1 International Journal of Research in Biological Sciences 2016; 6(1): 1-6

ISSN 2249–9687

Original Article

Checklist of Commonly Occurring Phytoplankton and Zooplankton Genera of

Urban and Rural Ponds of Raipur, Chhattisgarh

Koushik Roy1, Sandipan Gupta2 and Saurav Kumar Nandy2

1Department of Fisheries, IGKV Raipur, Chhattisgarh- 492012, India 2ICAR-Central Inland Fisheries Research Institute, Barrackpore, Kolkata-700120, India

Received 14 December 2016; accepted 20 January 2016

Abstract

Phytoplankton and zooplankton are integral part of any aquatic ecosystem. They not only serve as food for aquatic animals,

but also play important role in maintaining the biological balance and quality of the aquatic ecosystem. Raipur is a district

of Chhattisgarh which is having about 58,514 ponds covering an area of about 0.744 lakh ha and these ponds have high

plankton diversity. The present work has been conducted to enlist phytoplankton and zooplankton genera occurring in a

few perennial unmanaged urban and rural ponds of Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Among phytoplankton, a total of 67 algal genera

belonging to the classes Chlorophyceae (29 genera), Bacillariophyceae (18 genera), Cyanophyceae (15 genera),

Chrysophyceae (2 genera), Euglenophyceae (2 genera) and Dinophyceae (1 genus) have been recorded from the studied

ponds while among zooplankton, a total of 24 genera belonging to the classes Rotifera (11 genera), Copepoda (7 genera),

Protozoa (3 genera), Cladocera (2 genera) and Ostracoda (1 genus) have been recorded during the study period. Results of

the present study depict that the studied ponds have high plankton diversity.

© 2016 Universal Research Publications. All rights reserved

Keywords:- Biodiversity; Phytoplankton; Zooplankton; Freshwater ponds; Raipur; Chhattisgarh.

INTRODUCTION Pond is relatively a shallow body of standing water; an

aquatic ecosystem which is generally rich in biodiversity.

On the other hand, plankton are the integral part of any

aquatic ecosystem. The term plankton refers to organisms

which have drifting habitat and includes all forms of both

macro and microscopic life which floats free in water or if

motile, are unable to swim against currents. The plankton

community is comprised of phytoplankton and zooplankton

[1].

Phytoplankton are free floating unicellular, filamentous and

colonial autotrophic forms of aquatic habitat whose

movement is more or less dependent on water currents [2].

They are the major primary producer in many aquatic

systems forming the first trophic level in the food chain and

are the important food source for other organisms of that

system [3]. They not only serve as food for aquatic animals,

but also play an important role in maintaining the

biological balance and quality of the aquatic ecosystem

[4,5]. The qualitative and quantitative studies of

phytoplankton have been successfully utilized to assess the

quality of water [6-9]. Several phytoplankton species have

served as bio-indicators [10-13] and it is a well suited tool

for understanding water pollution studies [14]. On the other

hand, zooplankton are integral components of aquatic food

webs and contribute significantly to aquatic productivity in

freshwater ecosystems; they are having the ability to swim

or move freely. They constitutes important food item for

many fishes; the larva of carps feed mostly on zooplankton

[15]. Zooplankton also play an important role in the food

chain as they are second in trophic level as primary

consumers and also contribute to the next trophic level

[16]. Phytoplankton are being fed by zooplankton and

facilitates the conversion of plant material into animal

tissue and in turn constitute the basic food for higher

animals including fishes, particularly their larvae.

Zooplankton are the major mode of energy transfer

between phytoplankton and fish [17]. Zooplanktons have

been considered to be the ecological indicators of water

bodies [18] and their biomass abundance and species

diversity have been used to determine the conditions of

aquatic environment [19].

Chhattisgarh (17o46'- 24o5' N latitude and 80o15'- 84o20' E

longitude) is a state of central India. Raipur is a district of

Chhattisgarh; the climate of the region is hot and sub

humid. This particular region receives 1200-1400 mm of

annual rainfall normally, out of which about 85% is

received during the rainy season (late June to October) and

15% during the winter season (November to January). The

maximum temperature ranges from 17-45.2°C and

Available online at http://www.urpjournals.com

International Journal of Research in Biological Sciences

Universal Research Publications. All rights reserved

2 International Journal of Research in Biological Sciences 2016; 6(1): 1-6

minimum from 8-22°C during the year. May is the hottest

and December is the coolest month of the year. Raipur

constitutes around 58,514 ponds covering an area of about

0.744 lakh ha and these are having high plankton diversity

[20].

The primary objective of the present study was to record

and disseminate the information on plankton biodiversity

existing within some freshwater ponds of Raipur,

Chhattisgarh in order to serve as an updated and

contemporary biodiversity database for future references.

MATERIALS AND METHODS The survey was conducted intermittently during 2012-2014

in total seven perennial unmanaged urban and rural ponds

of Raipur, Chhattisgarh to enlist phytoplankton and

zooplankton genera commonly available there. Details

of the sampling sites have been presented in Table 1 and

Table 1: Details of the study sites

Pond Location coordinates Size

Urban ponds

Telibandha talab (P1) 21°14’21.55”N, 81°39’33.57”E 97810.5 m2

Raja talab (P2) 21°14'52.2''N, 81°39'17.3''E 80000 m2

Budha talab (P3) 21°13'57.5''N, 81°38'02''E 302500 m2

Katora talab (P4) 21°14'05.27"N, 81°39'19.06" E 8335 m2

Rural ponds

Jora talab (P5) 21°14’27.8”N, 81°42’44.8”E 22570 m2

Labhandi talab (P6) 21°14'58.13" N, 81°43'15.56" E 10100 m2

Dharampura.talab.(P7) 21°12'58.44" N, 81°42'38.24" E 12007 m2

Figure 1. Plankton samples were collected during early

morning. 10 liters of water sampled from different areas

and depths of the pond was filtered through 25 μ mesh

plankton net. The collected sample was then concentrated

in 30 ml receptacle glass tube, attached at the end of the

plankton net. Plankton samples were then preserved in

phosphate buffered formalin @ 3% concentration along

with one drop of glycerin. After that the preserved samples

were kept in refrigerated condition for further analysis.

Plankton was identified up to generic level following

earlier documented plankton identification key and

monographs [1, 21-25]. Phytoplankton was classified under

different classes: Cyanophyceae, Chlorophyceae,

Bacillariophyceae, Dinophyceae, Euglenophyceae and

Chrysophyceae [25] while zooplankton was classified

under the following classes: Protozoa, Copepoda, Rotifera,

Cladocera and Ostracoda [21]. All plankton samples were

identified under LABOMED TCM-400 compound light

emission binocular microscope. Microphotographs were

obtained intermittently from collaborative institutions viz.

Central Inland Fisheries Research Institute, Barrackpore;

Central Inland Fisheries Education, Salt Lake and

Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata through submitted

plankton samples. Microphotography was done with

CATCAM microscope photographic attachment and with

Plankton Identifier software v1.1.

Fig.1.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Phytoplankton A total of 67 algal genera belonging to the classes

Chlorophyceae (29 genera), Bacillariophyceae (18 genera),

Cyanophyceae (15 genera), Chrysophyceae (2 genera),

Euglenophyceae (2 genera) and Dinophyceae (1 genus)

have been recorded from the studied ponds of Raipur,

Chhattisgarh during the study period. On the basis of

number of genera encountered in this study, Chlorophyceae

constituted the largest group among phytoplankton

followed by Bacillariophyceae and Cyanophyceae. Details

of the identified phytoplankton genera have been presented

below:

Bacillariophyceae: Achnanthidium sp., Amphipleura sp.,

Aulacoseira sp., Cocconeis sp., Craticula sp., Cyclotella

sp., Cymbella sp., Diatoma sp., Epithemia sp., Eunotia sp.,

Frustulia sp., Melosira sp., Navicula sp., Nitzschia sp.,

Pinnularia sp., Pleurosigma sp., Synedra sp. and

Tabellaria sp.

Chlorophyceae: Ankistrodesmus sp., Botryococcus sp.,

Chaetophora sp., Chlamydomonas sp., Chlorella sp.,

Chlorococcum sp., Closterium sp., Coelastrum sp.,

Cosmarium sp., Crucigenia sp., Dictyochloris sp.,

Dictyosphaerium sp., Euastrum sp., Eudorina sp.,

Micractinium sp., Micrasterias sp., Monoraphidium sp.,

Mougeotia sp., Oedogonium sp., Oocystis sp., Pandorina

sp., Pediastrum sp., Scenedesmus sp., Spirogyra sp.,

Tetraedron sp., Tetrastrum sp., Ulothrix sp., Volvox sp.,

Zygnema sp.

Chrysophyceae: Dinobryon sp., Synura sp.

Cyanophyceae: Anabaena sp., Aphanocapsa sp.,

Arthrospira sp., Aulosira sp., Chroococcus sp.,

Coelosphaerium sp., Cylindrospermopsis sp.,

Gomphosphaeria sp., Lyngbya sp., Merismopedia sp.,

Microcystis sp., Nostoc sp., Oscillatoria sp., Phormidium

sp., Spirulina sp.

Dinophyceae: Ceratium sp.

Euglenophyceae: Euglena sp., Phacus sp.

Zooplankton A total of 24 zooplankton genera belonging to the classes

Rotifera (11 genera), Copepoda (7 genera), Protozoa (3

genera), Cladocera (2 genera) and Ostracoda (1 genus)

have been recorded during the study period. On the basis of

number of genera encountered, Copepoda and Rotifera

constituted the major group among the zooplankton

community. Details of the identified zooplankton genera

3 International Journal of Research in Biological Sciences 2016; 6(1): 1-6

Fig. 2. Phytoplankton

4 International Journal of Research in Biological Sciences 2016; 6(1): 1-6

Fig.3. Phytoplankton

have been presented below:

Cladocera: Ceriodaphnia sp., Moina sp.

Copepoda: Acanthocyclops sp., Aglaodiaptomus sp.,

Cyclops sp., Diacyclops sp., Eucyclops sp., Leptodiaptomus

sp., Microcyclops sp.

Rotifera: Anuraeopsis sp., Asplanchna sp., Brachionus sp.,

Euchlanis sp., Filinia sp., Keratella sp., Lecane sp.,

Monostyla sp., Notholca sp., Polyarthra sp., Rotaria sp.

Ostracoda: Cyclocypris sp.

Protozoa: Amoeba sp., Paramaecium sp., Trinema sp.

Therefore, the results of the present study are depicting the

presence of high diversity of both phytoplankton and

zooplankton in the studied rural and urban ponds of Raipur,

Chhattisgarh and in this way also suggesting a healthy

ecosystem available in these ponds. The phytoplankton

diversity which has been observed in the present study is in

close resemblance to the earlier observation made by [20]

who reported a total of 52 algal genera belonging to the

classes Chlorophyceae (21 genera), Cyanophyceae (12

genera), Bacillariophyceae (16 genera) and Eugleno-

-phyceae (3 genera) from the urban and rural ponds of

Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Algal genera belonging to two

classes i.e. - Chrysophyceae (Dinobryon sp. and Synura

sp.) and Dinophyceae (Ceratium sp.) observed in the

present study was not reported earlier by [20], thus giving

first time evidence of their presence in this region. These

algal classes are indicative of the accumulation of organic

load in the bottom sediment of water bodies and are often

considered undesirable for fishes due to their associated

toxins when they bloom [25]; though in this study no such

algal bloom of these classes has been observed.

On the other hand, the zooplankton diversity observed

in the present study is quite different from the observation

earlier made by [20]; most of the genera under protozoa

(Zoothamnium sp., Arcella sp., Diffugia sp. and

Centrophyxis sp.) and cladocera (Bosmina sp.,

Diaphanosoma sp., Moinodaphnia sp., Macrothrix sp. and

Alona sp.) reported earlier by [20] have not been observed

5 International Journal of Research in Biological Sciences 2016; 6(1): 1-6

in the present study. However, the generic diversity of

copepods and rotifers are almost similar as reported by [20]

and [26] earlier from the same area.

Current study though has been conducted in some selected

rural and urban ponds of Raipur, this will help to get an

overall idea about the phytoplankton and zooplankton

diversity present here and will surely help for further study

related to this field. Studies alike will help to create region

wise plankton biodiversity maps and provide knowledge

regarding the types of plankton that can be expected in a

particular region of India. Moreover, the mere existence or

unavailability of a particular plankton community or genera

can be related with the prevailing agro-climatic conditions

of any region, if similar studies will be extensively

conducted throughout India or published reports are

compiled into region specific and time framed plankton

databases.

Fig 4. Zooplankton

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The first author expresses his heartfelt gratitude to the

faculties of fisheries department, IGKV, Raipur,

Chhattisgarh for supporting this freelance investigation as

an extended part of his M.F.Sc. (Aquaculture) Thesis work.

REFERENCES 1. Battish, S.K. (1992) Freshwater zooplankton of India.

Oxford and IBH Publishing Co., New Delhi.

2. Millman, M., Cherrier, C. and Ramstack, J. (2005) The

seasonal succession of the phytoplankton community

in Ada Hayden Lake, North Basin, Ames, Iowa.

Limnology Laboratory, Iowa State University, Ames,

Iowa.

3. Gupta, T. and Dey, M. (2012) Hydro biological

characteristics of some semi-intensive fish culture

ponds of Lumding town of Nagaon district, Assam.

Curr World Environ 8(1): 30-39.

4. Pandey, B.N., Hussain, S., Ambasta, O.P. and Poddar,

S.K. (2004) Phytoplankton and its correlation with

certain physicochemical parameters of Ramjan river of

Krishanganj, Bihar. Environ Ecol 22: 804-809.

5. Benarjee, G. and Narasimha, R.K. (2013) Physico-

chemical factors influenced plankton biodiversity and

fish abundance- a case study of Nagaram tank of

Warangal, Andhra Pradesh. Int J Life Sci Biotechnol

Pharma Res 2(2): 248-260.

6. Adoni, A., Joshi, D.G., Ghosh, K., Chourasia, S.K.,

Vaishya, A.K., Yadav, M. and Verma, H.G. (1985)

Work Book on Limnology. Pratibha Publishers, Sagar.

7. Chaturvedi, R.K., Sharma, K.P. and Sharma, S.

(1999) Plankton community of polluted water around

6 International Journal of Research in Biological Sciences 2016; 6(1): 1-6

Sanganer, Jaipur. J Environ Pollut 61: 77-84.

8. Ponmanickam, P., Rajagopal, T., Rajan, M.K.,

Achiraman, S. and Palanivelu, K. (2007) Assessment

of drinking water quality of Vembakottai reservoir,

Virudhunagar district, Tamil Nadu. J Exp Zool, India

10: 485-488.

9. Shekhar, R.T., Kiran, B.R., Puttaiah, E.T., Shivaraj, Y.

and Mahadevan, K.M. (2008) Phytoplankton as index

of water quality with reference to industrial pollution. J

Environ Biol 29: 233-236.

10. Vareethiah, K. and Haniffa, M.A. (1998)

Phytoplankton pollution indicators of coir retting. J

Environ Pollut 3: 117-122.

11. Bianchi, F., Acri, F., Aubry, F.B., Berton, A., Boldrin,

A., Camatti, E., Cassin, D. and Comaschi, A. (2003)

Can plankton communities be considered as bio-

indicators of water quality in the lagoon of Venice?

Mar Pollut Bull 46: 964-971.

12. Tiwari, A. and Chauhan, S.V. (2006) Seasonal

phytoplanktonic diversity of Kitham Lake, Agra. J

Environ Biol 27: 35-38.

13. Hoch, M.P., Dillon, K.S., Coffin, R.B. and Cifuentes,

L.A. (2008) Sensitivity of bacterioplankton nitrogen

metabolism to eutrophication in sub-tropical coastal

water of Key West. Florida. Mar Pollut Bull 56: 913-

926.

14. Ahmad, M.S. (1996) Ecological survey of some algal

flora of polluted habitats of Darbhanga. J Environ

Pollut 3:147-151.

15. Jhingran, V.G. (1985) Fish and fisheries of India.

Hindustan Publishing Corporation (India), Delhi.

16. Aarti, D., Sharma, K.K., Sharma, A. and Antal, N.

(2013) Zooplankton diversity and physico-chemical

conditions of a temple pond in Birpur (J & K, India).

Int Res J Environ Sci 2(5): 25-30.

17. Howick, G.L. and Wilhm, J. (1984) Zooplankton and

benthic macro invertebrates in lake Carl Blackwell.

Proc Oklahoma Acad Sci 64: 63-65.

18. Gajbhiye, S.N. and Desai, B.N. (1981) Zooplankton

variability in polluted and unpolluted waters off

Bombay. Mahasagar- Bull Natl Inst Oceanogr 4: 173-

182.

19. Marine Biology Organisation (MBO) (2007)

Zooplankton Retrieved 29th September, 2006.

Retrieved from: http://www.marinebiocom /oceans/

zooplankton.asp.62k.

20. Sarkar, T. (2010) Phytoplankton and periphyton

diversity in four ponds or minor reservoirs in Raipur

city, Chhattisgarh. M.F.Sc. (Inland Fisheries) Thesis,

IGKV, Raipur.

21. APHA (1998) Standard Methods for the Examination

of Water and Wastewater, 20th edition. American

Public Health Association, Washington, D.C.

22. Needham, J.G. and Needham, P.R. (1966) To guide to

the study of freshwater biology, 5th Edition, Holden-

Day Lnc. San Francisco, California, USA.

23. Tonapi, G.T. (1980) Freshwater Biology. National

Book Trust of India, New Delhi.

24. Bellinger, E.G. (1992) A Key to Common Algae:

Freshwater, Estuarine and Some Coastal Species. The

Institute of Water and Environment Management,

London, UK.

25. van Vuuren, S.J., Taylor, J., Gerber, A. and Van

Ginkel, C.E. (2006) Easy identification of the most

common freshwater algae: a guide for the

identification of microscopic algae in South Africa.

University of North-West and Department of Water

Affairs and Forestry.

26. Kumar, N. (2006) Limnological studies on a sewage

fed tank of Raipur, Telibandha. M.F. Sc. (Inland

Fisheries) Thesis, IGKV, Raipur.

"The authors are associated as research fellows at ICAR-Central Inland Fisheries Research Institute, Barrackpore, Kolkata-120 under NICRA project. This is the sole content of the authors and is not a

part of the project conducted by the institute".