Spatial Distribution and Diversity of Phytoplankton and Zooplankton and Status of Physico-chemical Parameters in White Nile, Blue Nile and River Nile

O. A. Idam

Department of Fish Production and Technology, Faculty of Animal Production, University of Gezira, Madani, Sudan.

Ramzy A. Yousif *

Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Science, Sudan University of Science and Technology, P.O. BOX204, Khartoum, Sudan.

Fouzi A. Mohamed

Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Science, Sudan University of Science and Technology, P.O. BOX204, Khartoum, Sudan.

Ameer A. Elobied

Department of Animal Production, Sudan University of Science and Technology, P.O. BOX204, Khartoum, Sudan.

Nasreldeen S. Ibrahim

Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Science, Sudan University of Science and Technology, P.O. BOX204, Khartoum, Sudan.

Salama M. Ibrahim

Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Science, Sudan University of Science and Technology, P.O. BOX204, Khartoum, Sudan.

Souad A. Mollah

Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Science, Sudan University of Science and Technology, P.O. BOX204, Khartoum, Sudan.

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.


Abstract

This study was conducted to estimate the distribution of phytoplankton, zooplankton and their correlation with physico-chemical conditions of water for White Nile, Blue Nile and River Nile, April – May 2022. Some of the important physico-chemical factors of the research stations have been analyzed and the water temperature (°C) were (22.00±1.00, 21.00±0.00 and 21.00±0.00),  pH (8.47±0.31, 7.6.00±0.35 and 8.07±0.12) and Transperancy (cm) (34.67±11.06, 85.33±4.16 and 47.00±8.54) for White Nile, Blue Nile and River Nile respectivley. The results revealed that there are 18 species of phytoplankton and 18 species of zooplankton were recorded from all the stations. Among these Bacillariophyceae was the most dominant class in phytoplankton 5 genus, followed by 4 genus Chlorophyceae, 3 genus Cyanophyceae, 3 genus Zygnematophyceae, 2 genus Xanthophyceae and 1 genus Coscinodiscophyceae. While zooplankton, 18 different genera, the genus are represented by 6 genus Rotifera, 2 genus for (Crustacea, Rhizopoda, Lobosea and Eurotatoria), 1 genus for (Adenophorea, Phylactolemata, Secernetea and Ciliata). Statistically, phytoplankton showed significat result with zooplankton (r2 = 0.81) and with water temperature and PO4 (r2 =0.43); non-significant different with transperancy (r2 = 0.01); for zooplankton the results showed that the positive relation between zooplankton and turbidity (r2  =0.27) and non-significat with other parameters.

Keywords: Phytoplankton, zooplankton, physico-chemical parameter, river nile, blue, white nile


How to Cite

Idam , O. A., Ramzy A. Yousif, Fouzi A. Mohamed, Ameer A. Elobied, Nasreldeen S. Ibrahim, Salama M. Ibrahim, and Souad A. Mollah. 2023. “Spatial Distribution and Diversity of Phytoplankton and Zooplankton and Status of Physico-Chemical Parameters in White Nile, Blue Nile and River Nile ”. Journal of Advances in Biology & Biotechnology 26 (8):1-13. https://doi.org/10.9734/jabb/2023/v26i8647.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.