Svoboda | Graniru | BBC Russia | Golosameriki | Facebook
Next Article in Journal
Seasonal Variability of Hydrological Parameters and Estimation of Circulation Patterns: Application to a Mediterranean Coastal Lagoon
Previous Article in Journal
MEvo-GAN: A Multi-Scale Evolutionary Generative Adversarial Network for Underwater Image Enhancement
Previous Article in Special Issue
Parallel Intelligent Monitoring System of Port Water Quality Based on the ACP Method
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
JMSE
Volume 12
Issue 7
10.3390/jmse12071211
jmse-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Diatoms of the Macroalgae Epiphyton and Bioindication of the Protected Coastal Waters of the Kazantip Cape (Crimea, the Sea of Azov)

by
Anna Bondarenko
1,
Armine Shiroyan
1,
Larisa Ryabushko
1 and
Sophia Barinova
2,*
1
Kovalevsky Institute of Biology of the Southern Seas, Russian Academy of Sciences, 2, Nakhimov Ave., Sevastopol 299011, Russia
2
Institute of Evolution, University of Haifa, Abba Khoushi Avenue, 199, Mount Carmel, Haifa 3498838, Israel
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2024, 12(7), 1211; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse12071211
Submission received: 28 May 2024 / Revised: 11 July 2024 / Accepted: 15 July 2024 / Published: 18 July 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Challenges in Monitoring and Management of Water Quality in Coastal Areas)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This article is about the diversity of diatoms in the benthos of the upper sublittoral near Kazantip Cape, located on the shore of the Sea of Azov in the northeastern part of Crimea. The study was conducted in 2022 and 2023 at a depth of 0.1 to 1 m at temperatures from 3.7 °C to 29 °C and salinity from 13.6 to 15.6 psu on the following 11 species of macroalgae: Phaeophyta of Ericaria crinita, Gongolaria barbata, and Cladosiphon mediterraneus; Chlorophyta—Bryopsis hypnoides, Cladophora liniformis, Ulva intestinalis, and Ulva linza; and Rhodophyta—Callithamnion corymbosum, Ceramium arborescens, Polysiphonia denudata, and Pyropia leucosticta. A total of 97 taxa of Bacillariophyta belonging to 3 classes, 21 orders, 30 families, and 45 genera were found. The highest number of diatom species was found on U. linza (61 species), P. denudata (45), E. crinita (40), the lowest number was recorded on thalli P. leucosticta (9). On macroalgae were found of 80% benthic diatoms, 50% marine species, 36% brackish-marine, 9% freshwater, 5% brackish, and 36% cosmopolites. The maximum abundance of the diatom community was 243.4 × 103 cells/cm2 (P. denudata in September at 23.9 °C and 15.0 psu) with dominance by the diatom of Licmophora abbreviata, and the minimum was 3.8 × 103 cells/cm2 (P. leucosticta in January at 3.7 °C and 15.0 psu). The presence in the epiphyton of diatoms—indicators of moderate organic water pollution (32 species), which developed in masse in late summer—indicate a constant inflow of organic matter into the coastal waters of the Kazantip Cape. The bioindicator and statistical studies indicate the effectiveness of the conservation regime, especially at stations within the IUCN reserve, despite relatively high saprobity rates at stations exposed to recreational pressure and poorly treated domestic wastewater.

1. Introduction

Seaweeds serve not only as a source of food and a habitat-forming component for many animals, but also as a substrate for colonization by different microalgae, among which diatoms are dominant [1,2]. It is known that diatoms create high primary production, make a significant contribution to the formation of microphytobenthos biodiversity, and can also be used as indicators of the quality of their habitat [1,2,3]. Together with floristic diversity, data on the abundance and biomass of diatoms from different ecotopes by season are important information [2].
The coastal waters of the Kazantip Cape of the Crimean coast of the Sea of Azov is one of the places of biological diversity of aquatic macrophytes due to a number of geomorphological features of the cape (for example, the presence of rocky territorial-aquatic complexes), as well as the influence of the more saline waters of the Kerch Strait, which unites the Sea of Azov and the Black Sea.
It should be noted that the water area of the Sea of Azov near the Kazantip Cape is part of the wetland of international importance “Kazantip Cape Aquatic Rock Complex”, protected by the Ramsar Convention, (certificate No. 1393 dated 29 July 2004, Iran, Ramsar), and some bays of the Cape are part of the Kazantip Reserve [3].
In this respect, its waters are subject to relatively little anthropogenic influence, and can be considered as a reference [4]. The study of organisms, especially poorly studied ones, in anthropogenically undisturbed natural complexes is always of scientific interest. At the same time, an important component is the knowledge of the state of the basis of the trophic pyramid, macro- and micro-producers.
In the protected waters of Kazantip Cape, the focus has long been on the study of macrophytes. The first work on the study of the flora coastal waters of the Kazantip Cape was carried out in the 1920s and was reduced to determining the species composition of macrophytobenthic communities [5]. Currently, there is a lot of work in this area of research [6,7,8,9,10]. Since 2000, the study of cyanobacteria in the rocky supralittoral zone has begun [9].
Studies of benthic community’s diatoms were first carried out in 2005 and covered several ecotopes, including the epilithon, epipsammon, and epiphyton of six species of macroalgae: Chlorophyta of genera Blidingia Kylin, Ulothrix Kützing, Ulva Linnaeus, Rhodophyta—Ceramium Roth, Polysiphonia Greville, and Phaeophyta—Ericaria Stackhouse [11]. In general, 95 diatom species were recorded in the microphytobenthos of the coastal Reserve and nearby bays, of which 79 taxa were recorded in the epiphyton. Together with data on floristic diversity, information on the abundance and biomass of diatoms from different ecotopes by season is presented [2,12].
To date, 69 taxa of macroalgae are indicated for the flora of benthic communities of coastal waters of Kazantip Cape: Chlorophyta—33 species, Ochrophyta—11, Rhodophyta—25 [10], as well as 184 taxa of microalgae: Cyanobacteria—83, Bacillariophyta—95, Dinophyta—2, Haptophyta—2, Chlorophyta, and Ochrophyta—1 of each [9,11].
However, communities of benthic microalgae, which are based on diatoms, have so far been poorly studied. It is known that species that are topically closely related to the substrate (benthos) are among the first to react to environmental changes, so they can be used for bioindication and assessment of the ecological situation, including in protected water areas. Therefore, it seems relevant to continue the study of the composition and quantitative parameters of diatom communities formed on different macroalgae of the Kazantip coast, as well as to expand the limited available information on the dominant species, their abundance and biomass, and to analyze the structure of the diatom community using a series of indices (species diversity, evenness, dominance, and saprobity), including for assessing the ecological situation of the study area.
The aim of this work is to study the diversity of diatom community in epiphyton of different species of macroalgae and bioindication of the protected coastal waters of the Kazantip Cape of the Sea of Azov based on the saprobity index.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Description of the Study Sites

The Kazantip Cape is located in the southern part of the Sea of Azov, and is a peninsula protruding into the sea for 2 km in the northeast of the Crimean Peninsula (Figure 1). We conducted a study of diatoms in four bays (stations) of Kazantip: Russkaya (st. 1), Shirokaya (st. 2), Kunushkay (st. 3), and Tatarskaya (st. 4). Shirokaya and Kunushkay bays are part of the Kazantip Reserve.
The Kazantip Cape is a fossil reef composed of briozoan limestone, consisting mainly of the skeletons Membranipora lapidosa Pallas, 1803 [13]. Alternating rocks of varying strength (limestones, clays, and marls) are destroyed by the sea at unequal rates, which determines the unique landscape of the Kazantip Cape (Figure 2). Its coastline is extremely rugged and consists of numerous small capes and bays [13].
The coastal waters of the cape have some features. For its shallow upper subtidal zone, the depth of which does not exceed 1.5 m, low salinity, varying in the range of 11–15 psu, as well as significant temperature changes, are noted. In July–August, coastal waters warm up to 28–30 °C, and in the winter months they cool to subzero temperatures, freezing already at minus 0.5 °C [11,14].
Ice can remain in the coastal area inclusive from December to March. Periodic strong storms in January–February break up the ice cover, leaving a pile of ice floes at the edge of the surf.
North-easterly and easterly winds prevail throughout the year. The windiest period is from October to June, with the highest number of storms, particularly in March. From July to September, storms are rare, the calmest month is August [14]. In general, unique ecological conditions have developed in the coastal waters of Kazantip Cape, which significantly distinguish it from other areas of Crimea.

2.2. Sampling and Material Processing

The material for this study was 108 samples of epiphyton from 11 species the macroalgae: Chlorophyta—Bryopsis hypnoides J.V. Lamouroux, Cladophora liniformis Kützing, Ulva intestinalis Linnaeus, and Ulva linza Linnaeus; Phaeophyta—Ericaria crinita (Duby) Molinari et Guiry, Gongolaria barbata (Stackhouse) Kuntze, and Cladosiphon mediterraneus Kützing; Rhodophyta—Callithamnion corymbosum (Smith) Lyngbye, Ceramium arborescens J. Agardh, Pyropia leucosticta (Thuret) Neefus et J. Brodie, and Polysiphonia denudata (Dillwyn) Grevillei ex Harvey. These species are predominantly annual forms (except E. crinita and G. barbata) and are widely represented in the shallow coastal waters of the Kazantip Cape. P. leucosticta is a seasonal winter species, selected for its dominance in the cold season. Samples of macroalgae with epiphyton were collected in four bays of the Kazantip Cape (Figure 1). Material was collected monthly from October 2022 to September 2023 (except for December) at a depth of 0.1 to 1.0 m, and water temperature varied from 3.7 °C in January to 29 °C in August with a salinity from 13.6 to 15.6 psu (Table 1).
The bays of the cape are bound by bryozoan limestone cliffs, and their bottom, rocky in places, is formed by sand and shell sediments (Figure 2). The adjacent bays have a similar bottom, but their shores are flat, sandy, and shell-like [13].
To identify diatoms, preparations from living cells were used, as well as permanent preparations from cleaned valves prepared according to known methods [15] and in our modification [16]. Determination of the qualitative diatom composition was carried out in a light microscope (LM) of the Axioskop 40 type with AxioVision Rel. 4.6 (Zeiss, Jena, Germany). For the more accurate identification of diatoms, scanning electron microscopy (SEM, Hitachi SU3500, Tokyo, Japan) was applied. The diatom suspension was cleaned of organic matter by keeping it in KMnO4 for 24 h, which was followed by adding HCl and heating this mixture to remove insoluble salts (e.g., carbonates). Then, the samples were washed with distilled water using repeated centrifugations to remove acid. Dried preparations of diatom valves were coated with gold-palladium for the SEM visualization.
In the classification of Bacillariophyta, we used the system of Round et al., 1990 [17]. Species identification of diatoms and determination of their ecological and phytogeographical characteristics were carried out by the following sources [3,12,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28].
Quantitative counting of cells was carried out in a Goryaev chamber with a volume of 0.9 mm3 in triplicate. The species richness (S), abundance (N), and biomass (B) of diatoms species were determined according to the method [1]. The species richness was determined as the number of species found in the counting chamber when viewing samples of macroalgae.
The analysis of the structure of the diatom community was carried out using indices of species diversity (H) [29], evenness (e) [30], and dominance (DBP) [31]. When calculating the surface area of the macrophyte-basiphyte, we were guided by the method [32]. Statistical processing of quantitative data were carried out using Microsoft Office Excel 2007 software and a statistical analysis application for Windows Past 4.03 [33]. The Bray–Curtis similarity index was used for comparison of the relative abundances of species in a community in entire habitats and varied between 0 and 1. The network analysis in JASP (Jeffreys’s Amazing Statistics Program), significant only, was doing on the botnet package in R Statistica package of [34]. The program conducts a Bayesian Pearson correlation analysis. The Pearson correlation coefficient is varied between −1 and 1, and measures the strength and direction of the relationship between each pair of variables. Bayesian analysis answers questions about the relationship of the parameters using probability statements.

3. Results

3.1. Fouling Species of Macroalgae

The following diatoms in the coastal waters of the Kazantip Cape in macroalgae epiphyton of 11 species have been studied: Phaeophyta—Ericaria crinita, Gongolaria barbata, and Cladosiphon mediterraneus; Chlorophyta—Bryopsis hypnoides, Cladophora liniformis, Ulva intestinalis, and Ulva linza; and Rhodophyta—Callithamnion corymbosum, Ceramium arborescens, Polysiphonia denudata, and Pyropia leucosticta (Figure 3a–k).

3.2. Species Composition, Ecology, and Distribution of Diatoms

A total of 97 Bacillariophyta taxa were found, belonging to 3 classes, 21 orders, 30 families, and 45 genera, of which 51 species were indicated the first time in the Kazantip Cape (Appendix A Table A1). The basis of their species composition is the class Bacillariophyceae, which is typical for microphytobenthos [1,2,18,35]. The highest number of diatom species was found on U. linza (61), P. denudata (45), and Ericaria crinita (40), and the lowest number of taxa was recorded on thalli of the red alga P. leucosticta (9) (Appendix A Table A1).
The diatom flora is represented by typical obligate fouling organisms—Achnanthes brevipes (Figure 4a,e, Figure 5k and Figure 6j), Achnanthes longipes (Figure 5o and Figure 6t), Gomphonemopsis pseudexigua (Figure 5n), Grammatophora marina (Figure 4b,k), Licmophora abbreviata (Figure 5j and Figure 6q,r), Rhoicosphenia marina (Figure 4c and Figure 6n), Tabularia parva (Figure 6m), Tabularia tabulata (Figure 4f,j,n, Figure 5q and Figure 6u), and Striatella unipunctata—which are capable of adhesion with the help of mucopolysaccharides they secrete, and often form colonies. One of the colonial species of Navicula ramosissima (Figure 4g,h) was found in mucus tubes in March and April. The bentho-planktonic species of Melosira jurgensii (Figure 4d), Melosira moniliformis (Figure 4i), and Melosira lineata (Figure 4m) were met as well.
We also found the following benthic free-living species capable of moving along the substrate (Figure 5 and Figure 6): Cocconeis placentula var. euglypta (Figure 5a and Figure 6k), Cocconeis scutellum (Figure 5b and Figure 6a), Fallacia forcipata (Figure 6i), Lyrella atlantica (Figure 6p), Caloneis liber (Figure 5g), Mastogloia pumila (Figure 5c and Figure 6b,c), N. cancellata (Figure 5d), N. perminuta (Figure 6f), Nitzschia lanceolata var. minor (Figure 5i), Rhopalodia musculus (Figure 6e), and others.
When studying thalli of macrophytes, we noted that Cocconeis scutellum often forms close, sometimes numerous groups located on the surface of the thalli or inside them (Figure 4l). A similar phenomenon was described for the Black Sea [1] and other waters [36].
The species Berkeleya rutilans, Cylindrotheca closterium, Grammatophora marina (Figure 5b,k), Licmophora abbreviata (Figure 5j and Figure 6q,r), Navicula cancellata (Figure 5d), Nitzschia sigma, N. sigmoidea (Fugure 5h), Rhoicosphenia marina (Figure 6n), T. tabulata (Figure 6u), and Trachyneis aspera are among the most frequently encountered. Some rare diatom species of the macroalgae epiphyton were found: Amphora laevis, Grammatophora angulosa, Licmophora rostrata, Lyrella lyra, L. lyroides, Navicula cancellata var. gregoryi, Navicula dumontiae (Figure 6d), Nitzschia dissipata, N. inconspicua (Figure 6g), Planothidium delicatulum (Figure 6h), Petroneis humerosa (Figure 5i), Striatella unipunctata, and Tryblionella compressa.
In addition to floristic analysis of diatom species, an analysis of ecological and phytogeographical characteristics was carried out, and average values of diatom abundance at the study stations were calculated (Appendix A Table A2). Ecological characteristics are represented by marines (50%) and brackish-marines (36%) as well as of freshwaters (9%) and brackish (5%). Of the 44 diatom species identified according to the saprobiont scale modified by [37], 32 were indicators of moderate organic pollution of waters or waters of Class 3 of water quality (species saprobity index varied from 0.7 to 3.6) (Appendix A Table A2). Betamesosaprobionts prevailed among this group (20 species). Of the phytogeographical elements of diatom flora, 36% species cosmopolites were found, of which Cocconeis scutellum, Tabularia tabulata, and Licmophora abbreviata recorded almost on all species of macroalgae, as well as the colonial species Achnanthes brevipes, Navicula ramosissima, and Rhoicosphenia marina. Each group of ABT, BT, and boreal species counted as 20%.
The calculation of species number, the average abundance of diatom cells on macroalgae at the study stations, and the calculation of the Saprobity Index S is shown in Table 2.
The minimum number of species was noted at st. 4. At the same time, the abundance of diatoms was in the range of 15–45 thousand cells/cm2 on average, and at st. 4, an average value of 28 thousand was observed, and the maximum value of 45 thousand was at st. 2. The saprobity indices of the station’s community calculated based on species-specific saprobity indices and the number of cells of each indicator species (Appendix A Table A2) varied between 2.19 and 2.26, which corresponds to Class 3 of water quality. The highest index was at st. 2, and the lowest at st. 4, which, together with the reduced species number here, suggests a negative influence of the environment. The Pearson coefficients calculated for the data of Appendix A Table A2 show insignificant correlation between species number and cells abundance (0.03) and Index S and cells abundance (0.45), but the correlation between species number and Index S was 0.84. It can confirm the negative influence of the environment near station 4 on species’ number of diatoms, as well as increasing the organic pollution load.
Statistical comparison of diatom communities on the different macroalgae and stations was conducted as a JASP network analysis (Figure 7a). It shows three different clusters of submerged macrophytes coded as in Appendix A Table A1.
The highest similarity was between communities of cluster 1 on P. denudata and U. linza sampled mainly in Shirokaya Bay. Their epiphyton had the highest number of diatom species among other macroalgae. Cluster 2 brought together communities on U. intestinalis, C. corymbosum, Cl. Liniformis, and G. barbata. These macroalgae were sampled only in Shirokaya Bay during the summer period (with the exception U. intestinalis). The remaining diatom communities on macrophytes constituted the third cluster (B. hypnoides, C. arborescens, E. crinita, and P. leucosticta). Among them, the similarity was noticeably lower. The listed macroalgae were sampled at four stations in different seasons of the year, which causes a wide variety of diatoms of their epiphyton.
The analysis of the similarity of diatom communities by stations (Figure 7b) also based on the abundance of species of the entire species composition (Appendix A Table A2) showed that the communities of stations 2 and 3 had the most similarity. These stations belong to the Kazantip Reserve, and are characterized by similar relief and underlying substrates. Among the diatoms, the following species prevailed here: A. brevipes, C. scutellum, C. closterium, G. marina, L. abbreviata, L. flabellata, M. jurgensii, M. moniliformis var. moniliformis, M. moniliformis var. subglobosa, N. perminuta, N. ramosissima, T. parva, and T. tabulata.

3.3. Structure of the Diatom Community in Different Seasons

The similarity of the species composition of diatoms of macroalgae by month, calculated using the Bray–Curtis index (BC) in the Past 4.03 program, turned out to be close to 0.45 (Figure 8). This indicated a certain similarity in the species composition on the epiphyton diatom community throughout the year. There were seven species (Achnanthes brevipes, Berkeleya rutilans, Cocconeis scutellum, Grammatophora marina, Melosira moniliformis, Navicula ramosissima, and Tabularia tabulata) that occur monthly on macroalgae.
At the same time, the following two clusters were distinguished: one included a complex of diatom species in November and January, the other in the remaining months. The identification of the first cluster is most likely since only in these two months the species Achnanthes brevipes var intermedia, Diploneis littoralis, D. didyma, Fallacia forcipata, Gomphonemopsis pseudexigua, and some others were found.
Another cluster is formed by a complex of species, evenly represented in the remaining months. This distribution may be associated with the hydrodynamic regime in the coastal region. As a rule, from April to September, a minimum number of storms are usually recorded at the Kazantip Cape. During the study period, the most hydrodynamically turbulent months were November, December, and January.
Analysis of diatom community structure showed seasonality in their development, despite the similar species composition during the annual cycle.
In winter (January and February), the macroalgae fouling (B. hypnoides, E. crinita, P. leucostica, and U. linza) represented 32 species of diatoms. The epiphyton contained numerous colonial benthic species of Tabularia and Navicula ramosissima, as well as a single attached C. scutellum. Species of Achnanthes, Grammatophora, Rhoicosphenia, and benthoplanktonic Melosira moniliformis were often found in the epiphyton. Planktonic species, Skeletonema costatum and S. subsalsum, with a winter peak in their development, were often detected in fouling. The species richness varied from 9 to 13. The maximum abundance of diatoms was 26.9 × 103 cells/cm2 on E. crinita in February, and the minimum was 3.8 × 103 cells/cm2 on P. leucostica in January. The values of the indices varied between (DBP = 18–53%), (H = 2.6–3.1), and (e = 0.7–0.9).
In spring (March, April, and May), 31 species of diatoms were recorded on the five species of macroalgae (B. hypnoides, C. arborescens, E. crinita, U. intestinalis, and U. linza). The above species, which are part of the winter complex, were more abundant in spring. The richness species varied from 7 to 18. The maximum abundance of diatoms reached 61.8 × 103 cells/cm2 in the epiphyton of E. crinita in March, and the minimum was 6.3 × 103 cells/cm2 on U. intestinalis in April. The indices varied within the following ranges: H = 1.6–2.9; DBP = 21–67%; and e = 0.5–0.9. In March–April, N. ramosissima was found in colonies represented by long mucous tubes (Figure 4h). It should be noted that the high abundance of the diatom community is often due to the massive development of one, two, or less often three species, which is reflected in higher values of the dominance indices compared to the winter season.
From June to September, 74 species of diatoms were recorded in the epiphyton of different macroalgae (B. hypnoides, C. corymbosum, Cl. liniformis, Cladosiphon mediterraneus, E. crinita, G. barbata, U. intestinalis, U. linza, and Polysiphonia denudata). At this period, the diatom genera Licmophora (six species), Melosira (four), and Nitzschia (ten) are most diversely represented. Thus, in June–July, the species C. scutellum was dominant; Navicula perminuta, N. ramosissima, and Rh. marina were subdominantes; other species were noted as single. At the beginning of summer, many diatom colonies were destroyed and were found mainly in the form of single cells, fouling substrates to a lesser extent than in spring. The abundance of diatoms ranged from 4.3 × 103 cells/cm2 (G. barbata, June) to 78 × 103 cells/cm2 (G. barbata, July). The species richness varied from 3 to 18. During these months, low species diversity indices of (H = 1.1–2.6) and (e = 0.2) were noted. The Berger–Parker dominance index was maximum (DBP = 87%). The abundant fouling of macroalgae by colonies of diatoms, mainly of the genera Licmophora spp., as also Tabularia spp., but less of Achnantes spp. and Grammatophora marina, were in August and September. Subdominant species Cocconeis placentula var. euglypta, Odontella obtusa, Rhopalodia musculus, and Seminavis ventricosa developed in mass. The richness species varied from 8 to 32, and the abundance ranged from 5 × 103 cells/cm2 (Cl. mediterraneus, August) to 243.4 × 103 cells/cm2 (P. denudata, September). The indices varied within the following ranges: H = 2.0–3.9, e = 0.7–0.9, DBP = 14–58%; this indicates a more uniform distribution of the abundance of species in the community than in June–July.
In October and November, 43 species diatoms were recorded in the epiphyton of four macroalgae species (B. hypnoides, C. arborescens, E. crinita, and U. linza). The species C. scutellum, G. marina, Tabularia fasciculata, T. parva, T. tabulata, and Melosira lineata occur frequently. The fouling of macroalgae thalli with diatom colonies is less abundant. The species richness varied from 6 to 17. The maximum abundance of the diatom community was 18.8 × 103 cells/cm2 on C. arborescens in October at 17 °C, and the minimum was 4.4 × 103 cells/cm2 on U. linza. In the diatom epiphyton on B. hypnoides and E. crinita, minimum values of indices (H = 0.8 and 1.2) and (e = 0.3 and 0.5) were noted, which is due to the high abundance of the dominants species (DBP = 61 and 67%). In the epiphyton of other macroalgae, the values indices varied between H = 2.4–3.3 and e = 0.7–0.8.
There were five cosmopolites of diatom species that dominated in different months of the year, as follows: C. scutellum, G. marina, L. abbreviata, Rh. Marina, and T. tabulata. The abundance of dominant diatom species during all seasons was as follows:
-
Cocconeis scutellum dominated in March (E. crinita), May (B. hypnoides, C. arborescens, U. linza), June (G. barbata), and July (C. corymbosum) with the highest abundance (18.9 × 103 cells/cm2) in May (C. arborescens) and the lowest (1.2 × 103 cells/cm2) in July (C. corymbosum).
-
Grammatophora marina dominated in October (E. crinita) with abundance of 15.3 × 103 cells/cm2.
-
Licmophora abbreviata (1004 cells/cm2) dominated in August on Cl. mediterraneus and U. linza, where its minimum abundance was noted, as well as the maximum (N = 97.7 × 103 cells/cm2) of P. denudata in September.
-
Rhoicosphenia marina (N = 13.7 × 103 cells/cm2) dominated on E. crinita in April.
-
Tabularia tabulata dominated in October (C. arborescens), January (U. linza), February (B. hypnoides), March (B. hypnoides, C. arborescens), April (B. hypnoides), and August (E. crinita). The highest abundance (24.2 × 103 cell/cm2) was recorded in the epiphyton of B. hypnoides in April, and the minimum (4.8 × 103 cell/cm2) was recorded in the epiphyton of E. crinita in August.

4. Discussion

The epiphytic diatoms on aquatic vegetation in the upper sublittoral seas live in highly variable environmental conditions. Shallow coastal waters are characterized by significant temperature fluctuations throughout the year, season, and even within day; noticeable changes in salinity due to rain, melting snow, and seasonal influxes of fresh water; and the influence of the movement of water masses due to storms, surge phenomena in the seas, etc. In addition, macroalgae, as a substrate, are very variable during their life cycle.
Obviously, in such conditions, it is mainly species with broad ecological plasticity that can exist and flourish. Thus, cosmopolites and species with a wide geographical distribution dominate in terms of species richness and abundance. Therefore, the microphytobenthos diatoms from the coastal waters of different seas are characterized by significant similarities. Thus, 54 species registered at Kazantip Cape are indicated on green, brown, and red algae in the Crimean coastal waters of the Black Sea [1]. On 25 species of macrophytes from the Peter the Great Bay of the Sea of Japan, 112 species of diatoms were found, of which 47 taxa were common to the Sea of Azov [38]. Of the 85 species of diatoms found in the epiphyton of red, brown, and green algae of the Mediterranean Sea (coast of Israel), 45 taxa are also common [39]. In the epiphyton of 6 species of wetland macrophytes in southern Iraq, 74 species of diatoms were recorded [40], of which 10 species were found in the Sea of Azov.
Among the diatoms noted in our list of species, there are obligate foulers, Achnanthes, Licmophora, Tabularia, Gomphonemopsis, Rhoicosphenia, Striatella, etc., capable of adhesion with the help of mucopolysaccharides they secrete [41,42], as well as species that move freely along the substrate.
Many authors have noted that macrophytes represent an ideal substrate its colonization by diatoms [38,43,44,45,46]. According to the authors [47], the structure of epiphyton diatom communities can vary significantly depending from the macrophyte species; based on this, they hypothesized that it was due to an increase in colonization surface area by diatoms. This is also evidenced by data [35,48].
A wide variety of factors are known to influence the species composition and quantity of diatom algae: abiotic environmental conditions, biogeographic isolation, the nature of the underlying bottom substrates, and the physiological state of the basiphyte [3,35,45,46,49,50,51,52,53]. For diatoms from mountain lakes, the dependence of the diversity of their communities on altitude has been shown [54]. At the same time, some authors indicate that the degree of colonization of macroalgae by diatoms may depend on the taxonomic rank of the basiphyte [44,45,48,49], the structure of their thalli, and the season [1,11,38].
Previously, the diatom epiphyton Bryopsis was classified as nonfouling [52] and Ulva was classified as weakly fouling [55,56,57,58]. However, subsequent work showed that Chlorophyta algae, having an axial type of thalli, for example, Cladophora, Chaetomorpha, and Bryopsis, can be fouled by diatoms [55,57,58,59]. The abundance of diatoms on Bryopsis plumosa was 14.4 × 103 cells/cm2 in May at depth up to 1 m in Koktebel Bay of the Black Sea [60]. The abundance of diatoms on Bryopsis hypnoides was 28 × 103 cells/cm2 in May at the Kazantip Cape. We noted that in the same months, the abundance of diatoms on U. intestinalis and U. linza, which have a lamellar thallus, was lower compared to the axial structures of the Bryopsis. In April, the abundance diatoms on U. intestinalis was 6.3 × 103 cells/cm2 and on B. hypnoides—53.9 × 103 cells/cm2. However, in September, at the Kazantip Cape, abundant development on U. linza and high (compared to other months) values of species richness (S = 24), the highest peaks of abundance (N = 17.7 × 103 cells/cm2), and biomass (B = 0.31 mg/cm2) diatoms were registered.
Cases of intensive colonization on Ulva have been recorded previously in the Crimean coastal waters of the Black Sea. For example, in the work, it was noted that, in certain seasons of the year, the thalli, and especially the rhizoids of Ulva rigida, were intensively overgrown with diatoms [57]. This may be due to a certain physiological state of the basiphyte at different stages of the life cycle, as indicated in the monograph [1].
The species Phaeophyta of E. crinita and G. barbata are well fouling with diatoms, as shown in this study and works [1,35,61,62]. These are perennial macroalgae, so the duration of existence of their thalli is longer compared to other studied species. It is indicated that the abundance of epiphyton on old plants was higher than in young ones [63].
Rhodophyta species with different thalli structures, sampled from the same depth, were colonized by diatoms differently. Thus, the lamellar thallus on P. leucostica had the lowest abundance of microphytes and the lowest species richness, while the epiphyton of Polysiphonia denudata had the highest number of all quantitative indicators. These macroalgae were selected in different seasons, but in comparison with other vegetation, P. leucostica thallus were practically not overgrown in winter, and in September the communities on P. denudata diatom epiphyton differed in the highest species richness, abundance, and biomass among other macroalgae. Therefore, there is a significant increase in the specific surface area of the thallus of axial-type macroalgae compared to the lamellar type [1,48,61]. At the same time, not only species diversity and species richness increase with increasing substrate area [64], but also the abundance of diatom populations and communities.
It should be taken into account that some macroalgae-basiphyte are overgrown with smaller macroepiphytes from the genera Ceramium, Cladophora, etc., which provide additional surface area for colonization by diatoms.
Let us note that an important factor influencing the development of epiphyton communities in coastal waters is hydrodynamics. Thus, according to the species composition, the diatom flora on macroalgae in different months of the year is divided into two clusters. One cluster unites a complex of species from November and January. During these months, strong stormy days were observed at Kazantip Cape, which made sampling impossible in December. The second cluster unites the diatom flora in the remaining months of the year, characterized by shorter and less severe storms. From October to March, the role of hydrodynamics increases significantly. By the beginning of summer, hydrodynamic activity decreases and in the calmest months, August, and September, we observed maximum species richness, species diversity, and evenness of species in diatom communities with abundant developments of macroalgae.
Some authors have noted a positive interaction between the organic matter content of natural habitats and the propensity of diatoms to heterotrophy [65,66,67]. The paper [68] indicates that the heterotrophic composition of microalgae is higher in the epiphyton than in the epilithon. Recent studies have shown that the beta diversity of producers is highest in the hypertrophic waterbody [69]. In conditions of increased nutrient content in water, there is a gradual replacement of the pioneer periphyton diatom community with green macroalgae [70]. Certain benthic diatoms of the genera Amphora, Licmophora, Navicula, Striatella, Cocconeis, Tabularia, and others prefer an environment enriched with dissolved organic matter and belong to heterotrophic (mixotrophic) species [1,65]. As a rule, such species are indicators of the trophic level of a water area and are abundantly represented in the organic-rich coastal area of the Sea of Azov.
In the coastal waters of the Kazantip Cape, we recorded the year-round presence of indicators of moderate organic pollution of waters, which develop en masse in late summer. This is probably due to the intake of organic substances with untreated sewage and domestic waters from adjacent settlements and recreation facilities near stations 1 and 4, with maximum load in summer period. Statistical comparison of diatom communities in terms of abundance and composition of bioindicators in JASP shows that the interaction between environment and biota is most similar at stations 2 and 3, and different at stations 1 and 4. It should be noted that stations 2 and 3 are located in the territory of the Kazantip Reserve, which indicates the effectiveness of the conservation regime, despite the relatively high saprobity indices (2.25–2.26). However, the ecosystems of stations 1 and 4 suffer significantly from anthropogenic load, although the saprobity indices here are lower (2.19–2.21) than in the protected part. This confirms our assumption of toxic pollution at the stations affected by recreational loads.
However, besides mesosaprobionts, oligosaprobionts were also observed, which were constantly present in the community, but with lower abundance, as it was previously noted in our work [3].
There are known works that show the role of benthic diatoms in the indication of other types of pollution, for example, metals [71]. Information on the floristic composition of diatoms and the structure of their communities in the Kazantip coastal area can be used to assess the ecological state of the intact environment or different types of impact, as indicated by the work carried out in other territories [72,73].

5. Conclusions

For the first time, data on the species composition, seasonal dynamics of abundance, biomass, and structural indicators of the diatom community of epiphyton of 11 species of red, brown, and green macroalgae were obtained for the protected waters of Kazantip Cape of the Sea of Azov represented by 97 taxa of Bacillariophyta were discovered, belonging to 3 classes, 21 orders, 30 families, and 45 genera, 51 species of which were indicated for the first time for the study areas. The number diatom species are the genera Nitzschia (12 species) and Navicula (11). Number of diatom species found by season: 32 in winter, 31 in spring, 74 in summer, and 43 in autumn, and 80% of benthic diatom species, 50% marine, 36% brackish marine, 9% freshwater, 5% brackish, 21% β-mesosaprobic species indicators of moderate organic pollution, and 36% cosmopolites were found.
Diatom communities are characterized by similar species composition throughout the year (except for November and January), with the highest similarity on macroalgae within the same station. The quantitative values of diatoms vary depending on the species of macroalgae and the season. The thalli of B. hypnoides, G. barbata, E. crinita и P. denudata, grow best, and the most abundant development of diatoms occurs in March and September. The maximum values of the abundance and biomass of diatoms for the entire study period were 243.4 × 103 cells/cm2 и 2.82 mg/cm2 on P. denudata in September. The minimum values (N = 3.8 × 103 cells/cm2, B = 0.006 mg/cm2) were noted on P. leucosticta in January.
The presence in the epiphyton of diatoms—indicators of moderate organic pollution of water, which developed in masse in late summer—indicate a constant inflow of organic matter into the coastal waters of the Kazantip Cape. Our bioindicator and statistical studies indicate the effectiveness of the conservation regime, especially at stations within the IUCN reserve, despite relatively high saprobity rates at stations exposed to recreational pressure and poorly treated domestic wastewater. In whole, the waters of the Cape are mesotrophic. The bioindicator properties of the identified diatom species can be used in further monitoring the dynamics of anthropogenic load in the Sea of Azov.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, L.R. and A.B.; methodology, L.R.; diatom species identification, A.B. and A.S.; preparation of diatom samples for SEM and obtaining SEM images, A.S.; data and formal analysis, A.B., S.B. and A.S.; writing—original draft preparation, A.B. and A.S.; writing—review and editing, A.B. and L.R.; supervision, S.B.; project administration, S.B.; funding acquisition, S.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article.

Acknowledgments

This research received financial support within the governmental research assignments IBSS RAS №124022400152-1. We are grateful to V.N. Lishaev for his help in preparing electronic microphotographs. We also thanks to the Israeli Ministry of Aliya and Integration.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Appendix A

Table A1. Average abundance (cells per cm2) of epiphytic macroalgae diatoms in the coastal waters of the Kazantip Cape in the Sea of Azov.
Table A1. Average abundance (cells per cm2) of epiphytic macroalgae diatoms in the coastal waters of the Kazantip Cape in the Sea of Azov.
No.TaxaEricaria crinitaGongolaria barbataCladosiphon mediterraneusBryopsis hypnoidesCladophora liniformisUlva intestinalisUlva linzaCallithamnion corymbosumCeramium arborescensPolysiphonia denudataPyropia leucosticta
CodeEcrCobClmBrhCllUliUllCacCeaPodPyl
1Achnanthes brevipes var. brevipes C. Agardh 18248391113092567336.72521332.5433667
2Achnanthes brevipes var. intermedia * (Kützing) P.T. Cleve 1895830000000000
3Achnanthes longipes C. Agardh 18240000000.33300.43250
4Amphora laevis * Gregory 18570000000.6670000
5Amphora marina * W. Smith 1856017910592.300.3330000
6Amphora ovalis (Kützing) Kützing 184400000033037.64330
7Amphora proteus * Gregory 18570000006.667004330
8Anaulus minutus * Grunow 1880 01314000000000
9Bacillaria paxillifer (O.F. Müller) Hendey 1951011131.401850010
10Berkeleya rutilans (Trentepohl ex Roth) Grunow 18801992002000194.782.330223.61300303
11Caloneis liber * (W. Smith) P.T. Cleve 1894533239061987.1038.670010
12Cocconeis neothumensis * Krammer 1990000000000.200
13Cocconeis placentula var. euglypta * (Ehrenberg) P.T. Cleve 18840000.12500180024920
14Cocconeis scutellum Ehrenberg 18384567274789441363184680243.3116244449424667
15Coscinodiscus janischii * A. Schmidt 1878010000.3332371010830
16Cylindrotheca closterium (Ehrenberg) Reimann et Lewin 19641565380021720.3336.66710907580
17Diatoma tenuis C. Agardh 1812000000.33300000
18Diploneis didyma (Ehrenberg) Ehrenberg 18940.10000000000
19Diploneis littoralis * (Donkin) P.T. Cleve 18940000000032.400
20Diploneis lineata * (Donkin) P.T. Cleve 18941010000000000
21Diploneis smithii * (Brébisson) P.T. Cleve 1894000000000.200
22Entomoneis paludosa (W. Smith) Reimer 19750000006.6670000
23Falcula media var. subsalina * Proschkina-Lavrenko 19630000000.6670010
24Fallacia forcipata * (Greville) A.J. Stickle et D.G. Mann 19900000000.6670010
25Fallacia pygmaea * (Kützing) A.J. Stickle et D.G. Mann 1990760000000000
26Gomphonemopsis pseudexigua * (Simonsen) Medlin 19867600740000000
27Grammatophora angulosa * Ehrenberg 1840000000000.200
28Grammatophora marina (Lyngbye) Kützing 1844566410214300480.708006717243
29Halamphora coffeiformis (C. Agardh) Levkov 20098623910007008670
30Halamphora hyalina * (Kützing) Levkov 200900100028.33037.619500
31Hantzschia marina * (Donkin) Grunow 188000040000032.400
32Haslea subagnita * (Proschkina-Lavrenko) Makarova et Karajeva 19850.11000000000
33Hyalosira delicatula Kützing 184486000.250000000
34Licmophora abbreviata C. Agardh 18247641829200789.717010172186397,7110
35Licmophora dalmatica (Kützing) Grunow 186700000028.330010
36Licmophora flabellata * (Greville) C. Agardh 183101775000235.31098580
37Licmophora hastata * Mereschkowsky 1901001790000037.600
38Licmophora paradoxa (Lyngbye) C. Agardh 182800000011.330000
39Licmophora rostrata * Mereschkowsky, 190200000000010
40Lyrella abrupta * (Gregory) D.G. Mann 19900000000.3330000
41Lyrella atlantica * (A. Schmidt) A.J. Stickle et D.G. Mann 199000000070010
42Lyrella lyra * (Ehrenberg) N.I. Karajeva 19780000000003250
43Lyrella lyroides * (Hendey) D.G. Mann 19900000000.3330000
44Mastogloia pumila * (Grunow) P.T. Cleve 189500000070000
45Mastogloia pusilla Grunow 18780000000.3330010
46Melosira jurgensii * C. Agardh 182400000000023,3990
47Melosira lineata * (Dillwing) C. Agardh 1824000000810753.953080
48Melosira moniliformis var. moniliformis (O.F. Müller) C. Agardh 182488210374.810.333728.700.410,1830
49Melosira moniliformis var. subglobosa * (Grunow) Hustedt 192746800310.400530.7084.619,0650
50Navicula ammophila var. intermedia Grunow 1822114000.25043908526000
51Navicula cancellata Donkin 1873 var. cancellata8923900.1259870.3330.33314563.410
52Navicula cancellata var. gregoryi * Grunow 18800000.1250000000
53Navicula cryptocephala * Kützing 18440000002803800
54Navicula directa (W. Smith) Ralfs ex Pritchard 186117723900000032.400
55Navicula dumontiae * Baardseth et Taasen 19730000.1250000000
56Navicula palpebralis Brebisson ex W. Smith 18530000000.333084.600
57Navicula pennata var. pontica * Mereschkowsky 190200000090010
58Navicula perminuta * Grunow 188034247800.55331870283.710912735750
59Navicula perrhombus * Hustedt ex Simonsen 19621560000000000
60Navicula ramosissima (C. Agardh) P.T. Cleve 1895203967,84914910734738114.3266.7980954.96825485
61Neosynedra provincialis * (Grunow) Williams et Round 19860.100172.1000059.5900
62Nitzschia dissipata (Kützing) Grunow 18620000000.3330000
63Nitzschia distans Gregory 18578300000.33311.67032.400
64Nitzschia hybrida f. hyalina Proschkina-Lavrenko 19630000.12500.3330.3330000
65Nitzschia inconspicua * Grunow 18620000000.3330000
66Nitzschia lanceolata var. minor Van Heurck 1880000211.810000.200
67Nitzschia rupestris * Proschkina-Lavrenko 1963000400000000
68Nitzschia sigma (Kützing) W. Smith 18534300149163.33356259672546016250
69Nitzschia sigmoidea (Nitzsch) W. Smith 1853001000186.70028160
70Nitzschia spathulata Brébisson ex W. Smith 18530000006.6670000
71Nitzschia tenuirostris Mereschkowsky 190100000000010
72Nitzschia vermicularis (Kützing) Hantzsch ex Rabenhorst 1860760000000000
73Nitzschia vidovichii * (Grunow) Grunow 188100000090000
74Odontella obtusa * Kützing 18440000000.667008670
75Parlibellus delognei (Van Heurck) E.J. Cox 1988111137400355400.333101182
76Petroneis humerosa (Brebisson ex Smith) Sticle et D.G. Mann 1990 00000000010
77Plagiotropis lepidoptera * (Gregory) Kuntze 18980.11790000195.2037.610
78Planothidium delicatulum * (Kützing) Round et Bukhtiyarova 19960000000.3330000
79Pleurosigma angulatum (Queckett) W. Smith 18520000000.3330000
80Pleurosigma elongatum W. Smith 185203580059200.667063.400
81Pleurosigma intermedium W. Smith 185301000000000
82Proschkinia poretzskiae * (Korotkevich) D.G. Mann 1990209000000000182
83Psammodictyon panduriforme * (Gregory) D.G. Mann 19901520000000000
84Rhoicosphenia marina (W. Smith) M. Schmidt 188927464780185.5789.714476.66710910290606
85Rhopalodia musculus * (Kützing) O.F. Müller 189900074000.6670023830
86Skeletonema costatum (Greville) P.T. Cleve 1878164500226.80000337.600
87Skeletonema subsalsum (Cleve) Bethge 19281000.1250000000
88Seminavis ventricosa * (Gregory) M. Garcia-Baptista 1993356000001260010830
89Striatella unipunctata * (Lyngbye) C. Agardh 18320.1000.1250000000
90Synedrosphenia crystallina
(C. Agardh) Lobban et Ashworth 2022 		01790227.61046.330636500
91Tabularia fasciculata (C. Agardh) Williams et Round 19864975970120400113806500
92Tabularia parva (Kützing) Williams et Round 19904750626911.425670929.50364.217,2240
93Tabularia tabulata (C. Agardh) Snoeijs 199226740180866120931.7859.3145298411,049425
94Trachyneis aspera * (Ehrenberg) P.T. Cleve 1894389358119104.20114.349006500
95Tryblionella compressa * (Bailey) Poulin 19900000.1250000000
96Tryblionella hungarica (Grunow) D.G. Mann 19900.1000.2500000.200
97Undatella lineolata (Ehrenberg) L.I. Ryabushko 20060000009.333109010
No of Species402615351819611437459
Average Abundance, cells/cm228,44478,010501321,73941,46291658418334413,362243,4263760
Note. (*)—species recorded for the first time in the Kazantip Cape.
Table A2. Species composition of diatoms, their averaged abundance (cells per cm2) by stations, ecological (Habitat, RS, SAPRO, s), and phytogeographical (PhG) characteristics in the coastal waters of the Kazantip Cape in the Sea of Azov.
Table A2. Species composition of diatoms, their averaged abundance (cells per cm2) by stations, ecological (Habitat, RS, SAPRO, s), and phytogeographical (PhG) characteristics in the coastal waters of the Kazantip Cape in the Sea of Azov.
No.TaxonSt. 1St. 2St. 3St. 4HabitatRSSAPROIndex SPhG
1Achnanthes brevipes546.60673.72406.78838.63BBMβ2.00C
2Achnanthes brevipes var. intermedia16.608.308.3083.00BBM--C
3Achnanthes longipes0.1532.5710.910.00BMβ-ABT
4Amphora laevis0.130.070.070.00BM--BT, not
5Amphora marina0.2777.1625.810.00BM--BT, not
6Amphora ovalis14.0550.3321.460.00BBMβ1.50C
7Amphora proteus1.3343.9715.100.00BMβ-C
8Anaulus minutus0.00131.4043.800.00BM--BT, not
9Bacillaria paxillifer43.4721.9421.800.00BPBMβ2.30C
10Berkeleya rutilans499.62429.58309.731992.13BBM--ABT, not
11Caloneis liber126.43185.93104.12532.50BM--C
12Cocconeis neothumensis0.040.020.020.00BFW--ABT, not
13Cocconeis placentula var. euglypta3.69251.0584.910.00BBMβ1.30ABT
14Cocconeisscutellum2751.353866.542205.964566.88BBMβ2.00C
15Coscinodiscus janischii47.47132.2759.910.00PM--BT, not
16Cylindrotheca closterium32.51373.96135.49155.88BPBMβ2.00C
17Diatoma tenuis0.000.030.010.00BPFWβ2.40C
18Diploneis didyma0.030.010.010.13BBM--ABT, not
19Diploneis littoralis6.483.243.240.00BM--ABT, not
20Diploneis lineata20.2510.1310.13101.25BMo0.70BT
21Diploneis smithii0.040.020.020.00BBM--C
22Entomoneis paludosa1.330.670.670.00BPBMβ-α2.50C
23Falcula media var. subsalina0.130.170.100.00BPMα-o2.70B
24Fallacia forcipata0.130.170.100.00BM--ABT, not
25Fallacia pygmaea15.207.607.6076.00BBM--BT
26Gomphonemopsis pseudexigua30.0015.0015.0076.00BM--ABT, not
27Grammatophora angulosa0.040.020.020.00BM--C
28Grammatophora marina1817.561604.881140.825664.25BMβ-C
29Halamphora coffeiformis18.70119.8546.1885.50BMo1.30C
30Halamphora hyalina13.39201.5971.660.00BBMo1.00ABT, not
31Hantzschia marina14.487.247.240.00BMo-α1.80BT, not
32Haslea subagnita0.030.110.050.13BBM--B
33Hyalosira delicatula17.158.588.5885.50BBMβ2.00ABT, not
34Licmophora abbreviata815.2810,046.313620.5376.00BMβ-C
35Licmophora dalmatica5.672.932.870.00BM--B
36Licmophora flabellata202.071009.53403.870.00BMo-β1.50BT, not
37Licmophora hastata43.323.7615.690.00BM--B
38Licmophora paradoxa2.271.131.130.00BM--C
39Licmophora rostrata0.000.100.030.00BM--B
40Lyrella abrupta0.070.030.030.00BM--BT
41Lyrella atlantica1.400.800.730.00BM--ABT, not
42Lyrella lyra0.0032.5010.830.00BMo-β1.50BT, not
43Lyrella lyroides0.070.030.030.00BMβ2.10BT
44Mastogloia pumila1.400.700.700.00BBM--BT, not
45Mastogloia pusilla0.070.130.070.00BBM--BT, not
46Melosira jurgensii0.002339.90779.970.00PBM--ABT, not
47Melosira lineata166.98614.29260.420.00PBMo-β2.00ABT, not
48Melosira moniliformis var. moniliformis397.231217.15538.13882.25BPBMo-β2.00C
49Melosira moniliformis var. subglobosa278.642045.82774.82467.50BPBM--B
50Navicula ammophila var. intermedia41.65285.13108.93114.00BBM--AB
51Navicula cancellata var. cancellata30.55152.5161.0288.88BM--C
52Navicula cancellata var. gregoryi0.030.010.010.00BM--B
53Navicula cryptocephala13.126.566.560.00BFWβ-α2.40C
54Navicula directa41.9344.8728.93177.25BM--C
55Navicula dumontiae0.030.010.010.00BM--B
56Navicula palpebralis16.998.498.490.00BM--ABT, not
57Navicula pennata var. pontica1.801.000.930.00BMβ1.00BT
58Navicula perminuta150.671111.58420.75342.13BFW--C
59Navicula perrhombus31.1815.5915.59155.88BM--B
60Navicula ramosissima896.598532.553143.052039.00BBMβ-α2.40ABT, not
61Neosynedra provincialis46.3623.1823.180.13BM--B
62Nitzschia dissipata0.070.030.030.00BFWo1.40C
63Nitzschia distans25.4112.7412.7283.00BBMα3.60BT, not
64Nitzschia hybrida f. hyalina0.090.080.060.00BBMβ-α2.50B
65Nitzschia inconspicua0.070.030.030.00BFW--ABT, not
66Nitzschia lanceolata var. minor42.3921.3021.230.00BBβ2.0BT
67Nitzschia rupestris8.004.004.000.00BBM--B
68Nitzschia sigma173.85621.48265.11430.00BPBα3.00ABT, not
69Nitzschia sigmoidea37.53300.27112.600.00BPFWβ-α2.50B
70Nitzschia spathulata1.330.670.670.00BMβ-α2.50BT
71Nitzschia tenuirostris0.000.100.030.00BPBβ1.70B
72Nitzschia vermicularis15.207.607.6076.00BBβ2.20BT, not
73Nitzschia vidovichii1.800.900.900.00BM--B
74Odontella obtusa0.1386.7728.970.00BPM--BT, not
75Parlibellus delognei22.19522.26181.49110.63BM--C
76Petroneis humerosa0.000.100.030.00BM--C
77Plagiotropis lepidoptera46.5941.2929.290.13BM--ABT
78Planothidium delicatulum0.070.030.030.00BFWo1.00ABT, not
79Pleurosigma angulatum0.070.030.030.00BM--C
80Pleurosigma elongatum12.81101.4138.070.00BBMβ2.00C
81Pleurosigma intermedium0.000.100.030.00BM--C
82Proschkinia poretzskiae41.7039.0526.92208.50BM--B
83Psammodictyon panduriforme30.3815.1915.19151.88BM--BT, not
84Rhoicospheniamarina793.32739.67511.002745.75BM--AB
85Rhopalodia musculus14.88245.7486.880.00BBMβ1.00BT
86Seminavis ventricosa441.82220.91220.91355.88BM--C
87Skeletonema costatum0.230.110.111644.75PBM--C
88Skeletonema subsalsum96.38156.4984.291.00PBMo2.30B
89Striatella unipunctata0.050.030.030.13BM--C
90Synedrosphenia crystallina67.39116.6961.360.00BBMβ-α2.50C
91Tabularia fasciculata580.89350.14310.34497.38BBMβ-α2.50C
92Tabularia parva661.212247.06969.43475.00BBMα3.00ABT, not
93Tabularia tabulata2920.893327.432082.772673.75BBM--C
94Trachyneis aspera132.26166.4699.58389.13BM--C
95Tryblionella compressa0.030.010.010.00BM--ABT, not
96Tryblionella hungarica0.120.060.060.13BBα-o2.90C
97Undatella lineolata1.8711.934.600.00BBMβ-ABT
Note. (-)—data absent. Habitat: B—benthos, P—plankton, BP—bentho-plankton. RS—the relationship of species to the water salinity: M—marine species, FW—freshwater, BM—brackish-marine, B—brackish. SAPRO—self-purification zone: α—mesosaprobic, α-β—mesosaprobic, α-o—mesosaprobic, β—mesosaprobic, β-α—mesosaprobic, o—oligosaprobic, o-β—mesosaprobic. Index: S—species-specific index saprobity s according to [37]. PhG—phytogeographic elements: B—boreal species, AB—arctic-boreal, BT—boreal-tropical, ABT—arctic-boreal-tropical, C—cosmopolite. not = notal species also found in the southern hemisphere.

References

  1. Ryabushko, L.I. Microphytobenthos of the Black Sea; Gaevskaya, A.V., Ed.; EKOSI-Hydrophyzica: Sevastopol, Russia, 2013; 416p. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  2. Ryabushko, L.I.; Bondarenko, A.V. The Qualitative and Quantitative Characteristics of the Benthic Diatoms near Kazantip Cape of the Sea of Azov. J. Black Sea/Mediterr. Environ. 2016, 22, 237–249. [Google Scholar]
  3. Barinova, S.; Bondarenko, A.; Ryabushko, L.; Kapranov, S. Microphytobenthos as an indicator of water quality and organic pollution in the western coastal zone of the Sea of Azov. Oceanol. Hydrobiol. Stud. 2019, 48, 125–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Litvinyuk, N.A. A. Cadastral documentation for the state budgetary institution of the Republic of Crimea Kazantipsky Nature Reserve. Sci. Notes Martyan Cape Nat. Reserve 2016, 7, 27–55. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  5. Volkov, L.I. Materials on the flora of the Sea of Azov. Proc. Rostov Reg. Biol. Soc. 1940, 4, 114–137. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  6. Gromov, V.V. Bottom Sea and coastal aquatic vegetation. In Modern Development of Estuarine Ecosystems on the Example of the Sea of Azov; Matishov, G.G., Ed.; Kola Scientific Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences: Apatity, Russia, 1999; pp. 130–166. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  7. Sadogurskiy, S.Y.; Belich, T.V.; Maslov, I.I.; Sadogurskaya, S.A. Phytobenthos species structure in Nature Reserve of Crimea. Bull. Main Bot. Gard. 2003, 186, 86–104. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  8. Maslov, I.I. Phytobenthos of some protected and natural aquatic complexes of the Sea of Azov. Proc. Nikitsk. Bot. Gard. 2004, 123, 68–75. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  9. Sadogurskaya, S.A.; Sadogurskiy, S.Y.; Belich, T.V. Annotated list of phytobenthos of the Kazantip nature reserve. Sci. Work. Nikitsk. Bot. Gard. 2006, 126, 190–208. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  10. Belich, T.V.; Sadogursky, S.E.; Sadogurskaya, S.A. Revision of the macrophyte flora of the water area of the Kazantip Nature Reserve. Sci. Notes Martyan Cape Nat. Reserve 2019, 10, 61–72. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  11. Bondarenko, A.V. Microalgae of the Benthos of the Crimean Coastal Waters of the Sea of Azov. Ph.D. Thesis, A.O. Kovalevsky Institute of Biology of the Southern Seas of RAS, Sevastopol, Ukraine, 2017; 176p. submitted. (In Russian). [Google Scholar]
  12. Bondarenko, A.V.; Ryabushko, L.I.; Sadogurskaya, S.A. Microalgae of benthos and plankton in the coastal waters of the Kazantip Nature Reserve (Sea of Azov, Crimea). Biota Environ. Prot. Areas 2018, 4, 25–48. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  13. Lebedinsky, V.I.; Kirichenko, L.P. Crimea Is an Open-Air Museum; SONAT: Simferopol, Ukraine, 2002; 184p. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  14. Boltachev, A.R.; Alemov, S.V.; Zagorodnyaya, Y.A.; Karpova, E.P.; Manzhos, L.A.; Gubanov, V.V.; Litvinyuk, L.A. Underwater World Kazantip Nature Reserve; Boltachev, A.R., Zagorodnyaya, Y.A., Eds.; Biznes-Inform: Simferopol, Russia, 2016; 112p. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  15. Proshckina-Lavrenko, A.I. (Ed.) Diatoms of the USSR (Fossil and Modern). 1; Nauka: Leningrad, Russia, 1974; 403p. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  16. Blaginina, A.; Ryabushko, L. Finding of a Rare Species of Diatom Nanofrustulum shiloi (Lee, Reimer et Mcenery) Round, Hallsteinsen et Paasche, 1999 in the Periphyton of the coastal waters of the Black Sea. Int. J. Algae 2021, 23, 247–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Round, F.E.; Crawford, R.M.; Mann, D.G. The Diatoms. Biology and Morphology of the Genera; Cambridge University: Cambridge, UK, 1990; 747p. [Google Scholar]
  18. Ryabushko, L.I.; Begun, A.A. Diatoms of Microphytobenthos of the Sea of Japan (Synopsis and Atlas); In 1–2 Volumes; RK KIA: Sevastopol, Russia, 2016; Volume 2, 324p. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  19. Smith, W. A Synopsis of the British Diatomaceae. 1; John Van Voorst: London, UK, 1853; 89p. [Google Scholar]
  20. Smith, W. A Synopsis of the British Diatomaceae. 2; John Van Voorst: London, UK, 1856; 107p. [Google Scholar]
  21. Kuylenstierna, M. Benthic Algal Vegetation in the Nordre Älv Estuary (Swedish West Coast). Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Marine Botany, University of Göteborg-Sweden, Göteborg, Sweden, 1989. Volume 1. 244p. in press. [Google Scholar]
  22. Kuylenstierna, M. Benthic Algal Vegetation in the Nordre Älv Estuary (Swedish West Coast). Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Marine Botany, University of Göteborg-Sweden, Göteborg, Sweden, 1990. Volume 2. 76p. in press. [Google Scholar]
  23. Guslyakov, N.E.; Zakordonets, O.A.; Gerasimyuk, V.P. Atlas of Benthic Diatoms of the Northwestern Part of the Black Sea and Adjacent Water Bodies; Nauk. Dumka: Kyiv, Ukraine, 1992; 112p. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  24. Witkowski, A.; Lange-Bertalot, H.; Metzelin, D. Diatom Flora of Marine Coasts I. Iconographia Diatomologica; Lange-Bertalot, H., Ed.; Koeitz Scientific Books: Königstein, Germany, 2000; Volume 7. [Google Scholar]
  25. Levkov, Z. Diatoms of Europe: Diatoms of the European Inland Waters and Comparable Habitats. In Amphora sensu lato; Lange-Bertalot, H., Ed.; A.R.G. Gantner Verlag K.G.: Ruggell, Liechtenstein, 2009; Volume 5, pp. 5–916. [Google Scholar]
  26. Al-Yamani, F.Y.; Saburova, M.A. Illustrated Guide on the Benthic Diatoms of Kuwait’s Marine Environment; Kuwait Institute for Scientific Research: Safat, Kuwait, 2011; 352p. [Google Scholar]
  27. Ryabushko, L.I.; Bondarenko, A.V.; Barinova, S.S. Benthic indicator microalgae in assessing the degree of organic water pollution using the example of the Crimean coast of the Azov Sea. Mar. Biol. J. 2019, 4, 69–80. (In Russian) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Guiry, M.D.; Guiry, G.M. AlgaeBase. World-Wide Electronic Publication, National University of Ireland, Galway. Available online: http://www.algaebase.org (accessed on 18 March 2023).
  29. Shannon, C.E.; Weaver, W. The Mathematical Theory of Communication; University of Illinois Press: Champaign, IL, USA, 1949; 117p. [Google Scholar]
  30. Pielou, E.C. The measurement of diversity in different types of biological collections. J. Theoret. Biol. 1966, 10, 370–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Berger, W.H.; Parker, F.L. Diversity of Planktonic Foraminifera in Deep-Sea Sediments. Science 1970, 168, 1345–1347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Minicheva, G.G. Allometric method for determining the specific surface area of algae-macrophyte. Algologia 1992, 2, 93–96. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  33. Hammer, Ø.; Harper, D.A.T.; Ryan, P.D. PAST: Paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontol. Electron. 2001, 4, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  34. Love, J.; Selker, R.; Marsman, M.; Jamil, T.; Dropmann, D.; Verhagen, J.A.; Ly, A.; Gronau, F.Q.; Smira, M.; Epskamp, S.; et al. JASP: Graphical statistical software for common statistical designs. J. Stat. Softw. 2019, 88, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Shiroyan, A.G. Diatoms of Macrophytes Epiphyton of the Crimean Coastal Waters of the Black Sea. Ph.D. Thesis, A.O. Kovalevsky Institute of Biology of the Southern Seas of RAS, Sevastopol, Ukraine, 2022; 167p. submitted. (In Russian). [Google Scholar]
  36. López-Fuerte, F.O.; Siqueiros-Beltrones, D.A.; Altamirano-Cerecedo, M.C. Species composition and new records of Diatom taxa on Phyllodictyon pulcherrimum (Chlorophyceae) from the Gulf of California. Diversity 2020, 12, 339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Sládeček, V. Diatoms as indicators of organic pollution. Acta Hydrochem. Et Hydrobiol. 1986, 14, 555–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Ryabushko, L.I.; Begun, A.A. Diatoms of Microphytobenthos of the Sea of Japan; In 1–2 Volumes; H. Opiaндa: Simferopol, Russia, 2015; Volume 1, 288p. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  39. Barinova, S.; Ryabushko, L.; Balycheva, D.; Blaginina, A.; Chiernyavsky, E.; Shiroyan, A. Benthic diatoms on macrophytes of the Israeli Mediterranean coast. Diversity 2024, 16, 338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Al-Handal, A.Y.; Abdulla, D.S.; Wulff, A.; Abdulwahab, M.T. Epiphytic diatoms of the Mesopotamian wetland: Huwaiza marsh, South Iraq. Diatom 2014, 30, 164–178. [Google Scholar]
  41. Ohgai, M.; Matsui, T.; Okuda, T.; Tsukahara, H. Fine structure of adhesive parts of diatoms (Bacillariaceae) and adhesive mechanism. J. Shimonoseki Univ. Fish. 1984, 33, 27–35. [Google Scholar]
  42. Ohgai, M.; Tsukahara, H.; Matsui, T.; Nakajima, K. Licmophora abbreviata Agardh. and L. paradoxa (Lyngbye) Agardh in vitro. Bull. Jpn. Sci. Fish 1984, 50, 1157–1163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Lee, J.J.; McEnery, M.E.; Kennedy, E.M.; Rubin, H. A nutritional analysis of a sublittoral diatom assemblage epiphytic on Enteromorpha from a Long Island salt marsh. J. Phycol. 1975, 11, 14–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Siqueiros-Beltrones, D.A.; Hernández-Almeida, O.U. Florística de diatomeas epifitas en un manchón de macroalgas subtropicales. Cicimar Oceánides 2006, 21, 11–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Hernández-Almeida, O.U.; Siqueiros-Beltrones, D.A. Substrate-dependent differences between the structures of epiphytic and epilithic diatom assemblages off the southwestern coast of the Gulf of California. Bot. Mar. 2012, 55, 149–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Korotkevich, O.S. Diatom flora of the littoral zone of the Barents Sea. Tr. Murm. Mar. Biol. Inst. 1960, 1, 68–338. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  47. Main, S.P.; McIntire, C.D. The Distribution of Epiphytic Diatoms in Yaquina Estuary, Oregon. Bot. Mar. 1974, 17, 88–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Ryabushko, L.I.; Zavalko, S.E. Microphytofouling of artificial and natural substrates in the Black Sea. Bot. J. 1992, 77, 33–39. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  49. Huang, R.; Boney, A.D. Effects of diatom mucilage on the growth and morphology of marine algae. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1983, 67, 79–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Huang, R.; Boney, A.D. Individual and combined interactions between littoral diatoms and sporelings of red algae. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1985, 85, 101–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Ryabushko, L.I. Fouling diatoms on the benthic plants of the Black Sea by Omega Cape. Hydrobiol. J. 1996, 32, 15–22. [Google Scholar]
  52. Proshckina-Lavrenko, A.I. Diatoms of the Benthos of the Black Sea; Nauka: Moskow, Russia, 1963; 243p. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  53. Siqueiros Beltrones, D.A.; Martínez, Y.J.; Aldana-Moreno, A. Exploratory floristics of epiphytic diatoms from Revillagigedo Islands (Mexico). Cymbella 2019, 5, 98–123. Available online: http://cymbella.mx (accessed on 11 July 2024).
  54. Sahin, B.; Barinova, S. Environmental factors structuring diatom diversity of the protected high mountain lakes in the Kaçkar Mountains National Park (Rize, Turkey). Ecologies 2024, 5, 312–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Kucherova, Z.S. Dynamics of diatom fouling on the Black Sea macrophytes. Biol. Morya 1969, 18, 114–122. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  56. Round, F.E. Benthic marine diatoms. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. Ann. Rev. 1971, 9, 83–139. [Google Scholar]
  57. Ryabushko, L.I.; Balycheva, D.S.; Strijak, A.V. Diatom epiphyton of some green algae and periphyton of anthropogenic substrates of Crimean coastal waters of the Black Sea (Ukraine). Algologia 2013, 23, 419–437. (In Russian) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Kolpakov, N.V.; Begun, A.A.; Olkhovik, A.V. Composition and distribution of microalgae in the estuary of the Sukhodol River (Ussuri Bay, Peter the Great Bay) in autumn. 2. Epiphyton. Izv. TINRO 2014, 176, 127–138. (In Russian) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Prazukin, A.V.; Lee, R.I.; Balycheva, D.S.; Firsov, Y.K.; Kholodov, V.V. Cladophora (Chlorophyta) as an ecological engineer in hypersaline lake Chersonesskoye: Distribution of diatom algae in the structured space of plant mats. Mar. Biol. J. 2023, 8, 62–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Ryabushko, L.I.; Bondarenko, A.V.; Shiroyan, A.G. Diatoms of Bryopsis plumosa (Hudson) C. Agardh (Chlorophyta, Bryopsidales) Epiphyton from the Black and Aegean Seas. Int. J. Algae 2019, 21, 321–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Colina, A. Investigation on the Structure, Composition and Productivity of the Epiphyte Communities on Fucus vesiculosus L. in the Western Baltic; Christian-Albrechts Universitat: Kiel, Germany, 1981; 118p. [Google Scholar]
  62. Ryabushko, L.; Balycheva, D.; Kapranov, S.; Shiroyan, A.; Blaginina, A.; Barinova, S. Seasonal dynamics of microphytobenthos distribution in three ecotopes on a mussel farm (Black Sea). J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 2100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Ballantine, D.L. The distribution of algal epiphytes on macrophyte hosts off-shore from La Parguera, Puerto Rico. Bot. Mar. 1979, 22, 107–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Odum, Y. Ecology; Mir: Moscow, Russia, 1986; Volume 2, 376p. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  65. Lewin, J.C. Heterotrophy in marine diatoms. J. Gen. Microbiol. 1953, 9, 305–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Admiraal, W.; Peletier, H. Influence of organic compounds and light limitation on the growth rate of estuarine benthic diatoms. Br. Psychol. J. 1979, 14, 197–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Saks, N.M. Primary production and heterotrophy of a pinnate and a centric salt marsh diatom. Mar. Biol. 1983, 76, 241–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Wijewardene, L.; Wu, N.; Giménez-Grau, P.; Holmboe, C.; Fohrer, N.; Baattrup-Pedersen, A.; Riis, T. Epiphyton in Agricultural Streams: Structural Control and Comparison to Epilithon. Water 2021, 13, 3443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Dunck, B.; Rodrigues, L.; Lima-Fernandes, E.; Cassio, F.; Pascoal, C.; Cottenie, K. Priority effects of stream eutrophication and assembly history on beta diversity across aquatic consumers, decomposers and producers. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 797, 149106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Kim, S.; Quiroz-Arita, C.; Monroe, E.A.; Siccardi, A.; Mitchell, J.; Huysman, N.; Davis, R.W. Application of attached algae flow-ways for coupling biomass production with the utilization of dilute non-point source nutrients in the Upper Laguna Madre, TX. Water Res. 2021, 191, 116816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Martínez, Y.J.; Siqueiros-Beltrones, D.A.; Marmolejo-Rodríguez, A.J. Response of benthic diatom assemblages to contamination by metals in a marine environment. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Siqueiros Beltrones, D.A.; Martínez, Y.J.; López-Fuerte, F.O. Epiphytic diatoms from the Central Region of the Gulf of California: Floristics and biogeographic remarks. Diversity 2023, 15, 510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Skorobogatova, O.; Yumagulova, E.; Storchak, T.; Barinova, S. Bioindication of the influence of oil production on sphagnum bogs in the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug–Yugra, Russia. Diversity 2019, 11, 207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Jmse 12 01211 g001
Figure 1. Map of the sampling sites of the Kazantip Cape in bays 1—Russkaya, 2—Shirokaya, 3—Kunushkay, and 4—Tatarskaya.
Figure 1. Map of the sampling sites of the Kazantip Cape in bays 1—Russkaya, 2—Shirokaya, 3—Kunushkay, and 4—Tatarskaya.
Jmse 12 01211 g001
Jmse 12 01211 g002
Figure 2. Various views of the Kazantip Cape and its bays: (a,d,e)—rocky cliffs; (b)—sandy coast of Russkaya Bay; (c)—Kunushkay Bay; (d)—Shirokaya Bay; (e)—coastal ice cover.
Figure 2. Various views of the Kazantip Cape and its bays: (a,d,e)—rocky cliffs; (b)—sandy coast of Russkaya Bay; (c)—Kunushkay Bay; (d)—Shirokaya Bay; (e)—coastal ice cover.
Jmse 12 01211 g002
Jmse 12 01211 g003
Figure 3. Samples of the macroalgae of the coastal waters of the Kazantip Cape: (a)—Bryopsis hypnoides, (b)—Callithamnion corymbosum, (c)—Cladosiphon mediterraneus, (d)—Ulva intestinalis, (e)—Polysiphonia denudata, (f)—Pyropia leucosticta, (g)—Ulva linza, (h)—Ericaria crinita, (i)—Cladophora liniformis, (j)—Gongolaria barbata, and (k)—Ceramium arborescens.
Figure 3. Samples of the macroalgae of the coastal waters of the Kazantip Cape: (a)—Bryopsis hypnoides, (b)—Callithamnion corymbosum, (c)—Cladosiphon mediterraneus, (d)—Ulva intestinalis, (e)—Polysiphonia denudata, (f)—Pyropia leucosticta, (g)—Ulva linza, (h)—Ericaria crinita, (i)—Cladophora liniformis, (j)—Gongolaria barbata, and (k)—Ceramium arborescens.
Jmse 12 01211 g003
Jmse 12 01211 g004
Figure 4. LM. Colonies of diatoms of various forms in the fouling of macroalgae in the Kazantip Cape: Achnanthes brevipes (a,e,o), Grammatophora marina (b,k), Rhoicosphenia marina (c), Melosira jurgensii (d), Tabularia tabulata (f,j,n), single cell of Navicula ramosissima (g) and its tube colonies (h), Melosira moniliformis (i), and Melosira lineata (m). A single living species of Cocconeis scutellum is inside of the red alga Ceramium arborescens (l).
Figure 4. LM. Colonies of diatoms of various forms in the fouling of macroalgae in the Kazantip Cape: Achnanthes brevipes (a,e,o), Grammatophora marina (b,k), Rhoicosphenia marina (c), Melosira jurgensii (d), Tabularia tabulata (f,j,n), single cell of Navicula ramosissima (g) and its tube colonies (h), Melosira moniliformis (i), and Melosira lineata (m). A single living species of Cocconeis scutellum is inside of the red alga Ceramium arborescens (l).
Jmse 12 01211 g004
Jmse 12 01211 g005
Figure 5. LM. Photographs of some diatom species frustules (a–e,g,i,p,q) and cells with chloroplasts (f–h,j–o) on macroalgae epiphyton: Cocconeis placentula var. euglypta (a), Cocconeis scutellum (b), Mastogloia pumila (c), Navicula cancellata (d), Navicula palpebralis (e), Diploneis didyma (f), Caloneis liber (g), Nitzschia sigmoidea (h), Nitzschia lanceolata var. minor (i), Licmophora abbreviata (j), Achnanthes brevipes (k), Petroneis humerosa (l), Undatella lineolata (m), Gomphonemopsis pseudexigua (n), Achnanthes longipes (o), Synedrosphenia crystallina (p), and Tabularia tabulata (q). Scale bar: 10 µm.
Figure 5. LM. Photographs of some diatom species frustules (a–e,g,i,p,q) and cells with chloroplasts (f–h,j–o) on macroalgae epiphyton: Cocconeis placentula var. euglypta (a), Cocconeis scutellum (b), Mastogloia pumila (c), Navicula cancellata (d), Navicula palpebralis (e), Diploneis didyma (f), Caloneis liber (g), Nitzschia sigmoidea (h), Nitzschia lanceolata var. minor (i), Licmophora abbreviata (j), Achnanthes brevipes (k), Petroneis humerosa (l), Undatella lineolata (m), Gomphonemopsis pseudexigua (n), Achnanthes longipes (o), Synedrosphenia crystallina (p), and Tabularia tabulata (q). Scale bar: 10 µm.
Jmse 12 01211 g005
Jmse 12 01211 g006
Figure 6. SEM. Some species of diatoms found in the macroalgae epiphyton of the Kazantip Cape coastal waters are as follows: Cocconeis scutellum (a), Mastogloia pumila (b,c), Navicula dumontiae (d), Rhopalodia musculus (e), Navicula perminuta (f), Nitzschia inconspicua (g), Planothidium delicatulum (h), Fallacia forcipata (i), Achnanthes brevipes (j), Cocconeis placentula var. euglypta (k), Haslea subagnita (l), Tabularia parva (m), Rhoicosphenia marina (n), Nitzschia hybrida f. hyalina (o), Lyrella atlantica (p), Licmophora abbreviata (q,r), Melosira moniliformis (s), Achnanthes longipes (t), and Tabularia tabulata (u). Scale bar: (a–e) = 5 µm; (f,g) = 3 µm; (h) = 4 µm; (i–n) = 10 µm; (o–q) = 20 µm; (r,s) = 30 µm; and (t,u) = 40 µm.
Figure 6. SEM. Some species of diatoms found in the macroalgae epiphyton of the Kazantip Cape coastal waters are as follows: Cocconeis scutellum (a), Mastogloia pumila (b,c), Navicula dumontiae (d), Rhopalodia musculus (e), Navicula perminuta (f), Nitzschia inconspicua (g), Planothidium delicatulum (h), Fallacia forcipata (i), Achnanthes brevipes (j), Cocconeis placentula var. euglypta (k), Haslea subagnita (l), Tabularia parva (m), Rhoicosphenia marina (n), Nitzschia hybrida f. hyalina (o), Lyrella atlantica (p), Licmophora abbreviata (q,r), Melosira moniliformis (s), Achnanthes longipes (t), and Tabularia tabulata (u). Scale bar: (a–e) = 5 µm; (f,g) = 3 µm; (h) = 4 µm; (i–n) = 10 µm; (o–q) = 20 µm; (r,s) = 30 µm; and (t,u) = 40 µm.
Jmse 12 01211 g006
Jmse 12 01211 g007
Figure 7. JASP plot of the full diatom community similarity in submerged macroalgae (a) and in four studied sites in the coastal waters of the Kazantip Cape of the Sea of Azov (b). Macrophyte names were coded as in Appendix A Table A1. The line thickness reflects the similarity coefficient value. The red lines are negative, and blue lines are positive correlations. Different clusters are numbered 1–3.
Figure 7. JASP plot of the full diatom community similarity in submerged macroalgae (a) and in four studied sites in the coastal waters of the Kazantip Cape of the Sea of Azov (b). Macrophyte names were coded as in Appendix A Table A1. The line thickness reflects the similarity coefficient value. The red lines are negative, and blue lines are positive correlations. Different clusters are numbered 1–3.
Jmse 12 01211 g007
Jmse 12 01211 g008
Figure 8. Dendrogram of the similarity of the diatom species composition in the epiphyton by seasons.
Figure 8. Dendrogram of the similarity of the diatom species composition in the epiphyton by seasons.
Jmse 12 01211 g008
Table 1. Temperature and salinity of the water in the bays of the Kazantip Cape in the different seasons 2022–2023.
Table 1. Temperature and salinity of the water in the bays of the Kazantip Cape in the different seasons 2022–2023.
Date13 October 202229 November 202231 January 202328 February 202329 March 202325 April 202331 May 202322 June 202327 July 202329 August 202325 September 2023
Depth, m0.50.20.50.20.50.20.50.1–10.1–10.10.1–0.5
Temperature,
t °C		17.010.03.74.98.114.019.226.227.329.023.9
Salinity, psu15.015.61515.615.115.014.914.913.613.615.0
Table 2. Species number, averaged abundance (cells per cm2) of diatoms on macroalgae, and Index saprobity S over the sampling stations in the coastal waters of the Kazantip Cape of the Sea of Azov.
Table 2. Species number, averaged abundance (cells per cm2) of diatoms on macroalgae, and Index saprobity S over the sampling stations in the coastal waters of the Kazantip Cape of the Sea of Azov.
VariableSt. 1St. 2St. 3St. 4
Species number89979742
Abundance averaged, cells/cm215,394.9845,112.8820,169.2928,443.75
Index S2.212.262.252.19
Note. St. 1—Russkaya Bay; St. 2—Shirokaya Bay, St. 3—Kunushkay Bay, St. 4—Tatarskaya Bay.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Bondarenko, A.; Shiroyan, A.; Ryabushko, L.; Barinova, S. Diatoms of the Macroalgae Epiphyton and Bioindication of the Protected Coastal Waters of the Kazantip Cape (Crimea, the Sea of Azov). J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2024, 12, 1211. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse12071211

AMA Style

Bondarenko A, Shiroyan A, Ryabushko L, Barinova S. Diatoms of the Macroalgae Epiphyton and Bioindication of the Protected Coastal Waters of the Kazantip Cape (Crimea, the Sea of Azov). Journal of Marine Science and Engineering. 2024; 12(7):1211. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse12071211

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bondarenko, Anna, Armine Shiroyan, Larisa Ryabushko, and Sophia Barinova. 2024. "Diatoms of the Macroalgae Epiphyton and Bioindication of the Protected Coastal Waters of the Kazantip Cape (Crimea, the Sea of Azov)" Journal of Marine Science and Engineering 12, no. 7: 1211. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse12071211

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop