Greener Journal of Biological Sciences Vol. 9(2), pp. 35-42, 2019 ISSN: 2276-7762 Copyright ©2019, the copyright of this article is retained by the author(s) DOI Link: https://doi.org/10.15580/GJBS.2019.2.091319170 https://gjournals.org/GJBS

Abundance and Distribution of Zooplankton in Pindiga Lake, Gombe State, Nigeria

^1,2Abbati, M.A.; ¹Umar, D.M.; ¹Shuaibu, F.A.; ¹ Ibrahim, U.G.; ¹Ahmadu, A.; ¹Umar, M.

¹Department of Biological Sciences, Gombe State University, Gombe, Nigeria

²Department of Biological Sciences, Federal University of Kashere, Gombe, Nigeria

ARTICLE INFO	ABSTRACT
Article No.: 091319170 Type: Research DOI: 10.15580/GJBS.2019.2.091319170	Zooplankton abundance and distribution of Pindiga Lake, Gombe State were evaluated. Four sampling sites (A, B, C, and D) with distance of 500 meters were selected. Physico-chemical characteristic were measured in situ and zooplanktons sampled fortnightly for three months. Zooplanktons collected were identified using taxonomic keys. Simpson’s and Margalef richness indices were employed for analyses. The results showed a total of 524 individual species of zooplankton in 26 genera among the three zooplankton taxa of Cladocera, Copepoda and Rotifera. The genera abundance of Pindiga Lake arranged in lessening trend as Copepoda > Rotifera > Cladocera, with respective total zooplankton values of 47.3%, 30.0%, and 22.7%. The number of individual zooplanktons and their genera for the respective sites were: A, 150 individuals in 26 genera; B, 127 individual in 22 genera; C, 123 individuals in 22 genera; and D, 124 individuals in 24 genera. The Simpson’s species diversity index for the three zooplankton taxa of Cladocera, Copepoda and Rotifera were 0.05124, 0.2235 and 0.08937 respectively; while the Margalef index of genera richness of Cladocera, Copepoda and Rotifera were 1.9272, 5.0116 and 3.1878 respectively. The zooplankton abundance and distribution observed in this study showed Pindiga Lake as a very productive ecosystem that can support other higher organisms and a potential for broader ecological studies. There is the need to maintain its ecological integrity through sustainable utilization of its other resources.
Submitted: 13/09/2019 Accepted: 16/09/2019 Published: 26/09/2019
*Corresponding Author Abbati, M.A. E-mail: muhabbaty0708@ gmail.com
Keywords: Diversity index Pindiga Lake; Species abundance; Zooplankton

INTRODUCTION

Reproduction, survival and growth of aquatic organisms depend basically on the water quality. Due to population density and maltreatment of humans, water quality is worsening each day (Alrumman et al., 2016). Water requirements in all living organisms are rising daily, but the source of drinking water is a crucial issue, as all water resources have attained to the stage of crisis due to urbanization and astonishing industrialization (Bibbi et al., 2016). Water pollution arise when there is adjustment in the physical, chemical or biological condition in the environment which damagingly affects the value of human life together with other fauna and flora (Ojitiku et al., 2018).

Zooplanktons are minute drifting and suspended organisms floating at the surface of the water body, which are essential components of water food web, as they have a say to the productivity of freshwater ecosystems. They are also very prone to changing ecosystem; therefore, they are perfect indicator organisms. Zooplanktons are the important aquatic organisms occurring profusely in all sorts of aquatic habitats, and they play a crucial role in energy transfer of aquatic ecosystem (Siddique and Kale, 2018). Zooplankton can also be classified as phytoplanktivores and zooplanktivores. Zooplanktons depending on their nature of feeding and in turn make up an essential foodstuff to other aquatic macro invertebrates in the higher trophic levels (Erondu and Solomon, 2017). Zooplankton shows disparity in the species composition and abundance according to the change in numerous physico-chemical characteristics of water (Sunder, 2015 and Azuka et al.,2018). They are internationally known as water quality indicator organisms in the aquatic ecosystem (Ikhuoriah et al., 2015).

Zooplankton study is very crucial in determination of water quality and the productivity of aquatic ecosystem. In spite of the copious study of planktons in Gombe state water bodies, the information of zooplankton abundance and distribution in Pindiga Lake is not well detectable based on the literature consulted; therefore, this research investigated the abundance and distribution of zooplankton present in the lake and served as baseline information for advance research.

METHODOLOGY

Study Area:

Pindiga Lake is positioned in the eastern part of Pindiga, taking about 1km to Pindiga Village (Fig. 1) in Akko Local Government Area of Gombe State. This Lake forms part of the abundant environmental niches connected with fresh water environment in Gombe State. The lake lies between latitude 10.13’15⁰N and longitude 11.11’19⁰E.

Figure 1: Map of study area, showing Pindiga Lake Akko Local Government, Gombe State

Collection of Zooplankton

Zooplankton samples were collected using plankton net of 55µm mesh size by hauling horizontally for five meters. The collected samples was preserved in 4% formalin and 3 drops of lugols iodine solution and transported to the Gombe State University, Biological Sciences laboratory for counting and identification (Isah et al., 2018 and Mohammed et al., 2017).

Zooplankton Identification

Zooplankton tote up were made by shaking each sample to share out organisms uniformly and one drop was put on top of a clean glass slide using pipette. This was then cautiously covered with a cover slip and brought beneath Olympus binocular microscope at 400× and 1000× magnification for further taxonomic analysis. The zooplankton was identified using applicable standard zooplankton keys like Umar (2018), Graham (2007), Witty, (2004), Petersen, (2018) and Phan et al., (2015).

Statistical Analysis:

The Zooplankton abundance and distribution were analyzed and presented using Excel Microsoft Software. Simpson’s biodiversity index was employed to determine the zooplankton species diversity of the samples in Pindiga Lake. Simpson’s equation is given by:

D

Where: n_i= the number of individuals in i^th genera and

N = the total number of individual

i = Number of genera.

Genera Richness Index (d) was employed according to the method used by Margalef (1958) to examine the community structure. The equation applied is given below:

D

Where:

D₁=Genera richness index

S=Number of genera in a population

N= Total number of individuals in S genera.

RESULTS

A total of 524 individuals’ organisms of zooplankton encompassing 26 numbers of genera among the three zooplankton taxa of Cladocera, Copepoda and Rotifers were recorded during the study period. The Copepods were the most abundant zooplankton taxon comprising 47.3% of the zooplankton abundance followed by Rotifers 30% and Cladocera least with 22.7% (table 1, Fig. 2).

Figure 2: Distribution and Abundance of Zooplankton among four sampling stations in Pindiga Lake, Gombe State, Nigeria.

Table 1: Checklist of the abundance and distribution of Zooplankton present in Pindiga Lake during the study period all together.

Zooplankton taxa	A	B	C	D	Total
Cladocera
Bosmina sp.	5	3	4	5	17
Daphnia sp.	10	3	4	4	21
Ceriodapnia sp.	2	3	4	0	9
Macrothrix sp.	10	9	5	7	31
Moina sp.	12	14	8	7	41
Copepoda
Skistodiapthamus sp.	7	11	9	4	31
leptodiapthamus sp.	4	8	6	2	20
Macrocyclops sp.	6	6	9	10	31
Paracyclops sp.	10	5	7	9	31
Senecella sp.	7	7	7	8	29
Acanthocyclops	7	2	1	4	14
Limnocalanus sp.	2	3	0	2	7
Tropocyclops sp.	9	10	4	11	34
Nauplius sp.	1	0	1	1	3
Cathocamptus sp.	4	2	3	5	14
Diacyclops sp.	4	5	6	6	21
Aglaodiaphthamus sp	3	2	3	3	11
Mesocyclops	1	0	0	1	2
Rotifera
Asplanchna sp.	12	7	6	6	31
Brachianus sp.	5	7	10	6	28
Keratella sp.	7	6	10	7	30
Polyarthra sp.	7	8	10	10	35
Trichocerca sp.	4	2	2	1	9
Synchaeta sp.	9	4	4	2	19
Hexarthra sp.	1	0	0	0	1
Anuraepsis sp.	1	0	0	3	4
Grand Total	150	127	123	124	524
Abundance (%)	28.63	24.24	23.47	23.66	100

Copepoda

In Pindiga lake, a total of 248 Copepods were sampled, with 13 different genera (Table 1), representing 65% of the total zooplankton population. Stations variation showed that station A, B, C and D recorded percentage population of 26, 25, 22 and 27% of individuals organisms respectively, this showed that station D has the highest population followed by Station A, Station B and C (Fig.2). The Copepoda identified during the study period include Skistodiaphthamus, Leptodiapthamus, Macrocyclops, Paracyclops, Senecella, Acanthocyclops, Limnocalanus, Tropocyclops, Nauplius, Cathocamptus, Diacyclops, Aglaodiaphthamus and Mesocyclops Species.

Figure 2: Distribution of Copepoda among four sampling stations in Pindiga Lake

Rotifera

Stations variation of rotifers showed that there was a highest population count at station A and lowest count at station D (Figure 3). Stations variation showed that stations A and C had total population count of 46 and 42 individual organisms respectively, higher than stations B and D with total population count of 34 and 35 individual organisms respectively (Table 1). The rotifers identified during the study period include Asplanchna sp., Brachianus sp., Keratella sp., Polyarthra sp., Trichorcerca sp., Synchaeta sp., Hexarthra sp. and Anuraepsis species (Table 2).

Figure 3: Distribution of Rotifera among four sampling Stations in Pindiga Lake Gombe State, Nigeria.

Cladocera

The Cladocera accounted for 30.0 % of the population count of zooplankton (524) with a total of five (5) different genera identified during the study period (Table 2). The study revealed that there was higher Cladocera in station A with 33% of individuals followed by station B with 27%, C with 21% and D with 19 (Fig. 4). Cladocera identified during the study period include Bosmina, Daphnia, Ceriodapnia, Macrothrix and Moina sp.

Figure 4: Distribution of Cladocera among four sampling stations in Pindiga Lake.

Station A comprises of 150 total numbers of individuals organisms and 26 genera, Station B consists of 127 numbers of individual’s organisms and 22 genera, station C has 123 numbers of individuals organisms and 22 genera, while station D has 124 numbers of individuals organisms and 24 genera (Table 2).

Table 2: Simpson and Margalef index of zooplankton Species Abundance in Pindiga Lake

Zooplankton Taxa	Station A	Station B	Station C	Station D	Total (%).	Simpson_1-D	MargaleF
Cladocera	39	32	25	23	119	0.05124	1.9272
					22.7%
Copepoda	65	61	56	66	248	0.2235	5.0116
					47.3%
Rotifera	46	34	42	35	157	0.08937	3.1878
					30.0%
Total	150	127	123	124	524
Genera Number	26	22	22	24
Abundance (%)	28.63	24.24	23.47	23.66	100

The Simpson’s Species diversity index for the three zooplankton taxa of Cladocera, Copepoda and Rotifera were 0.05124, 0.2235 and 0.08937 respectively (Table 2, Figure 5), while the Margalef index of genera richness of Cladocera, Copepoda and Rotifera were 1.9272, 5.0116 and 3.1878 respectively (Table 2, Figure 6).

Figure 5: Simpson diversity index of zooplankton at Pindiga Lake during the study period

Figure 6: Genera richness of zooplankton in Pindiga Lake during the study period

DISCUSSION

Similar results of distribution and abundance of Zooplanktons have been reported by Erondu and Solomon (2017) and Emmanuel et al., (2008). Their abundance may be due to acclimatization to altering ecological condition and capability to bear up varying ecological hassle (Emmanuel et al., 2008). The abundance of Copepoda is also dependent on availability of sufficient nutrients and favorable temperature (Sharma et al., 2013). Subsequently, the abundance and richness of taxon Rotifera, which make up 30.0% of the total zooplankton abundance, would be attributed to their capability to undergo upright movement, which lessens competition through niche exploitation and food utilization (Usman and Yerima, 2017). Rotifers have widely been used as biological indicators in studies due to their sensitivity to various levels of water quality characteristics (Radix, et al., 2002). Then Cladocera which has 22.7% is the least abundant zooplankton in the study area contrary to the statement of Forro (2010) who reported that Cladocera are the most abundant zooplankton in freshwater.

CONCLUSION

The zooplankton abundance and distribution observed in this study was very exhilarating and made Pindiga Lake a very productive ecosystem and exceedingly potential for broaden ecological studies. The diversity and richness of zooplankton species in Pindiga Lake is attributed to the quality of the water to sustain high productivity and stumpy level of predators. The zooplankton have 26 genera that fall under 3 taxa in a shrinking order of abundance Copepoda>Rotifera>Cladocera, the copepods, having the utmost numbers of 13 genera and abundance with 47.3%.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors are grateful to the Department of Biological Sciences, Gombe State University for field and logistical support, desirable laboratory equipment and encouragement.

REFERENCES

Alrumman, S. A., El-kott, and A.F., Kehsk M.A.(2016) Water pollution: Source and treatment. American journal of Environmental Engineering. 6(3):88-98.

Azuka, R. A., Imah, J.F., Grace, I. A. and Helen, O. (2018): Seasonal variation in the physicochemical parameters of Ikpoba river water samples, International journal of life science and scientific research 4(3):1810-1821.

Bibi, S., Khan, R. L., Nazir, R., (2016) Heavy metals in drinking water of LakkiMarwat District, KPK, Pakistan. World applied sciences journal. 34(1):15-19.

Emmanuel, C. U., Chinasa, U., Akpan, P.A., Ekpeme, E. M., Ogbeche, L. U. and Asor, J. (2008). Bio-survey of plankton as indicators of water quality for recreational activities in Calaba River, Nigeria. Journal of applied Sciences and Environmental management, 12(2):35-42.

Erondu, C.J. and Solomon, R. J. (2017): Identification of plankton (zooplankton and phytoplankton) behind Girls Hostel University of Abuja, Nigeria. Direct research journal of public health and Environmental technology. 2(3):21-29.

Forro, I. Korovchinsky, N.M. Kotov, A.A., and Petrosek, A. (2008). Global diversity of Cladoceran (Cladoera:crustacean) in fresh water animal diversity assessment. Hydrobiologia 595:177-184.

Graham, F. (2007): Quick guide to free-living orders of New Zealand freshwater Copepoda, Terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity information system, Taihoro Nukurangi. Pp10.

Ikhuoriah, S. O., Oronsaye, C.G. And Adebanjo, I. A.(2015).Zooplankton Communities Of The River Ossiomo,Ologbo, Niger Delta, Nigeria animal Research International, 12(3): 2249 – 2259 2249.

Isah, Z., Abubakar, K. A, Umar, D.M. and Hassan, S.K. (2018): a study on phytoplanktonic composition in Dadin kowa dam, Gombe State, Nigeria. Greener journal of biological sciences 8(2): 45-50.

Margalef R.(1958). Temporal succession and spatial heterogeneity in phytoplankton. In: Buzzati-Traverso A. (ed.) Perspectives in Marine Biology. Berkeley, CA, University of California Press, Princeton, New Jersey. Pp.179.

Mohammed, S., Mosses, N., Saidu, H., Galadima, A.I., Umar, D.M., Abubakar, K.A., Kefas, M. and Billah, C. (2017). Determination of physicochemical parameters and riparian land effect on Kwadon stream, Journal of advanced research design 36(1):13-24.

Ojitiku, R.O., Habibu, S. and Kolo, R.J. (2018). Zooplankton abundance and diversity of River Kaduna and college of Agriculture and animal science dam (CAAS) Kaduna, Nigeria. Nigerian Journal of Fisheries and Aquaculture, 5(2):1-10.

Peterson, F. (2018). An illustrated Key to the Philippine Freshwater Zooplankton. Including some brackish water species from Laguna de Bay. Pp460.

Phan, D. D., Nguyen, V.K., Le, T. N. N., Dang, N.T. and Ho, T.H. (2015). Identification Handbook of Freshwater Zooplankton of the Mekong River and its tributaries, Mekong River Commission, Vientiane. Pp207.

Radix, P., Serverin, G., Schramm, K.W. and Kettrup, A. (2002). Reproduction disturbances of Brachianus calyciflorus(rotifer) for the screening of environmental endocrine disrupters journal of chemosphere 10:1097-1101.

Saidu, H., Usman, B. and Umar, D. M. (2016). Studies of Species Distribution for phytoplankton in Balanga Dam, Journal of advanced research in applied sciences and engineering technology, 3(1):1-9.

Sharma, K.K., Arti D., Sharma, A. and Antal., A.(2013). Zooplankton diversity and physicochemical condition of a temple pond in Birpur, India. International Research Journal of Environmental Science. 2(5):25-30.

Siddique, K.F. and Kale, M. K. (2018): Species diversity of zooplankton and physicochemical parameters of Bindusara Dam fromBeed district Maharashtra, India, International journal of universal print.4(6):308-319.

Sunder, S. (2015). Analysis of plankton diversity and density with physicochemical parameters of open pond in Town Deeg, India. International Research journal of biological sciences, 4 (11): 61-69.

Umar, D. M. (2018): Practical Hydrobiology Manual for Fisheries Scientists, Department of Biological Sciences, Gombe State University, Unpublished. Pp36.

Usman. L. U and Yerima, R. (2017). Ecological investigation of zooplanktons abundance in Ajiwa reservoir Katsina State-Nigeria, International journal of Applied Biological Research, 8(1):50-69.

Witty, L.M. (2004). Practical guide to identifying freshwater crustacean zooplankton. 2^nd edition Sudbury, Ontoria: cooperative Freshwater Ecology Unit. P60.

Cite this Article: Abbati, MA; Umar, DM; Shuaibu, FA; Ibrahim, UG; Ahmadu, A; Umar, M (2019). Abundance and Distribution of Zooplankton in Pindiga Lake, Gombe State, Nigeria. Greener Journal of Biological Sciences, 9(2): 35-42, https://doi.org/10.15580/GJBS.2019.2.091319170.