekik et al., Reference Rekik, Kmiha-Megdiche, Drira, Pagano, Ayadi, Zouari and Elloumi2021), which recorded between 56 and 63 taxas. These differences in microzooplankton diversity are linked to the study sites, the climate variability and the sampling period that affect the planktonic composition and distribution (Irigoien et al., Reference Irigoien, Huisman and Harris2004; Hays et al., Reference Hays, Richardson and Robinson2005).

Variation of abundances with environmental factors

In this study, temperature and salinity were the most relevant factors in shaping the species distribution patterns, followed by chlorophyll a, silicate and nitrate. All these factors had a significant impact on the distribution of microzooplankton abundances. This result was confirmed by comparing the indices (abundance, Shannon–Wiener, evenness and species richness). The only significant difference was between total abundances and it was confirmed by the dissimilarity analysis. Moreover, the ecological characterization of dinoflagellates and ciliates showed mature populations according to the evenness index (Magurran, Reference Magurran2013). This statement leads to oligotrophic environment.

NMDS and CCA ordinations have separated the samples into two groups according to the sampling seasons (spring and summer). By comparing the indices (abundance, Shannon–Wiener, evenness and species richness), we can state that the seasonal transition affected the abundances (high in spring and low in summer) but had no significant effect on the diversity. This was also confirmed by similarity percentage analysis (SIMPER). Moreover, the ecological characterization of dinoflagellates and ciliates showed mature populations according to the evenness index. This statement leads to oligotrophic environment.

Temperature and salinity were the most relevant factors in shaping the species distribution patterns, followed by chlorophyll a, silicate and nitrate. All these factors had a significant impact on the distribution of microzooplankton abundances.

The seasonal evolution of chlorophyll a distribution still follows the typical succession of temperate regions, characterized by a phytoplankton abundance increase in spring, a decrease during the summer season (Siokou-Frangou et al., Reference Siokou-Frangou, Christaki, Mazzocchi, Montresor, D'Alcala Ribera, Vaqúe and Zingone2010; Gasol et al., Reference Gasol, Cardelús, Morán, Balagué, Forn, Marrasé, Massana, Pedrós-Alió, Sala and Simó2016; El Hourany et al., Reference El Hourany, Abboud-abi Saab, Faour, Mejia, Crépon and Thiria2019). Similar observations were reported in distinct regions of the northern Adriatic Sea (Mozetič et al., Reference Mozetič, Francé, Kogovšek, Talaber and Malej2012). Phytoplankton, in the north-eastern Adriatic Sea in the period 2010–2017, showed a maximum abundance characterized by a bloom in spring, with a peak in May (Cerino et al., Reference Cerino, Fornasaro, Kralj, Giani and Cabrini2019). Relatively high values (up to 1.7 g C m−2 d−1) have been reported in the Catalan front area in March (Moran and Estrada, Reference Morán and Estrada2005) and in the Alboran Sea in May–June (Lohrenz et al., Reference Lohrenz, Wiesenburg, DePalma, Johnson and Gustafson1988).

Microzooplankton are a major predator for phytoplankton in the ocean (Sherr and Sherr, Reference Sherr and Sherr2002; Calbet and Landry, Reference Calbet and Landry2004), and they are themselves important prey for zooplankton (Calbet and Saiz, Reference Calbet and Saiz2005). Then, changes in the temperature could have also significant direct effects on the composition, abundance, feeding activities and growth efficiency of local microzooplankton species (Rose and Caron, Reference Rose and Caron2007; Caron and Hutchins, Reference Caron and Hutchins2013).

During spring, high dinoflagellate abundances were observed in coastal waters of Algeria in May. Similar observations were reported in the southwestern Mediterranean, at Tunis (Daly Yahia-Kéfi et al., Reference Daly Yahia-Kéfi, Souissi, Gómez and Yahia2005) and Ville-Franche bays (Gómez and Gorsky, Reference Gómez and Gorsky2003), where dinoflagellates were numerous from March to May. In summer, the abundance of dinoflagellates decreased. Their maximum values were registered in deep layers when temperature and salinity were low. Dale et al. (Reference Dale, Edwards and Reid2006) reported that under unfavourable conditions, dinoflagellates have a competitive advantage due to their ability to swim to deeper layers (characterized by low temperatures and nutrients). In addition to physical variables such as temperature and depth, food requirements are related to dinoflagellates population dynamics. Most of them are mixotrophic or heterotrophic (Ismael, Reference Ismael2003). Their diverse feeding mechanisms allow them the ability to feed on diverse prey items including bacteria, picoeukaryotes, nanoflagellates, diatoms, other dinoflagellates and ciliates (Stoecker et al., Reference Stoecker, Hansen, Caron and Mitra2017).

In this study, high abundances of ciliates were associated with high temperatures and low silicate concentrations. According to Ohtsuka et al. (Reference Ohtsuka, Yamaguchi and Hanamura2011), high abundance of ciliates was recorded with increasing temperature values, suggesting that this factor controlled their abundance, which could also affect their life cycle. Our results were similar to those of Makhlouf et al. (Reference Makhlouf, Touahria and Seridji2014) where low abundance of ciliates was observed during spring diatom bloom, occurred in coastal waters of Algeria. The dominance of diatoms coincided with the highest silicate concentration (Rekik et al., Reference Rekik, Ben Salem, Ayadi and Elloumi2016). Thus, this may be attributed to the inability of microzooplankton and particularly ciliate population to graze on large-cell phytoplankton (Froneman, Reference Froneman2004; Dolan et al., Reference Dolan, Pierce, Yang and Kim2012b).

S. acuminata, P. globulus and T. furca in this study were largely accounted with increasing spring dinoflagellates abundance. Observations from many studies indicated that blooms of plankton coincided with the increasing of diatom abundance (Martin-Jézéquel et al., Reference Martin-Jézéquel, Hildebrand and Brzezinski2000; Menden-Deuer et al., Reference Menden-Deuer, Lessard, Satterberg and Grünbaum2005; Kremp et al., Reference Kremp, Tamminen and Spilling2008). In the Bay of Tunis and during spring, Scrippsiella spp. was associated with the bloom-forming diatoms. Also, Gribble et al. (Reference Gribble, Nolan and Anderson2007) reported that the heterotrophic Protoperidinium had the potential to consume up to 80% of dinoflagellates or diatoms. However, since the majority of Protoperidinium species were widespread in the spring in our study area, food availability may be the most important factor in regulating the seasonal dynamics of different Protoperidinium species. Generally, heterotrophic dinoflagellates are considered important diatom grazers (Tiselius and Kuylenstierna, Reference Tiselius and Kuylenstierna1996; Sherr and Sherr, Reference Sherr and Sherr2007; Löder et al., Reference Löder, Meunier, Wiltshire, Boersma and Aberle2011). Strom et al. (Reference Strom, Fredrickson and Bright2019) showed that microzooplankton grazers in the Gulf of Alaska consumed nearly all of the small phytoplankton production and an average of half the production in the larger (diatom) size fraction, in spring and summer. Moreover, high concentrations of dinoflagellates with a remarkable dominance of T. furca have been recorded many times during this period in Ligurian sea (Gómez and Gorsky, Reference Gómez and Gorsky2003; Tunin-Ley et al., Reference Tunin-Ley, Labat, Gasparini, Mousseau and Lemée2007). This trend is the result of the mixotrophic capacity of this species (Gómez et al., Reference Gómez, Moreira and López-García2010). According to Gómez and Gorsky (Reference Gómez and Gorsky2003), when the microzooplankton reached phototrophic peaks, they can feed on the organic matter reserve. In addition, T. furca is able to prey on a wide variety of prey (small dinoflagellates, ciliates and flagellates) with a preference for small ciliates (Smalley et al., Reference Smalley, Coats and Adam1999). During spring, S. acuminata, P. globulus and T. furca appeared under high phosphate levels and were positively associated with silicate concentrations. In comparison with other phytoplankton groups, dinoflagellates have higher levels of nucleic acids that could imply higher phosphate requirements (Costas and Lopez-Rodas, Reference Costas and Lopez-Rodas1991). In the bay of Tunis, Daly Yahia-Kéfi et al. (Reference Daly Yahia-Kéfi, Souissi, Gómez and Yahia2005) asserted that high silicate values were related to dinoflagellates. In parallel, when dinoflagellates (thecate and athecate species) feed on diatoms, pallium-feeding thecate dinoflagellates reject empty silicate frustules (Jacobson and Anderson, Reference Jacobson and Anderson1986). Whereas athecate dinoflagellates produce mini-faecal granules composed mainly of frustules (Strom and Strom, Reference Strom and Strom1996; Horner et al., Reference Horner, Postel, Halsband-Lenk, Pierson, Pohnert and Wichard2005; Saito et al., Reference Saito, Ota, Suzuki, Nishioka and Tsuda2006). Then, diatom consumption by heterotrophic dinoflagellates also has an impact on biogeochemical cycles, since diatoms produce biogenic silica cell walls, which are recycled of Si (OH)4 in the microbial loop when grazed (Schultes et al., Reference Schultes, Lambert, Pondaven, Corvaisier, Jansen and Ragueneau2010).

In this study, the genera Gyrodinium peaks during summer as reported by Gómez and Gorsky (Reference Gómez and Gorsky2003). Despite the presence of some dinoflagellate species capable to form red tides such as T. furca, this phenomenon was not detected in this study. It is likely due to poor nutritional conditions of the studied area with low nitrate concentrations (Ferrier-Pages and Rassoulzadegan, Reference Ferrier-Pages and Rassoulzadegan1994). Scrippsiella and Gyrodinium presented maximum abundances in summer at low nutrient concentrations and consequently a mixo-heterotrophic behaviour can be expected. Mixotrorophy has been reported in S. acuminata (Stoecker, Reference Stoecker1999) and heterotrophy in G. fusiforme (Ismael, Reference Ismael2003). Also, Daly Yahia-Kéfi et al. (Reference Daly Yahia-Kéfi, Souissi, Gómez and Yahia2005) reported genus Scrippsiella as the most abundant species in the Bay of Tunis during summer.

In conclusion, our study clearly showed that the community structure of planktonic ciliates and dinoflagellates varied greatly between seasons and denoted a seasonal affinity in most species. During spring and summer, the environmental factors such as temperature and salinity influenced the abundance and the distribution pattern of dinoflagellates and ciliates in coastal waters of Algeria. Their ecological characterization showed mature populations according to the evenness index, leading to oligotrophic environment. The observed oligotrophy of this islandic environment is a characteristic of this region, especially during the summer with low chlorophyll a and nutrients. However, the seasonal transition influenced significantly the abundance variation of both dinoflagellates and ciliates, due to changes in environmental factors. In contrast, the diversity is less affected by the spring–summer transition in coastal waters of Algeria.

In order to better understand the ecology of the microzooplankton community in the Algerian coast, we suggest more intensive studies on the mesoscale spatial distribution of their abundances and biomasses, in relation to environmental factors. Also, further investigations using molecular tools could be interesting to study the physiology of cells, to characterize the diet and highlight the mixotrophy behaviour.

Acknowledgements

This research is a part of a thesis study, which is being carried out in Biological Oceanography and Marine Environment Laboratory, at the University of Science and Technology Houari Boumediene. We thank the National Coastal Center (CNL) and the National School of Marine Sciences and Coastal Planning (ENSSMAL). We also would like to thank Dr Glaucia Fragoso from the Trondheim Biological Station of the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, for her constructive comments on the previous version of the manuscript. We thank MEFTI Mohamed Abdelghafour, TAHAR BELKACEM Maria and SELMI nihed achouak for their English review of this paper, SELLAMI Abdelaziz and BELKHEIR Amine for their help in designing the database.

Author contributions

R. S. carried out the sampling and experimentation, summarized the results and performed statistical analysis. G. E. Y. K. contributed to the study conceptualization, data collecting and statistical expertise. Z. A. helped in the discussion of the results and writing and editing the manuscript and R. S. A. supervised the work.

Competing interest

None.

References

Abboud-Abi Saab, M (2008) Tintinnids of the Lebanese Coastal Waters (Eastern Mediterranean). CNRS-Lebanon/UNEP/MAP/RAC/SPA. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-71404-2Google Scholar
Avancini, M, Cicero, AM, Di Girolamo, I, Innamorati, M and Magaletti, E (2006) Guida al riconoscimento del plancton dei mari Italiani – Fitoplancton. Ministero dell'Ambiente della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare–DPN ICRAM-Instituto Centrale per la Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica Applicata al Mare, Roma.Google Scholar
Benabdi, M (2020) Inventaire des gorgones de la côte algérienne; étude de la démographie, biométrie et statut de conservation de la gorgone blanche Eunicella singularis (Esper, 1791) des îles de l'Ouest algérien (Méditerranée occidentale). Université Oran 1, Ahmed Ben Bella.Google Scholar
Borcard, D, Gillet, F and Legendre, P (2018) Numerical Ecology with R, 2nd Edn. Springer International Publishing.10.1007/978-3-319-71404-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boudjenah, M, Mokrane, Z and Soualili, D (2019) Diversity of Phytoplanktonic populations along the Algerian. Biodiversity Journal 10, 8192.Google Scholar
Calbet, A (2008) The trophic roles of microzooplankton in marine systems. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea. Oxford Journals. 65, 325331.Google Scholar
Calbet, A and Alcaraz, M (2007) Microzooplankton, key organisms in the pelagic food web. Fisheries and Aquaculture 5, 227242.Google Scholar
Calbet, A and Landry, MR (2004) Phytoplankton growth, microzooplankton grazing, and carbon cycling in marine systems. Limnology and Oceanography 49, 5157.10.4319/lo.2004.49.1.0051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calbet, A and Saiz, E (2005) The ciliate-copepod link in marine ecosystems. Aquatic Microbial Ecology 38, 157167.10.3354/ame038157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caron, DA and Hutchins, DA (2013) The effects of changing climate on microzooplankton grazing and community structure: Drivers, predictions and knowledge gaps. Journal of Plankton Research 35, 235252.10.1093/plankt/fbs091CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cerino, F, Fornasaro, D, Kralj, M, Giani, M and Cabrini, M (2019) Phytoplankton temporal dynamics in the coastal waters of the north-eastern Adriatic Sea (Mediterranean Sea) from 2010 to 2017. Nature Conservation 34, 343.10.3897/natureconservation.34.30720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaouadi, M and Hafferssas, A (2018) Seasonal variability in diversity and abundance of the free-living pelagic copepod community of the Algerian coasts (SW Mediterranean Sea). Crustaceana 91, 913946.10.1163/15685403-00003805CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, KR (1993) Non-parametric multivariate analyses of changes in community structure. Australian Journal of Ecology 18, 117143.10.1111/j.1442-9993.1993.tb00438.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costas, E and Lopez-Rodas, V (1991) A comparative study of DNA content in six dinoflagellate species. Scientia Marina, 55, 369375.Google Scholar
Dale, B, Edwards, M and Reid, PC (2006) Climate change and harmful algal blooms. In Ecology of Harmful Algae. Ecological Studies, vol 189. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, 367378.10.1007/978-3-540-32210-8_28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daly Yahia-Kéfi, O, Souissi, S, Gómez, F and Yahia, MND (2005) Spatio-temporal distribution of the dominant diatom and dinoflagellate species in the Bay of Tunis (SW Mediterranean Sea). Mediterranean Marine Science 6, 1734.10.12681/mms.190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dolan, JR, Montagnes, DJS, Agatha, S, Coats, DW and Stoecker, DK (2012 a) The Biology and Ecology of Tintinnid Ciliates: Models for Marine Plankton. Chichester,UK: Wiley-Blackwell, a John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.10.1002/9781118358092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dolan, JR, Pierce, RW, Yang, EJ and Kim, SY (2012 b) Southern Ocean biogeography of tintinnid ciliates of the marine plankton. Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology 59, 511519.10.1111/j.1550-7408.2012.00646.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Drira, Z, Hamza, A, Hassen, MB, Ayadi, H, Bouain, A and Aleya, L (2010) Coupling of phytoplankton community structure to nutrients, ciliates and copepods in the Gulf of Gabes (south Ionian Sea, Tunisia). Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 90, 12031215.10.1017/S0025315409990774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drira, Z, Hassen, MB, Hamza, A, Rebai, A, Bouain, A, Ayadi, H and Aleya, L (2009) Spatial and temporal variations of microphytoplankton composition related to hydrographic conditions in the Gulf of Gabes. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 89, 15591569.10.1017/S002531540900023XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edler, L and Elbrächter, M (2010) The Utermöhl method for quantitative phytoplankton analysis. Microscopic and Molecular Methods for Quantitative Phytoplankton Analysis 110, 1320.Google Scholar
El Hourany, R, Abboud-abi Saab, M, Faour, G, Mejia, C, Crépon, M and Thiria, S (2019) Phytoplankton diversity in the Mediterranean Sea from satellite data using self-organizing maps. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 124, 58275843.10.1029/2019JC015131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elloumi, J, Drira, Z, Hamza, A and Ayadi, H (2015) Space-time variation of ciliates related to environmental factors in 15 nearshore stations of the Gulf of Gabes. Mediterranean Marine Science 16, 162179.Google Scholar
Elloumi, J, Guermazi, W, Ayadi, H, Bouain, A and Aleya, L (2009) Abundance and biomass of prokaryotic and eukaryotic microorganisms coupled with environmental factors in an arid multi-pond solar saltern (Sfax, Tunisia). Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 89, 243253.10.1017/S0025315408002269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferrier-Pages, C and Rassoulzadegan, F (1994) Seasonal impact of the microzooplankton on pico- and nanoplankton growth rates in the northwest Mediterranean Sea. Marine Ecology-Progress Series 108, 283294.10.3354/meps108283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Froneman, PW (2004) Protozooplankton community structure and grazing impact in the eastern Atlantic sector of the Southern Ocean in austral summer 1998. Deep-Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography 51, 26332643.10.1016/j.dsr2.2004.09.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardener, M (2014) Community Ecology: Analytical Methods Using R and Excel. London, UK: Pelagic Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
Gasol, JM, Cardelús, C, Morán, XAG, Balagué, V, Forn, I, Marrasé, C, Massana, R, Pedrós-Alió, C, Sala, MM and Simó, R (2016) Seasonal patterns in phytoplankton photosynthetic parameters and primary production at a coastal NW Mediterranean site. Scientia Marina 80, 6377.10.3989/scimar.04480.06ECrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gómez, F (2003) Checklist of Mediterranean free-living dinoflagellates. Botanica Marina 46, 215242.10.1515/BOT.2003.021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gómez, F and Gorsky, G (2003) Annual microplankton cycles in Villefranche Bay, Ligurian Sea, NW Mediterranean. Journal of Plankton Research 25, 323339.10.1093/plankt/25.4.323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gómez, F, Moreira, D and López-García, P (2010) Neoceratium gen. nov., a new genus for all marine species currently assigned to Ceratium (Dinophyceae). Protist 161, 3554.10.1016/j.protis.2009.06.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gribble, KE, Nolan, G and Anderson, DM (2007) Biodiversity, biogeography and potential trophic impact of Protoperidinium spp. (Dinophyceae) off the southwestern coast of Ireland. Journal of Plankton Research 29, 931947.10.1093/plankt/fbm070CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hannachi, I, Drira, Z, Hassen, MB, Hamza, A, Ayadi, H and Aleya, L (2011) Species composition and spatial distribution of abundances and biomass of phytoplankton and ciliates during summer stratification in the Gulf of Hammamet (Tunisia). Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 91, 14291442.10.1017/S0025315410002092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hays, GC, Richardson, AJ and Robinson, C (2005) Climate change and marine plankton. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 20, 337344.10.1016/j.tree.2005.03.004CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hinder, SL, Hays, GC, Edwards, M, Roberts, EC, Walne, AW and Gravenor, MB (2012) Changes in marine dinoflagellate and diatom abundance under climate change. Nature Climate Change 2, 271275.10.1038/nclimate1388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horner, RA, Postel, JR, Halsband-Lenk, C, Pierson, JJ, Pohnert, G and Wichard, T (2005) Winter-spring phytoplankton blooms in Dabob Bay, Washington. Progress in Oceanography 3–4, 286313.10.1016/j.pocean.2005.09.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ignatiades, L and Gotsis-Skretas, O (2010) A review on toxic and harmful algae in Greek coastal waters (E. Mediterranean Sea). Toxins 2, 10191037.10.3390/toxins2051019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Irigoien, X, Huisman, J and Harris, RP (2004) Global biodiversity patterns of marine phytoplankton and zooplankton. Nature 429, 863867.10.1038/nature02593CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ismael, AA (2003) Succession of heterotrophic and mixotrophic dinoflagellates as well as autotrophic microplankton in the harbour of Alexandria, Egypt. Journal of Plankton Research 25, 193202.10.1093/plankt/25.2.193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobson, DM and Anderson, DM (1986) Thecate heterophic dinoflagellates: Feeding behavior and mechanisms 1. Journal of Phycology 22, 249258.10.1111/j.1529-8817.1986.tb00021.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kchaou, N, Elloumi, J, Drira, Z, Hamza, A, Ayadi, H, Bouain, A and Aleya, L (2009) Distribution of ciliates in relation to environmental factors along the coastline of the Gulf of Gabes, Tunisia. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 83, 414424.10.1016/j.ecss.2009.04.019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khames, GEY and Hafferssas, A (2019) Abundance and species composition of gelatinous zooplankton in Habibas Islands and Sidi Fredj (Western Mediterranean Sea). Cahiers De Biologie Marine 60, 143152.Google Scholar
Kherchouche, A and Hafferssas, A (2020) Species composition and distribution of Medusae (Cnidaria: Medusozoa) in the Algerian coast between 2° e and 7° e (SW Mediterranean Sea). Mediterranean Marine Science 21, 5261.10.12681/mms.20849CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kremp, A, Tamminen, T and Spilling, K (2008) Dinoflagellate bloom formation in natural assemblages with diatoms: Nutrient competition and growth strategies in Baltic spring phytoplankton. Aquatic Microbial Ecology 50, 181196.10.3354/ame01163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakkis, S and Novel-lakkis, V (1981) Composition, annual cycle and species diversity of the phytoplankton in Lebanese coastal water. Journal of Plankton Research 3, 123136.10.1093/plankt/3.1.123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larbi Doukara, K (2019) Density and ecological aspect of endangered limpet Patella ferruginea in the western Algerian coast: Implications for the Conservation. Egyptian Journal of Aquatic Biology and Fisheries 23, 6576.10.21608/ejabf.2019.28015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lavrentyev, PJ, Franzè, G and Moore, FB (2019) Microzooplankton distribution and dynamics in the eastern Fram Strait and the Arctic Ocean in May and August 2014. Frontiers in Marine Science 6, 264.10.3389/fmars.2019.00264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laybourn-Parry, J and Parry, J (2000) Flagellates and the microbial loop. Systematics Association Special Volume 59, 216239.Google Scholar
LeGresley, M and McDermott, G (2010) Counting chamber methods for quantitative phytoplankton analysis-haemocytometer, Palmer-Maloney cell and Sedgewick-Rafter cell. UNESCO (IOC Manuals and Guides) 55, 2530.Google Scholar
Löder, MGJ, Meunier, C, Wiltshire, KH, Boersma, M and Aberle, N (2011) The role of ciliates, heterotrophic dinoflagellates and copepods in structuring spring plankton communities at Helgoland Roads, North Sea. Marine Biology 158, 15511580.10.1007/s00227-011-1670-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lohrenz, SE, Wiesenburg, DA, DePalma, IP, Johnson, KS and Gustafson, DE Jr (1988) Interrelationships among primary production, chlorophyll, and environmental conditions in frontal regions of the western Mediterranean Sea. Deep Sea Research Part A. Oceanographic Research Papers 35, 793810.10.1016/0198-0149(88)90031-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lynn, DH (2008) The Ciliated Protozoa: Characterization, Classification, and Guide to the Literature. Dordrecht Smilauer: Springer, p. 272. ISBN: 978-1-118-68792-5Google Scholar
Magurran, AE (2013) Measuring biological diversity. In Current Biology, Vol. 31. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Makhlouf, A, Touahria, T and Seridji, R (2014) Composition, densité et biomasse des peuplements phytoplanctoniques au niveau des îles Habibas (Oran, Algérie) durant la période printanière. In 40ème anniversaire de l'USTHB- Journées scientifiques de la FSB, p. 33.Google Scholar
Martin-Jézéquel, V, Hildebrand, M and Brzezinski, MA (2000) Silicon metabolism in diatoms: Implications for growth. Journal of Phycology 36, 821840.10.1046/j.1529-8817.2000.00019.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mclachlan, A and Defeo, O (2018) The ecology of sandy shores. In The Ecology of Sandy Shores, 3rd Edn. London, UK: Academic Press, an imprint of Elsevier. ISBN: 978-0-12-809467-9Google Scholar
Menden-Deuer, S, Lessard, EJ, Satterberg, J and Grünbaum, D (2005) Growth rates and starvation survival of three species of the pallium-feeding, thecate dinoflagellate genus Protoperidinium. Aquatic Microbial Ecology 41, 145152.10.3354/ame041145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morán, X and Estrada, M (2005) Winter pelagic photosynthesis in the NW Mediterranean. Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers 52, 18061822.10.1016/j.dsr.2005.05.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mozetič, P, Francé, J, Kogovšek, T, Talaber, I and Malej, A (2012) Plankton trends and community changes in a coastal sea (northern Adriatic): Bottom-up vs. top-down control in relation to environmental drivers. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 115, 138148.10.1016/j.ecss.2012.02.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (2022). Available at https://www.nasa.gov/ (Accessed 27 February 2022).Google Scholar
Ohtsuka, S, Yamaguchi, A and Hanamura, Y (2011) Life cycle and ecological roles of ciliates associated with marine zooplankters. Bulletin of the Plankton Society of Japan 58, 8793.Google Scholar
Paraskevi, P, Giannakourou, A and Christaki, U (2001) Planktonic ciliates in the oligotrophic Mediterranean Sea: Longitudinal trends of standing stocks, distributions and analysis of food vacuole contents. Aquatic Microbial Ecology 24, 297311.Google Scholar
Peyre, O, Telailia, S, Benhartiga, S and Beddek, M (2018) The Eleonora's Falcon Falco eleonorae in Algeria: Status, population size, distribution and update of the world population size. Alauda 86, 109116.Google Scholar
Polat, S and Koray, T (2007) Planktonic dinoflagellates of the northern Levantine Basin, northeastern Mediterranean Sea. European Journal of Protistology 43, 193204.10.1016/j.ejop.2007.03.003CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R Core Team (2020) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available at https://www.r-project.org/.Google Scholar
Rekik, A, Ben Salem, Z, Ayadi, H and Elloumi, J (2016) Species composition and spring ciliates variability on the south coast of Sfax (Eastern Mediterranean Sea). Journal of Applied Environmental and Biological Sciences 6, 5771.Google Scholar
Rekik, A, Kmiha-Megdiche, S, Drira, Z, Pagano, M, Ayadi, H, Zouari, AB and Elloumi, J (2021) Spatial variations of planktonic ciliates, predator-prey interactions and their environmental drivers in the Gulf of Gabes-Boughrara lagoon system. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 254, 107315.10.1016/j.ecss.2021.107315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, JM and Caron, DA (2007) Does low temperature constrain the growth rates of heterotrophic protists? Evidence and implications for algal blooms in cold waters. Limnology and Oceanography 52, 886895.10.4319/lo.2007.52.2.0886CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saito, H, Ota, T, Suzuki, K, Nishioka, J and Tsuda, A (2006) Role of heterotrophic dinoflagellate Gyrodinium sp. in the fate of an iron induced diatom bloom. Geophysical Research Letters 33, L09602.10.1029/2005GL025366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultes, S, Lambert, C, Pondaven, P, Corvaisier, R, Jansen, S and Ragueneau, O (2010) Recycling and uptake of Si(OH)4 when protozoan grazers feed on diatoms. Protist 161, 288303.10.1016/j.protis.2009.10.006CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sherr, EB and Sherr, BF (2002) Significance of predation by protists in aquatic microbial food webs. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 81, 293308.10.1023/A:1020591307260CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sherr, EB and Sherr, BF (2007) Heterotrophic dinoflagellates: A significant component of microzooplankton biomass and major grazers of diatoms in the sea. Marine Ecology Progress Series 352, 187197.10.3354/meps07161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siokou-Frangou, I, Christaki, U, Mazzocchi, MG, Montresor, M, D'Alcala Ribera, M, Vaqúe, D and Zingone, A (2010) Plankton in the open Mediterranean Sea: A review. Biogeosciences 7, 15431586.10.5194/bg-7-1543-2010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smalley, GW, Coats, DW and Adam, EJ (1999) A new method using fluorescent microspheres to determine grazing on ciliates by the mixotrophic dinoflagellate Ceratium furca. Aquatic Microbial Ecology 17, 167179.10.3354/ame017167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smayda, TJ and Reynolds, CS (2003) Strategies of marine dinoflagellate survival and some rules of assembly. Journal of Sea Research 49, 95106.10.1016/S1385-1101(02)00219-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smilauer, P and Leps, J (2014) Multivariate Analysis of Ecological Data Using CANOCO 5. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139627061CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SPAMI Collaborative Platform (2019) Habibas islands. Available at http://spami.medchm.net/en/spami-list/habibas-islands (Accessed 10 July 2021).Google Scholar
Stoecker, DK (1999) Mixotrophy among dinoflagellates. Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology 46, 397401.10.1111/j.1550-7408.1999.tb04619.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoecker, DK and Capuzzo, JM (1990) Predation on protozoa: Its importance to zooplankton. Journal of Plankton Research 12, 891908.Google Scholar
Stoecker, DK, Hansen, PJ, Caron, DA and Mitra, A (2017) Mixotrophy in the marine plankton. 9, 311335. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/Annurev-Marine-010816-060617.Google Scholar
Strom, SL, Fredrickson, KA and Bright, KJ (2019) Microzooplankton in the coastal Gulf of Alaska: Regional, seasonal and interannual variations. Deep-Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography 165, 192202.10.1016/j.dsr2.2018.07.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strom, SL and Strom, MW (1996) Microplankton growth, grazing, and community structure in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Marine Ecology Progress Series 130, 229240.10.3354/meps130229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strüder-Kypke, MC, Kypke, ER, Agatha, S, Warwick, J and Montagnes, DJS (2001) Guide to UK Coastal Planktonic Ciliates. DJS Montagnes, University of Liverpool. Available at http://www.Liv.Ac.Uk/Ciliate.Google Scholar
Tiselius, P and Kuylenstierna, M (1996) Growth and decline of a diatom spring bloom: Phytoplankton species composition, formation of marine snow and the role of heterotrophic dinoflagellates. Journal of Plankton Research 18, 133155.Google Scholar
Tomas, CR (1997) Identifying Marine Phytoplankton. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Tunin-Ley, A, Labat, JP, Gasparini, S, Mousseau, L and Lemée, R (2007) Annual cycle and diversity of species and infraspecific taxa of Ceratium (Dinophyceae) in the Ligurian Sea, northwest Mediterranean. Journal of Phycology 43, 11491163.10.1111/j.1529-8817.2007.00417.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
UNEP/MAP-SPA/RAC (2020) SPAMIs in the Mediterranean – January 2020.Google Scholar
Van Rossum, G (2021, October 4) Python Programming Language. Available at https://www.python.org/.Google Scholar
Xu, Z and Chen, Y (1989) Aggregated intensity of dominant species of zooplankton in autumn in the East China Sea and Yellow Sea. Chinese Journal of Ecology 8, 1315.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Figure 1. Sampling stations in coastal waters of Algeria (southwestern Mediterranean Sea).

Figure 1

Table 1. Sampling station coordinates in coastal waters of Algeria

Figure 2

Figure 2. Box plot of physico-chemical parameters (A: temperature, B: salinity, C: nitrite, D: phosphate, E: silicate, F: nitrate) in spring (green) and summer (red). The vertical lines (whiskers) represent the range of the data outside of the central 50% of the data, which is represented by the box. The dots outside of the whiskers represent outliers.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Temperature and salinity contour maps of sampling stations in the coastal waters of Algeria in spring and summer.

Figure 4

Figure 4. Chlorophyll a of surface layer (5 m) of the six sampling stations in coastal waters of Algeria in spring and summer.

Figure 5

Table 2. List of microzooplankton taxa recorded per season in coastal waters of Algeria

Figure 6

Figure 5. Seasonal distribution (Venn diagram) of dinoflagellates and ciliates species in coastal waters of Algeria in spring (green) and summer (red) (values indicate the number of species found in each season).

Figure 7

Figure 6. Scatterpie plot of total and relative abundance of microzooplankton groups in coastal waters of Algeria (A: spring, B: summer).

Figure 8

Table 3. Abundances (ind l−1) of microzooplankton with seasons and depths sampled in coastal waters of Algeria

Figure 9

Figure 7. Boxplots of the diversity (species richness, evenness and Shannon–Wiener indices) and Logabundance of microzooplankton communities sampled in coastal waters of Algeria during spring (green) and summer (red). The vertical lines (whiskers) represent the range of the data outside of the central 50% of the data, which is represented by the box. The dots outside of the whiskers represent outliers.

Figure 10

Figure 8. Non-multidimensional scaling ordination (NMDS) of microzooplankton abundances from the 47 samples collected in coastal waters of Algeria.

Figure 11

Table 4. Results of the similarity percentage (SIMPER) analysis and the analysis of similarity (ANOSIM) of variance between two seasons

Figure 12

Figure 9. (A) Canonical correspondence analysis triplot of microzooplankton abundances showing the distribution of the 47 samples (green points: spring samples; red points: summer samples) and environmental variables (blue arrows) in coastal waters of Algeria. The total explained inertia (28.5%), and partial explained inertia (axe 1: 34.6%; axe 22.41%). NO3: nitrate; SiO2: silicate. (B) Scatterpie plot of ordinated total and partial microzooplankton group abundances based on CCA simple scores.

Figure 13

Table 5. ANOVA-like permutation test for constrained correspondence analysis for environmental parameters through seasons and depth of sampling in coastal waters of Algeria

Figure 14

Figure 10. Balloon plot of ordinated species abundances based on CCA sample scores sampled in coastal waters of Algeria.

Figure 15

Figure 11. Graphical display of a pairwise Spearman correlation matrix between species abundances and environmental factors of coastal waters of Algeria. Temp: temperature; Sal: salinity; Si(OH)4: silicate; NO3: nitrate; NO2: nitrite.