Environmental Effects

Marine Phytoplankton

Freshwater Phytoplankton

Harmful Algal Blooms


General Introduction | History | Environmental Conditions | Biological Resources | Species Gallery | Socioeconomic Assessment | Resource Use | Resource Management | Synthesis Modules | Community Perspectives | Image Atlas | GIS Data | Bibliography | Glossary | About This CD-ROM | ACE Contacts | Site Map | Search



marine phytoplanktonPhytoplankton are free-floating microscopic plants that are mostly unicellular and produce chemical energy from light. This process is called primary production. Phytoplankton have a critical role in primary production, nutrient cycling, and food webs and make up a significant proportion of the primary production in aquatic systems (Dawes 1998). In many coastal systems, primary production is almost entirely a function of the phytoplankton. Even in salt marsh estuaries, where vascular plant biomass can greatly exceed that of algae, phytoplankton can contribute substantially to overall primary production (Sandifer et al. 1980; Lewitus et al. 1998).

Primary productivity is “the rate at which solar energy is converted into chemical energy by photosynthetic and chemosynthetic organisms” (Dillon and Rodgers 1980), and is usually expressed as grams of carbon fixed per unit area per unit of time (Dawes 1998). Dardeau et al. (1992) reported that annual phytoplankton primary production in southeastern estuaries ranges from 67-375 grams of carbon per square meter per year (gC/m2/year) while Verity et al. (1993) reported values of 600-700 gC/m2/year for Wassaw Sound in Georgia. These primary productivity values are very high compared to other ecosystems. For example, the primary productivity of a rice field has been reported to be 4.0 gC/m2/year (Dawes 1998).

Phytoplankton are classified as microalgae and include species from the following divisions: Cyanobacteria (blue-green algae), Chlorophyta (green algae), Prochlorophyta, Euglenophyta, Pyrrhophyta (dinoflagellates ), Cryptophyta (cryptomonads), Chrysophyta, and Bacillariophyta (includes diatoms). Most phytoplankton are motile, however, movement in the water column is mostly through transport by currents (Dawes 1998; Sandifer et al. 1980). Phytoplankton are usually grouped according to cell size. Picoplankton are the smallest and are identified as phytoplankton <2 micrometers (µm) in diameter. Nanoplankton are intermediate sized microalgae and range in size from 2-20 µm. Microplankton are the largest phytoplankton and include those algae >20 µm in diameter.

DinoflagellateMicroplankton are made up mostly of diatoms and dinoflagellates. Nanoplankton are dominated by phytoplankton with flagellas (e.g. cryptophytes and chrysophytes, and prymnesiophytes). These plankters can account for 75% of the total primary productivity of a system (Dawes 1998). Picoplankton are mostly prokaryotes such as cyanobacteria and prochlorophytes as well as several eukaryotic alga species. These tiny phytoplankters can account for as much as 50% of the primary production in oceanic waters (Dawes 1998).

Phytoplankton must be in the photic zone to photosynthesize. They rely on many different adaptations to move into or remain there. Non-motile phytoplankton rely on physical factors (water viscosity, convection cells, and wind- induced rotations), morphological features (branching frustules, colony formation, and bladder- like or needles-like cell shape), and physiological adaptations (production of mucilage and accumulation of lighter ions with a reduction of heavier ions or compounds) to reduce sinking rates (Dawes 1998). Cyanobacteria contain gas vacuoles that act like flotation and motile species can swim toward light.

Phytoplankton are the food source for numerous other organisms, especially the zooplankton. Zooplankton grazers can significantly decrease phytoplankton density. For example, at a grazing rate of 20%, zooplankton can decrease phytoplankton populations by approximately 75% (Dawes 1998). As with other factors which affect phytoplankton production, the effect of grazers is seasonal. Because grazers decline in winter, there is a lag in the spring before grazers become effective in controlling the spring bloom. Phytoplankton growth and productivity are affected by several factors which are called limiting factors. These limiting factors include light, temperature, circulation, grazing, and nutrients (Dardeau et al. 1992).

Back to Top

Environmental Effects

Effect of Light
Photosynthesis is the process by which solar energy is converted to chemical energy. This process usually involves the production of carbohydrates from carbon dioxide and water with the release of oxygen as a byproduct. Phytoplankton contain several different types of pigments which aid in the photosynthetic process. These pigments include: chlorophylls a and b (green), carotenoids (yellow and orange) and phycobilins (red and blue). The different divisions of phytoplankton are based partly on the types of pigments found in their cells.

Phytoplankton experience the greatest productivity when they encounter their optimal light and nutrient conditions. With adequate nutrients, phytoplankton growth and productivity increases with increasing light levels until a certain light level is reached. At this point photosynthesis is at a maximum (Pmax) and further photosynthesis is inhibited with increasing light levels. Phytoplankton can only photosynthesize in the photic zone {short description of image}, which is limited to the maximum depth to which light can penetrate the ocean. Nutrients are often depleted in the photic zone because of utilization by phytoplankton and other organisms. The optimal depth for maximum production is reached when the light limiting effects of vertical mixing are balanced out by the benefits of advection into nutrient-rich bottom waters (Yentsch 1981). Seasonal changes in the length of the day also influence phytoplankton production, especially in mid and high latitudes. Phytoplankton abundance and biomass greatly increase during the summer months in higher latitudes because of the increased amount of light.

Effect of Temperature
Phytoplankton reproduction rates are closely linked to temperature. The maximum rate of cell division doubles for each 10°C increase in temperature. The upper limit of growth is therefore determined by temperature (Harris 1986). Several phytoplankton species (e.g. the diatom, Skeletonema costatum), however, increase assimilation rates of nutrients at lower temperatures and subsequently increase biomass (Goldman 1977). Coincidentally, S. costatum is often found in marine coastal waters during winter (Goldman 1977). The different responses to temperature exhibited by phytoplankton species can lead to a strong seasonal change in species composition and biomass.

Effect of Circulation
A pattern of stabilization-destabilization in circulation results in the highest rates of primary production in many estuarine, coastal, oceanic, or frontal environments. The stabilization period that occurs during slack tides or slow currents results in increased rates of photosynthesis and nutrient uptake. The destabilization period that occurs during flood or ebb tides or during fast current movement results in a replenishment of nutrients to the photic zone from more nutrient-rich underlying waters. During and following the destabilization period, photosynthesis is decreased by a shortage of light due to increased turbidity and mixing of the phytoplankton to deeper waters (Legendre 1981). Circulation patterns are vital in establishing the balance between light levels and nutrient availability necessary to maintain high primary productivity rates in marine systems.

DiatomEffect of Nutrients
Although phytoplankton produce energy from carbon and water, they still require both inorganic (phosphorous, nitrogen, silicon, iron, etc.) and organic (vitamins) nutrients for growth. Vitamin concentrations are low in coastal waters but because vitamins have a high turnover rate and phytoplankton have low requirement levels for them, vitamins are not limiting to phytoplankton growth. Generally, phytoplankton growth is limited by inorganic nutrients. Four trace metals (zinc, copper, iron, and manganese) are considered to be important to phytoplankton. Of these four, iron and manganese are thought to be in low enough concentrations to limit growth (Dawes 1998).

Of the three other inorganic compounds (silicon, nitrogen, and phosphorous), nitrogenous compounds have the lowest concentrations in oceanic waters and are generally thought to limit phytoplankton growth in marine waters. Phosphate is the most biologically available form of phosphorous for most phytoplankton. This nutrient is found in low concentrations in marine systems, and in some cases, may be a significant limiting factor in phytoplankton growth. Finally, silicon, which is used in the cell structure of diatoms and silicoflagellates, usually has concentrations higher than nitrogen and phosphorous. During diatom blooms, however, the bioavailability of silicon may be severely lowered (Dawes 1998).

Eutrophication is an increase in the nutrient level in an aquatic system. As nutrient levels rise, growth of phytoplankton is no longer nutrient-limited and algal blooms occur. If the blooming algae produce toxic chemicals, fish kills and adverse human health effects can occur. If the algae don’t produce toxins, the ecosystem can still be affected because phytoplankton respiration, zooplankton grazing, and bacterial decomposition can act to deplete dissolved oxygen to undesirable levels.

enslosure experimentPhytoplankton composition changes with nutrient fluxes because individual taxa have different requirements (Tilman 1977; Kilham and Kilham 1984). Enclosure experiments have confirmed that nutrient enrichment alters the community composition of phytoplankton (Goldman and Stanley 1974; Sanders et al. 1987). Field studies report similar occurrences. In Moriches and Great South Bays (NY), for example, extremely dense populations of chlorophytes and cyanobacteria developed in waters fertilized by effluent from adjacent duck farms. These blooms coincided with collapse of the oyster fishery (Ryther 1954). Similar occurrences of dense concentrations of phytoflagellates in other eutrophic waters (e.g., Mahoney and McLaughlin 1977) imply that elevated nutrient concentrations alter phytoplankton community composition toward prevalence of smaller "less desirable" species (Smayda 1983; Verity 1998).

However, dominance by flagellates is not exclusively predicated on nutrient loading. The availability of dissolved silicate may be equally or more important, because diatoms are dependent upon it while the vast majority of non-diatoms are not. Introduced by Schelske and Stoermer (1971, 1972), the hypothesis that silicate availability regulated phytoplankton community composition was formalized by Officer and Ryther (1980) and Ryther and Officer (1981). These studies describe two types of planktonic ecosystems, one dominated by diatoms, and another by flagellates and other small non-motile cells. They proposed that the diatom food web was associated with extensive fisheries (and therefore was preferable), while the flagellate food web was undesirable because it coincided with higher trophic levels which were not economically useful, or it was associated with hypoxia. While details are still being resolved, e.g. all diatoms are not apparently of equal value as food resources for zooplankton (Ianora et al. 1995) or necessarily better than equivalent-sized flagellates or ciliates (Verity and Paffenhšfer 1996), mesocosim studies support the relationship between silicate availability, diatoms, and fish (Doering et al. 1989). (Verity 1998).

fish killSilicate concentrations in major southeastern rivers, in contrast to nitrogen, have been constant or declining during the past 25 years (Windom et al. 1993). If land use patterns result in nitrogen and phosphorus loading while silicate delivery to southeastern estuaries declines, diatom- dominated ecosystems may be replaced by flagellate-dominated ecosystems. This same pattern of changing phytoplankton community composition is also hypothesized to occur in the presence of pollutants (Greve and Parsons 1977), and was observed in mesocosim experiments with additions of trace metals (Cu, Hg) and hydrocarbons (Dunstan et al. 1975; Gray 1982). Thus, increased land use can be expected to produce three broad impacts: eutrophication, shifting nutrient ratios, and introduction of contaminants. These changes have been associated with shifts from diatom- to flagellate-dominated ecosystems. If such land use impacts occur in South Carolina and Georgia watersheds, a concurrent shift in ecosystems food chain dynamics may occur (Greve and Parsons 1977). Increasing occurrence and spread of novel phytoplankton blooms with nutrient loading and shifts in N:Si ratios may also occur (Smayda 1989). Blooms of toxic dinoflagellates that can cause major fish kills have already been reported in estuarine waters of North Carolina and Florida (Burkholder et al. 1992, 1995; Lewitus et al. 1995). Thus, phytoplankton community composition can both directly and indirectly affect ecosystem structure and its harvestable resources (Verity 1998).

Back to Top

Marine Phytoplankton

Few studies on marine phytoplankton have been conducted in the regions in or surrounding the ACE Basin study area. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Estuarine Eutrophication Survey assessed the status and trends of phytoplankton in twelve estuarine systems in Georgia and South Carolina (Verity 1998). This survey was based on qualitative responses from survey participants and are not always based on detailed data collection. Of the twelve estuaries examined, the Stono/North Edisto River system and the St. Helena Sound system are located within the ACE Basin study area (NOAA 1996). This study reported that the phytoplankton community for both estuaries was dominated by diatoms. Chlorophyll a concentrations, which is a measure of phytoplankton concentrations, were unknown in the Stono/North Edisto rivers, but in St. Helena Sound, they were reported to be < 5 microgram per liter (µg/L) for areas with salinity >0.5 parts per thousand (ppt) (NOAA 1996). wassaw sound

Although no other studies are known from the ACE Basin study area, studies in other regions of the southeast can be used to estimate the phytoplankton community in the ACE Basin region. Verity et al. (1993) examined the species composition and productivity of phytoplankton in Wassaw Sound, Georgia. They reported that, during the summer, flagellated nanoplankton (2-4 µm) were the numerical dominants and diatoms dominated the biomass (Dominant phytoplankton in Wassaw Sound, GA {short description of image}). During the winter, the flagellated nanoplankton Katodinium rotundatum dominated both biomass and abundance. However, a diatom bloom developed each January during the three-year study. Verity et al. (1993) also reported that chlorophyll a concentrations ranged from 3.2-6.3 µg/L over the three-year study with the highest concentrations occurring inshore and during the summer.

Davis and Van Dolah (1992) examined the phytoplankton community in Charleston Harbor, South Carolina. This study identified 451 species of phytoplankton including 170 diatoms, 152 chlorophytes, 48 dinoflagellates, 36 cyanobacteria, 29 euglenophytes, 10 chrysophytes, and 6 cryptomonads in the harbor. They found that the diatom, Skeletonema costatum, along with three other diatoms, and one cyanobacterium were the dominant species (Phytoplankton species in Charleston Harbor {short description of image}). synecoccochusDavis and Van Dolah also reported that seasonal trends occurred in species composition and abundance. Diatoms dominated the spring and early fall periods while cyanobacteria and flagellates dominated the summer and winter periods. Highest phytoplankton abundances (~ 7,000 cell/ml) occurred in May-June with a smaller peak in abundance in February.

The importance of nano- and picoplankton to primary production in southeastern estuaries was emphasized by Lewitus et al. (1998), who examined the phytoplankton community of North Inlet, South Carolina. They found that picoplankton were the numerically dominant phytoplankton throughout the entire year, and that nanoflagellates contributed substantially to phytoplankton abundance and biomass during the summer bloom. The cyanobacteria Synechococcus spp. composed 95-100% of the phototrophic picoplankton. Other dominant species included the diatoms Cylindrotheca closterium (microplankton), Nitzschia spp. (nanoplankton), and Thalassiosira spp. (nanoplankton). Chlorophyll a concentrations were highest in July at 15 µg/L.

Back to Top

Freshwater Phytoplankton

Just like many other aquatic organisms, phytoplankton species distributions are controlled by salinity. So far, this discussion has centered on marine phytoplankton. Freshwater primary producers include members from the same divisions and are affected by the same limiting factors as marine phytoplankton (i.e. light, temperature, circulation, and nutrients). Primary producers in the static environment of freshwater lakes and ponds are mostly phytoplankton, however, in the more dynamic flowing water conditions of freshwater creeks and rivers, attached algae (i.e. periphyton ) are the dominant organisms. To our knowledge, no studies exist which characterize freshwater phytoplankton or periphyton in the ACE Basin study area.

Grant (1974) found that diatoms were the dominant organisms in the upper reaches of the Cooper River-Tailrace Canal system in South Carolina. Molley et al. (1976) examined the freshwater riverine regions surrounding Ocala, Florida. They reported that centric diatoms (i.e. having surface markings radially arranged) were the dominant organisms with blue-green algae such as Chroococcus spp., Microcystis spp., Spirulina spp., and Anabeana spp. also abundant. Camburn et al. (1978) examined the benthic diatom community of Long Branch Creek, South Carolina. They reported 268 diatom taxa with Eunotia spp., Achnanthes spp., Navicula spp., Pinnularia spp., Gomphonema spp., and Nitzschia spp. being the numerical dominants.

Zingmark (1975) examined the phytoplankton community in freshwater ponds on Kiawah Island, South Carolina map icon. He found that the cyanobacteria, Oscillatoria spp., made up approximately 50% of the cells counted. Other common phytoplankton species included Crucigenia irregularis, Microcoleus spp., Anabaena spp., Anacystis cyanea, Tricodesmium spp., and Merismopedia spp. In all, Zingmark reported 27 species as being common in these ponds (Phytoplankton in freshwater pond samples from Kiawah Island,SC {short description of image}). Goldstein and Manzi (1976) examined the freshwater phytoplankton in two ponds in South Carolina. This study identified 259 phytoplankton and periphyton species. Of these, 146 were Chlorophyta, 11 were Pyrrhophyta, 46 were Cyanobacteria, and 45 were Chyrsophyta.

Back to Top

Harmful Algal Blooms

Most phytoplankton have the potential to bloom. Usually environmental (e.g. nutrient depletion) and biological (e.g. grazing) factors are sufficient to limit phytoplankton populations from attaining exceptionally high densities. If, however, these controlling factors are eliminated, blooming phytoplankton can have environmentally detrimental effects either by causing oxygen depletion or toxic poisoning. Oxygen depletion effects occur when respiration by blooming phytoplankton (usually non-toxic species) and by other organisms feeding on the phytoplankton decrease oxygen to low enough levels to cause animal mortalities. Toxic poisoning effects are caused by only a few dozen phytoplankton species and most of these are dinoflagellates, prymnesiophtyes, chloromonads, or diatoms.

The best known toxic algal blooms are those produced by dinoflagellates. Some of these blooms are called red tides because of the red or rust color of the water caused by high concentrations of phytoplankton cells. Some red tides are believed to begin with the germination of dormant cells that settled onto the seafloor during times of nutrient scarcity (Anderson 1994). When conditions improve these cells germinate and bloom. Toxic red tides are often grouped into the following categories: (1) those that kill primarily fish (e.g. Gymnodinium sp.); (2) those that kill invertebrates (e.g. Gonyaulax sp.); and (3) those that don’t kill but produce toxins that are sequestered by bivalves (e.g. Protogonyaulax sp.) or fish (e.g. Gambierdiscus toxicus).

Toxins can kill fish and invertebrates directly. For example, in the Gulf of Mexico, the dinoflagellate, Gymnodinium breve, causes massive fish kills by releasing neurotoxins into the gills of nearby fish causing asphyxiation (Anderson 1994). Algal toxins can also cause mortality as they are accumulated in the food web. For example, thousands of herring in the Bay of Fundy died after eating planktonic snails which had consumed the toxic dinoflagellate Alexandrium sp. Toxins bioaccumulated by bivalves can cause paralytic shellfish poisoning (PSP), diarrhetic shellfish poisoning (DSP), neurotoxic shellfish poisoning (NSP), or amnesic shellfish poisoning (ASP) when these contaminated bivalves are consumed by humans. Humans can develop ciguatera fish poisoning (CFP) from eating fish which have consumed the toxic dinoflagellate, Gambierdiscus toxicus.

PfiesteriaRecently, a heterotrophic dinoflagellate, Pfiesteria piscicida, has been identified as the causative agent in numerous major fish kills in the southeastern United States (Burkholder et al. 1995). These fish kills occur when dormant benthic cysts of the dinoflagellate encounter chemical cues from nearby fish. The cysts release zoospores which produce an exotoxin that anaesthetizes the fish, causes shedding of the fish epidermis, and produces open ulcerative lesions. The dinoflagellates consume the fish epidermis. The fish eventually dies and the dinoflagellates once again become non-toxic (Burkholder et al. 1995). The presence of Pfiesteria or Pfiesteria-like species has been confirmed at selected, sudden-death fish-kill sites from Delaware to Alabama (Burkholder et al. 1995).

Outbreaks map icon of toxic algal blooms have been reported in many regions of the United States. They are, however, either unknown or thought to have no impacts on resources in any Georgia or South Carolina estuaries. It is generally thought that the rigorous vertical mixing imposed by high tidal amplitudes minimizes the potential development of blooms or high concentrations of the flagellated phytoplankton species generally associated with nuisance or toxic occurrences. In contrast, blooms of the toxic heterotrophic dinoflagellate Pfiesteria are reported to occur in North Carolina and Florida estuaries, where tidal amplitudes are considerably smaller (Verity 1998).



L. Zimmerman, SCDNR Marine Resources Research Institute


Anderson, D. M. 1994. Red tides. Scientific American 271(2):62-68.

Burkholder, J. M., E. J. Noga, C. W. Hobbs, H. B. Glasgow, Jr., and S. A. Smith. 1992. New 'phantom' dinoflagellate is the causative agent of major estuarine fish kills. Nature 358:407-410.

Burkholder, J. M., H. B. Glasgow, Jr., and C. W. Hobbs. 1995. Fish kills linked to a toxic ambush-predator dinoflagellate: distribution and environmental conditions. Marine Ecology Progress Series 124:43-61.

Camburn, K. E., R. L. Lowe, and D. L. Stoneburner. 1978. The haptobenthic diatom flora of Longbranch Creek, South Carolina. Nova Hedwigia, Band 30:149-279.

Dardeau, M. R., R. F. Modein, W. W. Schroeder, and J. J. Stout. 1992. Estuaries. p. 615-744. In: C. T. Hackney, S. M. Adams, and W. H. Martin (eds.). Biodiversity of the southeastern United States: Aquatic communities. John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York, NY.

Davis, R. B. and R. F. Van Dolah (eds.). 1992. Characterization of the physical, chemical, and biological conditions and trends in three South Carolina estuaries 1970-1985. Vol. I. Charleston Harbor estuary. South Carolina Seagrant Consortium, Charleston, SC.

Dawes, C. J. 1998. Marine Botany. 2nd edition. John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York, NY.

Dillon, C. R. and J. H. Rodgers. 1980. Thermal effects on primary productivity of phytoplankton, periphyton, and macrophytes in Lake Keowee, SC. Water Resources Research Institute. Clemson University, Clemson, SC.

Doering, P. H., C. A. Oviatt, L. L. Beatty, V. F. Banzon, R. Rice, S. P. Kelly, B. K. Sullivan, and J. B. Frithsen. 1989. Structure and function in a model coastal ecosystem: Silicon, the benthos, and eutrophication. Marine Ecology Progress Series 52:287-299.

Dunstan, W. M., L. P. Atkinson, and J. Natoli. 1975. Stimulation and inhibition of phytoplankton growth by low molecular weight hydrocarbons. Marine Biology 31:305-310.

Goldman, J. C. and H. I. Stanley. 1974. Relative growth of different species of marine algal in wastewater-seawater mixtures. Marine Biology 28:17-25.

Goldman, J. C. 1977. Temperature effects on phytoplankton growth in continuous culture. Limnology and Oceanography 22:932-935.

Goldstein, A. K. and J. J. Manzi. 1976. Additions to the freshwater algae of South Carolina. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Society 92:9-13.

Grant, R. R. Jr. 1974. Algae. p. 16-30. In: Cooper River survey 1973 for the E.I. Dupont de Nemours and Company. Academy of Natural Science, Philadelphia, PA.

Gray, J. S. 1982. Effects of pollutants on marine ecosystems. Netherlands Journal of Sea Research 16:424-443.

Greve, W. and T. R. Parsons. 1977. Photosynthesis and fish production: Hypothetical effects of climatic change and pollution. Helgolander Wissenschaftliche Meeresuntersuchungen 30:666-672.

Harris, G. P. 1986. Phytoplankton ecology: Structure, function, and fluctuation. Chapman and Hall, London, UK.

Ianora, A., S. A. Poulet, A. Miralto. 1995. A comparative study of the inhibitory effect of diatoms on the reproductive biology of the copepod Temora stylifera. Marine Biology 121:533-539.

Kilham, S. S. and P. Kilham. 1984. The importance of resource supply rates in determining phytoplankton community structure. In: D. G. Meyers and J. R. Strickler (eds.). Trophic Interactions Within Aquatic Ecosystems. Westview Press Inc., Boulder, CO.

Legendre, L. 1981. Hydrodynamic control of marine phytoplankton production: The paradox of stability. p. 191-207. In: J. C. J. Nihoul (ed.). Ecohydrodynamics. Elsevier Scientific Publishing, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

Lewitus, A. J., R. V. Jesien, T. M. Kana, J. M. Burkholder, H. B. Glasgow, and E. May. 1995. Discovery of the phantom dinoflagellate in Chesapeake Bay. Estuaries 18:373-378.

Lewitus, A. J., E. T. Koepfler, and J. T. Morris. 1998. Seasonal variation in the regulation of phytoplankton by nitrogen and grazing in a salt-marsh estuary. Limnology and Oceanography 43(4):636- 646.

Mahoney, J. B. and J. J. A. McLaughlin. 1977. The association of phytoflagellates in lower New York Bay with hypereutrophication. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 28:53-65.

Molley, M., J. Lennon, N. Drawas, and P. Herbst. 1976. Cross Florida Barge Canal restudy report: Benthic macroinvertebrate and plankton communities of the associated aquatic systems for the proposed Cross Florida Barge Canal. Environmental Research and Technology, Inc. Prepared for: Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville, FL.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 1996. Estuarine Eutrophication Survey. Vol. 1. South Atlantic Region. Office of Ocean Resources Conservation Assessment, Silver Spring, MD.

Officer, C. B. and J. H. Ryther. 1980. The possible importance of silicon in marine eutrophication. Marine Ecology Progress Series 3:83-91.

Ryther, J. H. 1954. The ecology of phytoplankton blooms in Moriches Bay and Great South Bay, Long Island, New York. Biological Bulletin 106:198-209.

Ryther, J. H. and C. B. Officer. 1981. Impact of nutrient enrichment on water uses. In: B. J. Neilson and L. E. Cronin (eds.). Estuaries and Nutrients. Humana Press, Clifton, NJ.

Sanders, J. G., S. J. Cibik, C. F. D'Elia, and W. R. Boynton. 1987. Nutrient enrichment studies in a coastal plain estuary: changes in phytoplankton species composition. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 44: 83-90.

Sandifer P. A., J. V. Miglarese, D. R. Calder, J. J. Manzi, and L. A. Barclay. 1980. Ecological characterization of the sea island coastal region of South Carolina and Georgia. Vol. III: Biological features of the characterization area. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, Washington, DC. FWS/OBS-79/42.

Schelske, C. L. and E. F. Stoermer. 1971. Eutrophication, silica depletion, and predicted changes in algal quality in Lake Michigan. Science 173:423-424.

Schelske, C. L. and E. F. Stoermer. 1972. Phosphorus, silica and eutrophication in Lake Michigan. In: G. E. Likens (ed.). Nutrients and eutrophication. American Society of Limnology and Oceanography, Lawrence, KS.

Smayda, T. J. 1983. The phytoplankton of estuaries. In: B. H. Ketchum (ed.). Estuaries and enclosed seas. Elsevier, New York, NY.

Smayda, T. J. 1989. Primary production and the global epidemic of phytoplankton blooms in the sea: A linkage? In: E. M. Cosper, V. M. Bricelj, and E. J. Carpenter (eds.). Novel phytoplankton blooms. Coastal and Estuarine Studies No. 35. Springer, New York, NY.

Tilman, D. 1977. Resource competition between planktonic algae: An experimental and theoretical approach. Ecology 58:338-348.

Verity, P. G. 1998. Phytoplankton of the South Atlantic Bight. Draft report submitted to LUCES-South Carolina Seagrant Consortium. Skidaway Institute of Oceanography, Skidaway, GA.

Verity, P. G. and G. A. Paffenhšfer. 1996. On assessment of prey ingestion by copepods. Journal of Plankton Research 18:1767-1779.

Verity, P. G., J. A. Yoder, J. S. Bishop, J. R. Nelson, D. B. Craven, J. O. Blandon, C. Y. Robertson, and C. R. Tronzo. 1993. Composition, productivity, and nutrient chemistry of a coastal ocean planktonic food web. Continental Shelf Research 13:741-776.

Windom, H. L., J. O. Blanton, P. G. Verity, and R. Jahnke. 1993. Oceanographic response to environmental change in ocean processes: U.S. southeast continental shelf. A Summary of Research Conducted in the South Atlantic Bight Under the Auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy From 1977 to 1991. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Scientific and Technical Information, Oak Ridge, TN.

Yentsch, C. S. 1981. Vertical mixing, a constraint to primary production: An extension of the concept of an optimal mixing zone. p. 67-78. In: J. C. J. Nihoul (ed.). Ecohydrodynamics. Elsevier Scientific Publishing, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

Zingmark, R. G. 1975. The phytoplankton of Kiawah Island. In: W. M. Campbell, J.M. Dean and W.D. Chamberlain (eds.). Environmental inventory of Kiawah Island. Prepared for Coastal Shores Inc. Environmental Research Center, Inc., Columbia, South Carolina.

General Introduction | History | Environmental Conditions | Biological Resources | Species Gallery | Socioeconomic Assessment | Resource Use | Resource Management | Synthesis Modules | Community Perspectives | Image Atlas | GIS Data | Bibliography | Glossary | About This CD-ROM | ACE Contacts | Site Map | Search

Site Map Search Help Return to Top Glossary Bibliography GIS Data Image Atlas Community Perspectives Synthesis Modules Resource Management Resource Use Socioeconomic Assessment Species Gallery Biological Resources Environmental Conditions History General Introduction