We identified 44 species belonging to 15 genera, the number of shells per sample varied from 10 to 224 individuals (mean = 81) (Table 2). The number of genera per sample varied from 3 to 11 (mean = 6.4). The maximal occurrence was observed for genera Difflugia (11, herein and after number of samples where particular genera or species was found), Centropyxis (10), Arcella (8) and Netzelia (8). Species richness in samples ranged from 4 to 20 (mean = 11.9). Maximal occurrence was observed for species Difflugia lobostoma (9), Arcella hemisphaerica (8), Netzelia gramen (8), Difflugia minuta (7) and Centropyxis pontigulasiformis (6) (Fig. 2). A total of 26 species, Arcella rotundata, A. gibbosa Centropyxys sylvatica, C. cassis, C. platistoma armata, Cyclopyxis kahli, Difflugia glans, D. pulex, D. geosphaerica, D. lithophila, Difflugia sp., D. oranensis, D. elegans, D. lucida, D. pristis, D. levandery, D. viscidula, D. claviformis, D. acuminata, D. mammilaris, Lagenodifflugia bryophila, Pseudodifflugia fulva, Trigonopyxis arcula and Trinema enchelys were found in only one sample.
The most abundant genera were Difflugia (hereinafter 35% of the total number of identified shells), Centropyxis (24%), Arcella (18%) and Cucurbitella (7%), the most abundant species were Arcella hemisphaerica (15%), Difflugia lobostoma (13%) and Centropyxis pontigulasiformis (13%).
Table 2
The list of testate amoeba species and the number of counted tests in eleven samples from Ugolnye Kopi. Samples ID correspond number of waterbody on Fig. 1.
Species/Sample ID | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
Arcella gibbosa Penard, 1890 | 10 | | | | | | | | | 1 | |
Arcella hemisphaerica Perty, 1852 | 73 | 3 | 9 | | 3 | | 21 | 9 | | 12 | 6 |
Arcella rotundata Playfair, 1918 | | 1 | | | | | | | | | |
Arcella vulgaris Ehrenberg, 1830 | 4 | 3 | 7 | | 1 | | | 1 | | | |
Centropyxis aculeata (Ehrenberg, 1838) | | | 1 | | | 1 | | 2 | | | |
Centropyxis aerophila Deflandre, 1929 | 3 | | 14 | | | | | 2 | | 1 | |
Centropyxis cassis (Wallich, 1864) | | 2 | | 2 | | | | | | | |
Centropyxis constricta (Ehrenberg, 1841) | | 3 | | | 1 | | | | 3 | | 5 |
Centropyxis platystoma (Penard, 1890) | | 22 | 18 | | 3 | 6 | | 2 | | | |
Centropyxis platystoma armata Deflandre, 1929 | | | | | | 1 | | | | | |
Centropyxis sp. | | 1 | | | | | | | | | |
Centropyxis sylvatica (Deflandre, 1929) | | 3 | | | | 4 | | | | | |
Сentropyxis pontigulasiformis (Beyens et al., 1986) | 14 | 28 | 64 | | 1 | 7 | 3 | | | | |
Cucurbitella mespiliformis Penard, 1902 | 2 | | | | | | | 17 | | 43 | |
Cyclopyxis eurystoma Deflandre, 1929 | 1 | 1 | | | | | | | | 1 | |
Cyclopyxis kahli Deflandre, 1929 | | | 1 | | | | | | 1 | | |
Cylindrifflugia acuminata (Ehrenberg, 1838) | | | | | | | | | | 1 | |
Cylindrifflugia elegans (Penard, 1890) | | | | | | 1 | | | | | |
Difflugia angulostoma Gauthier-Lièvre, Thomas, 1958 | 3 | | 10 | | | 1 | | | | | |
Difflugia claviformis Penard, 1899 | 1 | | | | | | | | | | |
Difflugia geosphaerica Ogden, 1991 | | 9 | | | | | 1 | | | | |
Difflugia glans Penard, 1902 | 1 | | 18 | | | | | | | | |
Difflugia globulosa Dujardin, 1837 | 1 | | 4 | | 1 | | | | | | |
Difflugia levanderi Playfair, 1918 | | | 1 | | | | | | | | |
Difflugia lithophila (Penard, 1902) | 3 | | | | | | | | | | |
Difflugia lobostoma Leidy, 1879 | 8 | 1 | 2 | | 100 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | | 1 |
Difflugia lucida Penard, 1890 | | | | | | 1 | | | | | |
Difflugia mammillaris Penard, 1893 | | | | 19 | | | | | | | |
Difflugia manicata Penard, 1902 | | | 20 | | 1 | 33 | | 2 | | | |
Difflugia minuta Rampi, 1950 | | 2 | 11 | | 2 | 10 | | | 1 | 2 | 3 |
Difflugia mulanensis Yang, Meisterfeld, Zhang et Shen, 2005 | 8 | | 3 | | | | | | | | |
Difflugia oblonga Ehrenberg, 1838 | 2 | 1 | | | | | | | | 6 | 1 |
Difflugia oranensis (Gauthier-Lièvre, Thomas, 1958) | | | 2 | | | | | | | | |
Difflugia penardi Hopkinson, 1909 | | | 1 | 9 | | | | 1 | | | |
Difflugia pristis Penard, 1902 | | 1 | | | | | | | | | |
Difflugia pulex Penard, 1902 | 2 | | 8 | | | | | | | | |
Difflugia sp. | | | | | | | | | | | 2 |
Galeripora discoides (Ehrenberg, 1843) | | 1 | 1 | | | | | | | | 3 |
Golemanskia viscidula (Penard, 1902) | 1 | | | | | | | | | | |
Lagenodifflugia bryophila (Penard, 1902) | | | | | | 1 | | | | 1 | |
Netzelia gramen (Penard, 1902) | 7 | 6 | 7 | | | 1 | 7 | 1 | 2 | 26 | |
Pontigulasia rhumbleri Hopkinson, 1919 | 1 | | 4 | | 1 | | | | 2 | | |
Pseudodifflugia fulva Archer, 1870 | | | 14 | 3 | | | | | | | |
Trigonopyxis arcula (Leidy, 1879) | | 1 | | | | | | | | | |
Trinema enchelys (Ehrenberg, 1838) | | 4 | 3 | | | | | | | | |
Zivkovicia spectabilis (Penard, 1902) | 8 | 6 | 1 | | | | | 5 | | | 2 |
Total | 153 | 99 | 224 | 33 | 114 | 70 | 33 | 44 | 10 | 94 | 23 |
Taxa richness (S) | 20 | 20 | 24 | 4 | 10 | 13 | 5 | 11 | 6 | 10 | 8 |
Shannon Index (H) | 2,15 | 2,42 | 2,67 | 1,07 | 0,68 | 1,85 | 1,07 | 1,95 | 1,72 | 1,53 | 1,95 |
Ward Cluster analysis (Fig. 4) distinguished 4 groups of samples. Group 1 included the sample 5 and dominated by D. lobostoma (Fig. 3, c1, c2), Group 2 included the sample 4 and dominated by Difflugia mammilaris (Fig. 3, h), Group 3 included two samples: 1 and 7 and was dominated by A. hemisphaerica (Fig. 3, l) and Group 4 included samples 2, 3, 6, 8–11 and was dominated by C. pontigulasiformis (Fig. 3, j) and subdominated by D. manicata, C. mespiliformis (Fig. 3, d1, d2) and C. constricta (Fig. 3, f).
The overall sample rarefaction curve (Fig. 5.) did not reach an asymptote, suggesting that the amoeba counts were insufficient to identify all taxa. Thus, our results should not be considered representative of a comprehensive description of the testate amoebae complex in this region.
The values of Shannon diversity indices ranged from 0.68 in sample 5 to 2.67 in sample 3, species riches in samples varied from 4 to 24 (mean = 11.9) (Table 2).