IMIS | Flanders Marine Institute

Flanders Marine Institute

Platform for marine research


Publications | Institutes | Persons | Datasets | Projects | Maps
[ report an error in this record ]basket (0): add | show Printer-friendly version

Periphyton light transmission relationships in Florida Bay and the Florida Keys, USA
Frankovich, T.A.; Zieman, J.C. (2005). Periphyton light transmission relationships in Florida Bay and the Florida Keys, USA. Aquat. Bot. 83(1): 14-30.
In: Aquatic Botany. Elsevier Science: Tokyo; Oxford; New York; London; Amsterdam. ISSN 0304-3770, more
Peer reviewed article  

Available in  Authors 

    Epiphytes; Light attenuation; Periphyton; Sea grass; Thalassia testudinum K.D.Koenig, 1805 [WoRMS]; ASW, USA, Florida, Florida Bay [Marine Regions]; ASW, USA, Florida, Florida Keys [Marine Regions]; Marine
Author keywords
    periphyton; seagrass epiphytes; light attenuation; Florida Bay;Thalassia testudinum; coralline algae

Authors  Top 
  • Frankovich, T.A.
  • Zieman, J.C.

    Light transmission was measured through intact, submerged periphyton communities on artificial seagrass leaves. The periphyton communities were representative of the communities on Thalassia testudinum in subtropical seagrass meadows. The periphyton communities sampled were adhered carbonate sediment, coralline algae, and mixed algal assemblages. Crustose or film-forming periphyton assemblages were best prepared for light transmission measurements using artificial leaves fouled on both sides, while measurements through three-dimensional filamentous algae required the periphyton to be removed from one side. For one-sided samples, light transmission could be measured as the difference between fouled and reference artificial leaf samples. For two-sided samples, the percent periphyton light transmission to the leaf surface was calculated as the square root of the fraction of incident light. Linear, exponential, and hyperbolic equations were evaluated as descriptors of the periphyton dry weight versus light transmission relationship. Hyperbolic and exponential decay models were superior to linear models and exhibited the best fits for the observed relationships. Differences between the coefficients of determination (r2) of hyperbolic and exponential decay models were statistically insignificant. Constraining these models for 100% light transmission at zero periphyton load did not result in any statistically significant loss in the explanatory capability of the models. In most all cases, increasing model complexity using three-parameter models rather than two-parameter models did not significantly increase the amount of variation explained. Constrained two-parameter hyperbolic or exponential decay models were judged best for describing the periphyton dry weight versus light transmission relationship. On T. testudinum in Florida Bay and the Florida Keys, significant differences were not observed in the light transmission characteristics of the varying periphyton communities at different study sites. Using pooled data from the study sites, the hyperbolic decay coefficient for periphyton light transmission was estimated to be 4.36 mg dry wt. cm−2. For exponential models, the exponential decay coefficient was estimated to be 0.16 cm2 mg dry wt.−1.

All data in IMIS is subject to the VLIZ privacy policy Top | Authors