Next Article in Journal
Evaluating Agricultural Drought in the Haihe River Basin Using an Improved Crop Moisture Index
Previous Article in Journal
From Flood Vulnerability Mapping Using Coupled Hydrodynamic Models to Optimizing Disaster Prevention Funding Allocation: A Case Study of Wenzhou
Previous Article in Special Issue
Zooplankton Community Responses to Eutrophication and TOC: Network Clustering in Regionally Similar Reservoirs
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Water
Volume 17
Issue 23
10.3390/w17233371
water-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
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Response of Phytoplankton to Nutrient Limitation in the Ecological Restoration of a Subtropical Shallow Lake

by
Shi Fu
1,2,
Zhenmei Lin
1,2,
Hu He
1,
Kuanyi Li
1,2,
Jian Gao
3,*,
Zhengwen Liu
1,2,4 and
Jinlei Yu
1,2,*
1
State Key Laboratory of Lake and Watershed Science for Water Security, Nanjing Institute of Geography and Limnology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Nanjing 211135, China
2
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 101408, China
3
Key Laboratory of Intelligent Health Perception and Ecological Restoration of Rivers and Lakes, Ministry of Education, Hubei University of Technology, Wuhan 430068, China
4
Department of Ecology, Jinan University, Guangzhou 510632, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Water 2025, 17(23), 3371; https://doi.org/10.3390/w17233371
Submission received: 22 October 2025 / Revised: 18 November 2025 / Accepted: 24 November 2025 / Published: 26 November 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Impacts of Environmental Change and Human Activities on Aquatic Ecosystems, 2nd Edition)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Lake restoration, achieved through a combination of biomanipulation and the recovery of submerged macrophytes, can effectively reduce nutrient concentrations, thereby suppressing phytoplankton biomass. Nevertheless, there is limited knowledge regarding the impact of nutrient limitation in phytoplankton biomass on lake restoration efforts. We compared the changes in nutrient levels and phytoplankton biomass (measured by chlorophyll a, Chl a) between restored and unrestored areas of a subtropical shallow Lake Yiai. Furthermore, we assessed the nutrient limitation patterns in these two areas through field nutrient addition experiments conducted during the summer. Monitoring results indicated that mean concentrations of Chl a and nutrients were significantly lower (t-test p < 0.0001) in the restored area compared to the unrestored area. In the nutrient addition experiment, phytoplankton biomass was nitrogen-limited in the unrestored part, whereas it was co-limited by both nitrogen and phosphorus in the restored area. These findings suggest that nutrient limitation may serve as a crucial mechanism in sustaining low phytoplankton biomass following the restoration of shallow lakes, particularly during the summer season, with the recovery of submerged macrophytes.

1. Introduction

The excessive input of nutrients stimulates the proliferation of phytoplankton, subsequently leading to the loss of submerged macrophytes and causing a shift in shallow lake ecosystems from clear-water to turbid states [1,2,3]. However, the recovery of submerged macrophytes plays a crucial role in re-establishing and maintaining the clear-water state of shallow lakes [4,5,6], because the sufficient coverage of submerged macrophytes can maintain lower nutrient levels by absorbing nutrients from both the water and the sediment [7,8]. Additionally, submerged macrophytes provide habitats for zooplankton and associated invertebrates, suppressing phytoplankton growth by strengthening top-down controls on phytoplankton populations [9,10,11]. Biomanipulation frequently entails the removal of omnivorous benthic fish and the introduction of piscivores and zoobenthos, thereby decreasing phytoplankton biomass by increasing grazing pressure on phytoplankton and reducing sediment resuspension [4,5,6]. Over the past two decades, the restoration of shallow eutrophic lakes in China has involved the combination of biomanipulation and the transplantation of submerged macrophytes [5,6,12].
The biomass of phytoplankton is largely determined by the concentrations of nutrients, particularly nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P), and their ratios in shallow lakes [13,14,15]. In temperate European shallow lakes, the TN to TP ratios typically increased following a reduction in external nutrient loading, resulting in a phosphorus-limited condition for phytoplankton [16,17]. Conversely, in subtropical shallow lakes, the concentration of TN significantly decreased, while TP remained stable after long-term control of external nutrient loading. Consequently, the TN/TP ratio decreased significantly, leading to N limitation and N/P co-limitation for phytoplankton biomass during summer and autumn [18,19,20]. However, the TN:TP ratios were significantly higher in the restored clear-water area than in the unrestored part after the recovery of submerged macrophytes in both subtropical and tropical shallow lakes [5,6]. Studies on the nutrient limitation of lake phytoplankton growth have been frequently conducted in various regions [13,14,15]. However, research on the response of nutrient limitation to restoration is scant, and the patterns of nutrient limitation in phytoplankton on the macrophyte-dominated clear-water lakes, after restoration, have not been clearly elucidated.
In the present study, we investigated the nutrient concentrations and phytoplankton biomass (as indicated by chlorophyll a content) in both the restored and unrestored areas of subtropical Lake Yiai during the summer. Additionally, we conducted a nutrient limitation experiment in the summer to assess the nutrient limitation patterns affecting phytoplankton biomass in the two lake basins. We hypothesized that phytoplankton growth would be P-limited in the restored section, whereas it would be N-limited in the unrestored section of the lake.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

Lake Yiai (30°25′48″–30°27′36″ N, 114°55′00″–114°55′48″ E) is an urban, eutrophic, shallow lake situated in Huanggang City, Hubei Province, China. The lake’s surface area spans 2.94 square kilometers, with an average depth of 2.5 m (Figure 1). In March 2022, a combination of submerged macrophyte transplantation and biomanipulation was implemented to restore one bay of the lake (Figure 1). The transplanted submerged macrophytes to the lake primarily included Vallisneria natans (Lour.) H. Hara, Hydrilla verticillata (L. f.) Royle, Ceratophyllum demersum L., Myriophyllum verticillatum L., and Potamogeton wrightii Morong. The coverage of submerged macrophytes increased to 60% of the restored lake’s surface area, whereas there were no submerged macrophytes in the unrestored part. Biomanipulation of the fish community involved the removal of benthic and planktonic fish and the introduction of piscivorous fish. By summer, the mean biomass of the submerged macrophytes had reached 1762.3 g per square meter following transplantation.

2.2. Sampling and Analysis

The restored and unrestored sections were separated using waterproof enclosures. We set six sampling sites in both the restored and unrestored areas (Figure 1). Water samples were collected in July 2023 at a depth of 0.5 m using a 5 L water sampler. In the laboratory, the concentrations of TN, TP, and Chl a were measured in the water samples. The concentrations of TP and TN were determined through a combined persulfate digestion method. The detection range for P in our method is 0.001–0.6 mg/L, and for N, it is 0.05–4 mg/L [21]. The concentrations were determined using an ultraviolet–visible spectrophotometer (PerkinElmer; Waltham, MA, USA). A subsample ranging from 100 to 500 mL was filtered using 1.2 μm GF/C filters (Whatman; Kent, UK), and the concentrations of Chl a were determined spectrophotometrically following extraction in 90% hot ethanol; the minimum detection limit for measuring chlorophyll using this method was 1 μg/L [22].

2.3. Nutrient Limitation Bioassay Experiments

The nutrient limitation experiments in the field were conducted in Lake Yiai during July 2023. Water samples for incubation were collected at a depth of 0.5 m from each of the three sampling sites in both the restored and unrestored lake basins. Subsequently, the water samples were filtered through a 200 µm sieve to eliminate large zooplankton grazers. Finally, the water samples from the same basin were transferred into 2 L polyethylene bottles, with each bottle being filled with 2000 mL of water. These bottles were chemically inert, unbreakable, and transparent, featuring a 90% PAR transmittance. Thereafter, the bottles were deployed in the field following the methods by Paerl et al. [23]. The bottles were secured to a mooring during the experiment and remained on the water’s surface, supported by a series of polystyrene floats, under natural lighting conditions. Previous studies suggested that a 6-day incubation experiment on phytoplankton was sufficient to detect significant changes in phytoplankton productivity and community dynamics [18,19].
At the beginning of the experiments, the concentrations of TN, TP, and Chl a in the water were determined. We established a gradient of nutrient concentrations based on field monitoring data from Lake Yiai. Twelve treatments were implemented in our experiment, each with four replicates (Figure 2). We used potassium nitrate (KNO3) as the nitrogen source and potassium phosphate (K2HPO4) as the phosphorus source. Furthermore, 560 μmol·L−1 of sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3) was added to each bottle to prevent inorganic carbon limitation during the incubation period [24].
The experiment lasted six days. Throughout the experiment, bottles were affixed to a plastic rack that floated on the corresponding lake basin. The rack’s four corners were secured with ropes to bamboo sticks inserted into the sediment. Consequently, all bottles were exposed to natural light, temperature, and surface turbulence conditions. The concentrations of nutrients and Chl a in each bottle were measured on days three and six.
The growth rate of conditions in each treatment was calculated using the following modified exponential growth equation [25]:
μ = ln X 2 / X 1 / T 2 − T 1
where X1 represents the Chl a concentration at the start of the incubation period (T1), and X2 denotes the Chl a concentration at the peak of the incubation period (T2). The growth rate of phytoplankton at peak biomass signifies the maximum growth potential under the specified conditions.

2.4. Data Analysis

All analyses were conducted using SPSS version 25.0, and graphing was executed using Origin 2019. The bar graph depicted the levels of Chl a and growth rates, with comparisons between the initial Chl a value and the maximum responses across various treatments (Control, +N, +P, +NP) to reflect the phytoplankton biomass response to nutrient additions. The differences in growth rates among treatments with varying concentrations of nutrient additions were compared to the range of nutrient-limiting concentrations determined for the phytoplankton. Variations in Chl a and growth responses among treatments were assessed using one-way ANOVA. In every instance, the untransformed data met the assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variance. Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS 25.0, and the significance level for all tests was set at p < 0.05.

3. Results

3.1. Nutrient and Chl a Concentrations in the Restored and Unrestored Lake Bay

The concentrations of TN, TP, and Chl a in the restored area were significantly lower than those in the unrestored area, respectively (Figure 3A,B,D; t-test, p < 0.0001). The mean concentrations in the restored area were 30.97 μg/L for Chl a, 0.65 mg/L for TN, and 0.056 mg/L for TP; in contrast, the unrestored lake had mean concentrations of 186.87 μg/L for Chl a, 2.25 mg/L for TN, and 0.32 mg/L for TP.
The mean TN/TP ratio in the restored area was significantly higher (t-test, p < 0.0001) than that in the unrestored lake during summer. The mean TN/TP ratio was 15.15 in the restored area and 6.96 in the unrestored part (Figure 3C).

3.2. Field Nutrient Limitation Experiments

In the restored area, the addition of N or P at various concentration levels all resulted in significantly higher phytoplankton biomass, as indicated by Chl a, compared to the controls (p < 0.0001). Additionally, the combined addition of both nitrogen and phosphorus led to the highest phytoplankton biomass (Figure 4A).
In the unrestored lake, both the dual N and P additions, as well as single N additions, led to significantly higher phytoplankton biomass compared to the control (p < 0.0001). However, there was no significant difference in phytoplankton biomass between the single P addition and control treatments (Figure 4A).
The overall growth rates displayed patterns similar to those observed in biomass in response to N and P additions (Figure 4B). In the restored area, there were no significant differences in growth rates between the sole addition of N and the sole addition of P across various concentrations (Figure 4C). While the P addition level was fixed at +0.3 mg/L, the rate of change in chlorophyll a increased significantly with increasing N addition. Conversely, when the N addition was fixed at +3.0 mg/L, no significant differences were observed among the various P additions. (Figure 4C).
In the unrestored lake, the phytoplankton growth rates increased significantly with the addition of nitrogen only compared to those in the controls. However, there were no significant differences in phytoplankton growth rates among the various treatments with the addition of nitrogen only. When sufficient nitrogen was supplied (+3.0 mg/L), the growth rate increased until the addition of phosphorus reached 0.05 mg/L (Figure 4C). The phytoplankton growth rates consistently increased with increasing levels of nitrogen addition, provided that there was an adequate supply of phosphorus (+0.3 mg/L) (Figure 4C).

4. Discussion

In this study, we found pronounced differences in nutrient levels and phytoplankton biomass between the restored and unrestored areas of Lake Yiai. The growth of phytoplankton in the unrestored lake was N-limited in summer, which was consistent with our hypotheses. However, in the restored areas, phytoplankton growth was limited by both N and P, which was partly consistent with our hypothesis. Our results indicated that the establishment of a high biomass of submerged macrophytes in a shallow subtropical lake could substantially maintain relatively low levels of nutrients and phytoplankton biomass in summer. Moreover, the nutrient limitation pattern of phytoplankton biomass in the restored lake could also be modified by the submerged macrophytes.
The recovery of submerged macrophytes following biomanipulation can significantly reduce nutrient concentrations, thereby limiting phytoplankton biomass in subtropical shallow lakes [5,6]. Previous studies indicated that at least 40% submerged macrophyte coverage is required to significantly reduce nutrient concentrations in the water column; furthermore, interactions with biomanipulation can further alter ecosystem dynamics [26]. Our study also found that the water nutrient concentrations and phytoplankton biomass were significantly lower in the restored area compared to the unrestored lake. In lakes where only external loading control is implemented, the reduction rate of TN often exceeds that of TP, largely due to internal phosphorus release [16,19,27]. In Lake Yiai, both TN and TP concentrations in the water decreased significantly following restoration. However, the reduction in TP was more pronounced than that of TN, resulting in significantly higher TN to TP ratios in the restored area. This may be attributed to the high biomass of submerged macrophytes, which can absorb nutrients from the water and inhibit internal phosphorus release by stabilizing and oxidizing the sediments [28,29,30]. The relatively high TN/TP ratios in our restored lake were consistent with those of other lakes after restoration, coinciding with the recovery of submerged macrophytes [5,6].
Nutrient limitation often dictates phytoplankton growth [13,14,15,31]. In our study, the TN/TP ratio in the unrestored area (6.96) was lower than 9, indicating that the growth of phytoplankton was limited by nitrogen [32]. In the restored area, the TN/TP ratio (15.15) fell within the range of 9 to 22.6, which is generally considered to be co-limited by both nitrogen and phosphorus [32]. These findings were confirmed by our field nutrient addition experiments. In shallow eutrophic lakes, the relatively higher water temperature typically enhances denitrification and anaerobic ammonia oxidation potentials, thereby leading to increased nitrogen removal from the lake and consequently lower total nitrogen levels in the water [33]. For example, in Lake Taihu, China, denitrification rates peaked during the summer, accounting for 33% of the annual denitrification [33]. However, the internal phosphorus release rate was commonly high during the summer [20,34], leading to the release of Fe-bound phosphorus from sediments [30]. Thereafter, an increase in TP concentration in the water of the unrestored lake was detected in our study. The loss of nitrogen and the increase of phosphorus during the summer result in lower TN/TP ratios, indicating possible nitrogen limitation of phytoplankton growth in the unrestored section of Lake Yiai. In the restored area, the high coverage of submerged macrophytes may inhibit nutrient release from the sediment by reducing sediment resuspension [26,29] and enhancing the concentration of dissolved oxygen in the sediment [20]; consequently, nutrient concentrations in the water column are lowered. Thus, the limiting patterns (nitrogen and phosphorus co-limitation) of phytoplankton growth in the restored area of Lake Yiai may be primarily due to nutrient control by submerged macrophytes.
The growth of phytoplankton is also affected by the concentrations of nitrogen and phosphorus, which act as limiting nutrients [15,35]. The nutrient limitation of phytoplankton growth is determined by both the internal nutrient concentration within the cells and the external dissolved nutrient concentration. Therefore, phytoplankton nutrient limitation is constrained not only by the N/P ratio but also by concentration thresholds. When the cell nutrients fall below the minimum cellular quota, phytoplankton cells experience absolute limitation by the corresponding nutrient. Beyond the minimum cellular quota but before reaching the maximum cellular quota, phytoplankton growth rates continue to increase, yet still exhibit some degree of nutrient limitation [35]. In the nutrient addition experiments conducted on the restored area, phytoplankton growth stabilized once the phosphorus concentration reached 0.17 mg/L, provided that nitrogen was adequate (3.0 mg/L N). This stabilization indicates the beginning of phosphorus limitation at concentrations beneath this threshold. Conversely, in cases where phosphorus levels were adequate (P + 0.3 mg/L), the introduction of nitrogen beyond 0.5 mg/L did not lead to a further increase in biomass, thereby setting a N threshold at approximately 2.12 mg/L in the restored area (Figure 4C, Table A1). However, this exceeds the concentration thresholds for nitrogen and phosphorus, which typically indicate nutrient limitation in eutrophic lakes in China [18,19]. A similar phenomenon has been observed in certain lakes and experimental settings in Europe and America [36,37]. This phenomenon can be attributed to the varied phytoplankton communities present in lakes, as well as the distinct forms and compositions of nutrients [37,38]. In the unrestored area, N limitation persists in phytoplankton growth despite higher initial TN concentrations. Even when TN concentration reached 4.25 mg/L following the co-addition of nitrogen and phosphorus, phytoplankton biomass continued to increase. This phenomenon, previously undocumented in studies of certain subtropical lakes in China, typically makes it challenging to demonstrate N-limitation when TN exceeds 0.8–1.0 mg/L [19]. The mechanisms behind this phenomenon are not fully understood, yet several potential explanations can be suggested. The TN/TP ratio for these treatments was relatively low, falling within the range (TN/TP < 9) identified by Guildford and Hecky [32] as being susceptible to nitrogen limitation. Additionally, nutrients were introduced in a single pulse during the experiment. Given the relatively high initial phytoplankton biomass in the unrestored area, the nitrogen in the bottles was rapidly depleted within a few days, resulting in nitrogen limitation [18]. To clarify these unclear mechanisms, further experiments are necessary to determine the composition of the phytoplankton community and to investigate their specific dynamics of nutrient uptake, utilization, and storage.
Our findings underscore how restoration initiatives modify the nutrient dynamics and phytoplankton growth potential of lakes. Nevertheless, certain gaps persist: without data on the phytoplankton community, we cannot completely elucidate species-specific reactions to nutrient enrichment (for instance, nitrogen limitation at elevated nitrogen levels in unrestored regions). Subsequent research should focus on conducting biodiversity evaluations and chemical analyses of nutrient bioavailability (such as the comparison between particulate and dissolved phosphorus forms) to enhance our understanding of these patterns. Additionally, the intricacy of lake recovery following restoration efforts, where abiotic thresholds, biotic interactions, and anthropogenic nutrient inputs collectively influence ecosystem outcomes, warrants further investigation.

5. Conclusions

In this study, we observed significant reductions in phytoplankton biomass (Chl a), TN, and TP concentrations in Lake Yiai following the restoration of submerged macrophytes. The decline in TP concentrations was more pronounced than that of TN, resulting in a notable increase in the TN/TP ratio in the restored area. This shift indicated a transition in phytoplankton growth from N limitation to co-limitation by both N and P during the summer. Our nutrient addition experiments further corroborated this pattern of N and P co-limitation in phytoplankton growth. Our study offers a valuable perspective for N and P management in restored lakes, emphasizing that the re-establishment of submerged macrophytes can help maintain the clear-water state of Lake Yiai.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Z.L. (Zhengwen Liu) and J.Y.; methodology, Z.L. (Zhengwen Liu) and S.F.; software, S.F. and H.H.; validation, S.F., Z.L. (Zhengwen Liu) and J.Y.; formal analysis, S.F.; investigation, S.F. and Z.L. (Zhenmei Lin); resources, Z.L. (Zhengwen Liu) and J.Y.; data curation, S.F.; writing—original draft preparation, S.F.; writing—review and editing, S.F., J.Y., K.L., Z.L. (Zhenmei Lin), J.G. and Z.L. (Zhengwen Liu); visualization, S.F. and J.Y.; supervision, Z.L. (Zhengwen Liu) and J.Y.; project administration, K.L. and J.Y.; funding acquisition, J.Y. and J.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (32330068, 42277067), Jiangxi Provincial Natural Science Foundation (20242BAB23063), and Open Project Funding of Key Laboratory of Intelligent Health Perception and Ecological Restoration of Rivers and Lakes, Ministry of Education, Hubei University of Technology (HGKFZP009).

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.

Acknowledgments

We thank Xiaolin He and Yunlong Lv for field support.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Appendix A

Table A1. Initial water nutrient concentrations and nitrogen-to-phosphorus ratio (TN:TP) in the nutrient manipulation experiments.
Table A1. Initial water nutrient concentrations and nitrogen-to-phosphorus ratio (TN:TP) in the nutrient manipulation experiments.
VariablesControl (mg/L)N Addition (mg/L)P Addition (mg/L)NP Co-Addition (mg/L)
Restored
  Total nitrogen1.622.123.124.621.621.621.622.123.124.624.624.62
  Dissolved inorganic
nitrogen		1.011.512.514.011.011.011.011.512.514.014.014.01
  Total phosphorus0.120.120.120.120.170.270.420.420.420.420.270.17
  Soluble reactive
phosphorus		0.070.070.070.070.120.220.370.370.370.370.220.12
  TN:TP13.2017.2725.4037.599.395.953.845.027.3910.9316.9426.73
Unrestored
  Total nitrogen2.753.254.255.752.752.752.753.254.255.755.755.75
  Dissolved inorganic
nitrogen		1.662.163.164.661.661.661.662.163.164.664.664.66
  Total phosphorus0.310.310.310.310.360.460.610.610.610.610.460.36
  Soluble reactive
phosphorus		0.160.160.160.160.210.310.460.460.460.460.310.21
  TN:TP8.8810.4913.7218.567.655.984.515.336.979.4312.5115.98
Table A2. Normality Test.
Table A2. Normality Test.
Sig (Shapiro–Wilk Test)
UnrestoredRestored
TP0.3540.100
TN0.4430.440
Chl a0.1910.070
TN/TP0.6470.152
Table A3. Homogeneity of Variance Test and t-Test.
Table A3. Homogeneity of Variance Test and t-Test.
Test of Homogeneity of Variancest-Test
Fsigtsig
TP11.820.0066.51<0.0001
TN9.260.0125.16<0.0001
Chl a8.700.0157.02<0.0001
TN/TP13.340.0043.01<0.0001

References

  1. Scheffer, M.; Hosper, S.H.; Meijer, M.-L.; Moss, B.; Jeppesen, E. Alternative Equilibria in Shallow Lakes. Trends Ecol. Evol. 1993, 8, 275–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Scheffer, M.; Jeppesen, E. Regime Shifts in Shallow Lakes. Ecosystems 2007, 10, 1–3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Su, H.; Wu, Y.; Xia, W.; Yang, L.; Chen, J.; Han, W.; Fang, J.; Xie, P. Stoichiometric Mechanisms of Regime Shifts in Freshwater Ecosystem. Water Res. 2019, 149, 302–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Hansson, L.; Annadotter, H.; Bergman, E.; Hamrin, S.; Jeppesen, E.; Kairesalo, T.; Luokkanen, E.; Nilsson, P.; Sondergaard, M.; Strand, J. Biomanipulation as an Application of Food-Chain Theory: Constraints, Synthesis, and Recommendations for Temperate Lakes. Ecosystems 1998, 1, 558–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Liu, Z.; Hu, J.; Zhong, P.; Zhang, X.; Ning, J.; Larsen, S.E.; Chen, D.; Gao, Y.; He, H.; Jeppesen, E. Successful Restoration of a Tropical Shallow Eutrophic Lake: Strong Bottom-up but Weak Top-down Effects Recorded. Water Res. 2018, 146, 88–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Li, B.; Chen, D.; Lu, J.; Liu, S.; Wu, J.; Gan, L.; Yang, X.; He, X.; He, H.; Yu, J.; et al. Restoring Turbid Eutrophic Shallow Lakes to a Clear-Water State by Combined Biomanipulation and Chemical Treatment: A 4-Hectare in-Situ Experiment in Subtropical China. J. Environ. Manag. 2025, 380, 125061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Hilt, S.; Koehler, J.; Adrian, R.; Monaghan, M.T.; Sayer, C.D. Clear, Crashing, Turbid and Back—Long-Term Changes in Macrophyte Assemblages in a Shallow Lake. Freshw. Biol. 2013, 58, 2027–2036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Zeng, L.; He, F.; Dai, Z.; Xu, D.; Liu, B.; Zhou, Q.; Wu, Z. Effect of Submerged Macrophyte Restoration on Improving Aquatic Ecosystem in a Subtropical, Shallow Lake. Ecol. Eng. 2017, 106, 578–587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Schriver, P.; Bogestrand, J.; Jeppesen, E.; Sondergaard, M. Impact of submerged macrophytes on fish-zooplankton-phytoplankton interactions—Large-scale enclosure experiments in a shallow eutrophic lake. Freshw. Biol. 1995, 33, 255–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. He, H.; Liu, X.; Liu, X.; Yu, J.; Li, K.; Guan, B.; Jeppesen, E.; Liu, Z. Effects of Cyanobacterial Blooms on Submerged Macrophytes Alleviated by the Native Chinese Bivalve Hyriopsis Cumingii: A Mesocosm Experiment Study. Ecol. Eng. 2014, 71, 363–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Hilt, S. Regime Shifts between Macrophytes and Phytoplankton—Concepts beyond Shallow Lakes, Unravelling Stabilizing Mechanisms and Practical Consequences. Limnetica 2015, 34, 467–479. [Google Scholar]
  12. Liu, Z.; Bai, G.; Liu, Y.; Zou, Y.; Ding, Z.; Wang, R.; Chen, D.; Kong, L.; Wang, C.; Liu, L.; et al. Long-Term Study of Ecological Restoration in a Typical Shallow Urban Lake. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 846, 157505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Elser, J.J.; Bracken, M.E.S.; Cleland, E.E.; Gruner, D.S.; Harpole, W.S.; Hillebrand, H.; Ngai, J.T.; Seabloom, E.W.; Shurin, J.B.; Smith, J.E. Global Analysis of Nitrogen and Phosphorus Limitation of Primary Producers in Freshwater, Marine and Terrestrial Ecosystems. Ecol. Lett. 2007, 10, 1135–1142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Moss, B.; Jeppesen, E.; Søndergaard, M.; Lauridsen, T.L.; Liu, Z. Nitrogen, Macrophytes, Shallow Lakes and Nutrient Limitation: Resolution of a Current Controversy? Hydrobiologia 2013, 710, 3–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Søndergaard, M.; Lauridsen, T.L.; Johansson, L.S.; Jeppesen, E. Nitrogen or Phosphorus Limitation in Lakes and Its Impact on Phytoplankton Biomass and Submerged Macrophyte Cover. Hydrobiologia 2017, 795, 35–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Jeppesen, E.; Søndergaard, M.; Jensen, J.P.; Havens, K.E.; Anneville, O.; Carvalho, L.; Coveney, M.F.; Deneke, R.; Dokulil, M.T.; Foy, B.; et al. Lake Responses to Reduced Nutrient Loading—An Analysis of Contemporary Long-term Data from 35 Case Studies. Freshw. Biol. 2005, 50, 1747–1771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Noges, T.; Järvet, A.; Kisand, A.; Laugaste, R.; Loigu, E.; Skakalski, B.; Noges, P. Reaction of Large and Shallow Lakes Peipsi and Vortsjarv to the Changes of Nutrient Loading. Hydrobiologia 2007, 584, 253–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Xu, H.; Paerl, H.W.; Qin, B.; Zhu, G.; Hall, N.S.; Wu, Y. Determining Critical Nutrient Thresholds Needed to Control Harmful Cyanobacterial Blooms in Eutrophic Lake Taihu, China. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 1051–1059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Xu, H.; Paerl, H.W.; Zhu, G.; Qin, B.; Hall, N.S.; Zhu, M. Long-Term Nutrient Trends and Harmful Cyanobacterial Bloom Potential in Hypertrophic Lake Taihu, China. Hydrobiologia 2017, 787, 229–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Wang, M.; Xu, X.; Wu, Z.; Zhang, X.; Sun, P.; Wen, Y.; Wang, Z.; Lu, X.; Zhang, W.; Wang, X.; et al. Seasonal Pattern of Nutrient Limitation in a Eutrophic Lake and Quantitative Analysis of the Impacts from Internal Nutrient Cycling. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 53, 13675–13686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Ebina, J.; Tsutsui, T.; Shirai, T. Simultaneous Determination of Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus in Water Using Peroxodisulfate Oxidation. Water Res. 1983, 17, 1721–1726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Pápista, É.; Ács, É.; Böddi, B. Chlorophyll-a Determination with Ethanol—A Critical Test. Hydrobiologia 2002, 485, 191–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Paerl, H.W.; Dyble, J.; Pinckney, J.L.; Valdes, L.M.; Millie, D.F.; Moisander, P.H.; Morris, J.T.; Bendis, B.; Piehler, M.F. Using Microalgal Indicators to Assess Human- and Climate-Induced Ecological Change in Estuaries. In Estuarine Indicators; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  24. Rudek, J.; Paerl, H.; Mallin, M.; Bates, P. Seasonal and Hydrological Control of Phytoplankton Nutrient Limitation in the Lower Neuse River Estuary, North Carolina. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1991, 75, 133–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Sommer, U. A Comparison of the Droop and the Monod Models of Nutrient Limited Growth Applied to Natural Populations of Phytoplankton. Funct. Ecol. 1991, 5, 535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Lv, C.; Shan, H.; Tian, Y.; Zhao, X.; Wen, Z.; Yin, C.; Li, Z.; Su, H.; Wang, W.; Chou, Q.; et al. The Dual Role of Benthic Fish: Effects on Water Quality in the Presence and Absence of Submerged Macrophytes. Water Res. 2024, 267, 122466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Jeppesen, E.; Sørensen, P.B.; Johansson, L.S.; Søndergaard, M.; Lauridsen, T.L.; Nielsen, A.; Mejlhede, P. Recovery of Lakes from Eutrophication: Changes in Nitrogen Retention Capacity and the Role of Nitrogen Legacy in 10 Danish Lakes Studied over 30 Years. Hydrobiologia 2025, 852, 377–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Hilt, S.; Alirangues Nuñez, M.M.; Bakker, E.S.; Blindow, I.; Davidson, T.A.; Gillefalk, M.; Hansson, L.-A.; Janse, J.H.; Janssen, A.B.G.; Jeppesen, E.; et al. Response of Submerged Macrophyte Communities to External and Internal Restoration Measures in North Temperate Shallow Lakes. Front. Plant Sci. 2018, 9, 194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Dong, B.; Zhou, Y.; Jeppesen, E.; Shi, K.; Qin, B. Response of Community Composition and Biomass of Submerged Macrophytes to Variation in Underwater Light, Wind and Trophic Status in a Large Eutrophic Shallow Lake. J. Environ. Sci. 2021, 103, 298–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Li, C.; Sheng, H.; Tan, M.; Dai, H.; Wang, X.; Xu, H.; Ding, S.; Zhao, G. Rhythmic Radial Oxygen Loss Enhances Soil Phosphorus Bioavailability. Nat. Commun. 2025, 16, 4413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Luong, H.A.; Rohlfs, A.-M.; Facey, J.A.; Colville, A.; Davie, A.W.; Pera, J.B.; Mitrovic, S.M. Influence of Macronutrient and Iron Enrichment on Phytoplankton Productivity and Community Dynamics: An in situ Microcosm Study in a Drinking Water Supply Reservoir. Inland Waters 2025, 15, 2475662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Guildford, S.J.; Hecky, R.E. Total Nitrogen, Total Phosphorus, and Nutrient Limitation in Lakes and Oceans: Is There a Common Relationship? Limnol. Oceanogr. 2000, 45, 1213–1223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Xu, H.; McCarthy, M.J.; Paerl, H.W.; Brookes, J.D.; Zhu, G.; Hall, N.S.; Qin, B.; Zhang, Y.; Zhu, M.; Hampel, J.J.; et al. Contributions of External Nutrient Loading and Internal Cycling to Cyanobacterial Bloom Dynamics in Lake Taihu, China: Implications for Nutrient Management. Limnol. Oceanogr. 2021, 66, 1492–1509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Reckhow, K.H.; Arhonditsis, G.B.; Kenney, M.A.; Hauser, L.; Tribo, J.; Wu, C.; Elcock, K.J.; Steinberg, L.J.; Stow, C.A.; McBride, S.J. A Predictive Approach to Nutrient Criteria. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2005, 39, 2913–2919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Reynolds, C.S. Eutrophication and the Management of Planktonic Algae—What Vollenweider Couldn’t Tell Us; Freshwater Biological Association: Milnthorpe, UK, 1992. [Google Scholar]
  36. Redoglio, A.; Sperfeld, E. What Drives Growth Responses of Nitrogen and Phosphorus (Co-)Limited Primary Producer Communities? Front. Ecol. Evol. 2024, 12, 1368445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Andersen, I.M.; Williamson, T.J.; González, M.J.; Vanni, M.J. Nitrate, Ammonium, and Phosphorus Drive Seasonal Nutrient Limitation of Chlorophytes, Cyanobacteria, and Diatoms in a Hyper-eutrophic Reservoir. Limnol. Oceanogr. 2020, 65, 962–978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Swarbrick, V.J.; Quinones-Rivera, Z.J.; Leavitt, P.R. Seasonal Variation in Effects of Urea and Phosphorus on Phytoplankton Abundance and Community Composition in a Hypereutrophic Hardwater Lake. Freshw. Biol. 2020, 65, 1765–1781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Water 17 03371 g001
Figure 1. Sampling sites in Lake Yiai.
Figure 1. Sampling sites in Lake Yiai.
Water 17 03371 g001
Water 17 03371 g002
Figure 2. Experimental design for nutrient addition experiments in the field.
Figure 2. Experimental design for nutrient addition experiments in the field.
Water 17 03371 g002
Water 17 03371 g003
Figure 3. The concentrations of TN (A) and TP (B), and TN/TP (C) ratios, as well as the Chl a (D) in the unrestored and restored zones of Lake Yiai during the summer (July). The black dots on the figure represent each measured value. The differences in each variable between the two zones were assessed using a t-test at a significance level of 0.05, with b > a. Error bars indicate ±1 standard deviation (SD).
Figure 3. The concentrations of TN (A) and TP (B), and TN/TP (C) ratios, as well as the Chl a (D) in the unrestored and restored zones of Lake Yiai during the summer (July). The black dots on the figure represent each measured value. The differences in each variable between the two zones were assessed using a t-test at a significance level of 0.05, with b > a. Error bars indicate ±1 standard deviation (SD).
Water 17 03371 g003
Water 17 03371 g004
Figure 4. Average biomass (Chl a concentration) (A) and growth rates (days 0–6) (B) of phytoplankton in different nutrient addition treatments, as well as growth rates (C) in each group during field nutrient addition experiments in summer. Notes: Ctrl, control treatment without adding either N or P; N represents nitrogen addition; P represents phosphorus addition; NP represents the dual addition of nitrogen and phosphorus. Nitrogen addition concentration treatments were 0.5 mg/L, 1.5 mg/L, and 3.0 mg/L, while phosphorus addition concentration treatments were 0.05 mg/L, 0.15 mg/L, and 0.3 mg/L. The number following N (or P) corresponds to the nutrient addition concentrations (increasing concentration from left to right). Differences between treatments are depicted based on ANOVA post hoc tests (c > b > a; p < 0.05). Error bars represent ±1 standard deviation (SD) of four replicates.
Figure 4. Average biomass (Chl a concentration) (A) and growth rates (days 0–6) (B) of phytoplankton in different nutrient addition treatments, as well as growth rates (C) in each group during field nutrient addition experiments in summer. Notes: Ctrl, control treatment without adding either N or P; N represents nitrogen addition; P represents phosphorus addition; NP represents the dual addition of nitrogen and phosphorus. Nitrogen addition concentration treatments were 0.5 mg/L, 1.5 mg/L, and 3.0 mg/L, while phosphorus addition concentration treatments were 0.05 mg/L, 0.15 mg/L, and 0.3 mg/L. The number following N (or P) corresponds to the nutrient addition concentrations (increasing concentration from left to right). Differences between treatments are depicted based on ANOVA post hoc tests (c > b > a; p < 0.05). Error bars represent ±1 standard deviation (SD) of four replicates.
Water 17 03371 g004
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

Fu, S.; Lin, Z.; He, H.; Li, K.; Gao, J.; Liu, Z.; Yu, J. Response of Phytoplankton to Nutrient Limitation in the Ecological Restoration of a Subtropical Shallow Lake. Water 2025, 17, 3371. https://doi.org/10.3390/w17233371

AMA Style

Fu S, Lin Z, He H, Li K, Gao J, Liu Z, Yu J. Response of Phytoplankton to Nutrient Limitation in the Ecological Restoration of a Subtropical Shallow Lake. Water. 2025; 17(23):3371. https://doi.org/10.3390/w17233371

Chicago/Turabian Style

Fu, Shi, Zhenmei Lin, Hu He, Kuanyi Li, Jian Gao, Zhengwen Liu, and Jinlei Yu. 2025. "Response of Phytoplankton to Nutrient Limitation in the Ecological Restoration of a Subtropical Shallow Lake" Water 17, no. 23: 3371. https://doi.org/10.3390/w17233371

APA Style

Fu, S., Lin, Z., He, H., Li, K., Gao, J., Liu, Z., & Yu, J. (2025). Response of Phytoplankton to Nutrient Limitation in the Ecological Restoration of a Subtropical Shallow Lake. Water, 17(23), 3371. https://doi.org/10.3390/w17233371

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