What makes a cyanobacterial bloom disappear? A review of the abiotic and biotic cyanobacterial bloom loss factors

Cyanobacterial blooms present substantial challenges to managers and threaten ecological and public health. Although the majority of cyanobacterial bloom research and management focuses on factors that control bloom initiation, duration, toxicity, and geographical extent, relatively little research focuses on the role of loss processes in blooms and how these processes are regulated. Here, we define a loss process in terms of population dynamics as any process that removes cells from a population, thereby decelerating or reducing the development and extent of blooms. We review abiotic (e.g., hydraulic flushing and oxidative stress/UV light) and biotic factors (e.g., allelopathic compounds, infections, grazing, and resting cells/programmed cell death) known to govern bloom loss. We found that the dominant loss processes depend on several system specific factors including cyanobacterial genera-specific traits, in situ physicochemical conditions, and the microbial, phytoplankton, and consumer community composition. We also address loss processes in the context of bloom management and discuss perspectives and challenges in predicting how a changing climate may directly and indirectly affect loss processes on blooms. A deeper understanding of bloom loss processes and their underlying mechanisms may help to mitigate the negative consequences of cyanobacterial blooms and improve current management strategies

Classifying Mixing Regimes in Ponds and Shallow Lakes

Lakes are classified by thermal mixing regimes, with shallow waterbodies historically categorized as continuously mixing systems. Yet, recent studies demonstrate extended summertime stratification in ponds, underscoring the need to reassess thermal classifications for shallow waterbodies. In this study, we examined the summertime thermal dynamics of 34 ponds and shallow lakes across temperate North America and Europe to categorize and identify the drivers of different mixing regimes. We identified three mixing regimes: rarely (n = 18), intermittently (n = 10), and often (n = 6) mixed, where waterbodies mixed an average of 2%, 26%, and 75% of the study period, respectively. Waterbodies in the often mixed category were larger (≥4.17 ha) and stratification weakened with increased wind shear stress, characteristic of “shallow lakes.” In contrast, smaller waterbodies, or “ponds,” mixed less frequently, and stratification strengthened with increased shortwave radiation. Shallow ponds (\u3c0.74 m) mixed intermittently, with daytime stratification often breaking down overnight due to convective cooling. Ponds ≥0.74 m deep were rarely or never mixed, likely due to limited wind energy relative to the larger density gradients associated with slightly deeper water columns. Precipitation events weakened stratification, even causing short-term mixing (hours to days) in some sites. By examining a broad set of shallow waterbodies, we show that mixing regimes are highly sensitive to very small differences in size and depth, with potential implications for ecological and biogeochemical processes. Ultimately, we propose a new framework to characterize the variable mixing regimes of ponds and shallow lakes